The Danger of Piping Failure Due
Since the acoustic
to Acoustic-Induced Fatigue
in Infrequent Operations:
Two Case Studies
Husain Mohammed Al-Muslim
e-mail: Husain.muslim.2@aramco.com
Nadhir Ibrahim Al-Nasri
e-mail: Nadhir.nasri@aramco.com
Mohammad Y. Al-Hashem
e-mail: Mohammad.hashem@aramco.com
Saudi Aramco
Dhahran 31311, Saudi Arabia
Failure in piping due to acoustic-induced fatigue can be consid-
ered catastrophic as it could happen only after a few minutes of
operation. Acoustic-induced fatigue occurs mainly in gas piping
systems with high velocity where high energy is dissipated
through pressure reducing stations and pipe branch connections.
It usually results in pipe through wall longitudinal cracks, pipe
detachment from saddle supports, and complete shear off of
branch connections. There are existing design criteria to avoid
acoustic-induced fatigue based on comparison of generated power
level to an acceptable power level. This criterion is normally used
for the design of pressure relief and flare piping where high gas
velocity exceeding 50% of the speed of sound (i.e., 0.5 Mach) is
expected. However, acoustic-induced fatigue has been experi-
enced in systems due to intermittent operations. Two case studies
are presented in this paper. The first one is during a steam-out
operation to clean a newly constructed steam header. During the
cleaning operation, an orifice plate was used to control the flow in
the steam header. Several pipe vents and drains failed due to fa-
tigue in less than 1 h. The second case is for drainage of com-
pressed natural gas during process upset condition. Because of
the high level buildup in the liquefied gas separator vessel, the
drain valve was opened to release the pressurized liquefied gas to
the relief system to reduce the level buildup. Wall cracks and sev-
eral pipe support detachments were found in the system after the
upset condition. This paper presents the engineering analysis and
material failure analysis conducted to find the root causes of the
failures. Moreover, it highlights the recommendations and lessons
learned from these two failures. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4025081]
Keywords: acoustic-induced fatigue, piping vibration, high gas
velocity
1 Introduction
Piping systems of high gas velocity, exceeding 0.5 Mach, are
susceptible to acoustic-induced fatigue. The susceptible areas are
those coupled with high-pressure drop, and therefore high energy
dissipations. Examples include relief valves, orifice plates, and
pipe branches discharging into low-pressure headers (1.7  105 Pa
and below). The high energy generates acoustic waves in the pipe
in the radial direction at several frequencies. Those frequencies
can be determined based on computational fluid dynamic analysis.
Simplified formulas to calculate the acoustic frequencies of pres-
Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received April 21, 2012;
final manuscript received April 29, 2013; published online October 10, 2013. Assoc.
Editor: Allen C. Smith.
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology Copyright V
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
sure reducing stations are also available [1].
waves are radial in direction, they excite the pipe shell mode
rather than the beam mode (Fig. 1). The mechanical natural fre-
quencies of the shell mode can be calculated using finite element
analysis or using mathematical formulas for 2D systems [1]. If the
natural frequency of the pipe shell is close to the acoustic wave
frequency, high vibration, noise levels, and dynamic stresses are
generated. The stresses are even further amplified at circumferen-
tial discontinuities, such as welded connections or welded attach-
ments. Therefore, cracks may initiate at these locations leading to
leaks or failures. These can be developed within a few minutes to
several hours depending on the magnitude of the frequencies gen-
erated by acoustic vibration. The acoustic vibration frequencies
are 1000 Hz to 20,000 Hz.
The methodology developed by Carucci and Mueller [2], who
were pioneers in the field, is widely used assessment of the
acoustic-induced fatigue. The methodology calls for calculating
sound power levels at different nodes in the piping system down-
stream pressure reducing devices and pipe branch connections.
The calculated sound power level at each node is compared with a
design curve establishing acceptable sound power levels as a func-
tion of pipe diameter. The curve had been generated based on a
number of actual field cases both failing and nonfailing. Eisinger
has improved the design curve by re-regenerating the design curve
based on the diameter-to-thickness ratio [3]. Eisinger and Sullivan
further developed a relationship between the generated sound
power level and the energy drop parameter MDp [4]. Energy Insti-
tute [5] developed quantitative assessment, which has mathemati-
cal formulation to generate likelihood of failure at the main line
and each weld discontinuity. Depending on the calculated likeli-
hood of failure, different mitigations are suggested, such as
increasing the pipe wall thickness, installing low-noise trims for
control valves, or even changing the piping layout.
Despite the available assessment method, failures due to
acoustic-induced fatigue still occur. One reason is that the assess-
ment is usually conducted in flare systems in which pressure drop
and mass flow rates are high. Other systems, which do not have
this feature under normal operating conditions, are not analyzed
for this type of vibration. Yet, these types of failures occurred in
conditions that only take place once in the life cycle of the plant.
Two case studies are presented in this paper. The first case is a
failure in a piping system during steam-cleaning of newly con-
structed pipe. The other case is failure in piping due to drainage of
liquefied gas during a plant upset. This paper presents the engi-
neering analysis based on sound power level criterion as well as
material failure analysis conducted to find the root causes of the
failures. Moreover, it highlights the recommendations and lessons
learned from these two failures.
Fig. 1 Illustration of shell-mode vibration
C 2013 by ASME DECEMBER 2013, Vol. 135 / 064501-1
 Fig. 2 Schematic illustration of case 1: steam cleaning of a
newly constructed pipe

Fig. 4 Drain completely sheared off

Fig. 3 Vent completely sheared off

2 Description of the Problem

2.1 Case 1: Steam Cleaning of a Newly Constructed Pipe.
A new steam header of 0.467 m diameter has been connected to
an existing header of the same size due to plant expansion, Fig. 2.
As per the company’s standard, newly constructed pipes should
be cleaned before startup operation. In this case, steam from an
existing steam header was used for the cleaning operation. Fig. 5 Cracked weld of structural attachment
An orifice plate was installed downstream of the steam header’s
isolation valve on a temporary basis to control the flow during the
cleaning operation. The orifice plate was designed for a mass flow
rate of 47.2 kg/s with a pressure drop ratio of more than 4.
The cleaning operation started with no problems noticed by
plant personnel, other than high noise levels. After 4 h, it was
observed that two branch connections of 0.019 m diameter were
completely sheared off, Figs. 3 and 4. The steaming operation was
discontinued and investigation was initiated to identify the root
cause of the failures. Further inspection revealed several cracks on
welds of structural attachments, Fig. 5.

2.2 Case 2: Drainage of Liquefied Natural Gas. As part of

the Natural Gas Liquefaction plant operation, a separator vessel is
used to separate the two phase liquefied gas into liquid and gas
phases. The gas phase leaves from a top outlet and the liquid
phase leaves from a bottom outlet through a flow control valve.
The vessel is also connected to a drain line of 0.102 m diameter
attached to relief header of 0.298 m diameter, Fig. 6. During the
commissioning, high level buildup in the liquefied gas separator Fig. 6 Schematic illustration of case 2: draining liquefied natu-
vessel took place due to a process upset. The vessel operating ral gas to atmospheric relief line
point was set at a pressure of 5.52  106 Pa and temperature of
205 K. The liquid level in the separator vessel was increasing de-
spite the full opening of the discharge flow control valve. To avoid was shutdown immediately and investigation was initiated to
vessel overfill and consequent unit shutdown, the drain valve was identify the root cause of the failure. Investigation revealed that
opened to release the pressurized liquefied gas to the relief system. this incident resulted in multiple cracks at six locations along the
High noise levels were reported during the relief. After a few header line, Fig. 7. This includes cracks at the tie-in point, cracks
minutes, hydrocarbon fumes where observed coming out from a at the weld attachments of four pipe supports and cracks initiated
crack at the tie-in point of the drain line to the header. The unit at the weld toe of the pipe support located 9 m away from the

064501-2 / Vol. 135, DECEMBER 2013 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Fig. 10 Case 1: fracture surface of vent line. The beach marks
Fig. 7 Crack locations of the relief header line with multiple initiation sites and multiple ratchet marks are
clear indication of fatigue failure

Fig. 11 Case 1: fracture surface of drain line. The arrow points

to a beach mark, which indicates the fatigue failure.

branch connection. This crack was discovered during the hydrot-

est. Figures 8 and 9 show the cracks.

3 Failure Analysis
3.1 Case 1: Steam Cleaning of a Newly Constructed Pipe.
Fig. 8 Photograph showing cracking along the relief header Visual and microscopic examinations were performed to analyze
line the material failure mechanism. The fracture surfaces were flat
with beach marks, multiple initiation sites and multiple ratchet
marks indicating a fatigue failure, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11.
The observation indicates that the vent and drain valves were sub-
jected to vibration resulting in fatigue failure. This was evident
from the surfaces of the sheared drain, sheared bracings, separated
vent, and cracked bracing.

3.2 Case 2: Drainage of Liquefied Natural Gas. Based on

metallurgical failure analysis of the crack initiated at the weldolet
vicinity of the branch to the header connection, the primary mode
of failure was identified to be fatigue. The chemistry of the piping
materials and weld were examined and found within specification
of stainless steel 316L. The crack was removed and sectioned,
Fig. 12. The cross section was mounted and examined metallurgi-
cally, Fig. 13, where the majority of the crack was straight, trans-
Fig. 9 Weld attachments of pipe supports have completely granular, and unbranching. The crack morphology indicates that
sheared off the crack was due to fatigue.

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology DECEMBER 2013, Vol. 135 / 064501-3

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Table 1 Summary of acoustic analysis

Case 1 Case 2

Parameters Original orifice New orifice Upset drainage

Process parameters to calculated generated power level

p1, Pa 4.24  106 4.41  106 2.76  106
p2, Pa 1.14  106 5.13  105 1.15  105
W, kg/s 47.2 20.8 131.5
T1, K 658 651 184
m, kg/kmol 18.0 18.0 20.7
Pipe geometry parameters to calculate allowable power level
D, m 0.467 0.467 0.317
t, m 0.0206 0.0206 0.00953
Calculation results
Fig. 12 Case 2: crack face of the failed branch PWL, dB 173.5 169.2 179.2
PWLallowable, dB 170.7 170.7 169.7
Conclusion Fail Pass Fail

Table 2 Radial modal frequencies

Radial modal frequency (Hz)

Mode Case 1 Case 2

1 3467 5486

The power level calculations for both cases are presented in

Fig. 13 Case 2: cross section of crack, exterior surface, 323,
oxalic acid elect
4 Acoustic Analysis
The sound power level criterion as modified by Eisinger [3] is
used in this paper for the acoustic analysis. This criterion is
adopted as the sound power level is strong function of the
upstream conditions, which are easier to predict. In contrast, the
energy input method [4] is a strong function of the downstream
conditions (downstream Mach number), which depend on simula-
tion and is not always accurate if available.
The acoustic analysis in its simplified version for a single pres-
sure drop source involves calculating the source power level,
Eq. (1), and comparing it to the allowable power level, Eq. (2) [3].
The parameters controlling the source power level are process pa-
rameters including mass flow rate, pressure drop, gas temperature,
and composition. On the other hand, the parameters controlling
the allowable power level is merely the pipe geometry in terms of
diameter-to-thickness ratio. In addition to this criterion, additional
measures may be required for some cases. The layout should alle-
viate structural discontinuity in the piping systems. For example,
the small-bore branches should be placed as far as practical from
the vibration source. Another measure is to install full encircle-
ment sleeves for branch connections and pipe supports.
Power level formula
" 
  #
Dp 3:6 2 T1 1:2
PWL ¼ 10log W þ 126:1 (1)
p1 m
Allowable power level
 
D2
PWLallowable ¼ 173:6  0:125 (2)
t2
Table 1. In both cases, the power level in the piping system
exceeds the allowable level. This supports the assumption that fa-
tigue in these two cases occurred due to acoustic-induced vibra-
tion. The fast failure in both cases within hours supports the
assumption of acoustic induced fatigue as it is known to cause
failure in short time.
The failure in the circumferential discontinuities (vent and
drain valves in case 1; and branch connection and structural sup-
port in case 2) also indicates acoustic-induced vibration. As
explained earlier, the acoustic induces vibration excites the shell
mode of the pipe, and therefore, it is amplified at structural dis-
continuities of the pipe circumference causing high dynamic stress
leading to failures at those points.
The radial mode frequencies were also calculated to check if
they coincide with the range of acoustic excitation (i.e.,
1000 Hz–20,000 Hz). The formula (Eq. (3)) as given by Blevins
[6] was used and the modal radial frequencies for cases 1 and 2
are given in Table 2. The table supports the conclusion that the
failure in both cases was due to acoustic-induced vibration as the
radial modal frequency fall in the range of acoustic-induced
vibration
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 E
f ¼ (3)
2pR lð1  v2 Þ
where R is given by
R ¼ 0:5  ðD þ tÞ (4)
Detrimental vibrations resulting from flashing and slug loads
were also considered as potential sources of failure. The upstream
steam piping is properly trapped and drained. The steam traps
were confirmed to be in proper working condition; thus, dynamic
loads resulting from these events were eliminated. The close prox-
imity of the orifice plate to the failed branch line and the straight
piping layout downstream of the orifice provide additional support
for acoustically induced fatigue failure.
For case 2, drainage of liquefied natural gas, accumulation of
liquid droplets could result in slug forces. However, due to the

064501-4 / Vol. 135, DECEMBER 2013 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 low pressure downstream of the drain valve, the liquid almost
completely flashes downstream of the valve. The gas then enters
the branch with very high velocity, which generates the acoustic-
induced vibration if at sonic conditions [2]. The time of failure in
hours is a strong indication of acoustic-induced fatigue. This is
also supported by the calculated radial frequency for the header,
which is 5486 Hz falling in the range of acoustic-induced fatigue
(1000–20,000 Hz). Furthermore, flexibility analysis was con-
ducted for the system with slug forces imposed as dynamic loads.
The resulting stress levels in the piping system were not high
enough to cause failure in such very short time. The details and
results of this flexibility analysis are outside the scope of this
paper.
power level generated at the orifice plate is not susceptible to
acoustic-induced fatigue. Piping system discharging to the main
flair headers should be analyzed for acoustic vibration.
The standards and procedures of the operating companies
should extend the identification and assessment of this vibration
phenomenon to cover modes of operation during commissioning
and upsets.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the met-
allurgical laboratory in Saudi Aramco for conducting the failure
analysis.

5 Modification and Corrective Measures Nomenclature

For case 1, the orifice plate was replaced. The new orifice plate D¼ inside pipe diameter, m
design was analyzed for acoustic vibration before it was used for E¼ modulus of elasticity, 200  109 Pa for steel
the cleaning operation. The power level generated by the new ori- m¼ molecular weight, kg/kmol
fice plate was within the allowable level as shown in the new ori- M¼ Mach number
fice of case 1. While the PWL drop on log scale is only 3%, the p¼ pressure, Pa
drop in the scalar parameters is about 61%, which is significant. PWL ¼ power level, dB
In the process of selection the new orifice, it was desired to have R¼ mean radius, m
more safety margin, but the cleaning process was limiting, and the t¼ pipe thickness, m
mass flow rate could not be reduced further. As additional precau- T¼ temperature, K
tion, field measurements and close observations were requested W¼ mass flow rate, kg/s
during the cleaning process with the new orifice, and they indi-
cated no severe vibration in the piping system. This further proved
that the failure was due to acoustic-induced fatigue. Moreover, it
Greek Symbols
showed the merit of the analysis. l ¼ density, 7800 kg/m3 for steel
For case 2, several precautionary measures have been taken to  ¼ Poisson’s ratio, 0.3 for steel
avoid future process upset. The drain line is not designed to Dp ¼ pressure drop (p1  p2), Pa
relieve pressurized gas into the flair system. It is designed to
depressurize fluid during testing and inspection shutdown. There- Subscripts
fore, the operation instruction manual was revised to avoid the
reoccurrence of the incident. Moreover, steel line blanks were in- 1 ¼ upstream conditions
stalled in closed position during normal operation. 2 ¼ downstream conditions

6 Conclusion and Recommendations

Piping systems that are not designed for acoustic-induced fa-
tigue may have potential to failure during intermittent operation.
In the case of piping system is subjected to high gas velocity
(>0.5 Mach), fatigue failure may develop at several locations in
the piping system. Failure due to acoustic-induced fatigue may
occur in a few minutes to a few hours. Fatigue cracks are usually
found in small branch connection and structural attachments. Fa-
tigue cracks are also found in pipe branches with bracing.
Cleaning by steam is often required by the company’s standards
after construction. Sizing the orifice plate to minimize the amount
of steam is required by the plant operation; however, acoustic
analysis should be conducted to verify that the system with the
References
[1] Eisinger, F. L., and Francis, J. T., 1999, “Acoustically Induced Structural Fatigue
of Piping Systems,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 121, pp. 438–443.
[2] Carucci, V. A., and Mueller, R. T., 1982, “Acoustically Induced Piping Vibration
in High Capacity Pressure Reducing Systems,” ASME Paper No. 82-WA/PVP-8.
[3] Eisinger, F. L., 1997, “Designing Piping Systems Against Acoustically Induced
Structural Fatigue,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 119, pp. 379–383.
[4] Eisinger, F. L., and Sullivan, R., 2010, “Acoustic Power and Acoustic Pressure
in Piping Systems Handling High Velocity Steam and Gases Through a Pressure
Reducing Device,” Proceedings of the ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping
Division, PVP2010-25127, July 18–22, 2010, Bellevue, Washington, 2010.
[5] Energy Institute, 2008, Guidelines for the Avoidance of Vibration Induced Fa-
tigue Failure in Process Pipe Work, 2nd ed., Energy Institute, London, UK.
[6] Blevins, R. D., 1979, Formulas for Natural Frequency and Mode Shape, Rein-
hold, New York.

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology DECEMBER 2013, Vol. 135 / 064501-5

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/09/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms