0
Research Papers: Fluid-Structure Interaction

# Prediction of Streamwise Fluidelastic Instability of a Tube Array in Two-Phase Flow and Effect of Frequency Detuning

[+] Author and Article Information
Stephen Olala

BWC/AECL/NSERC Chair of Fluid-Structure
Interaction
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
École Polytechnique de Montréal,
C.P. 6079, Succursale Centre-ville,
Montréal, QC H3C 3A7, Canada
e-mail: stephen.olala@polymtl.ca

Njuki W. Mureithi

BWC/AECL/NSERC Chair of Fluid-Structure
Interaction
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
École Polytechnique de Montréal,
C.P. 6079, Succursale Centre-ville,
Montréal, QC H3C 3A7, Canada
e-mail: njuki.mureithi@polymtl.ca

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received September 25, 2015; final manuscript received August 4, 2016; published online October 11, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Tomomichi Nakamura.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(3), 031301 (Oct 11, 2016) (15 pages) Paper No: PVT-15-1220; doi: 10.1115/1.4034467 History: Received September 25, 2015; Revised August 04, 2016

## Abstract

Experimental measurements of the steady forces on a central cluster of tubes in a rotated triangular array $(P/D=1.5)$ subjected to two-phase air–water cross-flow have been conducted. The tests were done for a series of void fractions and a Reynolds number (based on the pitch velocity), $Re=7.2×104.$ The forces obtained and their derivatives with respect to the static streamwise displacement of the central tube in the cluster were then used to perform a quasi-steady fluidelastic instability analysis. The predicted instability velocities were found to be in good agreement with the dynamic stability tests. Since the effect of the time delay was ignored, the analysis confirmed the predominance of the stiffness-controlled mechanism in causing streamwise fluidelastic instability. The effect of frequency detuning on the streamwise fluidelastic instability threshold was also explored. It was found that frequency detuning has, in general, a stabilizing effect. However, for a large initial variance in a population of frequencies (e.g., $σ2=7.84$), a smaller sample drawn from the larger population may have lower or higher variance resulting in a large scatter in possible values of the stability constant, $K,$ some even lower than the average (tuned) case. Frequency detuning clearly has important implications for streamwise fluidelastic instability in the steam generator U-bend region where in-plane boundary conditions, due to preload and contact friction variance, are poorly defined. The present analysis has, in particular, demonstrated the potential of the quasi-steady model in predicting streamwise fluidelastic instability threshold in tube arrays subjected to two-phase cross-flows.

