Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference
PVP2012
POWER SPECTRAL DENSITY ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTICALLY INDUCED
VIBRATION IN PIPING SYSTEMS
Dr. Ahmed H. Dweib
WorleyParsons
Frontier Plaza, Atyrau 060011
Kazakhstan
Phone: +7 7012 068974
Fax: +7 7122 992520
E-mail: ahmed.dweib@worleyparsons.com
ABSTRACT
Acoustically induced vibration near points of large
pressure reduction in piping systems can cause fatigue failure
of the piping material at points of discontinuity.
Empirical design curves have been used extensively for the
assessment of acoustic fatigue risk level in piping systems.
Subsequent development in the field resulted in the application
of more detailed methods of analysis including, displacement-
based and energy-based Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and
Statistical Energy Analysis (SEA).
Displacement-based FEA, which provides deterministic
approach for the detailed analysis of the vibration response, is
suitable for low and intermediate frequency range where the
dynamic stresses in the pipe wall can be determined with
reasonable certainty.
For large complicated systems and high frequency range,
the deterministic FEA becomes impractical due to the large
number of mode shapes involved and the sensitivity of the
results to small changes in system parameters. In these cases,
the results of the FEA can have only a statistical value and
SEA methods, which are based on statistical approach in
contrast to deterministic approach, become more effective.
SEA methods require accurate estimation of energy coupling
parameters, on which the validity of the methods is dependent.
In this paper, energy-based FEA is utilized for the
evaluation of the system response and the SEA parameters.
Power Spectral Density (PSD) analysis is performed for finite
element model of a system consisting of pipe and acoustic
fluid. The system is subjected to acoustically induced vibration
through the input of acoustic energy at the downstream of a
pressure-reducing valve. The system response is obtained and
1 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
July 15-19, 2012, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA
PVP2012-78422
the parameters required for SEA, including the coupling power
factor, are estimated.
INTRODUCTION
The assessment of fatigue life of piping systems due to the
acoustically induced vibration has gained considerable
importance recently due to the increased potential of failure
especially in high-pressure gas systems with large pressure
reduction at locations of pressure reducing devices such as
control valves and pressure safety valves.
Emperical design curves [1] and [4] have been developed
and used extensively for the assessment of acoustic fatigue.
However, the results of this assessment can be overly
conservative.
FEA and SEA methods provide a more detailed approach
for the acoustic fatigue assessment. Through the application of
these methods, the dynamic stresses at the critical points in the
piping system can be estimated. Methods of assessment based
on SEA are more suitable for large and complicated systems
where large number of modes and/or several acoustic sources
are present in the system.
Lyon et al [2] first developed the SEA method as a noise
and vibration estimation technique for complex sound and
vibration systems. Several authors [6] and [7] have contributed
to the development of the SEA theoretical bases.
Since then SEA, method has been used in many structural
and aerospace applications. T. Koizumi et al [8] have applied
the SEA method for the analysis of noise and vibration in
building structures. The SEA parameters were estimated
experimentally and analytically.
 B.R. Mace [9] has described different approaches for the
use of FEA to predict coupling loss factors of SEA for Strouhal number at the peak frequency lies typically at the
structural vibration. range 0.10 to 0.30 and is given for the different types of
J. Smeulers et al [10] have described a detailed approach valves.
for the application of SEA to acoustic fatigue in piping Besides the acoustic power and the peak frequency, the
systems. Standard provides the acoustic pressure level for different
In this paper, the FE model that was developed in a frequency bands. The frequency bands are taken as 1/3 octave
previous study [11] is used to obtain the coupling power factor bands starting from 12.5 Hz to 20000 Hz.
essential for the performance of the SEA. PSD analysis is In this study, a pressure-reducing valve is considered the
performed for a basic system consisting of a straight pipe with acoustic power source with the parameters summarized in
an acoustic source at the upstream end. The total dynamic Table (1). These parameters are used to obtain the acoustic
energy of the system and the coupling power factor are pressure level at the different frequency bands spanning the
determined. range from 100 Hz to 10000 Hz. The acoustic pressure level
against the frequency is used to obtain the acoustic power
ACOUSTIC POWER SPECTRAL DENSITY spectral density for the mentioned frequency range. The
Acoustic power is generated from the mechanical power resulting power spectrum density is shown in Fig. 1.
of the gas stream at the exit of pressure-reducing valves such
as control valves or safety relief valves. There has been
research in the area of the definition of the spectrum of the
induced acoustic power. The results of the research have been
implemented and formalized in the standard IEC [12]. This
standard provides detailed calculation procedure for the
calculation of the acoustic power spectrum at the exit of
pressure-reducing valves. The power spectrum depends on the
flow regime at the exit of the pressure-reducing device. Five
different flow regimes have been defined:
- Regime I: subsonic flow and recompression after the vena
contracta
- Regime II: sonic flow and isentropic recompression exists
but is decreasing
- Regime III: supersonic flow and no isentropic
recompression and the turbulent flow-shear dominates
- Regime IV: supersonic flow and the dominant mechanism
is shock cell-turbulent flow interaction
- Regime V: there is constant acoustical efficiency; a further
decrease in downstream pressure will result in no increase
in acoustic power.
The overall sound power is given by the equation:
Table 1: System Parameter Values
Wa = ηa Wm (1)

