Identifying and Understanding the Risk of Acoustic-Induced Vibration Failures

  • Home
  • Identifying and Understanding the Risk of Acoustic-Induced Vibration Failures

Identifying and Understanding the Risk of Acoustic-Induced Vibration Failures

Nathan D. Libertowski, Engineer II; Michael F.P. Bifano, Ph.D., P.E., Consulting Engineer I

Note: The following article was published in the March/April 2021 issue of the Inspectioneering Journal. Please submit the form below to access the full article. 

One source suggests that 10-15% of piping failures are a result of fatigue from vibration. Piping vibration can be caused by multiple different mechanisms such as flow-induced turbulence, slug flow, mechanical excitation from machinery, and acoustic pulsation. These mechanisms are often observed by plant operators since they present themselves during normal operation. On the other hand, acoustic-induced vibration (AIV) in pressure relief lines and downstream of control valves used for blow-down (BDV) is difficult to identify since the vibration is not readily observable unless the valves are opened. 

Often downstream of a pressure-reducing device (PRD), AIV occurs in gas systems when acoustic waves generated at flow restrictions excite natural modes of the piping, thus leading to vibration. AIV is different from most types of piping vibration because it generally occurs at much higher frequencies (300-1,500 Hz) and is the result of shell mode excitation. For this reason, AIV is typically not visible to the human eye but is noticeable by touch and transmits high-frequency audible noise outside the piping to the surrounding areas. The occasionality, combined with the high-frequency, low-amplitude vibration, allows AIV to usually go unnoticed until the vibration is heard, the pipe is touched, or a failure occurs. 

To continue reading the article, submit the form below:

Newsletter Archive

Access all of our previously published Industry Insights Newsletter articles:

Recently Published

Evolution of Gas Dispersion Modeling

As hazardous release scenarios grow more complex, outdated Gaussian plume models are leaving facilities either over-exposed to risk or over-invested in unnecessary safety infrastructure. This article explores how advanced gas dispersion modeling with rigorous thermodynamic calculations and 3D consequence contours delivers right-sized process safety decisions.

Read More »

Asset Lifecycle Management: An Introduction to Process Safety

The most serious incidents in industrial history were not the result of a single equipment failure — they were the product of systemic breakdowns in design, operations, and management. Understanding how process safety works, and where it can fail, is essential knowledge for any engineer working with complex systems or hazardous materials.

Read More »

Two-Phase Flow Piping Vibration

Two-phase flow creates complex dynamic forces that can lead to catastrophic fatigue failure, yet traditional restraints often clash with high-temperature thermal expansion needs. This article explores how to diagnose flow regimes and use advanced metrics like kurtosis to design effective, thermally safe remediation strategies.

Read More »

A Detailed Approach to Slug Flow and its Consequences

Two-phase flow is a common challenge in chemical process equipment that can lead to costly malfunctions, high pressure drops, and damaging mechanical vibrations. This article explores how to use mechanistic modeling and liquid holdup analysis to identify unstable flow regimes like slug flow before they cause fatigue failure or other risks to integrity. Learn how strategic piping configurations and dynamic hydraulic analysis can ensure process stability and protect your facility.

Read More »
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Pages
Industry Insights Newsletter Articles
Events
Library Items