Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Static and Dynamic Analysis of A Piping System PDF
Static and Dynamic Analysis of A Piping System PDF
By
Master of Science
In
Mechanical Engineering
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagez Campus
December 2004
________________________________
Basir Shafiq, Ph.D.
Member, Graduate Committee
_________________
Date
_________________________________
Frederick Just, Ph.D.
Member, Graduate Committee
_________________
Date
_________________________________
Oswald Uwakweh , Ph. D.
Representative of Graduate Studies
_________________
Date
_________________________________
Jia Yi, Ph.D.
Chairman, Graduate Committee
_________________
Date
_________________________________
Prof. Paul Sundaram, Ph.D.
Chairperson of the Department
_________________
Date
ABSTRACT
An Investigation of flow-induced vibration is presented in this thesis. Three
finite elements models for the pipe system were developed: a structural finite
element analysis model with multi-support system for frequency analysis, a fluidstructure interaction (FSI) finite element model and a transient flow model for
waterhammer induced vibration analysis in a fluid filled pipe. The natural
frequencies, static, dynamic and thermal stresses, and the limitation of the pipeline
system were investigated. The investigation demonstrates that a gap in a support
at the segment k has a negative effect on the entire piping system. It was
determinated that the first natural frequency of the whole system occurs at 2.07
Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz. Resonance vibration for the first
mode shape was found at a flow rate of 40 lbm/s, and resonance vibration for the
second mode shape occurs at a flow rate of 275lbm/s. In the warterhammer
analysis, the limit maximum flow rates were determinated based on the rate of a
rapid closure of the isolation valve. A study of the fluid transient in a simple
pipeline was performed. Results obtained from FE model for fluid-structure
interaction was compared with a model without considering fluid-structure
interaction effects. The results show notable differences in the velocities profile
and deformation due to the fluid-structure interaction effects.
ii
RESUMEN
Una investigacin de vibracin inducida por fluido es presentada en esta
tesis. Tres modelos de elementos finitos para las tuberas fueron desarrollados: un
modelo estructural de elementos finitos con mltiples soportes para un anlisis de
frecuencias, un modelo de elementos finitos de fluido estructura y un modelo de
fluido transiente para anlisis de golpe de ariete en una tubera llena de fluido. Las
frecuencias naturales, estreses dinmicos, estticos y termales, y las limitaciones
de la tubera fueron investigados. Al inspeccionar la tubera, se encontr un
espacio entre el segmento K y su soporte. Los resultados indicaron que el espacio
encontrado en este segmento tiene un efecto negativo en toda la tubera. Se
determino que la primera y la segunda frecuencia natural del sistema completo
ocurre a 2.07 Hz y a 5.65 Hz respectivamente. Para la primera forma de vibracin
fue encontrada resonancia a una razn de flujo de 40 lbm/s, y para la segunda
forma de vibracin a una razn de 275 lbm/s. Para el anlisis de golpe de ariete, el
lmite mximo de flujo fue determinado basado en la razn de cerrado de la
vlvula de aislamiento. Se complet un estudio de flujo transiente para una tubera
simple. Los resultados obtenidos del modelo de elementos finitos para el caso de
interaccin fluido-estructura fueron comparados con el modelo sin el efecto de la
interaccin. Se identificaron diferencias significativas entre los modelos.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author
University of Puerto Rico and NASA for their financial support; especially Dr.
Travis for the opportunity to be a part of a summer intern at NASA facilities, Dr.
Castillo and Dr. Just for their supports and helps. Special thanks to my advisor of
the thesis, Dr. Yi Jia, who has treated me with honesty and provided wise advises
for the completion of the work during all my master studies. The graduate students
for their friendship and Virmarie Zengotita, who has been with me since the
beginning of my graduate studies providing support and encourage. Finally my
mother, even when fiscally cant be with me, her lessons and values are always
present.
.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. viii
LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................x
NOMENCLATURE .............................................................................................. xi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................1
1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................1
1.1.1 Flow Induce Vibration ............................................................................2
1.1.2 The Analysis ...........................................................................................5
1.2 Literature Reviews .........................................................................................6
1.3 Objective ........................................................................................................9
CHAPTER 2 STATIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................11
2.1 Finite Element Model ..................................................................................11
2.1.1 Assumptions..........................................................................................14
2.1.2 Stress Calculation based on ASME B31.1............................................15
2.2 Static Analysis .............................................................................................16
2.2.1 Thermal Deformation...........................................................................17
2.3 Results..........................................................................................................19
2.3.1 Static Stress Analysis Results ...............................................................19
2.3.2 Results of Thermal Stress Analysis ......................................................21
2.4 Discussion ....................................................................................................24
2.5 Chapter Conclusions ....................................................................................25
CHAPTER 3 WATERHAMMER INDUCED TRANSIENT FLOW
ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................27
3.1 Transient Flow Analysis ..............................................................................27
6.5 Conclusions..................................................................................................76
CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..............................................78
7.1 Summary ......................................................................................................78
7.2 Conclusions..................................................................................................79
7.3 Future works ................................................................................................82
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................83
APENDIX ..............................................................................................................88
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Acoustic wave in pipes..........................................................................4
Figure 1.2: Diagram of the structural study .............................................................6
Figure 2.1: Elastic straight pipe elements ..............................................................12
Figure 2.2: 3D Structural model geometry ............................................................13
Figure 2.3: Different piping supports.....................................................................14
Figure 2.4: Pipe with gap .......................................................................................17
Figure 2.5a: Stress vs. length for gap space case...................................................19
Figure 2.5b: Stress vs. length for gap correction case ...........................................19
Figure 2.6: Gap locations in segment K.................................................................20
Figure 2.7: Stresses distribution along the piping system......................................21
Figure 3.1: Transient flow model...........................................................................31
Figure 3.2: Typically close-open curve [55]..........................................................32
Figure 3.3: Wave pressure for different dt.............................................................35
Figure 3.4: Detail of numerical noise effect ..........................................................35
Figure 3.5: Effect of friction loss...........................................................................36
Figure 3.6: Effect of time of close .........................................................................37
Figure 3.7: Effect of bulk Elasticity Modulus .......................................................38
Figure 3.8: Effect of time of close in the maximum pressure................................39
Figure 3.9: Effect of initial velocity in the wave pressure.....................................40
Figure 3.10: Wave in close duct ............................................................................41
Figure 3.11: Isolation valve and tank location.......................................................43
Figure 3.12: Length vs. stress/allowance no failure is predicted at this flow........45
Figure 3.13: Possible failure is presented at segment F and E...............................45
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Pipe Specifications................................................................................13
Table 2.2: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0 Gap........................................22
Table 2.3: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0.25 Gap...................................22
Table 2.4: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap.....23
Table 2.5: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0.25
Gap.................................................................................................................23
Table 2.6: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap ....................................24
Table 2.7: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for Gap Case...............................24
Table 2.8: System Maximum.................................................................................25
Table 3.1: E2 Facilities Technical Data of Pipe and Content ................................38
Table 3.2: Transient Pressures ...............................................................................44
Table 4.1: Fluid Excitation Frequencies by Others [1]..........................................53
Table 5.1: Uc, Frequency Parameters and Joint Acceptances ...............................64
Table 5.2: PSD and RMS Responses.....................................................................65
Table 6.1: Dimensions Free Flowing Channel ......................................................69
Table 6.2: Dimensions Channel with Obstruction.................................................69
Table 6.3: Material Properties................................................................................70
NOMENCLATURE
= Divergent
ac
= Cross-sectional Area
Ac
= Speed of Sound
Ca
= Corrosion Allowance
Cs
= Damping of Structure
Cv
Di
= Inner Diameter
Do
= Outer Diameter
= Modulus of Elasticity
= Total Force
Fa
= Axial Force
fn
= Natural Frequency
fs
= Intensification Factor
ii
io
= Pipe Stiffness
= Length
= Structure Mass
= Mass intensity
xi
ma
Ma
= Torsion Moment
Mi
= In Plane moment
Mo
mt
= Total Mass
Pd
= Design Pressure
= Pressure
Pa
Po
= Applied load
Re
= Reynolds Number
Sa
= Axial Stress
SB
= Bending Stress
Se
= Expansion Stress
Sh
= Strouhall Number
SH
= Hoop Stress
SL
= Longitudinal Stress
Ss
= Sustained Stress
So
Ssm
Ssh
ST
= Torsion Stress
= Time
thk
T1
= Low Temperature
T2
= High Temperature
= Flow velocity
= 2
wf
= Natural frequency
= Applied frequency
= deflection
th
= Thermal Strain
= Poisson Ratio
= Structure Density
= Water Density
th
= Thermal Stress
=The
xiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
One of the major problems during the rocket-engine test at NASA is the
vibration experienced from the exhaust plume on its components. Flow induced
vibration occurs when the natural frequency, fn of the line transporting the
propellant and fluid flow are the same or near 1.4. This matching of the two
frequencies produces a condition known as resonance, this behavior in many cases
yields to failure of components or collapse of an entire system. Another problem
of this piping system is the operation of valve. The effect of suddenly stopping or
accelerating a fluid by closing and opening a valve may induce a waterhammer
overpressure. Is this overpressure is enough the pipeline may fail or deform. The
temperature operational condition of this piping system is also of concern. This
piping system operates at extremely low temperature. If the temperature of an
object is changed in the structure, the object will experience length or area
deformation thus volume changes. The magnitude of this change will depend on
the coefficient of linear expansion. This drastically temperature changes create
additional stress in the piping system.
Two know investigation has been previously done in this facilities, Castillo [1]
created a model to study the acoustic induce vibration, he obtain results of noise
and frequency. Also shed vortices solutions, by calculating the vortex-shedding
frequency, which is characterized by the Strouhal number. He also obtain critical
velocities that may cause buckling of the pipelines. His models were based on a
1D mass spring model. It was performed to study the natural frequencies and
critical flows velocities at resonance, it main focus was on the fluid flow. He
discretized the pipe system in straight segments, the problem of his model is that
not considers the boundary conditions and support configurations. Also, it did not
provide stresses and strain results in all axis. The other know work was performed
by Indine, inc, they created a fluid dynamic model using EASY5 software to
simulated the transient pressure and flow state at each point in the feedline.
Furthermore a detailed time simulations of valve motions was presented. The
modeling methodology discretized the feedline into a series of capacitance and
flow nodes. These models allowed assessment of waterhammer pressure
oscillations associated with valve opening and closing operations as well as
pressure oscillation forces on propellant line. A problem of their model is that the
pressure response effect was not applied to the piping system.
This new investigation is focus on the structure, it consider the effect created
by the support as well as other boundary conditions. In the investigation the
vibration effect caused by vortex shedding and turbulence flow were consider as
well the water hammer effect on the structure and the thermal stress. For this
purpose a finite elements model was created. Furthermore, a fluid-structure
interaction (FSI) finite element general model and transient timer response general
model were develop.
systems can cause severe economic losses and in worst cases the loss of human
lives. Some of the design or operation factors that may cause failures in piping
systems are: incorrect support, transient pressure changes, flow induced vibration
and thermal stresses. Several standard codes have been developed to regulate the
design and fabrications of piping systems.
There are various type of phenomena that may induce vibration on
components; vortex shedding, turbulence, water hammer, acoustic among others.
Vortex shedding occurs when the flow past an obstacle such as cylinder, sphere or
any other disturbing object; resulting in vortices behind the cylinder. These
vortices move downstream of the pipeline at a frequency, fs, if the conditions are
appropriate these excitation frequencies may induce vibration.
When the fluid velocity exceeds any but the smallest values characteristic of
seepage flows, eddies will form even if the surface of the flow channel is
perfectly smooth. The flow is said to be turbulent after it has achieve a specific
Reynolds number. Turbulence flow in most application is desired; a typical
application is to increase the efficiency of a heat exchanger. The force generated
by the turbulence flow has the characteristic of being random. With the
appropriate conditions this force will induce pipe vibration, this type of vibration
is call turbulence induce vibration.
Water hammer normally occurs during the opening or closing of valves, and it
generates an acoustic wave that propagates upstream and downstream of the
system. Figure 1.1 shows a diagram illustrating this phenomenon. Notice that this
acoustic wave may indeed contribute to changes in the thermodynamic properties
of the tank (i.e. thermodynamic equilibrium). This transient phenomenon manifest
as a big noise coming out of the pipe. This is what is heard sometimes when the
3
V a lve
A co u stic W av e
Flo w
T an k
.
Figure 1.1: Acoustic wave in pipes
4
3D Solid Model
Static
Dynamic
Vibration
Maximum
Stress
Maximum
Displacement
Pressure
History
Natural
frequencies
Complete
System
Complete
System
Valve Closing
Time
Complete
System
Various Flows
Segments
Segments
Excitations
Frequencies
study the acoustic induce vibration, he obtain results of noise and frequency.
Castillo [1] obtained the shed vortices, by calculating the vortex-shedding
frequency, which is characterized by the Strouhal number. He also obtain critical
velocities that may cause buckling of the pipelines.
Chiba [33];[34];[35];[36] extensively studied piping response using multiple
support system generally under the action of seismic conditions for both linear and
non linear behaviors under the action behaviors. Vayda [37], presented his
research on the dynamic behavior of piping systems under the influence of support
to pipe gap with the seismic conditions and the nonlinearity of the system
Lockau,Haas and Steinweder [38] presented their work on piping and support
design due to high frequency excitation as the criterion. Morgan [30] studied the
propagation of axis-metric waves through fluid filled cylindrical elastic shells.
The dependence of phase velocity on various physical parameters of the system
was analyzed. However their results were restricted to real wave numbers and to
circumferential modes of zero order.
Thomson [29] introduced the effects of Poissons ratio and included flexural
and axial wave motion and evaluated the phase velocities of the first three
axisymmetric fluid waves. Blevins, [5] in his book Flow-Induced Vibration,
presents an equation to estimate the values for the frequency of the vortex
shedding,
fs =
SV
di
(1.1)
where S is the Strouhal number, V is the flow velocity and di the inner pipe
diameter.
He
proposed
that
for
the
high
Reynolds
number
ranges,
7
1.3 Objective
The objective of this thesis is to conduct an investigation of flow induce
vibration, the research will be extended to an specific propellant pipeline at NASA
facilities. As outcomes, maximum flow rate that may cause resonance and
9
10
11
12
A
I
2
H F
B
2
K
L
N
3
4 in section
Material
Austenitic 304
stainless steel
Austenitic 304
stainless steel
6.625
4.50
4.209
3.68
Thickness (in)
1.208
0.82
Inside Fluid
Liquid Oxygen
Liquid Oxygen
13
The pipeline has three types of supports as shown in Figure 2.3; the first one is
a one-way support, constraining the movement in the negative Y axis. The second
one is a 4 way constrain support, it has a .25 inches of gap for the x and for the
positive Y axis, for the negative Y axis the displacement is constrained. The last
type of supports constrains the movement in the negative Y direction.
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
2.1.1 Assumptions
The weight of the tank which is at section A was not included in the analysis
because all its weight is sustained by its own separate supports. This part of the
piping was considered rigid and modeled with an anchor. At section 3, a T
connection was considered welded under ANSI B16.9. The section connected in
the T has two valves and was not considerate after the valves refer to Figure 2.2.
For the location of the T, there is a flow meter that its weight was also not
considerate at segment F because the additional weight of this segment compared
to the piping is minimal. The supports were treated as rigid elements. The anchors
14
at sections F and N were modeled as rigid in all directions. The weight of the
valve at section I is considered to be held by its own supports, thus is not include
in the 3D model. All the analyses were modeled at an ambient temperature of
85F witch is typical for the geographic location.
Do
0 .4
SH = P
2(thk ca)
(2.1)
[(i Mi)
SL =
i
+ (io Mo) 2
Z
Fa + Pa
Ac
(2.2)
15
{P[D0 2(ca)]2 }
(2.3)
16
th = E th
(2.4)
where E is the modulus of elasticity and th is the thermal strain, the length L,
area A, and volume V, strain are calculated with the following equations.
17
L = L0 (T2 T1 )
(2.5)
A = A0 (T2 T1 )
(2.6)
(2.7)
V = V0 (T2 T1 )
(2.8)
(2.9)
Algor calculate the thermal stress using the restrained and unrestrained
conditions, PipePlus determines the restrained or unrestrained status according to
the Y coordinate for each segment of pipe. A positive Y coordinate value
represents an aboveground (unrestrained) segment. A negative Y coordinate value
represents a buried (restrained) segment.
For the restrained segments the sustained stress is calculated with the
following equation [14]:
S L = E (T 2 T 1)
(2.10)
For the unrestrained segment the expansion stress is calculated with the
following equations [14]
S E = Sb2 + 4 St2
Where;
[(i M ) + (i M ) ]
=
2
Sb
(2.11)
Z
Mt
St =
2Z
(2.12)
(2.13)
18
2.3 Results
2.3.1 Static Stress Analysis Results
Maximum Stress/Allowance ratio with gap
0.12
Segment A
Segment B
0.1
Segment C
Stress/Allowance
Segment D
0.08
Segment E
Segment F
0.06
Segment G
Segment H
Segment I
0.04
Segment J
Segment K
0.02
Segment L
Segment M
Segment N
Segments
0.03
Segment C
Stress/Allowance
0.025
Segment D
Segment E
0.02
Segment F
Segment G
0.015
Segment H
Segment I
0.01
Segment J
Segment K
0.005
Segment L
Segment M
Segment N
Segments
19
Figures (a) and (b) show the peak static stress/allowance ratio value for segments
from A to M for both cases, with the gap and without the gap in section k, refers
to Figure 2.6 for location of this segment. The stress to allowance ratio is the
division of the maximum allowance stress per ASME code B31.1 and the actual
maximum actual stress per segment. These values were obtained using the Algor
finite element program.
Gap
20
545 psi
.25in gap
0 in gap
70
1789 PSI
1789 psi
220
Figure 2.7 shows the stresses distribution along the piping system. It also
shows the peak stress for the case with gap and without gap, and the location of
the same. The left side of the Figure is the case without the gap and the right one
is the case with the gap.
21
Temperature
F
X
(inches)
Segment
Y
(inches)
Segment
Z
(inches)
Segment
-100
0.276
0.158
0.340
-200
-0.406
0.233
-0.490
-300
-0.531
0.330
-0.703
-400
-0.562
0.378
-0.748
Temperature
F
X
(inches)
Segment
Y
(inches)
Segment
Z
(inches)
Segment
-100
0.276
0.159
0.332
-200
-0.406
0.234
-0.490
-300
-0.531
0.330
-0.703
-400
-0.562
0.378
-0.748
The results from Tables 2.2 and 2.3 reveal that the structure experiences some
displacement due to temperature changes, but the changes in all directions are
almost identical. In Tables 2.4 and 2.5 present rotation experience by the zero and
with the .25 inches gap cases. However, after -300 F degrees the two cases are
identical.
22
Table 2.4: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap
Maximum Rotational 0 GAP
Temperature
F
X
(inches)
Segment
Y
(inches)
Segment
Z
(inches)
Segment
-100
-0.145
-0.233
-0.16
-200
0.249
-0.369
-0.22
-300
0.398
-0.245
-400
0.444
-0.226
-0.486
-0.487
Table 2.5: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0.25
Gap
Maximum Rotational .25 GAP
Temperature
F
X
(inches)
Segment
Y
(inches)
Segment
Z
(inches)
Segment
-100
-0.119
-0.252
-0.124
-200
0.243
-0.383
-0.197
-300
0.398
-0.486
-0.245
-400
0.444
-0.487
-0.226
The stresses due to temperature changes are shown in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 for
the gap and elimination of the gap cases, respectively. Unlike the previous tables
of displacement and rotation the results for the stresses are different for the zero
gaps. Only at a temperature of -300 F both stresses are the same, but for the other
temperature cases the difference is evident.
23
Maximum (psi)
Stress/Allowance
Segment
-100
7137
0.16
-200
10710
0.25
-300
12326
0.28
-400
12640
0.62
Maximum (psi)
Stress/Allowance
Segment
-100
7602
0.17
0.26
-200
11188
-300
12332
0.28
-400
13641
0.62
2.4 Discussion
In Figure 2.5, it can be seen that a stress peak point at segment L. This peak
value means that there are some factors increasing the stress in this location. Some
factors that may contribute to the increment of the stress are supports, tees or
anchors. In this particular case it was found that a .25 inches gap in two supports
located at section K creates an increase of stress. The reason is that the entire
24
segment does not touch the support. With the gap correction the stress reduces, it
is true not only in section L but also in almost all other segments, for comparison
cases, Figure 2.7 can be referenced. With the .25 in gap the maximum static stress
is 1789 psi that is a ratio of stress/allowance of .10. With the gap correction the
maximum stress is only 545 psi, which is in segment I with a Stress/Allowance of
.03. This number looks insignificant at this moment later when the fluid pressure
is taken into account this increase in stress becomes more significant. Again the
intention at this moment is to identify which are the weakest elements and its
cause. Table 2.8 summaries the findings.
With No Gap
Segment L
Segment I
Maximum Stress
1789 psi
545 psi
Stress/Allowance
0.10
0.03
26
27
[42] [49]. Limitation of this technique is when nonlinear terms are included,
therefore the MacCormack predictor corrector method is used to solve for the
nonlinear terms.
p
V
+ a 2
=0
t
x
(3.1)
V 1 dp fV V
+
+
=0
t dx
2D
(3.2)
Where f is the friction factor. Bergant and etal [46], based on experimental
results recommend the original Brunoe model as an effective model. Brunoe [47]
model for the friction factor is:
29
f = fq +
kD V V
V V t
x
(3.3)
k=
C*
2
(3.4)
0.00476
7.41
Re
log(14.3 / Re 0.05 )
Laminar Flow
(3.5a)
Turbulent flow
(3.5b)
assumed that the reservoir of the pipe line will maintain constant level, thus
maintaining constant inlet hydraulic pressure Pi The boundary condition is
expressed mathematically as:
pn
inlet
= gH = Pi
(3.6)
Where the subscript n indicate time at the instant n . Therefore, the boundary
condition for the velocity at the valve, under steady state conditions, is known and
also the volumetric flow rate. Using the discharge coefficient, the volumetric flow
rate is:
Q0
Where the subscript
valve
= C d A0 2 p 0 /
(3.7)
coefficient and A0 is the area of open valve. An schematic of the model with it
corresponding boundary conditions is shown in Figure 3.1.
31
Assuming that last relationship is valid for transient conditions, the velocity at
the valve at time n is:
Vn
valve
= C d F (l )
AT
A0
pn
= Vv
(3.8)
Where, F (l ) is the percent of caudal obtained from Figure 3.2 and l the stem
position. AT the area of valve totally open and A0 the area of the valve partially
open, according with the stem position l . As an initial condition a constant
velocity profile and pressure in the pipe is used:
V 0 = V initial
p0 = Pinitial
(3.9)
32
p
V
+ a 2
=0
t
x
(3.10)
V 1 dp fV V
+
+
=0
t dx
2D
(3.11)
V ( x,0) = Vinitial
(3.12)
p ( x,0) = Pinitial
(3.13)
p(inlet , t ) = P
(3.14)
V (valve, t ) = V
(3.15)
Then, for the spatial and temporal discretization the MacCormak is used. The
MacCormak method is a two step predictor corrector finite different. The
MacCormak method can solve linear partial differential equations (PDE),
nonlinear PDE and system of PDE [48]. In the MacCormak method, the predicted
provisional
values
are
obtained
using
first
order
forward
difference
approximations:
pin +1 = pin a 2
Vi n +1 = Vi n
t n
(Vi +1 Vi n )
x
t
t n
(
Vi
p in+1 p in ) Vi n f
x
2D
(3.16)
(3.17)
33
p in +1 =
Vi n +1 =
1 n
t n +1
p i + p in +1 a 2
Vi Vi n1+1
2
x
(3.18)
t
1 n
t n
Vi
pin +1 pin+11 Vi n f
Vi + Vi n +1
2
x
2D
(3.19)
Cn1 = a 2
t
t
1 and Cn1 =
1
x
x
(3.20)
Here, when x is imposed, the t can be found from the last equation.
34
Based on previous result, t and x was selected. After the selection of step
and time, a simulation considering the friction factor is performed. Figure 3.5
shows the results of the simulation for the pressure distribution adjacent to the
point of the valve. The simulation is performed for both with and without friction
case. Friction effect can be appreciated as a decrement of pressure along time. The
effect of pressure losses can be seen when comparing with previous case.
37
For Oxygen
Density
1137.64 kg/m3
1000 kg/m3
0.1682
N/A
0.1069
0.1069
Thickness (m)
.0306
N/A
1.93E15
1000
Length (m)
Operating temperature
30 C
30 C
38
39
40
fluid that will cause the fluid to full fill the pipe. As a result an over pressure is
created. If the valve is rapidly open a depression or a negative transient pressure is
obtained.
Flow
Velocity
Pressure
P+d P
d
F = dt wVAc dx + ( w AcV 2 ) out ( w AcV 2 ) in
x1
(3.21)
First because the flow is steady, the first term on the right-hand side of the
momentum equation is zero. Referring to equation 3.21, and introducing the force
and velocity into equation:
(3.22)
41
dp = 2 wV dV + 2 w dVc + d w (V 2 + 2Vc + c 2 )
(3.23)
The general form of the equation for conservation of mass for one-dimension
flows may be written as
x2
0=
d
w Ac dx + ( wVAc ) out ( wVAc ) in
dt x1
(3.24)
Having steady flow the first term on the right hand side of equation 3.24 is
zero and introducing the velocities the equation becomes
0 = ( w + d w )(V + c + dV ) Ac w (V + c) Ac
(3.25)
w dV
V +c
(3.26)
w dV
c
(3.27)
(3.28)
42
C=
1+
(3.29)
KD
eE
Tank
Location
Isolation
valve
275
275
in
=
= 456
w Ac .0433 13.914
sec
(3.30)
43
The theoretical maximum pressure surge for this flow velocity using a specific
speed of sound C of 39,015 ft/s is:
Pmax =
w c V
g
(3.31)
The pressures plotted in Table 3.2 are the pressures at the run valve, which is
at steady state flow. At steady state the local pressure is the tank pressure minus
flow friction losses. At a valve totally closure, flow is stopped therefore friction
losses becomes zero. Since the friction losses are zero it can be assumed that the
local pressure will be the peak surge pressure at the valve plus the tank pressure.
The tank pressure is 8000 psia.
Pressure
(mpa)
Pressure
(psia)
Pressure + Tank
Pressure
(psia)
16.40
5.937
861
8861
32.80
11.870
1722
9722
38.00
14.250
2067
10067
49.21
17.810
2583
10583
65.61
23.750
3445
11445
The pressure plotted in Table 3.2 are applied to the structural model created in
Algor, this pressure do not consider as fluctuating over time, therefore considered
as a constant pressure simulating failure by peak transient pressure. Algor has the
capability of simulate loadings to the structure and study the effect along
structural elements; it doesnt have the capability of create a pressure wave
running in the fluid.
44
0.9
0.8
Stress/allowance
0.7
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
Segment
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Segments
With a 16.4 ft/s and a sudenly close no failure is predicted as shown in Figure
3.12, but it clearly can be seen that the stress per segment is close to the limit
therefore, this can be considered a caution situation.
Flow 32.8 ft/s
1.2
1
Segment A
Stress/Allowance
Segment B
0.8
Segment C
Segment D
Segment E
0.6
Segment F
Segment G
0.4
Segment H
Segment I
0.2
0
Segments
45
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
With a flow of 32.4 ft/s and instantaneous closure of the isolation valve,
possible failure for segments A, B, D, and F is predicted. As shown in Figure 3.13
most of the segments also are close to their limits. This may be considered as the
maximum allowed flow in the case of an instantaneous closure of the isolation
valve.
Flow 38 ft/s
1.2
1
Segment A
stress/allowance
Segment B
0.8
Segment C
Segment D
0.6
Segment E
Segment F
Segment G
0.4
Segment H
Segment I
0.2
0
Segment
With a flow rate of 38 ft/s which is the maximum flow rate proposed by the
facility it is clear as shown in Figure 3.14, that with a suddenly close of the test
valve almost all segments are on they limit and most of them are over their limits.
No flow over this value is recommended based on an emergency situation, some
cushion devices should be added for prevention.
46
1
Segment A
Sterss/Allowance
Segment B
0.8
Segment C
Segment D
0.6
Segment E
Segment F
Segment G
0.4
Segment H
Segment I
0.2
0
Segment
For this case failures of almost all segments is evident as shown in Figure 3.15,
this flow velocity should be avoided and there is no reason for study higher flow
values.
3.3 Conclusions
A study of the fluid transient in a simple pipeline is done. For that reason, a
Fortran code is developed to integrate the governing partial differential equation
using MacCormak method. The behavior analyzed for different test cases the
incremental time is performed based on these results. After that, using
manufacturer information, the time of close and open is also analyzed as a
parameter to control the crest of wave pressure. The result obtained indicates that
with adequately time of operation of the wave crest no reach the pressure of
failure.
Maximum pressures caused by rapid closure of isolation valve are obtained for
various flow using standard book equations. The transient flow pressure wave was
47
applied to the piping system before the isolation valve. Failure prediction is
obtained for several segments. It is found that for the case of a valve rapid closure,
possible failure will occur at a flow rate of 38 ft/s which is the maximum flow the
facility is planning to run. Some pressures reducer is recommended before the test
valve in order to reduce the impact of the traveling wave.
48
49
M Y + ky = P0 sin t
(4.1)
As one of boundary conditions, the beams is fixed at both ends. Solving for
the displacement response, maximum displacement and natural frequency is
50
straight forward and the development of these set of equations can be found in text
books [5] [14]
The displacement response of the system is given by [5]:
y (t ) = A cos t + B sin t +
P0 1
sin t
k 1 r2
wf
r=
(4.2)
(4.3)
dyn =
Po 1
k 1 r2
(4.4)
n 2
2 L2
EI
m
(4.5)
natural frequencies per segment, the natural frequencies were compared with the
excitation frequencies from the fluid, Table 4.1 illustrates the excitation
frequencies from the fluid obtained in [1]. The shaded cells represent possible
flows rate that may cause resonance for the complete system. To determinate if
resonance is present for individual segments, the natural frequencies were
calculated for the first three mode shapes per segment, Figure 4.2 illustrates the
beam discretization approach. Figures 4.3 to 4.5 show the relationship of fluid
excitation frequency and natural frequencies for each segment. Note that any
segment at the frequency ratio between the value of 1.4 or .5 is considered in
resonance, two lines are included in each graphics representing the upper and
lower limit. The fluid excitation frequencies were calculated at flow rate of 40,
113 and 275 lbm/sec .
11
1
2
10
12
5
13
14
15
17
16
52
fs_(113lbm/s)
Fs_(275lbm/s)
Fs_(40(lbm/s)
597.379005
1453.70771
2.11401778
74.6723757
181.713464
1.05700889
22.1251483
53.8410262
0.70467259
9.33404696
22.7141829
0.52850445
4.77903204
11.6296617
0.42280356
2.76564354
6.73012828
0.3523363
1.74162975
4.23821489
0.30200254
1.16675587
2.83927287
0.26425222
3.48451039
8.47947379
0.99881594
1.8
1.6
1.4
Ratios
1.2
fs 113
fs 275
fs 40
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
Segments
Figure 4.3: Resonances per segment at different flow rates for the mode
shape 1
53
1.8
1.6
1.4
Ratios
1.2
fs 113
fs 275
fs 40
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
Segments
Figure 4.4: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode
shape 2
1.8
1.6
1.4
Ratios
1.2
fs 113
fs 275
fs 40
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
Segments
Figure 4.5: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode
shape 3
54
55
4.3 Conclusions
The natural frequencies considering the system as a whole were obtained
using ALGOR and compared with the excitation frequency obtained from the
fluid at different flow rates. The results yields that the first natural frequency for
the whole system will occurs at 2.07 Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz
with its corresponding mode shapes. It is very clear in Table 4.1 that almost the
entire feed line might suffer from the resonance effect as calculated by finite
element analysis. The first mode is in resonance at a flow rate of 40 lbm/s,
whereas, resonance for the second mode may occur at a flow rate of 275 lbm/s.
Figures 4.6 and 4.7 show the displacement results for the first and second mode
shapes. Notices that for the first mode shape the greatest displacement and stresses
is near the end of the piping system whereas, for the second mode shape the
segments near the center might be in resonance. It is expected that for the third
mode the elements near the tank could have the greatest displacement, of course it
may take place at higher frequencies.
With the analytical method approach the pipeline was discretized in straight
segments between supports as shown in Figure 4.1, the segments were idealized as
simple supported beams which are more appropriate for piping [16,18]. In
addition to explore more in deep the possibility of resonance, the natural
frequencies were calculated for the first three mode shapes. Examining possible
resonance was studied for the first mode shape in segments three, four and six. For
the second mode shape resonance was studied only in segment number two and
for the third mode shape resonance was predicted for segment one and two as
shown in Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5.
56
The results in this investigation reveal higher natural frequencies for all
segments than the anticipated in previous research [1]. The discretization made in
previous investigation was along straight pipe, which making the segments longer
and more susceptible to vibration than analyzing between supports. Supports will
tend to increase the stiffness of the segment. Taking into account only the straight
segments will underestimate the additional stiffness that comes from these
segments.
57
estimate the response of reactor internal component excited by the coolant flow
and again to cross-flow-induced vibration of a multiple span tube [21].
As previously mention the ultimate goal is to determinate the vibration root
mean square amplitudes. To determinate the root-mean square (rms) response the
following equation formulated by Powell [17] is often used.
AG p ( f ) ( x ) J ( f )
y x =
2
3
64 3m f
(5.1)
fluctuating power spectral density (PSD) due to boundary layer type of turbulence.
Equation 5.1 is general and applicable to one dimensional as well as two
dimensional structures in either; parallel flow or cross-flow. This equation is
derived under many simplifying assumptions, of which the most import ants are
that the cross modal contribution to the response is negligible, and the turbulence
is homogeneous, isotropic and stationary.
To characterize the turbulent forcing function three parameters are required:
The convective velocity Uc, which determines the phase relationship of the
forcing function at two different points on the surface of the structure; the
correlation length , which determines the degree of coherence of the forcing
function at two different points on the surface of the structure; and finally the
power spectral density function, Gp, which determines the energy distribution as a
function of the frequency of the forcing function. These three fluid parameters are
59
obtained by model testing and scaling. In this thesis existing data from the
literature will be applied to turbulence induced vibration estimates.
Based on data obtained from turbulent flows, Chen and Wambsganss [18] derived
the following empirical equation for the convective velocity as a function of
frequency:
2. 2 (
Uc
= 0.6 + 0.4e
V
*
V
(5.2)
Where
(5.3)
or in our case the hydraulic radius in confined internal flow. Both equations
show that except at very low frequencies, the convective velocity is fairly
independent of the frequency, being equal to approximate 0.6 times the free
stream velocity . In confined flow channels in which very high turbulence is
generated or by flow in 90 degree channels, Au-Yang and Jordan [23], Au-Yang
[24] found, in two separate experiments, that the convective velocity is about the
same as the mean free stream velocity. Uc V
60
For this investigation the flow is internal in a pipe, therefore the boundary layer
cant grow indefinitely. In small pipes and narrow flow channels, the boundary
layer will fill up the entire cross section of the flow channel. In that case the
displacement boundary layer thickness which is a fluid mechanical parameter is
the hydraulic radius of the flow channel.
* =
DH
= RH
2
(5.4)
The most important fluid mechanic parameter that characterizes the turbulence
forcing function is the power spectral density (PSD). And can be obtained with
the following empirical equation, which was derived based on data from a scale
model test Au-Yang and Jordan [23].
( w)
G p ( f ) = 2 2V 3 * 2PP 3 *
V
(5.5)
61
(5.6)
=.027e-1.26F, 1 F 5
where
F = fRH/V
(5.7)
x 4
GP ( f )
) ,1.0}
= min{20 F 2 (
2 3
V RH
RH
(5.8)
where x is the absolute value of the distance from the cavitation source such
as an elbow or a valve.
62
Figure 5.2: Boundary layer type of turbulence power spectral density [5]
63
Natural
Frequency
(Hz)
61.181
Uc (in/s)
Convective
Velocity
417.130
19.921
4fL1 /Uc
Jmm
Jnm
*/V
59.255
0.010
1.000
0.193
493.204
28.597
0.010
1.000
0.063
46.784
432.455
49.980
0.010
1.000
0.147
14.565
513.828
23.471
0.010
1.000
0.046
717.158
393.950
214.811
0.001
1.000
2.260
8.058
544.733
16.467
0.010
1.000
0.025
78.79
406.410
1
69.018
0.010
1.000
0.248
195.507
394.154
112.100
0.001
1.000
0.616
9a
5660.833
393.950
603.516
0.001
1.000
17.842
9b
90.951
421.639
58.155
0.010
1.000
0.177
Segment
64
Natural
Frequency
(Hz)
61.181
19.921
4.000E-05
5.635E-04
0.211
46.784
4.000E-05
5.635E-04
0.211
14.565
4.000E-05
5.635E-04
0.211
717.158
3.500E-06
4.931E-05
0.020
8.058
4.000E-05
5.635E-04
0.211
78.791
2.000E-05
2.818E-04
0.149
195.507
2.000E-05
2.818E-04
0.047
9a
5660.833
2.000E-08
2.818E-07
0.001
9b
90.951
1.500E-05
1.304E-04
0.121
Segment
Normalized
PSD
Gp
(psi^2 / Hz)
Yrms (in)
2.000E-05
2.818E-04
0.149
65
67
Structure
Fluid
Structure
68
Thickness
0.003175 m
Length
.5 m
.05 m
Structure
Fluid
Obstruction
Structure
Thickness (m)
0.003175
Length (m)
.5 m
.05 m
Obstruction Length
Obstruction location
.25 m
69
1000
.00046
2.82E+009
0.49967
2.93E+005
1.77E+005
70
6.3.3 Mesh
The procedure to mesh the areas in both types of analyses was practically the
same and it yielded very similar meshes. It was not desired to free mesh the
created volumes causing a mesh that would degenerate the geometry or that would
be inconsistent, uneven or inconsistent. To prevent this from happening the mesh
was done in a constant area basis except in the case with the obstruction were the
mesh was finer near this area. This resulted in a regular mesh that was even and
very similar between the two analyses.
6.4 Results
The results presented are focus in to demonstrate that for a fluid flowing in a
highly deformable environment the dynamic deformation of the pipe will have an
71
effect in the behavior of the fluid. Therefore, the result presented in this section is
a comparison between a non fluid structure interaction and a fluid structure
iteration solution. To present this, a graphic was created showing average percent
difference of the velocity results obtained for each node of the channel. The
procedure to calculate the percent difference was the fallowing. First a nodal
solution was run to solve for the velocity this solution was saved and the same
was used as the non fluid structure interaction solution. Then a subroutine was
created using ANSYS. In the subroutine an iterative method was created were the
pressure solution from the fluid was applied to the walls of the channel and the
deformation created from the pressure was used to solve the fluid until velocity
values converge. Then each velocity solution per node was compared with the non
fluid structure interaction and for each of them the percent difference was
calculated. Finally an average of the all the percent difference was calculated. This
procedure was applied for both cases the channel with the obstruction and the free
flowing one for flows from .01 m/s to .1 m/s. Figure 6.4 resumes the results. To
physically see how the results change per iteration a sequence of pictures
examples for the specific case of fluid flowing at .04 mps are presented, see
Figures 6.5 to 6.10. Note how the maximum velocities change from the first
iteration and the second one. This is expected due to the higher deformation will
occur in this iteration.
72
25%
20%
P e rce n t E rro r
15%
10%
Obstruction
No Obstruction
5%
0%
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
Velocity M/S
73
74
75
6.5 Conclusions
Two models were created; a free flowing channel and a channel with 50%
obstruction in its cross-sectional area. For both cases, a non-fluid structure
interaction solution was compared against a fluid-structure interaction solution.
Various flow cases were study, after comparing the non interaction with the
interaction solution, it was notice a percent difference up to 25% in the fluid
velocity. This may be attributed to the fact that when the fluid applies pressure to
the rubber channel the rubber channel deforms, this deformation decrease the
velocity at which the fluid is traveling. Because the axial velocity has decrease
now the pressure applied by the fluid also decrease, at this point the rubber
channel tries to gets is steady state form. Now the cross-sectional area has
decrease again and by consequence the fluid increase again its velocity and the
76
pressure applied to the wall of the channel also increase. This phenomenon
continues until a convergence is achieved.
For the fluid structure interaction investigation, two models were created; a
straight pipe and a straight pipe with 50% obstruction in its cross-sectional area.
For both cases, a non-fluid structure interaction solution was compared against a
fluid-structure interaction solution. Various flow cases were studied, after
comparing the non interaction with the interaction solutions; it was noticed that a
percent difference up to 25% in the fluid velocity. This is attributed to the fact that
when the fluid applies pressure to the pipe, it deforms. This deformation decrease
the velocity at which the fluid is traveling. As the axial velocity decreased, the
pressure applied by the fluid also decrease. Since the cross-sectional area
decreases again, by consequence the fluid increase its velocity again and the
pressure applied to the wall of the pipe also increase. This phenomenon continues
until a convergence is achieved.
Comparing both models, the fluid structure interaction in pipe with 50%
obstruction is more significant than the pipe with no obstruction. The main reason
is that the obstruction creates a local increase of pressure leading to a deformation
in this specific area.
77
7.2 Conclusions
In the structural analysis the gap on the supports at segment k has a negative
effect on the piping system, the gap increases the stress and displacement in
almost all the segments. The more vulnerable segments of the pipe system are
found to be segments F, G, H and I. As results of the structure analysis, correction
of the gap could reduce fifty percent of the maximum stress in the pipeline
system. However, none of the segments are close to the critical stress and
allowance ratio of 1 although it is expected that the dynamic analysis could be
affected by this gap.
The thermal stress analyses were conducted for the gap and non-gap support at
certain segments. The analyses were performed in a range from -100 to 400 F
degrees as system content and 85F as surrounding temperature. The results yield
values of stresses and displacement. However, the -200F is consistent to the
facilities operational conditions. For the support with gap, the maximum stress
was found as 11,188 psi with a stress/allowance ratio of .26, and for the support
without gap, the maximum stress 10,710 psi with a stress/allowance ratio of .25.
Both maximum stresses were found at segment F. However, these values are in
the acceptable range and no action is required.
Maximum waterhammer pressures caused by rapid closure of isolation valve
were studied for various flows. The peak values of transient flow pressure were
generated in the piping system before the isolation valve. Possible failures were
predicted for several segments. It is clear that for the case of a valve rapid closure,
possible failure might occur at a flow rate of 38 ft/s, which is the maximum flow
79
at which the facilities operate. Some pressures reducers placed before the test
valves are recommended in order to reduce the impact of the traveling waves.
A study of the fluid transient in a simple pipeline was completed. The
governing partial differential equations were integrated using the MacCormak
method, and the behavior of the system was analyzed for different test cases. The
incremental time was performed based on these results. Then, using material and
fluid properties, the time of valve close and open was analyzed as a parameter to
control the crest of wave pressure. The results obtained indicate that with adequate
time of valve operation, the wave crest will not reach to the pressure of failure.
For the vibration resonance analysis, the natural frequencies of the system as
a whole were obtained and compared with the excitation frequency of fluid at
different flow rates. The results conclude that the first natural frequency of the
whole system occurs at 2.07 Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz with its
corresponding mode shapes. Resonance for the first mode shape was found at a
flow rate of 40 lbm/s, whereas, resonance for the second mode occurs at a flow
rate of 275 lbm/s. For the first mode shape the greatest displacement and stresses
are near the end of the piping system, and for the second mode shape the segments
near the center could be in resonance. It is expected that for the third mode the
elements near the tank might have the greatest displacement, of course it takes
place at higher frequencies.
With the analytical method approach the pipeline was discretized in straight
segments between supports. In addition to explore the possibility of resonance, the
natural frequencies were calculated for the first three mode shapes. Examining
possible resonances were predicted for the first mode shape in segments three,
four and six. For the second mode shape resonance was predicted only in segment
80
number two and for the third mode shape resonance was predicted for segment
one and two.
The results in this investigation reveal higher natural frequencies for all
segments than the anticipated in previous research [1]. The reason can be found in
the idealization of the system. The discretization made in previous investigation
was along straight pipe making the segments longer and more susceptible to
vibration than analyzing between supports. Supports will tend to increase the
stiffness of the segment. Taking into account only the straight segment will under
estimate the additional stiffness that comes from them.
For the fluid structure interaction investigation, two models were created; a
straight pipe and a straight pipe with 50% obstruction in its cross-sectional area.
For both cases, a non-fluid structure interaction solution was compared against a
fluid-structure interaction solution. Various flow cases were studied, after
comparing the non interaction with the interaction solutions; it was noticed that a
percent difference up to 25% in the fluid velocity. This is attributed to the fact that
when the fluid applies pressure to the pipe, it deforms. This deformation decrease
the velocity at which the fluid is traveling. As the axial velocity decreased, the
pressure applied by the fluid also decrease. Since the cross-sectional area
decreases again, by consequence the fluid increase its velocity again and the
pressure applied to the wall of the pipe also increase. This phenomenon continues
until a convergence is achieved.
Comparing both models, the fluid structure interaction in pipe with 50%
obstruction is more significant than the pipe with no obstruction . The main reason
is that the obstruction creates a local increase of pressure leading to a deformation
in this specific area.
81
82
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
Indyne, inc., (2000) Dynamic Analysis for E2 Ultra High Pressure RS76
Segunda Edicin, Editorial del Castillo Y Harper & Row Publisher, Inc.
[8]
Company
[15] Leonard Meirovitch, Fundamental of Vibrations Mc Graw Hill higher
education (2001)
[16] Au-Yang,M.K, Flow-Induced Vibration of Power and Process Plant
Components, ASME Press, Professional Engineering Publishing, NY
(2001).
[17] Powell, A 1958, On the Fatigue Failure of Structure Due to Vibration
Exited by Random Pressure Fields, Jurnal of Acoustical Society of America,
Vol 30 No 12, pp 130-1135
[18] Chen, S.S. and Wambsganss, M. W., 1970 Response of a Flexible Rod to
Near Field Flow Noice, in Proceeding of Conference on Flow Induced
Vibration in Reactor Components, Argonne National Laboratory Report
ANL-7685, pp 5-31.
[19] Chyu, W.J. and Au-Yang M.K., 1972 Random Response of Rectangular
Panels to the Pressure field Beneath a Turbulent Boundary Layer in Subsonic
Flow, NASA TN D-6970
[20] Au-Yang, M. K., 1975 Response of Reactor Internals to Fluctuating
Pressure Forces, Journal Nuclear Engineering as Design, Vol. 35 pp 361375.
[21] Au-Yang, M.K.,2000, The Joint and Cross Acceptance in Cross-Flow
Induced Vibration, Part I Theory and Part II Charts and Applications,
ASME Transaction, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol 122, pp 349361.
[22] Bull, M.K., 1967, Wall-Pressure Associate with Subsonic Turbulent
Boundary Layer Flow, Journal of Fluid Mechanic, Vol.28, part 4, pp. 719754.
[23] Au-Yang, M.K. and Jordan, K.B., 1980, Dynamic Pressure Inside a PWRA Study Based on Laboratory and Field Test Data, Journal Nuclear
Engineering as Design, Vol 58, pp 113-125
[24] Au-Yang M.K., Brenneman, B. and Raj, D. 1995 Flow induce Vibration
Test of an Advance Water Reactor Model, Part I Turbulence Induced
Vibration Test, Journal Nuclear Engineering and Design,Vol 157, pp 93-109
84
[25] K.T. TRUONG, Evaluating dynamic Stresses of a Pipe Line, This paper is
provided to Piping design.com by Ultragen
[26] Paidoussis, M.P.; Au-Yang, M.K. and Chen, S. S., 1988, editors,
Proceeding: International Symposium on Flow-Induced Vibration and Noise,
Vol. 4, Flow-Induced Vibration due to Internal and Annular Flow, ASME
Press, New York.
[27] R. Kumar 1971 Acustica 24, pp.137-146. Flexible vibrations of fluid-filled
circular cylindrical shells
[28] D.R. Samsury 1974 Research Report-Naval Ship Research and Development
Center, Bethesda, Md. 20034. Liquid-structure coupling in pipes
[29] W.T. Thomson 1953 Proceedings of First U.S. National Congress on
Applied Mechanics, pp. 922-933. Transmission of pressure waves in fluid
filled pipes.
[30] T.C. Lin and G.W. Morgan 1956 The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America 28(6), pp.1165-1176. Wave propagation through fluid contained in a
cylindrical, elastic shell.
[31] J.M. Cuschieri 1988 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83(2),
pp.641-646. Excitation and response of piping systems.
[32] A.L. Lewis and D.R. Roll 1997 Tappi Journal, pp.76-82. Pulsing and
vibration caused by control valve induced acoustic resonances.
[33] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1989), A Test and
Analysis of the Multiple Support Piping System, Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Vol. 111, pp 291p299
[34] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1990), Dynamic
Response Studies of Piping Support System, Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Vol 112, pp 39-45
[35] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1990) Response
Characteristic of Piping System Supported by Visco Elastic and ElastoPlastic Damper, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 112, pp 34-38
[36] Chiba, T and Koyanagi, R., (1988), An Experimental Study of the Response
of Multiple Support Piping System, Res Mechanica, Vol.25, pp. 145 157
85
[37] Vayda, J.P., (1981), influence of Gap Size on the Dynamic Behavior of
Piping System, Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 67, pp 145164
[38] Lockau, J., Haas, E. and Steinweder, F., (1984), The influence of HighFrequency Excitation on Piping and Support Design, Journal of Pressure
Vessel Technology, Vol. 106, pp. 175 -187
[39] Paidoussis, M.P.; Au-Yang, M.K. and Chen, S. S., 1988, editors,
Proceeding: International Symposium on Flow-Induced Vibration and Noise,
Vol. 4, Flow-Induced Vibration due to Internal and Annular Flow, ASME
Press, New York
[40] Taylor, C. E.; Pettigrew, M. J., Dickinson, T. J. and Currie, I. G.,
Vidalou, P, 1997 Vibration Damping in Multispan Heat Exchanger Tubes,
87
APENDIX
*******************************program****************************
1388,1389,1384,1385,1386,1387,1375,1383,1382,1381,1380,1379,1378,238,1377,1376
668,667,666,665,664,663,662,661,660,659,657,658,656,655,669
/BATCH
/COM,ANSYS RELEASE 5.7.1 UP20010418
12:33:43 05/23/2002
/input,menust,tmp ,'',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1 !User interface on
/GRA,POWER
/GST,ON
/PLO,INFO,3
/COL,PBAK,ON,1,BLUE
/VIEW, 1 ,1,1,1 !view
/ANG, 1
/REP,FAST
/PREP7
/prep7
shpp,on !element shape checking
!!Assign element
ET,1,142
ET,2,58
CYL4,0,0,.0534543, ,.0841375
!!Geometry
!Hollow Cylinder, inner diameter outer
!Fluid Area
FLST,2,4,3 !specify data required for a picking operation NFIELD, NARG, TYPE, Otype, LENG
FITEM,2,7
!key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,8
!key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,6
!key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,5
!key points in active coordinate system
A,P51X
!Area arbitrary through key points
K, ,0,0,0,
!key point in point 0,0,0
K, ,0,0,-1.524, !key point
K, ,0,.6,-1.524, !key point
LSTR,
9, 10 !straight line through key point
LSTR, 10, 11 !straight line through key point
!*
LFILLT,10,9,.18, , !line fillet, line ,line ,radius
FLST,2,2,5,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,1
FITEM,2,-2
FLST,8,3,4
FITEM,8,9
FITEM,8,11
FITEM,8,10
VDRAG,P51X, , , , , ,P51X
FLST,2,2,6,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,3
FITEM,2,5
VADD,P51X
FLST,2,2,6,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,4
FITEM,2,6
VADD,P51X
88
SAVE
!Mesh Creation
!Select all
!Select all
!!Fluid Environment
et,1,142
et,2,0
!!CFD Conditions and Type of fluid
flda,solu,flow,1
!Flotran executions option for flow 1
flda,solu,turb,1
! Flotran executions option for flow 1 turbulent
flda,iter,exec,100
!Flotran Iterations
flda,outp,sumf,10
!Output Summary frequencies
!! CFD Property Information
flda,prot,dens,constant
flda,prot,visc,constant
flda,nomi,dens,998
flda,nomi,visc,8.94e-7
flda,conv,pres,1.E-8
FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,2
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
89
CM,_Y1,AREA
!Y1 = Area
CMSEL,S,_Y
! Selects a subset of components and assemblies
CMDELE,_Y
!Deletes a component or assembly definition.
!*
!*
!*
DA,_Y1,VX,0,1
!Specify fluid velocity in volumes X Axis inlet
DA,_Y1,VY,0,1
! Specify fluid velocity in volumes y Axis inlet
DA,_Y1,VZ,-5,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes z Axis inlet
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*
FLST,5,12,5,ORDE,6
FITEM,5,7
FITEM,5,-10
FITEM,5,17
FITEM,5,-20
FITEM,5,27
FITEM,5,-30
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
!*
!*
!*
DA,_Y1,VX,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes X Axis
DA,_Y1,VY,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes Y Axis
DA,_Y1,VZ,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes Z axis
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*
FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,32
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
!*
/GO
! Reactivates suppressed printout.
!*
DA,_Y1,PRES,0,1 !Specify Pressure at outlet of piping
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*
SAVE
alls
/title,Fluid Analysis
physics,write,fluid,fluid
physics,clear
!Creating the Solid Enviroment
et,1,0 ! The Null element for the fluid region
et,2,58 ! assign element 45 to material 2
mp,ex,2,2.82e9 !psi Young's modulus
mp,nuxy,2,0.49967 ! Poisson's ratio
tb,mooney,2
90
91
*if,i,ne,1,then
!!,IF,VAL1,Oper,VAL2, If I not equal to 1 then
flda,iter,exec,100
! Execute 100 global iterations for
*endif
! each new geometry
solve
! FLOTRAN solution
fini
! end of fluid portion
physics,read,struc
! Read in structures environment
/assign,esav,struc,esav ! Files for restarting nonlinear structure elementsave
!!Assign,Ident,Fname,Ext,Dir
/assign,emat,struc,emat
*if,i,gt,1,then
! Structural restart loop If i is grater than a
parsave,all
! Save parameters for convergence check
resume
! Resume DB - to return original node positions
parresume
! Resume parameters needed for convergence check
/prep7
antype,stat,rest
!Analysis type Static, restart
fini
*endif
/solu
/Enter Solution preprocesor
solc,off
asel,s,,,7,10
! Select proper areas to apply fluid pressures
asel,a,,,17,20
asel,a,,,27,30
nsla,,1
!nsla,Type,NKEY - Selects those nodes associated with the selected areas
esel,s,type,,2
!,ESEL Type,Item,Comp,VMIN,VMAX,VINC,KABS - Selects a subset of elements.
ldread,pres,last,,,,,rfl ! Apply pressure surface load from Flotran
alls
rescontrol,,none ! Do not use multiframe restart for nonlinear
solve
*if,i,eq,1,then
save
! save original node locations at the first run
*endif
fini
/prep7
*SET,mkey,2
! Select level of mesh morphing for fluid
dvmorph,2, ,mkey
dvmorph,3, ,mkey
! Perform morphing of volume 2
alls
fini
/assign,esav
/assign,emat
*enddo
save
92