You are on page 1of 11

Method for Hydrodynamic Coupling of Concentric

Cylindrical Shells and Beams


Matthew D. Snyder
Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC
Abstract
Dynamic analyses of pressurized water reactor vessels, core support structures, and internals require
accurate representation of dynamic coupling due to fluid in annuli between concentric cylindrical shells. In
practice, the structure is frequently modeled using beam elements with Fritzs hydrodynamic mass matrix
as is implemented using the FLUID38 element. In advanced reactor designs, it is desirable to have a
comprehensive analysis model that includes shell modes while remaining sufficiently simple for long
nonlinear transient dynamic analyses. The aim of this paper is to describe a straightforward method that can
be used to represent hydrodynamic mass effects in models of concentric cylindrical vessels constructed of
shell elements. In the method, shell displacement and hydrodynamic inertial forces are expressed as Fourier
series. The Fourier series are entered into ANSYS using linear constraint equations that relate
displacements of each shell node to displacements at supplementary sets of Fourier nodes.
Hydrodynamic mass is then entered using STIF27 elements connecting Fourier nodes associated with
corresponding nodes on inner and outer shells. The method allows the Fritz beam mode mass to be entered
separately from mass matrices representative of each shell mode. The method also applies when either the
inner or outer shell or both may be represented as a beam. Examples of the method are presented with a
discussion of techniques for evaluating mass matrices for shell modes based on theory and experimental
data. Application of the method is demonstrated for irregular meshes and variable-thickness or folded-plate
structures of near cylindrical form. Examples also demonstrate that the method is enhanced by its
compatibility with using superelements (MATRIX50) to represent more complex shell structures.
Introduction
The structural system of a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) includes fluid-coupled concentric cylindrical
vessels ( See Figure 1) whose functions are containing the reactor core, directing flow, and providing
support for the reactor core and internals. For improved reliability and maintainability, the next generation
of PWRs has incorporated some significant design changes in these structures (References 1 and 2). Of
particular importance are modifications of bolts, welds, tie rods, hold-down springs, and other means used
to join or support the internal structures and to prevent excessive relative movement in response to dynamic
forces.

Figure 1. Features of the AP1000 Structural Design
In design of earlier generations of PWRs, dynamic analysis of lateral response has been frequently
performed using lumped mass beam models with a mass matrix to represent fluid coupling. For more
accurate evaluation of the newer designs and in order to evaluate and fully apply scale model test data from
other plants, a structural model that included both beam and shell mode response was needed. The purpose
of this paper is to describe one relatively simple way to extend models to include shell mode responses with
fluid-structure coupling in a reasonably sized model.
In this paper, the terms beam and shell mode refer to vibration modes of the cylindrical shells. When
viewed from the end, the vibration modes of the cylindrical shell may consist of any number of
circumferential waves. The number of circumferential waves is denoted by n . Since it represents classical
beam bending deformation without distortion of the cross section of the cylinder, the mode 1 n = is called
the beam mode. Modes for 2 n are called the shell modes and the mode 0 n = is called the breathing
mode.
Description of Structural Problem
Analyses described in this paper are for the Westinghouse AP1000 "Advanced Passive" reactor plant
design (See Figure 1). The AP1000 reactor vessel internals include many features present in other
Westinghouse designs (Reference 1). However, most notable of differences from previous designs is the
replacement of a baffle-former structure with a core shroud. Both structures directly surround reactor core;
however a baffle-former structure is bolted to the core barrel whereas a core shroud is a welded structure
that is bolted to the lower core plate. The core shroud, core barrel, reactor vessel and annular spaces of
water between them are representative of the types of fluid coupled concentric cylindrical vessels that are
the subject of this paper.
For dynamic analyses of earlier reactor designs, 3-D beam models have been considered acceptable
methodology to calculate overall structural response of the major components such as reactor vessel, core
barrel, and core support plates. The motions of these supporting structures are then used in more detailed
analysis of internals structures that include the array of fuel assemblies that forms the reactor core.
For any design, there must be some concern about the accuracy of using beam models to represent
cylindrical shells whose length to diameter ratio is much smaller than those for which Timoshenko beam
theory is generally considered applicable. For shells as short as the core shroud, this is of particular
concern. Experimental measurement of structures similar to the core shroud show that shear deformation
leads to significant distortion of the cross-section even in the fundamental beam bending mode. To some
extent this could be compensated for by the use of appropriate shear factors; however little work has been
done to refine shear factors from usual beam values. With this in mind, it was decided that the core barrel
and core shroud would be modeled of the AP1000 plant as using a combination of shell and solid elements.
To represent the hydrodynamic coupling in the shell element models several options were considered:
The water could be modeled using elements such as FLUID30 or FLUID80. Models have been
constructed using these elements and have proven useful for the eigenvalue problem. This can be
particularly useful in evaluating cases where the fluid annuli are non circular, however these
models have been found to be impractical for most long transient dynamic analyses.
To avoid the cost of fluid element modeling, models were initially constructed with radial mass
matrices distributed between each inner and its outer shell. Based on the Fritz (Reference 3) mass,
the matrices were assigned values so that the beam mode frequency is reproduced relatively well.
When represented this way, the shell mode frequencies were unacceptably underestimated. This
should have been expected as will be apparent from discussion of the beam mode hydrodynamic
mass that follows.
In the method which is the focus of this paper, fluid displacements and inertial forces were
represented using Fourier series. This permits mass matrices to be assigned independently for the
beam and shell modes. The degrees of freedom used to represent the fluid motion are reduced to a
small set of Fourier amplitudes. The advantage of this approach is even greater when these degrees
of freedom are used within superelement representations.
Methodology for Added Mass of Beam and Shell Modes
Added Mass Coupling for the Beam Mode
For relative lateral motion of two long concentric cylinders, the hydrodynamic mass is the Fritz (Reference
3) mass matrix which is the basis of the ANSYS FLUID38 element. This mass matrix is based on the
assumption that the cross sections of the cylinders do not deform as they move laterally, i.e. displacement
in the beam mode , n=1.
The Fritz mass matrix , as well as the mass matrices given later for shell modes assume that fluid motions
are small, that the fluid is incompressible, and that fluid velocities are much less than speed of sound.
The equations for the Fritz mass are repeated here in order to establish the notation for use with shell modes
n>1.
1
1
1 1 2
( )
[ ] (1)
( )
h h
h h
M M M
M M M M M
+ | |
=
|
+ + +
\ .
M
For two concentric cylinders:
2
1
M a L = is the mass of fluid displaced by the inner cylinder.
2
2
M b L = is the mass of fluid that could fill the outer cylinder in absence of the inner cylinder
2 2
1
2 2
h
b a
M M
b a
+
=

is the hydrodynamic mass associated with relative accelerations of the cylinders.


a = radius of inner cylinder
b = radius of outer cylinder
= fluid density
L = axial length of cylinders.
This may be written as:
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
( ) 2 (1 ) 2
[ ] (2)
1 2 ( ) 2 (1 )
a a b a b a r a L L
b a r a b b a b a b r

| | | | + +
= =
| |
+ +
\ . \ .
M
where r =a/b.
In most situations of interest the fluid annulus is thin relative to the radius of the cylinders. For a thin
cylindrical annulus ( a>> c=b-a)
2
(3)
h
a
M a L
c

2
2
1
2
[ ] (4)
a b
L a
b
c b a
a

| |
|
=
|

|
\ .
M

All of the above equations apply to cases where axial flow induced by relative lateral motion of the
cylinders is insignificant either because the flow is blocked at the ends or because the cylinders are long
enough to ignore end effects. For common cases such as the downcomer annulus (See Figure -- Features of
the AP1000 Structural Design), axial flow is blocked at one end open at other. For these situations it is
common to employ the following approximation that applies only to the thin annular case.

Figure 2. Shell Element Model of Core Shroud
Considering a finite length thin cylindrical annulus open at one end and imposing relative lateral
acceleration while permitting only axial flow results in an added axial hydrodynamic mass:
3
1
(5)
3
axial
h
a
M L
c
=
This axial mass effectively acts in series with the circumferential mass given previously so that the two
may be put together to give the hydrodynamic mass for the finite length case:
3
2
1
(6)
1 3
axial
finite
axial
h h
h
h h
M M
a L
M
M M c
a
L

| |
|
|
=
|
+
| |
| +
|
|
\ . \ .
The final beam mass matrix then has the form:
1
1
1 1 2
( )
[ ] (7)
( )
finite finite
finite
finite finite
h h
h h
M M M
M M M M M
+ | |
| =
|
+ + +
\ .
M
Equation (7) represents the total hydrodynamic mass for the beam mode. It is distributed to nodes over the
height of the model using either STIF27 or FLUID38 elements.
Added Mass Coupling for Shell Modes
The fluid displacements and resultant forces from pressure acting on the structures will be defined by a
Fourier series expansion. This defines a set of generalized forces, F
n
and F
n
,and generalized
displacements, A
n
and A
n


0
1 1
( )
( , ) ( ) cos( ) ( ) sin( ) (8)
2
r n n
n n
A t
U t A t n A t n

= =
= + +

&&
&& && &&

0
1 1
( )
( , ) ( ) cos( ) ( ) sin( ) (9)
2
r n n
n n
F t
F t F t n F t n

= =
= + +


Next, the shell mode mass matrices, [M
n
] can be defined as relating the generalized force and
accelerations:
[ ] (10)
a a
b
b
n n
n
n
n
F A
F
A



=
` `

)
)
M
&&
&&

[ ] (11)
a a
b
b
n n
n
n
n
F A
F
A



=
` `



)
)
M
&&
&&

where subscripts a and b are used for the inner and outer shells.
The fluid mass matrices are defined using solutions of the equations for incompressible flow whereby the
acoustic pressure distribution within the fluid annulus can be obtained using separation of variables. The
complete solution, given in Reference 5, expresses the radial pressure distribution using Bessel functions,
the circumferential distribution as the sine and cosine terms, and the axial distribution in form a Fourier
series. The full solution is somewhat complex but can be simplified by noting that for the range of
structural frequencies of interest, the axial length of the cylinders is small compared to the wavelength of
acoustic waves and the solution from Reference 5 can be written as:
2 2 2 1 1
2 2 1 1 2 2 2
2 2
2 2 2
( ) 2
[ ]
( ) 2 ( )
(1 ) 2
(12)
(1 ) 2 (1 )
n n n n
n
n n n n n n
n n
n n n
a a b a b L
n b a a b b a b
a r abr L
n r abr b r


+ +
+ +
| | +
=
|
+
\ .
| | +
=
|
+
\ .
M

where / r a b =
It is emphasized that use of this equation implies the same assumptions as used for the Fritz mass of FLUID
38:
The motions are small with respect to annulus width.
The fluid is incompressible (fluid velocities are less than 10% of speed of sound in the fluid.)
The axial length of the channel is small relative to wavelength of propagating disturbances.
To compare shell mode and beam mode masses it is helpful to expand the terms in equation 12 as follows:

2
2 2 4 4 6 6 8
2 2
1 1 1 1 1 2
(1 log ( ) log ( ) log ( ) [ ] (13)
3 45 945 1 log(1/ )
n
n
r
r n r n r n O n
n r r n
+
= + + +


and

2 2 4 4 6 6 8
2 2
1 1 1 7 31
(1 log ( ) log ( ) log ( ) [ ] (14)
6 360 15120 1 2log(1/ )
n
n
r
r n r n r n O n
n r r n
= + +


Then, for 1/3 x log
2
(r) n
2
<< 1:

2
2 2
1 1 1
(15)
1 log(1/ )
n
n
r
n r r n
+


Similarly for equation 14:

2 2
1 1
(16)
1 2log(1/ )
n
n
r
n r r n


These approximations are sufficiently accurate for the cases of general interest, e.g. for r 0.8 the errors in
the approximations are less than {2%, 7%, 15%, 26%} for n= {1,2,3,4}.

Therefore reasonable approximation for thin fluid annuli is:

2
2 2
[ ] (17)
log( / )
n
a ab L
n b a ab b

| |
==
|

\ .
M

This gives the very simple result that the shell mode mass matrices as defined above are equal to 1/n
2
times
the beam mode mass matrix.
The 1/n
2
result applies only to the circumferential part of the mass. For a finite length cylinder, added
mass for flow in the axial direction will be in proportion to the circumferential half wavelength,

= a /
n. Therefore equation 5 can be generalized for n 1 to be:

3
1
(18)
3
axial
h
a
M L
n c
=

The axial mass varies in proportion to 1/n versus the 1/n
2
behavior of the circumferential mass. Therefore,
since the axial mass acts in series with the circumferential mass, the adjustment for finite length has much
less significance for higher modes; nevertheless the axial length correction can still be approximated as
described in deriving equation 6.
Approach to Representing Shell Mass Matrix in ANSYS
The circumferential variation of radial displacements at any elevation of the cylindrical shell can be
expressed as a Fourier series given in equation 8.
Similar expressions can be written for tangential and vertical displacements but they will not be needed
since hydrodynamic forces are only radial.
The n=0 (or A
o
) term is the breathing mode; n=1 terms are the beam mode terms and n 2 terms are shell
modes. The cosine terms are symmetric about the =0 plane and the sine terms are antisymmetric. The
breathing modes for these shells have a very high frequency so that this term is not included in models
discussed later; however, it is included here for completeness. Making use of orthogonality, the Fourier
coefficients are:
2
0
1
( ) cos( ) d for n 0 (19)
n r
A U n


2
0
1
( ) sin( ) d for n 1 (20)
n r
A U n

If the shell is represented by N equally spaced (=2/N) nodes using N shell elements around the
circumference, the previous integrals may be approximated by the following sums:
1
2
cos( ) for n 0 (21)
i
N
n r i
i
A U n
N

=
=

1
2
sin( ) for n 1 (22)
i
N
n r i
i
A U n
N

=
=

where U
r
is the radial displacement.
Equations 21 and 22 can be entered into ANSYS as constraint equations. This is done by creating new
nodes which will be referred to as "Fourier" nodes and setting the displacement of these Fourier nodes to
the above relations, i.e.

1
2
cos( ) for n 0 (23)
n i
N
x r i
i
U U n
N

=
=

1
2
sin( ) for n 1 (24)
n i
N
y r i
i
U U n
N

=
=


For unequally spaced nodes, =(
i+1
-
i-1
)/2 , and equations 21 and 22 become:
1 1
1
1
cos( ) for n 0 (25)
2
i
N
i i
n r i
i
A U n

+
=

1 1
1
1
sin( ) for n 1 (26)
2
i
N
i i
n r i
i
A U n

+
=

Equations 23 and 24 are modified similarly. These are the equations used for the non-circular and irregular
mesh of the core shroud.
Typically, the n=0 mode is not needed and no more than the beam and first 3 shell modes are significant.
Therefore, 4 nodes (at each shell elevation) are created each with 2 degrees of freedom (U
x
and U
y
). Note
that the degrees of freedom at the new nodes are in the Cartesian x and y directions. The z direction is
assumed to be the axis of the cylinders.
Equations 23 and 24 are in a form that ANSYS defines as linear constraint equations. If these constraints
are entered into ANSYS, the displacements calculated at the "Fourier" nodes will be equal to the
coefficients of the Fourier expansion of radial displacements. For the case of n=1, these coefficients are
equal to the beam mode displacements in the Cartesian x and y directions.
Fourier nodes are created on both the inner shell and outer shell. The hydrodynamic mass is entered as
STIF27 mass matrices connecting the Fourier nodes ( Note: The case that either the inner or the outer
cylinder is modeled as a beam is discussed below.)

1 1
1 1 2
( )
(27)
( )
n n
n n
a a
x x
n n hn
b b
n hn n n hn x x
F U
M M M
M M M M M F U

+ | |

=
` ` |
+ + +
\ .
) )
&&
&&
1 1
1 1 2
( )
(28)
( )
n n
n n
a a
y y
n n hn
b b
n hn n n hn y y
F U
M M M
M M M M M F U

+ | |

=
` ` |
+ + +
\ .
) )
&&
&&

where a and b correspond to Fourier nodes of the inner and outer shell respectively.
Note that the mass matrices will be different for each mode, but it is assumed that they can all be written in
this form. The mass matrix for n=1 will be taken as the usual Fritz mass. As discussed previously an initial
estimate mass for n2 can be obtained by multiplying the masses for n=1 by 1/n
2
, i.e. use 1/4, 1/9, and 1/16
for modes 2, 3, and 4.
The reactor vessel is modeled as a beam which is equivalent to assuming that its shell modes are "rigid".
Therefore the mass matrices couple the reactor vessel and core barrel for n=1 only. For n=1 the mass matrix
is placed between the Fourier node of the core barrel and the node of the beam element. For n>1, the mass
matrix is between the Fourier node of the core barrel and a fictitious fixed (grounded) node.
Added Mass for Noncircular Fluid Annuli
The problem of added mass for non-circular annuli has been studied experimentally in Reference 4.
Additional unreported studies have been performed using models that make used of 3-D fluid elements.
Nevertheless this remains an area in which further research is needed.
In the present study, the beam mode mass for non-circular annuli, such as that between the core shroud and
core barrel, was determined by using an equivalent circular radius. The equivalent circular radius was taken
to be that which gives the same fluid cross sectional area as the actual geometry. Experimental
measurements have shown this to be reasonable for the beam mode. For higher modes the 1/n
2
adjustment
to the beam mode mass was used. Although for these structures this produced reasonable agreement with
available data and models using 3-dimensional fluid elements, this should not be used as a general rule for
noncircular annuli without further study or experimental data.
Procedure
In summary the methodology is applied as the following steps:
a) Create "Fourier" nodes at each elevation of each shell. If the first m shell modes are
considered, there will be m separate nodes per each shell per each elevation at which the
hydrodynamic mass is to be distributed to 2m Fourier degrees of freedom. Note that nodal
coordinates on the shells are rotated to the cylindrical coordinate system while Fourier nodes
remain in a Cartesian nodal coordinate system.
b) Enter constraint equations to define the Fourier node displacements. For each Fourier node
there will be an "x" and "y" direction constraint. Terms of the constraint equation are easily
entered in a macro with do-loops over elevation, direction and shell mode.
c) Enter the 2x2 hydrodynamic masses between adjacent (in elevation and direction) Fourier
nodes.
It is recommended that:
1) First run the model for in-air frequencies before adding the Fourier nodes and constraints.
Add the Fourier nodes and constraint equations but set mass matrices to small values. Verify
that the in-air modes and frequencies are not affected by the constraints and Fourier nodes.
2) Add the hydrodynamic masses for the beam mode and verify that the beam mode is correct
and that in-air shell modes are not affected.
3) Add masses for shell modes to complete problem.
4) Estimate the hydrodynamic mass using the 1/n
2
and 1/n rules discussed above. These values
should be treated as initial estimates with refinement based on experimental data.
Analysis
A full discussion of the AP1000 structural model and results is beyond the limits of this paper; however a
brief description of the model will explain the benefits of using the methods discussed above to obtain an
economical model.
The full model of the AP1000 system included over 15000 elements with over 85000 active degrees of
freedom (DOF). The majority of the elements and DOF were associated with the core shroud which had
over 11000 shell elements and 67000 DOF (See Figure Shell Element Model of Core Shroud). The core
shroud was represented as a superelement (MATRIX50) with 240 master DOF. The master DOF included
the Fourier nodes used for representing the hydrodynamic mass for the core shroud to core barrel annulus
for the beam and first 3 shell modes. Using the superelement, the number of active DOF in the analysis run
was reduced from approximately 85,000 to 19,000.
In general the analysis models included a small number (< 100) of nonlinear gap, contact and sliding
elements at supports of the vessels. Therefore most analyses of the response of the AP1000 structures due
to turbulent forces were performed using non-linear transient dynamic analysis with applied pseudo-
random force-time histories. Following the time-history analysis, the super element solution was expanded
at selected times. Finally, submodels were analyzed to calculate peak stresses in localized regions of the
core shroud and core barrel.
Conclusion
The analyses performed for the AP1000 plant demonstrated that the method of including hydrodynamic
mass for shell modes will reduce models to practical sizes needed for non-linear transient dynamic analysis.
Had the same models been prepared using solid fluid elements, they would have been an order of
magnitude more costly to run if even possible. The method reported here has significant advantages in its
compatibility with using superelements to represent portions of the structure; whereas models with fluid
elements typically have coupling that makes division into superelements much more difficult.
For this and similar dynamic analyses of fluid-structure interaction problems, (Reference 6) ANSYS
constraint equations have been demonstrated to be a useful means to minimize the number of element that
would be needed to represent coupling of incompressible fluids.
The extension of models to include shell modes is essential in more accurate assessment of flow induced
vibration (FIV). These assessments are necessary in that relative movements of structures that surround the
reactor core could lead to core damage or interference with control rod movement. Flow-induced
vibrations may also be a cause of some cases of loose parts and indication of other problems in the system.
Finally, although FIV is not generally the controlling loading for stress levels in these structures, the
assessment of flow induced vibration is required in evaluating normal operating stress and fatigue damage.
The initial application of the methodology described in this paper has been for assessment of structural
vibrations resulting from lateral forces due to turbulent flow; however, the models have also been used in
analysis of structural response due to vertical forces. The methods may also be used in future analyses for
other dynamic loadings including pump-induced acoustic waves, seismic, and Loss-of-Coolant-Accident
(LOCA) analyses.
References
1) M. D. Snyder, et.al., AP1000 Reactor Internals Flow-Induced Vibration Program, 2003
International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP 03), May 4-7, 2003,
Crdoba, SPAIN.
2) Yoshio Miyake and Hiroshi Mukai, For the Long Term Stable Supply of Electric Energy,
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Technical Review, Vol. 40, No.1, February 2003.
3) R. J. Fritz, The Effect of Liquids on the Dynamic Motion of Immersed Solids, Journal of
Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the ASME, February 1972.
4) S. Nakura, et.al., Basic Test of Added Mass and Added Damping of a Rigid Body Enclosed in a
container in Narrow Passage, Proceedings of ICONE 8, 8th International Conference on Nuclear
Engineering, Baltimore, MD., April 2-6,2000.
5) M. K .Au-Yang, Dynamics of Coupled Fluid-Shells, Journal of Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and
Reliability in Design, , Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 108, July 1986.
6) R.E. Schwirian, D.R. Forsyth, M. D. Snyder, et.al., "The Baffle-Barrel-Bolting Analysis
Program: Evolution & Technical Accomplishments", Ninth International Conference on Nuclear
Engineering , ICONE-9, Paris, April, 2001.