BULLETIN 417 DECEMBER 1996 HIS ig era iil Ue tira DESIGN GUIDE TO REDUCE POTENTIAL FOR VIBRATION CAUSED BY FLUID FLOW INSIDE PIPES-REVIEW AND SURVEY ©. W. Lin ‘These Bulletins contain final Reports from projects sponsored by the Welding Research Council, important papers presented before engineering societies and other reports of current ISSN 0043-2326 intrest WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL, INC. UNITED. ENGINEEFING CENTER, 345 EAST 47th STREET, NEW YORK. NX. 10017 WRC N.417 ex.02WRC Bulletin Series. 219 Seaton of stent Sins St: ero WeldngVarales on HAZ Senta of S904 an HA etm BM Ara loys 9NG and 47,876 D Ln OH Ls Menon ae E Se, Neste 6, £20 Wet tray en elas igh Seong minum Alay) & Ku beset 180 {21 The Dynami Deomaton of Png by Jean, PK Goan) and Wachee lone ee 32 (1) The Stain ging Behvi of Mlraleyd Stel by WA. Heron tsa Dp, M-Scan Pen) Tho Frere TougheasBeaviorf ASTILAS7 Grade an Gage CMeronlloyed Proctre Vessel Sls b& Andon 3 Omahons WP tke Frat shor ot ST ATS Grae Dan rn uicoaayed see! Names| Roscoe B cenecok Feng, tan es Ses! tern ASTINA7S Grade Ban Grae CMe olaydsealebyN Src M Sots sndk Won oa oe 225 Monograph on Naru apelin eomoloahtyV Mala ey str 524 loves et Opn Cre for Dynami Lane on har Poe Ping FJ Scio ana, 5 Furor Geshe Lentage Sehr od oA tog Mano ersheD at ee 32 Revised ulin 11-Augst 187. Suggested re Welng Prosedures Set Metin Standard Spectiestns CW Oa Sd Te vache» poe! Ge Fibs, Wes e Seana en evo Bulli 257. Loca esses in Cal Sets ust eral Leadings on ozs Supplement o WRC Bilan 107 edsin yb J. osha K Metre Gain ante © Roth Sentara 587 221 Langfang Panto Pressure esse Reta fn Eaton, 9D Pasare Vol Ressich Crm, Oe 1387 528 (0) Spsinen Mhekens eca for Eases C100 Tins a sn A Sion cy Ge Merten W A Soren YH Dos Jy and Tks @)n Anas ant ExowinenialCompureon ol ectraie and Squat TOD Farts Spcinens ofan S96 Sta, Yi Soon A he Tas 1 Pol Nt eT £20 Accuracy Sst erscton Fair for Branch Connectors 4 €.Rostgh Dacre 867 280 (ihe ice Babar of at rose Steel Welamen oy GV Pie Nigh AW te ant (Ee Long Tine Postel es Timer on Proper Coneiuconl ie ckera PL Kohl Lana tote 201 (1)eta ial nvesigaon on eae Tougher inlet Procure ess Steno Par Cent Coopma Research] etarlest Invention on ee fovea Wel! restr ora sels -Patl Coopers seven eon 1008, {2 (1) haere of any Weigh Wietnnge Seta Shapes.) Bcacm an @ © ast echnical Povey Chaaceeaton of ASG Sjenl Plats a Weldon & Perse Bo 253 sostayan rag of Wetientsand Lene Renew on Palle rack ae om We Dicontnuts, y:0 Lsn. ay e 54 Revo of Proprio Teo Alesha Convo Precosnd Scale Presur Vee sear iow Tompeeacn Sern Je ae 435 Avon pre pacomer ues lr Php Comactons Pressure Vessels one Png je oboe oe os 205 Intpev Report on Dynami Ayelet PresereComponeris Fath eon soporte at 257 Expres valiaton ote lun o Rsnoread Openings Lage Sle Pacer Veto yon Citi 208 jnterratve ipo on Eats, Eoctoge, at ler Welding Proszeen by 8D Thotes nd Les heen oe 35 Devlopment ct hess et Proceso anes in lr Temperate Sneak Sco al Meroe Cente 108 390 inte port one acharlal Popes ofsrzea Jt boo cotta ena te ‘311A Preliminary Evaluation of the Elevatod Temperature Behavior of @ Bolted Flanged Connectton, by J. H. Bickford, K Hayashi, A. T; Chang and J, R, Yan abn 8, 342 Snes el ed al Predictor of ort content by ©. conan 7 Sowet nh ee 34% Desrocine Exainton of Pu Wats Spocmone S02 20 on 351 09 | | $4 (Thee Binenoiat ints Eman amie o PV 4 oars Lt! Mal 4 (GD ~ 05,1 = sh Under Outta ent Loading on : Branch Pomn 7 P Fa @) twee rnesonl ince ont Ashlee Dero Laurel ZNO -05 FF 10} dene Surat oes Monet tencing one Bratch Pp 972© Fane 9 248 hasssng cre Toughness and Crocsng Sisco teal Wlimenis—ARelew A Onsen Pl Konkan Soy 160 248 MMPvEC amen ate Txs ont aater Bi Tres ty6 F Won ose ¢ hedteanp Awe es 7 (0 Weta Tx Comers of Pac Egor tot neni inte! Pocoue stoner Flaed Pees and Branch Gonucons sg _fiitec teste Pulser andsheekWaveo by Senovoer Seno era “SHE leper Welding of Service Exposed Cr-Mo Stec! Woldments, oy ©. D. Lundin and. Wang. November 1989, (SP Hen Testo rctng in Crom tac Siem 2) © D.Ltsin AHera, ro ans A Tost @) Post Hat 1, lssinent creck ish Seng Low sto Sion CD Lun and? Goa tocar “$5 Deine for Danna a Wen ty Freeans hr an 0, ()eartyicn Compaen cl Shor crake ono ak TOD Favre Spotimons ofan A36 SI, Soe. A Dis an'S Foe | @)Mis tects or rac dept on tt Paste CYOD Fracture Toughness eA Seem ST Pete aa" H Oude) Goma on tine ie end 100 Parameter Shot Crack Spcinen Testo. Stan FH buat saa Fe Fess ih Indrwiden supporto (SN) lhe oto! Speces Seis Al ea tee. BeAr ie let yore cn ees Leta comvedoniwie back cover Wae Bile at pubiciod monhiyoyceptMarcand Oxobe by The Wet Rescanc\ GANCL. S48 Eas 7m Si, Now York NY 40017, A Pemba ese WRC Bulovs aspartol eitmemberhip No arnt of ay snd. exzteased ol pl espectn he data. nchacs, apr Eaves bosses punieaon mae ty ths Wold RessachCounel ard te vs ley sah ifornatorieatn sere sk Aliph reli rancttor, ale series by WAC.Design Guide to Reduce Potential for Vibration Caused by Fluid Flow Inside Pipes-Review and Survey Cc. W. Lin Consultant Martinez, California WRC Bulletin 417—December 1996 Publication of this report was sponsored by the Pressure Vessel Research Council of the Welding Research Council, Inc. WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL, INC. United Engineering Center 345 East 47th Street New York, NY 10017Library of Congress | Catalog Card Number: 96-61970 Copyright © 1996 by Welding Research Council, Inc. All Rights Reserved Printed in U.S.A. iiExecutive Summary . Nomenclature ... 10 Introduction......... 2.0 Objective and Scope ....... 3.0 Industry Experience. 3.1 Industry Survey . INPO Data Search - aaeneneees 8.3 Vibration Problem Groupings ........ 4.0 Literature Review . 4.1 Identification of References . 4.2 Abstracts of References Reviewed 5.0 Vibration Sources and Phenomena . 5.1 Mechanical Based Sources...........44+ 5.2 Non-Mechanical Based Sources 5.2.1 Fluid-Dynamic Exeitations .... 5.2.2 Fluid-Resonant Excitation. ...... 5.2.2.1 Pressure Pulsation from Safety Relief Valves . 5.2.2.2 Side-Branch Harmonies . 5.2.2.8 Helmoltz Resonator in Piping Systems 5.2.8 Other Vibration Sources. 5.2.3.1 Cavitation and Flashing . 8.2 Organ-Pipe Resonance... 5.2.3.8 Piping Resonance...... 5.2.3.4 Pipe Instability, Flutter, and Two-Phase Flows. 6.0 Design Considerations....... 6.1 Valve Design and Placement 6.1.1 Safety Valve Design 6.1.2 Placement of Safety Valves . 6.1.3 Control Valves.....sesseeesees 6.1.4 Hydraulic Valves . 6.2 Pump Design.......000. 2.1 Boron-Charging System .... 6.3 In-Line Devices. ERE ATeconed 6.8.1 Expansion Joints (Bellows).......s.00000 6.3.2 Flow Constricting/Conditioning Devices .. 6.4 Piping Layout and Configuration... 6.4.1 Placement of Pipe Elbows... 6.4.2 Piping Design Configurations 6.5 Support Designs . 7.0 Design Guidelines. : 7.1 Elimination of the Vibration Source 7.2 Vibration Mitigation .........+. 8.9 Vibration Monitoring : 8.1 Monitoring Instruments . 19 82 Piping Vibration Limits sieeasnienes 18, 8.2.1 Sample and Recommended Piping Vibration Limits........... 20 8.3 Piping Support Vibration Limits. i cee 8 iiiSample and Recommended Piping Support Vibration Limits... 28 1.1 Vibration Limits for Snubbers . 28 8.3.1.2 Sample and Recommended Vibration Limits......... 24 9.0 Recommended Future Research Programs 26 9.1 Industry Survey... 26 9.2 Vibration Sources and Phenomena... 26 9.3 Systems Design Considerations . 26 9.4 Vibration Monitoring .. 26 10,0 Conclusions....... 27 11.0 Acknowledgements ....... 27 12.0 References........ a7 Appendix A: Industry Survey Questionnaire ... 27 Appendix B: Abstracts of the References Reviewed 28Design Guide to Reduce Potential for Vibration Caused by Fluid Flow Inside Pipes-Review and Survey C. W. Lin Executive Summary Flow-induced piping vibration problems are com- mon oecurrences in power plants. Both nuclear and fossil plants experience similar types of vibration problems, However, most of the published results relate to nuclear plants. In view of the large number of piping component and support failures reported in the literature due to flow-induced vibration problems, the lack of industry guidance and regulatory requirements on piping design to limit or reduce such vibration problems is a significant deficiency, one which requires prompt industry action, This bulletin, produced from the reports written under the grants PVRC 94-04 and 95-11 (Fluid Flow in Pipes), is intended to fulfill such aneed. This bulletin identifies the extent of industry problems and reveales the types of sources through an industry survey and a literature review. A list of references has been developed. Most of the useful references have been retrieved and reviewed. The abstracis of the references reviewed are compiled 23 an appendix and attached to the report (Appendix B) for easy reference hy others. Based on the industry deta compiled and by using the results of the published data in the literature, all pertinent sourees of flow-induced vibration problems are identified and discussed in detail. The character- istics of the vibration problems from different sources are presented and the design considerations and guidelines that can be used by the designer to prevent, ‘correet, or reduce the vibration problems are listed. This bulletin also presents a set of guidelines for vibration monitoring and recommends vibration lim- its for piping and piping supports for long-term structural integrity monitoring Finally, many worthwhile future research topies have been proposed in this bulletin to enhance the understanding of piping flow-induced vibration prob- Jems and to control or reduce such vibration prob- lems In summary, through literature review and indus- try survey, this bulletin provides a comprehensive overview of flow-induced piping vibration problems, identifies the design considerations for remedial action, and recommends design guidelines to miti- gate potential concerns for long-term safe operation. Nomenclature A, the area of the neck of a valve cavity C, the speed of sound in the fluid within cavity L, the effective length of the neck of the valve or the pipe, depending on application M, the maximum zero to peak dynamic moment loading due to vibration only, or in combination with other loads as required by the system design specifi cation N, the frequeney number R, the radius of the pipe YV, the volume of the cavity X, the running speed of the pump expressed in rotation per minute (rpm) Y, the number of plungers, blades, or vanes Z, the section modulus of the pipe , the Helmholtz resonator or organ-pipe natural frequency in Hz Ay» the characteristic root for the j-th number of diameters and k-th number of nodal circles p, the density C,, the speed of sound in the fluid within cavity where the subscripts I and 2 refer to the incident medium and boundary medium, respectively Sq, the endurance limit Sq, allowable stress from Figures 1.9.1 or 1.9.2 of Section II of the ASME Code F,., allowable range of stress in ksi 1.0 Introduction To satisfy safety and economic requirements, the design of pressure components requires the analysis ofdynamic events, which includes flow-induced vibra- tions. In recognition of the importance of the flow- induced vibrations on the design integrity of the pressure vessels and pressure components, the Sub- committee on Flow-Induced Vibrations of the Dy- namic Analysis and Testing Committee of the PVRC WRC Bulletin 417 1has supported research activities dealing with flow- induced vibrations under the following specific top- © WRC Bulletin 281—Hydrodynamic Response of Fhuid Coupled Cylinders: Simplified Damping and Inertia Coefficients, by S.J. Brown, October 1982. © WRC Bulletin 389—Damping Studies in Two- Phase Flow, by M.J. Pettigrew et. al., February 1994. © WRC Bulletin 889—Acoustic Resonance in Tube Bundles, by Dr. R.D. Blevins, February 1994. © WRC Bulletin 372—Guidelines for the Flow- Induced Vibration Design of Heat Exchanger ‘Tube Bundles, by J.B. Sandifer, May 1992. In contrast with the above listed WRC Bulletins that published the results of the PVRC sponsored research activities on external flow-induced vibra- tion problems, this report presents the results of a companion research program sponsored by the Flow- Induced Vibration Subcommittee of the PVRC, which deals with piping vibration problems caused by flow-through pipes. : Flow-induced piping vibration problems are a com- mon occurrence in power plants, Both nuclear and fossil plants experience similar types of vibration problems. However, most of the published results relate to nuclear plants. For instance, Bush? pre- sented failure statisties of pressure vessels and piping. It identified that many pipe breaks are due to vibration fatigue. An earlier paper by Bush? indi- cated that failure due to vibration in most instance: has occurred in smeller piping (e.g., 2 inches or less). Larger piping failures due to cavitation and erosion are also cited. ‘The survey performed by Kustu and Scholl? identi- fied significant vibration problems experienced with light water reactor. Mechanieal vibration was listed as the cause of 22.3% of all reportable occurrences involving pipes and fittings. Problems with pipes and fittings were found to be responsible for approxi- mately 10% of all safety-related events and 7% of all outage time at LWRs, Although these translate into only 2.23% of all safety-related events and 1.56% of all outage time, much of these occurrences are not random events. It can be expected that many of these vibration problems would persist and could worsen with serious safety implications if no permanent solutions were provided after the incident, not to mention the impact of long-term vibration and noise on plant maintenance and personnel health Olson‘ diseussed in a survey paper that the NRC had identified in a period through October 1979 81 pipe cracks that were directly attributable to vibra- tion. Tn addition, a September 1983 Institute of ‘Nuclear Power Plant Operations (INPO) Significant Event Report (SER-64-83) reported that from April 1970 to September 1983 pipe components and sup- ports on 284 small diameter related pipes failed because of vibration fatigue. A German publication? discussed piping failure sourees and mechanisms. The paper identified that there have been 1100 cases of damage to pipes and pipeworks in Germany. Among them, 4.5% can be attributed to vibrations In a recent survey conducted in conjunction with an investigation into the main steam line vibration problems of a nuclear power plant, Lin* indicated that many nuclear power plants experience serious vibration problems with its main steam lines, some of which occur on pipe sizes of 24 inches and larger. Most of these vibration problems were determined to be flow induced. The vibration problems have re- sulted in failed valves, cracked supports, and pertur- bation in operating logic. Many costly corrective actions had to be instituted. These included new valve designs, large-scale support changes, piping system modifications, and, in the worst situation, derating. ‘The survey conducted by Au-Yang’ revealed that no major engineering society and regulatory agency issued or adopted any codes or standards to provide guidance for piping and vessel design in the areas of flow-induced vibration and fluid-structure interac- tion, particularly with respect to piping vibration caused by flow-through pipes. ‘The proposed ANSV/ASME Standard OM.8, Rev. 1° provides guidance for piping vibration limits, in addition to preoperatio ration measurement techniques. This standard has been widely refer- enced but has only been used sparingly hecause ofits “proposed” status ‘The guidance provided by Regulatory Guide 1.68 requires that all new nuclear power plants conduct Teactor coolant system flow test to establish the fact that vibration levels are acceptable. It further re- quires that operability of system pumps, valves, controls, and instrumentation be demonsirated to provide reasonable assurance that flow instabilities (e.g., water hammer), will not occur in system compo- nents, piping, or inside the steam generator during normal system start-up and operation. Section 14.2, Iniviai Plani Test Program: Final Safety Analysis Report of the Standard Review Plan'® references Regulatory Guide 1.68 but pro- vides no additional guidance on piping vibration. In view of the large number of piping component, and support failures reported in the literature due to flow-indueed vibration problems, the lack of industry guidance and regulatory requirements on piping design to limit such vibration problems is a signifi- cant deficiency, one which requires prompt industry action. This report, prepared under the grants PVRC 94-04 and 95-11 (Fluid Flow in Pipes), is intended to fulfill such a need. ‘The Introduction provides the background informa- tion relating to the flow-induced piping vibration 2 WRC Bulletin 417problems. It defines the objectives of this report and presents the organization of the report. Chapter 2, Objective and Scope, gives a concise statement of the seope and purpose of the PVRC research conducted under this program. Chapter 3, Industry Experience, presents and summarizes the results of an industry survey that was conducted in conjunction with the investigation into main steam line vibration problems of a nuclear power plant.* The vibration problems identified in this survey for main steam lines are grouped based on design characteristics. Next, the open literature is reviewed in Chapter 4, Literature Review, to identify useful references. The information available from the literature is corre- lated with the vibration problems and characteris- tics identified in the industry survey, particularly with respoct to possible corrective actions. Addi- tional groups of vibration problems are added when necessary with new information from the literature reviewed. These are presented in Chapier 5, Vibra- tion Sources and Phenomena. The correlation of the industry survey results and the information from the literature review provides the basis of Chapter 6, Design Considerations. Chapter 7 presents the design guidelines to lessen the potential for piping vibration problems caused by flow-through pipes and remedial actions that can be taken to correct such vibration problems. The vibration monitoring instruments and vibra- tion limits for long-term safe operation are discussed in Chapter 8, Vibration Monitoring. Chapter 9 presents the recommended future re- search programs that are deemed to provide more insight and effective resolution to the flow-induced piping vibration problems, The summary discussions and conclusions are presented in Chapter 10, Conclusions, with the Acknowledgments and References sections in Chap- ters 11 and 12, respectively. Finally, Appendix A presents the questionnaire sent to the selected utility personnel for the industry survey and the abstracts of the references reviewed are presented in Appendix B. 2.0 Objective and Seope The objective of the PVRC research program, which culminated in the issuance of this WRC Bulletin, is to identify tho various types of internal flow-induced vibrations frequently encountered in the power generation industry, determine the charae- teristics and mechanism of the vibrations, and velop guidelines and procedures for designing piping systems and components to reduce the potential for such vibrations. ‘The scope of this program includes internal flow- induced piping vibration problems caused by the flow characteristics of the in-line components such a8 pumps, valves, tanks, and the design of piping and piping supports. 3.0 Industry Experience Industry experience on piping vibration was ob- tained primarily through an industry survey con- ducted in two stages. The first was to identify the nuclear power plants that encountered main steam Tine piping vibration problems in the past. This was followed by another survey to extend the inquiry into other piping vibration problems. In addition, INPO data were reviewed to gather information concern- ing piping damages due to vibration. The first industry survey was accomplished by sending a survey questionnaire (Appendix A) to 105 addresses (from 104 domestic operating nuclear power plants) responsible for either technical issues or operations management of the plants listed in Reference 11. The survey letter solicited from the addresses their observation and experience concern- ing any main steam line vibration problems that required corrective actions. Subsequently, a second survey was conducted to cover more than just the main steam lines. In addition to the industry survey, the information available through the INPO Nuclear Reliability Data Systom was reviowed. 3.1 Industry Survey A total of 29 respondents from 26 plants represent- ing 25 utilities responded to the initial survey. Fifteen of these respondents indicated that their plants had encountered significant main steam line vibration problems. Subsequent to the initial survey, a follow-up sur- vey letter was sent to 30 addressees, which included the 29 respondents from the initial survey and 1 newly identified plant personnel. The follow-up sur- vey sought to identify any piping vibration problems not included in the initial main steam line survey. The follow-up survey identified three additional nuclear power plants with significant piping vibra- tion problems outside of the main steam lines. This brings to a total of 18 domestic operating nuclear power plants that encountered significant piping vibration problems requiring corrective c- tions. The data compiled indicates that at least 17% of the domestic operating nuclear power plants have known significant vibration problems. The actual number of plants that have encountered significant piping vibration problems is expected to be substan- tially higher because not all survey letters were directed to the proper personnel for response and not all respondents were willing to release plant opera- tional data. Fifteen of 18 plants that have encountered signifi- cant vibration problems were selected for follow-up telephone interviews for the purpose of gaining more insight to the vibration source identification and problem resolution process adopted by these plants. Design Guide 38.2 INPO Data Search In addition to the letter survey discussed previ- ously, a data search was conducted by using the INPO Nuclear Reliability Data System. This search identified that through April 1992 there were 807 cases of valve problems on piping of 18 inches and largez. Table 9.2-1 presents the number of occur- rence for various problem categories indicated in the INPO data. The maintenance cases identified above include out-of-mechanieal adjustments and set point adjust- ment problems. The contamination cases include dirty, corroded, or contaminated (dirty) parts. The parts cases involve defective parts and defective connections. The fatigue cases are from cyclical fatigue. The damage cases are mechanical damages and binding problems. Finally, the wear cases in- clude both normal and abnormal wear. None of the cases cited above have been directly assigned to vibration problems. In fact, only five cases have been identified to be vibration related However, in those cases labeled as cyclical fatigue and abnormal wear, the cause is most often deter- ‘mined to be eithor high pressure or steam flow. Only vibration problems would have generated enough fatigue eyeles to cause the damage. Therefore, it is conceivable that some of these fatigue and normal/ abnormal wear cases are actually vibration related. ‘The INPO data search results were used to aug- ment the list of personnel for telephone interviews and literature search. 8.8 Vibration Problem Groupings The results of the industry survey, including infor- mation obtained through telephone interviews, were organized according to the following vibration char- acteristics: © Turbine vibration atits running speed © Vortex shedding inside the header © Helmholtz resonator at the inlet and outlet of the header © Flow disturbance lock-in with piping organ-pipe frequencies © Piping resonating with flow disturbances © Piping resonating with pump pulsation © Flow perturbation due to valve configuration and/or operation © Flow acoustic coupling at the mouth of side branch © Vibration with unknown origin and characteris- ties Acomplete list of the survey results is presented in ‘Table 3.3-1. The names of the utilities and plants included in the survey are not identified for obvious reasons. Also, some plants reported multiple types of Table 3.2-1—INPO Valve Problem Cases Maintenance Contamination Parte Fatigue Damage Wear 12 a eos F390 vibration problems. Therefore, the total number of problems indicated is more than the number of plants included in the survey. 4.0 Literature Review Several activities contributed to the assembly of the information presented herein from the literature search, First, the industry survey helped to identify technical papers that contain key parts of the infor- mation used by nuclear utilities and their contrac- tors to report and discuss remedial actions taken to resolve flow-induced vibration problems. Second, the INPO data search and the co data search, using the engineering library facility of the University of California at Berkeley, identified many references from the domestic and interna- tional technical conferences and technical journals relating to flow-induced piping vibration problems. Third, another ASME piping committee provided technical papers that have been accumulated for use within the committee but have since been released to the PVRC for this effort. Fourth, an investigation into the main steam line flow-induced vibration problem the author was con: tracted to perform for a nuclear utility generated useful data (including problem sources, vibration characteristics, long-term monitoring, and remedial actions), which are discussed throughout this bulle- tin. Finally, close association with the members of the Fluid-Structure Interaction Technical Committee of the ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Division for the past decade provided sources of many relevant technical papers. ‘The technical papers and roports identified in the literature search process have been compiled. The relevant articles have been retrieved and reviewed. The next two sections present the results and pro- vide a summary of the contents of key papers. 4.1 Identification of References A total of 203 references that contain the informa- tion related to flow-induced piping vibration prob- lems has been identified. Table 4.1-1 groups the references into different categories, In the above table the references on header, turbine, and valve deal with the piping vibration problems induced by these components. The piping references are on the subject of flow-indueed piping vibration problems, Transient vibration problems such as those caused by water hammers are not included in this reference list. Transient loadings are short-term loads that are more operational related and are much more severe in nature. Therefore, they are excluded from the discussion in this report. The books, general references, and codes/standards/guides included in ‘Table 4.1-1 are believed to cover the subjects related to flow-induced piping vibration problems. ‘The references in Table 4.1-1 include foreign publi- cations that are difficult to retrieve and, when re- 4 WRC Bulletin 417‘Table 2.3-1—Main Steam Line Vibration Survey Results By Problem Similarities Vibration No. ‘Sawess Characteristics Damage Remedies Results 1 Turbine (piping too lex: a0 He Supports failed Installed dampers Vibration reduced by ibly supported) 10% 1 Fullare (turbine) control Unknowa Valves came apart, hand Changed turbine control Problem resolved ‘wheels came off and ‘conduit eame loose 1 Vortex shedding at the 26 Exand above Valve stem and set point Repaired and replaced Problem suppressed header adjusting bolts fretted and manal gear heavily damaged 1 Reliuf(balance) header Resonance frequeney Unknown Modifiod relief header Problem resolved ‘unknown) 1 MSstop valve High frequency and low Nosorious damage NDE. No chenge amplitude 1 Proseure reduetion High frequency (1000 Cracking at lug locations Increased wall thickness Vibration reduced but feross the bypass andl Hz) shell mode vibra- and small brefeonaec- of hypase piping noteliminated stop valves tion tions 1 Pressure pulsation Pipe bending vibration. Removed intogral 10 He motion remained ‘attachment Added restricting orifices and flexible hores Removed soubbers/oup- porte 2 Organ-pipe resonance High frequaney (252 He) Unknown Modified the SRV header Resonance eliminated 1 Acoustiemechanicsl Vibration characteristics Excessive wearand Removed 12" eroas-tie Problems solved "esonance in the ‘unknown fatigue falares on gov. line crosstie line cemnor valves 4 Unidentified High frequency (22000 Noseveredamoge ‘Eliminated snubbers High frequency vibration Hg)low amplitude Snubber pins kept emains, pin elimi vibration between tur. wearing out nated, thereby elimi Dine and stoprontrol pated'pin wear valve 8 Wnldentified Unknown ‘Soubber faitures Poriodic inspections No change in status 1 Unknown High frequency low mag- Safety valve Gange and Repairs made No change in status nitude vibration seat leaks 2 TurbulencoinMS High noise level Sauber faites ‘Modified and added sup- Vibration magnitude ‘branch ines (MIS ports ‘reduced but not elimi- dutap line and MS nated, extracting piping) 1 Branch line geometry High noise level Nodamage Monitoring No change in status 1 Not identified Piping vibration stless NoKnown damage Reinforced aupports and! Vibration reduced than 15 Hz turbine building struc- ‘ovbine hall structure ture ‘vibration at high fe quencies 1 Support changes affected Large branch piping No damage Modified hangers.and Unknown piping characteristies movements 12" supports branch line of che header moves 4" at 5 He and 26° branch line off the header moves 34" ab 10 Hz) 1 Nocidentifed Vibration at 8 He Broken supports Modified support Vibrations remained 1 Sweam flow resonance Low frequency (2-3 Ha) Hanger welds cracked Modifad and added aup- Unknown with the ines vibration and impact andbroken rods and ports, Gusto turbine step damaged snubers valve closure 2 Steam low resonanes Low frequencies (0.9 and Perturbation in reactor Added 2nd steam line, Vibrations eliminated ‘withthe linea 24H) Treasure control logic resonance compen- Nostructuredamage —sator(SLRO),and secumulator [No., number of plants reporting, MS, main steam; SRV, safety reli valve; NDE, nondastructve examination; Hz, Hortz (eycles per second; SURG, sigam line resonance compensator trieved, not easily translated. Theso references are therefore not reviewed. Furthermore, some refer- ~ ences appear to be outdated by more recent publica- tions. These references are also not reviewed. Fi- ‘Table 4.1-1—Flow-induced Piping Vibration References By Groups ae seakT,, nally, there are books, codes, and guides that contain Header Sine Valve Pump Piping Book Generat “Gute only limited discussions or terse statements concern- — = ing the subject matter. These are not reviewed as 7 us, well. Design Guide 5Table 4.1-2 identifies the references that were reviewed for each of the categories specified. 4.2 Abstracts of References Reviewed The references cited in this report are listed in Chapter 12.0, References. In addition to the refer- enced papers and reports, a condensed version of the abstracts of all references reviewed is presented in Appendix B to this report. 5.0 Vibration Sources and Phenomena ‘This chapter presents a discussion of the piping vibration sources and phenomena that have been identified to be flow induced. The vibration sources and phenomena included herein can be largely deter- mined through correlation of the industry survey data with the information available from the litera- ture. As expected, some sources and phenomena appear to not have been thoroughly studied by the industry, thereby only weak correlations could be established. The weak correlations are included in Table 4.1-2—Flow-Induced Piping Vibration References Reviewed By Groups this report for completeness and for the purpose of stimulating future research in these areas. Reference 12 presented the following matrix (Fig, 5.0-1) to describe the self-sustaining oscillations in three groups: 1) fluid-dynamic, where oscillations arise from inherent instability of the flow; 2) fiuid- resonant, where oscillations are influenced by reso- nant wave effects (standing waves); and 3) fiuid- elastic excitation, where flow oscillations are coupled with the motion of a solid boundary. ‘The first column of the matrix presented in Figure 5.0-1 depicts the cavity geometry and the second column shows some of the variations of the basic cavities. The first group, fluid-dynamic excitation, has two important aspects: the amplification condi- tions of shear layer instability and the feedback condition. As can be witnessed by reviewing the variations of cavities identified in Figure 5.0-1, flow disturbances associated with this group of cavities are primarily changes in flow patterns and character- istics constrained by the boundary conditions. There is little or no interaction and amplification from the standing waves generated in the cavities. In contrast with the first group, the second-group has strong interaction or resonance effects with the standing waves from either the side branch or the iia sents! cavity. The second group also includes the cavity, Heater bie Viloe Pump Piping Book Gewrat "Gar which is generally known es a Helmholz resonator. T 7 The third group, fluid-elastic excitation, depicts } 5 se B = the interaction of the fluid motion with the dynamic sasic canty VARIATIONS OF BASIC CANTY LES ydteni7: g qe ZZ E Z| yom ge | Miser exrennan —cavite-fenronareo Z F cay ae 3 | smeceay | pase Ne eeLLows = AXISYMMETRIC INTERNAL GATE WITH EXTENDED LIP civ na Fyssetpn yAO~ ay = |7F z = SF 1% B | succcowenary | swtTEo Fame Ott etn ETEUSION @ Key 3 i 2 | Ka eames HELMHOUTE REOULTOR & ~ 7 == ane = b E wats ser Z OEEP CAVITY ‘WITH PORT BRANCHED PIPE CIRCULAR CAVITY 5 hb —_ a = = x 2 Jommnewm | vioratincoare —anaTING BELLONS wararing FLAP GuPoNexT Fig 5.0-\—Catogorzaton of fd namie hc-esonent end itl types of cv ceils WRO Bulletin 417excitation of a mechanical device such as the pulsat- ing piston, vibrating gate, moving bellows, or flutter- ing wing. This group of problems are discussed in the section Mochanical-Based Sources. Finally, there are flow-induced vibration problems resulting from flow disturbance in resonance with either piping natural frequencies anW/or organ-pipe frequencies. This group of problems is related to the problems depicted in the second group. Therefore, these typos of problems are discussed in the section Nonmechanical-Based Sources. 5.1 Mechanical-Based Sources ‘All operating machinery has the potential of creat- ing vibration problems. The vibration of equipment ‘could excite the controlling natural frequencies of the piping systems. For instance, turbine vibration at its running speed (usually at 1800 rpm, which is equivalent to 30 Hz) has been identified in Table 3.3-1 by two nuclear operating plants to be the Key sources of vibration problems, Also, the vibration ofa pump motor was discussed in Reference 13 to be a significant source of noise. However, these are not exactly fow-induced vibration problems, Therefore, only limited discussions will be offered herein. ‘A more commonly occurring vibration problem, which is directly related to or can be a souree of flow-induced vibration problems, is the pump- induced pressure pulsations from positive displace- ment reciprocating pumps. Pressurized water reactor (PWR) plants often used reciprocating pumps in the boron-charging systems. These pumps are used to meet the require- ments of maintaining a high pressure head at low flow levels. ‘There are two types of problems associated with the reciprocating pumps. One is caused by the demand for liquid at each plunger created by the plunger acceleration. This results in cavitation and stripping of gases from the piping and causing large pressure pulsations in both suction and discharging piping. ‘The second source of problems with reciprocating pumps are the pressure pulsations caused by the reciprocating pistons. Pump-induced pressure pulsations occur ab dis- tinet frequencies, which are multiples of the pump speed. Typically, the reciprocating pump pulsation frequencies are at higher frequencies, generally higher than 10 Hz. A different type of mechanically based source is the cavitation and flashing of the fluid resulting from operation of a mechanical device such as: © Over throttling of control valves © Using block valves for flow control © Sudden flow termination due to a pump trip. ‘The phenomenon of cavitation and flashing from operation of a mechanical device are the same a8 those resulting from rapid change of fow conditions discussed in Section 5.2.3, Other Vibration Sources, 5.2 Nonmechanical-Based Sources ‘The nonmechanical-based sources can be devel- oped from flow-passing cavities, obstacles, or simply changing directions. The resulting flow turbulence could be accentuated and amplified by resonating with either piping natural frequencies or the acous- tie frequencies of the pipe. Although not itself a vibration source, resonance with either piping natu- ral frequencies or the acoustic frequencies of pipe is an important part of the flow-induced piping vibra- tion problems. Therefore, organ-pipe and piping resonances, treated as vibration carriers in this report, are both included as nonmechanical sources in this section. 