The Standard provides the peak frequency of the acoustic

power fp and the acoustic efficiency factor ηa as function of 300.00
Acoustic Power Spectral

the following flow parameters: 250.00

Density, watt / Hz

- Flow regime & flow Mach number 200.00

- Speed of sound in the vena contracta 150.00

- Pressure recovery factor of the pressure-reducing device 100.00

50.00
- Pressure-reducing device volumetric coefficient
0.00
- Jet diameter in the vena contracta
0
0

00

00

00

00

00
10

16

25

40

63

00
10

16

25

40

63

10

- Inlet pressure and temperature conditions Frequency, Hz

- Pressure ratio of the pressure-reducing device

2 Copyright © 2012 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Figure 1: Acoustic Power Spectral Density

The frequency range selected covers all the range of

interest for the acoustically induced vibration in piping
systems. The lowest frequency at which significant acoustic
fatigue is produced in piping systems is the cut-off frequency.
The cut-off frequency is defined as the acoustic natural
frequency corresponding to acoustic mode (p=1 & q=0), where
p is the number of plane diametral nodal surfaces and q is the
number of cylindrical nodal surfaces concentric with the
cylinder axis.

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

A finite element model of a straight pipe with acoustic
fluid inside is built by use of ANSYS 11.0 software utilizing
structural 3D solid element to model the pipe wall, and 3D
fluid acoustic element to model the bulk of the gas inside the
pipe. The fluid elements in contact with the pipe structural
elements have the capability of interface with the solid Fig. 2: Finite Element Model
elements. The acoustic source is placed at the upstream end of
the pipe and fluid acoustic surface element to simulate infinite
absorbing medium is placed at the downstream end.
The solid element has three translation degrees of freedom
at each node and the fluid element has pressure as the only
degree of freedom at each node. The fluid-solid interface
elements have three translation degrees of freedom and one
pressure degree of freedom at each node. The finite element
model is shown in Fig. 2.
A fine mesh has been used in the analysis to ensure the
convergence and accuracy of the solution for all the frequency
range. As has been demonstrated in the previous study [11],
the model has been validated by checking the percent error in
energy norm, as well as by comparing the results obtained
utilizing larger number of elements with insignificant
difference. The mesh is defined such that the element
dimension is less than the value 0.2 λ, where λ is the
wavelength corresponding to the highest frequency in the
frequency range of interest.
A sinusoidal pressure is applied at the upstream end of the
pipe and absorbing boundary conditions are placed at the Figure 3: Example of Acoustic Modal Shape at 2011 Hz
down stream end of the pipe. The magnitude and frequency of
the pressure sine wave is taken from the acoustic power
spectral density curve of the pressure-reducing device. The
results of the FEA are obtained as the total acoustic energy of
the fluid and the total dynamic vibrational energy of the pipe.
The FE model was also utilized for the determination of
the modal densities by performing modal analysis for the two
subsystems: the structural pipe and the acoustic fluid
separately. Figures 3 and 4 show examples of the mode shapes
obtained for the two subsystems.
For the modal analysis of the structural pipe subsystem,
the acoustic fluid was eliminated and for the modal analysis of
the acoustic fluid subsystem, the displacement degrees of
freedom at the pipe-fluid interface were eliminated.

3 Copyright © 2012 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


Figue 4: Example of Pipe Structural Modal Shape at 2067 Hz
STATISTICAL ENERGY ANALYSIS MODEL
SEA is a method of analyzing the flow of dynamic energy
in systems based on the statistical coupling of the dynamic
modes of response of the system. The statistics of the dynamic
response is determined using the dynamic energy flow as the
primary response variable. This method has been used
successfully in the analysis of many coupled sound-vibration
problems.
This method has been applied recently to the analysis of
the acoustic fatigue in piping systems. The model of the
system used for the analysis consists of many pipe and fluid
elements connected according to the geometry of the system
and acoustic power sources placed at the points of pressure–
reducing devices. The pipe elements and the fluid elements are
coupled by the corresponding coupling power factors. The
acoustic power at the pressure-reducing devices is considered
as input to the corresponding fluid element. The energy flow
between the elements of the system is determined by solving a
set of linear system energy flow equations based on the
balance of the energy flow for each element in the system.
In this method, several acoustic sources can be considered
to act simultaneously at several locations in the system. The
dynamic energy at certain frequency band of a pipe element at
certain location in the system is used to obtain the rms value of
the dynamic stress at the corresponding frequency band. This
dynamic stress together with the frequency are used for the
fatigue life evaluation of the pipe component.
ACOUSTIC POWER FLOW PARAMETERS
In the present study, the basic energy flow model of the
system is considered. This model consists of pipe and fluid
subsystems and an acoustic power source is applied to the
fluid subsystem, as shown in Fig. 5. The coupling between the
4 Copyright © 2012 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
acoustic fluid and the pipe subsystems is investigated and the
results of the FEA are used to obtain the coupling power
factor.
Figure 5: Power Flow Model
Pi is the acoustic power input due to the pressure-reducing
device. The outlet power of the fluid element Po is considered
as the input power to the subsequent fluid element in the
piping system. The coupling between the fluid subsystem and
the pipe subsystem is represented by the power flow P12. This
net power flow is related to the subsystems energies and their
modal densities as given by the following equation:
P12= (E1 N2 – E2 N1) η12 ω (2)
The power loss of the pipe subsystem PL2 can be obtained
from the damping ratio and the dynamic energy of the pipe
subsystem as follows:
PL2 = 2 π ζ E2 f = ω ζ E2 (3)
The balance of power flow for the pipe subsystem gives
the following relationship:
P12 = PL2 (4)
The decay of the acoustic power for a certain pipe length
has been documented in many references [4] and [13] as given
by following relationship:
PL = 0.060 (L / Di) dB (5)
Using the above relationship, the fluid subsystem power
loss PL1 can be obtained as follows:
PL1 = Pi [ 1 - 10 – 6 L / (1000 Di ) ] - P12 (6)
 The results of PSD analysis performed on the finite
6.00
element model are presented in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 as the

Modal Density, modes / Hz

dynamic energy of the two subsystems E1 and E2 against the 5.00

frequency. 4.00
The results of the modal analysis performed are presented
in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 as the modal densities N1 and N2 against 3.00

the frequency. The values of the modal densities correspond 2.00

well with those obtained by the equations provided in
1.00
reference [8], as follows:
0.00
N1 = 4 π2 Di2 L / C23 f2 (7)

00

00

00

00

00

0
00
10

16

25

40

63

10

16

25

40

63

10
Frequency, Hz
N2 = Di L / ( 4 T ) [ 12 ρs ( 1 – ν2 ) / E ]0.5 (8)

Figure 8: Acoustic Subsystem Modal Density

6.00E+05
Fluid Subsystem Energy, N.mm

5.00E+05

4.00E+05
0.400
3.00E+05
0.350

Modal Density, Modes / Hz

2.00E+05
0.300
1.00E+05
0.250
0.00E+00
0.200
0

0
00

00

00

00

00
10

16

25

40

63

00
10

16

25

40

63

10

Frequency, Hz 0.150

0.100
Figure 6: Fluid Subsystem Energy Against Frequency
0.050

0.000
Pipe Subsystem Energy, N.mm

00

00

00

00

00

0
2.50E+02

00
10

16

25

40

63

10

16

25

40

63

10
2.00E+02 Frequency, Hz

1.50E+02

1.00E+02
Figure 9: Pipe Subsystem Modal Density
5.00E+01

0.00E+00
The coupling power factor η12 as obtained by substituting
100
125
160
200
250

315
400
500

630
800

1000
1250
1600
2000
2500
3150

4000
5000

6300
8000
10000

Frequency, Hz
Eq. (2) and Eq. (3) into Eq. (4) is plotted against the frequency
in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11.
The high value of coupling power factor corresponds with
Figure 7:Pipe Subsystem Energy Against Frequency the frequency range from the cut-off frequency fc to the ring
frequency fr. These characteristic frequencies are defined as
follows:

Cut-off frequency fc = 0.184 C2 / Di = 425 Hz (9)

Ring frequency fr = Cs / (π Di) = 3185 Hz (10)

Figures 10 and 11 indicate the presence of some coupling

above the ring frequency up to about twice the ring frequency.
Therefore, it can be concluded that in the analysis of
acoustically induced vibration in a piping system, the range

5 Copyright © 2012 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 from the cut-off frequency up to twice the ring frequency function of the frequency as well as the fluid and pipe
should be investigated. subsystems dynamic energy and modal density. The coupling
power factor is required for the application of SEA for the
6.00E-05
estimation of the dynamic stresses and the acoustic fatigue
Coupling Power Factor, s-1

5.00E-05
assessment of piping systems.
The results have provided the variation of the coupling
4.00E-05
power factor with the frequency and the range of frequency
3.00E-05
with significant interaction between the fluid and the pipe
2.00E-05
subsystems.
1.00E-05 The results obtained can be generalized and used for the
0.00E+00 formulation of power flow equations and the definition of the
100
125

160
200

250
315

400
500
630
800
1000
1250
1600
2000
2500
3150
4000
5000
6300

8000
10000
SEA model of piping systems as well as for the frequency
Frequency, Hz domain fatigue life estimation.
Further research in this area should be directed towards the
definition of the relationship between the coupling power
Figure 10: Coupling Power Factor factor and the different system dimensionless parameters such
as flow Mach number, pipe L/D and D/T ratio.

1.00E+00 NOMENCLATURE
9.00E-01
Coupling Power Factor x

8.00E-01
C2 = sound speed in fluid downstream of pressure-reducing
device, m/sec
Frequency, s-2

7.00E-01
6.00E-01
5.00E-01
Cs = sound speed in pipe material, m/sec
4.00E-01 D = pipe average diameter, m
3.00E-01 Di = pipe inside diameter, m
2.00E-01
1.00E-01
E = modulus of elasticity of pipe material, Pa
0.00E+00 E1= total acoustic energy of fluid subsystem, Joule
E2= total dynamic energy of the pipe subsystem, Joule
0

0
00

00

00

00

00
10

16

25

40

63

00
10

16

25

40

63

10

Frequency, Hz f = frequency, Hz
fc = cutt-off frequency, Hz
Figure 11: Coupling Power Factor Multiplied by Frequency fr = ring frequency, Hz
L = pipe length, m
N1= modal density of fluid subsystem, sec
For frequencies above this range, the coupling power N2= modal density of pipe subsystem, sec
factor is low and the pipe dynamic energy is insignificant. This P12 = net power flow from subsystem 1 to subsystem 2, watt
is attributed to the fact that the rate of power flow between the Pi = power input from the pressure-reducing device, watt
two subsystems is proportional to the difference in their Po = power at the exit of the fluid subsystem, watt
energies. The power flow from the fluid subsystem to the pipe PL1 = power loss of the fluid subsystem, watt
subsystem increases with the difference between the energy of PL2 = power loss of pipe subsystem, watt
the two subsystems. The effect of the modal density, as given PL = decay of the acoustic power in dB
by Eq. (2), is such that the increase in the modal density of the T = pipe wall thickness, m
fluid subsystem reduces the power flow from the fluid Wa = sound power at the exit of the pressure-reducing device,
subsystem to the pipe subsystem. watt
At high frequencies, while the pipe modal density Wm = mechanical power of the flow, watt
fluctuates, the modal density of the acoustic fluid subsystem, ζ = damping ratio
as shown in Fig. 8, increases to high level such that the flow of η12 = coupling power factor, sec-1
energy from the fluid to the pipe is reduced significantly. ηa = acoustic efficiency factor
The coupling power factor shows several peaks in the ω = band center frequency, rad/sec
frequency range of interest. The peaks correspond with the ρs = density of pipe material, kg/m3
maximum power flow from the fluid subsystem to the pipe ν = Poisson’s ratio of pipe material
subsystem. These peaks correspond with the highest dynamic
stresses in the piping component and lowest fatigue life. REFERENCES
[1] Carucci, V.A. and Mueller, R.T., "Acoustically Induced
CONCLUSIONS Vibration in High Capacity Pressure Reducing Systems",
The results of the PSD analysis and modal analysis ASME Paper No. 82-WA/PVP- 8, 1982.
performed provide the fluid-pipe coupling power factor as

6 Copyright © 2012 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 [2] Lyon, R.H., Dejong, R.G.,” Theory and Application of
Statistical Energy Analysis, Butterworth-Heinemann, Second
Edition, Boston, 1995.
[3] Thomson, A.G.R.,” Acoustic Fatigue Design Data - Part
I & Part II”, Advisory Group For Aerospace Research And
Development, Technical Editing and Reproduction Ltd, 1972.
[4] Guidelines for the Avoidance of Vibration Induced
Fatigue in Process Pipework, Published by The Marine
Technology Directorate Ltd (MTD), 1999.
[5] ANSYS Finite Element Analysis Software, Release
11.0.
[6] Woodhouse, J.,” An Approach to The Theoretical
Background of Statistical Energy Analysis Applied to
Structural Vibration”, Journal of Acoustical Society of
America, June 1981.
[7] Langleya, R.S., Cotoni, V.,”Response Variance
Prediction in The Statistical Energy Analysis
of Built-Up Systems’, Journal of Acoustical Society of
America, February 2004.
[8] T. Koizumi *, N. Tsujiuchi, H. Tanaka, M. Okubo, M.
Shinomiya,” Prediction of The Vibration In Buildings Using
Statistical Energy Analysis”, Proceedings of The International
Modal Analysis Conference Imac, 2002.
[9] Mace, B.R., “Statistical Energy Analysis and Finite
Elements,” Euronoise 2003: Fifth European Conference on
Noise Control, Naples, Italy, 19 - 21 May 2003.
[10] Smeulers, J.P.M., Van Beek, P.J.G., Golliard, J.,”
Analysis of Acoustic Fatigue In Safety Relief Systems”,
Proceedings of the ASME 2011 PVP Conference, July, 2011.
[11] Dweib, A.H.,” Acoustic Fatigue Assessment of Piping
System Components By Finite Element Analysis”, Proceedings
of the ASME 2011 PVP Conference, July, 2011.
[12] International Electrotechnical Commission IEC
Standard 60534-8-3, Industrial-Process Control Valves – Part
8-3: Noise Considerations – Control Valve Aerodynamic Noise
Prediction Method, Edition 03, 2010-2011.
[13] ISO 15665:2003, Acoustics – Acoustic Insulation for
Pipes, Valves and Flanges.

7 Copyright © 2012 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/75761/ on 06/24/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo