Anda di halaman 1dari 105

Static and Dynamic Analysis of a Piping System

By
Victor Robles Nieves

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment


of the Requirements for the Degree of:
Master of Science
In
Mechanical Engineering
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagüez Campus

December 2004

________________________________ _________________
Basir Shafiq, Ph.D. Date
Member, Graduate Committee

_________________________________ _________________
Frederick Just, Ph.D. Date
Member, Graduate Committee

_________________________________ _________________
Oswald Uwakweh , Ph. D. Date
Representative of Graduate Studies

_________________________________ _________________
Jia Yi, Ph.D. Date
Chairman, Graduate Committee

_________________________________ _________________
Prof. Paul Sundaram, Ph.D. Date
Chairperson of the Department
ABSTRACT

An Investigation of flow-induced vibration is presented in this thesis. Three

finite elements models for the pipe system were developed: a structural finite

element analysis model with multi-support system for frequency analysis, a fluid-

structure interaction (FSI) finite element model and a transient flow model for

waterhammer induced vibration analysis in a fluid filled pipe. The natural

frequencies, static, dynamic and thermal stresses, and the limitation of the pipeline

system were investigated. The investigation demonstrates that a gap in a support

at the segment k has a negative effect on the entire piping system. It was

determinated that the first natural frequency of the whole system occurs at 2.07

Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz. Resonance vibration for the first

mode shape was found at a flow rate of 40 lbm/s, and resonance vibration for the

second mode shape occurs at a flow rate of 275lbm/s. In the warterhammer

analysis, the limit maximum flow rates were determinated based on the rate of a

rapid closure of the isolation valve. A study of the fluid transient in a simple

pipeline was performed. Results obtained from FE model for fluid-structure

interaction was compared with a model without considering fluid-structure

interaction effects. The results show notable differences in the velocities profile

and deformation due to the fluid-structure interaction effects.

ii
RESUMEN

Una investigación de vibración inducida por fluido es presentada en esta

tesis. Tres modelos de elementos finitos para las tuberías fueron desarrollados: un

modelo estructural de elementos finitos con múltiples soportes para un análisis de

frecuencias, un modelo de elementos finitos de fluido estructura y un modelo de

fluido transiente para análisis de golpe de ariete en una tubería llena de fluido. Las

frecuencias naturales, estreses dinámicos, estáticos y termales, y las limitaciones

de la tubería fueron investigados. Al inspeccionar la tubería, se encontró un

espacio entre el segmento K y su soporte. Los resultados indicaron que el espacio

encontrado en este segmento tiene un efecto negativo en toda la tubería. Se

determino que la primera y la segunda frecuencia natural del sistema completo

ocurre a 2.07 Hz y a 5.65 Hz respectivamente. Para la primera forma de vibración

fue encontrada resonancia a una razón de flujo de 40 lbm/s, y para la segunda

forma de vibración a una razón de 275 lbm/s. Para el análisis de golpe de ariete, el

límite máximo de flujo fue determinado basado en la razón de cerrado de la

válvula de aislamiento. Se completó un estudio de flujo transiente para una tubería

simple. Los resultados obtenidos del modelo de elementos finitos para el caso de

interacción fluido-estructura fueron comparados con el modelo sin el efecto de la

interacción. Se identificaron diferencias significativas entre los modelos.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wish to thank the Mechanical Engineering Department of the

University of Puerto Rico and NASA for their financial support; especially Dr.

Travis for the opportunity to be a part of a summer intern at NASA facilities, Dr.

Castillo and Dr. Just for their supports and helps. Special thanks to my advisor of

the thesis, Dr. Yi Jia, who has treated me with honesty and provided wise advises

for the completion of the work during all my master studies. The graduate students

for their friendship and Virmarie Zengotita, who has been with me since the

beginning of my graduate studies providing support and encourage. Finally my

mother, even when fiscally can’t be with me, her lessons and values are always

present.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. viii

LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................x

NOMENCLATURE .............................................................................................. xi

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................1

1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................1

1.1.1 Flow Induce Vibration ............................................................................2

1.1.2 The Analysis ...........................................................................................5

1.2 Literature Reviews .........................................................................................6

1.3 Objective ........................................................................................................9

CHAPTER 2 STATIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................11

2.1 Finite Element Model ..................................................................................11

2.1.1 Assumptions..........................................................................................14

2.1.2 Stress Calculation based on ASME B31.1............................................15

2.2 Static Analysis .............................................................................................16

2.2.1 Thermal Deformation...........................................................................17

2.3 Results..........................................................................................................19

2.3.1 Static Stress Analysis Results ...............................................................19

2.3.2 Results of Thermal Stress Analysis ......................................................21

2.4 Discussion ....................................................................................................24

2.5 Chapter Conclusions ....................................................................................25

CHAPTER 3 WATERHAMMER INDUCED TRANSIENT FLOW

ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................27

3.1 Transient Flow Analysis ..............................................................................27

v
3.1.1 Governing Equation ..............................................................................29

3.1.2 Boundary conditions .............................................................................30

3.1.3 Numeric Discretization .........................................................................33

3.1.4 Transient Investigation Results and Discussion ...................................34

3.1.5 Valve Programming of Close-Open......................................................36

3.2 Specific Applications ...................................................................................40

3.2.1 Results and Discussion for Waterhammer Pressure Analysis ..............43

3.3 Conclusions..................................................................................................47

CHAPTER 4 RESONANT FREQUENCY ANALYSIS ......................................49

4.1 Resonant Analysis........................................................................................49

4.1.1 Governing Equations and boundary conditions....................................50

4.2 Results and Discussions...............................................................................51

4.3 Conclusions..................................................................................................56

CHAPTER 5 TURBULENCE INDUCED VIBRATION.....................................58

5.1 Turbulence induce vibration ........................................................................58

5.2 Results and Discussions...............................................................................64

CHAPTER 6 FE Model of Fluid-Structure Interaction .........................................66

6.1 Fluid Structure Interaction ...........................................................................66

6.2 FEM Analysis ..............................................................................................67

6.3 Finite Element Models.................................................................................67

6.3.1 Material Properties................................................................................70

6.3.2 Element Types ......................................................................................70

6.3.3 Mesh......................................................................................................71

6.3.4 Boundary Conditions ............................................................................71

6.4 Results..........................................................................................................71

vi
6.5 Conclusions..................................................................................................76

CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..............................................78

7.1 Summary ......................................................................................................78

7.2 Conclusions..................................................................................................79

7.3 Future works ................................................................................................82

REFERENCES ......................................................................................................83

APENDIX ..............................................................................................................88

vii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Acoustic wave in pipes..........................................................................4

Figure 1.2: Diagram of the structural study .............................................................6

Figure 2.1: Elastic straight pipe elements ..............................................................12

Figure 2.2: 3D Structural model geometry ............................................................13

Figure 2.3: Different piping supports.....................................................................14

Figure 2.4: Pipe with gap .......................................................................................17

Figure 2.5a: Stress vs. length for gap space case...................................................19

Figure 2.5b: Stress vs. length for gap correction case ...........................................19

Figure 2.6: Gap locations in segment K.................................................................20

Figure 2.7: Stresses distribution along the piping system......................................21

Figure 3.1: Transient flow model...........................................................................31

Figure 3.2: Typically close-open curve [55]..........................................................32

Figure 3.3: Wave pressure for different dt.............................................................35

Figure 3.4: Detail of numerical noise effect ..........................................................35

Figure 3.5: Effect of friction loss...........................................................................36

Figure 3.6: Effect of time of close .........................................................................37

Figure 3.7: Effect of bulk Elasticity Modulus .......................................................38

Figure 3.8: Effect of time of close in the maximum pressure................................39

Figure 3.9: Effect of initial velocity in the wave pressure.....................................40

Figure 3.10: Wave in close duct ............................................................................41

Figure 3.11: Isolation valve and tank location.......................................................43

Figure 3.12: Length vs. stress/allowance no failure is predicted at this flow........45

Figure 3.13: Possible failure is presented at segment F and E...............................45

viii
Figure 3.14: Possible failures for segments A, B, C, D, and F ..............................46

Figure 3.15: Failures for almost all segments........................................................47

Figure 4.1: NASA diagram configuration from previous investigation[1]............50

Figure 4.2: Discretization of the system ................................................................52

Figure 4.3: Resonances per segment at different flow rates for the mode

shape 1 ...........................................................................................................53

Figure 4.4: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode

shape 2 ...........................................................................................................54

Figure 4.5: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode

shape 3 ...........................................................................................................54

Figure 4.6: Natural frequency mode shape 1 of a complete systems.....................55

Figure 4.7: Vibration modes shape 2 for the complete system..............................55

Figure 5.1 Comparison of convective velocity predicted by Chen and

Wambsganss and Bull [5] ..............................................................................61

Figure 5.2: Boundary layer type of turbulence power spectral density [5] ...........63

Figure 5.3: Longitudinal joint acceptances [5] ......................................................63

Figure 6.1 Fluid structure interaction loop flow chart ...........................................68

Figure 6.2: Geometry of free flowing channel.......................................................68

Figure 6.3: Geometry of channel with obstruction ................................................69

Figure 6.4: Average percent difference at different flows.....................................73

Figure 6.5: Velocities profile at the first iteration..................................................73

Figure 6.6: Velocities profile at the second iteration.............................................74

Figure 6.7: Velocities profile at the third iteration ................................................74

Figure 6.8: Velocities profile at the fourth iteration ..............................................75

Figure 6.9: Velocities profile at the fifth iteration ................................................75

ix
Figure 6.10: Velocities profile at the sixth iteration ..............................................76

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Pipe Specifications................................................................................13

Table 2.2: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0 Gap........................................22

Table 2.3: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0.25 Gap...................................22

Table 2.4: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap.....23

Table 2.5: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0.25

Gap.................................................................................................................23

Table 2.6: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap ....................................24

Table 2.7: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for Gap Case...............................24

Table 2.8: System Maximum.................................................................................25

Table 3.1: E2 Facilities Technical Data of Pipe and Content ................................38

Table 3.2: Transient Pressures ...............................................................................44

Table 4.1: Fluid Excitation Frequencies by Others [1]..........................................53

Table 5.1: Uc, Frequency Parameters and Joint Acceptances ...............................64

Table 5.2: PSD and RMS Responses.....................................................................65

Table 6.1: Dimensions Free Flowing Channel ......................................................69

Table 6.2: Dimensions Channel with Obstruction.................................................69

Table 6.3: Material Properties................................................................................70

x
NOMENCLATURE

∇ = Divergent

ac = Cross-sectional Area

Ac = Corroded Cross-sectional Area

C = Speed of Sound

Ca = Corrosion Allowance

Cs = Damping of Structure

Cv = Damping due to Water

Di = Inner Diameter

Do = Outer Diameter

E = Modulus of Elasticity

ΣF = Total Force

Fa = Axial Force

fn = Natural Frequency

fs = Vortex Shedding Frequency

g = Gravity Force or Gravitational Force

I = Moment of inertia of pipe cross section

i = Intensification Factor

ii = In-plane Stress Intensification Factor

io = Out-of-plane Stress Intensification Factor

K = Pipe Stiffness

L = Length

M = Structure Mass

m = Mass intensity

xi
ma = Mass Added due water

Ma = Torsion Moment

Mi = In Plane moment

Mo = Out of plane moment

mt = Total Mass

n = mode shape number

Pd = Design Pressure

P = Pressure

Pa = Axial force from internal pressure

Po = Applied load

r = ratio of circular frequency

Re = Reynolds Number

Sa = Axial Stress

SB = Bending Stress

Se = Expansion Stress

Sh = Strouhall Number

SH = Hoop Stress

SL = Longitudinal Stress

Ss = Sustained Stress

So = Sustained plus Occasional Stress

Ssm = Maximum Shear Stress

Ssh = Secondary Shear Stress

ST = Torsion Stress

t = Time

thk = Pipe Wall Thickness

xii
T1 = Low Temperature

T2 = High Temperature

V = Flow velocity

Z = Section Modulus of Effective Section Modulus

α = Coefficient of Linear Expansion

γ = 2α

β = Coefficient of Volumetric Expansion

wf = Natural frequency

w = Applied frequency

∆ = deflection

εth = Thermal Strain

υ = Poisson Ratio

ρs = Structure Density

ρw = Water Density

σth = Thermal Stress

W = Strain Energy density function

C10 = Mooney-Rivlin constant

C01 = Mooney-Rivlin constant

∆1 =The principal stretch ratio in the unaxial direction

xiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

One of the major problems during the rocket-engine test at NASA is the

vibration experienced from the exhaust plume on its components. Flow induced

vibration occurs when the natural frequency, fn of the line transporting the

propellant and fluid flow are the same or near 1.4. This matching of the two

frequencies produces a condition known as resonance, this behavior in many cases

yields to failure of components or collapse of an entire system. Another problem

of this piping system is the operation of valve. The effect of suddenly stopping or

accelerating a fluid by closing and opening a valve may induce a waterhammer

overpressure. Is this overpressure is enough the pipeline may fail or deform. The

temperature operational condition of this piping system is also of concern. This

piping system operates at extremely low temperature. If the temperature of an

object is changed in the structure, the object will experience length or area

deformation thus volume changes. The magnitude of this change will depend on

the coefficient of linear expansion. This drastically temperature changes create

additional stress in the piping system.

