×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Surge Loads in Pipework
2

Surge Loads in Pipework

Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
Hi There,
         I have a general question regarding Surge Loads. If you were presented with the results from a hydraulic surge analysis and wanted to perform a Time History Analysis of the pipework system to ensure stress levels are acceptable and also to determine the support loads would it be relevant to apply a Dynamic Load Factor to the calculated loads. I ask because there are two schools of thought within my Company. I beleive a DLF is applicable whereas others seem to beleive the DLF is already taken care of within the Hydraulic analysis.

Regards

DSB123

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
thanks desertfox,
                 I have already had a look at this but it does not answer my question.

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Hi DSB123

I looked at the theory at the bottom of of tab2 in the spreadsheet and it says a DLB should be applied if the force you are looking at from the hydraulic surge analysis
is the product of the pressure wave size * pipe area, then a DLB of 2 should be applied to err on the safe side.
I looked at the surge calculator on tab6 and the DLB is included.
Surely whoever did the surge analysis can tell you whether he just used peak pressure * pipe area or whether he put a factor of 2 in.

regards

desertfox

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Hi

please read DLF where I wrote DLB

desertfox

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Don't count on that!  It is extremely doubtful that a hydraulic analysis included any consideration of the pipe stresses at all.  The general design process considers hydraulics for hydraulic design and pipe stress for pipe stress and there is seldom any interaction between the two disciplines.  A hydraulic analysis typically makes sure only that pressures are within the design pressure and that the design flowrates are possible, given the rotating equipment engineer buys the right pumps.  A transient hydraulic analysis will include the additional consideration that any transient pressures are within the design pressure plus allowable transient pressure.  Most hydraulic engineers will give little thought to the pipe support manner at all and will know nothing about any "pipe load factors".  Any assumption made about the rigidity of the pipe supports (usually assumed totally rigid) should be stated in the analysis, but it is probably not as the hydr engr just left the default condition checked (and might not even know he did that), and whatever was said, if anything, should be verified by the stress engineer anytime he might think it was important to do so.  

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Impulse 4 has just been released by AFT and has the ability to provide a load file for Caesar II. I am still investigating what is behind this and will revert. The difficulty I have is that i do not use Caesar II but use Algor's pipepak.


What I have done in the past is taken the variation of pressure versus time from Impulse results, converted this to a force and then applied the force vs time to Pipepak at the node in question. I have not applied a DLF as I have simulated a dynamic loading.

I figure the designer of the structure taking the loads is going to apply their design factor and having factor on factor is overkill.

The study of fluid structure interaction is very complex. When you consider that when a dynamic event occurs the structure will deflect and the stresses will be relieved. The main concern is from buckling. The structural engineer has to be concerned as to how lean the structural design is before the hydraulic or piping designer starts adding factors.

The factors that are applied depend upon the risk profile of the design. A risk profile of a nuclear reactor or refinery will be somewhat different to water pump station in a remote location.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
Thanks for the replies,

Stanier,
         You say you have not applied a DLF and just converted the pressure to a force vs time loading and applied this to the pipework via Pipepak. I am not convinced this is correct as the results from the Hydraulic analysis is just a pressure vs time. The actual loading on the nodes within the piping system is an effective force vs time and without the DLF does not "model" the dynamic effect of the pressure wave travelling through the pipework.
          
BigInch,
        Thanks for the reply but can you advise whether you think that a DLF should be included in the actual loadings (from the pressure X area) vs time used in a pipe stress analysis or not.

Regards

DSB123

        

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

DSB123

The dynamic results are change in pressure (force) with time. The rate at which the change occurs is the significant point. If the force were to increase in 0.1s it would have a different impact to a change in 5 seconds.

The use of  2 times DLF is a sledgehammer of a way of looking at things. The profile generated is not being used but some number that has little engineering basis but to feel good about something.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

DSB its the same thing, Pressure x Area = Force x Time = impulsem and the effects of the pressure wave traveling through the pipe at more or less 3000 ft/sec on a short pipe means it happens pretty much all at the same time, so Stainer's is correct (for short pipes).  With a pipe 1000 meters long, I doubt that applying the load to one end and then opposite end 1 second later would be any different as far as the pipe supports are concerned than applying the loads at the same time.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
stanier,
        I know a DLF of 2 is OTT generally but do you consider that some value of DLF is applicable or not?

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

IMO, a DLF should be used for support analysis, the magnitude of the factor applied is set either by the structural (or other?) code, or lacking a suitable code or standard, by the engineer's opinion of the support's failure mechanism and the overall consequences of a failure of the support.  A typical no impact type (static) live load design factor for concrete member design is 1.7, so 2 could be entirely reasonable for an impact loaded steel compression member failing in a column or lateral buckling mode, so similar situation.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

DSB123,

The short answer is that a DLF should not be applied to the restraint loads reported by a time history analysis.  

The tricky bit is ensuring that you've got the time profile of the surge pressures correct and of course that your system is realistically modelled. You can easily see for yourself the effect of dynamic amplification on restraint loads by varying the load-time profile in a simple model. Better yet read a book on Structural Dynamics.

If on the other hand you are conducting a pseudo-static analysis you should make your own estimate of DLF and apply that to the static loads to be input to the stress program.

Also I would not expect the surge analysis to have any DLF included. Remember, the force from the surge does not somehow get increased, it is simply that the restraints must resist the load as well as decelerate the pipe.

regards
MB

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

MBlackman,
I don't follow what you mean by this?
"the force from the surge does not somehow get increased, it is simply that the restraints must resist the load as well as decelerate the pipe".  

I would say that F = M x Acceleration  where acceleration could also mean deceleration, so of course there is an increase in total load to the support, surge load = F, total load to the support = initial load + F

Load factors are not for "somehow increasing" any calculated surge load.  Load factors are used to compensate for,

1.) That a calculated load itself may contain errors (ex. maybe the mass of all the moving liquid was not properly included) and,
2.) The support's margin of failure range, given material type and assumed failure mode (concrete explosive fracture),
3.) Impact, which considers the time history of the applied loads and the materials ability "toughness" to resist local high energy levels for a sufficiently long period to distribute them without reaching failure conditions.
  
all of which can be combined to some equivalent,a multiple of, the calculated load, such that the total effect could reasonably be assumed to have an equivalent load less than or equal to the upper limit of the calculated load's value multiplied by the chosen load factor.  

Time history is not important to the design of the support, if the material is sufficiently tough to resist the impact, as the design load is always the maximum load F, which does not change if the load is applied slowly or quickly.  The rest of the time history effect is only the resulting vibration frequencies and vibratory displacements.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

The situation is even more complex in that the properties of steel are time dependent. We have all learnt the static properties of steel. When you go deeper into material research you will find that when a load is applied rapidly the material property increases. None of this benefit is taken into account in codes and standards.

Steel is cheap so the structural engineer doubling the hydraulic load is not going to cost a lot more and allows the engineer to sleep at night.

4) variation in material properties
5) errors in fabrication
6) damage during installation
7) lack of certainty in design of weldments
8) the life of the structure for it may corrode

You will find in researching the history of standards that the factors have little basis in fact. Take stress intensification factors for piping. All based on testing done in the 1950's for ferrous materials. Yet they are applied to alloys not available at the time. Why have they not bee updated? The cost of the research is prohibitive in the western world. perhaps it is time for the developing nations with lower labour costs to step up and do the research instead of relying on work done by others.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Stanier,  I'd say its because there's no money to be made or saved in reducing the stress intensification factors any more than they are now, or have been since the 50's as you say.  I think a different approach has taken root, probaby via competition between material manufacturers, and we have seen an increase the yield strengths and other engineering properties, which have made many of the materials so thin we have to worry more now about things such as local buckling and excessive thinning when bending, etc. in addition to the realization that stress redistribution and plastic design is possible with these materials as well. Heck a lot of them are plastics anyway.  I think there are even some acrobatic airplanes made now without any wood or metal in any load carying member, nor a rivit or bolt either.  With d/t ratios so low as they are now, there is not much economic necessity to reduce the stress intensification factors even more, unless you just happen to stumble onto a most unusual situation.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

BigInch

I agree with your point below, either I didn't make myself clear or you have read something unintended into my statement.  The point I was making is that while the total load on a support may be increased, it is not due to the driving force (surge pressure) increasing, but is due to the combination of driving force plus inertial effects.


Quote (BigInch):

I would say that F = M x Acceleration  where acceleration could also mean deceleration, so of course there is an increase in total load to the support, surge load = F, total load to the support = initial load + F

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Surely that is what you analyse for in the stress package. By inputing a time history from the hydraulics software, the stress software develops the forces that result in the inertia of the piping being overcome? These forces are then resisted by the support.

Certainly in Pipepak I can plot a force vs time output from such an event. Perhaps Ceasar II handles this differently. Now in Impulse 4 the force vs time can be output. there is even a capability to generate a Ceasar II input file.

Then the DLF is applied to design the support to resist this predicted load.

I think we may be in violent agreement here just expressing it differently.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

stanier (Mechanical)

COADE: Piping Stress Analysis application Ceasar II with the additional; Paulin Research Group www.paulin.com BOS Fluids:

BOS Fluids is an engineering software package that analyzes fluid transients in pipe systems and relates this information back to the mechanical piping system transferring the fluid.

For years, piping engineers have labored with simplifying hand methods, cumbersome analogue computers, or user-unfriendly software products when needing basic steady state and transient fluid analysis capability.  BOS Fluids is written specifically to address the needs of the piping engineer for fluid reaction forces, and to provide a system whereby the fluid simulation results can be easily integrated back into the piping system design and analysis.

BOS Fluids is an interactive computer simulation package that models steady state and transient flow in liquid or gas carrying piping systems. The procedure is easy to use and interfaces with most pipe stress programs. The package contains the elements required to model most common unsteady flow conditions. The elements included in the simulation package are pipes, valves, pressure relief valves, vacuum breaker, air valves, pumps, equipment, surge vessels, inlets, outlets, and orifices. BOS Fluids makes fluid simulation simple and easily accessible and yet gives the analyst pressure transients and dynamic force results with an engineering accuracy.

The present friction model used in BOSFluids is Colebrook-White. The Darcy-Weisbach flow model is used for steady state pressure drop calculations and the basic theory applied in BOS Fluids can be found in Wylie & Streeter's "Fluid Transients" published by FEB Press. BOS Fluids is capable of simulating both the steady and transient behavior of liquid carrying closed conduit systems of pipes, valves, pumps and surge relief devices.

Typical analyses using BOS Fluids include:

Water Transmission and Distribution Systems

Main Cooling Water Systems for Chemical Plants

Sewage Water Systems

Combined Power and Drinking Water Cycle Power Stations

Oil Product Transport Lines

Tanker Loading and Unloading Systems

Dynamic Behavior of Chemical Liquid Transport Lines

Acoustic Analyses for Compressors and Pumps

Regards
Leonard Stephen Thill

L S THILL

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Hi IstHill

Thanks for the information. I am aware of BOS Fluids and Paulin.

There is nothing in your message that Impulse does not do except for the acoustics analysis of compressors & Pumps. I have been using Impulse for ten years now and find that it meets all my needs. In fact in Australia I do work for many of the local and overseas consultants. They have other software packages but still get me to the analysis and design.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Stainer

In the AFT product range what is the difference between Impulse and Fathom?

Best regards

Morten

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
All,
     Thanks for the responses from everyone. There seems to be a lot of differing opinions on this - not a concise yes or no to the application of a DLF or not. Also when you look at the Caesar II applications guide then there seems to be two inputs that are required. The first is the forcing function (time history information from a hydraulics analysis) and a DLF spectrum input which applies Force Multipliers if I am not mistaken dependant on frequency. To me this suggests that the Caesar II software does apply a DLF to the basic Hydraulic time history input.

Any comments of what Caesar II actually does? Am I interpreting the application guide correctly?

Regards

DSB123

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

I'm not sure what Caesar is doing these days, but it sounds like its handling things correctly.  As I said, the LFs don't get applied in the hydraulic analysis.  LFs are applied by the pipe stress and structural engineers.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

(OP)
BigInch,
        Thanks for the quick response. So basically I am right when I say that you need to apply a DLF to the time history information (i.e. loads) when doing a pipe stress analysis.

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

IMO, yes you are totally correct.  (see above 11 Nov 07 17:31)  The hydraulics guy probably doesn't know much about pipe stress other than S=PD/2/t/DF (where DF = design class factor, not dynamic factor), and if he does know more about stress, he usually doesn't care because stress is another department in the company matrix.  Hydraulics analysis usually only sets the minimum wall thickness for pressure containment.  At least that's the way its been at all the companies I've ever worked for (and that's a whole lot of companies).

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

Hi Morten

These descriptions are off the top of my head. The website has more comprehensive descriptions. I run Fathom and Impulse but have used Arrow as well.

Fathom is a steady state analysis program with the capability of heat transfer, extended period simulation, goal seeking and costing. It handles Newtonian and non Newtonian incompressible fluids

Impulse is an unsteady state program for Newtonian and non Newtonian fluids. It does have the Fathom steady state engine as part of the software however does not have heat transfer, goal seeking and extended period simulation

Arrow is a steady state program for compressible fluids with the same functionality as Fathom.

Mercury is another even more sophisticated modelling program for a complete facility that is designed to critically model  Capex and Opex costs with the ability to determine optimum line sizes, pumps operation and far more.

Geoffrey D Stone FIMechE C.Eng;FIEAust CP Eng
www.waterhammer.bigblog.com.au

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

A DLF is used just to take approx. into account the dynamic response ("dynamic amplification") of a structure (piping system) to a given dynamic load, when the static (maximum) value of the load is applied to the structure and the system is solved statically. DLF may be defined as: "maximum dynamic response / static response". Due to the problem linearity, you can apply the amplification factor to the loads instead to the response, you will get the same results.
So, the answer to your question about if you have to apply a DLF in your mechanical analysis is: only is you are solving the problem statically. If you are solving an actual dynamic problem, i.e. you are applying a dynamic load (time history load vs. time at each loaded point of the system) and you are solving the problem dynamically (dynamic equilibrium: M d2u/dt + C du/dt + K u = P(t) ) you don“t have to apply a DLF, because the time history response of the problem ( u(t) ; F(t) = K u(t) ) will provide you the actual response of the structure, and obviously, its maximum values.
Regards.

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework

BigInch (Petroleum)

Yes, Anybody know what Caesar II is doing?   Ask WWW.COADE.COM

L S THILL

RE: Surge Loads in Pipework


Quote:

CAESAR II includes a full range of the latest international piping codes. It provides static and dynamic analysis of pipe and piping systems and evaluates FRP (fiber reinforced plastic); buried piping; wind, wave, and earthquake loading; expansion joints, valves, flanges and vessel nozzles; pipe components; and nozzle flexibilities. The program automatically models structural steel and buried pipe and provides spectrum and time history analysis and automatic spring sizing. CAESAR II includes component databases and an extensive material database with allowable stress data. It also includes a bi-directional link to COADE`s CADWorx Plant drafting package.

So the capability for dynamic analysis is apparently there. Getting back to the original question, "I beleive a DLF is applicable whereas others seem to beleive the DLF is already taken care of within the Hydraulic analysis."  I'd still say NO. Its not taken care of in the hydraulic analysis.  

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources