Augustus 2007

DYNAMIC MODULE OF CAESAR II
Is it of any use?? 30th August 2007
DYNAFLOW
lectures 2007
Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved
-1-
Why is dynamics not used more

Coade: < 5% of Caesar II license holders also makes use of dynamic module Dynamical effects are overlooked Dynamical effects are underestimated Pipe stress engineers prefer quasi static approach Dynamic load * 2
Pipe stress engineer feels uncomfortable with dynamics
-2-
Function of the dynamical module

Facilitate accurate assessment of the dynamical effects Effects of unsteady loads on stress and load levels in piping systems.
When is it used?? During design (avoid fatigue, overloading, large displacements) Control of Vibration problems (development of mitigation measures)
-3-
Few examples of what might go wrong!!
Piping Incidents due to dynamic loads
-4-
Collateral Damage due Dynamic Effects from Flange Failure
-5-
Support Damage (I)
-6-
Support Damage (II)
-7-
Support Damage (II)
-8-
Support Damage (III)
-9-
More Incidents due to fluid/gas transients (small bore piping)
-10-
Examples of incidents as a result of fluid transients
-11-
Deluge FF System on Jetty when Tested First Time (I)
-12-
Deluge FF System on Jetty when Tested First Time (II)
-13-
Flange Failure
-14-
Dynamic loads are classified based on time history

Sustained dynamic loads Periodic loads of moderate amplitude and long duration (minutesdays) - Forces due to pressure oscillations in pump/compressor suction or discharge systems - Imposed oscillating displacements at pump/compressor nozzle connections. - Oscillating forces originating from flow fluctuations/instabilities Transient, intermittent dynamic loads Relatively large forces of relatively short duration (seconds) - Slug Loads - Relief Loads - Waterhammer, surge loads - Earthquake
-15-
Effect of dynamic loads

Sustained dynamic loads Vibration with a periodicity equal to the excitation mechanism Vibration amplitude depends on separation between excitation frequency and natural frequency of the piping system Failure mechanism: High cycle fatigue
Transient dynamic loads All natural mode shapes and natural frequencies of the piping system are affected. Response may show large amplitude vibrations of short duration. Failure mechanism: Excessive support loads Accumulation of strain, low or high cycle fatigue
-16-
Required data for dynamic analysis

Dynamic model of piping system Good distribution of lumped masses, additional nodes Sufficient number of DOF For lumped mass (FE) type calculations typically only the first 33% of the modes shapes are accurate.
Accurate boundary conditions
Magnitude of the excitation forces Mechanical Fluid mechanical Slug load calculation (manual??) Acoustical simulation (pulsation study) Waterhammer (surge) load calculation, simulation or manual
(Measurement results for bench marking the simulations)

-17-
Assessment of dynamic results

Material Fatigue data, ASME B&PV section VIII div 2 appendix 5 API 579 AD Merkblatter BS-5500 EN-13445
-18-
Vibration Assessment conform VDI 3842

Typical Vibration Level Limits conform VDI 3842, Vibrations in Piping Systems
1000.0
Vibration Velocity [mm/s] RMS
100.0
10.0
1.0 1 10 Frequency [Hz.]

design marginal correction danger
100
1000
-19-
Three Options for Dynamic Response Analysis in Caesar II
0 1 2 3
-20-
Harmonic analysis
Application Input Periodic Loads can be applied at any node in the system Per load case one excitation frequency Many load cases are possible Sustained vibrations (compressors & pumps)
Solution method Since response frequency equals excitation frequency solution procedure is quasi static (fast)
Output Stress, displacement and load amplitude per frequency
-21-
Spectrum Analysis
Application Input Load time histories at many nodes in the system Transient vibrations: slug, waterhammer, relief
Calculation method Load time histories are translated into response spectra (time phase between different loads is lost) Natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated Response for each mode shape is determined Mode shape responses are combined into a final system response
Output Maximum stress, largest modal contribution Maximum loads, largest modal contribution Maximum displacements
-22-
Response Spectrum Generation
-23-
Response Spectrum Generation
DLF may grow > 2 if time history contains only a limited amount of consistent periodicity
DLF Related to 4 harmonic cycles
-24-
Time History Analysis

Application Input Load time histories at many nodes in the system Transient vibrations: slug, waterhammer, relief
Calculation method Load time histories are maintained (time phase between different loads is conserved) Natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated Response of each mode shape is determined Mode shape responses are combined into a final system response Output
Maximum stress, actual stress at user defined times (snapshots) Maximum loads, actual load at user defined times Maximum displacements, actual displacement at user defined times By combination of several runs a time history of stress, loads displacements can be composed
-25-
Missing Mass correction

Only limited number of mode shapes are extracted and participating in the response Only a fraction (preferably close to 100%) of the system mass is participating Only a fraction of the total excitation force is participating The missing force fraction is calculated and applied statically after multiplication by the largest DLF value above the frequency cut-off. Important when large axial loads are applied (axial mode shapes have relatively high natural frequencies.
-26-
Spectrum versus Time History

Spectrum Frequency domain Conservative results: only maximum response per mode shape is calculated and combined in system response Mode making maximum contribution is identified (advantage for vibration control) Only maxima are calculated, time phase is lost Number of participating modes is finite (missing mass) Time history Time domain More accurate results: time history response per mode is conserved and time phasing between model maxima is maintained during combination. Load, stress time histories (enables fatigue assessment by means of cumulative damage, counting of cycles) Graphical response is possible Modal info is not available Calculation is memory intensive (limits simulation duration, number of participating modes, time step resolution) Number of participating modes is finite (missing mass)
-27-
Quasi-Static Approach
Dynamic Load amplitude (maximum) * DLF=2 as static load Quasi static approach is simple and fast Quasi static approach works when there is only one dominant mode shape that is excited Quasi static approach focuses on loads (dynamic response is not considered), i.e. solution by change/elimination of modes is not possible.
-28-
Best Method for Transient (Impact) Loads Analysis

Quasi static Simple but only if there is one dominant mode shape
Spectrum Time phase between several impacts on one system is lost (e.g. slug hitting consecutive elbows) Conservative but output provides clues for problem solving. Mode with largest contribution is identified.
Time history Exact, timing relation between impacts is maintained (slug, waterhammer) Clues for diagnosis are less obvious
For transient loads a combination of spectrum and time history runs provides the best opportunities
-29-
Protective Measures
Sustained dynamic loads Control of mechanical natural frequencies of the piping system in relation to the excitation frequency Support functions and support stiffness (in general high stiffness) Analysis accuracy is increased if support structure is included in the model Control of support and nozzle loads Support flexibility is sometimes useful Elimination of damaging mode shapes
Transient dynamic loads
Protective measures for dynamics may be conflicting with statics
-30-
-31-
-32-
Example 1
Problem High vibration level in compressor suction piping
Steps to solution Vibration Measurements, identification of main contributions in frequency domain Verification of acoustical natural frequencies of piping system (acoustical resonance) Verification of mechanical natural frequencies (mechanical resonance) Identification of source of vibration problem Modification proposal
-33-
Compressor Location
-34-
Steel Supporting (I)
-35-
Steel Supporting (II)
-36-
Compressor Layout
-37-
Step 1. Vibration Measurements and Compressor Harmonics

120.00
33 Hz
100.00
49 Hz 16 Hz
66 Hz 83 Hz
99 Hz
80.00 Amplitude (dB)
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Frequency (Hz)

60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
-38-
Intermediate Conclusion from Step 1

Vibrations are at compressor harmonics Vibrations must be result of: or or High pulsation forces without resonance (compressor bottle sizing problem) Mechanical resonance Acoustical resonance
-39-
Step 2. Acoustical Natural Frequencies & Compressor Harmonics (Search for acoustical resonance)
250
16 Hz
200
Purple vertical lines represent compressor harmonics

150 Amplitude 100 50 0 10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
Frequency (Hz)
-40-
Intermediate Conclusion from Step 2

Maybe near to resonance condition at first compressor harmonic (16.5 Hz.). No further acoustical resonance Vibration peak at 16.5 Hz, most probably is due high shaking forces as a result of near resonant condition. The other vibration peaks must be the result of: or High pulsation forces without resonance (compressor bottle sizing problem) Mechanical resonance
-41-
Step 3. Vibration Measurements & Calculated Mech. Natural Frequencies (Search for Mechanical Resonance)
100.00 90.00
33 Hz
66 Hz.
80.00 70.00 60.00
Amplitude (dB)
83 Hz
50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Frequency (Hz)
Purple vertical lines represent pipe system natural frequencies
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
-42-
Conclusion from Step 3 & Identification Cause of Vibration Problem

Apparently there is mechanical resonance at 33 Hz and 66 Hz and near mechanical resonance at 83 Hz. No mechanical resonance condition at the first compressor harmonic (16.5 Hz.) and at 49 Hz. and 99 Hz. The high vibration levels 33 Hz, 66 Hz and 83 Hz are of mechanical nature. The high vibration level at 16.5 Hz most probably is an acoustical resonance problem. The high vibration level at 49 Hz and 99 Hz. must be the result of: High pulsation forces without resonance (compressor bottle sizing problem)
-43-
Examination of Mechanical Behavior

66 Hz. Mode Shape
Large amplitude movement in suction manifold
-44-
Step 4. Modifications
The high vibration levels 33 Hz, 66 Hz and 83 Hz are of mechanical nature and need a mechanical solution Better supporting Improved support stiffness
The high vibration level at 16.5 Hz is due to acoustical resonance and needs an acoustical solution, I.e. different bottles and/or orifice plates to introduce more damping The high vibration level at 49 Hz and 99 Hz. are the result of high pulsation forces without resonance and must be resolved by compressor bottle (re)sizing.
-45-
As Built Supporting Structure of Compressor Manifold
-46-
Modified/Improved Supporting Structure of Compressor Manifold
-47-
Modified Structure Implemented & Connected to Attached Piping
-48-
Conclusion from Example 1

Compressor vibration problems are of a mixed nature Part is mechanical Part is acoustical
Each category requires a different approach and result in different solutions Not all vibration problems can be solved by mechanical measures.
-49-
Example 2
Problem Failure in cooling pump discharge line (possibly vibration induced)
Steps to solution No vibration measurements just visual observation Identification of excitation mechanism thru fluid simulations (pump trips & start-up and check valve closures) Time history mechanical simulation to verify stress levels Identification of source of vibration problem Modification proposal
-50-
Model of the System
Steady State Volume Flowrate [m3/s]
-51-
Time History of Pumps
Pump trips at t=1 seconds, Pump inertia: 8 kgm2
-52-
Time History of Valve
Check valve closes in 0.5 second
-53-
Time History of Flow through Valve
Flow thru checkvalve
-54-
Maximum Transient Pressure
Maximum Transient Pressure during pump trip [Barg]
-55-
Unbalanced Load Time Histories (I)

Load in Newton * 104
-56-
Unbalanced Load Time Histories (II)

-57-
Unbalanced Load Time Histories (III)

-58-
Unbalanced Load Time Histories (IV)

-59-
Unbalanced Load Time Histories available in CAESAR
-60-
Conclusion from Example 2:
Alternating stress amplitude of 233 MPa results in stress range of 466 MPa may be responsible for LCF
-61-
Example 3
Problem Excessive pressure in injection line.
Steps to solution Assumed mechanism entrapped (undrained) fluid propelled by gas at gas velocity during start-up hits valve that is cracked open Identification of source of problem thru simulation
-62-
Valve Damage
-63-
Model of the System
-64-
Pressure Time History at the Ball Valve in Case of Entrapped Gas at the Valve
Pressure in Barg
Valve cracked open at t=0
-65-
Pressure Time History of Entrapped Gas

Maximum Transient Pressure in trapped gas
Slug 29 liter, 20 meter Slug 130 liter, 90 meter
500 450 400 . 350 M a x im u m P re s s u re [B a rg ] 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
-66-
Trapped gas volume [Liter at atmospheric pressure]

Conclusions for presentation

Dynamic analysis is an important and sometimes a critical element in integrity analysis Many failure modes are to be addressed Excessive loads are to be handled
CAESAR offers several types of dynamic analyses to assist in the demonstration of integrity: 1. 2. 3. Harmonic Analysis Spectrum Analysis Time History Analysis
Solutions to possible problems are often found by introduction of the right supporting and/or supporting steel structure
-67-
END Thank you for your attention
-68-

Augustus 2007

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Augustus 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DYNAMIC MODULE OF CAESAR II

Is it of any use?? 30th August 2007

Why is dynamics not used more

Pipe stress engineer feels uncomfortable with dynamics

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Function of the dynamical module

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Few examples of what might go wrong!!

Piping Incidents due to dynamic loads

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Collateral Damage due Dynamic Effects from Flange Failure

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Support Damage (I)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Support Damage (II)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Support Damage (II)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Support Damage (III)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

More Incidents due to fluid/gas transients (small bore piping)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Examples of incidents as a result of fluid transients

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Deluge FF System on Jetty when Tested First Time (I)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Deluge FF System on Jetty when Tested First Time (II)

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Dynamic loads are classified based on time history

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Effect of dynamic loads

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Required data for dynamic analysis

Accurate boundary conditions

(Measurement results for bench marking the simulations)

Assessment of dynamic results

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Vibration Assessment conform VDI 3842

Vibration Velocity [mm/s] RMS

1.0 1 10 Frequency [Hz.]

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Three Options for Dynamic Response Analysis in Caesar II

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Output Stress, displacement and load amplitude per frequency

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Response Spectrum Generation

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Response Spectrum Generation

DLF Related to 4 harmonic cycles

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Time History Analysis

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Missing Mass correction

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Spectrum versus Time History

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Best Method for Transient (Impact) Loads Analysis

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Transient dynamic loads

Protective measures for dynamics may be conflicting with statics

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved

Copyright 2007 by Dynaflow Engineering B.V. All rights reserved