Two know investigation has been previously done in this facilities, Castillo [1]

created a model to study the acoustic induce vibration, he obtain results of noise

and frequency. Also shed vortices solutions, by calculating the vortex-shedding

frequency, which is characterized by the Strouhal number. He also obtain critical

velocities that may cause buckling of the pipelines. His models were based on a

1D mass spring model. It was performed to study the natural frequencies and

1
critical flows velocities at resonance, it main focus was on the fluid flow. He

discretized the pipe system in straight segments, the problem of his model is that

not considers the boundary conditions and support configurations. Also, it did not

provide stresses and strain results in all axis. The other know work was performed

by Indine, inc, they created a fluid dynamic model using EASY5 software to

simulated the transient pressure and flow state at each point in the feedline.

Furthermore a detailed time simulations of valve motions was presented. The

modeling methodology discretized the feedline into a series of capacitance and

flow nodes. These models allowed assessment of waterhammer pressure

oscillations associated with valve opening and closing operations as well as

pressure oscillation forces on propellant line. A problem of their model is that the

pressure response effect was not applied to the piping system.

This new investigation is focus on the structure, it consider the effect created

by the support as well as other boundary conditions. In the investigation the

vibration effect caused by vortex shedding and turbulence flow were consider as

well the water hammer effect on the structure and the thermal stress. For this

purpose a finite elements model was created. Furthermore, a fluid-structure

interaction (FSI) finite element general model and transient timer response general

model were develop.

1.1.1 Flow Induce Vibration

Transporting liquids through piping systems is a common practice. The term

piping system is not new; practically every person has used one. For the general

public there is very little understanding of the phenomenon behind the use of

piping systems. In some applications, like power plants, the failure of piping

2
systems can cause severe economic losses and in worst cases the loss of human

lives. Some of the design or operation factors that may cause failures in piping

systems are: incorrect support, transient pressure changes, flow induced vibration

and thermal stresses. Several standard codes have been developed to regulate the

design and fabrications of piping systems.

There are various type of phenomena that may induce vibration on

components; vortex shedding, turbulence, water hammer, acoustic among others.

Vortex shedding occurs when the flow past an obstacle such as cylinder, sphere or

any other disturbing object; resulting in vortices behind the cylinder. These

vortices move downstream of the pipeline at a frequency, fs, if the conditions are

appropriate these excitation frequencies may induce vibration.

When the fluid velocity exceeds any but the smallest values characteristic of

“seepage” flows, eddies will form even if the surface of the flow channel is

perfectly smooth. The flow is said to be turbulent after it has achieve a specific

Reynolds number. Turbulence flow in most application is desired; a typical

application is to increase the efficiency of a heat exchanger. The force generated

by the turbulence flow has the characteristic of being random. With the

appropriate conditions this force will induce pipe vibration, this type of vibration

is call turbulence induce vibration.

Water hammer normally occurs during the opening or closing of valves, and it

generates an acoustic wave that propagates upstream and downstream of the

system. Figure 1.1 shows a diagram illustrating this phenomenon. Notice that this

acoustic wave may indeed contribute to changes in the thermodynamic properties

of the tank (i.e. thermodynamic equilibrium). This transient phenomenon manifest

as a big noise coming out of the pipe. This is what is heard sometimes when the

3
water faucet is suddenly open or close.

Fluid flow through valves, bends and orifices generates turbulence as the flow

passes through the obstacle. This in turns radiates acoustic waves (of velocity Ua

and pressure Pa) upstream and downstream of the valve. Thus, as the area of the

valves and flow meters changes subsequently the acoustic waves. This is because

the waves have an acoustic pressure that acts against the surface of the pipe.

Consequently, the fluid flow and the solid surface are coupled through the forces

exerted on the wall by the fluid flow. The fluid forces cause the structure to

deform, and as the structure deforms it then produces changes in the flow. As a

result, feedback between the structure and flow occurs: action-reaction. This

phenomena is what is call fluid structure interaction. Because of the interaction

between the fluid flow and the solid surface the equations of motions describing

the dynamics are coupled. This makes the problem more challenging, and even

worse when the flow is turbulent. In addition, this means that the Navier-Stokes

equation and the structure equation for the solid surface must be solved

simultaneously with their corresponding boundary conditions.

V a lve

A co u stic W av e Flo w

T an k
.

Figure 1.1: Acoustic wave in pipes

4
1.1.2 The Analysis

Steady flow and waterhammer analyses could provide information on the

liquid behavior under operational conditions. Static pipe stress and structural

dynamics analyses give insight to the corresponding behavior of the piping

system; whereas the fluid analysis yields stream pressures; the structural dynamic

analysis provide dynamics stress, reaction forces and resonance frequencies.

Figure 1.2 shows the structural analysis element with its corresponding

analyses. In the static analysis maximum stresses and displacements were found

for the complete system, the weakest elements of the piping system with different

support configurations were identified. For the dynamic analysis waterhammer

pressure waves were applied to the system as internal pressure loads, as a result

the maximum flow rate that the system can resist before failure was identify

within its corresponding stress. For the thermal analysis stress caused by a

temperature change were studied. As outcome thermal stresses and displacements

were obtained. For the resonance vibration analysis the first and second natural

frequencies of the piping system were identified using a finite element program

and compared with the applied frequency from the fluid resulting from vortex

shedding to identify possible resonance at different flow rates.

5
3D Solid Model

Static Dynamic Vibration

Maximum Maximum Pressure Natural Excitations


Stress Displacement History frequencies Frequencies

Complete Complete Valve Closing Complete


System System Time System

Segments Various Flows Segments

Figure 1.2: Diagram of the structural study

1.2 Literature Reviews

This section services as a literature review about previous works done by other

researchers, which has been used as reference sources, support and background

for this research. Many papers and books have been consulted, but most of them

are briefly mentioned and some of them are discussed along the thesis. The papers

with more significant contribution to the field are discussed here.

Investigation of the flow induced vibration at the NASA Facility has been

conducted by InDyne, Inc. They. Created a fluid dynamic model using EASY5

software to have simulated the transient pressure and flow state at each point in

the feedline. Furthermore a detailed time simulations of valve motions was

presented. The modeling methodology discretized the feedline into a series of

capacitance and flow nodes. These models allowed assessment of waterhammer

pressure oscillations associated with valve opening and closing operations as well

as pressure oscillation forces on propellant line. Castillo [1] created a model to

6
study the acoustic induce vibration, he obtain results of noise and frequency.

Castillo [1] obtained the shed vortices, by calculating the vortex-shedding

frequency, which is characterized by the Strouhal number. He also obtain critical

velocities that may cause buckling of the pipelines.

Chiba [33];[34];[35];[36] extensively studied piping response using multiple

support system generally under the action of seismic conditions for both linear and

non linear behaviors under the action behaviors. Vayda [37], presented his

research on the dynamic behavior of piping systems under the influence of support

to pipe gap with the seismic conditions and the nonlinearity of the system

Lockau,Haas and Steinweder [38] presented their work on piping and support

design due to high frequency excitation as the criterion. Morgan [30] studied the

propagation of axis-metric waves through fluid filled cylindrical elastic shells.

The dependence of phase velocity on various physical parameters of the system

was analyzed. However their results were restricted to real wave numbers and to

circumferential modes of zero order.

Thomson [29] introduced the effects of Poisson’s ratio and included flexural

and axial wave motion and evaluated the phase velocities of the first three

axisymmetric “fluid” waves. Blevins, [5] in his book “Flow-Induced Vibration”,

presents an equation to estimate the values for the frequency of the vortex

shedding,

SV
fs = (1.1)
di

where S is the Strouhal number, V is the flow velocity and di the inner pipe

diameter.

He proposed that for the high Reynolds number ranges,

7
5.43 X 10 5 ≤ Re D < 6.06 X 10 6 , a Strouhal number of about 0.41 is appropriate.

This is the range of Reynolds number used in our case. Blevins [26] gives a brief

discussion of the application of dimensional analysis to flow-induced vibration.

A.S. Tijsselin [9],[10] has done extensive literature reviews about Fluid Structure

interaction problems with cavitation. He presents one dimensional basic equations

by integration of general three-dimensional equations for fluid dynamics and

structural linear elasticity. He solved by the method of the characteristics the

governing equation, formulated as a hyperbolic set of fourteen first order partial

differential equation. He simulated vaporous cavitation numerically. Taylor [41]

offers an alternative way to measure the damping ratio by measuring the power

supplied to maintain a steady-state, resonant vibration of the structure. J.M.

Cuschieri [31] investigated the transmission of vibrational power from the piping

system to the supporting structure using power flow and structural mobility

methods. This approach can be applied to isolate straight pipe sections as well as a

number of subsections joined together by components that can be represented by

structural mobility terms. Kumar [27] derived the frequency equation for

vibrations of a fluid-filled cylindrical shell using the exact three-dimensional

equations of linear elasticity. These equations were analyzed quantitatively to

study the flexural vibrations (n=1) of empty and fluid-filled shells of different

thickness. The effect of fluid was negligible for vibrations of thick shells. As the

thickness of the shell decrease, the presence of fluid gave extra modes of

vibrations. T. Repp [13] Presents a simulation that shows an overall good

agreement for the average pressure amplitude of a straight pipe in comparison to

the analytical results obtained with the extended Joukowksy equation. He found

that In the case of the bended pipe the pressure amplitude of the extended

8
Joukowsky equation seems to be too conservative. Samsury [28] discussed the

phenomenon of liquid-structure coupling in fluid-filled pipes, which results in

plane axial waves in the fluid getting converted to flexural beam vibrations of the

pipe. A mathematical analysis of liquid-structure coupling in a liquid-filled elbow

is presented. Morgan [32] studied the propagation of axis-metric waves through

fluid filled cylindrical elastic shells. The dependence of phase velocity on various

physical parameters of the system was analyzed. However their results were

restricted to real wave numbers and to circumferential modes of zero order. M. K.

Au-Yang [16],[20],[21],[23],[24] Reviewed and put onto a firm mathematical

basis of the theoretical development of the acceptance integral method to estimate

the random vibration of structures subject to turbulent flow. He derived closed-

form solutions for the joint acceptances for spring-supported and simply supported

beams. K.T. TRUONG [22] in his paper evaluated dynamic stresses of a Pipe

Line, presented a fast and reliable way to evaluate the harmonic dynamic stresses

of a simply supported pipeline from the data collected on the field. He also offers

a basic understanding to solve quickly vibration problem when and where the

computer software is not accessible. Paidoussis, M.P.; Au-Yang, M.K. and Chen,

S. S., [38] in 1988, studied leakage flow induced vibration. He collected technical

papers, most of them dealing with numerical analysis or testing of specific

components.

1.3 Objective

The objective of this thesis is to conduct an investigation of flow induce

vibration, the research will be extended to an specific propellant pipeline at NASA

facilities. As outcomes, maximum flow rate that may cause resonance and

9
vibration amplitudes, based on transient flow analysis, will be identified. The

scope extended to the fluid structure interaction phenomena, general application

programs will be created In order to achieve these major goals. The following are

specific objectives:

1. Create a finite element model for static structural analysis of the specific

application at the NASA facilities.

2. Obtain maximum flow rate and maximum pressure solutions to prevent

pipeline failure during operation.

3. Investigate the transient waterhammer phenomena.

4. Develop a general application subroutine that enables the study of fluid

structure interaction.

10
CHAPTER 2 STATIC ANALYSIS

2.1 Finite Element Model

The model is created based on the actual pipe configuration; it is a 3-

dimensional model, which has the capability of simulating different boundary

conditions for given problem. This model was created in the commercial software

PipePack, which is a part of Algor® software. The structural analysis performed

by this software is in compliance with various industrial standards piping codes.

In our case the code that was applied is the ASME B31.1 power piping code. This

model is intended to only simulate static fluid flow, and for a structural analysis.

Simulating the effects of fluid flow will be presented in separate analysis in the

following chapters.

Finite element analysis is an advance method that divides the structure in

small elements and applied it corresponding boundary conditions to solve a

complex problem [6]. The type of element used can be described as following: an

uniaxial element with tension-compression, torsion, and bending capabilities. The

element has six degrees of freedom at two nodes: translations in the nodal x, y,

and z directions and rotations about the nodal x, y, and z axes. Figure 2.1 shows

the characteristic of the element used.

11
Figure 2.1: Elastic straight pipe elements

The entire pipeline has 14 straight segments, 13 elbows, 2 valves and a

reducer as shown in Figure 2.2. The segments are named with letter that goes from

A to N. The model has the capability of return values every 4 inches. For sections

A to the beginning of section I the pipelines have an external diameter of 6.625

inches and an internal diameter of 4.209 inches, this leads to a thickness of 1.208

inches. From sections I to n the outside diameter is 4.5 inches with an inside

diameter of 2.86 inches and a thickness of .820 inches.

The material of the pipeline is Austenitic stainless grade (301-309) with a

density of 0.2899 lb/cu in. The fluid inside of the piping is liquid oxygen with a

density of .0411 lb/cu in. Table 2.1 summaries the properties of the pipelines.

12
A

2 2
I E B
H F
2 1

3 3
J G D C

L
N

3
M

Figure 2.2: 3D Structural model geometry

Table 2.1: Pipe Specifications

6 in section 4 in section

Austenitic 304 Austenitic 304


Material
stainless steel stainless steel

Outer Diameter (in) 6.625 4.50

Inner Diameter (in) 4.209 3.68

Thickness (in) 1.208 0.82

Inside Fluid Liquid Oxygen Liquid Oxygen

13
The pipeline has three types of supports as shown in Figure 2.3; the first one is

a one-way support, constraining the movement in the negative Y axis. The second

one is a 4 way constrain support, it has a .25 inches of gap for the x and for the

positive Y axis, for the negative Y axis the displacement is constrained. The last

type of supports constrains the movement in the negative Y direction.

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3

Figure 2.3: Different piping supports

2.1.1 Assumptions

The weight of the tank which is at section A was not included in the analysis

because all its weight is sustained by its own separate supports. This part of the

piping was considered rigid and modeled with an anchor. At section 3, a T

connection was considered welded under ANSI B16.9. The section connected in

the T has two valves and was not considerate after the valves refer to Figure 2.2.

For the location of the T, there is a flow meter that its weight was also not

considerate at segment F because the additional weight of this segment compared

to the piping is minimal. The supports were treated as rigid elements. The anchors

14
at sections F and N were modeled as rigid in all directions. The weight of the

valve at section I is considered to be held by its own supports, thus is not include

in the 3D model. All the analyses were modeled at an ambient temperature of

85°F witch is typical for the geographic location.

2.1.2 Stress Calculation based on ASME B31.1

Cylindrical pressure vessel and pipes carrying fluids at high pressure develop

stresses with values that are dependent upon the radius of the element under

consideration. The pressure inside of the cylinder acts on the wall of the same, as

a result a stress acting uniformly over the area is created. This stress is the hoop

stress and is calculated with the following equation.

⎧⎪⎡ Do ⎤ ⎫
SH = P ⎨⎢ ⎥ − 0 .4 ⎬ (2.1)
⎪⎩⎣ 2(thk − ca) ⎦ ⎭

Were P is the internal pressure exerted by the fluid, Do is the exterior

diameter, thk is the thickness and ca is the corrode cross-sectional area, in our case

no corrosion is expected for the stainless steel, thus the ca value becomes 0.

Another stress created due to pressure is the longitudinal stress, this stress is

created along the pipe, and it will depend on the geometry of the pipe as well on

support or any stress intensity factor in the pipe. The stress is calculated with the

following equation.

SL =
[(i Mi)
i
2
+ (io Mo) 2 ] 1
2
+
Fa + Pa
(2.2)
Z Ac

15
where Mi is the in-plane moment, Mo is the out of plane moment Z is the

section Modulus of Effective Section Modulus, Fa is the axial force, Ac is the

cross-sectional area and Pa is the axial force from internal pressure and is

calculated with the following equation.

Pa =
π
{P[D0 − 2(−ca)]2 } (2.3)
4

In this equation the pipe is assumed without corrosion thus ca becomes 0.

2.2 Static Analysis

The static analysis serves as a starting point, where the weakest elements are

going to be identified and the cause of it. As well, the support with the reaction

that creates to the piping system will be analyzed. It’s not expected any failure or

critical stress at this point.

After an inspection of the pipeline it was found a space or gap between certain

supports and the pipeline as shown in Figure 2.4. The gap means that the pipelines

in certain areas do not touch the support, therefore their weight load is supported

by segments of others areas. The reason for the space is unknown but it might

design to accommodate thermal expansions or a construction error. The analyses

were made with the gap and without the gap to see if the gap makes any

significant difference in the system stresses.

16
Figure 2.4: Pipe with gap

2.2.1 Thermal Deformation

One of our goals in this investigation is to study the effect of the temperatures

changes. If the temperature of an object is changed in the structure, the object will

experience length or area thus volume changes. The magnitude of this change will

depend on the coefficient of linear expansion, α, which is widely tabulated for

solids. The coefficient of volumetric expansion, β, which is used extensively with

liquids and gasses.

Changes in temperature affect all dimensions in the same way. In this case,

thermal strain is handled as strain due to an applied load. For example, if a bar is

heated but is constrained the stress can be calculated from the thermal strain and

Hooke’s law.

σ th = Eε th (2.4)

where E is the modulus of elasticity and ε th is the thermal strain, the length L,

area A, and volume V, strain are calculated with the following equations.

17
∆L = αL0 (T2 − T1 ) (2.5)

∆A = γA0 (T2 − T1 ) (2.6)

γ ≈ 2α (2.7)

∆V = βV0 (T2 − T1 ) (2.8)

β ≈ 3α (2.9)

Algor calculate the thermal stress using the restrained and unrestrained
conditions, PipePlus determines the restrained or unrestrained status according to
the Y coordinate for each segment of pipe. A positive Y coordinate value
represents an aboveground (unrestrained) segment. A negative Y coordinate value
represents a buried (restrained) segment.

For the restrained segments the sustained stress is calculated with the
following equation [14]:

S L = Eα (T 2 − T 1) (2.10)

For the unrestrained segment the expansion stress is calculated with the
following equations [14]

[
S E = Sb2 + 4 St2 ] 1
2
(2.11)
Where;

Sb =
[(i M ) + (i M ) ]
i i
2
0 0
2
1
2
(2.12)
Z
Mt
St = (2.13)
2Z

18
2.3 Results

2.3.1 Static Stress Analysis Results

Maximum Stress/Allowance ratio with gap

0.12
Segment A
Segment B
0.1
Segment C
Segment D
0.08
Stress/Allowance

Segment E
Segment F
0.06 Segment G
Segment H

0.04 Segment I
Segment J
Segment K
0.02
Segment L
Segment M
0 Segment N
Segments

Figure 2.5a: Stress vs. length for gap space case

Maximum Stress/Allowance ratio gap correction

0.035
Segment A
0.03 Segment B
Segment C
0.025 Segment D
Stress/Allowance

Segment E
0.02 Segment F
Segment G
0.015 Segment H
Segment I
0.01 Segment J
Segment K
0.005 Segment L
Segment M
0 Segment N
Segments

Figure 2.5b: Stress vs. length for gap correction case

19
Figures (a) and (b) show the peak static stress/allowance ratio value for segments

from A to M for both cases, with the gap and without the gap in section k, refers

to Figure 2.6 for location of this segment. The stress to allowance ratio is the

division of the maximum allowance stress per ASME code B31.1 and the actual

maximum actual stress per segment. These values were obtained using the Algor

finite element program.

Gap
J

Figure 2.6: Gap locations in segment K

20
0 in gap .25in gap
545 psi

70
1789 PSI
1789 psi
220

Figure 2.7: Stresses distribution along the piping system

Figure 2.7 shows the stresses distribution along the piping system. It also

shows the peak stress for the case with gap and without gap, and the location of

the same. The left side of the Figure is the case without the gap and the right one

is the case with the gap.

2.3.2 Results of Thermal Stress Analysis

The following Tables 2.2 to 2.7 summarize some of the results. Although the

system experiences some displacement due to temperature change, the maximum

effect can be seen in the stresses, particularly for those where the gap of .25 inches

is present

21
Table 2.2: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0 Gap

Maximum Displacement for 0 GAP

Temperature X Y Z
Segment Segment Segment
°F (inches) (inches) (inches)

-100 0.276 D 0.158 J 0.340 K

-200 -0.406 B 0.233 J -0.490 I

-300 -0.531 B 0.330 L -0.703 I

-400 -0.562 B 0.378 L -0.748 I

Table 2.3: Thermal Maximum Displacement for 0.25 Gap

Maximum Displacement .25 GAP

Temperature X Y Z
Segment Segment Segment
°F (inches) (inches) (inches)

-100 0.276 J 0.159 K 0.332 K

-200 -0.406 M 0.234 K -0.490 K

-300 -0.531 M 0.330 K -0.703 K

-400 -0.562 M 0.378 K -0.748 K

The results from Tables 2.2 and 2.3 reveal that the structure experiences some

displacement due to temperature changes, but the changes in all directions are

almost identical. In Tables 2.4 and 2.5 present rotation experience by the zero and

with the .25 inches gap cases. However, after -300 F degrees the two cases are

identical.

22
Table 2.4: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap

Maximum Rotational 0 GAP

Temperature X Y Z
Segment Segment Segment
°F (inches) (inches) (inches)

-100 -0.145 J -0.233 K -0.16 K

-200 0.249 M -0.369 K -0.22 K

-300 0.398 M K -0.245 K


-0.486

-400 0.444 -0.487 K -0.226 K


M

Table 2.5: Maximum Axial Rotation Due to Temperature Changes for 0.25
Gap

Maximum Rotational .25 GAP


Temperature X Y Z
Segment Segment Segment
°F (inches) (inches) (inches)

-100 -0.119 J -0.252 K -0.124 H

-200 0.243 M -0.383 K -0.197 K

-300 0.398 M -0.486 K -0.245 K

-400 0.444 M -0.487 K -0.226 K

The stresses due to temperature changes are shown in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 for

the gap and elimination of the gap cases, respectively. Unlike the previous tables

of displacement and rotation the results for the stresses are different for the zero

gaps. Only at a temperature of -300 °F both stresses are the same, but for the other

temperature cases the difference is evident.

23
Table 2.6: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for 0 Gap

Stress 0 GAP

Temperature °F Maximum (psi) Stress/Allowance Segment

-100 7137 0.16 F

-200 10710 0.25 F

-300 12326 0.28 C

-400 12640 0.62 C

Table 2.7: Stress Due to Temperature Changes for Gap Case

Stress .25 GAP


Temperature °F Maximum (psi) Stress/Allowance Segment

-100 7602 0.17 F

-200 0.26 F
11188

-300 12332 0.28 C

-400 13641 0.62 C

2.4 Discussion

In Figure 2.5, it can be seen that a stress peak point at segment L. This peak

value means that there are some factors increasing the stress in this location. Some

factors that may contribute to the increment of the stress are supports, tees or

anchors. In this particular case it was found that a .25 inches gap in two supports

located at section K creates an increase of stress. The reason is that the entire

24
segment does not touch the support. With the gap correction the stress reduces, it

is true not only in section L but also in almost all other segments, for comparison

cases, Figure 2.7 can be referenced. With the .25 in gap the maximum static stress

is 1789 psi that is a ratio of stress/allowance of .10. With the gap correction the

maximum stress is only 545 psi, which is in segment I with a Stress/Allowance of

.03. This number looks insignificant at this moment later when the fluid pressure

is taken into account this increase in stress becomes more significant. Again the

intention at this moment is to identify which are the weakest elements and its

cause. Table 2.8 summaries the findings.

Table 2.8: System Maximum

With Gap With No Gap

Segment L Segment I

Maximum Stress 1789 psi 545 psi

Stress/Allowance 0.10 0.03

2.5 Chapter Conclusions

For the static stress case the gap on the supports at segment k has a negative

effect in the piping, increasing the stress and displacement in almost all the

segments. The more vulnerable segments of the pipe system are F, G, H and I.

Correction of the gap definitely reduce the stress in almost half for the static case.

None of the segments are close to the stress/allowance ratio of 1.0, and is expected

that with the addition of the fluid pressures loads to the system, the stress will be

affected by this gap also the natural frequencies and the pressure history. At this

25
phase of the investigation the more vulnerable segments were found.

For the thermal case the stress and displacement with the gap of .25 in and

zero gaps were analyzed in a range from -100 to -400 °F degrees, (the temperature

were chosen to be in concordance of liquid oxygen properties). The maximum

stress and displacement were found. However; the more important values

correspond to the -200°F which are the operational values for liquid oxygen. For

the .25 in the maximum stress and displacement was found 11,188 psi with a

corresponding stress/allowance ratio of .26. For the zero gap 10,710 psi with a

stress/allowance of .25 were obtained. Both maximum stresses were found at

segment F. However, these values are in the acceptable range and no action is

required at this phase of the investigation.

26
CHAPTER 3 WATERHAMMER INDUCED

TRANSIENT FLOW ANALYSIS

3.1 Transient Flow Analysis

In this chapter an investigation of transient flow due to waterhammer was

performed. An extension to the specific case study was achieved. The main focus

is to analyze the effect of suddenly stopping or accelerating a fluid by closing and

opening a valves. The investigation was concentrated in the behavior of a control

valve as a potential source for excessive pressure and the possible violent pipe

vibration. Simulation of different opening and closing times of a simple valve is

also treated. Therefore, the model used for the study of the valve behavior was a

simple pipeline that connects two reservoirs. For application purpose the

maximum waterhammer pressure was analysis for the NASA piping system and

applied to the piping model discussed in previous chapters.

The classical formulation of water hammer problem was applied and a

numerical code has been developed. Then, the effect of closing the valve at

different times was analyzed as a special parameter to control the maximum

pressure. Contemplation of pressure attenuation is also performed by applying a

model for frictional losses. The specific case of the NASA facilities is discussed in

section 3.6.

Classical equations that describe this problem can be found in the literature

[42]. Develop of these equations and simplifications can be found in Chaundhry

and Etal works. In this investigation the formulation includes the nonlinear terms.

Contemplation of friction losses are estimated by applying a coefficient of

27
pressure drops in this investigation. In many cases this coefficient is calculated

experimentally or the use of empirical correlations. Attributions of frictional

losses are found in the valve and pipe, as consequence of fluid contractions and

shear stress.

Commonly in the case of a valve, a discharge a coefficient of pressure drop is

applied to represent frictional losses. A simple valve can be idealized as a flow

orifice; therefore modeling the same can be represented with a flow orifice study.

Thus, the coefficient of discharge for the valve case is assumed the same as in the

orifice. For the case of flow through an orifice Sisavath and etal [43] develop

different models, the application of this model can be extended to pressure drop in

a valve. For the case of friction losses due to shear stress the most useful model is

the frictional loss, which depends on the velocity (Darcy-Weisbach formula).

These models were compared with others models and the unsteady friction

were classified by Bergant and etal [44] [45]. Also, they investigated the Brunone

[46] models in detail and compare with results of laboratory measurements for

water hammer cases with laminar and low Reynolds number in turbulent flows.

Assumptions of pure liquid all the time without presence of air or bubbles is

made, therefore the cavitation effect is not considered in this model. Under this

assumption, the study of air valve [50] and entrapped bubbles [51] are not

considered. Another assumption is that the pipe has thick wall.

The method chosen to solve the system of equation is the MacCormak

technique. This numerical technique discretized the resulting partial differential

equation in the space and time domain [48]. For transient part the method of

characteristic is applied, this is the preferred method to solve the time integration

28
[42] [49]. Limitation of this technique is when nonlinear terms are included,

therefore the MacCormack predictor corrector method is used to solve for the

nonlinear terms.

3.1.1 Governing Equation

Under typical pipeline operating conditions of the fluid accelerates and holds

suddenly, it is necessary to analyze the transient condition by solving the Navier-

Stoke equation and the momentum equation.

In order to derive the mathematical model for this problem some

simplifications will be taking into account: axisymetric flow, no sterling flow and

1D model. Under these assumptions it is possible to neglect the viscous term in

the momentum equation, but the friction losses is contemplated using unsteady

model. Another consideration is that the fluid is essentially compressible and the

pipe is considered flexible. The derivations of these equations are straightforward

and can be found in standard references [42] [52].

∂p ∂V
+ ρa 2 =0
∂t ∂x (3.1)

∂V 1 dp fV V
+ + =0
∂t ρ dx 2D (3.2)

Where f is the friction factor. Bergant and etal [46], based on experimental

results recommend the original Brunoe model as an effective model. Brunoe [47]

model for the friction factor is:

29
kD ⎛ ∂V ∂V ⎞
f = fq + ⎜ − ⎟
V V ⎝ ∂t ∂x ⎠
(3.3)

Where f q is the quasi-steady friction factor, which is plotted for different

Reynolds number ( Re = VD ν ) and relative roughness ( e = k s D ) in the Moody

Diagram [i]. Also the relative roughness can be found tabulated for different pipe

diameters and materials. The coefficient k is called the Brunoe’s friction

coefficient. It can be predicted analytically using Vardy’s [53] shear decay

coefficient C * :

C*
k=
2 (3.4)

The Vardy’s [54] shear decay coefficient C * is given by:

0.00476 Laminar Flow (3.5a)

7.41
log(14.3 / Re 0.05 )
Turbulent flow (3.5b)
Re

3.1.2 Boundary conditions

As mention earlier the objective of the investigation is to analyze the effect of

opening and closing a valve located in a pipeline, therefore the following

boundary condition assumption is made; Independent of flow oscillation is

30
assumed that the reservoir of the pipe line will maintain constant level, thus

maintaining constant inlet hydraulic pressure Pi The boundary condition is

expressed mathematically as:

pn = ρgH = Pi
inlet (3.6)

Where the subscript n indicate time at the instant n . Therefore, the boundary

condition for the velocity at the valve, under steady state conditions, is known and

also the volumetric flow rate. Using the discharge coefficient, the volumetric flow

rate is:

Q0 = C d A0 2 p 0 / ρ
valve (3.7)

Where the subscript 0 refers to steady state conditions, C d is the discharge

coefficient and A0 is the area of open valve. An schematic of the model with it

corresponding boundary conditions is shown in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1: Transient flow model

The volumetric flow as a function of valve steam depends on the type of valve

and is specified by the manufacturer. Commonly the volumetric flow plotted as a

percent of the maximum volumetric flow at the acting pressure of the system [54]

[55] Figure 5.2 shows a typically close-open curve [56] for a valve.

31
Figure 3.2: Typically close-open curve [55]

Assuming that last relationship is valid for transient conditions, the velocity at

the valve at time n is:

AT pn
Vn = C d F (l ) 2 n
= Vv
valve
A0 ρ (3.8)

Where, F (l ) is the percent of caudal obtained from Figure 3.2 and l the stem

position. AT the area of valve totally open and A0 the area of the valve partially

open, according with the stem position l . As an initial condition a constant

velocity profile and pressure in the pipe is used:

V 0 = V initial p0 = Pinitial (3.9)

32
3.1.3 Numeric Discretization

The system of equations to solve is:

∂p ∂V
+ ρa 2 =0 (3.10)
∂t ∂x

∂V 1 dp fV V
+ + =0 (3.11)
∂t ρ dx 2D

V ( x,0) = Vinitial (3.12)

p ( x,0) = Pinitial (3.13)

p(inlet , t ) = P (3.14)

V (valve, t ) = V (3.15)

Then, for the spatial and temporal discretization the MacCormak is used. The

MacCormak method is a two step predictor corrector finite different. The

MacCormak method can solve linear partial differential equations (PDE),

nonlinear PDE and system of PDE [48]. In the MacCormak method, the predicted

provisional values are obtained using first order forward difference

approximations:

∆t n
pin +1 = pin − ρa 2 (Vi +1 − Vi n )
∆x (3.16)

∆t ∆t n
Vi n +1 = Vi n −
ρ∆x
( p in+1 − p in ) − Vi n f
2D
Vi
(3.17)

In the second final step, a first order backward difference approximations

based on the provisional values is used.

33
p in +1 =
1⎡ n

2⎣
p i + p in +1 − ρa 2
∆x
(
∆t n +1
)⎤
Vi − Vi n−1+1 ⎥
⎦ (3.18)

Vi n +1 =
1⎡ n

2⎣
Vi + Vi n +1 −
∆t
ρ∆x
( )⎤
pin +1 − pin−+11 ⎥ − Vi n f

∆t n
2D
Vi

(3.19)

The MacCormak method is conditionally stable and convergent. The

stationary condition given by the Courant number less than one. For this system of

equation it is necessary to satisfy the courant conditions in the two equations.

∆t ∆t
Cn1 = ρa 2 ≤ 1 and Cn1 = ≤1 (3.20)
∆x ρ∆x

Here, when ∆x is imposed, the ∆t can be found from the last equation.

3.1.4 Transient Investigation Results and Discussion

To integrate the equations a Fortran code has been developed. As a test case,

the instantaneously totally close behavior for the valve was performed to validate

convergence. The nodal point selected for the spatial discretizacion was chosen as

500 for all the cases. The ∆t was chosen as: 0.03, 0.04 and 0.05 second.

The frictional term for the test case was neglected. The pressure distributions

for different times in the adjacent point to the valve are shown in Figure 3.3 as a

result.

Pressure fluctuation in each step corner of Figure 3.3 are not smooth, this is

attributed to the noise effect. Figure 3.4 shows the details of the numerical noise

effect of Figure 3.3 after 80 seconds.

34
Figure 3.3: Wave pressure for different dt

Figure 3.4: Detail of numerical noise effect

35
Based on previous result, ∆t and ∆x was selected. After the selection of step

and time, a simulation considering the friction factor is performed. Figure 3.5

shows the results of the simulation for the pressure distribution adjacent to the

point of the valve. The simulation is performed for both with and without friction

case. Friction effect can be appreciated as a decrement of pressure along time. The

effect of pressure losses can be seen when comparing with previous case.

Figure 3.5: Effect of friction loss

3.1.5 Valve Programming of Close-Open

A study of time of closing was performed with the same parameter that in the

test case. The valve studied is of a linear type. The behavior of the pressure for

different time of closing is shown in Figure 5.6.

36
Figure 3.6: Effect of time of close

Figure 3.6 shows that the maximum pressure as a function of valve closing

time, the faster the valve is close the higher and the abrupt the change on pressure

is.

The fluid bulk modulus of elasticity is the other parameter that may contribute

to the maximum pressure. For different Bulk modulus of elasticity the maximum

pressure as a function of valve closing time is plotted in Figure 3.7.

37
Figure 3.7: Effect of bulk Elasticity Modulus

3.1.6 Case study

To be in concordance with the NASA facilities, the material of the pipeline

chosen was austenitic stainless steal and the fluid content is liquid oxygen. The

applicable properties are shown in Table 3.1. To have liquid oxygen at ambient

temperature a pressure of 2.5 GPa was assumed.

Table 3.1: E2 Facilities Technical Data of Pipe and Content

Pipeline Properties For Oxygen

Density 1137.64 kg/m3 1000 kg/m3

Outer Diameter (m) 0.1682 N/A

Inner Diameter (m) 0.1069 0.1069

Thickness (m) .0306 N/A

Bulk Modulus of elasticity 1.93E15 1000

Length (m) 1 1

Operating temperature 30° C 30° C

38
Figure 3.8: Effect of time of close in the maximum pressure

For this specific problem the spatial grid was made using ∆x = 0.0002 and the

time grid with a ∆t = 0.0000002. This grid was chosen to minimize numerical

fluctuation according with the previous analysis. Figure 3.8 show the maximum

pressure as a function of initial velocity for different closing time. For all the cases

it can be seen a linear behavior between maximum pressure and the initial

velocity. In this Figure is evident that the faster the close time higher is the

pressure. Also, the difference between closing the valve at .05 and .1 second is

minimal thus, .01 second may be taken as the critical value. As expected the fluid

will tend to increase it pressure at higher velocities.

39
Figure 3.9: Effect of initial velocity in the wave pressure

Using a valve closing time of .01 seconds for different initial velocity, the

pressure behavior is calculated in time, as shown in Figure 3.9. It can be seen a

higher pressure in the first millisecond, the same is attenuated as time pass due to

pipe friction.

3.2 Specific Applications

As shown in Figure 3.9 transients flows has a peak maximum pressure value,

thus if failure due to an overpressure could occur it will happen at this value. For

the specific application our interest is to determinate flow limit due to a

waterhammer maximum pressure. Therefore, a different approach will be made

for this section.

Analyzing the energy conservation for the case rapid valve closure or open.

The diminution of Kinetic energy will transform in a compression work for the

40
fluid that will cause the fluid to full fill the pipe. As a result an over pressure is

created. If the valve is rapidly open a depression or a negative transient pressure is

obtained.

c Moving wave front


Flow

V V +dV
Velocity
Pressure P P+d P

Figure 3.10: Wave in close duct

If the flow velocity at the downstream end is changed from V to V + dV,

thereby changing the pressure from P to P + dP. This change in pressure will

produce a pressure wave that will propagate in the upstream direction. The

pressure on the upstream side of this wave is p, whereas the pressure on the

downstream side of this wave is p + dp.

It is possible to transform the unsteady-flow situation to a steady-flow

situation by letting the velocity reference system move with the pressure wave.

Then creating a control volume at the interrupted area the momentum equation is

solved as following:

x2
d
∑ F = dt ∫ ρ wVAc dx + ( ρ w AcV 2 ) out − ( ρ w AcV 2 ) in (3.21)
x1

First because the flow is steady, the first term on the right-hand side of the

momentum equation is zero. Referring to equation 3.21, and introducing the force

and velocity into equation:

pAc − ( p + dp) Ac = (V + c + dV )( ρ w + dρ w )(V + c + dV ) Ac − (V + c) ρ w (V + c) Ac

(3.22)

41
By simplifying and discarding terms of higher order, this equation becomes

− dp = 2 ρ wV dV + 2 ρ w dVc + dρ w (V 2 + 2Vc + c 2 ) (3.23)

The general form of the equation for conservation of mass for one-dimension

flows may be written as

x2
d
dt x∫1
0= ρ w Ac dx + ( ρ wVAc ) out − ( ρ wVAc ) in (3.24)

Having steady flow the first term on the right hand side of equation 3.24 is

zero and introducing the velocities the equation becomes

0 = ( ρ w + dρ w )(V + c + dV ) Ac − ρ w (V + c) Ac (3.25)

Simplifying this equation,

− ρ w dV
dρ w = (3.26)
V +c

Because the fluid velocity v<< c

− ρ w dV
dρ w = (3.27)
c

Now, by substituting equation 3.27 into equation 3.23, discarding terms of

higher order, and simplifying

dP = − ρ w * dV * c (3.28)

This equation is commonly named Joukowosky equation it predicts a pressure

due to suddenly change in flow of a fluid.