<>
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

## References

Weaver, D. S. , and Fitzpatrick, J. A. , 1988, “ A Review of Cross-Flow Induced Vibrations in Heat Exchanger Tube Arrays,” J. Fluids Struct., 2(1), pp. 73–93.
Chen, S. S. , and Srikantiah, G. S. , 2001, “ Motion-Dependent Fluid Force Coefficients for Tube Arrays in Crossflow,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 123(4), pp. 429–436.
Roberts, B. W. , 1962, “ Low Frequency, Self-Excited Vibration in a Row of Circular Cylinders Mounted in an Airstream,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Roberts, B. W. , 1966, “ Low Frequency, Aeroelastic Vibrations in a Cascade of Circular Cylinders,” Mechanical Engineering Science Monograph, No.4, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London.
Connors, H. J. , 1970, “ Fluidelastic Vibration of Tube Arrays Excited by Cross Flow,” Flow-Induced Vibrations in Heat Exchangers, D. D. Reiff , ed., ASME, New York, pp. 42–56.
Price, S. J. , and Paidoussis, M. P. , 1982, “ A Theoretical Investigation of the Parameters Affecting the Fluidelastic Instability of a Double Row of Cylinders Subject to Cross-Flow,” 3rd International Conference on Vibrations in Nuclear Plant, pp. 107–119.
Price, S. J. , and Paidoussis, M. P. , 1983, “ Fluidelastic Instability of a Double Row of Circular Cylinders Subject to Cross-Flow,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust. Stress Reliab. Des., 105(1), pp. 59–66.
Price, S. J. , and Paidoussis, M. P. , 1984, “ An Improved Mathematical Model for the Stability of Cylinder Rows Subject to Cross-Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 97(4), pp. 615–640.
Tanaka, H. , and Takahara, S. , 1980, “ Unsteady Fluid Dynamic Force on Tube Bundle and Its Dynamic Effect on Vibration,” Flow-Induced Vibration of Power Plant Components, M. K. Au-Yang , ed., ASME, New York, NY, pp. 77–92.
Tanaka, H. , and Takahara, S. , 1981, “ Fluid Elastic Vibration of Tube Array in Cross Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 77(1), pp. 19–37.
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. 147–158.
Lever, J. H. , and Weaver, D. S. , 1986, “ On the Stability Behaviour of Heat Exchanger Tube Bundles. Part 2—Numerical Results and Comparison With Experiments,” J. Sound Vib., 107(3), pp. 393–410.
Pettigrew, M. J. , and Taylor, C. E. , 1994, “ Two-Phase Flow-Induced Vibration: An Overview,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 116(3), pp. 233–253.
Chen, S. S. , 1983, “ Instability Mechanisms and Stability Criteria of a Group of Circular Cylinders Subjected to Cross-Flow. Part I: Theory,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust. Stress Reliab. Des., 105(1), pp. 51–58.
Chen, S. S. , 1983, “ Instability Mechanisms and Stability Criteria of a Group of Circular Cylinders Subjected to Cross-Flow. Part II: Numerical Results and Discussion,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust. Stress Reliab. Des., 105(2), pp. 253–260.
Austermann, R. , and Popp, K. , 1995, “ Stability Behavior of a Single Flexible Cylinder in Rigid Tube Arrays of Different Geometry Subjected to Cross-Flow,” J. Fluids Struct., 9(3), pp. 303–322.
Mureithi, N. W. , Zhang, C. , Ruel, M. , and Pettigrew, M. J. , 2005, “ Fluidelastic Instability Tests on an Array of Tubes Preferentially Flexible in the Flow Direction,” J. Fluids Struct., 21(1), pp. 75–87.
Violette, R. , Pettigrew, M. J. , and Mureithi, N. W. , 2006, “ Fluidelastic Instability of an Array of Tubes Preferentially Flexible in the Flow Direction Subjected to Two-Phase Cross Flow,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 128(1), pp. 148–159.
Janzen, V. P. , Hagberg, E. G. , Pettigrew, M. J. , and Taylor, C. E. , 2005, “ Fluidelastic Instability and Work-Rate Measurements of Steam-Generator U-Tubes in Air–Water Cross-Flow,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 127(1), pp. 84–91.
Nakamura, T. , Fujita, Y. , and Sumitani, T. , 2014, “ Study on In-Flow Fluidelastic Instability of Triangular Tube Arrays Subjected to Air Cross Flow,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 136(5), p. 051302.
Granger, S. , Campistron, R. , and Lebret, J. , 1993, “ Motion-Dependent Excitation Mechanisms in a Square in-Line Tube Bundle Subject to Water Cross-Flow—An Experimental Modal-Analysis,” J. Fluids Struct., 7(5), pp. 521–550.
Weaver, D. S. , and Koroyannakis, D. , 1983, “ Flow-Induced Vibrations of Heat Exchanger U-Tubes: A Simulation to Study the Effects of a Symmetric Stiffness,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust., 105(1), pp. 67–75.
Weaver, D. S. , and Schneider, W. , 1983, “ The Effect of Flat Bar Supports on the Crossflow Induced Response of Heat Exchanger U-Tubes,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 105(4), pp. 775–781.
Feenstra, P. A. , Janzen, V. P. , and Smith, T. , 2014, “ In-Plane Vibration Damping of a U-Tube With Wet and Dry Flat-Bar Supports,” ASME Paper No. PVP2014-28429.
Hassan, M. , and Weaver, D. S. , 2015, “ The Effect of Flat Bar Supports on Streamwise Fluidelastic Instability in Heat Exchanger Tube Arrays,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 137(6), p. 061302.
S. C. E. , 2013, “ San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2 Return to Service Report,” Southern California Edison, Rosemead, CA, Technical Docket No. 50-361.
Sawadogo, T. , and Mureithi, N. , 2014, “ Fluidelastic Instability in a Rotated Triangular Tube Array Subjected to Two-Phase Cross-Flow. Part II: Experimental Tests and Comparison With Theoretical Results,” J. Fluids Struct., 49, pp. 16–28.
Olala, S. , Mureithi, N. , Sawadogo, T. , and Pettigrew, M. J. , 2014, “ Streamwise Fluidelastic Forces in Tube Arrays Subjected to Two-Phase Flows,” ASME Paper No. PVP2014-28153.
Price, S. J. , and Paidoussis, M. P. , 1986, “ A Single Flexible Cylinder Analysis for the Fluidelastic Instability of an Array of Flexible Cylinders in Cross Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 108(2), pp. 193–199.
Pettigrew, M. J. , Taylor, C. E. , and Kim, B. S. , 1989, “ Vibration of Tube Bundles in Two-Phase Cross-Flow: Part I—Hydrodynamic Mass and Damping,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 111(4), pp. 446–477.
Paidoussis, M. P. , and Price, S. J. , 1988, “ Mechanisms Underlying Flow-Induced Instabilities of Cylinder Arrays in Cross-Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 187(1), pp. 45–59.
Shahriary, S. , Mureithi, N. W. , and Pettigrew, M. J. , 2007, “ Quasi-Static Forces and Stability Analysis in a Triangular Tube Bundle Subjected to Two-Phase Cross-Flow,” ASME Paper No. PVP2007-26017.
Inman, D. J. , 2001, Engineering Vibration, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Pettigrew, M. J. , Tromp, J. H. , Taylor, C. E. , and Kim, B. S. , 1989, “ Vibration of Tube Bundles in Two-Phase Cross-Flow: Part 2—Fluidelastic Instability,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 111(4), pp. 478–487.
Blevins, R. D. , 1979, Formulas for Natural Frequency and Mode Shape, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Cheng, B. , 1994, “ The Mechanisms Underlying Flow-Induced Instability of Cylinder Arrays in Cross-Flow: An Investigation of System Parameters,” Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.

## Figures

Fig. 1

Two-phase test loop and array configuration

Fig. 2

Test section

Fig. 3

Instrumented tubes: (a) central tube mounted on linear motor and (b) instrumented neighboring tube

Fig. 4

Variation of the drag and lift coefficients with tube C dimensionless displacement for tube C

Fig. 5

Variation of the drag and lift coefficients with tube C dimensionless displacement for tube 1

Fig. 6

Variation of the drag and lift coefficients with tube C dimensionless displacement for tube 4

Fig. 7

Variation of the drag and lift coefficients with tube C dimensionless displacement for tube 2

Fig. 8

Variation of the drag and lift coefficients with tube C dimensionless displacement for tube 3

Fig. 9

Variation of the derivative of the drag coefficient with void fraction for (a) tubes C, 2, and 4, and (b) tubes 1 and 3

Fig. 10

Flexible tubes configuration for stability analysis—single column

Fig. 11

Flexible tubes configuration for stability analysis—multiple columns

Fig. 12

Effect of the number of flexible tubes on the critical velocity for a column of tubes (refer to Fig. 10)

Fig. 13

Effect of the number of flexible tubes on the critical velocity for multiple columns of tubes (refer to Fig. 11)

Fig. 14

Comparison between present analysis and dynamic stability test: (a) flexible central cluster (Fig. 11(f)) and (b) two partially flexible columns (Fig. 11(d))

Fig. 15

Instability map: comparison of present analysis with published data, ▲ two flexible columns in air–water two-phase flow with tubes flexible in flow (present analysis),◆ two partially flexible columns in air–water two-phase flow (present analysis), ▶ central flexible cluster in air–water two-phase flow (present analysis), ★ a fully flexible array in air–water two-phase flow (present analysis), ● axisymmetrically flexible tube bundles in air–water two-phase flow [34], ▽ a single flexible column in air flow with tubes flexible in flow [17], ◁ a central flexible cluster in air flow with tubes flexible in flow [17], ◻ a central flexible cluster in air–water two-phase flow with tubes flexible in flow, fn = 28 Hz [18], ◇ a central flexible cluster in air–water two-phase flow with tubes flexible in flow, fn = 14 Hz [18], and ☆ two partially flexible columns in air–water two-phase flow with tubes flexible in flow [18]

Fig. 16

Evolution of eigenvalue with flow velocity for 90% void fraction, σ2 = 0 (0% detuning): (a) real part and (b) imaginary part

Fig. 17

Modes of vibration for 90% void fraction, σ2 = 0 (0% detuning): (a) unstable mode (mode 1) and (b) mode 2

Fig. 18

Evolution of eigenvalue for seven arrays, original population σ2 = 0.49 (5% detuning): (a) real part and (b) imaginary part

Fig. 19

Evolution of eigenvalue for seven arrays, original population σ2 = 1.96 (10% detuning): (a) real part and (b) imaginary part

Fig. 20

Evolution of eigenvalue for seven arrays, original population σ2 = 7.84 (20% detuning): (a) real part and (b) imaginary part

Fig. 21

Effect of frequency detuning on streamwise stability constant: (a) σ2 = 0.49 (5% detuning) and (b) σ2 = 7.84 (20% detuning)

Fig. 22

Effect of random frequency detuning on streamwise stability constant, 2 Hz ≤ f ≥ 14 Hz

## 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 Proceedings Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections