Rotordynamic coefficient test results for a four-stage brush seal

1993 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 462-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly J. Conner ◽  
Dara W. Childs
Keyword(s):  
Test Results ◽  
Brush Seal ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

scholarly journals Annular Honeycomb Seals: Test Results for Leakage and Rotordynamic Coefficients; Comparisons to Labyrinth and Smooth Configurations

1989 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Childs ◽  
D. Elrod ◽  
K. Hale
Keyword(s):  
Labyrinth Seal ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficients ◽  
Damping Coefficients ◽  
Stiffness Coefficients ◽  
Shaft Rotation ◽  
Honeycomb Seal ◽  
Cell Dimensions ◽  
Honeycomb Seals ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

Test results are presented for leakage and rotordynamic coefficients for seven honeycomb seals. All seals have the same radius, length, and clearance; however, the cell depths and diameters are varied. Rotordynamic data, which are presented, consist of the direct and cross-coupled stiffness coefficients and the direct damping coefficients. The rotordynamic-coefficient data show a considerable sensitivity to changes in cell dimensions; however, no clear trends are identifiable. Comparisons of test data for the honeycomb seals with labyrinth and smooth annular seals shows the honeycomb seal had the best sealing (minimum leakage) performance, followed in order by the labyrinth and smooth seals. For prerotated fluids entering the seal, in the direction of shaft rotation, the honeycomb seal has the best rotordynamic stability followed in order by the labyrinth and smooth. For no prerotation, or fluid prerotation against shaft rotation, the labyrinth seal has the best rotordynamic stability followed in order by the smooth and honeycomb seals.

scholarly journals Rotordynamic Coefficient and Leakage Test Results for Interlock and Tooth-on-Stator Labyrinth Seals

1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dara W. Childs ◽  
David A. Elrod ◽  
Keith Hale
Keyword(s):  
Labyrinth Seal ◽  
Damping Coefficient ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Labyrinth Seals ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficients ◽  
Damping Coefficients ◽  
Leakage Test ◽  
Stiffness And Damping ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

Test results (leakage and rotordynamic coefficients) are presented for an interlock and tooth-on-stator labyrinth seals. Tests were carried out with air at speeds out to 16,000 cpm and supply pressures up to 7.5 bars. The rotordynamic coefficients consist of direct and cross-coupled stiffness and damping coefficients. Damping-coefficient data have not previously been presented for interlock seals. The test results support the following conclusions: (a) The interlock seal leaks substantially less than labyrinth seals. (b) Destabilizing forces are lower for the interlock seal. (c) The labyrinth seal has substantially greater direct damping values than the interlock seal. A complete rotordynamics analysis is needed to determine which type of seal would yield the best stability predictions for a given turbomachinery unit.

Rotordynamic-Coefficient and Leakage Characteristics for Hole-Pattern-Stator Annular Gas Seals—Measurements Versus Predictions

2004 ◽  
Vol 126 (2) ◽  
pp. 326-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dara W. Childs ◽  
Jonathan Wade
Keyword(s):  
Flow Model ◽  
Control Volume ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Damping Coefficients ◽  
Supply Pressure ◽  
Static Data ◽  
Leakage Characteristics ◽  
Gas Seals ◽  
Stiffness And Damping ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

Selected test results are presented for an annular gas seal using a smooth rotor and a hole-pattern-roughness stator for a supply pressure of 70 bar, three pressure ratios, three speeds up to 20,000 rpm, two clearances, and three preswirl ratios. Dynamic data include frequency-dependent direct and cross-coupled stiffness and damping coefficients. Static data include leakage and upstream and downstream pressures and temperatures. Very good agreements are found between measurements and predictions from a two-control-volume bulk-flow model.

Rotordynamic Characteristics of a Flexure Pivot Pad Bearing With an Active and Locked Integral Squeeze Film Damper

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Agnew ◽  
Dara Childs
Keyword(s):  
Added Mass ◽  
Squeeze Film ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Squeeze Film Damper ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficients ◽  
Damping Coefficients ◽  
Stiffness Coefficients ◽  
Direct Stiffness ◽  
Active Damper ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

Measured rotordynamic coefficients are presented for a flexure-pivot-pad journal bearing (FPJB) in a load-between-pad configuration with: (1) an active, and (2) locked integral squeeze film damper (ISFD). Prior rotordynamic-coefficient test results have been presented for FPJBs (alone), and rotor-response results have been presented for rotors supported by FPJBS with ISFDs; however, these are the first rotordynamic-coefficient test results for FPJBs with ISFDs. A multi-frequency dynamic testing regime is employed. For both bearing configurations, quadratic curve fits provide good representation of the real portions of the dynamic-stiffness coefficients yielding a direct stiffness and a direct added-mass coefficient. The imaginary portions are well represented by linear curve fits, implying constant, frequency-independent direct-damping coefficients. Direct stiffness coefficients are ∼50% lower for the active-damper configuration, and direct damping coefficients are only modestly lower. The combination of ∼50% reduction in direct stiffness with a modest drop in direct damping indicates a very effective squeeze-film damper application. Added-mass coefficients are normally lower for the active-damper configuration, and all coefficient trends (for changes in loading and shaft speed) are “flatter” for the active flexure pivot-pad damper bearing. The measured rotordynamic coefficients are used to calculate the whirl frequency ratio and indicate high stability for both bearing configurations.

Brush Seal Free State Stiffness Analyses, Tests and Inspection on Dynamic Effects

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Tolga Duran ◽  
Mahmut F. Aksit ◽  
Murat Ozmusul
Keyword(s):  
Load Capacity ◽  
Dynamic Stiffness ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Wear Rates ◽  
Backing Plate ◽  
Brush Seal ◽  
Study Test ◽  
Brush Seals ◽  
Interference Measurements

While the efficiency of a brush seal is measured by its leakage rate, the overall performance of the seal is mostly affected by wear rate and durability. Seal stiffness and hysteresis behavior play important roles in determining the leakage performance and rotor stability due to the fact that they directly affect wear rates and pressure load capacity of the seal. The complicated nature of the bristle, rotor and backing plate interactions at typical operating conditions makes it difficult to determine the stiffness and durability of brush seals. In this study, test and computer aided engineering (CAE) methodologies have been developed to simulate brush seal stiffness and stress levels at unpressurized conditions. Unpressurized stiffness tests have been conducted by using two different test rigs, one of which uses a simple metallic pad and the other one uses a full-sized rotor for seal interference measurements. Test results for the two different rigs have been compared and the drawbacks of the simple stiffness test rig have been detailed in this study. CAE analyses at unpressurized conditions have been conducted by using 3D finite element (FE) models, and analyses have been correlated with the stiffness tests. The influence of rotor rotation has also been analyzed at unpressurized seal conditions. Transient simulation results also demonstrated good agreement with the dynamic stiffness tests of the brush seals.

Theory Versus Experiment for the Rotordynamic Coefficient of Labyrinth Gas Seals: Part II—A Comparison to Experiment

1988 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. W. Childs ◽  
J. K. Scharrer
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Test ◽  
Damping Coefficient ◽  
Test Facility ◽  
Radial Clearance ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficients ◽  
Theory Versus ◽  
Gas Seals ◽  
Predicted Values ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient

An experimental test facility is used to measure the leakage and rotordynamic coefficients of teeth-on-rotor and teeth-on-stator labyrinth gas seals. The test results are presented along with the theoretically predicted values for the two seal configurations at three different radial clearances and shaft speeds to 16,000 cpm. The test results show that the theory accurately predicts the cross-coupled stiffness for both seal configurations and shows improvement in the prediction of the direct damping for the teeth-on-rotor seal. The theory fails to predict a decrease in the direct damping coefficient for an increase in the radial clearance for the teeth-on-stator seal.

scholarly journals JTAGG II brush seal test results

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gul Arora ◽  
Margaret Proctor ◽  
Gul Arora ◽  
Margaret Proctor
Keyword(s):  
Test Results ◽  
Brush Seal

Experimental Leakage and Rotordynamic Results for Helically Grooved Annular Gas Seals

1996 ◽  
Vol 118 (2) ◽  
pp. 389-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. W. Childs ◽  
A. J. Gansle
Keyword(s):  
Helix Angle ◽  
Progressive Increase ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Progressive Reduction ◽  
Stiffness Coefficients ◽  
Leakage Test ◽  
Gas Seals ◽  
Frequency Ratios ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient ◽  
Better Than