For the sound velocity c if the conduits of the walls are assumed to be slightly

deformable instead of rigid, then the speed of sound would take the following

form.

42
K
ρ
C= (3.29)
KD
1+
eE

3.2.1 Results and Discussion for Waterhammer Pressure Analysis

The proposed facility maximum flow is 275 lbm/sec, because the structural

analysis intends to study the limitation of the piping system this flow will be

considered as the maximum theoretical flow. The inner pipe diameter recalling

from previous chapter is 4.209 in. The total line length from the tank bottom to the

isolation valve is 1131.7 in. Valve location is shown in Figure 3.11.

Tank
Location

Isolation
valve

Figure 3.11: Isolation valve and tank location

The flow velocity at a mass flow rate of 275 lbm/sec is

275 275 in
V = = = 456 (3.30)
ρ w Ac .0433 × 13.914 sec

43
The theoretical maximum pressure surge for this flow velocity using a specific

speed of sound C of 39,015 ft/s is:

ρw × c ×V .0433 × 39015 × 456


Pmax = = = 1994 psi (3.31)
g 386

The pressures plotted in Table 3.2 are the pressures at the run valve, which is

at steady state flow. At steady state the local pressure is the tank pressure minus

flow friction losses. At a valve totally closure, flow is stopped therefore friction

losses becomes zero. Since the friction losses are zero it can be assumed that the

local pressure will be the peak surge pressure at the valve plus the tank pressure.

The tank pressure is 8000 psia.

Table 3.2: Transient Pressures

Pressure + Tank
Velocity Pressure Pressure
Pressure
ft/s (mpa) (psia)
(psia)
16.40 5.937 861 8861
32.80 11.870 1722 9722
38.00 14.250 2067 10067
49.21 17.810 2583 10583
65.61 23.750 3445 11445

The pressure plotted in Table 3.2 are applied to the structural model created in

Algor, this pressure do not consider as fluctuating over time, therefore considered

as a constant pressure simulating failure by peak transient pressure. Algor has the

capability of simulate loadings to the structure and study the effect along

structural elements; it doesn’t have the capability of create a pressure wave

running in the fluid.

44
Flow 16.4 ft/s

0.9

0.8

0.7
Segment A
Segment B
0.6
Stress/allowance

Segment C
Segment D
0.5 Segment E
Segment F
Segment G
0.4
Segment H
Segment I
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Segments

Figure 3.12: Length vs. stress/allowance no failure is predicted at this flow

With a 16.4 ft/s and a sudenly close no failure is predicted as shown in Figure

3.12, but it clearly can be seen that the stress per segment is close to the limit

therefore, this can be considered a caution situation.

Flow 32.8 ft/s

1.2

1
Segment A
Segment B
Stress/Allowance

0.8 Segment C
Segment D
0.6 Segment E
Segment F

0.4 Segment G
Segment H
Segment I
0.2

0
Segments

Figure 3.13: Possible failure is presented at segment F and E.

45
With a flow of 32.4 ft/s and instantaneous closure of the isolation valve,

possible failure for segments A, B, D, and F is predicted. As shown in Figure 3.13

most of the segments also are close to their limits. This may be considered as the

maximum allowed flow in the case of an instantaneous closure of the isolation

valve.

Flow 38 ft/s

1.2

1
Segment A
Segment B
0.8
stress/allowance

Segment C
Segment D
0.6 Segment E
Segment F

0.4 Segment G
Segment H
Segment I
0.2

0
Segment

Figure 3.14: Possible failures for segments A, B, C, D, and F

With a flow rate of 38 ft/s which is the maximum flow rate proposed by the

facility it is clear as shown in Figure 3.14, that with a suddenly close of the test

valve almost all segments are on they limit and most of them are over their limits.

No flow over this value is recommended based on an emergency situation, some

cushion devices should be added for prevention.

46
Flow 49.21 ft/s

1.2

1
Segment A
Segment B
Sterss/Allowance

0.8 Segment C
Segment D
0.6 Segment E
Segment F

0.4 Segment G
Segment H
Segment I
0.2

0
Segment

Figure 3.15: Failures for almost all segments

For this case failures of almost all segments is evident as shown in Figure 3.15,

this flow velocity should be avoided and there is no reason for study higher flow

values.

3.3 Conclusions

A study of the fluid transient in a simple pipeline is done. For that reason, a

Fortran code is developed to integrate the governing partial differential equation

using MacCormak method. The behavior analyzed for different test cases the

incremental time is performed based on these results. After that, using

manufacturer information, the time of close and open is also analyzed as a

parameter to control the crest of wave pressure. The result obtained indicates that

with adequately time of operation of the wave crest no reach the pressure of

failure.

Maximum pressures caused by rapid closure of isolation valve are obtained for

various flow using standard book equations. The transient flow pressure wave was

47
applied to the piping system before the isolation valve. Failure prediction is

obtained for several segments. It is found that for the case of a valve rapid closure,

possible failure will occur at a flow rate of 38 ft/s which is the maximum flow the

facility is planning to run. Some pressures reducer is recommended before the test

valve in order to reduce the impact of the traveling wave.

48
CHAPTER 4 RESONANT FREQUENCY ANALYSIS

4.1 Resonant Analysis

Flow induced vibration is to a large extend, an operational problem that has on

worst cases direct impact on public safety. Vibration in piping systems consists of

the transfer of momentum and forces between piping and the contained liquid

during flow. Excitation mechanisms may arise by rapid changes in flow and

pressure or may be initiated by mechanical action of the piping. The resulting

loads impart on the piping are transferred to the support mechanisms such as

hangers, thrust blocks, etc. Special attention has to be taken when this phenomena

is present.

Free vibration occurs when a system is displaced from its static position and

left free to oscillate. Under free vibration the system oscillates at its natural

frequencies. The natural frequencies are dynamic characteristics of the system

specified by its stiffness and inertia properties. Natural frequencies are calculated

with modal analysis. Forced vibrations are classified into periodic and non-

periodic. In a periodic vibration, the response repeats itself at a regular time

interval, called period T. Harmonic excitation is a sub-class of periodic vibration

and is referred hereafter as an analytical approach for the present investigation.

The resonance effect can be described as a non stable vibration. Resonance will

take effect when the exiting frequency is near 1.4 the natural frequency [15][16].

Figure 4.1 shows the segments that the excitation frequencies need to be

calculated

49
Figure 4.1: NASA diagram configuration from previous investigation[1]

4.1.1 Governing Equations and boundary conditions

With the objective to derive the mathematical model for this problem some

simplifications was taking into account: the piping system is idealized as a group

of 1D beams and no damping is considered. Under these assumptions it is possible

to consider the system as an undamped single degree of freedom (SDOF) system

that is subjected to a harmonic force P (t) with amplitude Po and circular

frequency, then the equation of motion is given by [14]

..
M Y + ky = P0 sin ωt (4.1)

As one of boundary conditions, the beams is fixed at both ends. Solving for

the displacement response, maximum displacement and natural frequency is

50
straight forward and the development of these set of equations can be found in text

books [5] [14]

The displacement response of the system is given by [5]:

P0 1
y (t ) = A cos ωt + B sin ωt + sin ωt (4.2)
k 1− r2

wf
r= (4.3)
w

Then the solution for maximum displacement for an un-phased harmonic

analysis is

Po 1
δ dyn = (4.4)
k 1− r2

And the natural frequencies are:

n 2π EI
wf = (4.5)
2 L2 m

4.2 Results and Discussions

The natural frequencies for the first 3 mode shapes were calculated per

segment and compared with the excitation frequency from the fluid. Also the first

2 mode shapes were determined with the consideration of the pipeline as a whole.

The natural frequencies and their corresponding mode shape were determinate

using ALGOR and analytical equations. The excitation frequencies from the fluid

obtained from previous research [1] did not cover all the segments. In order to

determine resonance, therefore, the natural frequencies obtained in this work were

fluid excitation frequencies for the entire segments.

Recalling from previous discussion if the excitation frequencies are equal

or between 1.4 the natural frequencies, resonance will occur. After calculating the

51
natural frequencies per segment, the natural frequencies were compared with the

excitation frequencies from the fluid, Table 4.1 illustrates the excitation

frequencies from the fluid obtained in [1]. The shaded cells represent possible

flows rate that may cause resonance for the complete system. To determinate if

resonance is present for individual segments, the natural frequencies were

calculated for the first three mode shapes per segment, Figure 4.2 illustrates the

beam discretization approach. Figures 4.3 to 4.5 show the relationship of fluid

excitation frequency and natural frequencies for each segment. Note that any

segment at the frequency ratio between the value of 1.4 or .5 is considered in

resonance, two lines are included in each graphics representing the upper and

lower limit. The fluid excitation frequencies were calculated at flow rate of 40,

113 and 275 lbm/sec .

7
8 1
11 9
2

10 6
12 3
5
13 4

14
17 15
16

Figure 4.2: Discretization of the system

52
Table 4.1: Fluid Excitation Frequencies by Others [1]

VORTEX SHEDDING CALCULATIONS (Hz)


Segment fs_(113lbm/s) Fs_(275lbm/s) Fs_(40(lbm/s)
1 597.379005 1453.70771 2.11401778
2 74.6723757 181.713464 1.05700889
3 22.1251483 53.8410262 0.70467259
4 9.33404696 22.7141829 0.52850445
5 4.77903204 11.6296617 0.42280356
6 2.76564354 6.73012828 0.3523363
7 1.74162975 4.23821489 0.30200254
8 1.16675587 2.83927287 0.26425222
9 3.48451039 8.47947379 0.99881594

Resonanse for Mode Shape 1


2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
Ratios

1
fs 113
0.8 fs 275
fs 40
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Segments

Figure 4.3: Resonances per segment at different flow rates for the mode

shape 1

53
Resonanse for Mode Shape 2
2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
Ratios

1
fs 113
fs 275
0.8
fs 40

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Segments

Figure 4.4: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode
shape 2

Resonanse for Mode Shape 3


2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

fs 113
Ratios

1 fs 275
fs 40

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Segments

Figure 4.5: Possible resonances per segment at different flow rates for mode

shape 3
54
Figure 4.6: Natural frequency mode shape 1 of a complete systems

Figure 4.7: Vibration modes shape 2 for the complete system

55
4.3 Conclusions

The natural frequencies considering the system as a whole were obtained

using ALGOR and compared with the excitation frequency obtained from the

fluid at different flow rates. The results yields that the first natural frequency for

the whole system will occurs at 2.07 Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz

with its corresponding mode shapes. It is very clear in Table 4.1 that almost the

entire feed line might suffer from the resonance effect as calculated by finite

element analysis. The first mode is in resonance at a flow rate of 40 lbm/s,

whereas, resonance for the second mode may occur at a flow rate of 275 lbm/s.

Figures 4.6 and 4.7 show the displacement results for the first and second mode

shapes. Notices that for the first mode shape the greatest displacement and stresses

is near the end of the piping system whereas, for the second mode shape the

segments near the center might be in resonance. It is expected that for the third

mode the elements near the tank could have the greatest displacement, of course it

may take place at higher frequencies.

With the analytical method approach the pipeline was discretized in straight

segments between supports as shown in Figure 4.1, the segments were idealized as

simple supported beams which are more appropriate for piping [16,18]. In

addition to explore more in deep the possibility of resonance, the natural

frequencies were calculated for the first three mode shapes. Examining possible

resonance was studied for the first mode shape in segments three, four and six. For

the second mode shape resonance was studied only in segment number two and

for the third mode shape resonance was predicted for segment one and two as

shown in Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5.

56
The results in this investigation reveal higher natural frequencies for all

segments than the anticipated in previous research [1]. The discretization made in

previous investigation was along straight pipe, which making the segments longer

and more susceptible to vibration than analyzing between supports. Supports will

tend to increase the stiffness of the segment. Taking into account only the straight

segments will underestimate the additional stiffness that comes from these

segments.

57
CHAPTER 5 TURBULENCE INDUCED VIBRATION

5.1 Turbulence induce vibration

When the fluid velocity exceeds any but the smallest values characteristic of

“seepage” flows, eddies will form even if the surface of the flow channel is

perfectly smooth. The flow is said to be turbulent after it has achieve a specific

Reynolds number. Turbulence flow in most application is desired; a typical

application is to increase the efficiency of a heat exchanger. The force generated

by the turbulence flow has the characteristic of being random. To study this type

of phenomena probabilistic method has to be applied. This will eliminate any

attempt for a detailed time history response. The approach to solve this problem is

by calculating the root mean square values of the responses. With this calculation

is possible to predict potential damage to the piping system.

At this days is still not feasible to determinate the turbulent forcing function

by numerical techniques. To study this phenomena is required a combination of

experimental data an analytical techniques. The experimental data are used to

determinate fluid parameters and analytical approach for the solid behavior. In

simple word the experimental data obtained from the fluid is applied to the

structure to predict it behavior under know conditions.

The most widely used method to solve this type of problem is the acceptance

integral method first formulated by Powell [17]. Chen and Wanbsganss [18]

followed this method to estimate the parallel flow induce vibration of nuclear fuel

roads and Chyu and Au-Yang [19] applied this method to estimate the response of

panels exited by boundary layer turbulence. Au-Yang [20] applied this method to

58
estimate the response of reactor internal component excited by the coolant flow

and again to cross-flow-induced vibration of a multiple span tube [21].

As previously mention the ultimate goal is to determinate the vibration root

mean square amplitudes. To determinate the root-mean square (rms) response the

following equation formulated by Powell [17] is often used.

→ →
AG p ( fα )ψ α ( x ) J αα ( fα )
2
⎛→⎞
y ⎜ x⎟ =∑
2
(5.1)
64π 3mα fα ζ α
2 3
⎝ ⎠ α


where J αα is the joint acceptance. The joint acceptance is a measurement of the

matching in space between the forcing function and the structural mode shape.

The same is tabulated in flow induce vibration text books [16] and is included in

this work for reference, see Figure 5.3, The term G p ( fα ) is the structural

fluctuating power spectral density (PSD) due to boundary layer type of turbulence.

Equation 5.1 is general and applicable to one dimensional as well as two

dimensional structures in either; parallel flow or cross-flow. This equation is

derived under many simplifying assumptions, of which the most import ants are

that the cross modal contribution to the response is negligible, and the turbulence

is homogeneous, isotropic and stationary.

To characterize the turbulent forcing function three parameters are required:

The convective velocity Uc, which determines the phase relationship of the

forcing function at two different points on the surface of the structure; the

correlation length λ , which determines the degree of coherence of the forcing

function at two different points on the surface of the structure; and finally the

power spectral density function, Gp, which determines the energy distribution as a

function of the frequency of the forcing function. These three fluid parameters are

59
obtained by model testing and scaling. In this thesis existing data from the

literature will be applied to turbulence induced vibration estimates.

Based on data obtained from turbulent flows, Chen and Wambsganss [18] derived

the following empirical equation for the convective velocity as a function of

frequency:

ωδ *
Uc − 2. 2 ( )
= 0.6 + 0.4e V
(5.2)
V

Bull [22] suggested a slightly different equation:


*
−.89ωδ
Uc
= .59 + .3e (5.3)
V V

Where δ
*
is the displacement boundary layer thickness for boundary layer flow

or in our case the “hydraulic radius” in confined internal flow. Both equations

show that except at very low frequencies, the convective velocity is fairly

independent of the frequency, being equal to approximate 0.6 times the free

stream velocity . In confined flow channels in which very high turbulence is

generated or by flow in 90 degree channels, Au-Yang and Jordan [23], Au-Yang

[24] found, in two separate experiments, that the convective velocity is about the

same as the mean free stream velocity. Uc ≈V

60
Figure 5.1 Comparison of convective velocity predicted by Chen and

Wambsganss and Bull [5]

For this investigation the flow is internal in a pipe, therefore the boundary layer

can’t grow indefinitely. In small pipes and narrow flow channels, the boundary

layer will fill up the entire cross section of the flow channel. In that case the

displacement boundary layer thickness which is a fluid mechanical parameter is

the hydraulic radius of the flow channel.

DH
δ* = = RH (5.4)
2

The most important fluid mechanic parameter that characterizes the turbulence

forcing function is the power spectral density (PSD). And can be obtained with

the following empirical equation, which was derived based on data from a scale

model test Au-Yang and Jordan [23].

⎡Φ ( w) ⎤
G p ( f ) = 2πρ 2V 3δ * ⎢ 2PP 3 * ⎥ (5.5)
⎣ρ V δ ⎦

61
In this equation the displacement boundary layer thickness δ * is the hydraulic

radius. The quantity in [] is plot in the ordinate of Figure 5.2, the data of this

Figure is unreliable in the low-frequency region, market “effective range.” For

low frequency, turbulent flow without cavitations the fallowing equation applies

[24]

Gp ( f )
= .155e − 3 F , 0 < F < 1 (5.6)
ρ V RH
2 3

=.027e-1.26F, 1 ≤ F ≤ 5

where

F = fRH/V (5.7)

For turbulent flow with light cavitations

GP ( f ) − x −4
= min{20 F − 2 ( ) ,1.0} (5.8)
ρ V RH
2 3
RH

where x is the absolute value of the distance from the cavitation source such

as an elbow or a valve.

62
Figure 5.2: Boundary layer type of turbulence power spectral density [5]

Figure 5.3: Longitudinal joint acceptances [5]

63
5.2 Results and Discussions

For the turbulence induce vibration, the analysis was performed at the

maximum flow rate proposed by NASA. The root-mean square (rms) response

was obtained at this flow. The highest flow was chosen due to the reason that has

the higher energy and representing the worst case. The results were limited to the

segments which were fluid information was available. For simplicity the analysis

was assumed without cavitation although cavitation may be experienced due to

the nature of the system.

It was found that segments 2, 3 and 4 experience the most significant

vibration. The higher displacement may be attributed at the lower natural

frequencies that characterize these segments. The specific segments have the

lower frequencies because they are the longest comparing with the others. The

stiffness of these segments can be increased if additional supports are added thus

increasing the natural frequencies.

Table 5.1: Uc, Frequency Parameters and Joint Acceptances

Natural Uc (in/s)
Segment Frequency Convective 4fL1 /Uc Jmm J´nm ωδ*/V
(Hz) Velocity
1 61.181 417.130 59.255 0.010 1.000 0.193
2 19.921 493.204 28.597 0.010 1.000 0.063
3 46.784 432.455 49.980 0.010 1.000 0.147
4 14.565 513.828 23.471 0.010 1.000 0.046
5 717.158 393.950 214.811 0.001 1.000 2.260
6 8.058 544.733 16.467 0.010 1.000 0.025
7 78.79 406.410
1 69.018 0.010 1.000 0.248
8 195.507 394.154 112.100 0.001 1.000 0.616
9a 5660.833 393.950 603.516 0.001 1.000 17.842
9b 90.951 421.639 58.155 0.010 1.000 0.177

64
Table 5.2: PSD and RMS Responses

Natural
Normalized Gp
Segment Frequency Yrms (in)
PSD (psi^2 / Hz)
(Hz)
1 61.181 2.000E-05 2.818E-04 0.149
2 19.921 4.000E-05 5.635E-04 0.211
3 46.784 4.000E-05 5.635E-04 0.211
4 14.565 4.000E-05 5.635E-04 0.211
5 717.158 3.500E-06 4.931E-05 0.020
6 8.058 4.000E-05 5.635E-04 0.211
7 78.791 2.000E-05 2.818E-04 0.149
8 195.507 2.000E-05 2.818E-04 0.047
9a 5660.833 2.000E-08 2.818E-07 0.001
9b 90.951 1.500E-05 1.304E-04 0.121

65
CHAPTER 6 FE Model of Fluid-Structure Interaction

6.1 Fluid Structure Interaction

Normally when it is desired to obtain the fluid velocity in a pipe, equations are

applied with the assumption of no wall deformation. If the walls deform, the

deformation will affect fluid thus creating a fluid structure interaction. This

chapter concentrates on applying iterative method to develop a fluid structure

interaction model. The solutions presented takes into account the interaction of the

solid. Several plots presented were compared in the percent difference if the

interaction between the solid and fluid is not taking into account.

Considering the behavior of the fluid structure interaction, the fluid will

applied a pressure to the pipe walls, and if the pressure is strong enough to cause

pipe deformation, this deformation will decrease the velocity along the pipe. The

pressure drop caused by a velocity decrease will change the pipe diameter again.

This phenomenon is what we are calling fluid structure interaction. To solve fluid

structure interaction problem, a subroutine was created using ANSYS. To achieve

a solution, an iterative subroutine was created. This subroutine combines the

solution of the fluid and applied the results to the structure until a criterion of

convergence is accomplished.

Two models were created one a 2D channel we no obstruction that will serve

as the base model. The other will be the same channel with an obstruction; this

obstruction can easily by a valve half open. The obstruction will locally increase

the pressure, creating a large deformation compare to the base model. Different

velocities were applied to compare both cases.

66
6.2 FEM Analysis

The procedure to solve the couple problem is essentially obtaining the solution

first form the dynamic fluid analysis, except that this solution are going to be

saved in what is call a physic environment. Then the program calls the solid

physic environment which at this point is only a solid with boundary conditions.

Then the pressure solution obtained from the fluid physic is applied to the internal

walls of the solid pipe. Finally a static analysis for the solid is performed,

obtaining deformations and stresses results.

6.3 Finite Element Models

Two models were created; a free flowing channel and a channel with 50%

obstruction in its cross-sectional area shown in Figures 6.2 and 6.3. In order to

compare the results, both geometries created were essentially the same for the

analyses. Soft materials were chosen, thus, it is expected that the pipe will deform

significantly enough to affect the fluid velocities. Tables 6.1 and 6.2 summarizes

the dimensions used for the straight pipe.

67
Figure 6.1 Fluid structure interaction loop flow chart

Structure

Fluid

Structure

Figure 6.2: Geometry of free flowing channel

68
Table 6.1: Dimensions Free Flowing Channel

Dimensions

Thickness 0.003175 m

Length .5 m

Fluid cross section .05 m

Structure

Fluid
Obstruction

Structure

Figure 6.3: Geometry of channel with obstruction

Table 6.2: Dimensions Channel with Obstruction

Dimensions

Thickness (m) 0.003175

Length (m) .5 m

Fluid cross section (m) .05 m

Obstruction Length Half of the fluid cross section

Obstruction location .25 m

69
6.3.1 Material Properties

The structural analyses require the definition of Young’s modulus of elasticity

and Poisson’s ratio. The modal analysis in addition to the previous properties also

required to define the density. For the Computational Fluid Dynamic CFD

analysis it is necessary to input density and viscosity of the working fluid.

Material properties used in both analyses are resumed in Table 6.3.

Table 6.3: Material Properties

Properties

Fluid density (kg/m3) 1000

Fluid Viscosity (kg-s/m) .00046

Young's modulus for rubber (Pa) 2.82E+009

Poisson ratio rubber 0.49967

Mooney-Rivlin Hyperelastic constant 1 2.93E+005

Mooney-Rivlin Hyperelastic constant 2 1.77E+005

6.3.2 Element Types

The sequential coupled field analysis requires a combination of solid and fluid

elements. For the structural analysis the element chosen was HYPER 74. This

element has the ability to accommodate nonlinear behavior being ideal to obtain

stresses and pressures results. This element is also compatible with some fluid

elements. For the fluid environment the element chosen was FLUID 141. This

element is ideal for pressure and velocity solutions.

70
6.3.3 Mesh

The procedure to mesh the areas in both types of analyses was practically the

same and it yielded very similar meshes. It was not desired to free mesh the

created volumes causing a mesh that would degenerate the geometry or that would

be inconsistent, uneven or inconsistent. To prevent this from happening the mesh

was done in a constant area basis except in the case with the obstruction were the

mesh was finer near this area. This resulted in a regular mesh that was even and

very similar between the two analyses.

6.3.4 Boundary Conditions

Since both models involve a modal analysis, the displacement boundary

conditions on the two were the same. This is a very important requirement since

the boundary conditions affect greatly the results and without this similarity a

comparison between them would not be effective. The displacement boundary

conditions were placed at both ends of the channel in order to simulate supports

acting on the outside of the channel. The channel was considered fixed at both

ends. The other boundary condition applied was related to the fluid and the same

were applied to the channel internal surface area. The velocities of the fluid near

the internal walls of the channel were set to 0 and the pressure at the end of the

channel was set to 0. The pressure will ensure flow in the desired direction.

6.4 Results

The results presented are focus in to demonstrate that for a fluid flowing in a

highly deformable environment the dynamic deformation of the pipe will have an

71
effect in the behavior of the fluid. Therefore, the result presented in this section is

a comparison between a non fluid structure interaction and a fluid structure

iteration solution. To present this, a graphic was created showing average percent

difference of the velocity results obtained for each node of the channel. The

procedure to calculate the percent difference was the fallowing. First a nodal

solution was run to solve for the velocity this solution was saved and the same

was used as the non fluid structure interaction solution. Then a subroutine was

created using ANSYS. In the subroutine an iterative method was created were the

pressure solution from the fluid was applied to the walls of the channel and the

deformation created from the pressure was used to solve the fluid until velocity

values converge. Then each velocity solution per node was compared with the non

fluid structure interaction and for each of them the percent difference was

calculated. Finally an average of the all the percent difference was calculated. This

procedure was applied for both cases the channel with the obstruction and the free

flowing one for flows from .01 m/s to .1 m/s. Figure 6.4 resumes the results. To

physically see how the results change per iteration a sequence of pictures

examples for the specific case of fluid flowing at .04 mps are presented, see

Figures 6.5 to 6.10. Note how the maximum velocities change from the first

iteration and the second one. This is expected due to the higher deformation will

occur in this iteration.

72
25%

20%

15%
P e rce n t E rro r

10%

Obstruction

No Obstruction

5%

0%
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Velocity M/S

Figure 6.4: Average percent difference at different flows

Figure 6.5: Velocities profile at the first iteration

73
Figure 6.6: Velocities profile at the second iteration

Figure 6.7: Velocities profile at the third iteration

74
Figure 6.8: Velocities profile at the fourth iteration

Figure 6.9: Velocities profile at the fifth iteration

75
Figure 6.10: Velocities profile at the sixth iteration

6.5 Conclusions

Two models were created; a free flowing channel and a channel with 50%

obstruction in its cross-sectional area. For both cases, a non-fluid structure

interaction solution was compared against a fluid-structure interaction solution.

Various flow cases were study, after comparing the non interaction with the

interaction solution, it was notice a percent difference up to 25% in the fluid

velocity. This may be attributed to the fact that when the fluid applies pressure to

the rubber channel the rubber channel deforms, this deformation decrease the

velocity at which the fluid is traveling. Because the axial velocity has decrease

now the pressure applied by the fluid also decrease, at this point the rubber

channel tries to gets is steady state form. Now the cross-sectional area has

decrease again and by consequence the fluid increase again its velocity and the

76
pressure applied to the wall of the channel also increase. This phenomenon

continues until a convergence is achieved.

For the fluid structure interaction investigation, two models were created; a

straight pipe and a straight pipe with 50% obstruction in its cross-sectional area.

For both cases, a non-fluid structure interaction solution was compared against a

fluid-structure interaction solution. Various flow cases were studied, after

comparing the non interaction with the interaction solutions; it was noticed that a

percent difference up to 25% in the fluid velocity. This is attributed to the fact that

when the fluid applies pressure to the pipe, it deforms. This deformation decrease

the velocity at which the fluid is traveling. As the axial velocity decreased, the

pressure applied by the fluid also decrease. Since the cross-sectional area

decreases again, by consequence the fluid increase its velocity again and the

pressure applied to the wall of the pipe also increase. This phenomenon continues

until a convergence is achieved.

Comparing both models, the fluid structure interaction in pipe with 50%

obstruction is more significant than the pipe with no obstruction. The main reason

is that the obstruction creates a local increase of pressure leading to a deformation

in this specific area.

77
CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

7.1 Summary

The investigations of static and dynamic analysis of a piping system at NASA

are presented in this thesis. For general purpose application; transient and fluid-

structure interaction research were performed.

The research conducted for the NASA facilities were; structural, thermal,

water hammer, resonance and turbulence induced vibration analysis. Three finite

elements models for the pipe system and segments at NASA facilities were

developed: a structural finite element analysis model with multi-support system

for frequency analysis, fluid-structure interaction (FSI) finite element model and

transient flow model for waterhammer induced vibration analysis in a fluid filled

pipe. The natural frequencies, static stress and the limitations of the pipeline

system were determined. A simple chart characterizing the relation between stress

and location along the length of the pipeline was developed for all segments.

In the warterhammer case, the limit maximum flow rates were determinate

based on the rate of a rapid closure of the isolation valve. A study of the fluid

transient in a simple pipeline was performed. The behaviors of different test cases

analyzed were completed based on these results. Subsequently, the time of valve

close and open was analyzed as a parameter to control the crest of wave pressure.

A fluid-structure interaction FE model was developed and compared with a

model without considering fluid-structure interaction effects. The results show

notable differences in the velocities profile and deformation. For comparison

purpose, the percent difference of velocities and deformation were illustrated.

78
7.2 Conclusions

In the structural analysis the gap on the supports at segment k has a negative

effect on the piping system, the gap increases the stress and displacement in

almost all the segments. The more vulnerable segments of the pipe system are

found to be segments F, G, H and I. As results of the structure analysis, correction

of the gap could reduce fifty percent of the maximum stress in the pipeline

system. However, none of the segments are close to the critical stress and

allowance ratio of 1 although it is expected that the dynamic analysis could be

affected by this gap.

The thermal stress analyses were conducted for the gap and non-gap support at

certain segments. The analyses were performed in a range from -100 to –400 °F

degrees as system content and 85°F as surrounding temperature. The results yield

values of stresses and displacement. However, the -200°F is consistent to the

facilities operational conditions. For the support with gap, the maximum stress

was found as 11,188 psi with a stress/allowance ratio of .26, and for the support

without gap, the maximum stress 10,710 psi with a stress/allowance ratio of .25.

Both maximum stresses were found at segment F. However, these values are in

the acceptable range and no action is required.

Maximum waterhammer pressures caused by rapid closure of isolation valve

were studied for various flows. The peak values of transient flow pressure were

generated in the piping system before the isolation valve. Possible failures were

predicted for several segments. It is clear that for the case of a valve rapid closure,

possible failure might occur at a flow rate of 38 ft/s, which is the maximum flow

79
at which the facilities operate. Some pressures reducers placed before the test

valves are recommended in order to reduce the impact of the traveling waves.

A study of the fluid transient in a simple pipeline was completed. The

governing partial differential equations were integrated using the MacCormak

method, and the behavior of the system was analyzed for different test cases. The

incremental time was performed based on these results. Then, using material and

fluid properties, the time of valve close and open was analyzed as a parameter to

control the crest of wave pressure. The results obtained indicate that with adequate

time of valve operation, the wave crest will not reach to the pressure of failure.

For the vibration resonance analysis, the natural frequencies of the system as

a whole were obtained and compared with the excitation frequency of fluid at

different flow rates. The results conclude that the first natural frequency of the

whole system occurs at 2.07 Hz, and the second at a frequency of 5.65 Hz with its

corresponding mode shapes. Resonance for the first mode shape was found at a

flow rate of 40 lbm/s, whereas, resonance for the second mode occurs at a flow

rate of 275 lbm/s. For the first mode shape the greatest displacement and stresses

are near the end of the piping system, and for the second mode shape the segments

near the center could be in resonance. It is expected that for the third mode the

elements near the tank might have the greatest displacement, of course it takes

place at higher frequencies.

With the analytical method approach the pipeline was discretized in straight

segments between supports. In addition to explore the possibility of resonance, the

natural frequencies were calculated for the first three mode shapes. Examining

possible resonances were predicted for the first mode shape in segments three,

four and six. For the second mode shape resonance was predicted only in segment

80
number two and for the third mode shape resonance was predicted for segment

one and two.

The results in this investigation reveal higher natural frequencies for all

segments than the anticipated in previous research [1]. The reason can be found in

the idealization of the system. The discretization made in previous investigation

was along straight pipe making the segments longer and more susceptible to

vibration than analyzing between supports. Supports will tend to increase the

stiffness of the segment. Taking into account only the straight segment will under

estimate the additional stiffness that comes from them.

For the fluid structure interaction investigation, two models were created; a

straight pipe and a straight pipe with 50% obstruction in its cross-sectional area.

For both cases, a non-fluid structure interaction solution was compared against a

fluid-structure interaction solution. Various flow cases were studied, after

comparing the non interaction with the interaction solutions; it was noticed that a

percent difference up to 25% in the fluid velocity. This is attributed to the fact that

when the fluid applies pressure to the pipe, it deforms. This deformation decrease

the velocity at which the fluid is traveling. As the axial velocity decreased, the

pressure applied by the fluid also decrease. Since the cross-sectional area

decreases again, by consequence the fluid increase its velocity again and the

pressure applied to the wall of the pipe also increase. This phenomenon continues

until a convergence is achieved.

Comparing both models, the fluid structure interaction in pipe with 50%

obstruction is more significant than the pipe with no obstruction . The main reason

is that the obstruction creates a local increase of pressure leading to a deformation

in this specific area.

81
7.3 Future works

The turbulence induces vibration solution, comprise analytical techniques and

experimental data. Due to no experimental data was available for the facilities,

data available in textbook was use to estimate the vibration response. For future

works is recommended to measure the turbulent forcing function and apply the

method of Chapter 5

In the transient investigation presented in Chapter 3, pressure analysis in a

time response fashion was performed without considering the fluid-structure

interaction effect. However, the analysis was made using the material properties

of stainless steel. As a future work, the fluid-structure interaction effect should be

investigated to determine the dynamic pressure response.

82
REFERENCES
[1] Castillo 2001, “Investigation of flow induce vibration” NASA report U.S.
[2] Indyne, inc., (2000) “Dynamic Analysis for E2 Ultra High Pressure RS76
Pre-Burner Test”, Report No. IDI-NS7393-00-1
[3] H.M. Blackburn, Two and Three Dimensional Simulation of Vortex Induced
Vibration of a Circular Cylinder.3rd int Offshore & Polar Engng Conf.,m
Singapore, 1993,3,715-720
[4] Nadeen Duranis 2001. “Dynamic of pipelines with finite element methods”
Thesis M.S. University of Galgary U.S.
[5] Blevins, (1994) R.D. Flow-Induced Vibration, second edition, Krieger
Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida
[6] Saeed Moaveni. (1999) Finite Element Analysis Theory and Applications
with ANSYS, Prentice Hall, NY
[7] Claudio Mataix (1982) Mecánica de Fluidos Y Maquinaria Hidráulica,
Segunda Edición, Editorial del Castillo Y Harper & Row Publisher, Inc.
[8] Bergant and Arris Tijsseling, (2001) Parameters Affecting Water Hammer
Wave Attenuation, Shape and Timing by Anton, Eindhoven University of
Technology
[9] A.S. Tijsseling(1993) Fluid Structure Interaction In Case of Water hammer
with Cavitations, Ph. D. Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Civil Engineering,
[10] A.S. Tijsseling(1993) Fluid Structure Interaction In Case of Water hammer
with Cavitations, Ph. D. Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of
Civil Engineering, Communications on Hydraulic and Geotechnical
Engineer, Report No. 93-6, Delft, The Netherlands, 1993, ISSN 0169-6548
[11] YI Jia, Frederick Just-Agosto and Luciano Castillo (2001) Investigation
of the Flow induced Vibration in the E2 Test Facility proposal.
[12] G.W. Housner 1952 “Bending vibration of a Pipe Line Containing Flowing
Fluid” Journal of applied mechanics.
[13] Thomas Repp (1998) Fluid dynamics Waterhammer Simulations With
Consideration of Fluid Structure Interaction
[14] Biggs,J.M,”Introduction to Structural Dynamics”, McGraw Hill Publisheng

83
Company
[15] Leonard Meirovitch, Fundamental of Vibrations Mc Graw Hill higher
education (2001)
[16] Au-Yang,M.K, “Flow-Induced Vibration of Power and Process Plant
Components”, ASME Press, Professional Engineering Publishing, NY
(2001).
[17] Powell, A 1958, “ On the Fatigue Failure of Structure Due to Vibration
Exited by Random Pressure Fields, Jurnal of Acoustical Society of America,
Vol 30 No 12, pp 130-1135
[18] Chen, S.S. and Wambsganss, M. W., 1970 “Response of a Flexible Rod to
Near Field Flow Noice,” in Proceeding of Conference on Flow Induced
Vibration in Reactor Components, Argonne National Laboratory Report
ANL-7685, pp 5-31.
[19] Chyu, W.J. and Au-Yang M.K., 1972 Random Response of Rectangular
Panels to the Pressure field Beneath a Turbulent Boundary Layer in Subsonic
Flow, NASA TN D-6970
[20] Au-Yang, M. K., 1975 “Response of Reactor Internals to Fluctuating
Pressure Forces,” Journal Nuclear Engineering as Design, Vol. 35 pp 361-
375.
[21] Au-Yang, M.K.,2000, “The Joint and Cross Acceptance in Cross-Flow
Induced Vibration, Part I Theory and Part II – Charts and Applications,”
ASME Transaction, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol 122, pp 349-
361.
[22] Bull, M.K., 1967, “Wall-Pressure Associate with Subsonic Turbulent
Boundary Layer Flow,” Journal of Fluid Mechanic, Vol.28, part 4, pp. 719-
754.
[23] Au-Yang, M.K. and Jordan, K.B., 1980, “Dynamic Pressure Inside a PWR-
A Study Based on Laboratory and Field Test Data, “Journal Nuclear
Engineering as Design, Vol 58, pp 113-125
[24] Au-Yang M.K., Brenneman, B. and Raj, D. 1995 “Flow induce Vibration
Test of an Advance Water Reactor Model, Part I Turbulence Induced
Vibration Test,” Journal Nuclear Engineering and Design,Vol 157, pp 93-109

84
[25] K.T. TRUONG, Evaluating dynamic Stresses of a Pipe Line, This paper is
provided to Piping design.com by Ultragen

[26] Paidoussis, M.P.; Au-Yang, M.K. and Chen, S. S., 1988, editors,
Proceeding: International Symposium on Flow-Induced Vibration and Noise,
Vol. 4, Flow-Induced Vibration due to Internal and Annular Flow, ASME
Press, New York.
[27] R. Kumar 1971 Acustica 24, pp.137-146. Flexible vibrations of fluid-filled
circular cylindrical shells
[28] D.R. Samsury 1974 Research Report-Naval Ship Research and Development
Center, Bethesda, Md. 20034. Liquid-structure coupling in pipes
[29] W.T. Thomson 1953 Proceedings of First U.S. National Congress on
Applied Mechanics, pp. 922-933. Transmission of pressure waves in fluid
filled pipes.
[30] T.C. Lin and G.W. Morgan 1956 The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America 28(6), pp.1165-1176. Wave propagation through fluid contained in a
cylindrical, elastic shell.
[31] J.M. Cuschieri 1988 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 83(2),
pp.641-646. Excitation and response of piping systems.

[32] A.L. Lewis and D.R. Roll 1997 Tappi Journal, pp.76-82. Pulsing and
vibration caused by control valve induced acoustic resonances.

[33] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1989), A Test and
Analysis of the Multiple Support Piping System, Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Vol. 111, pp 291p299
[34] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1990), Dynamic
Response Studies of Piping Support System, Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Vol 112, pp 39-45
[35] Chiba,T., Koyanagi,R., Ogawa, N. and Minowa, C., (1990) Response
Characteristic of Piping System Supported by Visco Elastic and Elasto-
Plastic Damper, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 112, pp 34-38
[36] Chiba, T and Koyanagi, R., (1988), An Experimental Study of the Response
of Multiple Support Piping System, Res Mechanica, Vol.25, pp. 145 – 157

85
[37] Vayda, J.P., (1981), influence of Gap Size on the Dynamic Behavior of
Piping System, Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 67, pp 145-
164
[38] Lockau, J., Haas, E. and Steinweder, F., (1984), The influence of High-
Frequency Excitation on Piping and Support Design, Journal of Pressure
Vessel Technology, Vol. 106, pp. 175 -187
[39] Paidoussis, M.P.; Au-Yang, M.K. and Chen, S. S., 1988, editors,
Proceeding: International Symposium on Flow-Induced Vibration and Noise,
Vol. 4, Flow-Induced Vibration due to Internal and Annular Flow, ASME
Press, New York
[40] Taylor, C. E.; Pettigrew, M. J., Dickinson, T. J. and Currie, I. G.,
Vidalou, P, 1997 “Vibration Damping in Multispan Heat Exchanger Tubes,”
4th International Symposium on Fluid Structure Interactions, Vol II, edited by
M.P. Paidoussis. ASME Special Publication AD-Vol. 53-2, pp. 201-208

[41] ASME, 1979, Steam Tables, Fourth Edition, ASME Press, New York

[42] M. C. haudhry, Hydraulic Engineering, Jhon Wile & Sons Inc., New York,
1998

[43] S. Sisavath, X. Jing, C. C. Pain and R. W. Zimmerman, “Creeping Flow


Through an Axisymmetric Sudden Contraction or Expansion”, Transactions
of the ASME, 124, pp. 273-278.
[44] A. Bergant and A. Tijsseling, “Parameters Affecting Water Hammer Wave
Attenuation, Shape and Timing”
[45] A. Bergant, A. R. Simpson J. Vitkovsky, “Developments in unsteady pipe
flow friction modeling”. J. of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 39, NO. 3, pp. 249-
257, 2001.
[46] B. Brunone, U.M. Golia, , and M. Greco, “Some remarks on the
momentum equation for fast transients”. Int. Meeting on Hydraulic
Transients with Column Separation, 9th Round Table, IAHR, Valencia,
Spain, pp. 140-148,1991.
[47] J. D. Hoffman, Numerical Methods for Engineers and Scientists, McGraw-
Hill Inc. Singapore, 1993.

86
[48] H. M. V. Samani and A. Khayatzadeh, “Transient flow in pipe networks” J.
of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 40, NO. 5, pp. 637-644, 2002.

[49] D. Stephenson, “Effect of Air Valve and Pipework on Water Hammer


Pressures”, J. of Transportation Engineering, pp. 101-106, March 1997.

[50] M. A. Chaiko and K. W. Brickman, “Models for Analysis of Water


Hammer in Piping with Entrapped Air”, Transactions of ASME, Vol. 124,
pp. 194-204, 2002.

[51] R. S. Gupta, Hydrology & Hydraulic Systems, Waveland Press Inc., Illinois,
1989.
[52] M. Moran and H. Shapiro, Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics,
JHON WILE & SONS, INC., New York, 2000.

[53] A. E. Vardy, and J. M. B. Brown, “On turbulent, unsteady, smooth-pipe


flow”. Proc., Int. Conf. on Pressure Surges and Fluid Transients, BHR Group,
Harrogate, England, pp. 289-311, 1996.
[54] B. Fitzgerald and C. Linden, “The Control Valve’s Hidden Impact on the
bottom Line (Part 1) Hidden Impact”, Valve Manufacturers Association,
2003.
[55] C.S. Beard, Control Valves, Intrument Publishing company, Pittsburgh,
1957.
[56] D. R. Yang, “Actuator And Control Valve Selection”, Lecture III, Dept. of

Chemical and Biological Engineering Korea University, 2001.

87
APENDIX
*******************************program****************************

1388,1389,1384,1385,1386,1387,1375,1383,1382,1381,1380,1379,1378,238,1377,1376
668,667,666,665,664,663,662,661,660,659,657,658,656,655,669

/BATCH
/COM,ANSYS RELEASE 5.7.1 UP20010418 12:33:43 05/23/2002
/input,menust,tmp ,'',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1 !User interface on
/GRA,POWER
/GST,ON
/PLO,INFO,3
/COL,PBAK,ON,1,BLUE
/VIEW, 1 ,1,1,1 !view
/ANG, 1
/REP,FAST
/PREP7
/prep7
shpp,on !element shape checking
!!Assign element

ET,1,142 ! 3D fluid element static mesh


ET,2,58 ! 3D solid element

!!Geometry
CYL4,0,0,.0534543, ,.0841375 !Hollow Cylinder, inner diameter outer
!Fluid Area
FLST,2,4,3 !specify data required for a picking operation NFIELD, NARG, TYPE, Otype, LENG
FITEM,2,7 !key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,8 !key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,6 !key points in active coordinate system
FITEM,2,5 !key points in active coordinate system
A,P51X !Area arbitrary through key points
K, ,0,0,0, !key point in point 0,0,0
K, ,0,0,-1.524, !key point
K, ,0,.6,-1.524, !key point
LSTR, 9, 10 !straight line through key point
LSTR, 10, 11 !straight line through key point
!*
LFILLT,10,9,.18, , !line fillet, line ,line ,radius

FLST,2,2,5,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,1
FITEM,2,-2
FLST,8,3,4
FITEM,8,9
FITEM,8,11
FITEM,8,10
VDRAG,P51X, , , , , ,P51X
FLST,2,2,6,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,3
FITEM,2,5
VADD,P51X
FLST,2,2,6,ORDE,2
FITEM,2,4
FITEM,2,6
VADD,P51X

88
SAVE

! Assign Properties to each volume


FLST,5,2,6,ORDE,2 !To select volumes
FITEM,5,1
FITEM,5,7
VSEL,S, , ,P51X !volume selected
vatt,2,2,2 !assign properties to p51x,elemento,material,real constant

FLST,5,2,6,ORDE,2
FITEM,5,2
FITEM,5,3
VSEL,S, , ,P51X !select Volume P51x
vatt,1,1,1 !assign properties to p51x,elemento,material,real constant

!Mesh Creation
ALLSEL,ALL !Select all
ALLSEL,ALL !Select all
FLST,5,4,6,ORDE,4
FITEM,5,1
FITEM,5,2
FITEM,5,3
FITEM,5,7
CM,_Y,VOLU ! CM,Cname, Entity - Groups geometry items into a component Y=Volume
VSEL, , , ,P51X !select Volume P51x
CM,_Y1,VOLU !Groups geometry items into a component Y1 = volume
CHKMSH,'VOLU' !Check Mesh named volu
CMSEL,S,_Y ! Selects a subset of components and assemblies
!*
VSWEEP,_Y1 !create mesh for Y1 volume
!*
CMDELE,_Y !Deletes a component or assembly definition.
CMDELE,_Y1 !Deletes a component or assembly definition.
CMDELE,_Y2 !Deletes a component or assembly definition.
!*
SAVE

!!Fluid Environment

et,1,142
et,2,0
!!CFD Conditions and Type of fluid
flda,solu,flow,1 !Flotran executions option for flow 1
flda,solu,turb,1 ! Flotran executions option for flow 1 turbulent
flda,iter,exec,100 !Flotran Iterations
flda,outp,sumf,10 !Output Summary frequencies

!! CFD Property Information


flda,prot,dens,constant
flda,prot,visc,constant
flda,nomi,dens,998 ! lbf/in^3 (density - water)
flda,nomi,visc,8.94e-7 ! Lb/in*s (viscosity of water)
flda,conv,pres,1.E-8 ! Tighten pressure equation convergence
FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,2
CM,_Y,AREA !Y = Area
ASEL,R, , ,P51X ! Selects a subset of areas Select R from P51x

89
CM,_Y1,AREA !Y1 = Area
CMSEL,S,_Y ! Selects a subset of components and assemblies
CMDELE,_Y !Deletes a component or assembly definition.
!*
!*
!*
DA,_Y1,VX,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes X Axis inlet
DA,_Y1,VY,0,1 ! Specify fluid velocity in volumes y Axis inlet
DA,_Y1,VZ,-5,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes z Axis inlet
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*
FLST,5,12,5,ORDE,6
FITEM,5,7
FITEM,5,-10
FITEM,5,17
FITEM,5,-20
FITEM,5,27
FITEM,5,-30
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
!*
!*
!*
DA,_Y1,VX,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes X Axis
DA,_Y1,VY,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes Y Axis
DA,_Y1,VZ,0,1 !Specify fluid velocity in volumes Z axis
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*

FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,32
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
!*
/GO ! Reactivates suppressed printout.
!*
DA,_Y1,PRES,0,1 !Specify Pressure at outlet of piping
!*
CMDELE,_Y1
!*
SAVE
alls
/title,Fluid Analysis
physics,write,fluid,fluid
physics,clear
!Creating the Solid Enviroment
et,1,0 ! The Null element for the fluid region
et,2,58 ! assign element 45 to material 2
mp,ex,2,2.82e9 !psi Young's modulus
mp,nuxy,2,0.49967 ! Poisson's ratio
tb,mooney,2

90
tbdata,1,0.293E+6 !Mooney-Rivlin Constants
tbdata,2,0.177E+6
FINISH
/SOLU !Enters the solution processor.
FINISH
/PREP7 !Define the options for the structure analysis. Loads>>analysis options
NLGEOM,0 !Large deformation off
NROPT,AUTO, , !Newton raphson method (program chosen)
LUMPM,0 !Use lumped mass approximation turned off
EQSLV, , ,0, !Equation solver type
PRECISION,0 !Single precision off
MSAVE,0 !Memory safe off
PIVCHECK,1 !pivot check on
PSTRES,ON !prestress on
TOFFST,0, !Temperature difference 0

! Boundary conditions for the solid

/REPLOT
FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,1
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
/GO
DA,_Y1,ALL,0
CMDELE, Y1

FLST,5,1,5,ORDE,1
FITEM,5,31
CM,_Y,AREA
ASEL,R, , ,P51X
CM,_Y1,AREA
CMSEL,S,_Y
CMDELE,_Y
/GO
DA,_Y1,all,0
CMDELE, Y1

/title,structural analysis
finish
/solu
antype,static
nlgeom,on
cnvtol,f,,,,-1
physics,write,struc,struc
physics,clear
save
/REPLOT
SAVE
SAVE
! Couple fluid Solution

*SET,loop,5 ! Maximum allowed number of loops


*do,i,1,loop ! Execute fluid -> structure solutions
/solu
physics,read,fluid ! Read in fluid environment

91
*if,i,ne,1,then !!,IF,VAL1,Oper,VAL2, If I not equal to 1 then
flda,iter,exec,100 ! Execute 100 global iterations for
*endif ! each new geometry
solve ! FLOTRAN solution
fini
! end of fluid portion
physics,read,struc ! Read in structures environment
/assign,esav,struc,esav ! Files for restarting nonlinear structure elementsave
!!Assign,Ident,Fname,Ext,Dir
/assign,emat,struc,emat
*if,i,gt,1,then ! Structural restart loop If i is grater than a
parsave,all ! Save parameters for convergence check
resume ! Resume DB - to return original node positions
parresume ! Resume parameters needed for convergence check
/prep7
antype,stat,rest !Analysis type Static, restart
fini
*endif
/solu /Enter Solution preprocesor
solc,off
asel,s,,,7,10 ! Select proper areas to apply fluid pressures
asel,a,,,17,20
asel,a,,,27,30
nsla,,1 !nsla,Type,NKEY - Selects those nodes associated with the selected areas
esel,s,type,,2 !,ESEL Type,Item,Comp,VMIN,VMAX,VINC,KABS - Selects a subset of elements.
ldread,pres,last,,,,,rfl ! Apply pressure surface load from Flotran
alls
rescontrol,,none ! Do not use multiframe restart for nonlinear
solve
*if,i,eq,1,then
save ! save original node locations at the first run
*endif
fini
/prep7
*SET,mkey,2 ! Select level of mesh morphing for fluid
dvmorph,2, ,mkey
dvmorph,3, ,mkey ! Perform morphing of volume 2
alls
fini
/assign,esav
/assign,emat
*enddo

save ! Nodal coordinates of deformed geometry are saved

92