See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267612885

Analysis of Acoustic Fatigue in Safety Relief Systems

Conference Paper · January 2011

DOI: 10.1115/PVP2011-57946

CITATIONS READS

2 1,211

3 authors:

Jan Smeulers Pieter van Beek

TNO TNO
20 PUBLICATIONS   114 CITATIONS    29 PUBLICATIONS   192 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Joachim Golliard
Centre de Transfert de Technologie du Mans
62 PUBLICATIONS   372 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Dense gas compression View project

Identification of acoustic modes for liners in aeroacoustics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jan Smeulers on 26 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the ASME 2011 Pressure Vessels & Piping Division Conference
ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTIC FATIGUE IN SAFETY RELIEF SYSTEMS
Jan P.M. Smeulers Pieter J.G. van Beek
TNO TNO
Delft, Netherlands Delft, Netherlands
ABSTRACT
To protect installations in the gas and oil industry and
process industries against overpressure the installation of relief
systems is common practice. However, there have been
incidents where such systems fail as a result of high dynamic
loads caused by: the generation of shock waves when the relief
valve is opened very instantly; the occurrence of two-phase
flow in the relief line and the corresponding formation of slugs;
instability of the relief valve and acoustic fatigue. This paper
focuses on acoustic fatigue, which occasionally has been the
cause of incidents like at Krechba – In Salah Gas Project
Algeria where a breakdown of a relief system occurred. The
extremely high sound levels caused by the expanding flow
through a relief line finally caused fatigue failure of the system.
Such incidents are the reason for the requirement to analyze the
possibility of acoustic fatigue of relief systems and other
systems with a strong acoustic source already during the design.
In the paper we present the method that TNO applied for
acoustic fatigue analysis. So far a calculation of the internal
sound power levels was made and evaluated against the
allowable levels presented by Carucci and Mueller [1].
However, this method does not allow computing the cyclic
stresses of the piping. Due to the large dimensions and the high
frequencies involved, it is not possible to compute accurately
the sound field in the piping and to use a deterministic method
to evaluate the cyclic stresses of the piping.
In this paper we present work recently done where the
Statistical Energy Analysis (SEA) method is applied to evaluate
the cyclic stresses in the piping material. Due to the statistical
nature of the method, it is not possible to determine with
deterministic certainty the stress levels in every point of the
piping. Yet, this method gives a range of cyclic stress for each
pipe section or element. This leads to a more reliable criterion
for acoustic fatigue studies than the earlier method, which is
based on maximum allowable pressure fluctuations.
PVP2011
July 17-21, 2011, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
PVP2011- 57946
Joachim Golliard
TNO
Delft, Netherlands
INTRODUCTION
Relief lines are applied at all installations that are operated
under high pressure to protect the system against overpressure.
Examples are gas production systems that collect gas from well
heads of high pressure and high temperature reservoirs, booster
stations in gas transportation and storage systems and in the
process industy. The relief system is often the last line of
protection and, though it will almost never come into action, it
should be very reliable. It appears that on the relief line high
dynamic loads can act that can be either shock loads, caused by
sudden opening of the relief valve or liquid slugs, chatter of the
relief valve, or very strong broadband acoustic excitation. The
latter is a dynamic load that is usually not considered in spite of
the fact that there have been relief line failures due to acoustic
fatigue. Therefore in this paper methods to analyze acoustic
fatigue are discussed.
In relief systems the high pressure difference across the
relief valve generates very strong turbulence, which results in
strong random noise that propagates both in the gas and the
pipe wall into the downstream pipe system. Because the
acoustic source extends into the range of high frequencies, the
acoustic propagation takes place in a large number of 3D modes
(i.e. waves). Also in the pipe wall a large number of vibration
modes propagate. The large number of modes and the large size
of the pipe systems to be analyzed makes an analytical approach
practically impossible. Instead a global method, the Statistical
Energy Analysis (SEA), is more practical. However, this
method does not directly give the local mechanical stresses that
are needed to determine whether fatigue failure can occur. In
our analysis we apply a method that gives an estimate of the
cyclic stresses within a certain confidence range. The width of
the range depends on the number of eigenmodes in the
frequency range that is of interest. The possibility of fatigue
failure is evaluated by taking the maximum of the cyclic stress
that is predicted.
In this paper an example case is presented for which first a
method to calculate the acoustic source strength of a valve is
1 Copyright © 20xx by ASME
described. Next the SEA method is described shortly and the
application to the example case.
NOMENCLATURE
B coupling factor
cL longitudinal wave speed
E internal energy of a component
f frequency
K coupling coefficient
LW acoustic power level
N number of resonance modes
v vibration velocity
η efficiency/damping
Π energy flux between components
ρ density
σ material stress
ω radial frequency
AN EXAMPLE CASE
The methods to analyze acoustic fatigue are discussed
using a real life example of a relief system of a high pressure
gas production system as shown in Figure 1. The primary over-
pressure protection consists of a HIPPS valve that closes the
well as soon as the pressure in the production system exceeds
the maximum allowable operating pressure. The second line of
protection is a relief valve that opens in the very rare occasion
that the HIPPS valve fails. In that case, however, the relief line
will be open for a longer period until the well is shut in by
another valve, during which the gas is fed into a flare system.
Because there exists a high pressure difference across the relief
valve and the flow velocities are very high, the possibility of
acoustic fatigue exists.
To analyze if acoustic fatigue could occur at first a
simplified approach has been applied, which predicts the sound
pressure levels in the system downstream of the relief valve
based on the magnitude of the acoustic source in the relief valve
as discussed in the next paragraph.
Figure 1 Example of a relief line. The pressure drop across
the relief valve is ca. 350 bar, the relief line
The transmission from the source to the downstream
system has been calculated by means of a 1D model. The
calculated sound pressure levels have been compared with the
limits that have been discussed in the paper of Carucci and
Mueller [1].
THE ACOUSTIC SOURCE STRENGTH
In the past many models have been developed that describe
the acoustic source strength of a pressure reducing device, such
as a control valve. Finally the methods have been formalized
effectively by IEC in a calculation procedure. See references [2]
and [3].
The IEC prediction method is a theoretical method to
predict external sound levels, i.e. outside the pipe system.
However, it starts out by calculating how much acoustic energy
is generated internally. This provides the source model we need.
The prediction method applies to the following valve types:
globe
butterfly
rotary plug
ball
valves with cage trim
For standard valves, without noise-reducing trim, the
procedure is as follows. The sound produced depends on the
following five valve flow regime:
1. Subsonic flow: the gas is partially recompressed after the
vena contracta. Noise generation is predominantly dipole.
2. Sonic flow in the throat. Interaction between shock cells
and turbulent choked flow mixing. Recompression
decreases as flow increases.
3. Supersonic flow, turbulent flow-shear. No isentropic
recompression exists after the vena contracta. Flow is
supersonic, and turbulent flow-shear mechanism dominates.
4. Supersonic flow, shock cell-turbulent flow interaction.
Shock cell structure diminishes as Mach disc is formed.
Shock cell-turbulent flow interaction is dominant
mechanism.
5. Supersonic, constant acoustical efficiency. Further
decreasing the downstream pressure will result in no
increase in noise.

The flow regime depends on the pressure ratio of the valve.

The code gives formulas to calculate the peak frequency fp and
the sound power radiated downstream. For fp formulas are
tube 17
given for each flow regime. For the sound power one formula is
Flare line
given, which contains parameters for the valve type and the
flow velocity in the valve.
tube 14
The code gives no spectral distribution of the acoustic
tube 1 power. For this we use the formula derived by Reethof et al. in
Relief valve reference [4]:
Production
 2
system
  f    f 
4
   p  
pressure is ca. 15 bar, the flow velocity ca. 70 m/s. L ( f ) = L − 5 .3 − 10 log 1 +    1 +  2 f 
w w 10  (1)
  2 f p  
    
  

2 Copyright © 20xx by ASME

 In the IEC code the acoustic source strength is calculated
for a two step pressure reduction. The first step in the valve
element and the second in a expander section, which is often
present between the valve housing and the piping. This results
in a broadband acoustic source distribution showing two peaks.
An example is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 Example of an acoustic source distribution for a
valve and expander: valve in red, expander in
green and the total in blue.
THE SIMPLIFIED APPROACH
At first a simplified approach was applied by using the
PULSIM software, which models one dimensional pressure
waves in pipe systems. As the equations are solved in the time
domain non-linear damping is included in the model. Because
the equations are one dimensional, the model is only valid for
low frequencies for which there is only plane wave propagation.
However, for the higher frequencies, which are the major part
of the spectrum, also 3D modes will propagate. This means that
in the 1D approach the sound pressure levels will be
overestimated near the source and underestimated downstream.
Moreover the method also neglects the transfer of acoustic
energy to and transmission via the pipe wall, which also leads to
overestimation of the sound pressure levels.
As with this method the SPLs are overestimated, the design
will be conservative. In this case presented here, the calculated
SPLs were around the maximum allowable levels proposed by
Carucci and Mueller [1] in the region near the relief valve and
would require drastic, and probably unnecessary, modification
of the design. Therefore the Statistical Energy Analysis (SEA)
method has been applied that includes all propagating acoustic
and vibration modes and shows how large the margins in the
predicted SPL’s are. Moreover, with this method also the
dynamic, mechanic stresses could be calculated with which a
fatigue analysis could be made.
Next a short introduction to SEA is given followed by the
application on the present example case.
A SHORT INTRODUCTION TO SEA
The term Statistical in SEA means that a system (the
construction) consists of a statistical population with each their
own distribution of dynamic parameters. Energy is the primary
response variable. All the other response variables like velocity
and/or pressure are derived from the energy. This implies that
there is no need for very detailed information, like for instance
phase relations between populations. The term Analysis means
that SEA is rather a framework instead of a specific numerical
technique.
A SEA model is a network of subsystems, coupled with each
other via junctions. A subsystem is a structure consisting of
similar eigenmodes and/or wave types, which are able to
contain energy. For instance the structural bending eigenmodes
of a straight pipe can be modeled as a single subsystem. The
pipe itself can be observed as a substructure of the complete
modeled system, consisting of e.g. bending and compression
(‘in-plane’) subsystems.
The energy is transferred from subsystem to another via the
junctions (couplings). When dynamic energy (or power) is fed
into a certain subsystem, it can be dissipated in this subsystem
via the internal damping and/or absorption, or (partly) being
transferred to adjoining subsystems. The amount of energy
transferred is determined by the so-called coupling factors or
coupling loss factors per (1/3) octave band. The primary
response is the time and space averaged (rms) dynamic energy.
With SEA a reliable prediction of this energy can be given, if a
subsystem is resonant. This means that it should contain enough
eigenmodes in a certain frequency band, i.e. there should be
enough ‘modal overlap’. If this is the case, the energy balance
of the complete system can be solved and energy response of
every other subsystem can be determined: the rms value over all
the eigenmodes in the relevant frequency band(s). In general the
energy will flow from subsystems with few modes to subsystem
with many modes. After all, in the latter there is more energy
dissipation (equivalent to thermal energy, which will flow from
high to low temperature zones).
Briefly in practice the SEA approach is as follows:
1. Define the subsystems- physically
Dynamic and/or acoustic noise sources, transmission paths
and response variables.
2. Model the system – network
Subsystems (including subsystems parameters), groups of
eigenmodes and couplings.
3. Evaluate the system – mathematically
Matrix solution of the modal energies and coupling (loss)
factors, followed by the dynamic and acoustic response.
3 Copyright © 20xx by ASME
 As an example the energy flow between 2 coupled
substructures is schematically shown in Figure 3. In this figure
Πi,in is the input power and Π i,diss the dissipated power (due to
internal damping ηi) in subsystem i. The power flow Πij
between the subsystems can be described with:
Πij = Bij ( Ei – Ej ) (2)
With Bij the coupling factor between the subsystems. This
is a parameter that ‘translates’ the internal energies Ei to the
power flow Πij and strongly depends on the inter-modal forces
at the subsystem junctions, averaged over the frequency bands
of interest and eigenmodes of the interacting subsystems.
Π1,in Π2,in
Π21
E1,tot E2,tot
N1 N2
Π1,diss Π2,diss
Figure 3 Energy flows to, from and between two coupled
Substructures in an SEA- Model.
Let Ni be the number of eigenmodes in a subsystem and ηij
the coupling loss factor (frequency dependent function of the
coupling factor), then the power flow in case of a power
injection in subsystem 1 can be written as:
E E 
Π 1 = ωη1 E1 + ωη12  1 − 2  (3)
 N1 N 2  Figure 4 SEA network representation of the relief line.
This shows that the power that will flow is proportional to the
difference between the modal energies of the 2 subsystems and
flows from the subsystem with the smallest amount of
eigenmodes to the subsystem with the highest amount of
eigenmodes.
See [5] for both the basics and more advanced theory of
SEA and it’s applications.
APPLICATION OF SEA TO THE EXAMPLE CASE
As a typical example a SEA model is made of the relief line
case shown in Figure 1. The model consists of several different
subsystems: mechanical pipe bending and in-plane i.e.
compression subsystems between each bend and intersection,
with accompanying 3D acoustic space subsystems of the
internal fluid for the same sections. The mechanical subsystems
are well-delineated by the bends and intersections, because at
these positions there is a mechanical impedance mismatch and
mode i.e. wave conversion will occur at these points.
Furthermore the surrounding air and the foundations are
modeled as acoustic sinks with respectively high internal
absorption and damping, because most of the acoustic energy
that flows into these subsystems by radiation and mechanical
coupling will not come back into the relief line anymore.
All together this results in 54 individual subsystems (separate
subsystems for bending and in-plane behavior). They are
connected to each other via 187 acoustic, structural-acoustic
and structural connections.
For the mechanical bending subsystems an internal loss factor
ratio (modal damping ratio) of 2% is used. In the fluid a small,
frequency independent loss factor of 0.4% is used.
A schematic drawing of the SEA network is shown in
Figure 4. In this figure ‘pipe 1’ is the first, short pipe section of
about 0.5m directly downstream of the relief valve. The
acoustic power is fed into the acoustic fluid subsystem in this
pipe section, i.e. into ‘tube 1’. Pipe section 15 to 17 represent
the 6 inch by pass, which is connected to the main pipe line just
after the PSV. ‘Pipe 14’ is the last section of the pipe line just
before the flare.
The acoustic power spectra for the 2 sources near the
relief valve, i.e. valve and expander, as estimated with the
methods described in [2] and [3], are combined to a single
power spectrum for the 40 Hz to 16 kHz 1/3 octave bands, see
Figure 2.
With the above described model and power input
spectrum the time and space averaged (rms) acoustic and
mechanical response of each tube and pipe section can be
determined. Some characteristic examples of the rms pressures
in the fluid in the pipes including the standard deviation are
shown in Figure 5. The standard deviation of 5dB in the lower
frequency range (say below 250Hz) shows that there might be
some variation in response at these frequencies. This is mainly
due to the low modal density at low frequencies. However,
note that most of the input power is fed into the system
4 Copyright © 20xx by ASME
between 500Hz and 4kHz, which makes the low frequency part empirical constant K depends on the type of motion and system
less important. geometry. For bending behavior K is equal to 3, see [5] and [6].
For compression K is equal to 1.
RESULTS
The total rms pressures are given in Table 1 and
Figure 5. Both the figure and the table show that the internal,
acoustic pressure is very high. This confirms the preliminary
conclusion from 1D model calculations that there is the danger
of acoustic fatigue failure. This conclusion is based on a
comparison of the calculated SPL’s with the allowable criterion
as specified in [1].

Pipe section rms SPL of SEA SPL from 1D

subsystem no. [dB re 2e-5 Pa] [dB re 2e-5 Pa]
1 190 187
2 186 185
3 182 185
4 176 181
5 173 181
6 169 180
7 169 180
8 168 178 Figure 5 RMS acoustic pressure inside the pipe section just
9 166 178 after the relief valve and in the by pass,
10 165 177 determined with SEA.
11 164 176 .
12 163 176
13 163 176 Pipe section rms bending stress
14 162 167 subsystem no. [MPa]
15 184 187 1 124
16 183 189 2 101
17 185 196 3 71
4 51
Table 1 RMS SPL inside pipe sections calculated with SEA 5 35
and the PULSIM model. 6 28
7 25
8 22
The dynamic mechanical bending response of pipe section 1 9 20
and 2 and the by pass is given in figure 6. With this response 10 18
the dynamic rms bending stress in the pipe sections can be 11 14
estimated. It can be assumed that in resonant behavior the rms 12 14
kinetic energy of the pipes, which is proportional to the 13 13
velocity, is totally converted into the dynamic rms potential 14 12
energy. This potential energy is proportional to the dynamic 15 77
strain and thus the dynamic, mechanical stress in the pipe. This 16 71
results in the following, simplified and generalized relation 17 75
between the dynamic, rms velocity response v and mechanical
rms stress σ:
Table 2 RMS mechanical bending stress in the pipe
sections.
σ 2 = K (ρ c L ) v 2
2
(4)
The rms bending stress is given in Table 2 for each pipe
In this equation cL is the longitudinal wave speed in the pipe section. Note that this is the time and space averaged, overall
wall section and ρ the density of the pipe (normal steel). The bending stress. With stress concentration factor of about 3 for

5 Copyright © 20xx by ASME

welds, restrictions, connections, etc. it is realistic to expect that non-linear acoustics will be a shift of the energy that is in the
acoustic fatigue will lead to failure! lower frequencies to higher frequencies for which the damping
is higher and as a consequence will result in lower vibration
amplitudes.

Though a simplified approach based on 1D modelling is

expected to be a conservative approach, the results of a SEA
show that this is not always true. Therefore the SEA approach
is considered to be a safer approach. Another advantage is that
with SEA the material stresses are estimated, which is more
accurate than applying a criterion on the maximum allowable
sound power level. However, in critical situations it is
recommended to make a detailed model.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank the management of TNO Science
and Industry for supporting this R&D work and the permission
to publish the results.

Figure 6 RMS mechanical bending response of the pipe REFERENCES

section just after the relief valve and in the by
pass, determined with SEA. [1] V.A. Carucci and R.T. Mueller, “Acoustically Induced
Piping Vibration in High Capacity Pressure Reducing
In Figure 6 the spectra of the dynamic stresses is shown for the Systems”, ASME paper No. 82-WA/PVP-8, 1982.
pipe sections where the largest vibrations occur. [2] Noise considerations – Control valve aerodynamic noise
prediction method, IEC 60534-8-3, 2000
In order to get more detailed results regarding velocity [3] Noise considerations – Prediction of noise generated by
responses and mechanical stresses at critical locations in the hydrodynamic flow, IEC 60534-8-4, 2005
structure, it is advised to make a detailed deterministic (e.g. [4] A theoretically based valve noise prediction methods for
FE) model of the local structure. For example FE model of the incompressible fluids, Reethof, Ward, J. of Vibration,
pipe sections near the PSV in combination with an aero- Acoustics, and Reliability in Design, Vol 108, 1986
acoustic coupled source, could be used to detect the weakest [5] “Theory and Application of Statistical energy Analysis”,
points in this part of the relief line. R.H. Lyon and R.G. DeJong, Butterworth-Heinemann,
Boston - MA, 1995
CONCLUDING REMARKS [6] “A Handbook of Statistical Energy Analysis for Designers”,
Acoustic fatigue is a phenomenon that can threaten the Part II: The Use of SEA in Preliminary Design, R.H. Lyon,
integrity of any pipe system that includes an element with a CC Report No. 73-1, Air Force Flight Dynamics
large pressure loss, such as a relief valve or a pressure control Laboratory, Ohio
valve, because such a component is an extremely strong
acoustic source.
With SEA a prediction of the sound power levels in the system
can be made that includes all propagating modes and is
therefore valid for higher frequencies. It should be kept in
mind, however, that with these extremely high pressure
amplitudes the linearization of SEA is not valid anymore and
we have to deal with non-linear acoustics. Though the effect of
non-linear acoustics requires further research, we expect that
the present approach is conservative, because the source energy
is distributed over a wide frequency band and non-linearity
depends on the local wave amplitudes. Moreover, the effect of

6 Copyright © 20xx by ASME

View publication stats