0
Research Papers: Fluid-Structure Interaction

Evaluation of the Integrity of Steam Generator Tubes Subjected to Flow Induced Vibrations

[+] Author and Article Information
Marwan Hassan

School of Engineering,
University of Guelph,
Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
e-mail: mahassan@uoguelph.ca

Jovica Riznic

Operational Engineering Assessment Division,
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission,
Ottawa, ON K1P 5S9, Canada
e-mail: jovica.riznic@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 29, 2013; final manuscript received February 13, 2014; published online August 19, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Samir Ziada.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 136(5), 051301 (Aug 19, 2014) (11 pages) Paper No: PVT-13-1150; doi: 10.1115/1.4026982 History: Received August 29, 2013; Revised February 13, 2014

Flow-induced vibrations (FIV) continue to affect the operations of nuclear power plant components such as heat exchanger tube bundles. The negative effect of FIV is in the form of tube fatigue, cracking, and fretting wear at the supports. Fretting wear at the supports is the result of tube/support impact and friction. Fluidelastic and turbulence forces are the two main excitation mechanisms that feed energy into the system causing these violent vibrations. To minimize this effect all support clearances must be kept at a very small value. This paper investigates the consequences of losing the effectiveness of a particular support as a result of corrosion or excessive fretting wear. A full U-bend tube subjected to both fluidelastic and turbulence forces is utilized in this work. The performance of countermeasures such as the installation of additional flat bars in the U-bend region is thoroughly investigated. The investigation utilized both deterministic and probabilistic techniques.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Weaver, D., Ziada, S., Au-Yang, M., Chen, S., Païdoussis, M. P., and Pettigrew, M., 2000, “Flow-Induced Vibrations in Power and Process Plant Components—Progress and Prospects,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 122(3), pp. 339–348. [CrossRef]
Pettigrew, M. J., and Taylor, C. E., 2003, “Vibration Analysis of Steam Generators and Heat Exchangers: An Overview Part 1: Flow Damping, Fluidelastic Instability,” J. Fluids Struct., 18(5), pp. 469–483. [CrossRef]
Chen, S. S., 1984, “Guidelines for the Instability Flow Velocity of Tube Arrays in Cross-Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 93, pp. 439–455. [CrossRef]
Weaver, D., and Fitzpatrick, J., 1988, “A Review of Cross-Flow Induced Vibrations in Heat Exchanger Tube Arrays,” J. Fluids Struct., 2, pp. 73–93. [CrossRef]
Pettigrew, M. J., and Taylor, C. E., 1991, “Fluidelastic Instability of Heat Exchanger Tube Bundles: Review and Design Recommendations,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 113(2), pp. 242–256. [CrossRef]
Schröder, K., and Gelbe, H., 1999, “New Design Recommendations for Fluidelastic Instability in Heat Exchanger Tube Bundles,” J. Fluids Struct., 13, pp. 361–379. [CrossRef]
Chen, S. S., 1983, “Instability Mechanisms and Stability Criteria of a Group of Circular Cylinders Subjected to Cross-Flow. Part 1: Theory,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust., 105(1), pp. 51–58. [CrossRef]
Connors, H. J., 1970, “Fluidelastic Vibration of Tube Arrays Excited by Cross Flow,” Flow-Induced Vibration in Heat Exchangers, D. D.Reiff, ed., ASME, New York, pp. 42–57.
Tanaka, H., and Takahara, S., 1981, “Fluid Elastic Vibration of Tube Array in Cross-Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 77, pp. 19–37. [CrossRef]
Lever, J. H., and Weaver, D. S., 1982, “A Theoretical Model for the Fluidelastic Instability in Heat Exchanger Tube Bundles,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 104(3), pp. 104–147. [CrossRef]
Price, S. J., and Païdoussis, M. P., 1984, “An Improved Mathematical Model for the Stability of Cylinder Rows Subjected to Cross-Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 97(4), pp. 615–640. [CrossRef]
Weaver, D. S., 2008, “Some Thoughts on the Elusive Mechanism of Fluidelastic Instability in Heat Exchanger Tube Arrays,” The 9th International Conference on Flow-Induced Vibration.
Heppner, K. L. S., and Pietralik, J., 2006, “The Thirst Chemistry Module as a Tool to Determine Optimal Steam Generator Corrosion Control Strategies,” CNS International Steam Generator Conference, Toronto, Canada, pp. 26–29.
Oengören, A., and Ziada, S., 2000, “Flow Periodicity and Acoustic Resonance in Parallel Triangle Tube Bundles,” J. Fluids Struct., 14(2), pp. 197–219. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., and Hayder, M., 2008, “Modelling of Fluidelastic Vibrations of Heat Exchanger Tubes With Loose Supports,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 238(10), pp. 2507–2520. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., and Hossen, A., 2010, “Time Domain Models for Damping-Controlled Fluidelastic Instability Forces in Tubes With Loose Supports,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 132(4), p. 041302. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M. A., Rogers, R. J., and Gerber, A. G., 2011, “Damping-Controlled Fluidelastic Instability Forces in Multi-Span Tubes With Loose Supports,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 241(8), pp. 2666–2673. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., and Mohany, A., 2013, “Fluidelastic Instability Modeling of Loosely Supported Multispan U-Tubes in Nuclear Steam Generators,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 135(1), p. 011306. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., Weaver, D., and Dokainish, M., 2002, “A Simulation of the Turbulence Response of Heat Exchanger Tubes in Lattice-Bar Supports,” J. Fluids Struct., 16(8), pp. 1145–1176. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., Weaver, D., and Dokainish, M., 2005, “A New Tube-Support Impact Model for Heat Exchanger Tubes,” J. Fluids Struct., 21, pp. 561–577. [CrossRef]
Hassan, M., and Rogers, R., 2005, “Friction Modelling of Preloaded Tube Contact Dynamics,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 235, pp. 2349–2357. [CrossRef]
Mohany, A., Janzen, V. P., Feenstra, P., and King, S., 2012, “Experimental and Numerical Characterization of Flow-Induced Vibration of Multispan U-Tubes,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 134(1), p. 011301. [CrossRef]
Weaver, D. S., and Parrondo, J., 1991, “Fluidelastic Instability in Multispan Heat Exchanger Tube Arrays,” J. Fluids Struct., 5, pp. 323–338. [CrossRef]
Soper, B. M. H., 1983, “The Effect of Tube Layout on the Fluid Elastic Instability of Tube Bundles in Cross Flow,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 105(4), pp. 744–750. [CrossRef]
Hartlen, R. T., 1974, “Wind Tunnel Determination of Fluidelastic Vibration Thresholds for Typical Heat-Exchanger Tube Patterns,” Ontario Hydro Research Division, Report No. 74-309-K.
Grover, L. K., and Weaver, D. S., 1978, “Cross-Flow Induced Vibrations in a Tube Bank-Vortex Shedding,” J. Sound Vib., 59(2), pp. 263–276. [CrossRef]
Connors, H. J., 1980, Fluidelastic Vibration of Tube Arrays Excited by Nonuniform Cross Flow,” Flow-Induced Vibration of Power Plant Components, Presented at the Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Publication PVP, Vol. 41, pp. 93–107.
Pettigrew, M., Sylvestre, Y., and Campagna, A., 1978, “Vibration Analysis of Heat Exchanger and Steam Generator Designs,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 48(1), pp. 97–115. [CrossRef]
Heilker, W. J., and Vincent, R. Q., 1981, “Vibration in Nuclear Heat Exchangers Due to Liquid and Two-Phase Flow,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 103(2), pp. 358–366. [CrossRef]
Gorman, D., 1976, “Experimental Development of Design Criteria to Limit Liquid Cross-Flow Induced Vibration in Nuclear Reactor Heat Exchanger Equipment,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 61, pp. 324–336.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Nuclear steam generator: (a) a typical overall view and (b) finite element model and flow distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Flow cell model in the U-bend region

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Loose support configurations and models

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Nonlinear model configurations: (a) configuration 1, (b) configuration 2, and (c) configuration 3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Linear mode shapes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Linear simulations: (a) predicted tube rms response versus flow velocity, (b) the predicted critical flow velocity versus available experimental data: * Soper [24]; • Hartlen [25]; ♦ Weaver and Grover [26]; ◇ Connors [27]; △ Pettigrew et al. [28]; □ Heilker and Vincent [29]; ⊳ Gorman [30]; ☆ simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Work rate results for configuration 1 varying H07 clearance: (a) U-bend clearance = 0.1 mm and (b) U-bend clearance = 0.2 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Work rate results for configuration 3 with varying clearance at: (a) scallop bars S1A and S1B, (b) flat bars F1 and F2, and (c) scallop bars S2A and S2B

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Tube support radial clearances and offsets: (a) broached-hole support, (b) scallop bar support, and (c) flat-bar support

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Impact force histograms for U-bend supports

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Relationship between individual support clearance and the impact force

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Relationship between support S2A clearance and the impact force

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Work rate histograms for U-bend supports

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Relationship between individual support clearance and the work rate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Relationship between support S2A clearance and the work rate

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In