Damping in components like materials used, insulation, soil-foundation, appendages and phenomena like liquid sloshing, and aerodynamics contribute to the dynamic response of process towers. Damping Forces commonly encountered in practical engineering vibration problems are of four types 1: 'Viscous' damping, when the damping force is proportional to the velocity. 'Aerodynarnic' or 'Material' damping is independent of the velocity but dependent on the amplitude of
Damping in components like materials used, insulation, soil-foundation, appendages and phenomena like liquid sloshing, and aerodynamics contribute to the dynamic response of process towers. Damping Forces commonly encountered in practical engineering vibration problems are of four types 1: 'Viscous' damping, when the damping force is proportional to the velocity. 'Aerodynarnic' or 'Material' damping is independent of the velocity but dependent on the amplitude of
Damping in components like materials used, insulation, soil-foundation, appendages and phenomena like liquid sloshing, and aerodynamics contribute to the dynamic response of process towers. Damping Forces commonly encountered in practical engineering vibration problems are of four types 1: 'Viscous' damping, when the damping force is proportional to the velocity. 'Aerodynarnic' or 'Material' damping is independent of the velocity but dependent on the amplitude of
Damping in components like materials used, insulation, soil-foundation, appendages and phenomena like liquid sloshing, and aerodynamics contribute to the dynamic response of process towers. Damping Forces commonly encountered in practical engineering vibration problems are of four types 1: 'Viscous' damping, when the damping force is proportional to the velocity. 'Aerodynarnic' or 'Material' damping is independent of the velocity but dependent on the amplitude of
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 4
"Used with permission from HYDROCARBON PROCESSING, May 1982, copyright 1982 by Gulf Publishing Co.
, all rights reserved."
Evaluation of percent critical
damping of process towers It is suggested that for wind and seismic analysis of tall process towers, percent critical damping should be assessed by considering several contributing factors judiciously for a more economic design. These factors are analyzed here K. C. Karamchandani, N.K. Gupta, Engineers India Ltd., New Delhi and J. Pattabiraman, Tata Consulting Engineers, Bangalore DAMPING MECHANISMS in components like materials used, insulation, soil-foundation, appendages and phenomena like liquid sloshing, and aerodynamics contribute to the dynamic response of process towers. Using a tower-foundation example, each of these damping rnechanisms is quantified and overall system damping is obtained by summing the individual logarithmic decrements. Types of damping. The damping forces frequently encountered in practical engineering vibration problems are of four types 1: •‘Viscous’ damping, when the damping force is proportional to the velocity. •‘Coloumb’ damping, when the damping force is independent of the velocity and depends on the normal pressure. •‘Aerodynarnic’ damping, assumed to be proportional to the square or some higher power of the velocity •‘Hysteretic’ or ‘Material’ damping, independent of the velocity but dependent on the amplitude of motion. For evaluating the total damping of the tower foundation Fig. 1 - Damping Forces acting on tower foundation system. structural system, the contribution of all the four types of damping psi and psf, respectively as given in ‘Shock and Vibration forces are taken into account. The various types of damping forces Handbook’ by C. M. Harris and C. E. Crede. acting on the system are shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1. Example. Determine δm, for a tower having diameter 1800 mm, Material damping. shell thickness 52 mm, material carbon steel. From formula. The damping of the tower is calculated from the D/t = 1800/52 = 34.6, say, 30. formula as given by Sachs2 From Fig. 2 (Sachs2) for clamped free cylinder, D/t = 30 and n = 2.15, β/α = 1.1,α/β = 1/1.1 = 0.909. δ m = EJσ maxn − 2 ( α / β) Two values are computed for σmax 2 = 20 X 103 lb/in2 (1406 kgf/cm2) and 40 x 103 lb/in2 (2812 kgf/cm2), i.e., for 2880 x 103 lb/ft 2 and 5760 x 103 lb/ft 2, E = 30 x 106 lb/in2 (2l90 x 103 kgf/crn2), and J = where δm is the material logarithmic decrement, E, the modulus of 447 x 10-12 (from Table2). elasticity of tower material, J, the material constant, n, the material δm = 30 x 106 (447 x 10-12)(2880 x 103)2.15-2(0.909) constant (2.15 for mild steel), σmax the cyclic stress (between 0.5 and = 0.1135 1.5 times the fatigue strength), and α, β, the constants dependent on Cm = material damping ratio = δm/2π = 0.1135/2π the stress distribution in the structure and n. = 1.8%. In the above equation the units for E and σmax are in
Hydrocarbon Processing, May 1982 205
TABLE 1—Damping forces on system TABLE 2—Values for J and n for various materials
Material Mild 70/30 Aluminium Glass
Nature of Location/inter- Mode of energy dissipation steel Brass reinforced damping action between plastic Hysterectic Soil Stress reversals, heat generation J 447x10 -12 30.5x10 -12 1221x10 -12 4.2x10 -12 and shock wave fronts radiating n 2.14 2.52 2.10 2.90 outwards in the soil δm = 30 X 106 (447 x 10-12) (5760 x 103)0.15 (0.909) = 0.1259 Viscous Soil and Rocking of foundation and heat foundation generation Coloumb Soil-foundation Nonlinear slippages at CM = 0.02 = 2% interfaces and heat generation From case histories. Not much field work has been done on the damping measu Hysteretic Foundation Stress reversal and heat concrete generation Coloumb Foundation Nonlinear slippages at concrete- interfaces and heat generation reinforcement TABLE 3 - Logarithmic decrement for Coloumb Foundation- Nonlinear slippages at unlined welded steel stacks anchor bolts interfaces and heat generation REMARKS Coloumb Base ring -tower Nonlinear slippages at Height Tip diameter Logarithmic 0.297 shell interfaces and heat generation δm = ft ft-in. decrement, δ 8 Viscous Tower shell- Sloshing of liquid and heat = 0.037 150 4 0 0.010 operating fluid generation 225 11 4 0.037 Coloumb Tower-shell Nonlinear slippages at CM = 0.027 2π insulation interfaces and heat generation 225 11 4 0.070 = 0.0059 Coloumb Tower shell and Nonlinear slippages at 200 11 0 0.040 = 0.59% trays and interfaces and heat generation 250 7 0 0.050 296 17 6 0.030 platforms and 274 13 3 6 0.038 other Zorrilla , has also reported an average value of logarithmic 253 12 9 0.032 appendages decrement of 0.0322 for welded unlined circular stacks and Viscous Tower shell and Out of phase vibration and heat recommends a value of 0.03. trays and generation CM = 0.03/2π = 0.478% platforms and Material damping as adopted. For towers additional decrement other appendages can be allowed for allowed for bolted joints, attachments, piping, etc. Hysteretic Tower shell Stress reversals, strains, and However, to be on the conservative side, the average of 1.8 percent heat generation and 0.478 percent based on lower stress level and for unlined Hysteretic Insulation Stress reversals, strains, and complete welded stack respectively, is considered: heat generation Hysteretic Platform, trays Stress reversals, strains, and (1.8 + 0.478)/2 = 1.14% and other heat generation Insulation damping. Freese4 has given the field test results to appendages establish the effect of insulation on the logarithmic decrement of tall Aerodyn- Tower, Vortex formation, shock waves towers: amic appendages, and heat generation è Before the insulation (tower empty) insulation and air δ = 0.0463 C1 = 0.0463/2π = 0.737% è After the insulation (tower empty) δ = 0.0848 C2 = 0.0848/2π = 1.35% In this case the addition of insulation almost doubled the percent damping of the tower. Sachs2 also has given the value of logarithmic decrement for the lined welded steel stacks, Table 4. For welded lined steel stacks, Zorilla3 has recommended a value of 0.05 for logarithmic decrement. So
C = 0.05/2π = 0.00796 = 0.796%
Comparison of Table 3 and 4 indicates that the effect of lining is
Fig. 2 - β/α for cylinders of various thickness ratios and different to increase the damping to the order of 0.3 percent. From values of damping constants, n (clamped free cylinders). damping percent calculated 206 Hydrocarbon Processing, May 1982 TABLE 4-Logarithmic decrement for and Whitman5 give up to 3 percent. Newmark and Rosenblueth7 state welded lined steel stacks that the percent damping is a function of the shear wave velocity and give values from 2 to 10 percent. Height Tip diameter Logarithmic Whitman and Richart 5, gave an empirical equation for internal ft ft-in decrement, δ REMARKS damping of soil as follows: 225 11 4 0.04 0.4 δm = 7 D ≅ δ/2π = 4.5 γxz0.2 σo-0.5 225 11 4 0.07 200 11 0 0.06 = 0.057 250 16 6 0.06 0.057 where γxz is the shearing strain (1 x 10-6 to 1 x 10-4), σo, the confining C= 300 14 6 0.03 2π pressure, psf (500 to 3000), and D, the soil damping ratio. For γxz = 1 0.09 = 0.907% x 10-1 0.05 D = 4.5 (1 x 10-4)0.2(3000)-0.5 based on Zorrilla's reported values of logarithmic decrements, it is = 0.0131 = 1.31% also observed that the effect of lining, is to increase the damping to To be on conservative side, least of the above values is considered the order of 0.3 percent. to arrive at the average value of the percent critical soil damping. Accordingly, for insulation a conservative value of 0.1 percent can Therefore, be safely considered since in the case of towers the insulation CSF=(3 + 2 + 1.31)/3 = 2.1%, say 2% density is much less than that of stack lining material. Therefore, vessel insulation percent damping, = C1 = 0.1 percent. Damping from appendages. Another source of damping which is very difficult to evaluate is that due to the out of phase vibration of Soil foundation damping. The contribution of foundation damping attachments like trays, platforms, ladders, piping, etc. Because of is quite large towards total damping of the system. According to large differences in the mass and stiffness of these elements, such Richart, et al5, soil foundation damping is of two types, internal components tend to vibrate in an uncoupled mode from that of the damping and radiation damping. overall tower. Damping forces are induced at the various interfaces The phenomenon of internal damping occurs in dry cohesionless (bolted joints, etc.) and also hysteretic damping occurs within the soil where the energy is lost in developing friction between soil various appendages. Since it is very difficult to assess this damping, particles during stress reversals. Radiation damping occurs when the a very low percent of 0.1 percent can be considered. Therefore, kinetic energy imposed on the soil in the form of vibrations, is sent percent critical damping, CA = 0.1 percent. out in waves and travels long distances through the soil. Damping from liquid sloshing. Out of the four types of damping discussed earlier, three occur in From field tests. Freese4 studied in field tests the effect of liquid the foundation soil interaction. Viscous damping occurs when one sloshing on the logarithmic decrement of a process tower. The field side of the foundation starts to lift and the other starts to depress test results, when the tower is empty, are under the action of horizontal forces due to wind or earthquake. The contact area under the foundation can be imagined as a piston, trying Logarithmic decrement, δ = 3.5% = 0.035 to slide through a cylinder of soil, with air or water rushing in to fill the void left by the foundation or being squeezed out on the Percent critical damping = 0.035/2π = 0.557% opposite side. and when the tower is filled with operating liquid, As the sides of the foundation slide on the surrounding soil, dry Coloumb friction damping force develops at these interfaces. At the Logarithmic decrement, δ = 14% = 0.14 same time the soil below the foundation undergoes the stress variation resulting in hysteretic damping. The energy is transformed Percent critical damping = 0.14/2π = 2.2% into heat and wave energy and thus lost. Hence the increase in percent critical damping due to the sloshing All these effects contribute to the loss of energy, thereby reducing is 2.2 - 0.557 = 1.643 percent. the vibration amplitude of successive cycles, i.e., logarithmic From calculations. The following procedure can be adopted to decrement. arrive at the logarithmic decrement due to liquid sloshing. Barkan6 stated that, “since the coefficient of damping is inversely The tower could be modelled as a cantilever fixed at the proportional to the amplitude of vibrations at resonances, it follows foundation. that in the case under consideration the value of the coefficient of 1. Analyze the cantilever without including the mass of the damping for a backfilled foundation will be approximately 3.5 times operating liquid and with zero damping, subjected to trapezoidal time larger than that for an exposed foundation.” A considerable effect of history transient forcing functions of wind loads applied laterally at backfilling on the value of damping was also observed in each node. investigations of foundations placed on grey sands. For example, 2. Obtain the dynamic amplitude and acceleration at each node, damping increased from 19 to 32 percent when a foundation was using any standard computer program. backfilled to the height of 1 m. 3. Allocate mass of operating liquid at each node based on the The foundation soil interaction has major effect on the damping of distribution of trays and liquid level. the structure 5-7. For sands, Barkan6 gives a value of damping up to 4. Calculate the sloshing forces at each node by multiplying liquid 19 percent, Richart mass allocated at each node with the maximum acceleration as obtained in step 2. Hydrocarbon Processing, May 1982 207 5. Apply the above sloshing forces in the opposite direction to but also a few higher modes participate in the response. The the direction of wind forces considered in step 2 above and obtain foregoing discussions are valid only for the fundamental response the dynamic amplitude. and require recalculation of damping coefficients corresponding to 6. Superimpose the displacements obtained in step 5 on the higher modes. This may be done by assuming that vibrations occur displacements obtained in step 2 and obtain the final displacement purely in these modes and repeat the procedures mentioned here. A curve. better assessment of damping factor is bound to arise from this 7. From the final displacement curve, calculate the logarithmic decrement exercise of two which successive may be displacement used for seismic andanalysis the damping, of such towers. It is suggested that for wind and seismic Percent critical damping = δ/2π analysis of tall process towers, percent critical damping should be worked out taking into account the geometry, material of For a typical example, the value of percent critical damping due to construction, stress variation and foundation system and judicious liquid sloshing has been observed to be 1.5. Therefore, CLS = 1.5 values adopted to have a more economic design. (Originally percent. presented at the Aeronautical Engineering Div., Institute of Engineers (India) Seminar on "Industrial Aerodynamics," Bangalore, Feb. 7 - 8, Aerodynamic damping. Generally, the aerodynamic damping is 1980) negligible. This is due to the fact that the velocity of oscillations of LITERATURE CITED the tower is normally very small and the aerodynamic damping is 1 J. P. Denhartog. ‘Forced Vibrations with Combined Coloumb and Viscous Friction.’ 2 proportional to the second (or higher) power of velocity. Therefore, P. Sachs. ‘Wind Forces in Engineering’. Pergamon Press, New York, 1972. 3 E. P. Zorilla. ‘Determination of Aerodynamic Behavior of Cantilevered Stacks and aerodynamic damping may be neglected. Towers of Circular Cross-sections’. 4 C. E. Freese. ‘Vibration of Vertical Pressure Vessels’. Journal of Engineering for Total damping of tower foundation system. To arrive at the total Industry, February 1959. 5 R. V. Whitman and F. E. Richart. ‘Design Procedure for Dynamically Loaded damping of the system, one considers vibration of the tower to be Foundations’. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division Proceedings predominantly in its fundamental mode. The energies dissipated by of ASCE , November 1967. the relevant. damping mechanisms of this system are summed up 6 D. D. Barkan. “Dynamics of Bases and Foundations.’ McGraw Hill, New York, and equated to the energy dissipated by a fictitious equivalent linear 1962. 7 N. W. Newmark and E. Rousenblueth. ‘Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering’. viscous damping mechanism which defines the total damping. As in this article the logarithmic decrements of various damping About the authors mechanisms are calculated and one is justified in adding these K. C. KARAMCHANDANI is project numerically to get the total damping. engineering manager for Engineers India Ltd., By adopting the concept of logarithmic decrement to each New Delhi. His responsibilities include ensuring damping mechanism the damping force irrespective of its law of compliance of engineering requirements of the projects under Aluminum Division of the variation is automatically linearized and converted to an equivalent company and technical development for the viscous damping force. So, in effect only adding the several Structural Department by way of analysis of linearized viscous damping coefficients is done to get the overall special problems, coordinating activities of developing engineering procedures, validation damping coefficient . and certification of computer programs and The following calculation sums up the damping calculated from variousexperience logarithmicincludes decrements for and empty updating and operating company conditions standards. Priorof ofstructural the tower. project engineering management works of refineries, petrochemical and fertilizer plants and ferrous and Tower Tower nonferrous industries. Mr. Karamchandani holds a B.E. (Civil) degree from the College of Engineering, Poona, and he is a member of the empty Institute of Civil Engineers,(London) and the Indian Standards operating Institution’s Sectional Committees and Panels. Material, CM 1.14 1.14 Insulation, C1 0.10 0.10 N. K. GUPTA is a supervising engineer for Soil-foundation, CSF 2.00 2.00 Engineers India Ltd., New Delhi. As a group leader he is responsible for structural Appendages, CA 0.10 0.10 engineering works for plants under the Liquid sloshing, CLS — 1.50 Petrochemical Division. Prior experience 3.34% 4.84% includes design of heavy and tall structures in steel and reinforced concrete for refineries and fertilizer plants. Mr. Gupta holds a B. Tech. Conclusions. It is observed the percent critical damping (Hons.) degree in civil engineering from the for the tower foundation system is of the order of 3.5 and 5 percent Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. for empty and operating conditions, respectively. Whereas the Dr. J. PATTABIRAMAN is a senior engineer practice was to consider this value as 2 percent for both the with Tata Consulting Engineers, Bangalore. He is responsible for software development for stress conditions, for wind and seismic analysis as recommended in Indian and vibration analysis in thermal power plant Standard IS: 1893 - 1975 (Criteria of Earthquake Resistance Design piping and equipment with a special interest in of Structures) leading to conservative designs. However, in the case machinery signature analysis. Prior experience of seismic loading which generally covers the frequency range of 0.2 includes teaching and research and to 33 cps it is quite likely that in the case of tall towers not only the development in stress, vibration and noise analysis and solving special problems in stress fundamental, and vibration analysis. Dr. Pattabiraman holds a B. Tech., M. Tech. And Ph.D. degrees in mechanical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology , Madras. He is also a 208 Hydrocarbon Processing, May 1982 reviewer for Applied Mechanics Reviews, and ASME publications.
Room Temperature Synthesis of Copper Oxide Nanoparticles Morphological Evaluation and Their Catalytic Applications For Degradation of Dyes and C-N Bond Formation Reaction PDF