0
Research Papers: Seismic Engineering

Steady-State Response of a Piping System Under Harmonic Excitations Considering Pipe-Support Friction With Variable Normal Loads

[+] Author and Article Information
José Argüelles

Sinclair Knight Merz Ltd.,
Santiago 7500011, Chile
e-mail: JArguelles@globalskm.com

Euro Casanova

Professor
Department of Mechanics,
Universidad Simón Bolívar,
Caracas 1080, Venezuela
e-mail: ecasanov@usb.ve

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received September 6, 2013; final manuscript received December 13, 2014; published online February 24, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Chong-Shien Tsai.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 137(5), 051801 (Oct 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: PVT-13-1153; doi: 10.1115/1.4029403 History: Received September 06, 2013; Revised December 13, 2014; Online February 24, 2015

Dynamic loads in piping systems are mainly caused by transient phenomena generated by operating conditions or installed equipment. In most cases, these dynamic loads may be modeled as harmonic excitations, e.g., pulsating flow. On the other hand, when designing piping systems under dynamic loads, it is a common practice to neglect strong nonlinearities such as shocks and friction between pipe and support surfaces, mainly because of the excessive cost in terms of computational time and the complexity associated with the integration of the nonlinear equations of motion. However, disregarding these nonlinearities for some systems may result in overestimated dynamic amplitudes leading to incorrect analysis and designs. This paper presents a numerical approach to calculate the steady-state response amplitudes of a piping system subjected to harmonic excitations and considering dry friction between the pipe and the support surfaces, without performing a numerical integration. The proposed approach permits the analysis of three dimensional piping systems, where the normal forces may vary in time and is based in the hybrid frequency–time domain method (HFT). Results of the proposed approach are compared and discussed with those of a full integration scheme, confirming that HFT is a valid and computationally feasible option.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Piping system under study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Second normal mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Orbits in plane X-Z for S1 (μ = 0.3, F = 1 × 104 N, and Ω = 10.15 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Response amplitude for E1 and S1 (μ = 0.1 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Response amplitude for E1 and S1 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Response amplitude for E2 and E3 (μ = 0.1 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Response amplitude for E2 and E3 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Response amplitude for E1 and S1 (μ = 0.1 and F = 2 × 104 N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Response amplitude for E1 and S1 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2 × 104 N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Response amplitude for E2 and E3 (μ = 0.1 and F = 2 × 104 N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Response amplitude for E2 and E3 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2 × 104 N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Friction effect in harmonic response for E1 (F = 2.5 × 103 N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Friction effect in harmonic response for S1 (F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Amplitude reduction due to friction for E1 (F = 2 × 104N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Amplitude reduction due to friction for S1 (F = 2 × 104N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Force effect in harmonic response of E1 and S1 (μ = 0.3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Force effect in harmonic response of E2 and E3 (μ = 0.3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Response amplitude for E1 and S1 considering constant and variable normal forces (μ = 0.3 and F = 2 × 104N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Response amplitude for E2 and E3 considering constant and variable normal forces (μ = 0.3 and F = 2 × 104N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Response amplitude for E1 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Response amplitude for S1 (μ = 0.3 and F = 2.5 × 103N)

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