Rotordynamic-coefficient and leakage test results are presented for three grooved seals with helix angles of 0, 15, and 30 deg against rotation. The seals are 50.8 mm long and 152.4 mm in diameter. Tests were done for two supply pressures (up to 17 bars), three speeds (5000, 12,000, and 16,000 rpm), four pressure ratios, and three inlet fluid prerotation conditions. The results showed that increasing the helix angle yields a progressive reduction in the cross-coupled stiffness coefficient k and a progressive increase in leakage. The helically grooved seals consistently yield negative cross-coupled stiffness coefficients for nonprerotated inlet flow; hence, k in these seals would oppose forward whirl of a rotor. Helically grooved seals become less effective at reducing k with increasing preswirl; hence, for optimum effectiveness they should be used with a swirl brake. Comparison between helically grooved and honeycomb-stator seals showed that helically grooved stators had reduced (negative) whirl-frequency ratios for nonprerotated flows but were no better than honeycomb-stator seals for elevated fluid prerotation. The 15 and 30 deg helix grooves leaked about 1.6 and 2.2 times, respectively, as much as the honeycomb-stator seals.

Stiffness Measurement for Pressure-Loaded Brush Seals

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul A. Bidkar ◽  
Xiaoqing Zheng ◽  
Mehmet Demiroglu ◽  
Norman Turnquist
Keyword(s):  
Gas Turbines ◽  
Design Parameters ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Pressure Loading ◽  
Friction Forces ◽  
Test Fixture ◽  
Hysteresis Behavior ◽  
Brush Seal ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Brush Seals

Brush seals are widely used as flexible seals for rotor-stator and stator-stator gaps in power generation turbo-machinery like steam turbines, gas turbines, generators and aircraft engines. Understanding the force interactions between a brush seal bristle pack and the rotor is important for avoiding overheating and rotor dynamic instabilities caused by excessive brush seal forces. Brush seal stiffness (i.e. brush seal force per unit circumferential length per unit incursion of the rotor) is usually measured and characterized at atmospheric pressure conditions. However, the inter-bristle forces, the blow-down forces and the friction forces between the backplate and the bristle pack change in the presence of a pressure loading, thereby changing the stiffness of the brush seal in the presence of this pressure loading. Furthermore, brush seals exhibit different hysteresis behavior under different pressure loading conditions. Understanding the increased brush seal stiffness and the increased hysteresis behavior of brush seals in the presence of a pressure loading is important for designing brush seals for higher pressure applications. In this article, we present the development of a test fixture for measuring the stiffness of brush seals subjected to a pressure loading. The fixture allows for measurement of the bristle pack forces in the presence of a pressure loading on the seal while the rotor is incrementally pushed (radially) into the bristle pack. Following the development of this test fixture, we present representative test results on three sample seals to show the trends in brush seal stiffness as the pressure loading is increased. Specifically, we study the effect of different brush seal design parameters on the stiffness of brush seals over a wide range of pressure loadings. These test data can be used for developing predictive models for brush seal stiffness under pressure loading. Furthermore, we demonstrate the utility of this fixture in studying the hysteresis exhibited by brush seals along with the importance of the backplate pressure balance feature present in several brush seal designs. The test results validate the bilinear force-displacement curves previously reported in the literature.

Experimental Leakage and Rotordynamic Results for Helically Grooved Annular Gas Seals

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dara W. Childs ◽  
Anthony J. Gansle
Keyword(s):  
Helix Angle ◽  
Progressive Increase ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Progressive Reduction ◽  
Stiffness Coefficients ◽  
Leakage Test ◽  
Gas Seals ◽  
Frequency Ratios ◽  
Rotordynamic Coefficient ◽  
Better Than

Rotordynamic-coefficient and leakage test results are presented for three grooved seals with helix angles of 0°, 15°, and 30° against rotation. The seals are 50.8 mm long and 152.4 mm in diameter. Tests were done for two supply pressures (up to 17 bars), three speeds (5000, 12000, and 16000 rpm), four pressure ratios, and three inlet fluid prerotation conditions. The results showed that increasing the helix angle yields a progressive reduction in the cross-coupled stiffness coefficient k and a progressive increase in leakage. The helically-grooved seals consistently yield negative cross-coupled stiffness coefficients for nonprerotated inlet flow; hence, k in these seals would oppose forward whirl of a rotor. Helically grooved seals become less effective at reducing k with increasing preswirl; hence, for optimum effectiveness they should be used with a swirl brake. Comparison between helically-grooved and honeycomb-stator seals showed that helically-grooved stators had reduced (negative) whirl-frequency ratios for nonprerotated flows but were no better than honeycomb-stator seals for elevated fluid prerotation. The 15° and 30° helix grooves leaked about 1.6 and 2.2 times, respectively, as much as the honeycomb-stator seals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document