You are on page 1of 174

Stability of Thick and Thin Flexible Pipes Subjected to Axial Flow

by Stéphane Jamin

Under the supervision of Professor M.P. Païdoussis and Professor M. Amabili

Department of Mechanical Engineering McGill University Montréal, Québec, Canada

© Stéphane Jamin, 2010 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Master’s of Engineering Thesis Program

Abstract
Have you ever experienced oscillatory motions of the free end your hose while watering your garden? This ordinary phenomenon of a pipe conveying fluid has asserted itself as a paradigm since it is described by quite simple equations and its study has various applications in engineering systems such as heat exchangers, blood circulatory systems as well as mining operations. The scope of the present work is the study of the dynamics of two different kinds of cylindrical pipes: (i) a cantilevered thin-walled pipe, i.e. a cylindrical shell, aspirating air and (ii) a thick-walled pipe subjected to internal, external, or simultaneous internal and external axial flows. This was accomplished for the cantilevered shell by deriving a linear analytical model through a variational principle while taking into account modified boundary conditions, and then by comparing theoretical and experimental results. For the thick wall pipe, the study was mainly experimental. A great part of the work was to design and build an entirely new apparatus allowing the investigation of the dynamics of the pipe in a lot of different configurations. The critical flow velocity and the corresponding frequency of oscillation as well as the pipe behaviour at higher flow velocities are described.

i|Page

.

L'objectif de ce travail de recherche est l'étude de la dynamique de deux différents types de tuyaux cylindriques: (i) un tuyau encastré-libre à paroi mince. externe. en comparant les résultats théoriques et expérimentaux.Sommaire N'avez-vous jamais ressenti un mouvement d'oscillations de l'extrémité libre de votre tuyau pendant que vous arrosiez votre jardin? Ce phénomène. Pour le tuyau à paroi large. une coque cylindrique. La majeure partie de ce travail fut la conception et le montage d'un appareil entièrement nouveau qui permet d'étudier le comportement du tuyau dans de multiples configurations. aspirant de l’air et (ii) un tuyau à paroi large soumis à un écoulement axial qui peut être interne. banal pour un tuyau véhiculant un fluide. ou les deux simultanément. s'est imposé comme un problème fondamental puisqu'il est gouverné pas des équations relativement simples et que son étude a des applications dans des systèmes aussi variés que les échangeurs de chaleur.e. i. La vitesse d'écoulement critique. ce fut accompli en dérivant un modèle analytique linéaire par l'intermédiaire d'un principe variationnel tout en prenant en compte des conditions aux limites modifiées. Pour la coque encastrée-libre. l'étude fut principalement expérimentale. les systèmes de circulation sanguine et les opérations minières. puis. la fréquence d'oscillation correspondante ainsi que l'évolution du comportement du tuyau lorsque la vitesse d'écoulement augmente sont présentées. iii | P a g e .

.

and my mother. I would like to express my gratitude to my family for their unconditional support and encouragement. Georges Tewfik. I am further indebted to François Di Quinzio. Valérie. I would also like to acknowledge the financial support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Solution Mining Research Institute. Special thanks go out to all my friends for the two wonderful and rewarding years I spent in Montreal. I would also like to thank my office coworkers for their pleasant discussion. it is a real pleasure to profoundly thank my research supervisor. Païdoussis for his support. Finally. Mergen. aid and technical assistance. Stephanie and Wensheng. Marie. and to Professor Roderick Guthrie and Dr Mihaela Isac for the heat treatment in their laboratory of the helical spring inserted in the pipe in the experiments. James. While completing this thesis. assistance and friendly talk: Ahmad. Medhi.Acknowledgements First. Kostas. v|Page . I would also like to thank Professor Marco Amabili for the co-supervision of a part of this work. I would like to spare a kind thought for my sister. Mojtaba. his guidance throughout the course of this project as well as his patience to my many questions. Tony Micozzi and William Alcock for their advice. Professor Michael P. I would like to extend my appreciation to all the members of the McGill Fluid-Structure Interaction lab for their company. in order to straighten it. I am also grateful to Thierry Lafrance of Ecole Polytechnique and Gary Savard for their valuable help to design and build a new experimental apparatus. Dana.

.

.............................2 Introduction ................... 31 Expression of the Unsteady Pressure .............................................6 Experimental Observations ................................2 1........... 1 Outline of the Thesis............................................................... 3 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures in Axial Flow ............3 2......2 Dynamics of a Cantilevered Shell Aspirating Fluid ....1 1....2......................................................4...................2 Preliminary Calculations ...1 2.................. 49 2...........................................4 Model Assumptions.......................... 19 Equations of Motion ...............................................................................3 Method of Solution.............................. 32 Solution to the Equations of Motion ................ 31 2................2...........1 1.....................3........................ 26 Dynamics of the Fluid Flow ......... 51 Discussion ...........1 2....................... 48 Predicted Dynamics for an Aspirating Shell ..........................................................................................................................3...................................4....................................2 2...................................................1 2..........................................................2............................................ 48 2....... v Table of Contents ..................................................................................... 7 Cantilevered Coaxial Cylindrical Structures......... 38 2.................2.....................2....................................................... 1 Literature Review ...........................Table of Contents Abstract ....... 19 2....................................4 Theoretical Results .......................................................................................2..................... iii Acknowledgements ................................. 22 Boundary Conditions ...........................2............................. 19 Introduction ..................................................... 20 Derivation of the Fundamental Equations .........................................................................3 1................................ 13 Chapter 2: 2.............................................................5 2......................................................................................................4 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures Discharging Fluid .................................. i Sommaire................................................................................... 62 vii | P a g e ...............................3.......... vii Chapter 1: 1............. 29 2.....2..2 2............3 General Form of the Solution ..............................................................1 2............................. 2 1............................. 8 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures Aspirating Fluids ..............................................

..............................5 Conclusion ..............................................................................13 3............. 65 3.............................................................................................................4 Introduction .........................................1 3.......... 80 Configuration 2i ........... 92 Configuration 4ii ....................... 70 The Experimental Apparatus .................................................................4....................................................................................................... XXVII Bibliography .................................4.. 95 Configuration 5ii .................................4...................4............14 3................................................................................................................................8 3...... XIII Technical Drawings for Chapter 2..................................................4 3............................ 80 3........................... 98 Configuration 6i ................. 103 Configuration 7i ............................................. 86 Configuration 3ii .............................15 Configuration 1 ............................ 100 Configuration 6ii .6 3........11 3............................................................ 105 Configuration 7ii .............7 3..12 3........... XXXV Drawings of the Experimental Configurations Tested in Chapter 3........................... 65 The Experimental Configurations ................................4........... 89 Configuration 3iii .................................................................. 83 Configuration 2iii ................................... 85 Configuration 3i ..................4.4..................................................Chapter 3: Experimental Study of the Stability of the Hanging Tubular Pipes Used in Salt Caverns .................................................................... 113 Stress Resultants and Moments Expressions ................................................................ 107 3...............4.9 3..................................................... 91 Configuration 4i .................................................................................4..................................................................................5 3.........4............ III Matrix Elements .4..........................4............................ XLVII viii | P a g e .3 3....2 3.............................................................4........................................................................ XXIII Technical Drawings for Chapter 3....................... 94 Configuration 5i ..............................................4.......................................................................... 81 Configuration 2ii ..................................................10 3................. I Application of the Variational Principle .......... 109 Chapter 4: Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Appendix D: Appendix E: Appendix F: Conclusion ...3 3...................................................2 3...................4............ 73 Experimental Observations .............................................................................................. IX Validation of the Computer Program .................................................................................................................................1 3..............

Chapter 3 treats the problem of the stability of the hanging tubular pipes used in salt caverns. The linear equations of motion are then derived through a variational principle and solved using the extended form of the Galerkin method. In the second one. The study was mainly experimental. the dynamics of a flexible cantilevered shell aspirating fluid is studied both experimentally and theoretically. The first deals with the stability of a cantilevered thin-walled pipe. In Chapter 2. a cylindrical shell. the theoretical results are compared to experimental observations for two different pipes that are made of the same material but whose lengths and wall thicknesses differ. (iii) cantilevered coaxial cylindrical structures and (iv) cantilevered cylindrical structures aspirating fluid. i. A new analytical model is first derived by taking into account a new boundary condition due to the fluid flowing from the free end to the clamped end. Finally. This thesis encompassed four chapters. In each configuration. the critical flow velocity and the corresponding 1|Page . the dynamics of a thick-walled pipe subjected to internal. (ii) cantilevered cylindrical structures in axial flow. Chapter 1 provides the general context of the research through a literature review that. aspirating air. external or simultaneous internal and external flows is experimentally investigated and some of the results are compared with an existing linear theory. introduces the field of Fluid-Structure Interactions and then briefly discusses earlier work carried out on different systems involving cylindrical cantilevered structures: (i) cantilevered cylindrical structures discharging fluid.e.Chapter 1: 1.1 Outline of the Thesis Introduction The work done in this thesis can be divided into two main themes. first. A great part of the work was to design and build an entirely new apparatus allowing the investigation of the dynamics of the pipe in a lot of different configurations with water as flowing fluid.

just like the column subjected to compressive loading and the rotating shaft are model problems for the study of stability of structures. Stability and reliability are always required in the development of new equipment. A really unfortunate example is the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in 1940. so that theoretical and experimental investigations can both be pursued and compared. as it is a simple system. Considering for example a woodwind instrument. it can be used to investigate the effects of 2|Page . But. such as heat exchangers. Since then. most importantly. That is why the study of flow induced vibrations of slender bodies has established itself as a challenging problem which the engineer has to face. Coriolis mass-flow meters.2 Literature Review Flow-induced vibration is a common phenomenon that arises in nature. nuclear reactors. usually. The dynamics of this system is indeed described by quite simple equations. as well as pulmonary and blood circulatory systems. much of the work in this area has been curiosity-driven because. Chapter 4 contains a summary and a discussion about this thesis as well as some insights for future work. 1. heat shields in aircraft engines. However. Finally. and experiments can easily be performed. it is well known that it produces music thanks to the reed that vibrates because of the blowing air. the pipe conveying fluid is asserting itself as another paradigm. But. jet pumps. the necessity of investigating the dynamics of slender structures subjected to and/or immersed in flow arises in a lot of different engineering systems. One of the early industrial studies was thus carried out by Ashley and Haviland (1950) to elucidate the vibrations of the Trans-Arabian pipeline. as pointed out by Païdoussis & Li (1993). in general. flow induced vibration is an undesirable feature in engineering systems where large amplitude vibrations could not only cause serious and costly damages but also put human life at risk.Chapter 1 frequency of oscillations as well as the pipe behaviour at higher flow velocity are described.

1 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures Discharging Fluid The early work on the dynamics of a pipe conveying fluid was conducted by Brillouin in 1885. his work remaining unpublished. he derived the correct equation of motion using string theory and was able to study the oscillatory instability of a cantilevered system both theoretically and experimentally. subjected to internal and/or external axial flow. In the following years. 1. He got very accurate results regarding stability but was unable to predict the critical flow velocity at the onset of oscillation due to lack of tools for numerical solutions. Bourrières. the interest for this subject was then driven by the problem of the Trans-Arabian pipeline that is considered as a series of simplysupported pipes at both ends. The work that has been undertaken for this Thesis deals with a lot of different configurations involving cantilevered pipes. Housner (1952) and Niordson (1953). rediscovered by Païdoussis more than thirty years later. undertook a very serious study on this subject right before the Second World War.2. such as dissipation. In his work (1939). it mainly focuses on the research dealing with aspirating cylindrical cantilevered structures. thick-walled or thin-walled (shells). his method of solution could only determine the dynamics of the system for 3|Page . Long (1955) was the first to consider a cantilevered pipe. fluid compressibility or viscosity but can also be the lead to study more complex systems. That is why the following literature review presenting various subjects is selective rather than exhaustive. Finally it is worth highlighting that these studies sometimes find practical applications years after they have been carried out.Chapter 1 different parameters. using different modelling but all considering pinned-pinned system. Unfortunately. the correct equations of motion were rederived by Feodos’ev (1951). But the equation of motion derived by Ashley and Haviland was incorrect. As recalled before. One of his students.

Païdoussis (1970) then extended the theory to vertical pipes where gravity is operative. Benjamin (1961) was the first to report on the phenomenon of unstable oscillations (he was unaware of Bourrières' work). surprisingly. It was later discovered by Chen (1971) and Sugiyama et al. dissipation in the material of the pipe due to the surrounding fluid. depending on its position along the pipe. not for longer tubes. Considering the dynamics of articulated cantilevered pipes conveying fluid. (1985) that the addition of a motion-constraining spring could stabilize the system or not. Deriving the linear equation of motion using a Newtonian approach. They specifically emphasized the inadequacy of the modelling used by Benjamin in the transition from a discrete to a continuous system. this theory was more suitable but. Contrary to what Benjamin (1961) observed for articulated pipes. he concluded that buckling does not occur for continuously flexible pipes. It was later confirmed both theoretically and experimentally by Gregory and Païdoussis (1966) that a continuous cantilevered pipe conveying fluid can flutter at sufficiently high flow velocity. In an attempt to improve the theory. they were able to predict the critical flow velocity at the onset of oscillatory instability. Païdoussis and Issid (1974) re-examined later the stability of the cantilevered pipe by deriving a more general equation of motion that takes into account gravity. this was later explained by Païdoussis and Deksnis (1970) in their study of articulated vertical pipes. They found that in the case of short tubes. tensioning and pressurization effects.Chapter 1 small flow velocities and he was unable to predict the oscillatory instabilities found by Bourrières. Laithier and Païdoussis (1981) included shear deformation in deriving the equations. that means they considered the tube as a Timoshenko beam. Other linear studies with additional springs and/or masses were then conducted by Hill and 4|Page .

(2007) conducted the same study but also considering 3-D motions in a three-part analysis. Wadham-Gagnon et al. Semler et al. 1971. Ghayesh and Païdoussis (2010) studied further the three-dimensional dynamics of a cantilevered pipe conveying fluid. In all previous studies mentioned so far. Jendrzejczyk and Chen (1985). additionally supported by an intermediate spring array. and Sugiyama et al. a socalled modified Flügge theory taking into account the effect of bending deformation is presented. It was not before the nonlinear equations of motion were derived in the 80’s that 3-D motion was considered. Because of the relative simplicity of the Donnell shallow shell theory. Flügge established a more refined theory presented in his own book (1973). (2007) and Modarres-Sadeghi et al. That is why Païdoussis and Denise (1970. In the past few years. In 1960. Païdoussis et al. 1972) studied both experimentally and theoretically such a system and predicted instabilities in the shell modes 5|Page . it has been widely used but gives accurate results only for large enough circumferential wavenumber n. (1988). Donnell was one of the first to tackle the problem of the dynamics of very thin pipes conveying fluid by deriving the equations of motion under simplifying hypotheses. More recently. Rinaldi (2010) studied the effect of a stabilizing end-piece. Renewed interest in the dynamics of thin-walled pipes (shells) conveying fluid was aroused by the fortuitous discovery in 1969 that both clamped-clamped and clamped-free shells conveying low-speed flow do flutter by losing stability in the so-called second circumferential ‘shell-type’ mode. (2007). Very recently. Chen and Jendrzejczyk (1985). In Yamaki’s book (1984).Chapter 1 Swanson (1970). They also considered the nonlinear equations with an added mass or springs but only for the case of planar motion. In 1934. The early nonlinear studies were conducted by Rousselet and Herrmann (1981) and Bajaj and Sethna (1982). the unstable oscillations are supposed to be planar. (1994) derived very accurate (to third order) and complete nonlinear equations of motion for pipes conveying fluid.

As the flow is incompressible. they introduce so-called downstream flow models. Reasonably good agreement was obtained between analytical results and experiments. Using this theory. In the current study also. To take that into account. Païdoussis. The problem was then revisited by Shayo and Ellen. Pursuing his work. it is the method that is used to solve the equations of motion. Luu and Laithier (1986) developed this concept by suggesting three different downstream flow models characterized by different conditions of continuity of the pressure and its derivative at the inlet of the shell and where the perturbation pressure is close to zero at a finite distance l downstream of the inlet. This method was then successfully used by Chan (1984) and Nguyen (1992) in their respective work concerning the dynamics of coaxial cylindrical shells conveying fluid that were clamped-clamped in Chan’s work and clamped-free in Nguyen’s. Païdoussis and Misra (1993) developed a new outflow model that is problem free with l tending to infinity. it has the great advantage of giving explicit expressions in terms of frequency. They first derived expressions for the generalized aerodynamic forces acting on the tube using Fourier Transform Theory. Nguyen pointed out some inaccuracies and numerical difficulties encountered with those models as l was increased. Shayo and Ellen (1974) were able to express the time-dependent fluid pressure due to flowing fluid and could obtain the critical flow velocity at divergence in terms of different parameters such as the radius-to-thickness ratio or the mode numbers.Chapter 1 involving deformation of the cross-section. first outlined by Dowell and Widnall (1966). Similar results were obtained independently by Weaver and Unny (1973) and extended by Weaver and Myklatun (1973). Thanks to this method. Shayo and Ellen (1978) revealed the importance of the effect of flow perturbations beyond the downstream end of the shell. it is possible to avoid considerable effort in the numerical solution required in previous methods. Nguyen. 6|Page .

(1999) who derived a first set of equations of motion. The experimental results are in good agreement with the theory. heat exchangers. the Dracone barge. It then regains stability and loses it again by flutter in its second mode and then in its third mode. Some nonlinear studies were then undertaken. the first-mode buckling and secondmode flutter can be missed out. This mistake was corrected and the correct linear equations of motion taking into account internal dissipation. A more general theoretical and experimental study of cylindrical structures in axial flow was conducted by Païdoussis (1966 a. towed acoustic arrays for oil exploration and high speed trains in tunnels. The linear equations of motion were derived including the viscous forces and a shape parameter f related to the tapering of the free end of the cylinder. f is equal to unity if the end is perfectly streamlined.Chapter 1 1. in nuclear reactors with fissile fuel rods subjected to axial flow. It was first related in the 60’s to the power generating industry. The Dracone is a long flexible towed container with tapered ends used for water transportation. pressurization and confinement are given in Païdoussis (1973). first by Lopes et al. However. The stability of this kind of flexible tubular container was first investigated by Hawthorne (1961). It has indeed some engineering applications: e. he showed the possible buckling of the system at sufficiently high towing velocity.2 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures in Axial Flow The study of vibration of cylindrical structures due to axial flow was undertaken quite recently. In the case of a sufficiently blunt end.2. However. as f approaches zero all instabilities disappear. The theoretical investigation showed that. A more general analysis was then undertaken by Païdoussis 7|Page . it first becomes unstable through a static divergence in its first mode. if the cylinder is sufficiently well streamlined.. Through a simplified analysis. a component due to viscous effects was forgotten when deriving the equations. b). it turns out that this correction did not change the general theoretical behaviour of the system. gravity.g. and zero if it is blunt.

Mateescu and Païdoussis (1985) developed a more rigorous inviscid analytical model.3 Cantilevered Coaxial Cylindrical Structures There exist many engineering applications involving cylindrical structures in a confined channel or two concentric pipes or shells. The linear and nonlinear theories were investigated and compared to experiments. The long ‘acoustic streamers’ used in oil exploration revived research interest in the subject.Chapter 1 et al. Païdoussis and Pettigrew (1979) and Païdoussis and Ostoja-Starzewski (1981). in control rods in guide tubes in nuclear reactors and in heat exchangers. (2002). (2002). Lopes et al. Unlike Dowling (1988) who showed that they were stable at all towed speed. the destabilization of the system as the gap becomes narrower and the dynamical effect of a convergent or 8|Page .2. The case of a rigid cylindrical body hinged at one point and coaxially positioned in a duct while subjected to annular flow was considered by Hobson (1982). Different related configurations will be discussed in this section because the flow can be in the inner cylinder only. or in both regions at the same time. de Langre et al. (2002) and Semler et al. He formulated an analytical model that showed the possible loss of stability via a negative-damping mechanism at sufficiently high velocity. Annular-flow-induced instabilities occur in certain types of pistons and valves. (2007) demonstrated that very long slender cylinders subjected to axial flow could indeed flutter if the free end is well streamlined. They demonstrate the existence of a critical location of the hinge. Considering the same type of problem but constraining the free motions of the centre-body with a rotational spring and a rotational dashpot at the hinge point. they all point out the destabilizing effect of confinement. Although the mathematical models do not seem so reliable in the case of not very confined flow. showing good agreement. in the annulus. The early studies on the stability of flexible cylinders in axisymmetrically confined flow were undertaken by Païdoussis (1973). 1.

discovering that they have a stabilizing effect on the system. cylinder wall thickness and boundary conditions were examined by Brown and Lieb (1980). Au-Yang (1976) calculated the added mass and the coupling coefficients of two coaxial cylinders of different lengths. In the same period. Yeh and Chen (1977) studied the effect of viscosity and found that it was negligibly small in most practical systems. One of the first studies of a coaxial system containing quiescent fluid is due to Chen and Rosenberg (1975). Païdoussis and Bélanger. some works dealing with the case of axysymmetric structures subjected to both inner and outer flow consider the external flow as unconfined. 1987) to deal with unsteady viscous effects. The main result was the relation of proportionality between their coupled axial mode numbers and their length. Some work was later undertaken to take into account turbulence in the flow and to use other integration methods. 1988). Those previous studies do not consider a flowing fluid. The foregoing works give a good overview of the general dynamics of a cylinder subjected to annular flow and we shall now focus on the studies that deal with coaxial systems in which both the inner cylinder and the annulus are filled with fluid.Chapter 1 divergent passage. The effects of gap width. They later improved their model (Mateescu and Païdoussis. A more general combined experimental and 9|Page . Cesari and Curioni (1971) studied a lot of different end-support configurations but only considered the buckling of horizontal pipes. as well as the hydrodynamical coupling in the motions of the coaxial cylinders giving rise to sets of in-phase and out-of-phase modes. The main interest was to study the effect of the added mass of the fluid due to the narrowness of the annulus. with results in good agreement with the theoretical predictions. They also conducted an experimental study of this problem (Mateescu. It was found that the lowest frequency of the coupled system is lower than those of the individual shells and is associated to an out-of-phase mode.

including the effects of gravity. potential flow theory is considered to describe the fluid motions. and the aerodynamic forces are evaluated through the Fourier transform method. It was found that. If it is well streamlined. the stability characteristics are not straightforward and depend on the velocities of the internal and external flow in a more complex fashion as well as on the shape of the free end. but only limited calculations and results were given. followed by a succession of buckling and flutter instabilities. It was found that.Chapter 1 theoretical study was done by Hannoyer and Païdoussis (1978). for a pinned-pinned system. In the 80’s. increasing the internal and/or external flow caused the system to lose stability first by buckling. For the cantilevered beam. the dynamics of the system is dominated by internal flow and flutter will occur. They derived the equations of motion for both the cases of cantilevered and simply supported beams. In all cases. They found that a conical beam inside and/or outside is usually less stable. by increasing the flow velocity in the inner and/or the outer region. but he was able to determine the lowest natural frequencies of the system only. depending on the parameters of the system. If the free end is blunt. Weppelink (1979) undertook a more general study of the dynamics of a flexible cylindrical shell in a coaxial rigid cylinder within the inner shell and/or in the annular region. Hannoyer and Païdoussis (1979) later extended their model to deal with the case of conical cantilevers. It appears that Krajcinovic (1974) was the first to consider flowing fluid in a confined annular region. experiments were also conducted and the results were found to be in good agreement with theory. the system will lose stability by a complex sequence of buckling and flutter instabilities. (1984) conducted a really serious study of the stability of a system of two clamped-clamped coaxial shells subjected to incompressible or compressible inviscid fluid in the annulus and/or the inner shell. Païdoussis et al. The shell motions are governed by Flügge’s thin-shell equations. internal dissipation and an external boundary layer. Galerkin’s method is used to get solutions of the set of equations. the 10 | P a g e .

the effect could be either stabilizing or destabilizing depending on the system parameters. They found that. Later. their stabilizing influence was overwhelmed by the opposing effect of the steady viscous forces. The same effects arise if the main flow is the internal one. some difficulties were encountered with the application of the no-slip boundary condition on the wall. Païdoussis et al. The model was then extended. The pressurization in the inner flow was found to be stabilizing.Chapter 1 system first loses stability by divergence followed by coupled-mode flutter. but also that the coupled system is less stable than a single shell. and the steady viscous terms were accounted for (Païdoussis et al. The viscous terms were found to destabilize the system visà-vis the annular flow but to stabilize it for internal flow. El Chebair et al. 1985).. whereas viscous theory assumed that the system would first lose stability by divergence and then by flutter. (1990) attempted to improve the model by taking into account the unsteady viscous forces. if the outer shell is flexible. in the case of inner flow. If the outer shell is rigid. decreasing the annular gap width or decreasing the shell thickness destabilizes the system. The unsteady viscous forces appeared to have a really small effect on the dynamics of the system. 11 | P a g e . flutter was predicted by inviscid theory. The steady viscous effects were taken into account and the fluid flow beyond the free end was determined by an ‘‘outflow model’’. (1991) studied the stability of cantilevered coaxial cylindrical shells conveying incompressible fluid. (1992) studied the effect of the system parameters. the system first loses stability by flutter in both inviscid and viscous theory. but. For annular flow. pressurization of the annular flow has a destabilizing effect. Following the same kind of method. In that study. Païdoussis et al. It was found that increasing the length of the shells. The presence of internal flow in addition to annular flow tends to stabilize the system at low flow velocities but to destabilize it at higher flow velocities.

She also found that it behaves 12 | P a g e . But the coupled-mode flutter predicted by theory was never observed. Some works were also undertaken considering a coaxial system in which the internal and annular flows are not independent. For the clamped-clamped shells. The same observations were made regarding the effects of the parameters of the system. followed by flutter at higher flow velocity. (2008). The study of such systems was motivated by the problem of the patented drill-string described by Den Hartog (1969). In both cases. The work of Luu (1983) was revisited by Païdoussis et al. Nguyen et al. Rinaldi (2009) undertook experimental work to compare with these theoretical results. The main effect is to destabilize the system. For internal flow the first instability is flutter. and flutter occurs at really low flow velocities. the dynamics of the system is dominated by the internal flow so that the system is damped at low flow velocities but loses stability by flutter at higher flow velocities. it was also pointed out that increasing the length-to-radius ratio or the gap-to-radius ratio destabilizes the system. the system first loses stability. (1993) conducted some experiments too. the water is conveyed downwards in the cantilevered pipe and then flows upward around the cantilever as a confined annular flow. The cantilevered system loses stability by a single degree of freedom flutter. In this system. the experimental observations show that the system first loses stability by buckling as predicted by the theory. (1989) conducted some experiments to observe the dynamics of annular-flow-induced instabilities of cylindrical clamped-clamped or clamped-free shells. generally by flutter but sometimes by divergence. It was observed that for annular flow. The experiments are in generally good agreement with the theory. For narrower annuli. Qualitatively. the dynamics of the system is overwhelmed by the annular flow. the system loses stability at very low flow velocity regardless of the amount of confinement.Chapter 1 El Chebair et al. The main results of this work show that for a wide annulus. but in the case of a cantilevered shell concentrically located within a rigid cylinder only.

i. the system becomes an aspirating cantilever pipe.Chapter 1 as a free-clamped cylinder. The dynamics was explored experimentally at the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories in Ontario. 1. Increasing the velocity further. with the fluid entering the free end and then flowing upward towards the clamped one. i.e. flutter in that kind of system has to be avoided. companies would prefer to liquefy the natural gas directly where it is extracted. was aroused by its use in “ocean mining”. it never occurred at any experimental flow velocity. paving the way to some suggestions for future work. The first attempt to study such a system was conducted by Païdoussis in the mid-1960s. a cantilevered cylinder subjected to axial flow directed from the free end to the clamped on. 13 | P a g e . which Rinaldi also studied in her work.4 Cantilevered Cylindrical Structures Aspirating Fluids The early interest in the dynamics of aspirating cantilevered pipes. cold water is aspirated by long pipes really deep in the ocean. Although flutter was expected. In this process. If.2. Increasing the flow velocity induces higher vibration frequencies and amplitudes. for any reason. to gain time and money. it appeared that the experimental results were not in good agreement with the theoretical ones. For the well-being of people and equipment. Some recent developments have given added impetus to the necessity of knowing if the system will become unstable at low flow velocity. Specifically.e. the system becomes chaotic and impacts the sides of the rigid annular channel surrounding the pipe. The system consists in a large vacuum cleaner with a “miner” at the end of the pipe in contact with the sea floor. this contact is broken. The work was abandoned because of the shelltype collapse of the pipe near the support due to the induced large negative transmural pressure. The effect of reinforcing the pipe was just to postpone the collapse to a higher flow. Even if the flutter was well predicted by theory.

In the new apparatus. the mirror-image behaviour of this system was theoretically predicted: the system was shown to lose stability by flutter at infinitesimal flow velocities in the absence of dissipation and then to regain stability at a higher flow rate. a lot of theories have been developed in an attempt to predict if flutter will occur and the critical velocity if necessary.J. an end-mass and viscous damping were derived considering the conventional boundary conditions (i. Thus one was aspirating flow and the other 14 | P a g e . Naturally. Here the direction of the inlet flow was considered to remain tangential to the deflected pipe. But the experiment was finally abandonned when water was spread all over the laboratory because the hose leading the water to the tank burst free of its clamp.Chapter 1 In the past twenty years. it was not before 1995 and a discussion between Prof. The first general theoretical study has been undertaken by Païdoussis and Luu (1985). The water was supplied into the tank and forced into the pipe and out of the tank. added mass. 1999) revisited the problem both theoretically and experimentally and came to the conclusion that ‘’aspirating pipes do not flutter at infinitesimally small flow’’. the pressure was continuously increased to get a higher flow rate. buoyancy. the pipe was hung vertically and was totally immersed in water in a steel tank. the bending moment and shear forces were assumed to be zero at the free end). A little later.e. Subsequently. Several experiments were conducted with different pipe thicknesses and different-shaped inlet forms. were connected via a pump. an experimental investigation was conducted at McGill University. The equations of motion including the effect of gravity. M. They conducted an experiment in which two flexible elastomer pipes fitted with elbows at their free end. The result was essentially obtained by replacing +U by -U in the equations of motion of a cantilevered pipe discharging fluid. Maull of Cambridge University linking this problem with Feynman’s aspirating rotary-sprinkler quandary that the investigation resumed. hanging vertically in water.P. As flutter was never observed. Païdoussis (1998. Païdoussis and Dr D.

It was found that the occurrence of flutter of the system depended on some parameters related to the tensioning effect (ߛ). even in the absence of centrifugal force. This effect would explain the stability of the system. the depressurization might have been overestimated and should finally lie between –ρU2 and –½ρU2. But it was not long before Kuiper and Metrikine (2005) raised some doubts concerning the previous analysis. by the action of Coriolis force alone. stable at low flow velocity.Chapter 1 discharging it. The basic theory assumes that the mean flow remains unchanged in the vertical direction and no tensioning effects are considered. The main theoretical device to explain the contradiction between theory and experiment was to find a correct description of the flow field in the vicinity of the inlet. 2005) were developed allowing the intake flow to remain tangential to the deflected pipe and also considering tensioning effects and dissipation. Thus having a correct description of both the flow field around the free end and the viscous damping due to the surrounding fluid seems of great importance. They pointed out that the depressurization influences the general dynamics of the system only slightly and that the system could lose stability. Once again.. A new description of the boundary conditions was developed assuming that forces are exerted at the inlet of the pipe because of a change of momentum of the entering fluid. buckled at higher flow rate. This depressurization was shown to cancel out the centrifugal force. For these reasons. Variants of the model (Païdoussis et al. To explain the paradox. Furthermore. they suggested that the external hydrodynamic drag on the pipe is a major stabilizing factor and the viscosity of the surrounding fluid has to be taken into account. Here the main new idea was to consider a pressure drop at the intake of the pipe. The system. considering the pressure drop at the inlet as well as a tensioning effect induced by the flow near the free end. the centrifugal force may in fact not cancel out. Païdoussis (2005) reevaluated the problem by developing a new set of boundary conditions. no flutter was observed. as it was made clear that it is not a reverse jet but rather a sink flow. the change of flow 15 | P a g e .

and the dissipation in velocity (ߙ ൌ ܸ ⁄ܷ with ܸ being the velocity near the inlet). was partially submerged in water. Although the main frequency is well predicted. the flow direction the pipe and from the surrounding fluid. the aim of the initial numerical experiment was to study the flow field in the vicinity of the intake to get a good estimation of the parameters ߛ. Païdoussis (2008) and Rinaldi (2009) carried out a general experimental. Some problems concerning length of the computing periods and mesh deformation were encountered. Using a computational fluid dynamics and finite element analysis model in ANSYS. On their side. Giacobbi et al.Chapter 1 (ߜ௦ =0 or 1 for vertical or tangential entry) at the free end. Giacobbi undertook a numerical simulation of the problem. in the recent past. the behaviour of the pipe is a complex motion combining two phases: a nearly periodic orbital motion alternating with a noise-like vibration of small amplitude. ߙ and ߜ௦ . It was concluded that it would be of particular interest to have CFD simulations to better understand what happens near the intake. For the first time. But.1 m. it was not possible to predict the unsteady unstable motion. The experimental results were compared to existing theory. but this method gave some significant results. the stability 16 | P a g e . 2008). (2007) tried to improve the description of the hydrodynamic drag. Then. but their results did not meet their expectations and they decided to undertake experiments with a long pipe (Kuiper and Metrikine. the amplitude of the steady state orbital motion. about 5 m long with a diameter of 0. and the critical flow velocity at the onset of flutter. theoretical and numerical investigation of this problem. First. it was observed that for a sufficiently high flow velocity. a cantilevered plastic pipe. above this critical velocity. (2008). Independently of the above. an aspirating cantilevered pipe can lose stability. Giacobbi (2007). In this new set-up. These results elicit the necessity to further study the problem. Kuiper et al. Some work started on this at McGill in 2005 and is discussed later.

Considering that the force exerted at the intake does not materialize instantaneously. The system loses stability by flutter in its first mode.Chapter 1 of the system was investigated and it was shown that it is definitely subject to flutter at flow velocities in the range of those observed experimentally. and a shell-type collapse of the free end of the cantilevered pipe in the absence of a stiffening end-piece. This numerical investigation is still being pursued. the theoretical and experimental results are in good agreement. New experiments in air were also conducted and it was shown that for an appropriate set of axial and lateral time delay values. it is worth pointing out that Rinaldi also observed an unexplainable and intermittent shuddering motion characterized by a decrease of the amplitude of the system. A review of the analytical model was performed by Rinaldi (2009). one for each component of this force. She rederived the equations of motion including the effect of gravity and modified it. two distinct time-delays are included in the equations. However. 17 | P a g e .

.

It will be followed by a discussion about the theoretical results and the experimental observations. It. It consists of a flexible cantilevered cylindrical shell aspirating fluid. the question of the stability of cantilevered shell arose.1.Chapter 2: Dynamics of a Cantilevered Shell Aspirating Fluid 2. The 19 | P a g e .a. a wall thickness h. a radius a. experienced a shell-type instability at rather low flow velocity. it recently appears necessary to investigate this problem. an analytical model of this problem will be developed.1 Introduction As presented in Chapter 1.2 Equations of Motion For the shell under consideration. The equations of motion will first be derived. Montreal.b is used due to cylindrical nature of the system.1. The cylindrical coordinate system (r. unexpectedly. e. The fluid has density ρf and a velocity U inside the shell. in boats liquefying the gas on board. Experiments were conducted a few years ago by Rinaldi (2009) at McGill University. θ.g. Canada. a lot of work has been carried out on the subject of cantilevered shell aspirating fluid over the past years. a method to find solution to these equations will then be presented. Her experiments involved a thick-walled cantilevered pipe that was aspirating air. In this Chapter. 2. The shell is characterized by a length L. x) shown in Figure 2. the configuration is presented in Figure 2. Its origin is located on the tube axis at the clamped end of the shell. a cross-sectional flow area A. a density ρs. as industrial installations now utlizise this kind of system. Although she bypassed the problem by adding a stabilising end-piece. a Young’s modulus E and a Poisson’s ratio ν. If it was first motivated by fundamental interest.

2.1 Model Assumptions In order to develop a first mathematical model for this configuration. The important consequence of this hypothesis is that it allows to describe this problem using a linear theory. (4) any straight line normal to the undeformed reference surface remains straight and normal to the deformed reference surface and their length is not affected. we shall consider only small deformations of the middle surface of the shell. (2) the strains are small enough for Hooke’s law to hold. ݄/ܽ ‫ ا‬1.1: a) A cantilevered shell aspirating fluid and b) the coordinate system and some key dimensions [Païdoussis et al. (3) the stress acting in the direction normal to the reference surface is negligible compared with the stresses acting in a direction parallel to the middle surface. i. For this purpose. (2005)] 2. Clamped end Shell Free end a) b) Figure 2. some assumptions need to be made. 20 | P a g e . we employ the modified Flügge theory based on the following assumptions: (1) the shell is sufficiently thin compared with the least radius of curvature of the reference surface. v and w with w being positive outward.e. First of all.Chapter 2 displacement components of the middle surface are u.

‫݌‬௫଴ . ܰ௫଴ . All these assumptions are relative to the shell. ‫݌‬଴ . The magnitude of the steady components. is much larger than the other ones. ‫כ‬ ‫ ݌‬ൌ ‫݌‬௫଴ ൅ ‫݌‬௫ଵ . ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬௭ ൌ ‫݌‬଴ ൅ ‫݌‬ଵ . And. Finally. inviscid. So that the stress resultants ܰ௫ and ܰఏ and the loads ‫݌‬௫ ‫כ‬ and ‫݌‬௭ represented in the Figure 2. ܰఏ଴ . the shell is pre-stressed by a constant axial force per unit surface area. In this theory. when it comes to calculating friction-related stress resultants. The first four hypotheses constitute the classical theory of shells proposed by Love in 1888 and presented in his book (1927). (2. non-heat-conducting. This means that the flow is irrotational. ܰఏ ൌ ܰఏ଴ ൅ ܰఏଵ . Regarding the fluid flow. and an axially ‫כ‬ basic hoop stress. viewed as additional loads. this means that terms of orders up to ሺ݄⁄ܽሻଶ are taken into account. second order terms are retained.2 are the combination of the former symmetric pressure. called basic loads. we consider it as a potential flow and the fluid to be incompressible. we will take into account steady viscous effects and pressurization effects in this theory. and a components and an additional time-varying part: All the other components consist only of an additional part and will not be denoted by any subscript. the shell is subjected to two kinds of load: a static part and a time dependent one. we consider the flow to be a fully-developed turbulent flow. ൞ ௫ ܰ௫ ൌ ܰ௫଴ ൅ ܰ௫ଵ . the incompressibility assumption may seem inappropriate but the velocity is sufficiently small for this assumption to hold. These forces generate a basic axial stress. However.1) 21 | P a g e . homogeneous and incompressible.Chapter 2 (5) in deriving the expressions for strain and stress resultants. As we are using air in the experiments.

ܽ (2. we get their final expressions (Appendix A). The definitions of the stress resultants and moments are defined in the first chapter of Flügge’s book (1973). Here.2. Introducing them in the definitions of the stress resultants and couples.2: Stress and moment resultants acting on a shell element 2. more elaborate explanations are presented in Appendices A and B. To obtain the relevant expressions in our particular case. we first need to express the displacement of an arbitrary point of the shell according to the displacement of the point located on the reference surface.Chapter 2 ܳఏ ܳ௫ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ ‫ݎ‬ ‫ݔ‬ ܰ௫ఏ ܰ௫ ߠ ܰఏ௫ ܰఏ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬௥ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ఏ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬௫ ‫ݎ‬ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ ‫ܯ‬௫ ‫ݔ‬ ߠ ‫ܯ‬ఏ Figure 2. we will just describe the most important steps in the employed method. Then. Using assumptions 2 and 3.2 Derivation of the Fundamental Equations The derivation is carried out in two major parts following the lead of Yamaki’s book (1984): (i) obtaining the expressions of the time-dependent stress resultants and stress couples. The first one is given by 1 ܷ௘ ൌ න න 2 ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ௛/ଶ ି௛/ଶ ‫ݖ‬ න ሺߪ௫௫ ߝ௫ ൅ ߪఏఏ ߝఏ ൅ ߪ௫ఏ ߛ௫ఏ ሻ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ܽ݀‫ݖ݀ߠ݀ݔ‬. we can define the strain expression considering only εx. Before applying the variational principle. (ii) deriving the equations through a variational principle.2) 22 | P a g e . we determine the corresponding stresses. εθ and γxθ. we have to determine the expressions of the variation of the elastic strain energy and of the potential of the external force.

and the fluid pressure outside the shell.௫ ൅ ൰ ߜ‫ݓ‬൨ൠ ܽ݀‫ߠ݀ݔ‬ ܽ ‫כ‬ െ ‫݌‬௭ ൤‫ݓ‬. as it is a radial load. ܲ௭‫ כ‬and ‫ܯ‬௫ are respectively the three components of the external ‫כ‬ ௫ୀ௅ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ െ න ሾܲ௫ ߜ‫ ݑ‬൅ ܲణ ߜ‫ ݒ‬െ ܲ௭‫ ݓߜ כ‬൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ ߜ‫ݓ‬. the acceleration terms and the radial additional load for the last one: ߲ଶ‫ݑ‬ ‫כ‬ ‫݌ ۓ‬௫ ൌ ‫݌‬௫଴ െ ߩ௦ ݄ ଶ . Finally. load and the bending moment applied to the edge of the shell. the product of the latter with a displacement or its derivative is of order one and has to be taken into account.Chapter 2 and the variation of this elastic strain energy is expressed as ߜܷ௘ ൌ න න ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ௛/ଶ ି௛/ଶ ‫ݖ‬ න ሺߪ௫௫ ߜߝ௫ ൅ ߪఏఏ ߜߝఏ ൅ ߪ௫ఏ ߜߛ௫ఏ ሻ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ܽ݀‫ݖ݀ߠ݀ݔ‬.௫ ߜ‫ ݑ‬൅ ଶగ௔ ଴ ‫ݒ‬. pe: 23 | P a g e . is given by the difference between the fluid pressure inside the shell.3) To express the variation of the potential of the external force.4) ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ where ܲ௫‫ כ‬.௫ ሿ௫ୀ଴ ܽ݀ߠ. we have to consider the deformation of the shell.ఏ െ ‫ݒ‬ ߜ‫ݒ‬ ܽ ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ‫כ‬ ൰ ߜ‫ ݑ‬൅ ‫ݒ‬. ‫݌‬ణ ܽ݊݀ ‫݌‬௭ load acting on the pre-stressed shell has only a radial component.௫ ߜ‫ݒ‬൨ ൅ ‫݌‬ఏ ߜ‫ݒ‬ ܽ (2. ߲‫ݐ‬ ۖ ۖ ଶ ߲ ‫ݒ‬ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ఏ ൌ െߩ௦ ݄ ଶ . we have to remember that one component of the loads is of zero order.5) where q.1). ௭ ଴ ௦ ‫ە‬ ߲‫ ݐ‬ଶ (2. the expression of this variation is given by ‫כ‬ ߜܸ௙ ൌ െ න න ൜‫݌‬௫ ൤൬1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬. pi. Indeed. ‫݌‬௫ consist in the association of the basic loads presented in equation (2. ܽ (2. If the additional ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ .ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ െ ൬1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬. to consider all the terms of first order in the equations of motion. As a result. ߲‫ݐ‬ ‫۔‬ ۖ ߲ଶ‫ݓ‬ ۖ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ ൌ ‫݌‬ ൅ ‫ݍ‬ െ ߩ ݄ . ܲణ .௫ ൅ ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ‫ݓ‬.

7) Developing this expression and keeping only the terms of zero order. neither ܰ௫଴ or ܰఏ଴ will depend of the θ component.Chapter 2 ‫ ݍ‬ൌ ‫݌‬௜ െ ‫݌‬௘ |௥ୀ௔ (2.10) so that (2. To get the pressure distribution along the shell. so. we obtain ൬‫݌‬଴ ൅ ߲‫݌‬଴ ݀‫ݔ‬൰ ߨܽଶ െ ‫݌‬଴ ߨܽଶ ൅ ‫݌‬௫଴ 2ߨܽ݀‫ ݔ‬ൌ 0. Whether it is laminar or turbulent. ߲‫ݔ‬ ܽ (2.8) wall shear stress of a fully-developed pipe flow.9) pipe. ‫݌‬௫଴ represents the At the zero order.11) 24 | P a g e . It is only subjected to steady pressure and steady viscous effect. we simply have to consider the equilibrium of a small section of the fluid inside a pipe. (2. (2. ‫ߠ߲ ۔‬ ܰఏ଴ ۖ ‫݌ ە‬଴ ൌ ܽ . the shell can be considered as an axially symmetric where λf is the friction factor given in Fox et al. (2009). 8 (2.6) The variational principle states that ߜܷ௘ ൅ ߜܸ௙ ൌ 0. (2009) that 1 ‫݌‬௫଴ ൌ െ ߣ௙ ߩ௙ ܷ ଶ . The length of this region being dx and the radius a. it has been shown by Fox et al. ۖ ߲‫ݔ‬ ߲ܰఏ଴ ൌ 0. we get ߲ܰ௫଴ ‫ۓ‬ ൌ െ‫݌‬௫଴ . ߲‫ݔ‬ ߲‫݌‬଴ ‫݌‬௫଴ ൅2 ൌ 0.

‫ ׏‬ൌa ∂x ଶ ∂θଶ ଶ ଶ ߲ . ‫ݒ‬. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ߥ‫ݑ‬ᇱ ൅ ‫ · ݒ‬൅ ‫ݓ‬ ൅ ݇௔ ൤ ൌ 0. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ 1൅ߥ · 1 െ ߥ ᇱᇱ ‫ݑ‬Ԣ ൅ ‫ ·· ݒ‬൅ ‫ ݒ‬൅ ‫·ݓ‬ 2 2 1 െ ߥ ᇱᇱ 3 െ ߥ · ൅ ݇௔ ൤3 ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬ԢԢ ൨ ൅ ߬௫ ‫ ݒ‬ᇱᇱ ൅ ߬ఏ ሺ‫ ·· ݒ‬൅ ‫ · ݓ‬ሻ 2 2 െߛ ߲ଶ‫ݒ‬ ൌ 0. ߲‫ ݐ‬ଶ 1 െ ߥ ·· 3െߥ · ‫ݑ‬Ԣ െ ‫ݑ‬ᇱᇱᇱ െ ‫ݒ‬ԢԢ ൅ ‫׏‬ସ w ൅ 2w ·· 2 2 ᇱᇱ ߲ଶ‫ݑ‬ ൌ 0. ߬.12) and from equations (2. ܰఏ଴ ሽ. 12 ܽ 1 െ ߥଶ ሼܰ௫଴ .15) ‫ܮ‬ଷ ሺ‫ݑ‬.14) (2. ‫ݒ‬. ߲‫ݔ‬ ሼ߬௫ .8). we get ‫݌‬଴ ሺ‫ݔ‬ሻ ൌ 2 ‫݌‬௫଴ ‫ܥ‬ଶ ሺ‫ ܮ‬െ ‫ݔ‬ሻ ൅ . ‫ݒ‬. we obtain ൜ where C1 and C2 are constant. ߲ߠ ሺ ሻᇱ ൌ ܽ ߲ . ‫݄ܧ‬ ߩ௦ ܽଶ ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ ߛൌ ‫ܧ‬ 25 | P a g e . Hence. ܽ ܽ (2. ܰఏ଴ ൌ 2‫݌‬௫଴ ሺ‫ ܮ‬െ ‫ݔ‬ሻ ൅ ‫ܥ‬ଶ .Chapter 2 Integrating equation (2.16) where ሺ ሻ· ൌ ∂ଶ ∂ଶ ൅ . ܽ‫݌‬௫଴ . ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ݑ‬ᇱᇱ ൅ 1 െ ߥ ·· 1 ൅ ߥ · ‫ ݑ‬൅ ‫ݒ‬Ԣ ൅ ߥ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ 2 2 1 െ ߥ ·· 1 െ ߥ ·· ൅ ݇௔ ൤ ‫ ݑ‬െ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱᇱ ൅ ‫ݓ‬Ԣ ൨ ൅ ߬௫ ‫ݑ‬ᇱᇱ 2 2 ൅ ߬ሺ‫ ݒ‬൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ߬ఏ ሺ‫ ··ݑ‬െ ‫ݓ‬Ԣሻ െ ߛ · ܰ௫଴ ൌ ‫݌‬௫଴ ሺ‫ ܮ‬െ ‫ݔ‬ሻ ൅ ‫ܥ‬ଵ . (2. depending only on the boundary conditions. ߬ఏ ሽ ൌ 1 ݄ ଶ ݇௔ ൌ ൬ ൰ .11) along the shell. This will be discussed later. we finally obtain the equations of motion: ‫ܮ‬ଵ ሺ‫ݑ‬.13) ‫ܮ‬ଶ ሺ‫ݑ‬. ൅ w൨ െ ߬௫ ‫ ݓ‬െ ߬ఏ ሺ‫ݑ‬ᇱ െ‫ ݒ‬൅‫ݓ‬ · ·· ሻ ߲ଶ‫ݓ‬ ‫ݍ‬ ൅ߛቈ ଶ െ ቉ ߲‫ݐ‬ ߩ௦ ݄ (2. ߲‫ ݐ‬ଶ (2.

and upon entering the shell it becomes U.ఏ ൌ 0. ‫۔‬ ܽ ۖ ‫ܯ‬௫ ൌ 0. the direction of the flow velocity depends of the position along the circumference of the intake.3. To determine the expression of the mass m. 2ߨ (2.௫ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ .2. That is why we will determine the fluid forces acting on a small part of the free end inclined at an angle ߯ ‫ ؠ‬tanିଵሺ‫ݓ‬.17) But here we are considering a shell that is aspirating fluid. ‫ܯ‬ ܰ௫ఏ െ ௫ఏ ൌ 0. we can get the usual boundary conditions for a cantilevered shell: ܽ‫ ݔ ݐ‬ൌ 0: ܽ‫ ݔ ݐ‬ൌ ‫ܮ‬: ߲‫ݓ‬ ൌ 0. ‫ۓ‬ ‫כ‬ ܽܰఏ଴ ൌ ܲణ . the flow velocity is V. so that the intake of the shell is not stress-free. ܷ݉∆ܷ. 26 | P a g e . As we consider shell vibrations.18) where ‫ ܯ‬ൌ ߩ௙ ߨܽଶ is the mass of fluid per unit length of the shell. Before entering the shell.2.௫ ሻ௅ . So that the norm and the direction of the fluid velocity change at the intake inducing a change in momentum.3.ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ .3 Boundary Conditions From the variational principle (see Appendix B) used in the Section 2.௫ ሻ௅ ൎ ሺ‫ݓ‬. The configuration of the vibrating end of a shell is presented in Figure 2. ߲‫ݔ‬ ‫כ‬ ܽܰ௫଴ ൌ ܲ௫ . we consider that the force exerted on the considered part of the intake is only due to the change of momentum of the fluid going through the region whose area is A1 represented in Figure 2. We have to consider that forces are exerted at this end due to the fluid entering the shell.a. V will remain vertical. ‫ݑ‬ൌ‫ݒ‬ൌ‫ݓ‬ൌ (2.2.b and that the fluid flow is equally distributed among the cross section: ݉ൌ ‫ܯ‬ ݀ߠ. Because of the circular shape of the shell. ۖ ‫ܯܽە‬௫ . ۖ ۖ ܰ௫ଵ ൌ 0.Chapter 2 2.

௫ |௅ . 2ߨ ‫ߠ݀ܯ‬ ‫ܨ‬௓ ൌ െ ܷሺ‫ݓ‬. 2ߨ ‫כ‬ ‫ܨ‬௑ ൌ ‫ܨ‬௓ ൌ ‫ߠ݀ܯ‬ ߲‫ݓ‬ ܷ ൭0 െ ൬ܷ sin ߯ ൅ ൰൱. a force that we separate in two components arises: ‫ܨ‬௑ ൌ ‫ߠ݀ܯ‬ ܷሺܸ െ ܷ cos ߯ሻ.௫ |௅ ሻ. 2ߨ ߲‫ݐ‬ (2.19) (2. 2ߨ thus where ߙ ൌ ܸ ⁄ܷ. But we are interested in the reaction: the forces exerted on the shell.22) These are the forces exerted by the shell on the fluid.23) (2.3: a) A cylindrical shell showing the configuration of a shell element at the free end and b) the forces acting on it.௫ |௅ ሻ.௧ |௅ ൅ ܷ‫ݓ‬. cos ߯ ൎ 1 and sin ߯ ൎ ‫ݓ‬. 2ߨ ‫ߠ݀ܯ‬ ‫כ‬ ‫ܨ‬௓ ൌ ܷሺ‫ݓ‬.20) (2. Because of this phenomenon.௧ |௅ ൅ ܷ‫ݓ‬. 2ߨ ‫ܨ‬௑ ൌ െ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ. and ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ. (2.24) 27 | P a g e .21) (2.Chapter 2 ‫ݖ‬ ߯ ‫ݔ‬ ܼ ܺ ሬԦ ܷ ሬԦ ܸ dθ ܶ௫ ܰ௫ a) ߯ A1 ܵ௫ b) Figure 2. As ߯ is supposed to be small.

Finally. the force acting at the shell intake in the x-direction is ܶ െ ‫݌‬ҧ ‫ܣ‬ଵ ൌ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻሺ1 ൅ ߛҧ ሻ. 2ߨ It is now supposed that the force ‫ܨ‬௫‫ כ‬is due to the pressure drop at the ‫ܨ‬௭‫ כ‬ൌ ‫ߠ݀ܯ‬ ܷሺ‫ݓ‬.and zdirection (see Figure 2. 2ߨ (2. is acting on the lips of the shell. A0 is the outer sectional area of the region considered and ߛҧ ൌ ߛ ஺బ ି஺భ ஺భ . and from (2.25) (2.13): ܽ݀ߠܰ௫଴ ሺ‫ܮ‬ሻ ൌ ܶ െ ‫݌‬ҧ ‫ܣ‬ଵ ൌ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻሺ1 ൅ ߛҧ ሻ. T.29) It is of order zero and it allows us to determine the constant C1 of (2. 2ߨ (2.26) (2.30) yielding ܰ௫଴ ሺ‫ܮ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ൌ Furthermore.Chapter 2 Therefore the fluid forces acting at the shell intake in the x. We also have to consider that a compression force. Then.27) we get ܰఏ଴ ሺ‫ܮ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ܥ‬ଶ ൌ െ ߩ௙ ܽ ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ.௧ |௅ ൅ ܷߙ‫ݓ‬.3.௫ |௅ ሻ.28) where ‫݌‬ҧ ൌ ‫݌‬଴ ሺ‫ܮ‬ሻ. we know that ܰఏ଴ ሺ‫ܮ‬ሻ ൌ ܽ‫݌‬ҧ.b) are: ‫ܨ‬௫‫ כ‬ൌ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ.27) (2. 2ߨ ‫ܣ‬଴ െ ‫ܣ‬ଵ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܶ ൌ െߛ‫݌‬ҧ ሺ‫ܣ‬଴ െ ‫ܣ‬ଵ ሻ ൌ ߛ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ ‫ܣ‬ଵ 2ߨ െ‫݌‬ҧ ‫ܣ‬ଵ ൌ ‫ܨ‬௫‫ כ‬ൌ ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ൌ ߛҧ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ. 2ߨ (2.32) ߩ௙ ܽ ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻሺ1 ൅ ߛҧ ሻ. 2 (2. ‫ ߠ݀ܯ‬ଶ ܷ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ. 2 (2.31) 28 | P a g e . 2ߨ shell intake.

‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱ ൅ ߥ‫ ·· ݓ‬െ ߥ‫ · ݒ‬െ ‫ݑ‬Ԣ ൌ 0. we will velocity potential Ψሺ‫ݔ‬. ‫ݒ‬.2.Chapter 2 Equation (2. ߠ. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ െ‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱᇱ െ ሺ2 െ ߥሻ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ ൅ ܴଶ ሺ‫ݑ‬. ܸ ‫׏‬ (2.39) (2. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ ·ݑ‬൅ ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ ൅ 3݇ሺ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ െ ‫ݓ‬Ԣ· ሻ ൌ 0. the potential Ψ can be separated into two 29 | P a g e . inviscid.௫ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ .௧ |௅ ൅ ܷߙ‫ݓ‬. homogeneous and incompressible.ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ . 2ߨ ܴଵ ሺ‫ݑ‬.4 Dynamics of the Fluid Flow In the equations of motion. ߩ௙ ܽଶ ൅‫ ݑ‬൅ ܷሺ‫ݓ‬. ‫ݐ‬ሻ: ሬԦ can be expressed by a use potential flow theory. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ݑ‬ᇱ ൅ ߥ‫ · ݒ‬൅ ߥ‫ ݓ‬െ ݇‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱ ൌ 0.38) components: a steady one giving the mean flow velocity U in the x-direction and for the pressure: a disturbed component defined by the scalar Ψሺ‫ݔ‬.26) is of the first order. ܲ ൌ ‫݌‬଴ ൅ ‫݌‬.௫ |௅ ሻ െ ሺܽ‫ܯ‬௫ . ‫ݒ‬.17) changes and it becomes ‫ܯ‬ ܷሺ‫ݓ‬. 2 ᇱᇱ ·· (2. we still need to develop the expression of the perturbation pressure inside and outside of the shell.33) Finally.36) 3 െ ߥ ᇱ · 1 െ ߥ ·· ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݑ‬ 2 2 (2. Recalling that the fluid flow we consider is irrotational.௧ |௅ ൅ ܷߙ‫ݓ‬. ‫ݐ‬ሻ. The same is also true Ψ ൌ ܷ‫ ݔ‬൅ ψ.35) (2. ‫ݎ‬. (2. ‫ݒ‬. ‫ݎ‬.௫ |௅ ሻ ൌ 0. That is why it has to be inserted in the expression of the boundary conditions.ఏ ሻ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ ݔ ݐ‬ൌ ‫ܮ‬.37) 2. As the force is in the direction of the zaxis. ‫ݒ‬. (2.34) (2. It specifies that the velocity ܸ ሬԦ ൌ ሬ ԦΨ. we get the expressions of all the boundary conditions in terms of displacement ܴସ ሺ‫ݑ‬. ߠ.40) From the former analysis. only the fourth expression of (2. ܴଷ ሺ‫ݑ‬.

At the clamped end. ߲‫ݎ‬ (2. where L’ is the position where both quantities are equal to zero.44) same where the shell is free to move.3.45) to assume that ψ vanishes for all x<0.41) The fluid flow being incompressible and irrotational. we should say some words about the boundary conditions of the where Ps is the stagnation point pressure. Finally. That is why we need to elaborate a model to specify the evolution of the velocity potential and of the fluid pressure for ‫ ܮ‬൏ ‫ ݔ‬൑ ‫ܮ‬Ԣ. once we have determined the general form of the solution. it is natural Here. We have to consider that the fluid is already perturbed when entering the shell. the unsteady pressure and potential are related to each other through the Bernouilli’s equation: ߲ψ ܸ ଶ ܲ ܲ௦ ൅ ൅ ൌ . ߲‫ݔ‬ ܸఏ ൌ 1 ߲ψ . The elaboration of this model will be discussed in Section 2.43) ∂ଶ ψ 1 ∂ψ 1 ∂ଶ ψ ∂ଶ ψ ‫ ׏‬Ψൌ ଶ ൅ ൅ ൅ ൌ 0. the velocity potential is governed by the Laplace equation: ଶ It also has to respect the impermeability condition at the wall: ∂w ∂w ∂ψ ൌ ൝ ∂t ൅ ܷ ∂x for 0 ൑ x ൑ L ฬ ∂r ୰ୀୟష 0 for x ൏ 0 ܽ݊݀ ‫ ݔ‬൐ ‫ܮ‬ ∂w ∂ψ ൌ ൝ ∂t for 0 ൑ x ൑ L ฬ ∂r ୰ୀୟశ 0 for x ൏ 0 ܽ݊݀ ‫ ݔ‬൐ ‫ܮ‬ (2. the general expressions of the flow and pressure fields are given by ܸ ௫ ൌܷ൅ ߲ψ .42) (2. we cannot assume the potential ψ at the intake and outlet of the shell.Chapter 2 Hence. ‫ߠ߲ ݎ‬ ܸ ௥ ൌ ߲ψ . ߲‫ݐ‬ 2 ߩ௙ ߩ௙ (2.2. On the contrary. 30 | P a g e . ∂r r ∂r r ଶ ∂θଶ ∂x ଶ (2.

3 Method of Solution 2.44) and (2. We finally use the extended form of the Galerkin method to solve them. we have to consider two different sets of equations referring to the dynamics of the fluid and to the motion of the shell. each of these terms is equal to zero: Uଶ . we shall use the Fourier-Transform Generalized-Force method that was used by Chan (1984). To satisfy these equations. The third is non-linear and will be neglected.1 General Form of the Solution To find solutions of the problem presented in the previous section.Chapter 2 We finally have: ቈ‫݌‬଴ െ ܲ௦ ൅ ߩ௙ ܷଶ ∂ψ ߲ψ ቉ ൅ ൤ߩ௙ ൅ ߩ௙ ܷ ൅ ‫݌‬൨ 2 ∂t ߲‫ݔ‬ The first term of (2.48). Then. To solve this set of equations.3. the general form of the solution we consider is close to the one governing the motion of cantilevered pipe: ߲ ஶ ஶ ‫ݑ‬ ‫ܣ‬௠ cos ݊ߠ ൬ܽ ൰ ߲‫ ݔ‬ൢ ߮ ሺ‫ݔ‬ሻ݁ ௜Ω௧ . The expression of the pressure drop between the inner fluid and the outer fluid is governed by the equations (2. 2 ߲‫ݔ‬ ‫ߠ߲ ݎ‬ ߲‫ݎ‬ (2.48) 2. ቊ‫ ݒ‬ቋ ൌ ෍ ෍ ൞ ௠ ‫ܤ‬௠ sin ݊ߠ ‫ݓ‬ ௡ୀଵ ௠ୀଵ ‫ܥ‬௠ cos ݊ߠ (2.46) (2.49) 31 | P a g e . 2 ∂ψ ߲ψ ‫ ݌‬ൌ െρ୤ ൬ ൅ ܷ ൰. ∂t ߲‫ݔ‬ ‫݌‬଴ ൌ ܲ௦ െ ρ୤ 1 ߲ψ ଶ 1 ߲ψ ଶ ߲ψ ଶ ൅ ߩ௙ ቈ൬ ൰ ൅ ൬ ൰ ൅ ൬ ൰ ቉ ൌ 0.46) is time-independent but the second one is not.47) (2.42) to (2. As a consequence. we substitute this solution into the equations of motion.

That is why we have to use the extended Galerkin method and look for a series-form solution.2 Expression of the Unsteady Pressure As explained before. ‫ݎ‬ሻ ௡ୀଵ ஶ ௡ୀଵ ஶ (2. ‫ݎ‬ሻ ߰ ߰ ൜ ௜ൠ ൌ ෍ ൜ ௜ ൠ cos ݊ߠ ݁ ௜Ω௧ .51) where the subscript i denotes the inner fluid properties and o the outer fluid ones. Bm and of a cantilevered shell.50) ത ሺ‫ݔ‬. ‫ݎ‬ሻ ൌ න ݂ ‫ כ‬ሺߙ.Chapter 2 Cm are constants. ߣ௠ . ‫݌‬௢ ‫݌‬ҧ௢ ሺ‫ݔ‬. ‫ݎ‬ሻ ൌ න ݂ሺ‫ݔ‬. Ω the frequency of oscillations and ߮௠ are the eigenfunctions of clamped-free pipe.3. ‫ݎ‬ሻ ߰ ߰ ൜ ௢ൠ ൌ ෍ ൜ ௢ ൠ cos ݊ߠ ݁ ௜Ω௧ . the expression of the unsteady pressure and velocity potential is given by ത ሺ‫ݔ‬. ‫ݎ‬ሻ݁ ௜ఈ௫ ݀‫ݔ‬. The expressions of these functions and of the eigenvalues.53) where α should not be confused with that in Section 2. Considering the general form of the displacement. we use a Fourier-Transform method to obtain the expression required. 2ߨ ିஶ ାஶ (2. The result is the same for both internal and external problems and we suppress the subscript here: 32 | P a g e .52) and its inverse is 1 ݂ሺ‫ݔ‬. ିஶ ାஶ (2. ‫ݎ‬ሻ݁ ି௜ఈ௫ ݀ߙ .3. are given in Paidoussis (1998).2. we introduce the expression of the velocity potential into (2.r) is given by ݂ ‫ כ‬ሺߙ. They do not satisfy the boundary conditions where m and n are respectively the axial and circumferential mode. Am. 2. ‫ݎ‬ሻ (2. ‫݌‬௜ ‫݌‬ҧ௜ ሺ‫ݔ‬.42). First. The Fourier transform of a function f(x.

each term has ‫݊׊‬. ‫ݎ‬ሻอ ෍ ∂r ஶ equal.55) We recognize the modified Bessel differential equation.54) We then take the Fourier transform: ෍ቆ to vanish: As this infinite series in cos ݊ߠ is identically equal to zero.57) where ‫ܫ‬௡ and ‫ܭ‬௡ are the modified Bessel functions of the first and second kinds. Taking the derivative of (2. Now we need to separate the study for the internal and external flow. ௡ୀଵ ത௜ ∂߰ ሺ‫ݔ‬.Chapter 2 ෍ቆ ஶ ௡ୀଵ ஶ ഥ 1 ∂ψ ഥ nଶ ഥ ∂ଶ ψ ∂ଶ ψ ഥ൅ ൅ െ ψ ቇ cos ݊ߠ ൌ 0. ψ (2. we obtain For the same reason as before. we substitute (2. ‫ݎ‬ሻอ ∂r ୰ୀୟ ∂߮௠ ൌ ෍ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ൬݅Ω߮௠ ሺ‫ݔ‬ሻ ൅ ܷ ൰ cos ݊ߠ ݁ ௜Ω௧ . ௡ୀଵ ௠ୀଵ ஶ ஶ cos ݊ߠ݁ ௜Ω௧ ஶ ஶ (2. ൅ െ ൅ ቆα ቇψ ∂r ଶ r ∂r rଶ (2.57) into (2. ഥ ‫ כ‬1 ∂ψ ഥ‫כ‬ ∂ଶ ψ nଶ ଶ ഥ ‫ כ‬ൌ 0.57). ∂x ௡ୀଵ ௠ୀଵ ‫ כ‬ሺߙሻ cos ݊ߠ ൌ ෍ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ݅ሺΩ െ ߙܷሻ߮௠ cos ݊ߠ . whose general solution takes the form ഥ ‫ כ‬ൌ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙ‫ݎ‬ሻ ൅ ‫ܥ‬ଶ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ‫ݎ‬ሻ. obtaining ෍ ஶ and C1 and C2 are constants to be determined from the boundary conditions. the coefficients of cos ݊ߠ have to be ௡ୀଵ ୰ୀୟ (2.56) ௡ୀଵ ഥ ‫ כ‬1 ∂ψ ഥ‫כ‬ ∂ଶ ψ nଶ ‫כ‬ ଶ ഥ ቇ cos ݊ߠ ൌ 0. ൅ െ ൅ ቆα ቇψ ∂r ଶ r ∂r rଶ (2.43).58) we then take the Fourier transform and we get ഥ‫כ‬ ∂ψ ୧ ሺߙ. ∂r ଶ r ∂r r ଶ ∂x ଶ (2. For the internal flow.59) 33 | P a g e .

ߙ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙܽሻ ௠ୀଵ ‫ כ‬ሺߙሻ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ .48). (2. Ω െ ߙܷ ‫ כ‬ሺߙሻ ‫ܥ‬ଵ௜ ൌ ݅ ᇱ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ . ‫ܥ‬ଶ௢ Ω ‫כ‬ ൌ݅ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ ሺߙሻ. ߙ ‫ܭ‬௡ ௠ୀଵ (2. ߙ‫ܭ‬௡ ௠ୀଵ ஶ ஶ (2. we get: ഥ‫כ‬ ∂ψ ୭ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ‫ כ‬ሺߙሻ ሺߙ.66) 34 | P a g e . ௡ୀଵ ஶ (2.63) Starting again from equation (2. we obtain the expression of the Fourier transform of the perturbed internal pressure: ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬௜ ஶ Equating the terms in cos ݊ߠ again.62) ሺΩ െ ߙܷሻଶ ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙܽሻ ‫כ‬ ൌ ߩ௙ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ ሺߙሻ. we obtain ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ҧ௜ ൌ െߩ௙ ݅ሺΩ െ ߙܷሻ ෍ ௡ୀଵ ഥ‫כ‬ ψ ୧ cos ݊ߠ ஶ ‫כ‬ ൌ ෍ ‫݌‬ҧ௜ cos ݊ߠ . ‫ݎ‬ሻቤ ൌ ‫ܥ‬ଵ௜ ߙ‫ܫ‬௡ ൅ ‫ܥ‬ଶ௜ ߙ‫ܭ‬௡ ∂‫ݎ‬ ୰ୀୟ ൌ ݅ሺΩ െ ߙܷሻ ෍ ஶ ௠ୀଵ ஶ Since the velocity cannot be infinite for r=0. ∂‫ݎ‬ ୰ୀୟ ௠ୀଵ ஶ (2.61) Next. ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ҧ௘ Ωଶ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙܽሻ ‫כ‬ ൌ ߩ௙ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ ሺߙሻ.Chapter 2 ഥ‫כ‬ ∂ψ ୧ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ᇱ ሺߙܽሻ ሺߙ. it cannot become infinite as ‫ ݎ‬՜ ൅∞ and thus ‫ܥ‬ଵ௢ ൌ 0. from (2. ߙ ‫ܫ‬௡ ௠ୀଵ (2.57) but for the external flow and using (2. ‫ܥ‬ଶ௜ ൌ 0 and. therefore.60) (2. therefore.44).64) As we are dealing with the outer velocity potential. ‫ݎ‬ሻቤ ൌ ‫ܥ‬ଵ௢ ߙ‫ܫ‬௡ ൅ ‫ܥ‬ଶ௢ ߙ‫ܭ‬௡ ൌ ݅Ω ෍ ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ . hence.65) The external perturbation pressure is.

௠ ൌ ‫ ܮ‬. ߩ௦ ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ ଵ/ଶ ‫ܧ‬ Ω଴ ൌ ൤ ൨ . ‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൌ ‫ ܮ‬.Chapter 2 Considering the general form of the unsteady pressure. ‫ݎ‬ሻ cos ݊ߠ ݁ ௜Ω௧ with ‫ݍ‬ ത ൌ ‫݌‬ҧ௜ െ ‫݌‬ҧ௢ |௥ୀ௔ . It has the general form ଶ ଶ ഥ 1 ݀ߙ ത ‫ܷܮ‬଴ Ω ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ഥక ି௜ఈ ഥ ‫ݍ‬ തൌ න݁ തܷቇ ᇱ ൝ߩ௙ ൥ቆ െ ߙ 2ߨ ‫ܮ‬ ߙ ത ε ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ିஶ ஶ ௠ୀଵ ஶ Finally we obtain the expression of ‫ݍ‬ ത by taking the difference of the ഥ ଶ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ Ω തߝሻ ‫כ‬ തതതത തതതത ቉෍‫ܥ‬ െቆ ቇ ᇱ തሻൡ ൌ ෍ ‫ܥ‬ ௠ ߮௠ ሺߙ ௠ ܳ௠௡ ሺߦሻ. We define the following reference velocity. we have to take the inverse Fourier transform nondimensionalize these equations.67) of (2.70) ഥక ‫ כ‬ሺߙ where ߮௠ തሻ ൌ ‫ି׬‬ஶ ߮௠ ሺߦሻ݁ ௜ఈ ݀ߦ . ାஶ ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ҧ௢ ൌ ߩ௙ (2. ε ൌ ܽ .72) 35 | P a g e . ε ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ௠ୀଵ ஶ (2.68) and the dimensionless parameters: We can therefore express the perturbation pressures as ‫כ‬ ‫݌‬ҧ௜ ଶ ଶ ഥ ‫ܷܮ‬଴ Ω ‫ ܫ‬ሺߙ തߝሻ ‫כ‬ തതതത ഥቇ ௡ ൌ ߩ௙ തܷ ෍‫ܥ‬ തሻ.66). Ω ܷ ത ൌ ߙ‫ܮ‬. ‫ܣ‬ ‫ܤ‬௠ ൌ ‫ܮ‬ . we should first To get the expression of ‫ݍ‬ ത . as it will be more convenient afterwards. ௡ୀଵ ஶ (2. the term q is given by: ‫ ݍ‬ൌ ෍‫ݍ‬ ത ሺ‫ݔ‬. ߩ௦ ܽଶ ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ ܳ଴ ൌ ߩ௦ ݄‫ܮ‬Ωଶ ଴. frequency and pressure: ଵ/ଶ ‫ܧ‬ ܷ଴ ൌ ൤ ൨ .63) and (2. (2.69) (2. ߙ ഥൌ ܷ. But. (2. ቆ െߙ ௠ ߮௠ ሺߙ ᇱ ሺߙ ߙ ത ε ‫ܫ‬௡ തߝሻ ଶ ഥ ‫ܷܮ‬଴ Ω ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ‫ כ‬ሺߙ ෍ തതതത ‫ܥ‬௠ ߮௠ തሻ. ܷ଴ Ω଴ ‫ܮ‬ ‫ ݔ‬തതതത ‫ܣ‬௠ ‫ܤ‬௠ ‫ܥ‬௠ തതതത തതതത ߦ ൌ ‫ܮ‬. ቆ ቇ ᇱ ߙ ത ε ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ଶ ௠ୀଵ ௠ୀଵ ஶ ஶ ഥ ൌ √ߛΩ ൌ Ω .71) Fourier transform of the two equations above.

Chapter 2 where ଶ ଶ ഥక ഥ ܷ଴ ݁ ି௜ఈ Ω ‫ ܫ‬ሺߙ തߝሻ ഥቇ ௡ ܳ௠௡ ሺߦሻ ൌ ߩ௙ න ݀ߙ ത ൝൥ቆ െ ߙ തܷ ᇱ ሺߙ 2ߨ ഥ α ε ‫ܫ‬௡ തߝሻ ஶ ഥ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ Ω തߝሻ ‫כ‬ ቉ ߮ ሺߙ െቆ ቇ ᇱ തሻൡ.73) So far. • Model 3: continuity of the pressure and its derivative at ξ=1 and ξ = l. Model 2: continuity of the pressure at ξ=1 and ξ=l and of its derivative at ξ=1. l ՜ ൅∞. The characteristics of the models are as follows: • • Model 1: continuity of the pressure at ξ=1 and ξ=l. ܴ௠ is non-zero only over [1. Here. we considered a simplified model: the unsteady pressure becomes suddenly non-zero when the fluid enters the shell. (1993). it might be better to consider more elaborate models describing the behaviour of the flow before entering the shell at its free end. • Model 4: continuity of the pressure and its derivative at ξ=1 and ξ= l.l]. we present different models that ensure some continuity of the pressure at the intake of the shell and where the pressure is close to zero at a finite distance l ahead of the intake. Equation (2. in the previous equations.73) now becomes ଶ ଶ ഥక ഥ U଴ ݁ ି௜ఈ Ω ‫ ܫ‬ሺߙ തߝሻ ഥቇ ௡ ܳ௠௡ ሺߦሻ ൌ ρ୤ න ݀ߙ ത ൝൥ቆ െ α ഥܷ ᇱ ሺߙ 2ߨ ഥ α ε ‫ܫ‬௡ തߝሻ ஶ To implement the above. ε ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ௠ ଶ ିஶ (2.74) 36 | P a g e . we replace ߮௠ by ഥ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ Ω തߝሻ ‫כ‬ ቉ ሺφ‫כ‬ െቆ ቇ ᇱ ഥሻൡ. ߮௠ ൅ ܴ௠ . To get more realistic results. ୫ ൅ R ୫ ሻሺα ε ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ଶ ିஶ (2. A more detailed description of these models and their expressions are presented by Nguyen in his thesis (1992) and in Nguyen et al.

the nondimensionalized general force is given by തതതതതതത ܳ௞௠௡ ൌ 1 න ܳ௠௡ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ ܳ଴ ଴ ଶ ିஶ ஶ ଵ ଶ ഥ Ω ‫ ܫ‬ሺߙ ρ୤ ܽ ߝ 1 തߝሻ ഥቇ ௡ ൌ න ൝൥ቆ െ ഥ αܷ ᇱ ሺߙ ߩ௦ ݄ 2ߨ ε ഥ α ‫ܫ‬௡ തߝሻ (2.79) ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ൌ (2.1] with respect to the variable ξ.80) 37 | P a g e . ‫ܫ‬௡ തߝሻ ‫ܨ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ ൌ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ᇱ ሺߙ . 2ߨ µୣ ε නߙ ത‫ܧ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ തሻ݀ߙ ത. ‫ܫ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ ᇱ ሺߙ . ε ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ തߝሻ The following notations will be used: µୣ ൌ ρ୤ ܽ . of the velocity and of the frequency and of the square of the frequency in (2.75). 2ߨߝ ഥ α µୣ ൌെ න ‫ܧ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ തሻ݀ߙ ത.76) (2. ଵ ଵ ௟ ഥ ‫ܭ‬௡ ሺߙ Ω തߝሻ ቉ൡ ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ െቆ ቇ ᇱ തሻ݀ߙ ത. we shall use the extended Galerkin method.77) where ሺଵሻ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ሺଶሻ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ሺଷሻ µୣ ‫ܧ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ െ ‫ܨ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ ൌ න ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ തሻ݀ߙ ത. ߩ௦ ݄ ‫ܧ‬௡ ሺߙ തሻ ൌ Regrouping the terms depending of the square of the velocity. we can write ሺଵሻ ഥ ଶ ሺଶሻ ഥ ഥ ሺଷሻ ഥ ଶ തതതതതതത ܳ௞௠௡ ൌ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ Ω ൅ 2‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ܷ Ω ൅ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ܷ .78) (2. The comparison functions will be the beam eigenfunctions and the domain of integration [0. ‫ܭ‬௡ തߝሻ (2.75) ഥక ഥక ഥక where ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ തሻ ൌ ቀ‫׬‬଴ ߮௞ ሺߦሻ݁ ି௜ఈ ݀ߦ ቁ ቀ‫׬‬଴ ߮௠ ሺߦሻ݁ ௜ఈ ݀ߦ ൅ ‫׬‬ଵ ܴ௠ ሺߦሻ݁ ௜ఈ ݀ߦ ቁ. Thus.Chapter 2 Furthermore. 2ߨ ିஶ ିஶ ஶ ିஶ ஶ ஶ (2.

83) ቑ ݀ߠ ൌ 0.82) where m and n are respectively the axial and circumferential mode of the displacement and k and l are respectively the axial and circumferential mode of the corresponding variations.14) to (2.16) and subjected to the boundary conditions (2.77) into those equations.81) (2. ൝ ߜ‫ ݒ‬ൡ ൌ ‫ ܮ‬෍ ෍ ത ത ത ത sin ݈ߠ ߜ‫ܤ‬ ‫۔‬ ௞ ۘ ߜ‫ݓ‬ ௟ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ۖ ۖ തതത ‫ܥߜ ە‬௞ cos ݈ߠ ۙ (2. We can now look for solutions for the problem of the cantilevered shell aspirating fluid governed by the equation (2. As explained before. The extended form of the Galerkin method is then given by ‫ܦ‬ ߜ‫ ܧ‬ൌ න ቐ නሾ‫ܮ‬ଵ ߜ‫ ݑ‬൅ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ߜ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ܮ‬ଷ ߜ‫ݓ‬ሿ݀ߦ ߝ ଴ ଴ ଶగ ଵ െ ‫ ܦ‬൤ܴଵ ߜ‫ ݑ‬൅ where the derivative is now defined by ሺ ሻᇱ ൌ ߲ሺ ሻ⁄߲ߦ .34) to (2.3 Solution to the Equations of Motion The expression of the perturbation pressure has now been fully determined.Chapter 2 2. the extended form of the Galerkin method is used.3. we consider the following nondimensionalized form of the perturbation displacements and of the corresponding variations ߲ ۗ ஶ ஶ ‫ۓ‬തതതത ‫ݑ‬ ۖ‫ܣ‬௠ cos ݊ߠ ൬ߝ ߲ߦ ൰ۖ ߮௠ ሺߦሻ݁ ௜Ω௧ . ൅ ݇௔ ሺܴଷ ߝߜ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ ൅ ܴସ ߜ‫ݓ‬ሻ൨ 1െߥ ܴଶ ߜ‫ݒ‬ 2 కୀଵ (2.37) by introducing (2. ቊ‫ݒ‬ቋ ൌ ‫ ܮ‬෍ ෍ തതതത ‫ܤ‬ sin ݊ߠ ‫۔‬ ௠ ۘ ‫ݓ‬ ௡ୀଵ ௠ୀଵ ۖ ۖ തതതത ‫ܥ ە‬௠ cos ݊ߠ ۙ ߲ ۗ തത തത ஶ ஶ ‫ܣߜۓ‬ cos ݈ߠ ൬ߝ ൰ ௞ ߜ‫ݑ‬ ۖ ߲ߦ ۖ ߮௞ ሺߦሻ݁ ௜Ω௧ . In this part. 38 | P a g e .

Chapter 2 Substituting (2.81) and (2.82) into the expressions of the boundary conditions, we obtain
ܴଵ ߜ‫|ݑ‬కୀଵ ൌ ‫݁ ܮ‬
ଶ ଶ௜Ω௧ ஶ ஶ

ܴଷ ߝߜ‫ݓ‬Ԣ|కୀଵ ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ෍ ෍ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂ோଷ ሺ݊ሻ, ܴସ ߜ‫|ݓ‬కୀଵ ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ෍ ෍ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂ோସ ሺ݊ሻ,
௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

ܴଶ ߜ‫|ݒ‬కୀଵ ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ෍ ෍ sin ݊ߠ sin ݈ߠ ݂ோଶ ሺ݊ሻ,
௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

෍ ෍ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂ோଵ ሺ݊ሻ,

(2.84)

(2.85)

(2.86)

(2.87)

where
തത തത തതതത ݂ோଵ ሺ݊ሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܣ‬ ௞ ൣ‫ܤ‬௠ ൫ߥ݊ߝ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ൯
௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ ஶ ஶ

ത ത ത ത തതതത ݂ோଶ ሺ݊ሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܤ‬ ௞ ൣ‫ܣ‬௠ ൫െ݊ߝ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൯
௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൫ߥߝ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ൯൧,

(2.88)

തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ൫ߝሺ1 ൅ 3݇ሻ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൯ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൫3݊݇௔ ߝ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൯൧,

(2.89)

തതത തതതത ݂ோଷ ሺ݊ሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܥ‬ ௞ ൣ‫ܤ‬௠ ൫െߥ݊ߝ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ൯ തതത തതതത ݂ோସ ሺ݊ሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܥ‬ ௞ ൥‫ܣ‬௠ ቆ
௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ ௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ଶ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൫െߥ݊ ߝ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ൯൧,

(2.90)

ଶ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൭ሺ2 െ ߥሻ݊ ߝ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ

തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ቆ

3െߥ ߝ݊߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2

1െߥ ଶ ݊ ߝ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 (2.91)

ഥ ߤ௘ ߝ Ω ഥ ቈ݅ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ ൅ ܷ ഥߙ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ቉ ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൱൩. ܷ 2݇௔ ε

39 | P a g e

Chapter 2 We obatin something similar for the equations of motion:
‫ܮ‬ଵ ߜ‫ ݑ‬ൌ ‫݁ ܮ‬
ଶ ଶ௜Ω௧

‫ܮ‬ଷ ߜ‫ ݓ‬ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ෍ ෍ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂௅ଷ ሺ݊, ߦሻ,
௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ

‫ܮ‬ଶ ߜ‫ ݒ‬ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ෍ ෍ sin ݊ߠ sin ݈ߠ ݂௅ଶ ሺ݊, ߦሻ,
௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

෍ ෍ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂௅ଵ ሺ݊, ߦሻ,

(2.92)

(2.93)

(2.94)

with
തത തത തതതത ଶ ഥଶ ݂௅ଵ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܣ‬ ௞ ቈ‫ܣ‬௠ ൬ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ ൤Ω
௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ቆ

൅ ߝ ସ ߮ԢԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻሾ1 ൅ ߬௫ ሺߦሻሿ൰ ൅ ߬ሺߦሻ݊ߝ߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻቇ 1൅ߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ 2 (2.95)

1െߥ ଶ ݊ ሺ1 ൅ ݇௔ ሻ െ ߬ఏ ሺߦሻ݊ଶ ൨ 2

ଶ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ቆߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ ஶ ஶ

ത ത ത ത തതതത ݂௅ଶ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܤ‬ ௞ ቈ‫ܣ‬௠ ቆെ
௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ

െ ݇௔ ߝ ସ ߮ԢԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ ൅ ߬ሺߦሻߝ߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻቇ቉,
ଶ തതതത ഥଶ ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ൬߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻൣΩ െ n ൫1 ൅ τ஘ ሺߦሻ൯൧

1െߥ ଶ ݊ െ ߬ఏ ሺߦሻ൨ 2

1൅ߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻቇ 2

തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൬߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻൣെ݊൫1 ൅ τ஘ ሺߦሻ൯൧ ൅ ߝ ଶ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ݇௔ 3െߥ ݊൰቉, 2

൅ ߝ ଶ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ ൤

1െߥ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ ൅ ߬௫ ሺߦሻ൨൰ 2

(2.96)

40 | P a g e

Chapter 2
ସ ସ തതത തതതത ݂௅ଷ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܥ‬ ௞ ൥‫ܣ‬௠ ൬߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻሾെ݇௔ ߣ௠ ߝ ሿ ௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ

തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ൬߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ݊ሾ1 ൅ ߬ఏ ሺߦሻሿ െ ߝ ଶ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ 3െߥ ݇௔ ݊ ൰ 2

൅ ߝ ଶ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔

1െߥ ଶ ݊ െ ߬ఏ ሺߦሻ൨൰ 2 (2.97)

ଶ ଶ ସ ସ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൭߮௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻሾ1 ൅ ݇௔ ߣ௠ ߝ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ݊ െ 1ሻ

ഥ ଶ ሿ െ ߝ ଶ ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ߮௞ ሺߦሻሾ2݊ଶ ݇௔ ൅ ߬௫ ሺߦሻሿ ൅ ߬ఏ ሺߦሻ݊ଶ െ Ω െ ܳ௠௡ ሺߦሻ ߮௞ ሺߦሻ൱൩. ܳ଴

the energy:

߮ԢԢԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ ൌ ߣସ ௠ ߮௠ ሺߦሻ. We can now re-write the expression of the variation of
ߜ‫ ܧ‬ൌ ‫݁ ܮ‬
ଶ ଶ௜Ω௧

In the above, we took into account that ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺ1ሻ ൌ ߮ԢԢԢ௠ ሺ1ሻ ൌ 0 and
‫ܦ‬ න ቐ න ൥෍ ෍൫cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂௅ଵ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ߝ
଴ ଶగ ଵ ஶ ஶ

൅ sin ݊ߠ sin ݈ߠ ݂௅ଶ ሺ݊, ߦሻ
ஶ ஶ

௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ

െ ‫ ܦ‬෍ ෍ ቆcos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ሾ݂ோଵ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ൅ ݇௔ ݂ோଷ ሺ݊, ߦሻ ൅ ݇௔ ݂ோସ ሺ݊, ߦሻሿ ൅
ଶగ ௡ୀଵ ௟ୀଵ

െ cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݂௅ଷ ሺ݊, ߦሻ൯൩ ݀ߦ

(2.98)

1െߥ sin ݊ߠ sin ݈ߠ ݂ோଶ ሺ݊, ߦሻቇቑ ݀ߠ. 2 0 ݂݅ ݊ ് ݈ ߨ ݂݅ ݊ ൌ ݈

We can invert the order of the integral and we also know that
න cos ݊ߠ cos ݈ߠ ݀ߠ ൌ න sin ݊ߠ sin ݈ߠ ݀ߠ ൌ ൜
଴ ଴ ଶగ

(2.99)

41 | P a g e

102) where ߣ 1 ෠ଵ ൌ ߤ௘ ܷ ഥ ଶ ൭ ௙ ൅ ሺ1 െ ߙሻሺ1 ൅ ߛҧ ሻ൱. ଴ ଵ (2. ߦሻ െ ݂௅ଷ ሺ݊. ߦሻ൨ቑ. ଴ ଵ ݀௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ߮ԢԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . The values of the eigenfunctions at both ends of the shell and of the previous expressions are given in Nguyen (1992).100) 1െߥ ݂ ሺ݊. ଴ ൌ ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ ൌ 4ߣ௞ ߪ௞ ሺെ1ሻ௞ା௠ .Chapter 2 Thus. 2 ோଶ To simplify the writing. ‫ܤ‬ 8ߝ 2 መଵ ൌ െߤ௘ ܷ ഥଶ ‫ܣ‬ ߣ௙ . ଴ ݈௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߦ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ߮ԢԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . ߬ఏ ൌ ‫ܣ‬ ߣ௙ . ଴ ܽ௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ߮௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . 8ߝ ෠ଶ ൌ ߤ௘ ܷ ഥଶ ‫ܤ‬ ߣ௙ . ଴ ଵ ܾ௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߮Ԣ௞ ሺߦሻ߮Ԣ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ .101) . ୡ୭ୱ୦ ఒೖ ାୡ୭ୱ ఒೖ ୱ୧୬୦ ఒೖ ିୱ୧୬ ఒೖ ݃௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߦ߮௞ ሺߦሻ߮௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . 8 ߣ ෠ଷ ൌ ߤ௘ ܷ ഥ ଶ ൭ ௙ െ ሺ1 െ ߙሻ൱. we define some new notations: ܿ௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߮ ሺߦሻ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . ߦሻ ൅ ݇௔ ݂ோଷ ሺ݊. ଴ ௞ ଵ ଵ ଵ where ߪ௞ ൌ ݁௞௠ ݇௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߦ߮௞ ሺߦሻ߮ԢԢ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ. 4ߝ (2. ߦሻ ൅ ݂௅ଶ ሺ݊. ߦሻ ൅ ݇௔ ݂ோସ ሺ݊. ߦሻ ൅ ଵ ௡ୀଵ ଴ ஶ ଵ (2.103) 42 | P a g e . only the terms corresponding to n=l are not equal to zero. ‫ܤ‬ 4ߝ መ ଷ ൌ െߤ௘ ܷ ഥଶ ‫ܣ‬ (2. and 1 ߜ‫ ܧ‬ൌ ‫ܮ‬ଶ ݁ ଶ௜Ω௧ ‫ ߨܦ‬෍ ቐ නሾ݂௅ଵ ሺ݊. ଴ ݂௞௠ ൌ ݁௠௞ . ߬௫ ൌ ‫ܣ‬ ෠ଶ . We also nondimensionalized the expression of the basic stresses and loads: መଵ ߦ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଵ . ଵ ݄௞௠ ൌ ‫׬‬ ߦ߮ ᇱ ௞ ሺߦሻ߮ ᇱ ௠ ሺߦሻ݀ߦ . ߬ൌ‫ܤ‬ መଷ ߦ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ . ߦሻሿ݀ߦ ߝ െ ൤݂ோଵ ሺ݊.

the expression of δE can simply be written as ‫݁ ܮ‬ ଶ ଶ௜Ω௧ ‫ܦ‬ തത തത തതത ത ത ത ത ߨ ෍ ෍ሾܹଵ௞௡ ߜ‫ܣ‬ ௞ ൅ ܹଶ௞௡ ߜ‫ܤ‬௞ ൅ ܹଷ௞௡ ߜ‫ܥ‬௞ ሿ ൌ 0. ߦሻ݀ߦ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܥ‬ ௞ ൤‫ܣ‬௠ ൬ߜ௞௠ ሾെ݇௔ ߣ௠ ߝ ሿ ଴ ଵ ஶ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൤ 1െߥ መଵ ൰ ෠ଵ ൨ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 2 3െߥ ݊൰൨. െ ݇௔ ߝ ସ ݀௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ஶ ஶ ଶ ଶ መ ഥଶ ෠ തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ൬ߜ௞௠ ൣΩ െ n ൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൯൧ െ ݊ ‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ 1൅ߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൰ 2 തതതത መ ෠ ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ൬ߜ௞௠ ൣെ݊൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൯൧ െ ݊‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ ସ ସ തതത തതതത න ݂௅ଷ ሺ݊. െ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ Finally. ߝ ௡ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ஶ ஶ (2. ߦሻ݀ߦ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܣ‬ ௞ ൤‫ܣ‬௠ ൬ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൤Ω െ ଴ ௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ଵ ஶ ஶ 1൅ߥ ଶ መଵ ݈௞௠ ൰ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ തതതത ෠ଶ ݊ߝܽ௞௠ ൰ ൅ ߝସ‫ܣ‬ ݊ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ௠൬ 2 1െߥ ଶ ଶ തതതത መଷ ෠ଷ ൨ െ ߝ ଶ ݄௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ൅‫ܥ‬ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ ௠ ൬ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ 2 ത ത ത ത തതതത න ݂௅ଶ ሺ݊. ߦሻ݀ߦ ൌ ෍ ෍ ߜ‫ܤ‬ ௞ ൤‫ܣ‬௠ ൬െ ଴ ௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ ଵ መ ଷ ݄௞௠ ൅ ߝ ସ ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ ଷ ݊ଶ ൨ െ ݊ ଶ ߝ ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ෠ଵ ൧݀௞௠ െ‫ܤ‬ 1െߥ ଶ ݊ ሺ1 ൅ ݇௔ ሻ 2 (2.104) ෠ଶ ߝܽ௞௠ ൰൨.106) ௠ ൬ߜ௞௠ ݊ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൧ ൅ ݊‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ െ ߝ ܿ௞௠ 2 ௠ୀଵ ௞ୀଵ መଵ െ ቂ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ Ω ഥ ଶ ൅ 2‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ܷ ഥΩ ഥ ൅ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ U ഥ ଶ ቃቁ൨.105) ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ݇௔ ஶ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ െ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൣ2݊ଶ ݇௔ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ ଷ ݊ଶ ሿ ൅ ݊ ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ෠ଵ ൧ ൅‫ܤ‬ ሺଵሻ ሺଶሻ ሺଷሻ ସ ସ ଶ ଶ തതതത ഥଶ ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ቀߜ௞௠ ൣ1 െ Ω ൅ ݇௔ ߣ௠ ߝ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ݊ െ 1ሻ 1െߥ ଶ መଷ൰ ෠ଷ ൨ െ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ 2 3െߥ ଶ መ തതതത ෠ ൅‫ܤ‬ ݇௔ ݊൰ (2.Chapter 2 Thus. we can write: തത തത തതതത ଶ ഥଶ න ݂௅ଵ ሺ݊. 2 (2.107) 43 | P a g e .

2 2 44 | P a g e .108) തതതത ܹଶ௞௡ ൌ ෍ ቈ‫ܣ‬ ௠ ቆെ ௠ୀଵ ஶ ෠ଶ ߝܽ௞௠ െ ߥߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻቇ቉.109) 3െߥ 1െߥ ݊െ 3݊݇௔ ߝ ଶ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ቉. െ ݇௔ ߝ ସ ݀௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 1൅ߥ ଶ 1െߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൅ ݊ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 2 1െߥ መଵ ෠ଵ ൨ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 2 1െߥ ଶ መଷ ෠ଷ ൨ െ ߝ ଶ ݄௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ 2 ଶ ଶ መ ഥଶ ෠ തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ቆߜ௞௠ ൣΩ െ n ൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൯൧ െ ݊ ‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൤ തതതത መ ෠ ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ቆߜ௞௠ ൣെ݊൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൯൧ െ ݊‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ݇௔ 1െߥ ଶ െ ߝ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 (2.Chapter 2 where ଶ തതതത ഥଶ ܹଵ௞௡ ൌ ෍ ቈ‫ܣ‬ ௠ ൬ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൤Ω െ ௠ୀଵ ஶ መ ଷ ݄௞௠ ൅ ߝ ସ ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ መଵ ݈௞௠ ൰ ෠ଵ ൧݀௞௠ ൅ ߝ ସ ‫ܣ‬ െ ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ‫ܣ‬ െ ߥ݊ߝ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻቇ ଶ തതതത ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ቆߝ ܾ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ ଶ 1െߥ ଶ ෠ ଷ ݊ଶ ൨ ݊ ሺ1 ൅ ݇௔ ሻ െ ‫ܤ‬ 2 തതതത ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ቆ 1൅ߥ ଶ ෠ଶ ݊ߝܽ௞௠ ݊ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 2 (2.

110) መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൣ2݊ଶ ݇௔ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ መଵ ෠ଵ ൧ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ െ ݊ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ൅ ߥ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ ሺଷሻ ഥ ଶ ൭‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ൅ܷ െ ସ ଶ ଶ ෠ ଶ െ ߜ௞௠ ൣ1 ൅ ݇௔ ߣସ ௠ ߝ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ݊ െ 1ሻ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ݊ ൧ ߤ௘ ߝ ߮ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 ௠ ߤ௘ ߝ ଶ ߙ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൱ 2 െ ሺ2 െ ߥሻ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቍ቏.Chapter 2 ସ ସ ଶ തതതത ܹଷ௞௡ ൌ ෍ ቎‫ܣ‬ ௠ ቆߜ௞௠ ݇௔ ߣ௠ ߝ െ ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ ௠ୀଵ ஶ መ തതതത ෠ ൅‫ܤ‬ ௠ ቆെߜ௞௠ ݊ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ൧ െ ݊‫ܣ‬ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ െ 3െߥ ଶ ߝ ݇௔ ݊߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 መଷ െ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ 1െߥ ଶ ଶ ݊ ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 1െߥ ଶ ෠ଷ ൨ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ 2 3െߥ ݇௔ ݊ ൅ ݇௔ ߥ݊ߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ 2 ഥܷ ഥ ቆ2‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ െ ݅ ൅Ω ሺଶሻ ሺଵሻ തതതത ഥଶ ൅‫ܥ‬ ௠ ቌΩ ቀߜ௞௠ ൅ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ቁ (2. This implies that ‫ۓ‬෍ ܹ ൌ 0 ଵ௞௡ ۖ ௡ୀଵ ۖ ۖஶ ෍ ܹଶ௞௡ ൌ 0 ‫۔‬௡ୀଵ ۖஶ ۖ ۖ ෍ ܹଷ௞௡ ൌ 0 ‫ە‬௡ୀଵ ஶ ‫݇׊‬: (2. The small displacements we chose are totally arbitrary.111) 45 | P a g e . As the series is equal to zero. each coefficient of these small displacements has to vanish.

Because the numerical method does not allow us to find solutions when these series are infinite. as follows: ሾ‫ܯ‬ሿ ൌ ൦ 0 0 ଵ. We define M as this number.112) is finally one unknown: the frequency Ω ഥ ଶ ൅ ሾCሿΩ ഥ ൅ ሾKሿሻሼܺሽ ൌ ሼ0ሽ. we need to choose a finite number of comparison functions to be used to solve the problem.112) ݅ ൌ 1. The resolution of equation (2. 2. ‫ܤ‬௠ and ‫ܥ‬௠ where 1 ൑ ݉ ൑ ‫ܯ‬. The series being null. so that each term is independent from the others. (2. in the previous three series. To get solutions. 3.113) are given in Appendix C. 1 ൑ ݇ ൑ ‫ ܯ‬. each term depends on n. the 3M unknowns being ഥ . (2.115) 46 | P a g e .113) The terms of equation (2. The summations on the axial wave number m will be limited to 1 ൑ ݉ ൑ ‫ ܯ‬. ‫݊׊‬: ஶ Each of these terms takes the following general form: ௜.ଶ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ ଷ.ଵ തതതത ௜.ଶ തതതത ௜. so that the different 0 0 0 ଶ.ଷ തതതത ܹ௜௞௡ ൌ ෍ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ‫ܣ‬௠ ൅ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ‫ܤ‬௠ ൅ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ‫ܥ‬௠ . so that the summation on the admissible function number. we need to solve these sets of equations. matrices take a simple form.ଷ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ 0 ൪. (2. That implies that the resolution of the problem (2. ሺሾ‫ܯ‬ሿΩ (2. ௠ୀଵ ܹଵ௞௡ ൌ 0 ൝ܹଶ௞௡ ൌ 0 ܹଷ௞௡ ൌ 0.Chapter 2 Furthermore.114) തതതത തതതത തതതത ‫ܣ‬ ௠ . there is still equivalent to the resolution of the following matrix equation: തതത തതതത തതത തതതത തതത തതതത ୘ where ሼܺሽ ൌ ሼ‫ܣ‬ ଵ ‫ܣ ڮ‬ெ ‫ܤ‬ଵ ‫ܤ ڮ‬ெ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ܥ ڮ‬ெ ሽ .112) is equivalent to the resolution of a 3M equation system.ଵ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ We chose this way of ordering the unknowns. this means that: ‫݇׊‬. In the terms of these equations.

ሾ‫ܥ‬ሿ ൌ ቎ ଷ. thus. by introducing a new variable (2.116) ଶ. The first one is called "structural damping". Thus.ଷ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଶ. the steady viscous effects. we use the standard method.ଵ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଷ. The second one is the "viscoelastic damping" and is characterized has to be replaced by ‫ ܧ‬ቂ1 ൅ ቀΩ ൅ ߯ቁ డ௧ቃ where Ω is the radian frequency of the ఓ డ by the viscoelastic damping coefficient χ. effectively reducing ሼܻሽ ൌ ቊ ሼXሽ ቋ.Chapter 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ቏.117) Each element of those matrices is actually a MxM submatrix. characterized by the structural damping coefficient µ.114) takes the form ሾ‫ܯ‬Ԣሿ ൌ ሾ‫ܯ‬ሿ.ଶ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଶ. suitable for the elastomer material of the shells used in the experiments. Thus.ଶ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଷ.118) To solve this system. ሺሾ‫ܯ‬ԢሿΩ (2. in effect.119) Thus. where ቐሾ‫ܥ‬Ԣሿ ൌ ሾ‫ܥ‬ሿ ൅ ݅߯Ω଴ ሾ‫ܭ‬ሿ. We shall employ a two-parameter damping model. we have taken into account the curvature of the shell. ሾ‫ܭ‬Ԣሿ ൌ ሺ1 ൅ ߤ݅ሻሾ‫ܭ‬ሿ. ሺሾPሿ ൅ Ω (2.ଷ ൪. ഥ ΩሼXሽ the second-order system to a first-order one. the former equation takes the form ഥ ሾQሿሻሼܻሽ ൌ ሼ0ሽ.ଷ 0 0 ‫ܥ‬௞௠ ଵ. They are given in Appendix C. So far.ଷ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ (2. we consider two kinds of damping (see Païdoussis and Des Trois Maisons.ଵ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଵ. new boundary conditions but not the internal dissipation of energy. 1971).ଵ ሾ‫ܭ‬ሿ ൌ ൦‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଵ.ଶ ‫ܭ‬௞௠ (2.120) 47 | P a g e . Young’s modulus E motion. equation (2. ഥ ଶ ൅ ሾCԢሿΩ ഥ ൅ ሾKԢሿሻሼܺሽ ൌ ሼ0ሽ. in the model. ‫ܭ‬௞௠ ଷ.

4 Theoretical Results 2. ሾKሿ ሾCሿ where ‫۔‬ሾQሿ ൌ ൤ሾെI୑ ሿ ሾ0ሿ ൨ . Matlab® will provide us efficient tools for solving this problem numerically.4. The problem has now been reduced to an തതത തതതത തതത തതതത തതത തതതത ୘ ഥ and eigenvectors ሼܺሽ ൌ ሼ‫ܣ‬ eigenfrenquencies Ω ଵ ‫ܣ ڮ‬ெ ‫ܤ‬ଵ ‫ܤ ڮ‬ெ ‫ܥ‬ଵ ‫ܥ ڮ‬ெ ሽ of ordinary eigenvalue problem. 2. Comparisons between existing results and the results obtained with this theory were carried out to validate the use of the extended Galerkin method to solve the equations of motion. 300] M=10 2൑݈൑3 Model 3 ∆ൌ 2 2 48 | P a g e . All these Table 2.1 Preliminary Calculations Before applying the theory developed in the previous parts to the case of a cylindrical cantilevered shell aspirating shell.1: The parameters of the computer program Number of Gaussian points Integration stepsize Domain of integration Number of admissible functions Chosen model Length l [-300. of the Gaussian quadrature to calculate the unsteady fluid forces and of an out-flow model to describe the downstream flow behaviour. Its numerical solution will give us the the problem. ሾ0ሿ ሾMሿ ‫ە‬ ‫ ۓ‬ሾPሿ ൌ ൤ Here [IM] is the MxM identity matrix.Chapter 2 ሾ0ሿ ሾI୑ ሿ ൨. preliminary calculations were conducted considering the case of a discharging cantilevered shell for two main reasons: to validate the Matlab® program developed to get theoretical results and to determine a number of parameters involved in the program.

2.4. (2. we consider the flow to be incompressible. The second one is a much thinner pipe.2 Predicted Dynamics for an Aspirating Shell All the parameters of the Matlab® program having been determined.2.041. ߤ ൌ 0. the following dimensionless parameters were used: ଵ/ଶ ‫ܧ‬ ܷ଴ ൌ ൤ ൨ .11. Both are made of the same elastomer material whose properties are: ߥ ൌ 0. So. For comparison with the experimental results. The results themselves are shown in Table 2.122) The Argand diagrams as well as the graph of the imaginary part of the non-dimensional frequency versus the non-dimensional flow velocity and the real part of the non-dimensional frequency versus the non-dimensional flow velocity obtained with the present theory for Pipe A and Pipe B are presented in Figure 2.123) 49 | P a g e .5. (2.4 to Figure 2.6 ‫ כ‬10଺ N⁄mଶ .00028s. we consider the fluid density to be the air density in the atmospheric conditions: ߩ௙ ൌ 1. In this theory. ‫ ܧ‬ൌ 2. it will now be used to study the theoretical dynamics of the cantilevered aspirating shell.Chapter 2 calculations were conducted without considering steady viscous effects. ߩ௦ ൌ 1108 kg⁄mଷ ߯ ൌ 0.17 kg⁄mଷ . The fluid used in the experiments is air. ߩ௦ ܽଶ ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ (2. The first one is the pipe used in the Rinaldi (2009) experiments. In the experiments that will be presented in the next section. The way to determine these parameters is presented more precisely in Appendix D. ߩ௦ ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ ଵ/ଶ ‫ܧ‬ Ω଴ ൌ ൤ ൨ .121) The geometric properties of the two pipes are presented in Table 2. two different pipes were used.1.

092 ܷ௖௥ ൌ 5. the theory predicts that the effect of flow for small values of the non-dimensional flow velocities is to damp the system in all modes as the imaginary part of the non-dimensional frequency is positive. ‫ ݑ‬ൌ 0.67*10-3 (0.182 (7.87*10-4 (0. As the dimensionless flow velocity increases.165 ൜ ௖௥ ܷ௖௥ ൌ 9. This corresponds to an instability threshold by flutter.15 m/s.129) 0. Moreover.445 (17. in both cases. it is seen that. (2. (2.228 ൜ ௖௥ ܷ௖௥ ൌ 12.28*10-3 (0. the theory predicts a loss by flutter in the 2nd circumferential mode and the 1st axial mode at: ൜ ‫ݑ‬௖௥ ൌ 0.15) From the figures.7 m/s.Chapter 2 Table 2.169 ܷ௖௥ ൌ 9.4 m/s.031) 0. More precisely. the theory predicts a loss by flutter in the 1st circumferential mode and the 1st axial mode at: (2.126) For Pipe B. the real part of the nondimensional frequency can be equal to zero at higher flow velocity while its imaginary part is still negative.35*10-3 (0. the pipe buckles in the 2nd circumferential mode and the 1st axial mode at (2.184) 3. ൜ ‫ݑ‬௖௥ ൌ 0. for Pipe A.127) 50 | P a g e .51) Pipe B 6.124) It is then followed by flutter in the 3rd circumferential mode and the 1st axial mode at: ‫ ݑ‬ൌ 0.250) 7. this corresponds to a static instability. all the modes become less damped and the imaginary part of the non-dimensional frequency eventually becomes negative while its real part is still positive.1m/s.2: The geometrical and physical properties of the pipes Properties a in meters (in) h in meters (in) L in meters (in) Pipe A 4.125) Finally.

13) whose function is to ensure that the air entering the tank does not disturb the pipe during the experiments. As mentioned in the previous section. a honeycomb and an additional screen are located at the bottom of the conduit for flow-straightening purposes. arises in the same mode for Pipe A and Pipe B.5 m/s. a flexible elastomer pipe.5 Experimental Observations As I mentioned it before. Their geometrical and physical properties are recalled in (2. presented in Figure 2. the initial motivation of this study was the observation of a shell-type instability in the experiments that were conducted by Rinaldi (2009) and that involved an aspirating cantilevered pipe. a compressed air reservoir and a flow meter device. (2. (2.12. That is why the experimental apparatus that was utilized in this project is the same as the one she used. an internal plexiglas flow-guiding protective conduit. the predicted critical flow velocities are higher for Pipe B than for Pipe A.270 ܷ௖௥ ൌ 15 m/s. the pipe buckles in the same mode at: ‫ ݑ‬ൌ 0. the buckling. the theory predicts a loss of stability by flutter followed at higher flow velocity by buckling. consists of a large steel tank.128) Finally. 2.121) 51 | P a g e . The tank possesses a plexiglas window for viewing purposes. For both instabilities. A screen. for both cases.Chapter 2 It is then followed by flutter in the 2nd circumferential mode and the 1st axial mode at: ൜ ‫ݑ‬௖௥ ൌ 0. The pipe is Iocated inside the plexiglas flow-guiding protective conduit (Figure 2. two different pipes were tested in the experiments. Flutter occurs not in the same mode for both pipes. The experimental apparatus. however.318 ൜ ௖௥ ܷ௖௥ ൌ 17.129) Thus.

Chapter 2 Figure 2.4: Argand diagram obtained with the present theory for Pipe A Figure 2.5: Argand diagram obtained with the present theory for Pipe B 52 | P a g e .

6: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 1 circumferential mode of Pipe A st 53 | P a g e .Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.

Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.7: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 2 circumferential mode of Pipe A nd 54 | P a g e .

8: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 3 circumferential mode of Pipe A rd 55 | P a g e .Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.

Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.9: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 1 circumferential mode of Pipe B st 56 | P a g e .

10: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 2 circumferential mode of Pipe B nd 57 | P a g e .Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.

11: a) Im(ω) and b) Re(ω) as a function of u for the 3 circumferential mode of Pipe B rd 58 | P a g e .Chapter 2 a) b) Figure 2.

a new mould was designed to cast Pipe B. (iii) flexible elastomer pipe (after Rinaldi. a true shell.Chapter 2 Compressed air reservoir Steel tank Figure 2. and on the experimental procedure. (b) aspirating configuration. (i) large steel tank.2. As it appeared necessary to experimentally study the dynamics of a thinner pipe. For more details on the procedure of the conventional pipe casting process. on the determination of the Young’s modulus and of the two damping parameters. 2009) and Table 2. (ii) Plexiglas protective conduit. 59 | P a g e .13: (a) Discharging configuration. But it was with this pipe that the shell-type instability was first observed. The schematics of the various pieces are given in Appendix E. That is why it was also studied here.12: The experimental apparatus Figure 2. the reader can refer to Rinaldi (2009). Pipe A is an ordinary elastomer pipe that is used in the laboratory for beam experiments.

Then. the pressure in the tank increases. the system loses stability by flutter in its second circumferential mode. The system is initially stable.15: The collapse of Pipe A 60 | P a g e . the pipe collapses rather quickly (Figure 2. But the phenomenon lasts only some seconds.15).Chapter 2 For both pipes. ܷ௖௥ ൎ 2 m/s (2. For Pipe A. the system loses stability at: ൜ ‫ݑ‬௖௥ ൎ 0. the instability threshold is really sharp.14.14: The observed shell-type instability with Pipe A Figure 2. nothing happens up to a velocity at which the pipe suddenly loses stability.130) As shown in Figure 2. Figure 2.036 . If the air control valve is not closed. When the velocity is increased.

Clamped end Shell Free end PVC tube Figure 2.5 m/s (2.17: The observed shell-type instability followed by a collapse with Pipe B 61 | P a g e . a PVC tube was placed inside the shell as shown in Figure 2. ൜ ௖௥ ܷ௖௥ ൎ 0.16: The thin shell and the PVC tube placed in it Figure 2.Chapter 2 With Pipe B. it did not change the critical flow velocity or the behaviour of the pipe.009 .16.131) To get a higher critical flow velocity. Despite making the observation easier. the critical flow velocity is even smaller: ‫ ݑ‬ൎ 0.

Chapter 2 As shown in Figure 2.17, at the critical flow velocity, the pipe collapses all along the shell, then experiences a shell-type instability in the second circumferential mode and finally collapses definitely in the same mode at the free end of the PVC tube.

2.6 Discussion
Table 2.3 presents a comparison between the theoretical and experimental results. The main comment that can be made is that the theory predicts qualitatively the first type of instability. However, the predicted critical flow velocity is overestimated: for Pipe A, it is more than two times higher and, for Pipe B, the ratio is close to nineteen. Furthermore, if experimental and theoretical predicted modes of instability are in good agreement for Pipe A, It is not the case for Pipe B. Actually, the theory predicts a loss of stability in the first circumferential mode while the experimental observation shows that the pipe exhibits a shell-type instability in its second circumferential mode. Finally, if the theory indeed predicts that the flutter is followed by buckling, the divergence is expected at higher flow velocity whereas, in the experiments, the flutter is followed by buckling at the same flow velocity. Because of all these differences and especially the last one, a question arose: the phenomenon observed in the experiments, is it really flutter followed by buckling? Maybe, the first observed instability could be a divergence. In that case, what seems to be flutter in the experiments could be due to a frequent switch from one possible buckling state to another one, and the final buckling would be the final state of this phenomenon. But, these multiple collapses of the shell might not be exactly a flow-induced instability of the pipe. It could be due to the combination of the transmural pressure difference at the wall and of the really low stiffness of the material. So it could be very interesting to conduct new experiments with a stiffer material. As it might be more difficult to reach sufficiently high flow velocity with 62 | P a g e

Chapter 2 air experiments, this work could be carried out with the new experimental apparatus, which is presented in Chapter 3, as the experiments could be conducted with water. Moreover, the analytical model certainly has to be improved. Firstly, the new boundary conditions developed for the case of an aspirating cantilevered shell should be reconsidered. Since the present theoretical model has been derived, a new insight has been has been developed by Giacobbi (2010) on this matter. It might be interesting to take that into account. Furthermore, as the flow at the free end is really not a jet, it should maybe not be considered that the flow is vertical before it enters the shell and the out-flow model should be modified to be closer to reality. To have a better understanding of the dynamics of the flow before it enters the pipe, it would be useful to develop a numerical approach. It might certainly help to develop this more realistic out-flow model.
Table 2.3: Comparison between the theoretical and experimental results

Pipe A Theory ‫ݑ‬௖௥ 0.092 5.1 Flutter followed Type of instability by buckling at higher flow velocity Mode of n=2 and m=1 instability n=2 Experiment 0.036 2 Flutter followed by buckling at the same flow velocity Theory 0.169 9.4

Pipe B Experiment 0.09 0.5 Flutter followed by buckling at the same flow velocity

ܷ௖௥ ሺm/sሻ

Flutter followed by buckling at higher flow velocity

n=1 and m=1

n=2

63 | P a g e

are shallower and thinner formations that hardly exceed 1. They can be found between 6. the salt walls are really hard and impermeable. wilful damage and other hazards by the thousands of feet of rock above them.1 Introduction Underground salt formations have been used over the past few decades as an alternative solution to store liquid hydrocarbons and natural gas. they are more prone to deterioration once a cavern has been formed.1: The different steps of the salt cavern formation and its use as storage facility (After AGL Resources website) 65 | P a g e . Furthermore.000 feet in height. Salt beds. Figure 3. as a result. because of the extreme geological conditions at cavern depth. Salt dome caverns hollowed in these formations are very safe storage facilities.000 and 1. That is why salt domes are considered to be more suitable for salt cavern construction.000 feet in height. Salt domes are really thick formations that can be as large as a mile in diameter and 30. They are protected from fire.Chapter 3: Experimental Study of the Stability of the Hanging Tubular Pipes Used in Salt Caverns 3. They are present below the Earth’s surface in two different configurations: salt domes and salt beds.500 feet below the surface. on the other hand. Underground salt deposits have been created through a natural process over the past millennia in certain areas throughout the world.

Chapter 3 Salt caverns are hollowed in a process called “solution mining”. the reverse process is applied.1. while the brine is produced through the inner p pipe. Two different methods of circulation can be used. the cavern is gradually formed. called brine. ipe. they are injected into the cavern through the annulus. a) b) Figure 3. To withdraw the gas or hydrocarbons. Either the fresh water is injected into the well tubing and brine is withdrawn through the annular space around it by a direct circulation process. Water is then injected into the well to dissolve the salt. Through this process. Once the cavern is formed. As shown in Figure 3.2: : Flow direction in the so called a) direct circulation and b) reverse circulation 66 | P a g e . Even though it is sometimes used for disposal of waste. it is ready to be used for storage. the main purpose is to store either natural gas or liquid hydrocarbons. Thus. leaving an empty space. Thus salt has been extracted from the formation. Both of them are lighter than brine and will float on top of it.2). The resulting very salty water. or the water is injected through the annulus and the brine extracted via the tubing in a process called ed reverse circulation (see Figure 3. a well is first drilled down through the overlaying formations into the salt formation. is then cycled back up the well.

The last one appeared to be the most often experienced.4. Here. Ratigan listed four different possible reasons for failure: salt falls. Ratigan (2008) reported that some industrial installations had experienced failures of the hanging tube (Figure 3.2. and sorted out according to different characteristics: if failure was experienced or not. From what is known.5 presents the dimensionless critical flow velocity ucf for flutter of that system according to two dimensionless parameters.Chapter 3 Salt caverns are very useful because they can be filled up more quickly than any other storage facilities and the product can be withdrawn on very short notice. at high enough flow velocity. pressure developed as a result of hydraulic transients. it can be seen as a system of two coaxial cylindrical structures simultaneously subjected to annular and internal flow. i. The first one. As a matter of fact. corrosion and wear. mass per unit length m and flexural rigidity EI. It consists of a uniform pipe of length L. Figure 3. it is not unreasonable to think that the system can experience a flowinduced instability. 67 | P a g e . if liquid or gas was stored in a domal or bedded salt cavern.3). and fluid-elastic instability. leading to a possible loss of isolation between the two flows inside and outside of the pipes. by failure we understand a significant deformation of the tube. Such a system is presented in Figure 3. that is why Ratigan’s report mainly focuses on that matter. As shown in Figure 3. Ratigan then compared this data with the theoretical critical flow velocities obtained from the linear theory of a hanging cantilevered beam conveying fluid. Data from more than 200 brine strings were collected. the tubular system used for the injection or the withdrawal of the different fluids involved in the process consists of a cantilevered cylindrical pipe located inside a borehole cemented casing and then in the cavern. which is of great interest in emergency situations. conveying a fluid of mass per unit length M with mean axial flow velocity U.e. buckling or flutter. Thus.

some inconsistency between the theoretical model and reality could be the source of the incompatibilities in the results. 2008) (3. As it is highlighted in the report. These three parameters are defined by ‫ܯ‬ ‫ݑ‬௖௙ ൌ ඨ ‫ܷܮ‬. is a mass parameter. The plotted data look quite the same whether the pipe failed or not. is a nondimensionnal gravity ߛൌ ሺ‫ ܯ‬൅ ݉ሻ‫ܮ‬ଷ ݃. ‫ܫܧ‬ ߚൌ ‫ܯ‬ . ‫ܫܧ‬ Figure 3.1) It was found that the brine string should not have experienced any failure in almost any of the reported cases. γ.Chapter 3 a) b) c) parameter. ݉൅‫ܯ‬ ߚ . As explained in the report. The second one. This means that only the dynamics of 68 | P a g e . (b) in a bedded slat and (c) in a gas storage well in a salt dome (After Ratigan.3: Brine string damage in a liquid storage well (a) in a salt dome. only the theory of a vertical cantilever has been considered.

Figure 3. Logically. Ratigan cast doubt on the validity of the boundary condition at the clamped end. Here. and the complex flows near the casing shoe and near the free end of the hanging pipe might be of great importance in the study of the dynamics of the system.4: a flexible cantilevered pipe conveying fluid (After Païdoussis. Finally. it is hung in water. the clamped-free pipe is supposed to be surrounded by a very light fluid like air. The main work of this project has been to work out an experimental process to test the stability of the hanging pipe in various model configurations matching the industrial ones. in the theory presented in the report. in this theory. Thus. as put forward by Ratigan. Indeed. the annular flow between the string and the cemented casing. The above are some reasons that might explain why the collected data does not match with the theoretical results. And. The work done by Rinaldi (2009) shows that the dynamics of an aspirating pipe is very different. Moreover. 1998) 69 | P a g e . natural gas or liquid hydrocarbons. it is not correct to consider that the hanging pipe is fixed at the casing shoe because it is clamped at the top of the well. The present study was motivated by the failure problems presented by Ratigan. it is not possible to consider only the portion of the hanging beam in the cavern. only the case of a discharging pipe has been undertaken. making obvious the necessity to understand better the dynamics of brine strings. brine.Chapter 3 the part of the pipe hanging in the cavern was studied.

2 The Experimental Configurations In the process of solution mining and then of natural gas and liquid hydrocarbon storage. 1998) The main objectives of this set of experiments are to test whether or not a configuration can develop flow-induced instability and to measure the critical flow velocities. or storage and 70 | P a g e .5: Dimensionless flow velocity for flutter of a vertical cantilevered pipe conveying fluid as a function of β for varying γ (After Païdoussis. the model experiments and their correlation with the cavern configurations are described. Firstly. a quantitative comparison of those velocities can be undertaken. The scope of this chapter is three-fold. pressurization of a cavern for a Mechanical Integrity Test (MIT). Finally. the design of the experimental apparatus that had to be assembled to observe the possible flutter or buckling of each configuration and determine the velocity at the onset of instability is detailed. Thus. Furthermore. Moreover.Chapter 3 Figure 3. it might help to determine in which of those configurations the failures are more likely to occur. as each model configuration corresponds to a specific cavern configuration. Secondly. the flow path in the hanging pipe and in the annular region depends on the situation: drilling of the cavern with brine production. 3. the experimental results are presented and used to compare the relative stability of the various configurations. the amplitude and the frequency of oscillations should also be measured whenever it is possible.

This case is similar to the first one but in this case the pipe is surrounded by water in three ways: (i) in unconfined water. So this is the 3 same as Configuration 2 but with the water flowing from the free end to the clamped one.6 provide a detailed description and illustration of all the different configurations. This is the same as Configuration 2ii and Configuration 2iii but with a 4 discharging annular flow and no flow in the pipe. However. In the various possible configurations for storage and withdrawal. This is the same as Configuration 2ii and Configuration 2iii but also with 71 | P a g e . the annulus is filled with quiescent or flowing fluid. Although this configuration does not exist in industry.Chapter 3 withdrawal of the natural gas and liquid hydrocarbons. In that case. the hanging pipe discharges water in unconfined air. it is a really important one to test the apparatus because it is a reference case that has been widely studied. That is why all these various configurations have to be defined and tested.1 and Figure 3. Table 3. (ii) with the 2 pipe confined by an outer rigid tube extending from 0 to ½L or (iii) from 0 to L. This is the same as Configuration 4 but with an aspirating annular flow. Table 3. This is the same as Configuration 3ii and Configuration 3iii but also with 7 a discharging annular flow. the cantilevered pipe can be hanging either in unconfined fluid (air or water) or confined by a larger rigid tube. 5 6 an aspirating annular flow.1: The description of the different tested configurations Configuration 1 Description This is the reference configuration of a cantilevered pipe surrounded by unconfined air and discharging water. Here the hanging pipe is aspirating the surrounding water. in the first configuration that has been tested.

where Di is the inner diameter of the inner pipe. 6ii Config. To stay close to reality. the annular gap is ½ Di or ¼ Di in configurations involving an annulus. 6i Config. 5ii Config. 3ii Config. 4ii Config. 4i Config.6: The experimental configurations The experiments are to be run with different gap size and external tube length to determine the influence of these parameters on the stability of the coaxial system.7ii Figure 3. 1 Config. 5i Config. 2i Config. 2iii Config. The length of the outer rigid tube can be the same as the length of the inner pipe or half its length. 7i Config. 3i Config. 2ii Config. 3iii Config.Chapter 3 Config. 72 | P a g e .

brine. Table 3.2: Correlation of models and cavern configuration Configuration 1 2i 2ii and 2iii Solution-mining or storage cavern configuration Reference case of the cantilevered pipe discharging water Pressurization of a liquid cavern for a Mechanical Integrity Test (MIT) Pressurization of a liquid cavern for a MIT with cemented production casing modelled 3i 3ii and 3iii Depressurizing a liquid cavern after a MIT Depressurizing a liquid cavern after a MIT with cemented production casing modelled 4 5 6 Product injection in a liquid cavern without brine withdrawal Product withdrawal from a liquid cavern without brine injection Brine production in direct circulation or product withdrawal with brine injection Brine production in reverse circulation or product injection with brine 7 withdrawal 3. Two different flexible pipes made of elastomer were used in the experiments. to promote the onset of that kind of instability. Table 3.Chapter 3 Furthermore. leakage-flow-induced instability was suggested as a possible explanation of brine string failure. hydrocarbons or natural gas in the industrial applications.2 provides a correlation of each model configuration with a specific cavern configuration.3 The Experimental Apparatus Even though the flowing fluid can be water. the experiments are all conducted with water. Thus an additional ring constrictor can also be used in configurations involving an annular flow. as described in the previous section. Their geometry and properties are 73 | P a g e .

Because the flow velocities are not higher than 12 m/s (≈40 ft/s) and because the elastomer pipe is more flexible.48*10-3 74 | P a g e . The schematics of the various pieces are given in Appendix F.52) 8.626) 0. Various outer tubes can be used. The free end of these tubes can be located either at the same height as the free end of the pipe or at half the length of the pipe.52) 7.28*10-3 0. The transparency of the material allows the observation of the motion of the pipe located inside it. the outer plexiglas tube can be considered as motionless.189 0. Because of these difficulties. the same as used in the experiments of Chapter 2.144 0.3: The geometrical and physical properties of the pipes Properties D0 in meters (in) Di in meters (in) L in meters (in) EI in N.368) 0. To conduct these experiments.0159 (0.250) 0. It consists of a large steel tank connected to a reservoir of compressed air.626) 0. a flow-meter and a water reservoir.7.35*10-3 0.0686 2. The only difference between these two pipes is their internal diameter. the first idea was to use an already existing apparatus.Chapter 3 presented in the Table 3.0159 (0.445 (17. The experiments themselves are conducted in a large stainless steel tank connected on its top to a vessel which is of great importance.00635 (0. Their characteristics are presented in Table 3. it appeared more realistic to build an entirely new apparatus.48*10-3 Pipe 2 0. It is presented in Figure 3.3. Table 3.00934 (0. It would have required significant modifications to conduct experiments with water flow – for example.m2 m in kg/m M in kg/m Ma in kg/m Pipe 1 0. the sealing has to be perfect – and with a possible outer tube.445 (17. The cemented casing is modelled by a rigid plexiglas tube.0317 2.4. The whole is then connected to two pumps.

In the configurations that do not involve coaxial flows. The four plexiglas windows allow easy observation inside and the recording of the motion of the elastomer pipe.570’’ (0. the water has to enter at the bottom of the tank.445’’ (0. Firstly. a perforated plastic plate was placed between the pipe and the bottom of the tank to decrease the intensity of the jet coming out of these four inlets.0191) 16.421) Pipe 2 Tube 5 1’’ (0.7) is made of stainless steel and was designed big enough so that the tested configuration could be considered as in an unconfined environment.421) Pipe 1 Tube 3 1’’ (0.421) Pipe 2 The tank (Figure 3. Secondly. The vessel sitting on the top of the tank was a very difficult part to design.445’’ L in inches (m) (0. it diminishes any a possible recirculation. two solutions were developed. a four-outlet manifold was added and connected to four holes located at the bottom of the tank (Figure 3.0191) 7.0318) 1’’ Di in inches (m) (0. a stainless steel mesh was added instead of the plastic one.445’’ (0.0254) 7/8’’ (0. instead of letting the flow enter through one hole.0254) 7/8’’ (0.0254) 7.0222) 16.0254) 16.570’’ (0.0254) 3/4’’ (0.189) Pipe 2 Tube 4 1’’ (0.570’’ (0.0222) 7.8). in the configurations with a flow coming from the bottom.4: The properties of the different outer tube Tube 1 1-1/4’’ D0 in inches (m) (0.Chapter 3 Table 3. Its very important function is to separate the two coaxial flows.0254) 3/4’’ (0.189) Pipe 2 Tube 6 1’’ (0. It decreases the intensity of the jet coming from the pipe or the annular flow and.189) Associated pipe Pipe 1 Tube 2 1-1/4’’ (0. Nevertheless. so that a second perforated plate was added. In the other cases.0318) 1’’ (0. the jets did not diffuse totally. It has the same function as a BNC connector at the end of a coaxial cable that physically separates the electric current from the two conductors: the centre core and the 75 | P a g e . To achieve a flow as straight as possible. thus.

the bottom of the tank and the three input/output ports 76 | P a g e . In the configurations involving two counter-current coaxial flows.8 and Figure 3. To achieve this. the vessel presented in Figure 3.Chapter 3 metallic shield. it is necessary that the flow reaches and leaves the tank through two different hoses and that there is absolutely no connection between the two flows. I/O-1 I/O-3 I/O-2 Figure 3.9). The flow going through the inner pipe runs inside a straight tube in the vessel.7: The experimental apparatus Figure 3. the sealing between this tube and the top cover is provided by an O-ring located in an additional part attached to the cover by bolts (Figure 3.8: The vessel. that guarantees the homogeneity of the flow in the annular region. The most serious difficulty was to ensure the sealing of the apparatus and still be able to open the vessel in case a piece had to be changed. The flow then goes from the vessel to the annular region through ten equally spaced holes.9 was designed. It was decided to use more than one hole so that the incoming flow would be split equally in the vessel. At the top of the vessel. The water from the annular flow surrounds the straight pipe in the vessel and is collected by a six-outlet manifold connected to six holes located on the side of the vessel.

It has multiple functions.9: Exploded view of the vessel A white plastic reservoir located on the right side of Figure 3. Pump 1 Pump 2 Figure 3. Firstly.Chapter 3 Figure 3.7 is also an important part of the apparatus. it is used as a water reservoir. It is also used to gather the water coming from the release valve described later if the pressure in the tank becomes too high.10: The two pumps Figure 3. as it is opened to air through a vent.11: The quick connect system 77 | P a g e . It is also useful when the tank has to be emptied. It is from this reservoir that the water is aspirated and injected in the system. It has an overflow in case there is too much water in the system. it prevents the existence of too high a pressure in the apparatus. It then goes back to the reservoir. the system is not hermetically closed and the water surface of the reservoir is at atmospheric pressure. Thus the water is not wasted every time the pipe configuration has to be changed. as pointed out by its name. Finally.

each pump is connected to one of the three input/output piping systems described above: one for the pipe flow (I/O-1). Depending on the configuration.13: The magnetic flow-meter and its local operator interface 78 | P a g e . As the connections need to be changed for each configuration. For measurement and safety reasons. One injects water (Pump 1) while the other one aspirates it from the tank (Pump 2). a quick connect system (Figure 3. a magnetic flow-meter (Figure 3. It operates as a noncontacting instrumentation that consists of a sensor and a transmitter with a local operator interface.Chapter 3 As shown at the bottom of Figure 3. These two pumps are not used in the same way.11) is used.7. so that this can be done easily and quickly.12: The pressure gauge and the release valve located on the top cover of the tank Figure 3.13) is located after the first pump.10). a pressure gauge and a release valve are located at the top of the tank (Figure 3. I/O-2 is closed. It uses the conducting properties of water that contains ions to get the fluid flow rate. one for the annular flow (I/O-2) and one at the bottom of the tank (I/O-3). To measure the flow velocity.12). in the usual case of a pipe discharging water and surrounded by air. two drives modulate the power of two pumps (Figure 3. Pump 1 connected to I/O-1 injects water in the pipe. this pressure cannot be higher than 75 psi. while Pump 2 connected to I/O-3 is used to maintain a constant water level in the tank. Figure 3. Thus. The other useful information that was recorded whenever possible is the frequency and the amplitude of oscillation of the cantilevered pipe. otherwise the release valve opens and the overflow goes to the plastic reservoir. For example.

the amplitude was more roughly measured using a ruler attached to one of the windows of the tank. At first. thus. a laser (Figure 3. In the end. so that it is possible to get the effective displacement of the pipe by multiplying the measured displacement. it appeared possible to calibrate it to know the conversion between the signal given by the laser and the effective displacement of the pipe. and. firstly because the motion of the pipe is not always planar and. It allows to measure the distance between the instrument and the pipe.14: The laser device Figure 3. the plane of motion is rarely the same as the measurement plane of the laser. with the ruler graduated in centimetres.14) is used. But it is not that simple.Chapter 3 To acquire the frequency of the oscillations. So the laser measurements were used to get the frequency of the motion by analysing the acquired time signal using a Matlab® program. when it is planar.15). to get a time signal of the motion of a point on the pipe. It was always placed at the same location. secondly.15: The amplitude measurement device 79 | P a g e . To be as accurate as possible. Figure 3. by a factor dependent on the fluid inside the tank (Figure 3. pictures were taken with a camera attached to a tripod.

Chapter 3

3.4 Experimental Observations
Because of the great diversity of studied configurations, the observations made for each of them are presented separately in this section. However, comparisons between different configurations are made on some occasions, e.g. to say that the pipe has the same dynamical behaviour. A whole set of experiments is presented using Pipe 1 and Tubes 1 and 2. The configuration of a cantilevered pipe discharging water in air was first studied and compared to the theory, as it is the reference case. For each experiment, the velocity is gradually increased from zero to the velocity after which the dynamics of the pipe does not change anymore. When there is flow inside the pipe, flow velocities cited are the flow velocities in the pipe. Otherwise, it is the flow velocity in the annular gap. The motion amplitude is denoted by A and the frequency by f. 3.4.1 Configuration 1 In this configuration, the very first vibrations of the pipe are observed at U=6.57 m/s but their amplitude is really small (A<1 cm) and there is no definite frequency. The Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm shows the existence of two or three peaks around 4.1 Hz. At ܷ௖௙ ൌ 6.94 m/s, the amplitude suddenly increases as shown in Figure 3.16.b. This is the instability threshold. At this point, we have ݂ ൌ 4.15 Hz and ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 21 cm. In that case, the motion of the pipe is really simple and simple-harmonic. It oscillates in a plane that does not change with time. From this point, the pipe dynamics remains qualitatively the same. It is a planar oscillation in the third mode of the pipe. The frequency of oscillation gradually increases with flow velocity (Figure 3.16.a) as well as the amplitude, to reach ݂ ൌ 4.61 Hz and ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 26 cm at ܷ ൌ 8.0 m/s.

in air predicts a loss of stability by flutter in the third mode at ܷ௖௙ ൌ 6.84 m/s 80 | P a g e

The standard theoretical model for a cantilevered pipe discharging water

Chapter 3
4,9 4,8 4,7 4,6 f [Hz] 4,5 4,4 4,3 4,2 4,1 4 6,5
a)

experiment theory

7

u [m/s]

7,5

8

8,5

30 25 20 A [cm] 15 10 5 0 U [m/s] b) Figure 3.16: a) The comparison between theoretical and experimental frequencies and b) the observed amplitude with Pipe 1 in configuration 1 6 6,5 7 7,5 8 8,5

with a frequency ݂ ൌ 4.24Hz. Furthermore, Figure 3.16.a shows the comparison between predicted and experimental frequencies with increasing flow velocity. It shows that the experimental results differ from the theoretical ones by less than 5%. They are therefore judged to be in really good agreement. 3.4.2 Configuration 2i Unlike the case of a cantilevered pipe discharging water in air, the instability of the pipe immerged in water develops much more gradually. The critical flow velocity, ܷ ൌ 3.93 m/s, is much lower than in Configuration 1. This 81 | P a g e

was expected (see Figure 3.5) as the coefficient ߚ is smaller because of the

Chapter 3 pipe dynamics is divided into two parts. For 3.93 ൑ ܷ ൑ 4.69, the amplitude mode of oscillations is the second one. For 3.93 ൑ ܷ ൑ 4.45, the oscillations are surrounding water. From the threshold of instability, as shown in Figure 3.17, the

opposite behaviour, decreasing from ݂ ൌ 1.40 Hz to ݂ ൌ 1.10 Hz . The axial

increases slowly from ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 0.4 cm to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 8 cm, while the frequency displays the

planar but the plane of oscillation is regularly changing. At higher flow velocities, the frequency of motion is clearly distinguishable but the pipe motion is more complex and comprises two phases: (i) a periodic planar motion alternating with (ii) a phase during which the free end of the pipe performs figure-of-eight motion.
1,6 1,4 1,2 1 f [Hz] 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 3,5
a)

4

4,5 U [m/s]

5

5,5

40 35 30 25 A [cm] 20 15 10 5 0 3
b)

3,5

4 U [m/s] 4,5

5

5,5

Figure 3.17: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 2i

82 | P a g e

The pipe impacting on the outer tube is certainly the reason for this difference in behaviour between configurations 2i and 2ii. ૛૙ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ The pipe dynamics suddenly changes at ܷ ൌ 4.25 Hz to 2. for 4.77. But behaviour of this cantilevered pipe discharging water in essentially unconfined water. At Figure 3.21 ൑ ܷ ൑ 5. the oscillations are planar and still in the second mode but. the frequency also increases from 1.76 m/s. Firstly. after a while. In this configuration.18). 83 | P a g e .Chapter 3 the beginning. the free end of the pipe performs a rotating motion along the wall of the tank (see Figure 3. It appears that this 3-D motion might be due to the vicinity of the tank wall when the amplitude of oscillation is really high (‫ ܣ‬ൎ 32 cm) as a result of the jet issuing from the pipe impacting this wall.4.18: Successive instantaneous views of the rotating motion of the pipe at ࢁ ൌ ૞.92 Hz. the pipe motion is constrained by the presence of an outer plexiglas tube whose length is half that of the pipe. 3. does not change the critical flow velocity and frequency. the pipe oscillates in its second mode with increases suddenly to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 32 cm and the frequency drops to ݂ ൌ 0. The amplitude slowly increases and. From this point on. This. in contrast to configuration 2i. the pipe does not stop its rotating motion. the behaviour of the pipe can be divided into three ranges. it has been found.3 Configuration 2ii In this configuration.19. and the amplitude as well as the frequency increase slowly. The amplitude the dynamics of the pipe in configuration 2ii lets us think that this is the natural small amplitude in a plane that sometimes changes. as shown in Figure 3. but it has a great influence on the dynamics of the pipe.25 Hz.

Chapter 3 3. ܷ ൌ 7.19: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 2ii 4 5 6 7 8 9 second to third axial mode.34. Then. the 84 | P a g e Finally.59 m/s. the amplitude abruptly increases from 9.5 3 2. the oscillation mode smoothly changes from third mode.5 f [Hz] 2 1.6 cm to 14. for 5. At ܷ ൌ 6.34 m/s.77 ൑ ܷ ൑ 6. the motion of the pipe becomes more complex. The rapidly than in the previous flow range. from this point.8 cm at A [cm] .5 0 4 a) 5 6 U{m/s] 7 8 9 25 20 15 10 5 0 U [m/s] b) Figure 3. There is no jump in the frequency but.50 Hz but the amplitude increases more periodic planar oscillations.5 1 0. This behaviour extends as far as ܷ ൌ 7. the pipe oscillates mainly in its Periods of chaotic motion without a definite frequency alternate with periods of frequency remains stable at ݂ ൌ 2.38 m/s. At the same time.

20. Thus. While the velocity is increased.a). a greater part of the the pipe moves away from the outer tube and the pipe suddenly diverges in its second mode (see Figure 3. Thus. seems surprising. is to increase the added mass on the upper part.c). the pipe begins to rotate at higher flow velocity (ܷ ൌ frequency of oscillation or rotation is around twice the one without the outer tube. 3.69 m/s (see Figure 3.4.80. due to the presence of the outer tube. a) b) c) Figure 3. as the only change to the system.80 m/s. From that point to ܷ ൌ 6.37 and c) U=8.b.20. The opposite behaviour is observable for 6.70 m/s.Chapter 3 frequency increases again and the slope of the amplitude curve is really steep.4 Configuration 2iii the pipe is buckling. in the presence of the outer tube. the pipe begins to rotate as in configuration 2i. the presence of the outer tube really changes the dynamical behaviour of the pipe. at first sight. the only instability that is observed with an outer tube all along ܷ ൌ 2. This. At ܷ ൌ 7.76 m/s in configuration 2i and ܷ ൌ 7. At this velocity. The free end of the pipe moves away from its equilibrium position until it touches the plexiglas tube at Overall.20.85 m/s in configuration 2ii) and the periods alternate with third mode planar motion periods.20: The buckling of the pipe 1 in Configuration 2iii at a) U=2. but rotation 4. b) U=5.69.06 m/s 85 | P a g e . the pipe pipe is in contact with the outer tube as shown in Figure 3.33 ൑ ܷ ൑ 6. At higher flow velocity up to ܷ ൌ 9.85 m/s. the upper part of diverges in its first mode. It appears around ܷ ൌ 1 m/s. there is no change in the dynamics of the pipe.

4. In fact. The frequency of oscillation is ݂ ൌ 0. Its amplitude increases very quickly to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 1 cm at . but they last longer as the flow velocity increases and can last as long as fifteen seconds. At the beginning. At ܷ ൌ 4.21. The pipe then loses stability by flutter in its first mode at ܷ ൌ 3.e. Although the oscillation is planar. the flow has a stabilizing effect on the pipe at low flow velocities and the bending decreases and dies out at ܷ ൌ 3. here. the pipe is aspirating water. the water is flowing from the free end to the clamped end.22. as only buckling is experienced and only in the first and second modes. whereas in configurations 2i and 2ii.13 m/s. a new instability arises.5 Configuration 3i In this configuration.b and Figure 3. is not clear. A first mode buckling overlaps 86 | P a g e the first mode flutter.39 m/s.Chapter 3 Thus. there is a slight bending of the pipe.19 m/s. the periods of periodic motion are not observable for more than a few seconds. as shown in Figure 3. which is then perpetuated nonlinearly. the behaviour of the pipe is not that simple. i. but. the pipe develops oscillations successively in its second and third mode. a helical spring was added inside and all along the pipe. But. In this configuration and all the other configurations in which the pipe is aspirating the fluid. the amplitude is really small. the longer outer tube completely changes the dynamics of the system. which is due to the inside spring not being perfectly straight. increasing smoothly. First. At zero flow velocity. a shell-type collapse of the pipe was experienced at low flow velocity and persisted thereafter. the pipe is hanging in unconfined water as in Configuration 2i.37 Hz and it remains the same during the experiments. periods of periodic planar motion alternate with periods of chaotic motion. 3. Whether this change in dynamical behaviour is due to the presence of the longer tube or to imperfection-initiated buckling against the plexiglas tube. To avoid this occurrence without constraining the motion of the pipe.

7 cm at ܷ ൌ 5. another instability is observable: a flutter of the pipe in its fifth mode superimposed on the first mode flutter.2 cm at ܷ ൌ 5. Thus. the amplitude of the first mode flutter increases more rapidly.5 0 0 1 2 b) Figure 3.84 m/s.5 Hz and it does not change much with flow.5 4 4.5 U [m/s] 5 5. then. First.33 m/s and.46 m/s. it is difficult to determine the mode of this instability because the amplitude is really small. From this velocity.5 Bending 2 A [cm] 1. At ܷ ൌ 4.Chapter 3 25 mode 1 20 mode 5 f [Hz] 15 10 5 0 2. but 21. The frequency is close to ݂ ൌ . the pipe exhibits at the same time a first mode flutter. a first mode buckling and 87 | P a g e it becomes obvious at higher flow velocities. reaching ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 1.40 m/s.5 1 0. from this flow velocity on. to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 2.21: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 3i mode 1 mode 5 3 U [m/s] 4 5 6 ܷ ൌ 4.5 6 3 Buckling 2.5 a) 3 3.

the amplitude of the fifth mode increases suddenly to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ observation of the first mode flutter becomes more difficult.84 m/s.23). ૚૜ ‫ܕ‬/‫ ܛ‬showing the disappearing of the static bending (bowing) Figure 3. the periods of shuddering motion of the first mode are more and more frequently observable.40 m/s . the peak corresponding to the fifth mode frequency. it becomes more important as the flow velocity is increased.22: View of the pipe at a) ࢁ ൌ ૙ ‫ܕ‬/‫ ܛ‬and b) ࢁ ൌ ૜.23: Superposition of the three observable instabilities at ࢁ ൌ ૞. At the highest reachable flow velocity. ܷ ൌ 5. At first. is a minor peak in comparison to the peak corresponding to the first mode flutter. In the mean time. The ܷ ൌ 5.Chapter 3 a fifth mode flutter (Figure 3.8 cm and its frequency becomes the main frequency of the oscillations. in the power spectrum. At 0. the first mode instability is not present oscillatory instability. anymore and the pipe only exhibits a first mode buckling and a fifth mode a) b) Figure 3. But. ૝૙ ‫ܕ‬/‫ ܛ‬over half a period of the first mode oscillations 88 | P a g e .

But. At this velocity.21 m/s. Then.51 m/s.39 Hz.8 cm at ܷ ൌ 4. As a result.85 Hz at ܷ ൌ 5. it loses contact with the outer tube. The Then.7 cm and the great influence on the dynamics of the pipe. this does not affect the dynamics of the pipe.83 m/s. the pipe comes closer to the plexiglas tube and finally touches it at ܷ ൌ 4. here.24: The motion of Pipe 1 in Configuration 3ii at ܷ ൌ 6. contact with the outer tube has a amplitude of first mode flutter suddenly increases to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 0. Up to this point.88 m/s. the dynamics of the pipe suddenly changes.03 m/s. Thus. Configuration 3i.06 m/s . At low flow velocity. the pipe also exhibits a first mode buckling instability but. the pipe is slightly bent at zero flow velocity but the bend then smoothly disappeared at ܷ ൌ 2. the frequency of oscillations to ݂ ൌ 0. a first mode flutter arises with a small amplitude and a frequency ݂ ൌ 0.67 Hz. the dynamics is very similar to that of Configuration 3i.25. periods of periodic motion alternate with periods of chaotic motion. Its amplitude grows rather quickly. at ܷ ൌ 3.6 Configuration 3ii The difference from the previous configuration is that the pipe motion is contained in an outer rigid tube whose length is half that of the pipe. amplitude of the buckling increases to reach ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 1. As in this appears at ܷ ൌ 3.Chapter 3 3. as the amplitude of the buckling increases.01 m/s 89 | P a g e . As in Configuration 3i. the amplitude of the Figure 3. first mode flutter grows suddenly to ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 1 cm and it continues to increase Sometimes. at ܷ ൌ 5. At higher flow velocities the frequency of oscillations also increases up to ݂ ൌ 0. As shown in Figure 3.25 m/s.4.

2 Hz.5 6 2 1. The amplitude of these oscillations 90 | P a g e . they might be a combination of different modes because because.79 0. ). These frequencies remain the same during the experiment. . the most important thing is that the pipe also exhibits higher mode oscillations when it is not in contact with the outer tube (Figure 3.Chapter 3 27 mode 1 23 19 f [Hz] 0. It is difficult to determine the mode of the oscillations.9 0. spectrum two wo minor peaks appear at f = 19.8 0.8 1.7 0.5 U [m/s] mode 1 higher mode 5 5.2Hz and f = 27.24).3 3 a) higher mode 1 higher mode 2 3.4 1.6 0.5 4 4.5 0.25: : a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 3ii U [m/s] quickly at higher flow velocity. However. The frequency jump jumps down to f = 0. but does not change anymore thereafter.2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 b) Figure 3.6 1.4 0.2 A [cm] 1 Buckling Bending 0.79 Hz. in the power spectrum.

4. a first mode buckling appears.7 Configuration 3iii This is the same as the previous configuration.26. The pipe then exhibits a complex motion at ܷ ൌ 4.20 m/s.91 m/s. As in the other configurations involving a spring. Its free end performs a cyclic motion.4 cm at the highest 3. it travels all over half the circumference of the free end of the outer tube. ૛૙ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ 91 | P a g e . at the beginning of the cycle.04 m/s . as the bending disappears at ܷ ൌ 3. The free end of the pipe then remains in contact with the outer tube but the point of contact moves. But. there is a bending of the pipe at zero flow velocity.Chapter 3 increases as the flow velocity increases and it reaches ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 0. except that the outer tube is as long as the pipe. At ܷ ൌ 4. the outer tube has a stabilizing effect too. The contact is finally broken and the pipe comes back to its initial position through the centre of the plexiglas tube. As shown Figure 3.26: The cyclic motion of Pipe 1 in Configuration 3iii at ࢁ ൌ ૝. velocity at which the pipe alternates between two positions: (i) the position of the pipe at lower flow velocity in which the pipe does not touch the outer tube and (ii) a first mode buckling instability in which the free end of the pipe is in contact with the free end of the plexiglas tube. This is a transition flow velocity. in this configuration. Figure 3. the pipe exhibits a first mode buckling instability and there is contact with the outer tube free end.

At ܷ ൌ 5.27. b) ࢁ ൌ ૞. a really weak instability arises. The amplitude is small (‫ ܣ‬ൎ 0. At ܷ ൌ 1. ૜૜ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬.14 m/s.28). 3.27: The first mode buckling of Pipe 1 in Configuration 3iii at a) ࢁ ൌ ૝. As shown in Figure 3. the flow might not be homogeneous in the annular region. If the tube comes only slightly closer to the outer tube. These small oscillations could be due to some imperfections inherent to the experiments. At higher flow velocity.4. Some holes are drilled in it so that the water can go through and then flows in the annular gap. ૞૜ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ and c) ࢁ ൌ ૞. the flow velocity is that of the flow in the annular arises (Figure 3.25 cm) and there is absolutely no definite frequency in the signal.88 m/s. The small oscillations might also be due to some imperfections that can be present on the outside part of the pipe or to a Bernoulli phenomenon. Each of these reasons might cause these small and non-periodic oscillations. an instability In that configuration. thus.33 m/s. the highest reachable flow velocity. periods of periodic 92 | P a g e . beginning by the upper part. the pipe gradually pulls away from the outer tube. In fact. the pipe exhibits only a first mode buckling instability. It is not always observable.8 Configuration 4i a) b) c) Figure 3. For example. then the velocity is locally increased and this can produce a local pressure reduction.Chapter 3 The transition period ends at ܷ ൌ 4. At ܷ ൌ 2. ૢ૞ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ gap.95 m/s. approximately half of the pipe length touches the outer tube at this velocity. there is a plate between the vessel and the tank. Then. only the lower part of the pipe is still in contact with the outer tube.

The decreasing. increased. Both second and third modes are present in the pipe motion. From this velocity to ܷ ൌ 3.5 3 A [cm] 2.38 m/s before oscillations does not change a lot and it remains around ݂ ൌ 5 Hz . the highest reachable.8 Hz and the amplitude is increased to amplitude first increases to reach ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 3.5 1 0.5 0 U [m/s] b) Figure 3. f [Hz] 2 U [m/s] 3 4 4 3. Furthermore. the periodic motions are hardly observable.5 cm at ܷ ൌ 3.84 m/s.Chapter 3 oscillations alternate with periods of quasi-chaotic motion of smaller amplitude. the pipe loses stability at ܷ ൌ 3.07 m/s 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 a) before regaining stability at a velocity higher than ܷ ൌ 3. it should be noted that the intervals of small chaotic motion become longer than the intervals of periodic motion as the velocity is It seems that.5 2 1.3 cm.84 m/s. ‫ ܣ‬ൌ 1. in this configuration. for ܷ ൌ 3. the frequency of The frequency of oscillation is ݂ ൌ 4. Thus.84 m/s .28: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 4i 1 2 3 4 93 | P a g e .

29 shows the time signal and the power spectrum obtained by Welch’s method and the FFT method.Chapter 3 3. ૙ૢ૝ ‫ܕ‬/‫ ܛ‬by a) the FFT method and b) Welch’s method 94 | P a g e .9 Configuration 4ii 1. the non-occurrence of instability was expected from the theory of a solitary clamped-free cylinder in axial flow. a) b) Figure 3.4.29: Power spectra obtained for pipe 1 in configuration 4ii at ࢁ ൌ ૜. From ܷ ൌ example. As the free end of the pipe is blunt. For In this configuration. there are some really small oscillations but they are not periodic. There is no discernible main frequency.38 m/s. Figure 3. These small perturbations can be due to the same reasons as in configuration 4i. there is no observable instability.

1 cm. the rest of the pipe gradually comes closer to the plexiglas tube (Figure 3. A = 0. at U = 0.a.22 m/s. A = 0. the whole pipe is subjected to this new instability and the point of the pipe close to the free end en of the outer tube is a node for this mode. The amplitude of both the first and third mode flutter first increases (Figure Figure 3.Chapter 3 3. U = 0. The pipe seems to be virtually separated into two parts: the upper part located in the plexiglas tube and the lower par part t in unconfined water.14 m/s 95 | P a g e . It reaches a maximum. . a first mode buckling instability arises at the first measurable flow velocity.5 cm. another instability is overimposed on the buckling.30: : The buckling of the pipe at a) U = 0. Here. For now. Despite appearing to be in contact in Figure 3.37 m/s and b) U = 1. That is why the amplitude of the buckling that is measured at the free end of the pipe decreases for U ≥ 0. However. They remain not in contact until U = 1. A = 0.14 m/s. amplitude is first rather small. A = 0.8 cm.54 m/s.4. At U = 1.b).31) to At U = 1.30. The amplitude is really small. the upper part is only subjected to buckling. a third mode flutter appears. The frequency is always close to 5 Hz. water is actually flowing between the e pipe and the outer tube even if the gap is really small. but increases quickly.30. The a) b) Figure 3.10 Configuration 5i In this configuration. Only the lower part is subjected to the first mode flutter that arises at this velocity.2 cm. The motion of the pipe is rather complex.10 m/s and finally reaches a constant value. At this velocity velocity. the pipe is really close to the free end of the outer tube.37 m/s.10 m/s.

the amplitude of the two flutter modes increases again rather quickly.54 m/s.5 2. The pipe is suddenly touching the free end of the outer tube. It then decreases. One might think that this sudden change would affect the dynamics of the pipe. certainly because a greater part of the pipe is close to the plexiglas: buckling works against flutter.5 3 3.5 2 U [m/s] 2. There is a sudden change in the buckling instability. mode 1 mode 3 1.5 Buckling 2 mode 1 mode 3 1.5 A [cm] 1 0.38 m/s .31: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 5i 0 1 2 3 96 | P a g e .5 0 U [m/s] b) Figure 3. From this velocity on.Chapter 3 reach a maximum at ܷ = 1. but the two frequencies remain 6 5 4 f [Hz] 3 2 1 0 1 a) At ܷ = 1. whereas the rest of the pipe moves away from it.

53 m/s with the first mode buckling on the left and the flutter represented on the other pictures 97 | P a g e . Furthermore. the peak corresponding to third mode flutter is less sharp. From ܷ = 2.Chapter 3 the same. The behaviour is highly erratic and there is no main frequency. the amplitude increases and. from this flow velocity on. the pipe located in the plexiglas tube is gradually coming in contact with it as the velocity increases. Figure 3.4 m/s. so.77 m/s. as in the previous step. The amplitude of both modes goes through a maximum around ܷ = 2. The pipe loses contact again with the outer tube except at the free end of the plexiglas tube. this point of contact regularly changes. the frequency of the third mode flutter seems to be close to ݂ = 5 Hz but might not be perfectly constant and. However. the pipe gradually comes into contact with the outer tube and the amplitude of both modes decreases again. not very well defined. the pipe sometimes loses contact with the outer tube and suddenly touches it again. becomes smaller again. the pipe seems in the mood to lose contact with the outer tube. the previous behaviour seems to begin again.00 m/s.85 ൑ ܷ ൑ 2. once again. Here. At ܷ ൌ 2. then. At higher flow velocity. Because of the contact.32: The complex behaviour of the pipe at ܷ = 3. and the motion of the third mode flutter becomes totally erratic at ܷ ൐ 2. not so high and rather wide. At ܷ = 3.08 m/s. However. the amplitude of the motion increases.85 m/s on. All these different causes might explain why the third mode flutter exhibits no main frequency for 1.08. The third mode appears again and its amplitude suddenly increases. the frequency of the third mode becomes less well defined. It suddenly moves a lot. Furthermore.

diverges.00 m/s.3 cm (Figure 3.42 m/s. 3. Then. At ܷ = 0.00 m/s. the opposite behaviour is observable and a smaller and the amplitude of oscillation slightly increased. Both suddenly increase at 98 | P a g e . determined by the presence of the outer tube. From ܷ = 2.38 m/s. The amplitude of this first mode As in Configuration 5i. buckling is ‫ = ܣ‬0. in this configuration. the frequency ܷ = 2. amplitude is small and the frequency is ݂ = 1. small vibrations of the pipe are observable but the pipe is coming more and more in contact with the outer tube at the same time. As a longer part of the pipe is in contact with the plexiglas tube.11 Configuration 5ii measurable flow velocity. When the pipe undergoes flutter. Furthermore. the pipe suddenly exhibits periodic planar motion for a few seconds (݂ = 0. Maybe it is not really flutter and it is a change of the position of buckling. finally. Until this point.13 m/s . the periods with no definite frequency become At ܷ = 1.33). It increases until it reaches its maximum At this velocity only the free end of the pipe is touching the free end of the outer tube. an instability arises at the first (‫ = ܣ‬0. the oscillations impact the outer tube at each extreme of the motion but they have no frequency. the rest of the pipe gradually comes in contact with the plexiglas tube. longer. At higher flow velocity. because the periods of periodic motion alternate with periods in which the pipe has no definite frequency: buckling set against flutter. ܷ = 0. the pipes exhibits alternately two different behaviours: a first mode buckling alternates with periods of flutter (Figure 3.30 m/s is a particular one. half and three-quarters of the pipe is touching the plexiglas. part of the pipe is in contact with the outer tube.70 Hz.5 cm).61 m/s. respectively.Chapter 3 The flow velocity ܷ = 3.85 Hz) and.89 m/s and at ܷ = 1. At higher flow velocities.32).4. at ܷ = 0. The point of contact between the pipe and the outer tube travels continuously all over the circumference of the free end of the outer tube with no frequency.

5 3 3.34).5 2 1.5 f [Hz] 3 2.70 Hz at ܷ = 2.84 m/s.00 ൑ ܷ ൏ 2.6 0.4 0.24 Hz.5 2 U [m/s] 2.69 m/s. the pipe seems to alternate between two new one appears at ݂ = 4. The frequency goes through a maximum at ܷ = 2.5 1.Chapter 3 5 main frequency 4. In fact. Sometimes.5 vibration buckling 2 U [m/s] 2. The pipe seems to exhibit vibrations in its 99 | P a g e third mode. even the first mode is observable (Figure 3. It then decreases to ݂ = 1.5 1 b) Figure 3.5 4 3.15 m/s. At ܷ = 2.2 1 0. the . At ܷ = 2.69 .2 0 0 0.5 3 3. the power spectrum exhibits no peak around 2 Hz but a For 2. only the free end of the pipe is always in contact with the outer tube whereas the rest of the pipe alternates between contact and non-contact.5 configurations: a second mode buckling and a third mode buckling.5 1 a) 1.8 A [cm] 0.33: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 5ii 1.61 m/s. The plane of oscillations changes constantly.

At higher flow velocities. The combination of the flow in the pipe from the top to the free end and a counter-current flow in the annular space has a stabilizing effect on the pipe (Figure 3.20 Hz at the critical flow velocity and it begins to decrease. b) third and c) second mode buckling successively observable at ࢁ = ૛. contact with the free end of the plexiglas tube but begins to flutter in its second This continues only over a brief interval.35. the amplitude remains the same to ܷ = 6. This corresponds to the first increase of the amplitude in Figure 3.2 cm. There is no more buckling and the whole pipe is now oscillating.4.59 m/s. the pipe is very stable. the pipe touches the outer tube at its free end (Figure 3. (‫ = ܣ‬3.93 m/s. 100 | P a g e at ܷ = 6. but there is no main frequency at all.08 Hz .99 Hz at ܷ = 5.37.14 m/s. the amplitude of oscillations reaches its maximum possible magnitude and the end of the pipe suddenly loses contact with the outer tube. But. rather quickly.12 Configuration 6i c) a) b) Figure 3. the pipe is still in mode. the pipe exhibits an erratic behaviour whose amplitude is limited by the presence of the plexiglas tube. free end of the pipe travels continuously all over the circumference of the free 3. At ܷ = 5.34: The a) first.b).28 m/s reaching ݂ = 2. ૟૚ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ At the beginning.35 m/s when really small non-periodic oscillations of the pipe appear. buckling in the first mode is experienced.35.a).82 m/s before increasing again to ݂ = 4.2 cm) before decreasing to ‫ = ܣ‬1.94 m/s. At ܷ = 1. The frequency is ݂ = 3. It then remains the same until ܷ = 5.Chapter 3 end of the outer tube. Meanwhile. At ܷ = 3.

The motion Figure 3. sometimes the free end performs a figure-of-eight oscillation. the amplitude of oscillation increased again to ‫ = ܣ‬6.26 Hz.42 m/s. At ܷ = 7.35: Pipe 1 in configuration 6i at a) ࢁ = ૚. ૢ૜ ‫ܕ‬/‫ܛ‬ b) if the oscillations of both parts have the same frequency. and sometimes it appears to be chaotic. This kind of motion is observable until ܷ = 7.36 shows the shape of the pipe at is more complex: sometimes in a plane. Figure 3.94 m/s. Even At ܷ ൒ 6.23 m/s. This might explain the decrease of the oscillation amplitude.40 cm and the frequency decreased to ݂ = 2.68 m/s. The dynamics of the pipe is the result of a combination of these two effects. it seems that the lower part is in the mood to flutter and the upper one to diverge. Meanwhile. different instants at ܷ = 7. The pipe does not touch the plexiglas tube only in one point. The upper part seems to want to diverge in the second mode. ૜ૠ ‫ܕ‬/‫ ܛ‬and b) ࢁ = ૚. From ܷ = 7. the dynamics of the pipe changes suddenly. so that the general motion of the pipe is flutter in the third mode. The contact line is around 3 cm long. the motion of the pipe 101 | P a g e . the dynamics of the pipe seems to change. The interaction between the possible buckling of the upper part and the flutter of the lower part might explain the complex behaviour.91 m/s . it is rather a part of the pipe that is in contact with the outer tube.Chapter 3 a) of the pipe gives the impression that the pipe behaves as if it was separated in two parts: one located in the outer tube and the other in unconfined flow.

the influence of the annular flow seems to die out and the dynamics of the pipe is the same as in configuration 2ii.36: Pipe 1 in configuration 6i at ܷ = 7. There At ܷ = 7.91 m/s . the Figure 3. The configuration. and ‫ = ܣ‬28 cm . increased to ‫ = ܣ‬26 cm . at higher flow velocity. with the upper part close to buckling and the lower to flutter. at ܷ ൎ 8.31 m/s. The amplitude is abruptly frequency also increases to ݂ = 3. configurations 2ii and 6i. For example. Subsequently. However. as the frequency goes through a minimum. but it then increases further more slowly.44 Hz. A comparison with the amplitude of motion is ‫ = ܣ‬24 cm respectively. the pipe diverges in its first mode.Chapter 3 dynamics of the pipe changes again. respectively. The whole pipe begins to move again. First at relatively low flow velocity. the presence of the outer counter-current flow has a lot of influence on the dynamics of the system in comparison with configuration 2ii.68 m/s at different instants is no more perpetual contact between the flexible and outer tubes and there is no buckling anymore. and the frequency is ݂ = 3.05 Hz and ݂ = 2. The motion of the pipe alternates between planar oscillations in the third mode and circular motion. in configuration 2ii shows that the pipe has the same behaviour in this To conclude. it undergoes a complex motion due to the virtual separation of the pipe into two parts. 102 | P a g e . the pipe oscillates in its third mode.54 Hz at ܷ = 9.15 m/s. in configurations 2ii and 6i. It then keeps the buckling shape and flutters close to this equilibrium position but at a higher flow velocity than in configuration 2ii.

5 2 1.14 m/s.Chapter 3 4. and the free end of the pipe finally touches the free end of the outer tube at ܷ = 1. Also. and the opposite behaviour is observable for 2.5 0 0 a) 2 flutter buckling 4 U [m/s] 6 8 10 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 A [cm] U [m/s] b) Figure 3.13 Configuration 6ii buckling arises at ܷ = 1 m/s (Figure 3. ܷ ൌ 3.a).14.39. a first mode increases with flow velocity.5 4 3.60 ൑ ܷ ൑ 3. only the free 103 | P a g e end of the pipe is touching the plexiglas tube.61 m/s.5 1 0. This is a particular velocity as the .5 3 f [Hz] 2. The two remain in contact until the end of the experiment. a greater part of the pipe is in contact with the outer tube as the velocity increases. At this velocity. The amplitude is very small but As in Configuration 2iii involving only a discharging pipe. as in configuration 2iii.37: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 6i 0 2 4 6 8 10 3.4.

b) but also very small vibrations with no dominant frequency. Over this range. They might be due to the same reasons as those presented in Configuration 4i. only the instability At ܷ = 6. the dynamics of the pipe go through a period of transition from second mode buckling to third mode buckling. mode is more and more present and finally.d) without any interval of transition. At this velocity.38).Chapter 3 pipe suddenly exhibits a periodic motion with a frequency ݂ = 1.20 Hz that immediately dies out as the flow velocity increases (Figure 3. For 4.c). at ܷ = 6.56 m/s. For some velocities as ܷ = 5. as the velocity increases. this particular velocity marks the transition from first mode buckling to second mode buckling. the pipe switching from one to the other.39.88. the motion of the pipe is almost entirely erratic and there is no definite frequency. Thus. The pipe then demonstrates a second mode buckling.44 m/s. It remains in this position until ܷ = 9.17 m/s.39.5 2 1. Both second mode buckling and third mode buckling are alternately observable.26 m/s. the third in the third mode is observed.56 ൑ ܷ ൑ 6. the oscillatory divergence is not observable anymore and the pipe exhibits a third mode buckling (Figure 3. the pipe exhibits a complex behaviour: periods of chaotic motion alternate with periods of oscillatory divergence. 104 | P a g e f [Hz] . But.88 m/s.5 1 0.39.38: The experimental frequency versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 6ii mode buckling (Figure 3. the pipe displays a second mode buckling (Figure 3. the pipe suddenly exhibits a fourth 2.5 0 0 2 4 U [m/s] 6 8 10 Figure 3. Up to ܷ = 4.

periods of chaotic motion are hardly observable.4. In this configuration also.85 m/s. b) second. the first oscillations arise at ܷ = 0. At first.45 Hz. This is because the collision with the plexiglas disturbs the dynamics of the pipe 105 | P a g e . the amplitude is 0. At this velocity. the pipe does not exhibit the amplitude remains constant. This contact has a great influence on the dynamics of the frequency ݂ = 0. a spring is inserted in the pipe because the pipe is aspirating fluid.Chapter 3 a) c) d) b) Figure 3.85 ൑ ܷ ൏ 2. the pipe is slightly bent at zero flow velocity. because of the discharging annular flow.34 m/s.2 cm. the amplitude is really small. the pipe impacts the free end of the plexiglas tube for the first time. It then smoothly decreases with increasing flow velocity and disappears at ܷ = 1.14 Configuration 7i In this configuration again.39: the a) first. As in configuration 3ii.90. really low flow velocity. Hence. ‫ = ܣ‬0. Thus. the bending dies out much more quickly than in configuration 3ii. For 1. really long and periods of periodic motion do not last more than a few seconds. From that point. the pipe loses stability by flutter in its first mode at continuous periodic motions. Furthermore. So. the frequency will always increase.8 cm. periods of shuddering motion are pipe. but increases quite rapidly to ‫ = ܣ‬2.5 cm at ܷ = 1. Furthermore. c) third and d) fourth mode observed successively with Pipe 1 in Configuration 6ii 3. The periodic motion alternates with chaotic motion.37 m/s with a In this configuration.

A period of chaotic motion follows and the cycle begins again. from ‫ = ܣ‬4.7 f [Hz] 0. The pipe exhibits mainly intervals of periodic motion.64 Hz to ݂ = 0.5 cm to ‫ = ܣ‬8.4 0 a) 1 2 3 U [m/s] 4 5 6 9 8 7 6 A [cm] 5 4 3 2 1 0 U [m/s] b) Figure 3.6 0. the amplitude increases again rather quickly.40). as two kinds of periodic motion alternate: periods of first mode 106 | P a g e .5 cm. the motion the frequency increases continuously from ݂ = 0. and 3.Chapter 3 0.9 mode 1 0.8 0.90 m/s and to the highest reachable flow velocity. However. From ܷ = 2.88 Hz (Figure is still complex.5 0.40: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 7i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 mode 1 Bending that exhibits periodic motion of small amplitude. The amplitude then increases until the pipe touches the plexiglas.

there is a bend of the pipe at low flow velocities. The amplitude is so small that it is really difficult to observe.15 Configuration 7ii In this configuration also.02 m/s.43) and periods of periodic motion last longer and longer.4. it is limited by the outer rigid tube whose length is equal to half that of the pipe. Here.Chapter 3 planar motion and phases during which the end of the pipe performs figure-ofeight motion.56 m/s. 3. the first oscillatory instability arises at and periods of chaotic motions also occur. the the frequency which is that of the first mode flutter is ݂ = 1. As the flow velocity increases.1 Hz. the bend disappears rather quickly because of the discharging annular flow. 107 | P a g e . but In this last configuration. As in configuration 7i.26 m/s and b) ܷ = 5.26 m/s b) a) Figure 3. Figure 3. It is not steady frequency and the amplitude do the same (Figure 3.42: The final second mode buckling of the pipe at a) ܷ = 5.41: The complex behaviour of the pipe at ܷ = 5. ܷ = 2.

In fact. From this velocity to higher mode decrease. it is hard to determine the mode of instability.6 A [cm] 0. It is quite difficult to detect it by the naked eye because the amplitude of these oscillations is less than a millimetre and.1 0 0 1 b) Figure 3. the pipe exhibits a complex motion: it is mainly 108 | P a g e U = 5. They first increase with the flow velocity before reaching a maximum at U = 4.9 0.8 cm).26 m/s. both the frequency of the first mode and the frequency of the .4 0.5 0.4 1.43: a) The experimental frequency and b) amplitude versus velocity with Pipe 1 in configuration 7ii mode 1 bending buckling 2 U [m/s] 3 4 5 seems that the frequency has reached a plateau around f = 1.34 Hz.4 25.3 0. the amplitude of oscillations reaches a maximum (A = 0.Chapter 3 25. so.03 m/s. . the amplitude increases more quickly.7 0.8 0.26 m/s. At U = 5.2 1 2 a) mode 1 higher mode 3 U [m/s] 4 5 0.2 25 f [Hz] 1.54 m/s. a minor peak appears in the power spectra. The frequency of these higher mode oscillations is U = 25.1 m/s.2 0. whereas it velocity. At this From U = 4.

The apparatus has to recreate the environment of a salt cavern.5 Conclusion This project is divided into two quite distinct parts. 3. which is the experimental fluid. a new apparatus had to be designed and built to experimentally study the dynamics of the hanging pipes used in salt caverns. yet the motion of the pipe would not be constrained in any way. Furthermore. but the sealing of the apparatus still has to be ensured. different instrumentation had to be added to record the flow velocity and the amplitude as well as the frequency of pipe motion.42.Chapter 3 oscillating but it sometimes remains in contact for a short time with the outer tube as if it was diverging (Figure 3. with no connection between them. the two coaxial flows have to be separated. the pipe suddenly exhibits a second mode buckling at the same velocity. There is a great variety of requirements. Moreover. The insertion of the spring generated a small bend in the pipe.4. the dynamics of the pipe does not change.3. this bow gradually disappeared. 109 | P a g e . It was really important to switch from one configuration to another quite quickly and easily.41). it was reduced by annealing the spring. The second step of this project was to conduct a whole set of experiments with Pipe 1. The major difficulty that was encountered was a shell-type collapse of the pipe in the configuration involving an aspirating pipe. Some problems and difficulties had to be overcome to finally get a useful apparatus allowing the study of a large set of configurations. A special part was designed to ensure this: the vessel sitting on top of the tank. The results are presented in Section 3.2 and 3. As presented in Sections 3. At higher flow velocity. As shown in Figure 3. However. It was decided to add a spring inside the pipe so that the collapse would be avoided. but not entirely removed. and in any case the real full-scale system is probably not 100% straight either. It means that the pipe can be completely surrounded by water. with flow.

51 4. depending on the configuration.357 observable velocity) 0.289 0.139 1.270 0.02 0.07 0.383 0.21 0.56 0.04 0.10 (first 0.39 3.364 Table 3.476 0.30 0. the 110 | P a g e .223 0.59 4. the onsets of buckling and flutter are presented separately.233 0.5 presents a comparison of the critical flow velocities of the system in each configuration.0254 0.19 3.0686 0.93 1 5.040 6i 6ii 7i 7ii 5.93 4.946 - Critical flow Corresponding velocity for flow rate (l/s) Buckling (m/s) 1 4.0686 0.313 0.031 5ii 1.14 0.372 observable velocity) 0.21 3.37 2.25 3. If they exist.94 3.5: Comparison of the different critical flow velocities and flow rates Critical flow Corresponding Configuration velocity for flow rate (l/s) Flutter (m/s) 1 2i 2ii 2iii 3i 3ii 3iii 4i 4ii 6.123 (first 0.241 0.287 0.132 0. Furthermore.277 - 5i 1.Chapter 3 Table 3.

the amplitude of motion can easily be larger than twenty centimetres if the outer tube does not have the same length as the pipe.5 cm. In these configurations. Nevertheless. by comparing the critical flow velocities for Configuration 2ii and Configuration 6i. the corresponding flow rates are also given in this table. it seems that this system should never be used with only an annular flow going from the free end to the clamped end. whereas the annular flow has a stabilizing effect when it is discharging water.Chapter 3 measured velocity was either the flow velocity in the pipe or in the annular flow. The first general observation that can be made is that the surrounding water clearly has a destabilizing effect on the system. except for Configuration 7i in which the amplitude reaches ‫ = ܣ‬8. If the pipe is aspirating the fluid. On one hand. it appears that. the comparison of the critical flow velocities of Configuration 3ii. it has the opposite effect when itis going the reverse way. it is difficult to say if the addition of the counter-current annular flow has a beneficial effect. On the other hand. Thus. the most stable one is Configuration 4ii as the pipe exhibited no instability in the experiment. for systems involving a discharging pipe. In contrast. Although the system certainly loses stability by buckling at a lower flow velocity in terms of flutter the system is more stable. the maximum velocity is higher than 8 m/s. Then. 111 | P a g e . In that case. whereas ܷ௠௔௫ ൏ 6 m/s when the pipe is aspirating fluid. Moreover. And. it is important to point out that the maximum experimental velocities are higher when the pipe is discharging water. the amplitude is rarely higher than three centimetres. it appears from this table that the less stable configurations are Configuration 5i and Configuration 5ii as a buckling instability is observable from the very first reachable velocity. For reasons of comparison. The critical flow velocity in Configuration 2i or Configuration 2ii is smaller than in Configuration 1. But it is still much smaller than for the cases of a pipe discharging water. the flow is only in the annular gap and goes from the free end to the clamped end.

it might be really useful to redo the whole set of experiments presented in Section 3. Furthermore.4 together with these new equipments in which the outer tube size is varied. as explained in Section 3. The behaviour then differ from one configuration to the other. the critical flow velocity and the behaviour of the pipe at higher flow velocities depend on the configuration. 112 | P a g e . storage or withdrawal of the liquid hydrocarbons and natural gas purposes. etc. of the width of the annular gap and of the pipe thickness could be investigated and. This study also shows that for salt mining. the effect of a ring is assessed. the apparatus was also designed to conduct experiments with another pipe. the present results could be compared with other sets of results.3. other outer tubes and also additional rings. the observations and conclusions presented in the present work could be fine-tuned.Chapter 3 Configuration 4i and Configuration 7i shows that the combination of both flows clearly has a destabilizing effect on the system. some similarities exist. the influence of an additional ring. Thus. However. at these velocities. the pipe exhibits again the same behaviour in both configurations. at high flow velocities. Finally. A good example is the comparison of the dynamics of the pipe in Configuration 2ii and Configuration 6i. the pipe has the same dynamics in both configurations. even if the type of instability. Indeed. In the future. At low flow velocities. Configuration 6i should be used as often as possible because the system is much more stable than in configuration 7i. the dynamics of the system is dominated by the inner flow in Configuration 6i.

As a matter of fact. whereas the work presented in Chapter 2 is of fundamental interest.e.Chapter 4 Chapter 4: Conclusion As discussed in Chapter 1. Nevertheless. In Chapter 2. or both internal and external axial flow has been investigated over the years. it is now certain that it is of both fundamental and practical interest. annular. First. the equations of motion are derived through a variational principle and by taking into account new boundary conditions associated with the fluid flowing from the 113 | P a g e . The dynamics of quite different systems involving thin and thick flexible pipes subjected to internal. the scope of the present work can be divided into two main issues: (i) the investigation of the dynamics of a thin-walled pipe. the experimental study undertaken in Chapter 3 is directly inspired by industrial problems and the results are expected with great interest by companies who store hydrocarbons and natural gas in salt caverns. annular. and (ii) the experimental study of the stability of a thick-walled pipe subjected to internal. a linear analytical model is developed. If the work in this area has often been curiositydriven. a lot of researchers have been intrigued by the dynamics of a pipe conveying fluid over the past few decades. the dynamical investigation of an aspirating cantilevered shell is conducted both theoretically and experimentally. as industrial applications have emerged years after the study has been carried out. Once the model assumptions have been defined. the study presented in Chapter 2 is also motivated by possible applications in existing industrial installations involving cantilevered shells aspirating fluid for ship-board liquefaction of natural gas. Canada. a cylindrical shell. So. external. aspirating air. or simultaneous internal and annular axial flows. i. Montreal. as well as by experimental observations made by Rinaldi (2009) at McGill University.

or if it is an "oscillatory buckling". involving the frequent switch from one possible buckling state to another. the first really important step of this project presented in Chapter 3 was the design of this new apparatus. there is a change of momentum of the flow at the inlet. and the corresponding force acting at the free end of the shell has to be considered in the equations. the critical flow velocities are overestimated by the theory. Indeed. However. Finally. the final buckling would be the final state of this phenomenon.Chapter 4 free towards clamped end. it quickly became apparent that it would be more expedient to build a new apparatus. Furthermore. The experimental study of the stability of the hanging tubular pipes used in salt caverns has been undertaken as a first step to better understand the failures that were observed in industrial installations. The second step of the investigation is to conduct experiments with two different flexible shells that are made of the same material but whose length and wall thickness differs. it is not sure yet if the phenomenon observed in the experiments is flutter followed by buckling. also taking into account an out-flow model. However. in the experiments buckling arises at the same flow velocity as flutter. the collapse of the shell could also be due to the combination of the intramural pressure difference at the wall and of the really low stiffness of the material. Whereas the theory is able to predict qualitatively the first type of instability. the theoretical and experimental results are compared. which is a first mode flutter. The pressure difference at the wall is determined with a Fourier-Transform Generalized-Force method. Some problems and difficulties had to be overcome to finally get a useful apparatus which would 114 | P a g e . In the latter case. They have been conducted in an existing apparatus involving air as flowing fluid. Thus. A solution of the problem is finally found by using the extended form of the Galerkin method. The experiments were first meant to be conducted with a pre-existing apparatus used for the experiments in Chapter 2. as the flow is not a reverse jet in the case of an aspirating cantilevered shell. So. at the end of this work. whereas the analytical model predicts buckling at higher flow velocities.

and (iii) even though the type of instability. the critical flow velocity and the behaviour of the pipe at higher flow velocities depend on the configuration. to fine-tune the investigation on the dynamics of an aspirating cantilevered shell. the configuration involving a discharging pipe and an aspirating annular flow should be used as often as possible. the apparatus was 115 | P a g e .e.Chapter 4 allow the study of a large set of configurations. i. A great number of experiments had to be tested and it was really important to be able to switch from one configuration to another quite quickly and easily. The main observations are that (i) the surrounding water has a destabilizing effect on the system. Thus. The stability of the system is investigated in each configuration: determining the critical flow velocity and frequency as well as the post-critical dynamics. it must be reconfirmed by other experiments to establish how robust this conclusion is. It is realized of course that this conclusion is based on just the experiments described. it could be very useful to conduct experiments with a stiffer material. storage or withdrawal of the liquid hydrocarbons and natural gas. some similarities exist. the second step of the project could be carried out. Finally. Furthermore. (ii) the motion amplitudes are much bigger when the pipe is discharging water than in the reverse case. this study also shows that. certainly by reconsidering the out-flow model and a new boundary condition. different instrumentation had to be added to record the flow velocity and the amplitude as well as the frequency motion. Moreover. In the future. for salt mining. Then. the analytical model needs some improvements. For the study undertaken in Chapter 3. namely a whole set of experiments on each of a number of flow configurations. the stability of the system in one configuration can be compared to that in others. because the system is much more stable than in the reverse configuration. This experiment could even be conducted with water in the new apparatus presented in Chapter 3. the behaviour of the pipe at higher flow velocities.

other sets of experiments should be conducted to study the influence of different parameters. Thus. 116 | P a g e . the width of the annular gap or the presence of an additional ring at the free end of the outer tube to induce a leakage-flow instability. such as the wall thickness of the pipe.Chapter 4 designed to investigate the dynamics of systems with different characteristics. These further experiments would be of great interest for confirming and adjusting the conclusions reached in the present work regarding the stability as well as the post-critical dynamics.

ఏ 2ܽ ൅ ‫ݖ ݖ‬ ‫ݒ‬.ଶ ௫ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.Appendix A: Stress Resultants and Moments Expressions In this appendix.ఏ ۖ ൅ ൤ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.௫௫ ൅ ሺ‫ݑ‬. the method to get the expressions of the stress resultants and moments is presented.3) I|Page .ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ‫ݒ‬െ‫ݓ‬. The expressions for the strains are given by 1 ଶ ଶ ‫ߝۓ‬௫ ൌ ‫ݑ‬. Their definitions are presented in the first chapter of Flügge’s book (1973).ఏఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ۖ ఏ ܽ ఏ ܽܽ ൅‫ݖ ݖ‬൅ܽ ۖ ሺ‫ݒ‬. ܸ ෨ and ܹ ෩ are the displacements of an arbitrary point located at a where ܷ (A. ܽଶ ܽଶ 2 ܽ ‫۔‬ ۖ ܽ൅‫ݖ‬ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ሻ.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻଶ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ‫ݑ‬. ܹ (A.1) distance z from the middle surface. To get their expressions for our particular case.ଶ ఏ ൅ ቈ ଶ ൅ ൅ ቉. Because of assumption 3. Considering the assumptions made in Chapter 2. െ ‫ݓ ݖ‬.ఏ ‫ݒ‬.௫ െ ‫ݓ‬. ܷ ܽെ‫ݖ‬ ෨ൌ ൞ܸ ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓݖ‬.௫ ൅ െ ‫ݓ‬. ۖ ߛ௫ఏ ൌ ‫ ݖ‬൅ ܽ ܽ ൅ ‫ ܽ ݖ‬௫ఏ ܽ ۖ 1 ‫ݑ‬. we consider only the strains εx. ௫ఏ ‫ە‬ 2ሺ1 ൅ ߥሻ ௫ఏ (A.௫ െ ‫ݓݖ‬.௫ . we determine the corresponding stresses: ‫ܧ‬ ሺߝ ൅ ߥߝఏ ሻ.ఏ ሻଶ 1 ‫ݑ‬. ‫ߪۓ‬௫௫ ൌ 1 െ ߥଶ ௫ ۖ ‫ܧ‬ ሺߥߝ௫ ൅ ߝఏ ሻ. εθ and γxθ. ‫ە‬ 2 ܽ ܽ ܽ ෩.௫ ൨. ܽ ෩ ൌ ‫ݓ‬. ߪఏఏ ൌ 1 െ ߥଶ ‫۔‬ ‫ܧ‬ ۖ ߪ ൌ ߛ . we first need to express the displacement of an arbitrary point of the shell according to the displacement of the point located on the reference surface.௫ ൅ ‫ݓ‬. we get: ෩ = ‫ ݑ‬െ ‫ݓݖ‬.௬ .2) Using assumptions 2 and 3 and Hooke’s law. 2 ۖ ۖߝ ൌ 1 ‫ݒ‬.

‫ܯ‬ఏ ൌ ‫݇ܦ‬௔ ሺ‫ ݓ‬൅ ‫ ·· ݓ‬൅ ߥ‫ݓ‬ԢԢሻ. Therefore. The terms of order higher than ሺ݄⁄ܽሻଶ are neglected when performing the integration. ‫ܯ‬௫ ൌ ‫݇ܦ‬௔ ሺ1 െ ߥሻሺ‫ݓ‬Ԣ· െ ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ ሻ. ‫ ·ݑ‬െ ‫ݒ‬Ԣ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ ൌ ‫݇ܦ‬௔ ሺ1 െ ߥሻ ൬‫ݓ‬Ԣ· ൅ 2 ൰ .Appendix A resultants and couples. ‫ܦ‬ ܰఏ ൌ ሾሺ‫ · ݒ‬൅ ‫ ݓ‬൅ ߥ‫ݑ‬ᇱ ሻ െ ݇௔ ሺ‫ ݓ‬൅ ‫ ·· ݓ‬ሻሿ. ܰఏ௫ ൌ ܽ 2 ‫ܦ‬1െߥ ሾሺ‫ ·ݑ‬൅ ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ ሻ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ െ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ · ሻሿ. ܽ ‫ܦ‬1െߥ ሾሺ‫ ·ݑ‬൅ ‫ ݒ‬ᇱ ሻ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ‫ ·ݑ‬൅ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ · ሻሿ. ܰ௫ఏ ൌ ܽ 2 ‫ܯ‬௫ ൌ ‫݇ܦ‬௔ ሺ‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱ ൅ ߥ‫ ·· ݓ‬െ ‫ݑ‬ᇱ െ ߥ‫ · ݒ‬ሻ. We then introduce these expressions in the definitions of the stress (A.4) where ‫ ܦ‬ൌ ‫݄ܧ‬⁄ሺ1 െ ߥ ଶ ሻ II | P a g e . the final linear expressions are given by ‫ܦ‬ ܰ௫ ൌ ܽ ሾሺ‫ݑ‬ᇱ ൅ ߥ‫ · ݒ‬൅ ߥ‫ݓ‬ሻ െ ݇௔ ‫ݓ‬ԢԢሿ.

we need to develop the expressions of the variation of the elastic strain energy (2. ܽ ‫ ݖ‬൅ ܽ ܽ ൅ ‫ ܽ ݖ‬௫ఏ (B.௫ ‫ݑ‬.௫ െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ሻቇ 2 ௫ 1 ‫ݓ ݖ‬.௫ ൅ െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݒ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ሻଶ 1 ‫ݑ‬.Appendix B: Application of the Variational Principle To derive the equations using this principle.ఏ ൅ ൤ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ሻߜ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݒ‬.௫ െ ‫ݓߜݖ‬. ܽ ܽ൅‫ݖ‬ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ߜ‫ݑ‬.௫௫ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏఏ ‫ݓ‬ ൅ ߪఏఏ ߜ ቆ ‫ݒ‬.2) III | P a g e .௫ െ ‫ݓݖ‬.ఏ ‫ݖ‬ ‫ݖ‬ ൅ ߪ௫ఏ ൬ െ ߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ ሻ ߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ െ ൅ ܽ ܽܽ൅‫ݖ ݖ‬൅ܽ ሺ‫ݒ‬.௫ ሺߜ‫ݒ‬.ଶ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.ఏ െ ߜ‫ݓ‬.2): ߜܷ௘ ൌ න න ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ௛/ଶ ି௛/ଶ 1 ଶ න ቊߪ௫௫ ߜ ቆ‫ݑ‬.௫௫ ൅ ሺ‫ݑ‬.௫ െ ߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ ݓ‬൅ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬. To accomplish this step.ఏ ሿ൰ ߜ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.ఏఏ ൅ ߪఏఏ ൬ ൅‫ݖ‬ ܽ ܽଶ 1 ‫ݖ‬ ൅ ଶ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ሾ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ൅ ߜ‫ݓ‬ ߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ 2ܽ ൅ ‫ݖ ݖ‬ ‫ݒ‬.3).௫ఏ ൅ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ߜ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ሺ‫ݓ‬.௫ ൨൰ቋ ቀ1 2 ܽ ܽ ܽ ‫ݖ‬ ൅ ቁ ܽ݀‫ݖ݀ߠ݀ݔ‬. (B.1) We then develop this expression term by term: ߜܷ௘ ൌ න න ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ௛/ଶ ି௛/ଶ ‫ݖ‬ න ൜ߪ௫௫ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ሺߜ‫ݑ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ‫ݒ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݓ‬.ଶ ఏ ൅ ቈ ଶ ൅ ൅ ቉ቇ 2 ܽ ܽଶ ܽଶ ൅ ߪ௫ఏ ߜ ൬ 1 ‫ݑ‬.௫ ሺߜ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻଶ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ܽ ܽ ܽ ‫ݖ‬ ‫ݖ‬ ൅ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ሺߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ሻߜ‫ ݒ‬െ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬. we introduce the expressions of the strains given by (A.ଶ ௫ ൅ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ െ ߜ‫ݒ‬ሻሿ൰ൠ ܽ݀‫ݖ݀ߠ݀ݔ‬.௫ఏ ሻ ܽ ܽ 1 ‫ݖ‬ ൅ ቀ1 ൅ ቁ ሾ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ܽ ܽ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬.ఏ െ ‫ݒ‬ሻߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ ܽ ൅ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ‫ݒ‬െ‫ݓ‬.௫ ܽ ܽ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.

ఏ ሻߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ ሺߜ‫ݒ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.௫ ሿ ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ ߜ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݓ‬. ܽ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ሻߜ‫ ݒ‬െ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ܽ݀‫ ߠ݀ݔ‬ൌ න ሾܰ௫ ߜ‫ߠ݀ܽݑ‬ሿ௫ୀ଴ െ න න ܰ௫ .3) ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬. the same method has to be used. δw).4) IV | P a g e .ఏ ߜ‫ݓ‬. we shall rearrange these components of the equation by using the divergence theorem.௫ ߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ ݓ‬൅ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ܽଶ ൅ ܰఏ௫ ൅ ൅ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ሻߜ‫ݒ‬ ൅ െ ሺ‫ ݒ‬െ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ሿ ܰఏ ሾሺߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ߜ‫ݑ‬.7) to be valid for any set of perturbations (δu.௫ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ ܽ ܽ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ሻ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ܽଷ (B.௫ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.ఏ െ ߜ‫ݒ‬ሻሿ In what follows.௫ ߜ‫ ߠ݀ݔ݀ܽݑ‬. .Appendix B Considering the definitions of the stress and moment resultants.௫ ሺߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ఏ െ ߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ሿ ܰ௫ఏ ሾܽߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬. the first term becomes ௫ୀ௅ න න ܰ௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬. For the two other equations.ఏ ൅ ߜ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ‫ݑ‬. we get ߜܷ௘ ൌ න න ൜ܰ௫ ሾߜ‫ݑ‬.ఏ െ ‫ݒ‬ሻߜ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݓ‬ ‫ܯ‬ఏ ሾܽሺߜ‫ݓ‬. some derivatives of the displacement δu are present. we only have to consider the terms involving δu.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݒ‬. In equation (B.௫ ߜ‫ݓ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏఏ െ ߜ‫ݒ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݓ‬. and their sum will be equal to zero because we want (2.௫௫ ൅ ൅ ሺ‫ݒ‬. For example. ଴ ଴ ଴ ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ଶగ௔ ௅ ଶగ௔ (B.௫ ߜ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ܽ ߜ‫ݓ‬. To obtain this equation.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻߜ‫ݒ‬.௫ ൠ ܽ݀‫ߠ݀ݔ‬. δv.ఏ ൅ ߜ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ ൅ ሺ‫ݓ‬.3). we will only show how to get the equations in the x direction.ఏ ሻߜ‫ݓ‬.

ఏ ൅ ൬ ൰.௫ ܰ௫ఏ ‫ݑ‬. ܰ௫ ሺ1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬. we finally obtain (B.௫ ൅ ൰ െ ‫݌‬௭ ‫ݓ‬.3) is ܰఏ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ൬ ଷ ൰ .7) where ܲ௫‫ כ‬is defined in Chapter 2.6) Considering the linear version of the above.ഇ ఏୀଶగ ௔మ ఏୀ଴ ቃ ߜ‫ ݔ݀ݑ‬ൌ 0.௫ ሻ.ఏ ‫ܯ‬ఏ ‫ݑ‬. ‫ ܮ = ݔ ݐܽ כ‬.8) V|Page .ఏ ܽ ܽ ܽ ܽ ܰ௫ఏ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൠ ߜ‫ߠ݀ݔ݀ݑ‬ ܽ ܽ ଶగ௔ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ఏୀଶగ െ න ܽ ቂܰఏ ଶ ቃ ߜ‫ݔ݀ݑ‬ ܽ ఏୀ଴ ‫כ‬ ൅ න න ܽ ൜‫݌‬௫ ൬1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൠ ߜ‫ߠ݀ݔ݀ݑ‬ ܽ ௎. ‫כ‬ ܽܰ௫଴ ൌ ܲ௫ ܽ‫ܮ = ݔ ݐ‬.ఏ ܰఏ௫ ܰ௫ఏ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ‫כ‬ ൰ െ ‫݌‬௭ ‫ݓ‬. The equation in the x-direction is given by ܰఏ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ‫כ‬ ‫כ‬ ൅൬ ൰ .௫ ൅ ሺܰ௫ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ൅ ൬ ൰ . ‫ݑ‬.Appendix B What we finally obtain from (B. Furthermore.௫ ሻ.ఏ ൅൬ ൰ . Keeping in mind that the shell is clamped-free.5) is true for any variational displacement. (B. (B.௫ ܰ௫ . ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ܰఏ௫ න න ܽ ൜ܰ௫ .ఏ ൅ ൬ ൰ . ܽ ܽ (B.௫ ൅ ଴ ଴ ଶగ௔ ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ଴ ௅ (B. we obtain the boundary conditions: ‫ ݑ‬ൌ 0 ܽ‫ = ݔ ݐ‬0.௫ ൌ 0. ܽ ܽ ܽ ఏ ଴ ଴ ௅ ଶగ௔ ܰ௫ఏ ‫ݑ‬. we have ‫׬‬଴ ܽ ቂܰఏ ௅ ‫ כ‬ሿ௫ୀ௅ ൅ න ሾܲ௫ ௫ୀ଴ ܽߜ‫ ߠ݀ݑ‬ൌ 0.ఏ ൅ ൬ ଷ ൰ . ܰ௫ଵ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ܮ = ݔ ݐ‬.ఏ ‫ݒ‬.ఏ ൅ ൬ ൰ .௫ ൅ ሺܰ௫ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ሻ ൅ ܰ௫ఏ ߜ‫ߠ݀ݑ‬ ቃ ܽ ௫ୀ଴ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ሻ ൅ ܰ௫ఏ ܽఏ ൌ ܲ௫ ‫ = ݑ‬0 ܽ‫ = ݔ ݐ‬0.௫ ൅ ൬ ଶ ൰ .௫ ൅ ൬ ଶ ൰ .௫ ൅ ‫݌‬௫ ൬1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ‫ܯ‬ఏ ‫ݑ‬.ఏ ௫ୀ௅ െ න ܽ ቂܰ௫ ሺ1 ൅ ‫ݑ‬.5) As the shell is a closed cylinder.

11) From the expressions of the stress and moment resultants (A.ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ .ఏ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ܮ = ݔ ݐ‬.ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ߲ଶ‫ݑ‬ ൌ ߩ௦ ݄ܽ ଶ . ߲‫ݐ‬ (B.12) Following the same procedure. ‫ݒ‬ൌ‫ݓ‬ൌ (B.13) VI | P a g e . this leads to ܽܰ௫ଵ .௫ െ ߩ௦ ݄ܽ ଶ ൌ 0.10) Considering (B.9) Using (B. ‫ݒ‬.௫ ሻ ܽ (B.9). ߲‫ ݐ‬ଶ (B. we finally have: ܽܰ௫ଵ . ܽ‫ܯ‬௫ .௫ ൅ ܰఏ௫ . we get the other boundary conditions for a clamped-free shell: ߲‫ݓ‬ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ = ݔ ݐ‬0.8) and taking into account only the linear terms of the first order. we have: ‫ܮ‬ଵ ሺ‫ݑ‬. ൅ ܰఏ௫ . ൌ 0. ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൌ ‫ݑ‬ᇱᇱ ൅ 1 െ ߥ ·· 1 ൅ ߥ · ‫ ݑ‬൅ ‫ݒ‬Ԣ ൅ ߥ‫ ݓ‬ᇱ 2 2 1 െ ߥ ·· 1 െ ߥ ·· ൅݇൤ ‫ ݑ‬െ ‫ ݓ‬ᇱᇱᇱ ൅ ‫ݓ‬Ԣ ൨ ൅ ߬௫ ‫ݑ‬ᇱᇱ 2 2 ൅ ߬ሺ‫ · ݒ‬൅ ‫ݓ‬ሻ ൅ ߬ఏ ሺ‫ ··ݑ‬െ ‫ݓ‬Ԣሻ െ ߛ ߲ଶ‫ݑ‬ ൌ 0.௫ ൅ ൰ െ ܽ‫݌‬଴ ‫ݓ‬.௫ ൅ ܽܰ௫଴ ‫ݑ‬.௫ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ . ߲‫ݔ‬ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ ܰ௫ఏ െ ܽ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ܮ = ݔ ݐ‬. ‫ܯ‬௫ ൌ 0 ܽ‫ܮ = ݔ ݐ‬.௫ ൌ െ‫݌‬௫଴ . ܽ (B.4).௫௫ ൅ ܽܰ௫଴ .௫ ൅ ܰఏ଴ ‫ݑ‬. ܽ ߲‫ݐ‬ ܰఏ଴ ሺ‫ݑ‬.Appendix B The zero-order equation is then easily obtained. Here we give also these equations along θ and z because they are useful in obtaining the final form of the first-order equation: ܰ௫଴ .ఏ ൅ ܽܰ௫଴ ‫ݑ‬.ఏఏ െ ܽ‫ݓ‬.௫ ‫ݑ‬. ൞ ఏ଴ ఏ ܰఏ଴ ‫݌‬଴ ൌ .ఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬ ߲ଶ‫ݑ‬ ൅ ܽ‫݌‬௫଴ ൬‫ݑ‬.௫௫ ൅ ‫݌‬௫଴ ሺ‫ݒ‬. ܰ .ఏ ܽ ఏఏ ‫ݒ‬.

߲‫ݐ‬ (B.ఏ െ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ .௫௫ ܽ ߲ଶ‫ݒ‬ ൌ ߩ௦ ݄ܽ ଶ .ఏఏ െ ܽ‫ ݍ‬ൌ െߩ௦ ݄ܽ ܽ ߲‫ ݐ‬ଶ (B.௫ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ .15) VII | P a g e . ௫ ൅ ‫ݒ‬.௫௫ ൅ ଶ ሺ‫ݒ‬.௫௫ ൅ ‫ܯ‬௫ఏ .ఏఏ ൅ ‫ݓ‬. ሻ ൅ .ఏ ൅ ܽܰ௫ఏ .ఏఏ ൅ ܰఏଵ െ ܽܰ௫଴ ‫ݓ‬.ఏ ሻ ܽ ܽ 1 ܽ‫ܯ‬௫ .௫ ൅ ܰ௫଴ ‫ݒ‬.Appendix B and the two other first order equations: 1 ܰఏ଴ ܰఏ .14) ܰఏ଴ ߲ଶ‫ݓ‬ ሺെܽ‫ݑ‬.ఏ െ ‫ݓ‬.௫ െ ‫ܯ‬ఏ .௫ఏ ൅ ‫ܯ‬ఏ௫ .

.

2 1െߥ ଶ ଷ.ଵ ഥଶ െ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌ ߝ ଶ ܾ௞௠ ൤Ω ଵ.3) ଶ. 2 3െߥ ଷ.ଷ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ݇௔ ෠ଷ ൯ െ ݊‫ܣ‬ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌ െߜ௞௠ ݊൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ݊ 2 1െߥ െ 3݊݇௔ ߝ ଶ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.8) IX | P a g e . 2 3െߥ ଶ.ଶ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ 1൅ߥ ଶ 1െߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൅ ݊ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.4) 1െߥ ଶ ߝ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. 2 2 መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ഥ ଶ െ nଶ ൫1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ൯൧ െ ݊ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ൌ ߜ௞௠ ൣΩ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൤ െ (C. 2 1െߥ መଵ ෠ଵ ൨ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 2 (C.ଷ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ 1൅ߥ ଶ ෠ଶ ݊ߝܽ௞௠ െ ߥ݊ߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ.ଵ ସ ଶ መଷ ෠ଷ ൨ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌ ߜ௞௠ ݇௔ ߣସ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ ௠ ߝ െ ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ 2 1െߥ ଶ ଶ െ ݊ ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. ൅‫ܤ‬ ଶ.1) (C.7) (C.5) (C. here are the expressions of the ଵ.6) (C. ෠ଵ ൧݀௞௠ ൅ ߝ ସ ‫ܣ‬ ൅ ߝ ସ ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ (C.ଶ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌ ଵ.ଶ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ෠ଷ ൧ െ ݊‫ܣ‬ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌ െߜ௞௠ ݊ൣ1 ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ݇௔ ݊ 2 3െߥ ଶ ൅ ݇௔ ߥ݊ߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ െ ߝ ݇௔ ݊߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. ݊ߝ ܾ௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ 2 1െߥ ଶ መ ଷ െ ݇௔ ߝ ସ ݀௞௠ ෠ଷ ൨ െ ߝ ଶ ݄௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ ൌ ߝ ଶ ܾ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ ݊ െ‫ܤ‬ 2 ෠ଶ ߝܽ௞௠ െ ߥߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ.Appendix C: coefficients of the terms Wikn: Matrix Elements Before giving the matrix elements.ଵ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ ൌെ 1െߥ ଶ መ ଷ ݄௞௠ ෠ ଷ ݊ଶ ൨ െ ݊ ଶ ߝ ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ݊ ሺ1 ൅ ݇௔ ሻ െ ‫ܤ‬ 2 መଵ ݈௞௠ .2) (C.

14) (C.ଵ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ ൌ ߝ ଶ ܾ௞௠ .3 Matrix [K] This matrix is much more complicated. namely ଵ.1 Matrix [M] In this matrix the only non-zero terms are located on the diagonal: ଵ.2 Matrix [C] This matrix has only one non-zero term: ଷ.ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ ݊ߝ ܾ௞௠ . [K1bis].1. 2 ௠ (C.15) X|Page .ଶ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ ൌ ߜ௞௠ .11) (C.13) C.ଷ ഥ ଶ ቀߜ௞௠ ൅ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ቁ ൅ Ω ഥܷ ഥ ቆ2‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ െ ݅ ‫ܬ‬௞௠௡ =Ω ሺଵሻ ሺଶሻ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൣ2݊ଶ ݇௔ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ መଵ ෠ଵ ൧ ൅ ߝ ଶ ݇௞௠ ‫ܣ‬ െ ݊ଶ ‫ܣ‬ ߤ௘ ߝ ଶ ሺଷሻ ഥ ଶ ൭‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ ൅ܷ െ ߙ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൱ 2 െ ሺ2 െ ߥሻ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. 2 (C. To better understand the influence of each term. we separate it in four different matrixes: [K1]. ସ ଶ ଶ ෠ ଶ െ ߜ௞௠ ൣ1 ൅ ݇௔ ߣସ ௠ ߝ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ݊ െ 1ሻ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ଷ ݊ ൧ ߤ௘ ߝ ߮ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ 2 ௠ (C. ଶ. (C. [K2] and [K3].Appendix C ଷ.ଷ ഥ ቆ2‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ െ ݅ ‫ܥ‬௞௠ ൌܷ ሺଶሻ ߤ௘ ߝ ߮ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻቇ. All of its terms are non-zero.ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌെ 1െߥ ଶ ݊ ሺ1 ൅ ݇௔ ሻߝ ଶ ܾ௞௠ ൅ ߝ ସ ݀௞௠ .12) ଷ.ଷ ‫ܯ‬௞௠ ൌ ߜ௞௠ ൅ ‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ .9) ൅ ߥ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ C.1 Matrix [K1] Matrix [K1] regroups the terms coming from the standard Flügge’s shell theory. Matrix [K1] C. ሺଵሻ C. except for the perturbation pressure term.10) (C. 2 1൅ߥ ଶ ଵ.

18) (C. 2 1െߥ 3݊݇௔ ߝ ଶ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.29) ଵ.ଷ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ െߥߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ.Appendix C 1െߥ ଶ ݊ ൨ െ ݇௔ ߝ ସ ݀௞௠ . 2 ଵ.ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ ଶ. (C. the boundary conditions of a clamped-free shell are considered: ଵ.1.28) (C.24) (C.ଷ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌെ 1െߥ ଶ ߝ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. both of them depending on the square of the velocity.ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌെ ݊ߝ ܿ௞௠ . namely ଷ.ଵ ସ ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ ߜ௞௠ ݇௔ ߣସ ݊ െ ߥ൨.ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌെ ଶ.2 Matrix [K1bis] Matrix [K1bis] accounts for the unsteady pressure term and the new boundary condition term due to the aspiration of a fluid.ଷ ସ ଶ ଶ ଶ ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ െߜ௞௠ ሾ1 ൅ ݇௔ ߣସ ௠ ߝ ൅ ݇௔ ሺ݊ െ 1ሻ ሿ ൅ ߝ ܿ௞௠ 2݊ ݇௔ .ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ 0.ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ െߥ݊ߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ.ଷ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ ߝ ଶ ܾ௞௠ ൤ߥ െ ݇௔ (C. ଶ.22) ଷ.25) (C. 2 1൅ߥ ଶ ଶ. ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ െnଶ ߜ௞௠ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ൤ 2 3െߥ ଶ.19) (C.26) (C.ଶ ሺ1 ൅ 3݇௔ ሻ൨. ଵ.ଷ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ െߜ௞௠ ݊ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ݇௔ ݊.ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଵ௞௠ ൌ െߜ௞௠ ݊ ൅ ߝ ଶ ܿ௞௠ ݇௔ ݊. 2 XI | P a g e . 2 (C.23) C. ௠ ߝ ൅ ߝ ܿ௞௠ ൤݇௔ 2 3െߥ ଷ. 2 1െߥ ଶ ଷ. 2 1െߥ ଶ ݊ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ. 2 1െߥ ଶ.ଷ ഥ ଶ ሺଷሻ ‫ܭ‬ଵ ௕௜௦௞௠ ൌ ܷ ൭‫ݍ‬௞௠௡ െ ߤ௘ ߝ ଶ ߙ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ൱.17) (C.3 Matrix [K2] In matrix [K2].27) (C.20) (C.21) (C. C.16) (C.1.

ଷ. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ െ݊൫‫ܣ‬ ଷ.37) (C. ෠ଵ ݀௞௠ ൅ ‫ܣ‬ ෠ଷ ܾ௞௠ ൅ ‫ܣ‬ ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ ߝ ସ ൫‫ܤ‬ ଵ.35) (C. ଵ. 2 Finally.30) (C.ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌെ C.ଶ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ መଵ ݇௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ߜ௞௠ ൯ ൅ ߝ ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ ෠ଵ ܿ௞௠ ൯.41) ଷ. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ െ݊൫‫ܣ‬ ଷ.34) (C.ଵ ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ 0.4 Matrix [K3] ଷ.ଷ መ ଷ ݄௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ܾ௞௠ ൯ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଶ ߝܽ௞௠ . ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ െ݊ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ XII | P a g e .38) (C.ଶ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ߜ௞௠ ൯.ଵ መଵ ݈௞௠ ൯ െ ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ൫‫ܤ‬ መ ଷ ݄௞௠ ൯.ଷ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ߜ௞௠ ൯.ଶ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ ݇௔ ߥ݊ߝ ଶ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ െ 1െߥ ଶ ଶ ݊ ߝ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.ଷ ‫ܭ‬ଶ௞௠ ൌ ߥ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮௠ ሺ1ሻ߮Ԣ௞ ሺ1ሻ െ ሺ2 െ ߥሻ݊ଶ ߝ ଶ ݇௔ ߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.ଶ ෠ଶ ݊ߝܽ௞௠ .31) (C.ଷ መ ଷ ݃௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ መଵ ݇௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ߜ௞௠ ൯ ൅ ߝ ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ ෠ଵ ܿ௞௠ ൯.40) (C. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ‫ܤ‬ (C.ଵ መ ଷ ݇௞௠ ൅ ‫ܤ‬ ෠ଷ ܿ௞௠ ൯.36) (C. matrix [K3] is composed of the terms related to steady viscous effects ଵ. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ ߝ ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ ଶ.Appendix C ଷ. 2 (C. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ െߝ ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ ଶ.33) (C. ‫ܭ‬ଷ௞௠ ൌ െ݊ଶ ൫‫ܣ‬ ଶ.32) 3െߥ ଶ ߝ ݇௔ ݊߮Ԣ௠ ሺ1ሻ߮௞ ሺ1ሻ.1.39) (C.

the forces are calculated in some cases by direct integration to validate the use of the Gaussian quadrature and the number of necessary points. it was decided to use the Gaussian quadrature method. Then. Firstly. it was necessary to get some preliminary results to validate the method of resolution but also to determine some parameters involved in the program. and because the previous work did not involve any viscous effects. the integration stepsize. as well as the most suitable distance beyond the free end of the shells for flow perturbations to die out. comparing the found critical flow velocities with existing results. it was important to determine the most suitable one. As several models were defined.Appendix D: Validation of the Computer Program Before using the computer program for the case of a cantilevered aspirating fluid. Furthermore. the present calculations were conducting without considering steady viscous effects also. XIII | P a g e . As all of the examined parameters are parts of inviscid theory only. a numerical integration is required to calculate the unsteady fluid forces because they are obtained through a Fourier transform method. To perform it. Two important aspects of the theory had to be examined: the validity of the extended Galerkin method for solving the equations of motion and the usefulness of the concept of an out-flow model for describing the fluid behaviour downstream of the free end. the domain of integration and the number of admissible functions are determined.

4 938.7 754. (D. Table D.2 Gaussian Quadrature To reduce the computing time required.3 3677. The agreement with experiment is even better with the present theory.2 m=2 827.6 m=3 1894.0 2148.1 Natural Frequencies of a Cylinder Gill (1972) experimentally measured the natural frequencies of a cantilevered shell with the following parameters: ‫ ܮ‬ൌ 0. a set of calculations with different values of these parameters has been conducted. ‫ = ܧ‬2.7 D.0 2045.5 1673.5 2092.502 m.5 2203.0 1504. ߥ ൌ 0.0635 m.1.6 1371.0 927.0 2403.0 1465. To determine the validity of this method and the values of the involved parameters (integration stepsize.7 m=4 --3882.8 886.2 1446.8 2356. The chosen values are usually a XIV | P a g e .7 902.2 1503.0 1006.0 318. a Gaussian quadrature has been used to calculate the unsteady fluid forces.8 2155.0016 m.0 310.0 1451.1 ‫ כ‬10ଵଵ N⁄mଶ . Gill’s experiments and the present theory ݄ ൌ 0. and the extended Galerkin method appears to be a suitable way to solve the equations of motion. It can be seen that the results obtained with Model 3 and ten admissible functions are in good agreement with the one measured by Gill in the experiments or found by Sharma’s theory.3 1491. ܽ = 0. In 1974. number of points and domain of integration). Sharma theoretically calculated the natural frequencies for the same system.0 769. ߩ௦ = 7.Appendix D D.0 1523. ߤ ൌ ߯ ൌ 0.0 1686.1: Comparison between the natural frequencies of a cantilevered shell from Sharma’s theory.8 ‫ כ‬10ଷ kg⁄mଷ .6 2307. These results are compared with those obtained with the present theory in Table D.9 760.28.1) n 2 3 4 Experiments or theory considered Gill (1972) Sharma (1974) Present theory Gill (1972) Sharma (1974) Present theory Gill (1972) Sharma (1974) Present theory m=1 293.0 1726.3 1436. The number of admissible functions is such that increasing it changes only slightly the natural frequencies of each mode.

00922݅ ‫ݍۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ െ5. To have a reference for the obtained results.122 ൅ 5.2: Comparison of the unsteady viscous forces using a Gaussian quadrature and a direct numerical integration for n=1 and k=1 ߩ௔௜௥ ൌ 1.78 ‫ כ‬10ିସ m.35 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ െ 1. ߤൌ߯ൌ0 (D.1013 m.300] using a million points.0172݅ ሺଶሻ ‫ݍ‬ଵଶଵ ൌ െ2. The results are presented in Table D.79 ‫ כ‬10ିଶ଴ ݅ ଵଶଵ ሺଵሻ ‫ݍ ۔‬ଵଷଵ ൌ 0.81) and (2.79 ‫ כ‬10ିଵ଺ െ 0.54 ‫ כ‬10ିଵଽ ݅ ۖ ሺଷሻ ‫ݍ ە‬ଵଶଵ ൌ 1. it was necessary to validate the use of the Gaussian quadrature.Appendix D compromise between the accuracy of the result and of the computing time required.0143݅ ሺଶሻ ‫۔‬ ۖ ‫ە‬ ൌ െ1.0218݅ ିସ ିଶ଴ ‫ݍۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ െ2.0234 ൅ 0.44 ‫ כ‬10ିଵ଼ ݅ ଵଶଵ ‫۔‬ ۖ ‫ە‬ ଵଶଵ ሺଶሻ ‫ݍ‬ଵଷଵ ൌ 1.0138 ൅ 4.39 ‫ כ‬10 ൅ 0. the properties of the pipe used in these calculations are the same as in Païdoussis and Denise (1972): ‫ ܮ‬ൌ 0.25 ‫ כ‬10ିଶ െ 1.0112݅ ۖ ሺଵሻ ‫ݍ ە‬ଵଶଵ ൌ െ0. only the results with k and n equal to 1 are shown. ߥ ൌ 0. ‫ = ܧ‬8.82 ‫ כ‬10ିଵଽ ݅ ሺଷሻ ሺଷሻ ‫ݍ۔‬ଵଷଵ ൌ െ9.66 ‫ כ‬10 ݅ ۖ ‫ ݍ‬ሺଷሻ ൌ 3.95 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ െ 6.82).41 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ ݅ ଵଶଵ ሺଵሻ ‫ݍ ۔‬ଵଷଵ ൌ 0. Firstly.78 ‫ כ‬10 ሺଶሻ ିଵ ଽ ۖ‫ݍ‬ ൌ െ6.25 ‫ כ‬10ିଶ െ 2.30 ‫ כ‬10 ݅ ۖ ‫ ݍ‬ሺଷሻ ൌ 3. where m represents the axial mode of the perturbation and k the axial mode of the corresponding variations as defined in (2.2.122 ൅ 5.0112݅ ۖ ሺଵሻ ‫ݍ ە‬ଵଶଵ ൌ െ0. For that purpose.95 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ ൅ 6.20 ‫ כ‬10 ݅ ۖ‫ ݍ‬ሺଵሻ ൌ െ0. That is why Table D.0186݅ XV | P a g e . ߩ௦ ൌ 850 kg⁄mଷ .0172݅ ିଵ଻ െ 0.80) were calculated using a direct numerical integration over the interval [-300. the unsteady fluid forces defined by (2.0205 െ 0. For clarity.0138 ൅ 4.2) Gaussian quadrature ିହ ‫ݍ ۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ 0.5.00922݅ ‫ݍۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ െ5.78) to (2.0143݅ ଵଶଵ ሺଶሻ ‫ݍ‬ଵଷଵ ሺଶሻ ‫ݍ‬ଵଶଵ ሺଶሻ ሺଵሻ Direct integration ିହ ‫ݍ ۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ 0.1564 kg⁄mଷ .0205 െ 0.34 ‫ כ‬10ିଶ଴ ݅ ሺଷሻ ሺଷሻ ‫ݍ۔‬ଵଷଵ ൌ െ9.20 ‫ כ‬10 ݅ ۖ‫ ݍ‬ሺଵሻ ൌ െ0.00 ‫ כ‬10 ൌ െ2.12 ‫ כ‬10 ൅ 2.957 ‫ כ‬10ହ N⁄mଶ .0186݅ ିଵଽ െ 0.18 ‫ כ‬10 ሺଶሻ ିଵ଺ ۖ‫ݍ‬ ൌ െ1.95 ‫ כ‬10ିଵଽ ൅ 0. ܽ ൌ 7. It appears very clearly that the only differences between the two calculations lie in really small numbers that can be considered as equal to zero in comparison with the modulus of the considered term.12 ‫ כ‬10 ൅ 7.41 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ ݅ ଵଶଵ ሺଵሻ ିଶ଴ െ 0.0234 ൅ 0.85 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ m. ݄ ൌ 1.23 ‫ כ‬10 ൅ 0.0218݅ ିସ ିଶ଴ ‫ݍۓ‬ଵଵଵ ൌ െ2.13 ‫ כ‬10ିଵଽ ݅ ۖ ሺଷሻ ‫ݍ ە‬ଵଶଵ ൌ 1.51 ‫ כ‬10ିଵ଺ ൅ 0.35 ‫ כ‬10ିଷ ൅ 7.

