0
Research Papers: Piper and Riser Technology

Prediction of Vortex-Induced Vibration Response of a Pipeline Span by Coupling a Viscous Flow Solver and a Beam Finite Element Solver

[+] Author and Article Information
Juan P. Pontaza

Innovation, Research & Development,
Shell International Exploration and
Production Inc.,
Shell Technology Center Houston,
Houston, TX 77082
e-mail: juan.pontaza@shell.com

Raghu G. Menon

Projects and Engineering Services,
Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd.,
Shell Technology Center Bangalore,
Bangalore, India 560048

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received May 24, 2010; final manuscript received November 17, 2012; published online May 24, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Charles Dalton.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 135(3), 031702 (May 24, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: OMAE-10-1047; doi: 10.1115/1.4023789 History: Received May 24, 2010; Revised November 17, 2012

This paper describes a fluid-structure interaction (FSI) modeling approach to predict the vortex-induced vibration response of a pipeline span by coupling a three-dimensional viscous incompressible Navier–Stokes solver with a beam finite element solver in time domain. The pipeline span is modeled as an Euler–Bernoulli beam subject to instantaneous flow-induced forces and solved using finite element basis functions in space and an unconditionally stable Newmark-type discretization scheme in time. At each time step, the instantaneous incremental displacement is fed back to the fluid flow solver, where the position of the pipeline is updated to compute the resulting instantaneous flow field and associated flow-induced forces. Numerical predictions from the FSI model are compared to current tank experimental measurements of a pipeline span subject to uniform free-stream currents.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Pontaza, J., and Chen, H., 2007, “Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulations of Circular Cylinders Undergoing Two Degree-Of-Freedom Vortex-Induced Vibrations,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 129(3), pp. 158–164. [CrossRef]
Pontaza, J., Menon, R., and Chen, H., 2009, “Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulations of Flows Past Smooth and Rough / Bare and Helically Straked Circular Cylinders Allowed to Undergo Two Degree-Of-Freedom Motions,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 131(2), p. 021301. [CrossRef]
Pontaza, J., and Menon, R., 2008, “Numerical Simulations of Flow Past an Aspirated Fairing With Three Degree-of-Freedom Motion,” Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Paper No. 57552.
Newman, D., and Karniadakis, G., 1996, “Simulations of Flow Over a Flexible Cable: A Comparison of Forced and Flow-Induced Vibration,” J. Fluids Struct., 10, pp. 439–453. [CrossRef]
Constantinides, Y., Oakley, O., and Holmes, S., 2007, “CFD High L/D Riser Modeling Study,” Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Paper No. 29151.
Huang, K., Chen, H., and Chen, C., 2007, “Riser VIV Analysis by a CFD Approach,” Proceedings of the 17th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, pp. 2722–2729.
Pontaza, J., Chen, H., and Reddy, J., 2005, “A Local-Analytic-Based Discretization Procedure for the Numerical Solution of Incompressible Flows,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 49, pp. 657–699. [CrossRef]
Chessire, G., and Henshaw, W., 1990, “Composite Overlapping Meshes for the Solution of Partial Differential Equations,” J. Comp. Phys., 90, pp. 1–64. [CrossRef]
Reddy, J., 2004, An Introduction to Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis, Oxford University Press, New York.
Forster, C., Wall, W., and Ramm, E., 2007, “Artificial Added Mass Instabilities in Sequential Staggered Coupling of Nonlinear Structures and Incompressible Viscous Flows,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 196, pp. 1278–1293. [CrossRef]
Lee, L., Allen, D., Pontaza, J., Kopp, F., and Jhingran, V., 2009, “In-Line Motion of Subsea Pipeline Span Models Experiencing Vortex-Shedding,” Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Paper No. 79084.
Petersson, A., 1999, “An Algorithm for Assembling Overlapping Grid Systems,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 20, pp. 1995–2022. [CrossRef]
Petersson, A., 1999, “Hole-Cutting for Three-Dimensional Overlapping Grids,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 21, pp. 646–665. [CrossRef]
Pontaza, J., and Menon, R., 2010, “On the Numerical Simulation of Fluid-Structure Interaction to Estimate the Fatigue Life of Subsea Pipeline Spans: Effects of Wall Proximity,” Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Paper No. 20804.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Verification of second order convergence in velocities and pressure for flow solver

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Verification of second order convergence in displacement and velocity for structural solver

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of fluid-structure coupling procedure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Computational domain and mesh for the L/D = 58 pipe. Three different views of surface slices composing the volume mesh are shown. Scale in the plot is X:Y:Z = 1:1:0.5.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Current tank experimental setup of Lee et al. [11]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

RMS of in-line and cross-flow response (normalized by pipe diameter) for varying reduced velocity at the pipeline midspan (z = L/2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Phase plots of X-Y trajectories at z = L/2 for different reduced velocities. Motion goes from almost purely in-line, to crescent moon-shaped, to figure-of-eight shaped.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

RMS of in-line and cross-flow forces at the pipeline midspan (z = L/2) for varying reduced velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Instantaneous vorticity contours at minimum and maximum cross-flow midspan (z = L/2) displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Instantaneous vorticity contours for reduced velocity, U*=6. Spanwise and streamwise cuts showing vortex shedding along the span of the pipe.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of predicted and experimentally measured RMS values of in-line and cross-flow displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of predicted (left column) and experimentally measured (right column) X-Y trajectories (at midspan, z = L/2) for selected reduced velocities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of predicted and experimentally measured response frequency

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