5.2.1 Fluid-Dynamie Excitations. Fluid-dy- namie excitation is generally the result of flow turbulence caused by changes in piping flow area, flow direction, or sudden loss of head. These changes result in unsteady unbalanced forees that must be absorbed by the piping support structure. ‘This type of flow turbulence generally has a broad frequency band ranging from 0 to 30 Hz. The turbu- ence magnitudes generally increase with the in- crease in flow rate, Resonance could result if the piping system frequencies are within the significant frequency range of the flow turbulence or when the acoustic organ-pipe frequencies are within the range of the flow turbulence frequencies. Most of the low frequency (below 10 Hz) piping vibration problems reported in Table 3.2-1 could have been the result of this resonance condition, particularly ifitis a flexibly supported main steam line with long legs between ‘major components (e.g., header and governor valve). 5.2.2 Fluid-Resonant Excitation 5.2.2.1 Pressure Pulsations from Safety Relief Valves. ‘The most commonly known piping vibration problems related to fluid-resonant excitation are those induced by pressure pulsations from the use of safety relief valves in high pressure piping, The vortices at the mouth of the valve have distinctive shedding frequency bands, and pulsation frequency is propdrtional to flow velocity. Therefore, the fre- quency varies with the system flow. Some piping vibration problems have been reported at low fre- quencies (e.g., 10 Hz or less; Table 3.2-1) because of safety valve operation. Others have reported prob- Jems at higher frequencies (e.g., more than 30 Hz"). ‘Tests conducted at SouthWest Research Institute (SWI have shown that vibration problems resulting from vortex shedding generally are not significant, until the shedding frequency is in resonance with the acoustical frequencies." 5.2.2.2 Side Branch Harmonics. Asecond class of fluid-resonant excitation that has been widely reported is the resonance of the pressure fluctuation from the run line passing the branch line. The resonance condition is the worst when the frequency of the pressure fluctuation coincides with the acous- tie frequency of the side branch. Flow harmonies of the piping that aren resonance Design Guide 1with the vortex shedding frequencies could develop into significant vibration problems.” The vibration could be exacerbated by the presence of heavy valves in the caso of small tap lines euch as vents and Grains.‘ The result has been # very high failure rate (eg, cracked welds and damaged supports) reported for such lines. 5.2.2.3 Helmholtz Resonators in Piping Sys- tems. A Helmholtz resonator is formed by an acous- tic cavity with a small opening (neck) to the atmo- sphere (Fig. 5.2-1). The system resonates as fluid oscillates back and forth in the neck in response to eyclic pressure fluctuations in the body of the cavity. ‘The fluid in the neck forms the mass of the oscillator and the compressible fluid in the eavity is the spring ofthe oscillator. The design that is closest to representing the Helmholtz resonator in praetico is the balance header in the main steam piping system (Fig. 5.2-2). When all inlet lines are on one side of the header and the outlet lines on the opposite side, an in-phase mode exists. However, when inlet lines are perpendicular to the outlet lines and the outlet lines exit from both sides of the header, both in-phase and out-of:phase modes can exist. Reference 17 provides natural frequencies and mode shapes for different types of ‘Helmholtz resonators. For a single vented resonator, the natural fre queney ean be ealeulated from the following equation: 0 = C2mKAVL) 621) where o is the Helmholtz resonator natural fre- quency in Hz, C is the spoed of sound in fluid in the cavity, Ais the area of the neck, V is the volume of the cavity, and Lis the effective length of the neck. (— Zz: = Li: Gp Fig. 52-1—Helmboltz resonator and analogous spring-mass sys tem." Single Vented Resonator ouble-vented Resonator AE 2 VT TR yp Fig, 5.2:2—Typleal single and double vented Helmholtz resonators.” Significant vibration can result if the natural frequency of the Helmholtz resonator is close to either the acoustic frequencies or the piping natural frequencies. Generally, distinct vibration patterns or modes exist for this situation. 5.2.3 Other Vibration Sources 5.2.3.1 Cavitation And Flashing. Cavitation or flashing typically result from: © Over throttling of control valves, © Using block valves for flow control © Too rapid pressure reduction at flow orifices or pressure-redueing valves © Sudden flow termination due to a pump trip © Discharging of hot water into the atmosphere or into vacuum environments, such as into a con- denser Cavitation occurs when fluid pressure approaches its vapor pressure, which causes the vapor pockets to form and collapse. This phenomenon results in pres- sure shocks and fluid turbulence, which causes cavi- tation noise and mechanical vibration, If cavitation occurs near 2 pump surface, it may result in cavitation damage. Cavitation has broad- band pressure pulsations. The resulting vibration downstream of the piping can be severe. ‘At the incipient stage, cavitation is typically char- acterized by light intermittent popping sounds; no damage or vibration will occur. At the higher level of | cavitation, the noise is increased substantially to an objectionable level with some minor vibration. The noise and vibration will become excessive near the choking stage of the cavitation and heavy damage to the supporting structure is likely. When the upstream pressure continues to increase, vapor pockets or cavities will form and collapse down- stream resulting in large vibration, intense noise, and severe damage to the system, Flashing occurs when the pressure of hot water falls below its saturation pressure and the water flashes into steam. Similar to cavitation, flashing also results in pressure pulsations with broad frequency band. Vibration and damage downstream. of the flashing component can be expected. 6.2.8.2 Organ-Fipe Resonance. As sound waves moves through the fluid contained in a piping sys- tem, the fluid particles are eyclieally displaced from their equilibrium positions and the pressure in the fluid rises and falls. Resonance of the fluid turbu- lence with the natural frequencies of this fluid motion is one of the most often cited causes of significant vibration problems in pipes. ‘The natural frequencies of the fluid oscillation are clearly functions of the boundary conditions at both ends of the pipe. For pipes that are open on both ends, the oscillating frequencies can be calculated from the following equation: = (CI2mVAGIRE + PPL where C is the speed of sound in the fluid, \y is the 22) 8 WRC Bulletin 417characteristic root for the, j-th number of diameters and k-th number of nodal circles, i is tho i-th longitudinal mode, R is the radius of the pipe, and L is the pipe length. ‘The first term in Equation 5.2-1 is zero for zero number of nodal diameters and zero number of nodal circles, This represents the longitudinal modes ofthe ongan-pipe frequencies. In general, the pipe length (L) is substantially greater than the radius (R). Hence, the first term is only significant for very high frequency modes. As a result, the first term is nor- mally neglected in the organ-pipe frequency calcula- tion for a piping system. This simplification results in: (CR y(ita Lt = iC. (5.23) For an open-closed boundary condition, the organ- pipe frequencies are: (Cham\(ia/4L2) iL, (2-4) Equations 5,2-3 and 5.2-4 indicate that the organ- pipe frequencies for the open-closed boundaries are only half of those for the open-open boundaries. This difference is contrary to the situation for the mechani- cal natural frequeneies of a piping system where a fully restrained piping generally has higher natural frequencies. Therefore, care must be exercised when considering the boundary conditions. Furthermore, when a pressure wave traveling through a fluid encounters @ boundary, it may be reflected by the boundary, transmitted through the boundary, or partially reflected and partially transmitted. The portion of the sound power that ia reflected by the boundary can be estimated by the following formula for an interface: = [6p2C.V(0C,) ~ TPM o2CaVlei@)) + 1? (6.2.5) whore p is the density, C is the speed of sound in the fluid, and the subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the incident medium and boundary medium, respectively. If C2 > p.Cr, which is the case for fluid fow in pipes, equation 5.2-65 indicates that there is little loss of sound power when the ffuid flow encounters an elbow. Therefore, when using Equations 5.2-3 and -4, the length (L) should be the total length including elbows and bends. 5.2.3.8 Piping Resonance. Piping resonance is not a phenomenon associated with fluid flow inside pipes. However, when resonance occurs where the piping natural frequencies are within the frequency range of flow disturbance, vortex shedding, pump pulsation, or the acoustic natural frequencies of the system, significant vibration amplification could re- sult, Therefore, piping resonance is an indispensable Part of the flow-induced piping vibration problem and is treated as such in this report. At low resonance frequencies, generally less than 10 Hz, piping usually experiences large displace- ments, Pipe stresses are more significantly affected by these low frequency and large displacement ampli- tudes, particularly at the elbow or nozzle locations, than for higher frequencies. Atintermediate frequencies between 10 and 50 Hz, the velocity movements are usually large. The high velocities are often the cause of large impact loads at supports with gaps. Athigh frequencies above 50 Hz accelerations are the controlling factor. The displacements and veloci- ties normally are not large at this frequency range. Therefore, both pipe stresses and support impact loads are not anticipated to be significant. Pipe supports normally are designed to have high natural frequencies. In piping systems where seismic loads are part of the design requirements, the sup- ports are normally designed to be “rigid” (i.c., with fundamental natural frequeney of at least 20-83 Hz) so that amplification will not result at the earthquake input frequency range (e.,, less than 33 Hz). As a result, support motions could be significantly ampli- fied and eause high support stresses. In addition, with high frequencies the number of stress eycles is large for continuous vibration during normal operations. Fatigue damage at these supports is a common phenomenon for nuclear power plants that encoun- tered significant high frequency vibration problems. 5.2.3.4 Pipe Instability, Flutter, and Two-Phase Flows. Other potential sources and phenomena in- clude pipe instability and flutter at high flow veloci- ties." No practical experience of such instability and flutter, however, have been reported either in the literature or from the industry survey for nuclear plant piping designs. Still other potential sources and phenomena in- clude two-phase flows where the fluid passing through the pipe is in the two-phase flow regime. The time varying density of the flow may cause paramet- rie resonance, (which oceurs over specific ranges of oscillating frequency of the flow and natural fre- quency of the pipe) and combination resonance (which is a function of flow velocity, flow excitation param- eter, and pipe support conditions). The two-phase flow is more random than the pulsating flow dis- cussed earlier in Section 5.1 for mechanical-based sources and the fluid damping is also greater. 