Dear Mr. Joshi,
Normally piping systems are more flexible than supporting systems (of course with exceptions). The reason behind this is that as a piping engineer, a flexible piping system is always preferred whereas a structural engineer is interested in making the structure rigid by adding bracings etc.
Eigen frequency of a piping systems is determined by the supporting of the piping system which in many cases are governed by stress analysis and hence controlling the stifness of the piping system by adding guides is not always possible. Of course, we can modify stifness of the piping system by adding snubbers but again the cost and utility of the same should be investigated. On similar lines, civil structures have also their own limitaions in the range of eigen frequencies.
In general, making one system more flexible than the other is often not possible from engineering point of view. What you have to look for is the comparative study of the eigen frequencies of the piping and the supporting structure. You may refer to the FEMA302, 1997 code for a comparative study.
However, I am still unable to understand your last question.
Regards,
Pankaj Mandal.
-----Original Message-----
From: KAUSTUBH JOSHI [mailto:kvj@epc.ltindia.com]
Sent: 28 May 2002 17:07
To: PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [PipingDesign] Query
Hi all,
When designing the piping and support structure, what is better:
1) To have a rigid piping and flexible support structure? 2) To have a flexible piping and rigid support structure? 3) To have a rigid piping and rigid support structure? 4) To have flexible piping and flexible support structure?
5) Does this philosophy depends on criticality of system? if yes, how? 6) How this philosophy differentiates with the dynamically loaded and statically loaded system?
waiting for replies,
Kaustubh
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Received on Tue May 28 08:04:00 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 27 2008 - 20:23:57 EDT