Flow-induced vibration (FIV) from high-velocity multiphase flow is a common source of vibration concern in process piping, potentially leading to fatigue failures and hydrocarbon leaks. A combination of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and finite element (FE) modeling offers a potentially powerful tool for assessing and diagnosing multi-phase FIV problems in hydrocarbon-production piping systems. Global energy consultancy Xodus Group performed FIV studies on an Equinor-operated topside production system, carrying multiphase flow at high-pressure (approximately 69 bara) conditions, where significant vibration was measured. The study assessed different vibration-simulation methodologies, combining FE analysis with forcing functions based on both correlations and CFD simulations. The aim was to gain a better understanding of the accuracy and limitations of calculation methods typically used to assess fatigue. Calculating Multiphase FIV in Operational Pipework While CFD FIV modeling methods have been well validated against low-pressure water-airflow under laboratory conditions (Emmerson et al. 2016a and 2016b), little has been published to show how well these techniques perform for operational hydrocarbon-production systems. As these systems usually operate at higher pressures with complex, live hydrocarbon fluids and water, the process conditions are often not well defined. They typically incorporate sev-eral features that could complicate the vibration-generation mechanisms such as long upstream pipelines, chokes, and convoluted combinations of pipe bends with complex support arrangements. As part of the development of a new Energy Institute guidance document for subsea pipework, the project with Equinor was instigated following a joint industry project (JIP) established by Xodus, in collaboration with TNO and funded by six major operators, to improve techniques for estimating forcing functions in liquid-gas flows. Vibration measurements were taken at various locations on a section of piping carrying multiphase flow at high-pressure conditions (approximately 69 bara) (Fig. 1). The forces were applied in harmonic, transient, and fluid structural interaction (FSI) simulations (directly coupled FE and CFD). The topside piping arrangement consists of 16-in. schedule-100 piping, with a tee at the top of a riser section followed by six 90° and four 45° 1.5 R/D elbows and is reasonably well supported (as shown in Fig. 1). The measurements provided the vibration velocity of the piping structure, and frequency spectra analysis was performed for comparison with the structural-response simulations. The main locations of interest are V4 and V5 as the measured vibration was the highest here. The peak vibration velocity at V4 is 4.7 mm/s and this occurs at 5.1 Hz in the EW-Y direction (Fig. 2), while at V5 the peak is 6.4 mm/s at 5.2 Hz.