pettervu
Mechanical
- Jul 29, 2008
- 10
In our pipe support evaluations we've always considered friction for all load cases, both static and dynamic (including waterhammer, global vibrations etc).
We do feel that this is quite conservative, but haven't found a convincing argument to reduce this assumption.
Now we've found that secition 6.10 in the AREVA document "U.S. EPR Piping Analysis and Pipe Support Design" (link below) assumes that only frictional loads from deadweight and thermal expansion need be considered. The argument is quite short "Since friction is due to the gradual movement of the pipe..." and there are no references for the basis of this assumption.
As we've seen it the pipe may move quite a bit while vibrating which could cause additional frictional forces from dynamic loads.
Could someone please elaborate on the reasoning behind ignoring frictional forces caused by vibrations or direct us to a more comprehensive explanation to this?
We do feel that this is quite conservative, but haven't found a convincing argument to reduce this assumption.
Now we've found that secition 6.10 in the AREVA document "U.S. EPR Piping Analysis and Pipe Support Design" (link below) assumes that only frictional loads from deadweight and thermal expansion need be considered. The argument is quite short "Since friction is due to the gradual movement of the pipe..." and there are no references for the basis of this assumption.
As we've seen it the pipe may move quite a bit while vibrating which could cause additional frictional forces from dynamic loads.
Could someone please elaborate on the reasoning behind ignoring frictional forces caused by vibrations or direct us to a more comprehensive explanation to this?