466 0. 5000ሿ.484 0.405 3 0.3 show that the calculated critical flow velocities are identical up to the fourth significant digit as long as the integration stepsize is smaller than two. the domain of integration is [-∞. ∆ .0 0.3) XVI | P a g e . 300ሿ. For time computing reasons. ‫ݖ‬ሿ = ሾെ1000. ‫ ܯ‬ൌ 10 and ∆ൌ 2.452 0.959 0. it has to be restricted to a narrower one.609 0.056 0.363 0.400 0. 1000ሿ. the integration stepsize had to be determined.957 0. Three sets of calculation were done with the following domain of integration: ሾ– ‫ݖ‬. ሾ– ‫ݖ‬.417 2 0.0 0. In that case.466 2 0. ‫ݖ‬ሿ = ሾെ300. as long as it is greater than two. n 1 Model 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 Païdoussis and Denise (1972) 0.091 1.415 0. +∞] but it is not possible to carry out a numerical integration over this domain.3: Comparison of the critical flow velocities of a cantilevered shell obtained by the present theory using different integration stepsizes with those calculated by Païdoussis and Denise (1972).963 0.405 0.364 0.524 Thirdly. from now on.424 Present Theory m ∆ൌ 2. the integration stepsize will always be taken equal to two: ∆ൌ 2.465 2 ∆= 1.957 2 0. the domain of integration and the number of admissible functions remained unchanged with ሾ– ‫ݖ‬.Appendix D using a Gaussian quadrature is the proper way to calculate the unsteady viscous forces. the predictions for the critical flow velocities are identical up to the sixth significant digit for all the results. At the same time. 300ሿ. The axial mode number m is associated with instability. ‫ݖ‬ሿ = ሾെ5000. (D.415 2 0. To study the influence of the integration stepsize. The results in Table D. the best is to chose this value and.417 0. ∆= 4.364 2 0. ݈ ൌ 3 and ‫ ܯ‬ൌ 10.609 1 0. Secondly. ሾ– ‫ݖ‬. the influence of the number of points inside each interval was also studied and it was observed that. ‫ݖ‬ሿ = ሾെ300.609 1.963 2 0.46 0.374 0. So it was decided to take only two points in each interval.0 0.465 Table D.

a compromise has to be found between the accuracy of the result and the required computing time. not considering the higher axial modes does not affect the predicted mode of instability. So. Thus. 0. ‫ݖ‬ሿ = ሾെ300. the predicted critical flow velocities remained unchanged up to the fourth significant digit.452 0. the first instability usually arises in the lower axial modes.415 0.957 0. the narrowest of the domains of integration can be used in the calculations. For example.524 D.4. The axial mode number m is associated with instability.10%).963 0.21%. For each axial mode.1%. the more functions are taken into account the more accurate should the results be. As shown in Table D. Table D. That is why.5000ሿ 0.364 0.405 0. the relative differences of these velocities for the first circumferential mode are (4.417 0. 0.5. The results in that table numerically describe the effect of the number of considered admissible functions. 300ሿ or ሾെ1000. n Model 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Present theory ሾ– ‫ݖ‬. and the difference between the critical velocities calculated for two consecutive M decreases as M is increased. It also appears in the third mode (n=3) that the predicted axial mode of instability changes as M is increased.465 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Païdoussis and Denise (1972) 0.4: Comparison of the critical flow velocities of a cantilevered shell obtained by the present theory using different domains of integration with those calculated by Païdoussis and Denise (1972). 0.41%.466 0. it can be seen that for each circumferential mode n. 1000ሿ or ሾെ5000.3 Number of Admissible Functions The number of admissible functions used in the calculations corresponds to the number of axial modes that is considered to describe the motion of the shell.609 0.Appendix D From the results in Table D. 2.1%.959 0. so. the predicted critical flow velocity seems to approach a limit value. from m=1 to XVII | P a g e .

n 1 Model 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Model 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 n 1 ‫ܯ‬ൌ2 0.418 0.463 ‫ ܯ‬ൌ 12 0.365 0.364 2 0.959 0.420 2 0.963 0.612 0.405 3 0.365 0.524 D.959 0.609 1 0.417 0. ‫ = ܯ‬10 appears to be high enough to get a good accuracy.415 2 0.969 0.466 2 0.484 1. (1993). This is the exact behaviour of a shell with both ends supported.415 0.971 2 0. Thus it seems important to take a sufficiently large number of admissible functions to have an accurate prediction. Table D.420 1.524 Païdoussis and Denise (1972) 0.364 0.465 0.468 0. Thus.418 0. Their physical characteristics are presented by Nguyen in his thesis (1992) and in Nguyen et al. four different models were applied.467 3 Present Theory m ‫ ܯ‬ൌ 10 0.476 ‫ܯ‬ൌ8 0.965 0.415 0.959 0. XVIII | P a g e .464 0.636 1. it was predicted to lose stability by divergence and then by coupled mode flutter.052 1.367 2 0.418 2 0. As specified in Chapter 2.466 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 Païdoussis and Denise (1972) 0.452 0.023 1. but it is also a good choice regarding the required computing time.416 0. the addition of an out-flow model appeared to be crucial.463 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 m 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 Present Theory m ‫=ܯ‬4 0.610 0. In the end.465 2 ‫ܯ‬ൌ6 0.5: Comparison of the critical flow velocities of a cantilevered shell obtained by the present theory using an increasing number of admissible functions with those calculated by Païdoussis and Denise (1972).405 0.013 0.373 0.957 2 0. Indeed.4 Out-flow Model It was quickly discovered that the predicated behaviour of the cantilevered shell was abnormal if no out-flow model was applied.978 2 0.963 2 0.406 0.609 0.956 0. The axial mode number m is associated with instability.618 1 0.961 0.468 3 0.452 0.405 0.417 2 0.423 0.Appendix D m=3 and finally to m=2 for Model 2 and Model 3.407 3 0.

465 m 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 Model 4 was developed to overcome some numerical difficulties due to the fact that the solution of the problem was not converging with any of the three first models when l was increased to infinity. Even if it is finite for any l. it always predicts a first axial mode instability.961 0. for n=1.958 0. These three models are empirical and Model 1 seems less realistic than the two other ones.959 0. the difference between Model 1 and Model 3 is greater than 10%.415 m 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 n=3 <0.472 0.75 0.417 0.465 0.25 0.1 2 n=1 0.465 0. It predicts a third axial mode instability.5 0. This non-convergence arises ݈݁ ௜௟ . Table D.3.Appendix D From Table D. the results of Model 1 are really different.425 0. the same kind of difference appears for n=3. Secondly. Firstly.807 0. The axial mode number m is associated with instability. whereas the two other models predict a second axial mode instability.465 0. ∆ 4 2 1 0. it can be observed that Model 1 gives results really different from those found by Païdoussis and Denise (1972) but also by Model 2 and Model 3.957 m 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Model 4 n=2 0. it does not have a limit when ݈ ՜ ∞. That is why Model 1 was not considered to be relevant.357 0.5%). in that model the decay of the perturbation is not really smooth since only the continuity of the pressure is imposed.01 0. The main idea was to consider that the perturbations of the flow would decay really slowly XIX | P a g e because of the non-existence of lim௟՜ஶ ‫ܪ‬௞௠ ሺߙ തሻ due to the presence of a term in .978 0.958 0.6: Comparison of the critical flow velocities of a cantilevered shell obtained by the present theory with Model 4 using different integration stepsizes with the one calculated with Model 3.416 0.958 0. as.416 0.5. Even for n=2 where the same axial mode of instability is predicted. Finally whereas the results of Model 2 and Model 3 are always really close (they differ by less than 0.467 0.416 Model 3 0.465 0.4 and Table D. Table D. whereas the two other models predict a second axial mode instability.416 0.

960 0.417 0. the critical flow velocities predicted by Model 4 tend toward the same limit as Model 3.461 2.960 0.408 0.887 0. For those reasons. If material damping would have been considered. for the first circumferential mode XX | P a g e .395 0.447 0. some of the axial modes higher than five are unstable at the beginning but regain stability shortly. for the case of an aspirating shell that is motivating this study.415 0.942 0. It appeared (Nguyen et al. That is why they were considered to be immediately unstable.408 0.465 0.444 0.905 0. solution is inadequate because some modes.409 0. A dash signifies that the shell is immediately unstable. Furthermore. For 2 ൑ ݈ ൑ 3.836 0. It should also be noted that for 3. it was decided to drop Model 4. the unstable from the very beginning.7: The critical flow velocities of a cantilevered shell obtained by the present theory using different length l.471 4 0.465 0.480 10 - 50 - The main difficulty with Models 2 and 3 lies in the determination of the length l.426 1. a much smaller integration stepsize has to be used and that leads to a much longer computing time. to get the same result.388 0. For Model 3.936 0. But.963 0.023 0. they would have been stable at the beginning.364 0.955 0. They might grow at a distance of the order of magnitude of a few pipe lengths.414 0.Appendix D and die out infinitely far from the free end. The first conclusion is that if l is greater than 10.5 0. That is why it is considered that the instability occurring for a lower axial mode was the relevant one.940 0.415 0.451 2 0.466 0.417 0. Thus.476 5 1.6 prove that if the integration stepsize of the Gaussian quadrature are modified.466 0. 1993) that the results with this new model would be slightly different than with Model 3. are some of the axial modes higher than M=5 are always unstable for Model 2.5 0.464 Length l 3 3.952 0. the predicted critical velocities are close to each other.460 0. n 1 2 3 Model 2 3 2 3 2 3 1.25 0.7. even small ones like m=2. it does not seem relevant to consider that perturbations can occur really far from the free end.5 ൑ ݈ ൑ 5. because of the convergence problem mentioned before and emphasized in Table D. For example.957 0.5 0. more recent results presented in Table D. Table D..412 0.884 0.

Appendix D and Model 3. and because a solution could be found for higher value of the length l.8: The parameters of the computer program Number of Gaussian points Integration stepsize Domain of integration Number of admissible functions Chosen model Length l [-300. predicting that the system is always unstable.8. For ݈ ൏ 1. 300] M=10 2൑݈൑3 Model 3 ∆ൌ 2 2 XXI | P a g e . the predicted critical velocities increase.5%. Table D. It was thus verified that the extended Galerkin method was a good one to solve the equations of motion. Comparing the results obtained by varying some parameters allowed to get the optimum values of these parameters and to validate the Gaussian quadrature method to calculate the unsteady viscous forces. The results are shown in Table D. the importance of an out-flow model was proved.g. the predicted velocities decrease by more than 5% for the same example. and then the most suitable mode was chosen. as the decay of the perturbation is smoother in Model 3 because of the continuity of the derivative of the pressure at the free end and at ξ=l. So it seems that the length l should be between 2 and 3. Finally. they differ by 1. it was chosen to adopt Model 3. D.5 Conclusion In this appendix. For the greater values of this length. For lower values.5% for the previous example. e. the system becomes unstable at infinitesimal flow velocity. some preliminary calculations were conducted to validate the computer program. It is still not understood why other values give really unexpected results. sometimes by more than 6. Finally.

.

2: Component technical drawings XXIII | P a g e .1: Assembly technical drawing Figure E.Appendix E: Technical Drawings for Chapter 2 Figure E.

2: cont’d XXIV | P a g e .Appendix E Figure E.

2: cont’d XXV | P a g e .Appendix E Figure E.

.

2: Assembly technical drawing for the vessel XXVII | P a g e .Appendix F: Technical Drawings for Chapter 3 Figure F.1: Assembly technical drawing for the tank and vessel Figure F.

Appendix F Figure F.4: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Top part XXVIII | P a g e .3: Assembly technical drawing for the tank Figure F.

6: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Clamped pipe XXIX | P a g e .Appendix F Figure F.5: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Bottom part Figure F.

7: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Annular tube part Figure F.8: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Flange part XXX | P a g e .Appendix F Figure F.

Appendix F Figure F.10: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Tube support part XXXI | P a g e .9: Sub-assembly drawing for the vessel: Vessel part Figure F.

12: Sub-assembly drawing for the tank: Top of the tank XXXII | P a g e .Appendix F Figure F.11: Sub-assembly drawing for the tank: Bottom of the tank Figure F.

Appendix F Figure F.13: Sub-assembly drawing for the tank: Tank and screen XXXIII | P a g e .

.

(1984) Dynamics and stability of two coaxial cylindrical shells conveying fluid.A. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. pp.R. & Haviland. F. G. Ashley. 457-486. Chan. Journal of Sound and Vibration 22.B. and control of instability of tubes conveying fluid.B. Bajaj. 301-311. A. Experiments. & Rosenberg. G. Chen. Bourrières. Part 2: Non-linear analysis. 229-232. Cesari. H. S. Nuclear Engineering and Design 32. M.W. Paper No 80-C2/PVP-104.-39. (1961) Dynamics of a system of articulated pipes conveying fluid.K. (1975) Dynamics of a coupled shell-fluid system. B. transition. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 261.J. S. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 261. Theory.S. F. T. American Society of Mechanical Engineering. & Lieb. S. P. & Curioni. Hungarian Academy of Sciences. (1980) A comparison of experimental and theoretical vibration results for narrow gap. Journal of Applied Mechanics 49. J. (1972) A comparison of approximate methods for solving nonconservative problems of elastic stability. 887-895. (1961) Dynamics of a system of articulated pipes conveying fluid. I. (1982) Bifurcations in three dimensional motions of articulated tubes.P. & Sethna. S. 487-499. Thesis.Eng. fluid-coupled. Brown.L. (1976) Free vibration of fluid-coupled coaxial cylindrical shells of different lengths. Au-Yang. Budapest. Chen. Journal of Applied Mechanics 43.S. Chen. S. Publication Scientifique et Technique du Ministère de l 'Air No. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.K. Series A. McGill University. Journal of Applied Mechanics 17.71Vibr.S. 159-168. & Jendrzejczyk. T. G. (1971) Flow-induced instability of an elastic tube. Benjamin. (1950) Bending vibrations of a pipeline containing flowing fluid. 147. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Dimensioning and Strength Calculations. S. 612-618. II. Series A.Bibliography Anderson. XXXV | P a g e .J. Benjamin.S. (1971) Buckling instability in tubes subject to internal and external axial fluid flow. M. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 77. 302-310. coaxial flexible cylinders. (2010) General characteristics. 480-484. (1939) Sur un phénomène d'oscillation auto-entretenue en mécanique des fluides réels. ASME Paper No.

M. E. El Chebair.P. Doaré.Eng. Athens. B. (2010) Three-dimensional dynamics of a cantilevered pipe conveying fluid. Negatively buoyant elements. Semler.. & Païdoussis. (2007) Flutter of long flexible cylinders in axial flow. Païdoussis. & Moddares-Sadeghi. J. W.J. Giacobbi. (1990) Theoretical study of the effect of unsteady viscous forces on inner. Honours Thesis.P. 53-68. (1988) The dynamics of towed flexible cylinders Part 2. Feodos'ev. (2009) Introduction to fluid mechanics. A. Hoboken. Giacobbi. Dowling.P. M. Dowling. O.P. D. (1973) Stresses in shells. & Païdoussis. & Widnall. A. M. & Païdoussis. Païdoussis. E. Misra. McDonald. additionally supported by an intermediate spring array. S. 371-389. M. (1988) The dynamics of towed flexible cylinders Part 1. The South African Mechanical Engineer 19.H. & Pritchard.P.. M. Dowell.1016/j. (1951) Vibrations and stability of a pipe when liquid flows through it. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Digital Archive 187. McGill University.B. B. D.T. (2008) Numerical fluid-structure interaction study of a cantilevered pipe discharging or aspirating fluid via a computational fluid dynamics and finite element analysis model. C. 2nd edition.02. M. (1989) Experimental study of annular-flow-induced instabilities of cylindrical shells. & Topping. V. Journal of Fluids and Structures 3. 507-532. (2010) The dynamics of aspirating cantilever pipes and pipes conveying variable density fluid.K. 457-478. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Engineering Computational Technology (eds Papadrakakis.. Giacobbi. 607610.. 533-571.Bibliography De Langre. N.).B. P. 169-170. Greece. A.2010. V.P. 2-5 September 2008.P.ijnonlinmec.001.E. & Misra. International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics doi:10. Neutrally buoyant elements. AIAA Journal 4. 349-364.W. M. A.B. Flügge. A. M.. Den Hartog.. A.H.K. El Chebair. XXXVI | P a g e .P. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. : Chichester: Ghayesh. D. Journal of Sound and Vibration 138. (1969) John Orr memorial lecture: recent cases of mechanical vibration. Fox. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Digital Archive 187. Y.P.Eng. A. Thesis. H.and annular-flow-induced instabilities of cylindrical shells. Inzhenernyi Sbornik 10. Paper 48.J. McGill University. (1966) Generalized aerodynamic forces on an oscillating cylindrical shell: subsonic and supersonic flow. (2007) A numerical and experimental study of the dynamics of aspirating cantilever pipes. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 571. R.

W. M. & Metrikine. G. Part1: Theory. M. M. 328-336. 52-57. 1051-1065. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 293. D. freehanging riser conveying fluid. Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Vibration in Nuclear Plant. D.W. I. Kuiper.P. 528-542. (1966) Unstable oscillation of tubular cantilevers conveying fluid. Kuiper. Theory. J.P. Journal of Fluids and Structures 23. & Païdoussis. & Païdoussis. (1978) Instabilities of tubular beams simultaneously subjected to internal and external axial flows. 512-527.S. & Metrikine. P.R. & Païdoussis. Journal of Applied Mechanics 46. pp. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 293. 429-445. (2010) The early development of the Dracone flexible barge. (2008) Experimental investigation of dynamic stability of a cantilever pipe aspirating fluid. Journal of Mechanical Design 100. G. 109-134.L. G. Gregory. Part2: Experiments. 242-248.A.W. J. (1979) Dynamics of slender tapered beams with internal or external axial flow.J. Series A. R. Gregory. 440-463. (1974) Vibrations of two coaxial cylindrical shells containing fluid. Housner. (1985) Experiments on tubes conveying fluid.Bibliography Gill. Keswick. Krajcinovic. A. Hawthorne. C. Journal of Sound and Vibration 280. Hannoyer.P. Metrikine.. ThinWalled Structures 109-134. (1970) Effect of lumped masses on the stability of fluid conveying tubes. Series A. Journal of Applied Mechanics 37. Journal of Applied Mechanics 19.A. Experiments. Hill.V. R.V. A. Journal of Fluids and Structures 24.A.P.P. (1972) Vibrations of a clamped-free circular cylindrical shells. M. Hannoyer. & Païdoussis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.J. M.E. W. (1979) Dynamics of slender tapered beams with internal or external axial flow. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. & Chen.L. 501-502.L. Journal of Applied Mechanics 46. Hannoyer. Hobson. & Battjes. 494-497. S. & Swnason.J. J.V. 541-558. Kuiper. G.L. (1982) Fluid-elastic instabilities caused by flow in an annulus. Jendrzejczyk. 45-51. M. (1952) Bending vibrations of a pipeline containing flowing fluid. XXXVII | P a g e . Journal of Sound and Vibration 25.T. & Païdoussis. (1966) Unstable oscillation of tubular cantilevers conveying fluid. A. M. (2005) Dynamic stability of a submerged. (2007) A new time-domain drag description and its influence on the dynamic behaviour of a cantilever pipe conveying fluid. M. II.P. Nuclear Engineering and Design 30.

Dept. J. Proceedings of the Conference on Flow-Induced Vibrations in Reactor System Components. (1999) Vibration and stability analysis of cantilevered two-pipes systems conveying different fluids. (1981) The equations of motion of initially stressed Timoshenko tubular beams conveying fluid.A. MERL-99-1. Journal of Fluids and Structures 1. Païdoussis. 65-68. Montreal. Journal of Sound and Vibration 79. (2007) Dynamics of cantilevered pipes conveying fluid. Luu. IL. Journal of Fluids and Structures 2.P. D.P.P.H. & Sugiyama. Report ANL-7685. M. Love. USA. Journal of Applied Mechanics 22.. of Mechanical Engineering. Païdoussis. Journal of Fluids and Structures 16. MERL-99-2. 251-268. 615-628. & Semler. Y. A.E. Journal of Fluids and Structures 13. pp.P.L. Mateescu. M. M. (1985) The unsteady potential flow in an axially variable annulus and its effect on the dynamics of the oscillating rigid centerbody.R. 427Mateescu. M. (1987) Unsteady viscous effects on the annularflow-induced instabilities of a rigid cylindrical body in a narrow duct. M. & Semler. (1955) Experimental and theoretical study of transverse vibration of a tube containing flowing fluid. & Semler. & Païdoussis. of Mechanical Engineering. Lopes.E. M. F. M. Montreal. Miller. (1927) The Mathematical Theory of Elasticity. & Païdoussis. R. Long. D.P. J. (2002) Linear and nonlinear dynamics of cantilevered cylinders in axial flow. 715-737. 175-195. D. & Païdoussis. M. Lopes. Part 3: Three-dimensional dynamics in the presence of an end-mass. (1999) Nonlinear equations of a cylinder in steady axial flow. (1983) On the dynamics of three systems involving tubular beams conveying fluid.. XXXVIII | P a g e . M. McGill University.P.P. D. Part 2: The equations of motion. C. Mateescu.L.H. 304-311. Mcgill University. M. & Bélanger. Argonne National Laboratory.L. J. & Païdoussis. Y. (1999) Nonlinear dynamics of a cylinder in steady axial flow. C. Dept. Païdoussis. Journal of Fluids Engineering 107. Wadham-Gagnon.P.. T.. B. Mcgill University. Modarres-Sadeghi. (1970) Generation of positive and negative damping with a flow restrictor in axial flow. 197-215. Langhtjem.Jr...P. (1988) Unsteady pressure measurements on an oscillating cylinder in narrow annular flow. Journal of Fluids and Structures 23. C. 589-603. Païdoussis. Cambridge University Press.Bibliography Laithier. C.Eng. M. Thesis. Argonne. Semler. Lopes.

Païdoussis. & Denise. Montreal: Dept.I. Païdoussis. Païdoussis. damped cantilever in a plane inclined to the vertical. (1970) Articulated models of cantilevers conveying fluid: the study of a paradox. a) Dynamics of flexible slender cylinders in axial flow Part 1.P. (1953) Vibrations of a cylindrical tube containing flowing fluid. Païdoussis. M. Theory. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 12. Nguyen.B. Montréal. V. A. Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolans Handlingar (Stockholm) No. Journal of Applied Mechanics 38. (1993) An experimental study of the stability of cantilevered coaxial cylindrical shells conveying fluid. Journal of Fluids and Structures 7. Experiments. & Denise.P. McGill University. Païdoussis. (1970) Dynamics of tubular cantilevers conveying fluid.K. E. 70-10. (1969) Free vibration of a heavy. 365-385. Païdoussis. Journal of Fluids and Structures 7. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Digital Archive 34. M. A.P. Journal of Sound and Vibration 16. P.P. (2000) An asymptotic theory for circular cylindrical shells.P. 459-461. Païdoussis.K. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 12.Bibliography Nguyen. (1970) Instabilities of cylindrical shells containing flow. 737-751. Journal of Sound and Vibration 20. (1973) Dynamics of cylindrical structures subjected to axial flow. Journal of Sound and Vibration 29. (1968) Stability of towed. Païdoussis. & Misra. F. Ph. (1992) Theoretical and experimental study of the stability of clamped-free coaxial cylindrical shells subjected to internal and annular flows of viscous liquid. McGill University.P. P.P. Report MERL-69-6. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 26. XXXIX | P a g e . J. M. 1817-1839. totally submerged flexible cylinders. of Mechanical Engineering.P. & Trois Maisons. M.P. 913-930.P. Païdoussis.P. of Mechanical Engineering. M. Païdoussis.P. & Denise. (1993) A new outflow model for cylindrical shells conveying fluid. McGill University. Thesis. (1966. Païdoussis. Païdoussis. Niordson. vertical cantilever. 524-526.P.P. (1972) Flutter of thin cylindrical shells conveying fluid. V.B. International Journal of Solids and Structures 37. M. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 26. 9-26. b) Dynamics of flexible slender cylinders in axial flow Part 2.P. & Misra. damped. M. M.P. & Deksnis. M. 273-297. J.. 717-736. 85-103. MERL Report No. 73.D. M. Dept. 417-419. (1966..B. (1971) Free vibration of a heavy.I. Nguyen.B. V. M. Niordson. M. 288-300.E. M. (1971) Flutter of cylindrical shells conveying fluid. & Des Trois Maisons. F. Païdoussis.E. J.

Journal of Sound and Vibration 159.Bibliography Païdoussis. T. Païdoussis. Luu.. & Besançon. & Issid. (1993) Pipes Conveying Fluid: A Model Dynamical Problem.P. P. Païdoussis. Journal of Sound and Vibration 76. D. (1984) Dynamics and stability of coaxial cylindrical shells containing flowing fluid.P.and annular-flowinduced instabilities of a clamped-clamped or cantilevered cylindrical shell in a coaxial conduit: The effects of system parameters. Misra. Païdoussis. Journal of Energy Resources Technology 107. (1985) Dynamics and stability of coaxial cylindrical shells conveying viscous fluid. B. & Li..T. A.P. (1981) Dynamics of a flexible cylinder in subsonic axial flow.P. S. Volume 1..P. Applied Mechanics Reviews 40. Journal of Fluids and Structures 13.P. & Misra. A. & Misra. 389-396. 127-164. Nguyen. (1991) A theoretical study of the stability of cantilevered coaxial cylindrical shells conveying fluid. London: Academic Press Limited. M.P. 250-255. (1990) Dynamics and stability of a flexible cylinder in a narrow coaxial cylindrical duct subjected to annular flow.P. (1981) Dynamics of arrays of cylinders with internal and external axial flow. Païdoussis. 163-175.X. M. 361-380. Journal of Fluids and Structures 7. M. (1979) Dynamics of flexible cylinders in axisymmetrically confined axial flow.P.. (1999) Aspirating pipes do not flutter at infinitesimally small flow.P. 37-44. & Laithier. 193-205.K. & Chan. & Nguyen. M. Païdoussis. M.P. G. & Sim. M. Païdoussis.K. (1992) Internal. M. M. Journal of Sound and Vibration 106. 201-235. W. (1986) Dynamics of finite-length tubular beams conveying fluid. Journal of Sound and Vibration 33. (1987) Flow-induced instabilities of cylindrical structures. Païdoussis.B.P. Chan. Païdoussis. & Pettigrew.E. Païdoussis. M.. 232-240. AIAA Journal 19. Journal of Applied Mechanics 57.K. A. Mateescu. 1467-1475. M. T. & Ostoja-Starzewski.P.J. M. S.B. Journal of Applied Mechanics 46. 311-331. Païdoussis.P. A.P. Misra.P. M. V. (1985) Dynamics of a pipe aspirating fluid such as might be used in ocean mining. Païdoussis. Journal of Sound and Vibration 97. M.. 419-425. N. Journal of Applied Mechanics 52. M. M. 267-294. XL | P a g e . Païdoussis. Païdoussis. (1998) Fluid-Structure Interactions: Slender Structures and Axial Flow.P.K. M. Journal of Fluids and Structures 5 . Païdoussis. M.P. 137-204.P. V.G. & Luu. (1974) Dynamic stability of pipes conveying fluid.

Volume 2. (1945) The theory of sound. McGill University.P. Rayleigh. M. (2009) Experiments on the dynamics of cantilevered pipes subjected to internal and/or external axial flow.3 July 2008. C. Grinevich. 147-156. Solution Mining Research Institute Fall 2008 Technical Conference.. 517-525 Rousselet.P.Bibliography Païdoussis. D. (2002) Linear and nonlinear dynamics of cantilevered cylinders in axial flow. 30 June . & Horacek.. Part 2: Dynamics of the system with intermediate spring support.. (2007) Dynamics of cantilevered pipes conveying fluid. USA. & Lindsay. C. Semler. J.Eng. & Prabhakar. Journal of Fluids and Structures 23. Semler.P. (1981) Dynamic behaviour of continuous cantilevered pipes conveying fluid near critical velocity.P. Thesis. 691-713. Journal of Sound and Vibration 310. Journal of Sound and Vibration 169. New York: Dover Publications.P.. C. M. M. Païdoussis.). Païdoussis. J. Rinaldi. Li. T.W. (2008) The canonical problem of the fluid-conveying pipe and radiation of the knowledge gained to other dynamics problems across Applied Mechanics.. & Wadham-Gagnon. M. Païdoussis. Paper 289. S. London: Elsevier Academic Press. Prague. Texas. Journal of Fluids and Structures 26. & Païdoussis. M. M. 569-587. (2008) Brine string integrity and model evaluation.. C. Galveston. (2008) Dynamics of a long tubular cantilever conveying fluid downwards. & Semler.P. Journal of Applied Mechanics 48. M. (1994) The non-lineare equations of motion of pipes conveying fluid. I. (2008) Dynamics of cantilevers subjected to internal and/or external axial flow: new developments and insights. Journal of Fluids and Structures 24.L. Proceeding of the 9th International Conference on Flow-Induced Vibration (eds Zolotarev. R. M.P. S. (2005) Fluid-structure interactions: slender structures and axial flow. & Saaid. which then flows upwards around the cantilever as a confined annular flow. G. (2005) A reappraisal of why aspirating pipes do not flutter at infinitesimal flow. E. fitted with a stabilizing end-piece. Wadham-Gagnon.P.. XLI | P a g e . 871-890. S. 943-947. M. (2005) Some unresolved issues in fluid-structure interactions. M. Journal of Fluids and Structures 20.P. (2010) Dynamics of a cantilevered pipe discharging fluid. Rinaldi.P. 111128. & Païdoussis. J. M.S. Luu. & Hermann. 462-492. Czech Republic. Païdoussis.X. M. Païdoussis. Journal of Fluids and Structures 16. Adamovic.B. Païdoussis. Païdoussis. J. M.P. Semler. S. Ratigan. Journal of Fluids and Structures 20. Part 1: Physical dynamics. G. 577-599.

55-76. N. (1974) The stability of finite length circular cross-section pipes conveying inviscid fluid. Journal of Sound and Vibration 37. (1988) Studies on the stability of pipes conveying fluid (the combined effect of a spring support and a lumped mass). 48-52. & Semler. (1985) Effect of a spring support on the stability of pipes conveying fluid. C. C. Journal of Fluids and Structures 16. & Johns.E. Advances in Acoustics and Vibration vol.S.. (2009) Vibration of slender structures subjected to axial flow or axially towed in quiescent fluid. C. Kishi. Augu. 459-474. T.H.K. Wang. Journal of Sound and Vibration 31. & Ellen. J. (1973) On the stability of thin pipes with an internal flow. T. (1979) Free vibration of finite circular cylindrical shells and tubes with and without a surrounding fluid. JSME International Journal 31. B. M. (2002) Linear and nonlinear dynamics of cantilevered cylinders in axial flow. Q. D.J.. Y. Lopes.P.P. M. (1974) Calculation of natural frequencies of fixed-free circular cylindrical shells. F. C. I. C. Journal of Fluids and Structures 13. (1971) Vibration characteristics of a clamped-free and clamped-ring-stiffened circular cylindrical shell.B. & Johns.. Sharma. Weaver. C. Wang. 739-759. Journal of Fluids and Structures 23.Sc.B. L. Y. (1978) Theoretical studies of internal flow-induced instabilities of cantilever pipes. Païdoussis. Weppelink. The Netherlands. Enschede. 399-410.Bibliography Semler. S. Kawagoe. & Nishiyama. 463-474.. 2009. H. & Myklatun. 19 pages. L. Tanaka.H.S. (2007) Dynamics of cantilevered pipes conveying fluid. & Bloom. M. T. Journal of Applied Mechanics 40. Part 3: nonlinear dynamics.. Shayo. H. & Ni. Sharma.K. & Unny. Journal of Sound and Vibration 35. Shayo. Journal of Sound and Vibration 25. D. D. 545-567. & Ellen. Weaver. 433-449. Sugiyama. Technische Hogeschool Twente.L. Part 1: Nonlinear equations of threedimensional motion.B. Thesis. XLII | P a g e . & Païdoussis. H. Sharma. D. C. 535-545. Journal of Sound and Vibration 56.. (1999) Dynamics of a submerged and inclined concentric pipe system with internal and external flows. & Kawagoe. (1972) Free vibration of cantilever circular cylindrical shells-A comparative study. 20-26. M.J.. Journal of Sound and Vibration 100. X. Journal of Sound and Vibration 14. 443-460. Sugiyama. Y. 257-270. Kishi. (1973) On the dynamic stability of fluid-conveying pipes. Wadham-Gagnon.

Bibliography Widnall, S.E. & Dowell, E.H. (1967) Aerodynamic forces on an oscillating cylindrical duct with an internal flow. Journal of Sound and Vibration 6, 71-85. Yamaki, N. (1984) Elastic Stability of Circular Cylindrical Shells. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Yeh, T.T. & Chen, S.S. (1977) Dynamics of a cylindrical shell system coupled by viscous fluid. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 62, 262-270.

XLIII | P a g e

.

it is not that simple to remember which configuration is related to which flow path. these drawings are presented here again. So that the reader can have a look at these drawings while reading the Thesis. . it appeared very useful to have a spare of the drawings of the different configurations tested in Chapter 3.Drawings of the Experimental Configurations Tested in Chapter 3 While reviewing this Thesis. because of the great number of configurations. Indeed.

3ii Config. 4ii Config.7ii . 1 Config.Config. 5ii Config. 2i Config. 7i Config. 6ii Config. 2ii Config. 5i Config. 2iii Config. 4i Config. 3i Config. 3iii Config. 6i Config.