05 - Arghir Floating Ring
05 - Arghir Floating Ring
05 - Arghir Floating Ring
• M. H. Nguyen, "Analyse des étanchéités annulaires à bague flottante" Poitiers, Thèse de doctorat 2011.
• M. Arghir, M. H. Nguyen, D. Tonon, and J. Dehouve, "Analytic Modeling of Floating Ring Annular Seals," J. Eng. Gas Turbines and Power, vol. 134,
no. 5, 2012.
• M., Arghir, M.-H., Nguyen, “Non-Linear Analysis of Floating Ring Annular Seals: Stability and Impacts”, Proceedings of the 9th IFToMM
International Conference on Rotor Dynamics, Milan, Italy, September 2014. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-06590-8, pages 2007-2018.
• A. Mariot, "Analyse théorique et expérimentales des joints d’étanchéité à bague flottante et des joints rainurés segmentés " Poitiers, Thèse de
doctorat 2015.
• A., Mariot, M., Arghir, P., Hélies, J., Dehouve, J., “Experimental Analysis of Floating Ring Annular Seals and Comparisons with Theoretical
Predictions”, " J. Eng. Gas Turbines and Power, October 13, 2016, 138(4):042503-042503-9, doi: 10.1115/1.4031347.
• R. E. Burcham, "Liquid Rocket Engine Turbopump Rotating-Shaft Seals," NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, NASA SP-8121, 1978.
• R. E. Burcham, "High-speed crygoenic self-acting shaft seals for liquid rocket turbopumps," NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, NASA CR-
168194, 1983.
Experimental analysis: first operating scenario
• The pressure difference Δ across the floating ring
increases with the rotation speed,
• For lower values of Δ , the floating ring “follows”
the rotor vibrations,
• As Δ increases, the vibration amplitudes of the
floating ring decrease because of the increasing
friction forces on the nose,
• For high values of Δ , the floating ring is “blocked”
and acts as an eccentric annular seal,
• There is a possibility of contacts between the rotor
and the carbon ring.
Experimental analysis: second operating scenario
Additional
unbalance
Rotor
Water injection Lomakin bearing
FRAS
The test rig houses 2 to 4 floating ring seals in a Rotor
back-to-back arrangement. Cartridge Feeding
groove
The displacements of the rotor and of the seals are The rotation speed, feeding pressure and mass flow rate
measured in 6 positions along 2 orthogonal directions , . across the seal are measured.
Radial
Rotor
clearance
Geometry of the seals and of the rotor
Seals: Rotor:
Ideal shape
• 38 mm diameter seals, 10 mm axial length
• 4 different seals, divided in two categories:
– Type 1 seals: small radial clearance ( 20 µm), + 7 µm
low conicity ( 7 µm)
– Type 2 seals: large radial clearance ( 30 µm),
high conicity ( 15 µm)
Nose
Collar
spectral components
are low compared to 1x)
The rotor 3x
component is larger
X FFT
FRAS displacement
amplitudes
decrease with
increasing ∆P
X FFT
Locked Locked
Orbits
FRAS are
locked!
X FFT
• The static forces and dynamic damping coefficients are computed by solving the zero
and first order “bulk flow” equations
The computation of the static forces and dynamic damping coefficients is performed for a
given seal geometry and pressure difference, rotation speed and eccentricity configuration.
Friction forces on the nose of the FRAS
• The secondary seal is not completely closed: a
mixed lubrication regime subsists across the
nose
• Normal forces on the floating ring:
– Pressure difference #$
#$ 56 78 7 595 7 7 #$,&
#$,5 <
– Hydrostatic contribution #$,& :
– Asperity contact forces #$,5
• Balance of forces:
;
yields
#$ #$,& : + #$,5 ;
Contact forces: the contribution of asperities
Greenwood & Williamson’s model for the contact
between two rough surfaces:
• Contact between a nominally, rigid flat surface
and a rough, deformable surface #$
• Asperities in contact are modelled as #$,&
elastically loaded spheres of constant radius #$,5 <
#$,5
HI
4 ∗C 8⁄
;
> ?@ B D " ; F " G"
3 1 %
Contact forces: hydrostatic contribution
• The flow in the secondary seal is modeled as a
1D, adiabatic channel flow (height ;, length <)
• The convective inertia effects are taken into
account (bulk flow equations): #$
4J& G" 1 L GL #$,&
K% M 1 #$,5 <
MLN 1+ L
2
• The height of the canal is constant along the axial
direction: analytic solution
;
2J&̅ "
P L P L
;
VWT XY
T VWT XY
T
1 L M+1 M+1 L S UT C H Y Z H Y
P L + ln
ML 2M 2+ M 1 L ST U VWT XY ZT VWT XY
H Y
H Y
The equivalent friction coefficient on the nose of the FRAS
• The relation between #& and #$ can be
expressed thanks to an “equivalent coefficient
of friction” J:[ :
#$
#& J:[ #$ #$,&
#$,5 <
• Because of the hydrostatic contribution, the
coefficient of friction J:[ is lower than the
carbon/steel coefficient of friction
;
• J:[ depends on:
– Surface conditions and geometry
– Pressure difference
Comparisons experimental vs. theoretical trajectories
✗ ✓
Thank you!
Questions?