6.0 Design Considerations Presented in this section aro the key factors and parameters to consider in piping s avoid the potential for causing fox tion problems. 6. Valve Design and Placement Valves, particularly the safety valves, are sources for much of the flow-induced piping vibration prob- lems reported in the nuclear industry. The improper selection of the valve design and poor placement of the valves are two of the most important factors. In what follows, some usefel guidelines and require- Design Guide 9ments are presented for safety valve design and placement. 6.1.1 Safety Valve Design. Many failures in high energy lines occur because of unstable coupling of vortex shedding with the side branch acoustic fre- quency at the mouth of the safety relief valves (Fig, 6.1-1), Reference 16 reported that the lowest Strou- hal number for which no coupling between the vortex shedding frequeney and the side branch acoustic fre- quency should occur is approximately 0.6 (Fig. Based on this Strouhal number, the maximum allowable valve mouth diameter (d, as shown in Fig. 6.1-3) to the valve stub length (L, as shown in Fig, 6.3) is 2.4, Reference 16 recommends the following guidelines as the means to avoid flow-indueed vibra- tion problems due to valve nozzle design: © Provide proper d/l sizing © Maich the required entrance diameter to the valve diameter d SAFETY REEF VALVE STANDING WAVE vortices Fig. 6.1-1—Vortex exclaton of acoustic resonance in safety valet valves. Fig. 6.1-2Safoty relist valve SM clagram for dasign 1° Fig 6.1-3—Two SAV designs te decouple vortex exctation. © © Bliminate sharp edges by providing a 45° ramp or by generous rounding of the entrance In addition to the above, the use of a conical shape may also provide somewhat greater resistance to excitation by vortex shedding than a cylindrical shape.™ Figure 6.1-3 provides two designs aimed at decoupling the vortex-induced excitation at the safety relief valve (SRV). 6.1.2 Placement of Safety Valves. Appendix IL of the ANS/ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code™ pro- vides nonmandatory rules for the design of safety valve installations. By definition of the B31.1 Code, safety valves include the safety valve, which is used to relieve gas or vapor pressure; the relief valve, which is primarily used for liquid service; and the safety relief valve, which can be used for either gas, vapor, or liquid. Section 6.2.1 of Appendix II of the ANSVASME B31.1 Code states: Safety valve installations should be located at least eight pipe diameters (based on inside diameter) down- stream from any bend in a high velocity steam line to help prevent sonic vibrations, This distance should be inereased if the direction ofthe change of the steam flow is from vertieal upward to horizontal in such a manner as to increase density of the flow in the area directly beneath the station nozzles. Similarly, safety valve installation should not be located closer than eight pipe diameters (based on inside diameter) either upstream or dawastream from fittings ‘This recommendation is based on the fact that fluid flow through a bend has different velocities on the outside and inside of the bend causing the flow to be turbulent immediately after the bend. This turbu- lence becomes the source that tends to create side branch acoustic resonance. This turbulence would require a distance to “work off” or decay. Figure 6.1-41 presents a plot of steam velocity versus valve location vibration experience that demonstrated the fact that the level of piping vibration is dependent on ‘the safety valve location. ‘As shown from this plot, strong vibrations exist for safety valves located at less than 5 pipe inside 10 WRC Bulletin 417diameters downstream of a pipe elbow or other flow disturbances for an average steam velocity as low as 150 fi/sec. Mild vibration was indicated for safety valves as far as 11 pipe inside diameters downstream of an elbow or other flow disturbances, Based on Figure 6.1-4, it appears that the ANSI/ ASME B31.1 guideline of placing the safety valves at a distance of 8 pipe inside diameters downstream of the elbow is generally sound. However, some vibra- tion may remain for high velocity piping. It is recommended that the 8 pipe inside diameters speci- fied by the B31.1 Code be only used as the minimum requirement. When practical, 10 pipe inside diam- ters should be used. 6.13 Control Valves. Control valves often en- counter high speed shear flow separated from the valve seats. The impingement of the separated shear flow provides @ feedback mechanism that enhances the pressure fluctuations at selected frequencies. ‘The resulting dynamic loading and noise generation can be sufficiently high to cause structure damage or noise problems. Figure 6.1-5 shows the feedback E soo — 3 } TTT : : 3 v1 2 lao i vy VibRATton 3 USUALLY VRACION FRE 3 | =i 9 8 | aw : 3 2 | & | t00- a ‘a NO VIBRATION’ 3 4 MUD VinRaTion 2|° § vinvetion comves BY SOME CHANGE g 8 STRONG VIBRATION | z! 4 t+ +++ + ot 2s « 6 8 7 @ 8 OH ww Ww w SAFETY VALVE LOCATION (PIPE ID'S DOWNSTREAM OF END OF PIPE ELBOW OR OTHER FLOW DISTURBANCE) Fig 61-4-Plot of stsam velociyivalo location vibration experience.'* ie ee ita mw) ~ c — _ re eA, Penns ey ee ome \ a VN min \ ! \ “t= | \ 7 \ caer | top eS Fig. 6.1-5Feecback mechanism of impinging shear flows Design Guidemechanism of impinging shear flows reported in Reference 20. ‘Two types of control valves have been reported to have encountered these flow impingement problems, The first is a bypass control valve and the second is a turbine control valve. Figure 6.1-6 shows schematics of a high pressure bypass control valve, whereas Figure 6.1-7 shows schematics of a turbine control valve, ‘The excitation mechanism for the bypass control valve is found to be similar to that associated with self-excited oscillations of cavity flows.” For this excitation mechanism, the flow impingement can be he Fig. 61-8—Schomatios of bypass control valve 1, stem: 2, cage; 3, Valve body (chest): 4, stoam ilo 5, valve outa 6, water injection, [ | Fig. 6.1-7—Schematies of turbine control valve 1, stem; 2, chest (orring chamber} 3, piston rings; 4, shroud: 5, nit pie: 6, exit pipe, climinated or substantially reduced by the addition of spoilers at the separation location. The excitation mechanism for the turbine control valve is found to be coupling of the pressure fluctua- tion frequencies with an acoustical resonance mode within the valve chest. For this flow impingement, a successful remedy is to incorporate guide vanes attached to the bottom of the valve shroud, as shown in Figure 6.1-8. The guide vanes preclude communi- cation within this ring cavity in the tangential direction. 6.1.4 Hydraulic Valves. A typical class of fiow- induced vibration problems is associated with the rapid closure of swing chock valves, gate valves, and other flow control devices. Figure 6.1-9 shows a typi- cal swing check valve investigated in Reference 21. Reference 21 identified through experiments that the phenomenon is caused by the high rate of change of discharge at small angles of valve opening and the hydrodynamic loading resulted from fluid inertia. This phenomenon is characterized by the steep angle of reverse charge at the small valve opening angle shown in Figure 6.1-10 in the original design of the valve investigated. Fig. 61-8—Turbine conto valve wth guide vanes.*" BACKFLOW during rapid closure S Fig.6.1-8—Cross section ofa swing check valve *! 2 WRC Bulletin 417mob g S Final Modification o REVERSE DISCHARGE 1(wsee x 10°) a a ® 2.83) @ © pot pa os 8 @ 6 2 2 ANGLE OF OPENING © (deg) Fig. 6.1-10—Static reverse discharge cheracterstice?" Figure 6.1-10 shows that the discharge of the original valve design is fairly regular and reasonably constant from approximately 24° down to 4°. Below 4°, there is a large reduction in discharge, which leads to a rapid increase in head loss across the valve. In addition, there will be a significant inertial pressure difference due to the rate of change of dis- charge as the valve moves through this region. These effects combined to accelerate the valve closure. The high rate of change of discharge over the last fow degrees of closing produces dynamic pressures result- ing in unstable movement of the valve gate. For gate valves and seals, vibrations of this nature can be reduced by reducing the stiffness of the gate and the element stiffness of the seal so that dynamic rebound of the gate or seal does not oecur.2" For check valves, Reference 21 reported that geo- metrical modifications by filling the apron (point A of Fig. 6.1-10) and an appropriate cutaway at the valve disk (point C in Fig. 6.1-10) are effective improve- ments. 6.2 Pump Design Pump-induced pressure pulsation occurs at dis- tinct frequencies. The frequencies (in Hz) controlled by the running speed of the pump can be expressed as follows: © = NX/60 62-1) where N is the frequency number and X the running speed of the pump expressed in revolutions per minute (rpm). Inaddition to the pulsation frequencies, still higher frequencies could be induced by pumps due to mul- tiple stages, blades, and vanes. These higher frequen- cies can be expressed in the following form: w= NXY/60 (6.2-2) where Y is the number of plungers, blades, or vanes. Although the frequencies can be determined rela- tively easily, its vibration magnitude is generally difficult to ascertain, Furthermore, the effect of the pump-induced fluid pulsation can reach system wide. Therefore, if the pump-induced pulsation frequency is close to any part of the structural/piping natural frequeney or the acoustic frequency of the piping, serious vibration problems could develop. 6.2.1 Boron-Charging System. To reduce the effect of piping vibration as a result of the flow variations from reciprocating pumps, Reference 23 recommended that the amplitude of the driving frequency be reduced by pulsation control. For a boron-charging system, this can he accomplished by the use of discharge dampeners. ‘There are two basic types of discharge dampeners available: energy absorbing, which uses a gas enve- lope to absorb pressure peaks, and reaction type, which operate on the principle of a volume-resis- tance acoustic filter. Figure 6.2-1 shows four typical Gee ttes Sirccor | _ owmacusi povexancet suanoen.ess rexcrox Fig. 82-1—Four typical dampener types (one reaction type and three hydronneumatic discharge types) * Design Guide 1Bdempener designs. Table 6.2-1 compares these four different discharge dampeners and their relative performance under various conditions. In addition to the use of discharge dampeners to dampen the discharge pulsation, suction stabilizers can also be used to provide a ready supply of liquid close to the pump. Figure 6.2-2 provides a schematic view of a commonly used stabilizer. Table 6.2-1—Dampeners and Relative Performance”? Flow igh Appendage Boundaries Reaction Pulse attennation Exoe Noise attensation Gone Back pressure on pomp Slight None None High Blectivencss at Vorious pump Bxeellent Fair Excillent : Fair Good tm Excellent Excellent Excellent Poor Various pump gpm Excellent Bxeellent Exedllent Poor ‘Various pump precharge” Excellent Initialcost Tigh Medium High High Repaircost_ ‘Moderate “Moderate None -Nane Nisintonance cast Low Low Medium None Slurrycapabiity Poor Bxosllent Good Poor “Excellent above procharge pressure, ‘Gasand labor dare. Ges bleedott ent Gas-tilled bladder Fig, .2:2~Schomatie vow ofa suction stables The following design rules are recommended by Reference 23 for the design of the boron-charging systems: © The system supply tank should be placed at the greatest practical elevation to provide maxi- mum net positive suction head © An adequately sized suction line at least one pipe size larger than the pump inlet connection should be provided to minimize losses. © ‘The suction stabilizer should be installed as close to the pump inlet as possible to eliminate the effects of long suction lines. This location also reduces the amplitude in the pressure waveform and helps to prevent slugs of gas from entering the pump. © Finally, a well-designed discharge dampener will minimize piping vibration, protect the sys- tem from surges, and prolong pump life. 6.3 In-Line Devices 6.3.1 Expansion Joints (Bellows). Expansion joints are commonly used in piping systems requir- ing flexibility. Expansion joints can have either internal sleeves or no internal sleeves. Figure 6.3-1 shows a typical expansion joint without an internal sleeve. Expansion joints with internal sleeves are nor- mally used when it is necessary to have a smooth flow. For instance, it is general practice to specify expansion joints with internal sleeves when the fluid velocity exceeds approximately 20 feet per second per inch of diameter in lines up to 6 inches. For large steam lines (larger than 6 inches) where steam velocity exceeds 100 feet per second, internal sleeves should be specified when expansion joints are used. For bellows without internal sleeves, flow-indueed vibration problems have been reported even at low velocities not specifying the use of internal sleeves. Reference 24 reported experiments aimed at study- ing the fiow-induced vibrations of a 20-mm diameter 130 Fig, 83-1—Alypical cross-sectional view of bellows convotutions * 4 WRC Bulletin 417Inconel 600 bellows unit and means of eliminating the vibrations. Figure 63-2 shows the amplitude response of the bellows as a function of flow velocity for service upstream flow condition. Figure 6.32 shows that large amplitude flow. induced vibrations were present for flow velocities exceeding 4.5 mm/sec under service upstream flow condition. Figure 6.3-2 also shows that the frequen- cies associated with these vibration amplitudes are at more than 700 Hz. Reference 24 recommended adding damping to the corrugated portion as a means of reducing the flow- induced vibration. Figure 6.3-3 shows the very fine stainless steel wire gauze used as the damping device. Tn addition to the use of a wire gauze, Reference 25 recommended the use of a wooden damping block as, the damping device for a long corrugated pipe (Fig. 63-4), 6.3.2 Plow Constricting!Conditioning Devices. In lieu of locating the safety valves at a distance of 8-10 pipe inside diameters downstream from the elbow, which may not be practical from the piping 3a ma z Ee 2 a* sme 8 5 a z “nae rr a VeLoGiTY (ms) Fig. 63-2—Ampliude response as a function of flow velocity for service upstream flow condition. = Fig. 63-3—Cross section of bellows showing most affective location of damping gauze." Design Guide 16 TT Section A-A Fig. 83-4—Geometry ofthe damping block. 1 inner pip: 2, pps wi insulating layers; 3, wooden bloc 4, camp. system design standpoint, installing a flow modifica- tion device such as strengthening vanes or spoilers™ in the steam line may be an alternative. One such flow constricting device that. have been used by the power industry with some succoss in reducing piping vibration problems is the Cheng rotation vane (RV)? ‘The vane is actually stationary. Although the vane isbeing depicted as helpful in eliminating the pump's high vibration at midshatt, it is apparently effective in providing a uniform velocity profile exiting from an elbow when placed immediately ahead of the last elbow. Therefore, in theory it could also be used to alleviate vortex shedding-induced vibration at the safety valve. However, there are several important constraints for using a flow constricting or conditioning device. One is that such devices are subjected to severe thermal and pressure loadings, in addition to poten- tial residual system vibrations. The fatigue life of such devices needs to be substantiated before instal- Iation. Should any part of the device become dis lodged, serious damage to downstream components may result, Another drawback is that these flow modifiers will increase the pressure drop through the remaining part of the system unless the flow is, reconstituted as in the case of the CRV.CRV™ Blade Leading Bdge Contoured CRV™ Blade Aerodynamic Shape ORV™ Blade Tralling Edge Pipe Wall Fig, 8. 8-5—The schematics of the CAV vanes?” Fig. 6.3-6—The flow velocty profile a the elbow witout (left figure) and withthe CRY vanes.27 16 WRC Bulletin 4176A Piping Layout and Configuration 6.4.1 Placement of Pipe Elbows. Section 6.1.2, Placement of Safety Valves, identified that to mini- mize the potential for vortox shedding at the side branch of @ safety valve, the valve should be placed at least 8-10 pipe inside diameters away from an upstream elbow. In addition to causing vortex shed- ding at the safety valves, elbows placed close to pumps can also cause cavitation at the pump, result- ing in severe vibration problems. Elbows placed too close to pumps can cause cavita- tion in two ways. First, as liquid passes through an elbow in front of a pump, it experiences a drop in pressure on the inside of the elbow. When the pressure drops below vapor pressure, vapor bubbles are formed. The bubbles are earried into the impeller and then collapse on the high pressure side. The collapse of the vapor bubbles causes serious vibra- tion problems, which could then induce high cycle fatigue damage. Second, any flow velocity nonuniformity causes local fluid acceleration and uneven pressure distribu- tion at the impeller vanes, which generates cavita- tion bubbles and imbalanced loads. The effect, in addition to vibration problems, is overall degrada- tion of the pump performance and the reduced pump seal, bearing, and impeller life. To avoid and reduce the potential of cavitation at the pumps, the requirements of placing the elbow at. a sufficient distance away from the valves are also applicable to the pumps. That is, when practical the elbow should be placed at approximately 10 pipe inside diameters upstream of the pumps. 642 Piping Configurations. To reduce the po- tential of generating vortex and flow disturbances caused by misplaced cavities,** such as valves, pumps, and branch connections, piping systems should mini- mize the number of bends and elbows. In addition, the length of a pipe segment from one opening to another, such as between two vessels (valves, pumps, turbine, and header), should be kept short. A long pipe segment (in the range of approximately 200 fect) has been found to be the source of many flow-induced vibration problems. This excitation is ue to the more pronounced pipe travel at low piping natural frequencies. Furthermore, low piping natu- ral frequencies are more capable of resonating with the organ-pipe frequencies. Finally, many piping designs share a common support platform or support frame. Hence, vibration at one piping system will permeate through other piping systems because of the support interaction effect. Isolated design should be considered if the piping has the potential of developing flow-induced vibration problems. 8.5 Support Designs Design of piping supports for nuclear power plants generally follow rigorous procedures. Deadweight Design Guide supports are normally provided according to the ANSI/ASME B31.1 spacing requirements. Seismic restraints are used for seismic loads and for other plant condition loads. In addition, snubbers and limit stops have been used as seismic restraints, which require special consideration for thermal ex- pansion. These supports are not usually designed for small magnitude but high eyele flow-induced vibra- tion loads. ‘There are two areas that require special treatment, for supports that need to be designed for flow- induced vibration loads. The first is offectiveness along the directions of restraint and the second is the long-term fatigue consideration, In the first area, the support should have essen- tially no gaps and no freedom of movements along, the directions of intended restrain. This requirement. is important because the magnitude of flow-indueed vibration is normally very small (less than a few mils). Ineffeetiveness of the support to provide re- straint along the intended direction because of gaps and freedom of movements could result in the piping having very low fundamental natural frequencies. Low piping natural frequencies in resonance with flow disturbances and/or organ-pipe frequencies have been the cause of many flow-induced piping vibra- tion problems ‘Also, because the piping inertial forces for flow- induced vibrations are low, which could be overcome by support friction, the restraining effects of the friction force should be addressed in designing and assessing the piping system for flow-vibration prob- ems. In addition, the possibility of fretting wear damage between piping and piping supports should be considered. Piping support failure due to cracking of the welds or support members is a major concern for piping systems experiencing flow-induced vibration prob- lems. Therefore, in designing: piping supports the potential for long-term fatigue should be evaluated. ‘The total number of eycles to be assessed depends on the frequencies of vibration. In general, for fre- quencies of 20 Hz or below, the 1E11 number of cycles can be used for an operating plant life of 40, years. The number of eycles for higher frequencies will be higher. However, the fatigue curves of ferrous materials are generally insensitive to the change of the number of the stress cycles at this level of high vibration cycles. Therefore, the use of IE11 as the number of eycles for fatigue design will suffice. 7.0 Design Guidelines ‘This chapter presents design guidelines to reduce the potential for vibration caused by fluid flow inside pipes. Two approaches are included. The first ap- proach is to eliminate the potential sourees for causing the vibration and the second is to mitigate the effets of vibration.7.1 Blimina on of the Vibration Sources The following are steps to be taken in the design phase. Piping and Support Design: 1, Avoid resonance of the significant frequency range of the potential flow turbulence (gener- ally below 10 Hz and caused by changes in piping flow area, flow direction, or sudden loss of head) with the piping natural frequencies and organ-pipe frequencies.“® 2. Avoid resonance of the pressure fluctuation frequency from the run line passing the branch line with the acoustic frequency of the branch line." 8. Avoid resonance of the frequencies of the Helm- holtz resonator (e.g., balance header) with the controlling piping natural frequencies close to the opening: 4, Install caseades of orifices at appropriate dis- tances instead of using a single orifice when pressure reduction is rapid? ' 5. Avoid resonance of the small tap lines such as vents and drains with piping containing the valves.® 6. Minimize the numbers of bends and elbows in the piping design.® 7. Avoid acoustic coupling of side branches by making the branches with different lengths from one another.** 8. Use a drain collar to restrict the amount of flashing in the drain line.” pumps at a distance from downstream of an elbow." 8. Keep the distance from one opening to the next (eg,, valves, pumps, turbine, and header) short. A distance of 200' or longer has the tendency of inducing large resonant vibration for main steam lines. 7.2 Vibration Mitigation It is not always possible to prevent flow-induced piping vibrations, The following are the steps to be taken to mitigate vibrations, Piping and Support Design: 1. Modify piping layout to provide required dis- tanco between branches, relief devices, or alter fittings (such as valves, orifices, and elbows.11 2, Add planum to change the piping organ-pipe frequencies. 3, Install a flow modification device such as strengthening vanes or spoilers to constrict flows. 4, Stiffen piping by adding supports.” 5, Modify piping natural frequencies by chang- ing the support arrangements. 6. Use sway braces or install vibration or damp- ening devices on the piping system." 7. Replace socket-welded joints by butt-welded joints to increase fatigue limits.** 8. Replace thin-walled pipes (schedule 10) with standard pipe sizes. 9. Shim small support gaps to provide active pipe support for low magnitude vibrations. 10. Provide constant vibration monitoring to pre- Design Selection and Placement of In-line Compo- vent degradation of the system integrity nents: ‘Modification of the In-line Component Design: 1. Avoid resonance between the frequencies of the rotating machinery and the controlling natural frequencies of the piping system. 2. Use vibration isolation devices on vibrating machineries.*! 8. Add localized damping mechanisms (e.g., pulsat- ing damping devices) close to positive displace- ment pumps. 4, Select safety valves with care. This inchudes:'* © Proper valve diameter (d) to the valve stube length () ratio (less than 2.4) © Match the required pipe entrance diameter tothe valve diameter © Eliminate sharp edges by providing a 45° ramp, generous rounding of the entrance, or use a conical shape 5. Locate safety valves at least 8 pipe inside diameters downstream from any bend in a high velocity steam line to help prevent sonic vibra- tions. 6. Use expansion joints with internal sleeves when flow velocity is large than 4.5 mmy/sec.* 1. Replace improperly sized valves, valve trims, and orifices." 2. Avoid flow impingement caused by control valves by adding spoilers or guide vanes at the bottom of the valve to eliminate or reduce cavitation.2” 3, Select gate valves with proper gate stiffness and the stiffaess of the seal so that dynamic rebound of the gate does not oceur.2122 4. Modify check valves by filling the apron and appropriately cutting away the valve disk to avoid vibration associated with the rapid clo- sure of the swing check valves.*" 5, Install mixing valves at water-steam interface.*! 6. Modify rotating equipment frequencies, install vibration isolation devices, or add damping.“ 7. Use wire gaze" or other damping devices (e.g., damping blocks*®) to damp out vibration at the expansion joints. 8.0 Vibration Monitoring Steady-state vibration, even at a low vibration Avoid cavitation at the pumps by placing the magnitude, could produce a large number of oscillat- 18 WRC Bulletin 417ing vibration cycles. The potential for fatigue failure is a concern whether either structural integrity and/or functionality of the system is to be main- tained, Discussed in this section are the recommen- dations for vibration monitoring, which include moni- toring instruments and allowable limits, 8.1 Monitoring Instruments ‘Soveral types of instruments can be used to either continuously or periodically monitor the vibration, ‘The following are some of the basic instrument types which can be used for vibration monitoring: @ Linear Voltage Deflection Transducer (LVDT): LYDTs provide relative displacements at the measured locations, They require only a simple DC power source, provide a low output imped- ance, and possess a high sensitivity. Therefore, LYDTs can be used for early problem diagnosis or integrity monitoring ata later stage. A special conditioning amplifier may have to be designed for interfacing with the computer if a computer is used to process and monitor the vibration ‘measurements, @ Velocity Transducer: The velocity transducers generally possess low impedance and provide high sensitivity. Therefore, they are relatively easy to use, can be used with long lines, do not usually require amplifiers, and are very rugged. ‘The main disadvantage of velocity transducers lie in the lower frequency limit at approximately 4.5 Hz. Also, different types of velocity transdue- ers may need to be used for vertical and horizon- tal orientations, © Accelerometer: In contrast with LVDT, the accel- erometer has a relatively stiff spring so that its natural frequency is comparatively high. Physi- cally, the accelerometer behaves as a highly damped lumped mass spring system. There are accelerometers that can be used to record very low frequencies. For instance, the servo acceler- ometer (or force-balance accelerometer) can have a frequency range between 0 and 50 Hz. ‘The accuracy of most if not all accelerometers is affected by high temperature of the line. There- fore, itis difficult if not impossible to obtain low frequency (e.g., less than 5 Hz to approximately 1 Hz) and high temperature (e.¢,, elose to 500°F) accelerometers for long-term operation. In lieu of continuous measurements, it may be neces- sary to conduct periodie manual measurements. However, the exactness of the measurement locations becomes an important factor in deter- mining the comparative usefulness of the mea- sured data, © Strain Gauge: The strain gauge provides a direct measure of local strain, which can be related direetly to a failure criterion based on the piping material. For the purpose of long- term vibration monitoring, weldable strain gauge, which provides ease of installation (spot ‘welded to the piping), may be desirable, How- ever, the strain gauge requires highly stable power supplies and amplifiers. Also, for long- term vibration monitoring the fatigue of the gauge itself and its stability at high tempera- ture are major concerns 8.2 Piping Vibration Limits The allowable vibration limits of a piping aystem generally relate to the necessity of maintaining either functionality or the structural integrity of the system. Maintaining functionality of the system means that the safe operation of the system cannot be impaired. For a piping system, maintaining functionality typically requires that the flow is not adversely constricted (e.g., reduced by more than 5% of the rated flow). This requirement can be met by satisfy- ing the code allowable stress limits for the design and operating conditions where the normal operat- ing vibration is part of the operation loads. This condition can be easily satisfied in view of the normally low vibration magnitudes. Amore serious concern is the potential for fatigue damage to either the supporting structure, or worse, the pressure boundary integrity. Past tests conducted by the industry and the data gathered have shown that piping systems are usu- ally rugged. Therefore, failure of a few of the piping supports does not normally result in failure of the piping system, However, the same conclusion cannot, be made with respect to its impact on the functional- ity of the system let alone the potential system or plant down time required to correct and repair the damaged supporting system. Hence, it is necessary that the potential for fatigue damage be either reduced or eliminated. The only vibration limits available in the industry to monitor the steady-state vibration are contained in Reference 8, In this standard the maximum calculated alternating stress intensity (S,,) is lim- ited as follows: Sax = (C:KY/ZM < 0.8 Su 1) where M is the maximum zero to peak dynamic ‘moment loading due to vibration only or in combina- tion with other loads as required by the system design specification, 8. is the endurance limit (S,) from Figures I-9.1 or 1-9.2 of Section ITT of the ASME Code, and Z is the section modulus of the pipe. Other constants in Equation 8.1 are defined for ASME Class 1 and Class 1 and 2, respectively, as the following: Class 1 Piping: Cy = secondary stress index as defined in the ASME Code = local stress index as defined in the ASME Code Design Guide 9Class 2 and 3: CuK = Bi 1 = stress intensification factor, as defined in ‘Subsections NC and ND of the ASME Code or ANSI B31. For normal operating vibration at a controlling frequency of approximately 1 Hz, the total potential number of maximum stress cycles is approximately 4189 for a 30-year operating life. The total potential number of maximum stress cycles could reach 2810 if the controlling frequency is at 20 Hz At a lower controlling natural fre- quency, the total number of stress eycies willl be lower, For instance, Reference 37 discussed the effects of fatigue due to small vibration at one times E9 eycles for a drain line. ‘At 10" cycles, the single amplitude peak stress limit for most stainless steel is approximately 13,600 psi. The limit for carbon steel is approximately 7690 psi, which is based on the allowable fatigue stress at ‘1E6 cycles and reduced to an equivalent of a higher number of stress cycles similar to the stainless steel. It should be noted that the limits specified in OM3-Rev. 1 are for piping only. There are no limits specified for the supporting steel structures. 82.1 Sample and Recommended Piping Vi- bration Limits, Reference 4 presented the work conducted by Wachel® which introduced a simple method of estimating vibration limits based on a simple beam analogy. The beam configurations used are shown in Figure 8.2-1. The sample vibration limits and perception levels recommended by Wachel® are shown in Figure 8.2-2. The perception levels depicted in Figure 8.22 are from Richart.” Figure 82-8 presents the comparison of several measured vibration levels and calculated vibration limits based on the simple beam analogy. ‘There are several points to be noted in using Figures 8.2-1 to 8.2-3. © The vibration limits are based on experience gained from primarily petrochemical industries where piping is generally very flexibly sup- ported. These limits have been used for nuclear power plants (Figs. 8.2-3 and 8.2-4), The mea- sured data shown in Figures 8.2-3 and 82-4 indicate that modifications to the vibration lim- its are warranted if the same limits are to be used for nuclear power plant piping systems, which tend to be more rigid than the petrochemi- cal piping. © The simple beam analogy is useful if there is only one predominant mode in the system, ‘Where multiple modes are present, the peak-to- peak vibration amplitude at a given measure- ment location could be significantly affected by the combination of various modes. © The perception levels indicated in Figure 8.2-1 do not have upper bounds at lower frequencies, Simple Seam Analosy: ‘Sample Applications Vibration in Straight Pipe Span ht ssit me ane. cee I Vibration out of Plane of Elbow Vibration in Plane of Elbow Fig, 22-1—A simple beam analogy ‘This could be due to a limited database at the low frequency range. On the other hand, the sample vibration limits are bounded. However, the bounding limits are higher (by a factor of 4) than the upper bound pereeption values, particularly at the high frequency end. 20 WRC Bulletin 417Peak to peak vibration amplitude (mils) (Caution: indicated vibration limits are for average piping systems constructed in ‘agzordanes with goad engineering practices. Make ‘adalional allowances for crtcal applications, unrein- forced branch connections, ‘to. Limits azo based on ‘oxperiencs. The values may De unconservative or overiy conservative for some config- urations, 234 A Desiga piping vibeation level 5 Marginal piping vibeation level © Correction piping vibcation level © Danger piping vibration level 6 810 20 3040 80100 200 300 Vibration frequency (hertz) Fig. 82-2—Sample vibration limits and peroeption levels The first point implies that more research is probably warranted to determine the credible vibra- tion limits for nuclear power plant piping systems, ‘The second point illustrates the complexity of the problem if the vibration source has a broad fre- quency band and if the systm has multiple domi- nant natural frequencies in this frequency band. Finally, the last point presented above is particu- larly important. For inatanee, by using the value of 8 mils at 300 Hz as the limiting piping vibration level, one arrives at an acceleration of: a= (2m # 300) + 0.008/(32.2 + 12) = 73.56 This is an unrealistic value, one which could cause many high frequency fatigue and support impact failures. As an illustration on the potentially unconserva- tive use of Figure 8.2-1 as the vibration limits, the measured vibration levels reported by a 600 MW nuclear power plant are plotted against the vibra- tion limits of Figure 8 2-1 and shown in Figure 8.2-4. As shown in Figure 8.2-4, the recorded vibration levels are substantially lower than the vibration limits recommended by Wachel.2* However, the vibra- Design Guide tion levels measured are sufficiently high so that many support failures have been recorded over the years. Therefore, a more conservative set of vibra- tion limits appear to be required. Because of this, a piping analysis was performed to investigate the acceptable vibration limits using the recorded fou- rier spectra as input. The OM-3 allowable stress was ‘used to determine the limiting values of the displace- ments, velocities, and accelerations. The resulting values are identified in Figure 8.2-4 as the revised sample allowable limits. Note the sample allowable limits is used to ensure piping deign integrity but not the integrity of the piping supports; diligence should be exercised to monitor the piping vibration levels on aregular basis. 83 Piping Support Vibration Limits The limits recommended by OM-3, Rev. 1, are for piping. They are determined based on fatigue allow- able stresses for piping at a very high number of vibration cycles (e.g., IE10 to 1E11 cycles). No piping failure (rupture) due to high eycle fatigue has been reported in the literature. In fact, Reference 30 reported a high magnitude vibration test program which demonstrated that piping is intrinsically for- 21aeel Berio peak Hal . bration . smite (rie) on TOSS ae ao Ba 1 Bo aoe ideation fequency (hers) Neasured Acceptable Vibrtion Levels: Bolling Water Resctor Plant woh 2a, Pecktopeck | 220] : oration festa (rls) og oa Sone aa a es Saas ae TOE ae Vibration frequency (hertz) Calculated Acceplable Vibration Limits (Simple Beam Method) Corresponding to Measured Vibrations Boling Water Resctor Plant 80; 09 soe Peak to pesk 20] Peak to peck oe oration | 200 . ovation fempliade (rls) Te a4 € 10 a0 30 9 080100 200 300 Vibration equency (herte) Measured Acceptable Vibration Levels: Pressurtzes Mater Resetor Pant Fig, 82-3--Comparison of several measured vibration lvels giving, even for very high cyclical loads. Therefore, it is anticipated that failure of piping because of rup- ture is very unlikely, particularly if the vibration limits recommended in Seetion 8.2 are met. fempittage (ms) ibcetion trequeney (hers) Calculated Acceptable Vibration Limits (Simple Beam Method) Corresponding to Measured Vibrations Pressurized Water Reactor Plant However, the same cannot be said for piping supports. As presented in Chapter 3.0, Industry Survey, failure duo to flow-indueed vibration prob- lems generally occurs at piping supports. ‘This is 22 WRC Bulletin 417Peak to peak vibration amplitude (mils) Design piping vibration level Marginal piping vibration level Correction piping vibration level Danger piping vibration level vawp 6 810 20 3040 6060100 200 300 Vibration frequeney (hertz) Fig. €2-4-Aestional measured vibration lavels an! he sample veration limits for png from 600 MW nuclear power plant * particularly the case for rigid supports, such as short struts and snubbers, where the piping vibration is being arrested. Rigid supports are strongly influenced by high frequeney components of the piping motions. The fatigue failure of piping supports could oceur at relatively low displacements, considerably lower than the displacements resulting from the design loads imposed by various codes. Because no specific code rules are available to guide piping support design to prevent failure of the piping supports due to flow- induced vibrations, there is the need to develop rational vibration limits. Below, a set of piping support allowable limits is recommended for piping supports subjected to flow- induced vibration problems. 83.1 Sample and Recommended Piping Sup- port Vibration Limits 8.3.1.1 Vibration Limits for Snubbers. Snub- bers are generally used for the purpose of providing restraint during seismic loads. Snubbers may not provide the necessary restraining effect if it is not properly engaged. A snubber may have over 32 mils of deadband space. When design analysis is per- formed to assess the piping integrity under flow- induced vibration, this deadband space needs to be included in modeling consideration. Typically, the displacement at the snubber location may not exceed the deadband space. In such a case the snubber may not be consideréd as a restraint. A.commonly used mechanical snubber is designed to limit vibration to 0.02 g and a commonly used hydraulic snubber is designed to limit vibration to 0.2 inchysec.*.*? Figure 8.3-1 presents the limits specified by the snubber manufacturers in a graphic form. As shown in Figure 8.3-1, the limits are presented in the relationship of vibration magnitudes (displacement, velocity, and acceleration) versus frequency. Based on Figure 8.3-1 at a frequency of 1 Hz both types of snubbers would allow at least 60 mils of peak-to- peak vibrations. These allowable magnitudes are exclusive of the mechanical deadband space. In addition to the above, the snubbers may also have manufacturer requirements on the peak-o- peak displacement across the unit. For instance, Reference 16 required that the peak-to-peak displace- ment excluding end attachments not exceed 0.12 inches when the input frequency is in the 3-33 Hz range at level A and B loads. The loads that corre- Design Guide PyDisplacement, inches peak-to-peak Hydrautic snubber wet 0.2 Velocity, Inches per second peak yeod 'B ‘uonesojosoy 0.01 — 0.005 — 0.003 — 9.002 — 0.001 — 02 foal \ > 030s “O {e ot 1 — Mechanical 2, snubber fienit Frequency, Hz Fig. 8.8-1—Sample snubbor vibration limiting offecs.* spond to flow-induced piping vibration are substan- tially lower than those specified for the level A and B plant conditions. It may not be unreasonable to assume that the maximum peak-to-peak displace- ment could be doubled for the flow-indueed vibration loads and the snubber is still accoptable. By using the displacement limit discussed above and the volocity and acceleration limits depicted in Figure 83-1, bounding vibration limits shown in Figure 8.3-2 appear to be more reasonable. 8.3.1.2 Sample and Recommended Support Vi- bration Limits. No specific support vibration limits (other than for snubbers) have been found in the literature for flow-induced piping vibrations. How- ever, ASME Section TIT, Subsection NF“° Component Supports, presents the rules for construction of nuclear power plant component supports. Subsec- tion NF-3921.2, Design for High Cycle Fatigue Con- ditions, specifies that design for high eycle fatigue conditions shall be based on the requirements of NF-3330 by using the allowable stresses of NF-3322 as modified by NF-8332.4. Table NF-3332.2-1 defines the number of loading cycles of more than 2,000,000 as Loading Condition 4 Table 8.3-1 presents the allowable stress range for Loading Condition 4. The stress categories listed in 24 WRO Bulletin 417Displacement, inches peak-to-peak e BS PS io- fs osaa 7 KS 8 / Sy y 1-— > Se ‘Hydraulic 4 ¥ snubber ‘Ss ¥ Z fini, “ & 2 ot 5 § 02> 3 : 3 5 Ot 2 & 3 2 g 8 = oo1— Ne ‘% _ \_ 7 Mechanical 0.005 p ssnubber 2 init 0.003 — 2 0.002 — 0.001 — 02 loal \} N} os0s 7 %Q id \“o ot 1 40 Frequency, Hz Fig, 8.8:2Bounded vibration iis for snuboers, Table 8.3-1—Aliowable Stress Ranges? 7285 Fy esi) ‘Tio stress catogory relates the gonoral condition ofthe support ing members eg, plain material, builtup members, mechanically fastened connections, fillet welded connections, grove welds, plug or slot wale, ov attachments) and the situation of tho design. A Tull deseription of the categories is beyond the scope of this ocument, However, interested readers may refer to Figure NB-8882.441 for explanation and guidance ‘Flexural stress range of 12 Ksi permitted at tee of stiffener in wobe or lanes Design Guide ‘Table 8.3-1 are from Subsection NF-3832.4. In addi tion, Subsection NF-3332.5 provides the provisions for mechanical fasteners which specifies that the connections subject to more than 500,000 cycles of direct tension may be designed for the stress pro- duced by the sum of applied and prying loads if the prying load does not exceed 5% of the externally appliod load. If the prying load exceeds 5%, the allowable tensile stress shall be reduced by 50%. The stress category A through F shown in Table 8.3-1 are those listed in Table NF-3332.3-1 of the ASME Subsection NF, based on the configuration example depicted in Figure NF-3332: ‘The allowable stress limits discussed above ap- pear to be reasonable and are recommended for usein the design and vibration monitoring for piping subjected to flow-indueed vibrations, Finally, note that because the allowable piping support vibration level will be emall for flow-induced vibrations, neither buckling nor limit analysis will be appropriate. Furthermore, thermal expansion of the piping system could produce sufficient: normal force that generates enough friction to resist: the flow-induced vibration loads. The capacity of the supports should be assessed for the friction loads. 9.0 Recommended Future Research Programs Presented in this section are the recommended future research programs. These programs are ei- ther studies recommended by past researchers dis- cussed in the published papers or deomed to be worthwhile efforts based on the data and investiga- tion findings gathered in this report. The recommen- dations are grouped according to the subject matter. 94 Industry Survey © Expanded Vibration Data Gathering and Analy- sis ‘There have been numerous flow-induced vibra- tion problems reported in the literature, includ- ing the survey results presented herein. Judg- ing by the data assembled, flow-induced vibration problems are a common phenomenon and potentially more widespread than generally believed. More complete information gathered through proper reporting processes and under- standing of the problems reported will help to improve future plant designs. An expanded sur- vey to include information from nonnuclear power plants should be conducted. Further- more, the data should be cataloged in detail to identify the relevant system and component design features, vibration sources, and the reme- dial actions taken © Guidelines for Vibration Problem Reporting ‘Qo alleviate the concerns of structure integrity and functionality for power plants operating under long-term vibration conditions, a set of guidelines should be developed and recom- mended to the nuclear industry to more thor- oughly document the extent of vibration prob- Jems encountered, 9.2 Vibration Sources and Phenomena, © Dynamic Characteristics and Vibration Magni- tudes; Much of the flow-induced vibration sources have been studied and reported. However, the charac- teristies (e.g, frequency range of vibration) and the vibration magnitudes are generally not well defined. In lieu of complete elimination of the vibration problems, there is the need to provide adequate piping support design to mitigate the potential of support fatigue failure. For this purpose, the vibration magnitudes and quency contents of each vibration source sh be clearly defined. © System and Support Stress Calculation Met! ods The flow-induced vibration loads are not sup port induced (such as seismic loads). Nor are they point loads (typically those of the pipe break loads). The flow-induced vibration loads are normally systemwide loads and cover a broad frequeney range. Currently, there is no known method that can be used to effectively compute the stresses of piping and piping sup- ports for such loads. Therefore, a realistic ana- lytical approach needs to be identified. Note, however, that piping vibration analysis com- puter codes and techniques are beyond the scope of this report and were not specifically reviewed. 9.8 Systom Design Considerations © Placement of Piping Elbows ANSV/ASME B31.1 Code specifies that safety relief valves be located at least 8 pipe diameters away from an upstream elbow. Chapter 7 recom- mended that the SRV should be placed at a distance of 10 pipe diameters downstream to alleviate the vortex shedding at the side branch of the mouth of the SRV. For large diameter piping, both requirements are impractical. A more useful criterion should be developed to correlate the optimum SRV and pipe elbow distance with the operating characteristics of the valve and piping, Alternatively, guidelines could be established to allow the use of a flow constricting/eonditioning deviee. sparation of the Organ-Pipe frequencies and System Natural Frequencies ‘The need to separate the organ-pipe frequencies and the piping system natural frequencies is obvious. However, no empirical data are avail- able to guide the designer to more effectively separate the two sets of frequencies. Recommen- dations with respect to the most commonly used configurations and support arrangements should be developed to achieve the purpose of fre- quency separation, 9.4 Vibration Monitoring © Piping and Support Vibration Limits ‘The vibration limits recommended in Sections 9.2 and 9.3 are based on available data. They have not been time tested. These limits should be further investigated to correlate with the expanded industry survey recommended in Sec- tion 8.1 above, Periodic review and update of the criteria would further enhance the usefulness of the vibration limits. © Guidelines for Support. Gaps and Friction Forces, ‘The tolerance limits recommended in WRC Bul- 26 WRC Bulletin 417