797492
other2018
NVW0010.1177/0957456518797492Noise & Vibration Worldwide
Others
Avoiding acoustic-induced vibration
and fatigue failure
Piping systems often fail due to vibration-induced
fatigue failures. This type of failure is typically
because of two common phenomena—the first, acous-
tic-induced vibration (AIV) and second, flow-induced
vibration (FIV). Pipeline facility engineers, designers,
operators, and managers need to identify and mitigate
the risks of AIV and FIV for avoiding catastrophic
instances of vibration-induced fatigue failures in their
facilities.
Sound energy from fluids flowing through pres-
sure reducing devices, such as valves and restrictive
orifice plates, causes AIVs. This sound energy causes
the vibration of the piping wall, thereby exciting, and
probably damaging, any nearby branch connections of
small bore.
Fluid flowing past dead legs in piping systems can
induce pulsations that create FIVs. Shaking forces from
these pulsations lead to vibrations in piping, vessels, and
equipment.
Analysis of AIVs
Vibration, dynamics, and noise1 analyze AIVs that cause
piping failure at pressure drop areas, such as safety valves,
pressure-reducing valves, and others in a piping system.
They recommend this study for gas systems with pressure
reducing valves.
According to vibration, dynamics, and noise,1 pres-
sure reducing devices usually generate acoustics with high
energy capable of exciting vibration modes in pipe shells.
Such high-energy AIV can generate broadband sound radi-
ation from 500 to 2000 Hz, leading to fatigue failures in
nearby small-bore connections and process piping. Unless
controlled, AIV can cause catastrophic failures in piping.
Apart from this, the internal acoustic energy may also
generate external noise that affects operator safety such as
hearing loss.
According to Piping Engineering,2 AIV is generally
applicable to lines in gas service. In gas systems, pressure-
reducing devices, such as orifice plates, control valves,
or relief valves, generate high levels of high-frequency
acoustic energy. The flow rate and pressure drop primarily
govern the amplitude of this energy, and excitation from
this energy can lead to fatigue failure of welded down-
stream connections.
Noise & Vibration Worldwide
2018, Vol. 49(7-8) 263­–265
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0957456518797492
https://doi.org/10.1177/0957456518797492
journals.sagepub.com/home/nvw
Background and common problem
areas
According to vibration, dynamics, and noise,1 AIV typi-
cally occurs in compressible flow streams such as in gas or
two-phase piping systems. Most at risk are small-bore con-
nections, or branch attachments such as welded supports.
As the excitation is mostly broadband, it causes locations
to resonate, resulting in cracking and fatigue failure, which
may occur in a very short period.
According to Piping Engineering,2 the common prob-
lem areas prone to AIV include piping downstream and
pressure reducing devices such as:
•• Relief valves
•• Restriction orifices and blow down valves
•• Pressure reducing valves
•• Compressor recycle valves
•• Choke valves
Mitigating the effects of AIVs
Vibration, dynamics, and noise1 suggest a design approach
to mitigate the effects of vibrations induced by acoustics.
For instance, for a new project, they would start with eval-
uating the piping system to identify the sources of AIV
and the high-risk areas. Based on their findings, they will
recommend modifications to the piping system, valves, or
offer other solutions for reducing the dynamic stress levels.
According to vibration, dynamics, and noise,1 they fol-
low one of two approaches to evaluate AIV—Eisinger
or D/t method, or follow the Energy Institute Guidelines
(2008). Although the two methods are very similar, they
differ in the manner of deriving the fatigue limit. They
check the piping against acoustic fatigue by comparing
the diameter/thickness ratio with empirical design limits.
The second method is useful in checking locations such as
branches and welded attachments.
To ensure the project completes quickly and on budget,
vibration, dynamics, and noise1 use specialized software
for improving the quality and efficiency of their analysis.
For new systems such as Centrifugal Compressor Systems,
Vibration, dynamics, and noise1 often conduct a study for
both AIV and FIV for ensuring proper addressing of both
the excitation sources.
264 Noise & Vibration Worldwide 49(7-8)
According to Verran,3 if the existing pipe is suscepti-
ble to AIV, engineers can undertake a number of remedial
strategies that may be logistically difficult, expensive to
implement, and may require lengthy shutdowns. These
include modifying the process system or redesigning the
piping systems.
For modifying the process system, Verran3 suggests
splitting the total inventory of the stream to reduce the pres-
sure, or use multiple stages for pressure let down. In rede-
signing the piping system, their suggestion is to replace
the susceptible component with one that will reduce the
generation of AIV by its design.
Verran3 also suggests redesigning the flare or discharge
header to make it resistant to AIV. For this, they suggest
rerouting all or part of the PSV discharge piping and con-
necting to a point on the header that is downstream of
potential stress concentration points.
Another suggestion from Verran3 is to remove local
stress concentrations. These would include small-bore fit-
tings and fillet-welded pipe supports, replacing them with
local stiffening rings for increasing the natural frequency
of the pipe. They also suggest increasing the pipe wall
thickness.
The Equity Engineering Group4 prefers to maximize
the process flow rates while avoiding FIV from two-phase
flow in systems such as heater crossover piping and heater
outlets. To do this, they detune the natural frequency of
piping from the mechanical excitation sources. They sug-
gest detecting the potential for AIV and FIV, and modify
the system design to prevent water hammer events. For
this, they suggest both simulation and field testing.
According to the Equity Engineering Group,4 they sug-
gest optimizing the piping support. They claim they can
optimize the online location of supports based on vibration
measurements and mode shape analysis. They verify that
all recommended supports comply with ASME B31 while
reducing the levels of damaging vibrations. According
to the Equity Engineering Group,4 the optimized piping
design can reduce flow-induced turbulence and high-
stress, fatigue-prone locations.
The Equity Engineering Group4 claims to use multiple
sensor technologies such as laser displacement sensors,
capacitive triaxial accelerometers, and dynamic pressure
transducers for investigating high-risk scenarios. They
also claim to use fatigue analysis to predict probabilisti-
cally approximated remaining life caused by fatigue-
induced damage.
According to the Equity Engineering Group,4 they use
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for modeling FIV.
According to them, CFD analysis offers valuable insight
into the locations and sources of flow-induced turbulence,
thereby allowing for cost-effective design iterations to
mitigate vibrations.
The Equity Engineering Group4 uses CFD as a valu-
able tool for supporting root cause analysis. Their simu-
lation results highlight the expected reduction in pressure
fluctuations that the recommended design changes cause.
This helps prevent future failures of downstream expan-
sion joints.
A new methodology for piping design
Agar and Ancian5 offer a new methodology for improved
piping design practice. According to them, existing meth-
odologies address the risk of AIV through analytical
assessment, with unknown and limited input parameters.
They5 claim to offer an advanced methodology for AIV
risk assessment allowing a better understanding of possi-
ble actions for the mitigation.
According to Agar and Ancian,5 they use dynamic
stress evaluation at pipe discontinuities to assess pipe
fatigue when identifying AIV risk. They perform dynamic
stress evaluation through a finite element analysis of fluid–
structure coupling. This helps them to predict the pressure
fluctuations within the pipe, and they can couple it with a
pipe structure analysis.
They5 provide the validation of their methodology
through measurements on an actual AIV field case. For
this, they use crack initiated due to AIV on a flare network
tail pipe. They claim the numerical approach enables them
to predict piping dynamic behavior and vibration levels
on the pipe, and compare them with results obtained in
the study of the field case. They claim to have obtained
good agreement between computed and experimental data,
thereby giving them confidence in the relevance of their
approach.
Agar and Ancian5 further use their methodology for
quantitative assessment of the efficiency of the mitigation
action initiated. Although many use existing guidelines, as
they are efficient when performing a quick screening of a
large number of pipes, it is difficult to apply for mitiga-
tion measures. Demonstration of the efficiency of exist-
ing mitigation measures becomes difficult, as the limited
input parameters do not adequately quantify the likelihood
of failure.
Therefore, they5 claim to apply this methodology to
existing mitigation measures that they cannot quantita-
tively assess using existing guidelines. This includes full
encirclement wrap branch reinforcement, forged tee, and
the use of sweepolet. They claim the comparison between
computation results with and without mitigation can quan-
tify the impact of all modifications for reducing the risk
from AIV.
Energy Institute guidelines for
avoiding failure in process pipework
from vibration-induced fatigue
Hamilton6 claims the Energy Institute (EI) Guidelines
have collected the considerations of all potential vibra-
tion mechanisms into a single process, and this assists new
or existing process pipework installations. For instance,
Avoiding acoustic-induced vibration and fatigue failure 265
they claim to have applied the guidelines successfully for
installations on a gas-rig platform for changing the duty to
accommodate the processing of fluids from a gas export
project.
According to Hamilton,6 such a change of duty neces-
sitated the assessment of several lines for evaluating
vibration mechanisms such as high-frequency acoustic
excitation, flow-induced turbulence, and flow-induced
excitation. Following the EI Guidelines, they typically use
a scoring concept for the likelihood of failure.
Hamilton6 claims that the numerical approach method
allows identification of priority areas for consideration
beyond that undertaken in a simple qualitative assessment.
The design of the method of screening and identifying
risk of vibration-induced fatigue failure is such that they
can use it in conjunction with more specialist studies for
determining the likelihood of identifying risk in practice.
Wherever the risk requires mitigation, they reduce the
likelihood of failure to acceptable levels by making rela-
tively simple design changes. However, some cases may
require specialist recommendations.
Undertaking a proactive assessment
According to the EI,7 proactive assessment is necessary for
three most common cases:
1. When starting the design of a new process system
2. When undertaking assessment of an existing plant
or process system
3. When considering changes to an existing plant or
process system
The EI7 claims all the three cases above have a number
of common steps, but the manner of execution of these
steps may vary.
According to the EI,7 a new design may place empha-
sis on a paper-based assessment during the construction,
which helps to identify potential issues early on, allowing
easy incorporation of mitigation measures. After build-
ing the plant, other steps may be necessary, such as visual
inspections. Alternatively, identification of any immediate
integrity threats during the assessment of an existing plant
may start with a visual inspection and targeted vibration
measurements may support it.
Preventing AIV and fatigue failures
AVT Reliability8 suggest undertaking a form of qualita-
tive assessment wherein visual inspection and specialist
measurement and predictive techniques are studied before
determining the corrective action. They suggest the spe-
cialist measurement phase should include a variety of
more in-depth tests from fatigue analysis and dynamic
strain measurement to operating deflection shape analysis
and experimental modal analysis.
According to AVT Reliability,8 engineers can also imple-
ment specialist predictive techniques such as applying mod-
eling and sophisticated tools to provide a detailed assessment
of the dynamics of specific pipelines in the life cycles.
AVT Reliability8 suggests removing the excitation
mechanism altogether as a solution to pipework fatigue.
However, they claim this could be quite intrusive, and
require modification of the process conditions or the geom-
etry of the pipework, resulting in disruption of production
and could involve temporary shutdown. Therefore, they
suggest a more nonintrusive retrofit solution for providing
the increased resistance to vibration.
According to AVT Reliability,8 some solutions may be
very straightforward. This could include resting the pipe-
line on supports and not requiring any further protection
against fretting damage. In cases that are more compli-
cated, piping may require braces, not for supporting the
pipe itself, but the main mass such as that of a valve.
Conclusion
Pipework vibration may be difficult to detect visually.
However, knowledge of EI Guidelines and safe limits as
well as an understanding of the most effective corrective
actions can prevent the kind of vibration-induced pipe-
work fatigue that commonly breaks a pipeline.
References
1. Vibration dynamics noise. Acoustic-induced vibration
(AIV) analysis, http://www.betamachinery.com/services/
acoustic-induced-vibration-aiv-analysis
2. Piping Engineering. Guidelines for Acoustic Induced Vibration
(AIV), Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) analysis, http://www.
piping-engineering.com/acoustic-induced-vibration-aiv-flow-
induced-vibration-fiv-analysis-guidelines.html#
3. Verran J. Use of composite wraps to prevent acoustic
induced fatigue failure in piping systems. In: CEED semi-
nar proceedings 2012, https://ceed.wa.edu.au/wp-content/
uploads/2017/02/Use-of-Composite-Wraps-to-Prevent-
Fatigue-Failure-Verran.pdf
4. The Equity Engineering Group, Inc. Vibration fatigue anal-
ysis, https://www.equityeng.com/service/vibration-fatigu/
5. Agar M and Ancian L. Acoustic-induced vibration: a
new methodology for improved piping design practice.
In: Offshore technology conference, 2016, https://doi.
org/10.4043/26784-MS
6. Hamilton M. Vibration induced fatigue in piping. Spectrum
Acoustic Consultants, 28 April 2017, http://www.spectru-
macoustic.com/news/vibration-induced-fatigue-in-pip-
ing-2017-04-28
7. Energy Institute, Guidelines for the avoidance of vibra-
tion induced fatigue failure in process pipework. London:
Energy Institute, 2008, https://kupdf.com/download/guide-
lines-for-the-avoidance-of-vibration-induced-fatigue-fail-
ure-in-process-p_59cdf57108bbc54259686f28_pdf
8. AVT Reliability. Vibration-induced fatigue and how to pre-
vent it, https://www.avtreliability.com/media-centre/white-
papers/vibration-induced-fatigue-and-how-prevent-it
Copyright of Noise & Vibration Worldwide is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.