5/26/2011

CAESAR II: Calculating Modes of Vibration

A Quick Overview 26 May 2011 Presented by David Diehl

Quick Agenda
Modal Extraction, a brief introduction Dynamic Input Review Results Review Model Adjustments Use as Acceptance Criteria Close

5/26/2011

INTRODUCTION
Modal Extraction / Eigen Solution

Modal Extraction / Eigen Solution the Start of It All

& M && + C x + Kx = F ( t ) x
let C =0

is the angular frequency (radians/second) of this free oscillation There is a matching shape to this oscillation There is no magnitude to this shape This is important: Think of a mode of vibration (the & mode shape pair) as a single degree of freedom system

F (t )
so

be harmonic

x = A sin t && = 2 A sin t = 2 x x 2 Mx + Kx = F ( t ) let F (t ) = 0 (K M 2 )x = 0 so x =0

or

K M 2 = 0

K M

5/26/2011

Examples of Modes of Vibration

Two examples of a One Degree of Freedom (DOF) System

A two DOF System

An n DOF System

Mode 1

Mode 2

Mode 1

Mode 2

Mode 3

Mode 4 Mode n

These are NOT circumferential modes

We are following nodal displacement distortion of the pipe centerline The pipe also has modes of vibration associated with shell distortion:

:From Piping Vibration Analysis by J.C. Wachel, Scott J. Morton and Kenneth E. Atkins of Engineering Dynamics, Incorporated San Antonio, TX A Tutorial from the Proceedings of 19th Turbomachinery Symposium Copyright 1990

CAESAR II does NOT calculate these circumferential or axial modes

5/26/2011

DYNAMIC INPUT REVIEW

Controlling the Analysis

Starting the Dynamic Input Processor

5/26/2011

Starting the Dynamic Input Processor

Starting the Dynamic Input Processor

5/26/2011

General Comments on Data Entry

Add a new line below current

Delete selected line(s)

Save, Error Check Check, Run Comment (do not process)

Modifying Mass

5/26/2011

Modifying Mass

The signed A zero magnitude th is eliminates the li i t summed with the mass. calculated mass. Calculated Mass:
Node

X, Y, Z or ALL affected The Or a range or Node number of Nodes RX, RY, RZ or RALL

Node

Node

Adding Snubbers

Remember, damping was eliminated from the equation of motion (C=0). Point damping is simulated with a stiff spring.
Mechanical Hydraulic

5/26/2011

Control Parameters

Def=Default; this is a button

Entry cell (use F1 for help)

Nonlinear Considerations
Our equation of motion insists on a linear system that is, the stiffness, K, is constant. ( K M 2 ) x = 0 But our static model allows nonlinear conditions. The dynamic model must linearize those nonlinear conditions. In many cases, the operating state of nonlinear boundary conditions can serve as the linear state for the dynamic evaluation. An example will help

5/26/2011

Nonlinear Considerations (Liftoff)

: Cold Position

A +Y (resting) restraint

Nonlinear Considerations (Liftoff)

: (Static) Operating Position 1

Liftoff

Dynamic Model (no restraint)

5/26/2011

Nonlinear Considerations (Liftoff)

: (Static) Operating Position 2

No liftoff

Dynamic Model (double-acting Y)

Nonlinear Considerations (Friction)

Y X : (Static) Operating Position

Friction defined; Normal Load = N Dynamic Model

X Z

K K

K=Stiffness Factor for Friction**N

10

5/26/2011

Stiffness Factor for Friction

This Stiffness Factor for Friction is not a physical parameter; it is a modeling tool. Larger normal loads ( ) will p g (N) produce g greater restraint This is NOT a 0 or 1! I use 1000 but values as low as 200 produce similar results for the models I run. This value will knock out frequencies associated with frictionless surfaces. ASCE 7-10 para. 15.5.2.1: "Friction resulting from gravity loads shall not be considered to provide resistance to seismic forces (But were not running a seismic analysis here ) we re here.) Use it as a tuning parameter in forensic engineering. How right is it?

Control Parameters (nonlinear issues)

11

5/26/2011

Stopping the eigensolver

A system with n degrees of freedom will have n modes of vibration. Are all mode important?
N not for our purposes. No, t f The lower (frequency) modes contribute the greatest structural response of the system.

CAESAR II extracts modes starting with the lowest mode (lowest frequency). Piping modes of vibration above 33 Hertz do not show resonant response to seismic motion. This is the default CAESAR II cutoff frequency. Piping modes of higher frequency (100+ Hz) may play a role in fast-acting events such as fluid hammer. Piping modes at lower frequencies respond to many environmental harmonic loads (equipment vibration, acoustic vibration & pulsation).

Stopping the eigensolver

Two parameters are checked to stop the eigensolution:
A maximum frequency. The total count of calculated modes (count = 0 ignores this check)

First limit reached stops the solution. Frequency cutoff is typically used alone.

12

5/26/2011

Control Parameters (to stop the eigensolution)

Lumped Mass versus Consistent Mass

For many years CAESAR II (like most analysis tools) ignored rotational inertia and off-diagonal mass terms. This is what we call lumped mass. p Todays bigger and faster PCs can handle the fully-developed, complete mass matrix. This is the consistent mass approach. Consistent mass will more accurately determine the frequencies of natural vibration without adding more nodes (mass points) to the static model. BUT more mass points may still be required to establish a proper mode shape in the frequency/mode shape pair.

13

5/26/2011

Lumped Mass versus Consistent Mass

Lumped mass matrix Consistent mass matrix

Control Parameters (mass model)

14

5/26/2011

Confirming the calculation

The Sturm sequence check is a back check on the calculated frequencies View the eigensolver as a search routine that finds system natural frequencies from lowest to highest. g At times these frequencies may be discovered out of sequence. The Sturm sequence check as a separate calculation of the total number of modes below the last frequency produced. If this count doesnt match the eigensolver total, the program will state that the check has failed. A cheap (time-wise) insurance that no mode is missing. Not so much a problem with todays PCs

Control Parameters (confirming the modal solution)

15

5/26/2011

RESULTS REVIEW
What Does It All Mean?

The Output Menu

No Load

16

5/26/2011

Results Frequency Report

cycles perradians per second per cycle second seconds

Results Mode Shapes

Mode shapes (mass & unity normalized)
Modes Mass Normalized the tendency of that modes contribution to the overall response to a quickly-applied load, all other things being equal (i.e. DLF and point of load application) application). Model Unity Normalized the typical mode shape. This is the same shape but normalized to one.

Same shape; different magnitude

17

5/26/2011

Results Mass Model

: Lumped Mass

Consistent Mass :

Results Active Boundary Conditions

Input Operating Position (Liftoff 30, Resting 40)

18

5/26/2011

Results Animation

MODEL ADJUSTMENTS
Is the Static Model Sufficient?

19

5/26/2011

Is the static model adequate?

More mass points may be required to approximate the continuous mass beam
Reality:
continuous mass throughout

CAESAR II:
half of total mass at end 10 20

Adding more nodes improves the calculation g p

Is the static model adequate?

Mode

2node lumped 1 2 3 4 5 0.328

2node consistent 0.473 1.51 4.658 57.339

10node 10node lumped consistent 0.469 2.902 8.039 15.572 25.415 0.479 2.971 8.235 16.005 26.377

100node lumped 0.471 2.948 8.248 16.143 26.646

hand calculation (continuous) 0.471 2.95 8.26

OD=4.5 in t=0.237 in length=50 ft density=0.283 lb/cu.in E=29.5E6 psi

Consistent mass will develop better frequencies ***BUT*** More mass points may be needed to develop the mode shapes

20

5/26/2011

Suggested mass spacing

Some simple suggestions: Add nodes (break pipe) so that the maximum node spacing is no more than one foot (300mm) p nominal inch of p p ( ) per pipe Use half this spacing into anchors Have a node between restraints Have a node between bends from the paper On Mass-Lumping Technique for Seismic Analysis of Piping Piping - John K Lin & Adolph T Molin of United Engineers & K. T. Constructors and Eric N. Liao of Stone & Webster

L = 4 9.2( D 3 t W )

USE AS ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

An End in Itself

21

5/26/2011

Use as an acceptance criteria

The lowest natural frequency can be used to assess the risk of failure associated with dynamic response DNV-RP-D101 recommends the first mode of vibration be no less than 4-5 Hz You typically increase frequency by adding stiffness Adding stiffness will increase cost Adding stiffness may impact thermal flexibility

CLOSE

22

5/26/2011

Closing Points
Many systems are built for static loads (deadweight and thermal strain) by providing Y supports alone, leaving great flexibility in the horizontal plane modal analysis will uncover such oversights. Modal evaluation is a quick and easy tool to learn more about your piping system response. The topic for Junes webinar is not established. Next dynamic session response to harmonic loads.

PDH Certificate

23

5/26/2011

Intergraph @ Hexagon 2011

www.hexagonconference.com/ppm

Join us for Intergraph @ Hexagon 2011 Intergraphs International Users Conference Orlando, FL, USA | June 6-9, 2011

CADWorx & Analysis University

www.cau2011.com

24