This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
SIMULATION OF AMB SUPPORTED ROTOR DURING DROP ON RETAINER BEARINGS
Antti Y. J. Kärkkäinen Jussi T. Sopanen Aki M. Mikkola
ISBN 952-214-200-X (Paperback) ISBN 952-214-201-8 (PDF) ISSN 1459-2932
Lappeenranta University of Technology Department of Mechanical Engineering Institute of Mechatronics and Virtual Engineering P.O.Box 20 FIN-53851 Lappeenranta Finland Lappeenranta, April 3, 2006
ABSTRACT The active magnetic bearings present a new technology which has many advantages compared to traditional bearing designs. Active magnetic bearings, however, require retainer bearings order to prevent damages in the event of a component, power or a control loop failure. In the dropdown situation, when the rotor drops from the magnetic bearings to the retainer bearings, the design parameters of the retainer bearings have a significant influence on the behaviour of the rotor. In this study, the dynamics of an active magnetic bearings supported electric motor during rotor drop on retainer bearings is studied using a multibody simulation approach. Various design parameters of retainer bearings are studied using a simulation model while results are compared with those found in literature. The retainer bearings are modelled using a detailed ball bearing model, which accounts damping and stiffness properties, oil film and friction between races and rolling elements. The model of the ball bearings includes inertia description of rolling elements. The model of the magnetic bearing system contains unbalances of the rotor and stiffness and damping properties of support. In this study, a computationally efficient contact model between the rotor and the retainer bearings is proposed. In addition, this work introduces information for the design of physical prototype and its retainer bearings. Keywords: Retainer bearing, Dropdown simulation, Ball bearing model, Contact model.
1 2 3
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................4 DESIGN PARAMETERS OF BACKUP BEARING .......................................................6 MODELS OF ROTOR AND BACKUP BEARING ........................................................9 3.1 3.2 3.3 Model of the Rotor ..................................................................................................9 Model of the Ball Bearing .....................................................................................12 Model of the Contact .............................................................................................13
STUDIED STRUCTURE................................................................................................16 SIMULATION RESULTS ..............................................................................................18 5.1 5.2 5.3 Effect of Friction Coefficient ................................................................................18 Effect of Mass of Unbalance .................................................................................22 Effects of Stiffness and Damping Coefficients of Support ...................................24
In this way. the controlling unit increases or decreases power of the AMB in order to achieve the reference value. The most crucial moment when the retainer bearings are needed is when the rotor drops from AMBs to retainer bearings due to component or power failure [1. the vibration at rigid body’s natural frequency damps out. Despite of that. In the unbalance compensation. In addition. From outside to inside the main parts are the following. the damping coefficient can be increased. machine tools. Function of the AMB’s active part is easy to understand. and the motor can be used at supercritical speeds. little energy loss. there is a great chance that AMB-rotor system will be suicidal on dropdown 4 . and electric components. The most important mechanical parts in AMB are widely known. strategies of controller. and electric motors are the most general applications of AMB. unbalance compensation during motor operation is possible due to active feedback control of AMB. the socalled retainer bearings. generate attraction which supports the rotor and. no need for lubrication. quiet operation and adjustable stiffness and damping which makes accurate rotor positioning possible. the rotor levitates in the reference location. AMBs offer almost unlimited control over the rotor that they support. Electromagnets. have a vital role in the AMB applications.1 INTRODUCTION The area of Active Magnetic Bearings (AMBs) has recently been developed intensively because this non-contact support system has several advantages compared to conventional bearings. at the same time. additional bearings. and rotor laminations. normally from 8 to 12 pieces in a stator. and when the location deviates from the reference value. The most important advantages are almost non-existent friction and. Furthermore. this is only in theory. stator. 2. Due to improved materials. Typically AMB application is expensive and unique due to high expense associated to development of control software. Compressors. 3]. the rotor does not rotate around its geometrical center but rotates around the centre of mass. Unfortunately. the performance and reliability of AMB is enhancing. because of that. Adjustable stiffness of the AMB makes it possible to decrease the natural frequencies of rotor’s rigid body modes under the operation while. As a consequence. Without any information and knowledge of retainer bearings. a sensor measures location of the rotor in the air gap. in principle. forces it to the center of the magnetic field. since gravity and unbalance forces make the design of control cumbersome leading to imperfect running of the rotor. generators. It is obvious that this is not possible when using mechanical bearings. Adjustable stiffness and damping become helpful especially from the mechanical point of view. electromagnets.
situation. For this reason. bushing type retainer bearings are unable to dissipate energy of the rotor without a whirling motion of the rotor. like Fumagalli  showed. this type suffers some drawbacks like a larger moment of inertia of rotating parts than rolling element bearing have. Bushing type bearings are simple. Zeng .  investigations proofed. damping and the friction coefficients between the rotor and bearing. The last one type is a combination of those two mentioned above. The most examined characteristics of retainer bearings are the stiffness. Influences of those coefficients are widely known as pointed out by Ecker . Dynamic behavior of bushing and rolling bearing type retainer bearings is different like Fumagalli’s  and Swanson et al. However. they are also more sensitive for impacts. This issue will be discussed later in this survey. Rolling element bearing increases the power dissipation of the rotor during dropdown.  examined the dynamic behavior of rolling element bearing following rotor impact successfully. For example. Accordingly. the objective of this research is to shed light on the design of the retainer bearings. This may prevent whirling motion of a rotor. Raju et al. which may restrict their use in some applications. Wang and Noah  examined an accurate model of a sleeve auxiliary bearing during rotors dropdown. but only when designing similar retainer bearings as they examined. therefore. In this topic. cheap and easy to repair if necessary. Retainer bearings can be categorized into three types. For this reason. based on low friction of coefficient. On the other hand. as Fumagalli  noted. a number of inventive examinations have been done. bushing type retainer bearings have some defects. Retainer bearings of rolling element bearing type are more complicated and. They pointed out that the inner race of the bearing should be allowed to accelerate as rapidly as possible in order to maximize the energy dissipation of the rotor. and consequently. Also force calculation and knowledge of the orbit of a rotor during contact are useful despite of the used bearing type. Both of the results are useful. Cole et al. because the inner race achieves rapidly the angular velocity of the rotor. They concluded that the system should be designed 5 . Secondly. Ishii and Kirk . This type of retainer bearing has some beneficial features as mentioned.  did similar examination as Cole et al. the coefficient of friction can change during rotor’s deceleration due to wearing of sleeve. Wearing typically increases the coefficient of friction and resulting to changes in the dynamic behavior of the rotor. bushing type retainer bearings must be normally replaced for new ones after few number of high speed dropdowns.  using solid brass backup bearings.
Design parameters will be studied also using numerical simulation later in this paper. Common to all above mentioned examinations is that they are based on finite element model. because forces are not anymore significant. The inertias of the cage and the balls are combined. The retainer bearings are modelled by using a detailed ball bearing model. Stiffness of Bearing and Support Wang and Noah  noted that the higher the bearing stiffness. In this section. The model also includes inertias of rotating parts. Zeng  mentioned in his examination that the effect of decaying magnetic force of the failed AMB might be ignored in the simulations. That is why a non-linear dynamical analysis is critical for specific design of the rotor-retainer bearing system.to avoid operation at the speed of the free-free eigenmodes of the rotor. The objective of this work is to build a more accurate model of AMB system during the rotor dropdown using a multibody simulation approach. which includes damping and stiffness properties.  compared the results of the Fumagalli’s doctoral thesis with their own examinations and suggested that the reason for discrepancy was the collapsing magnetic field of the AMB’s that was still producing decreasing magnetic force. those effects must be known before the design of the backup bearings can be embarked. The model of the AMB system includes unbalances of the rotor and stiffness and damping properties of the support. On the other hand. In addition. As a consequence. Secondary objective of this work is to obtain of important information for the design the physical prototype and its retainer bearings. the most valid design parameters of backup bearings are studied with the help of literature. Orth et al. since it can lead to the chaotic behavior. the higher the full clearance backward whirling speed and the amplitude of whirling after dropdown of the rotor. oil film and friction between the races and rolling elements. This should be accounted in the dropdown situation. rotor dynamic calculation or experimental studies. parameters of retainer bearings modified in order to find their contribution to the dynamic responses during the drop down. 2 DESIGN PARAMETERS OF BACKUP BEARING Backup bearings’ design parameters have significant effect on the dynamic behavior of the rotor during the dropdown. They proposed that the bearing support stiffness can be selected at a value close to the stiffness of 6 .
highly preloaded. Because of larger friction force. In this range. The backward whirl may lead to a large contact force. because the backup bearings are inactive during the normal operation and. where Cbb is backup bearing damping and Csh is unsupported shaft damping. Sun  examined thermal growth of retainer bearing during the contact. Zeng  noted in his research that suitable soft support stiffness could reduce the nonlinear resonance and hence avoid whirling motion of the rotor.25 to 0. Damping of Bearing and Support Ishii and Kirk  noted that in the cases of very low and high support damping. It is important to note that the coefficient of friction is not always constant. like the nonlinearity of contact point. It is also good to remember that the vibration amplitude must be small enough to ensure that the rotor does not touch other parts of the assembly. the optimum support-damping ratio Cbb/Csh. orbit of a rotor extends after dropdown and 7 . This means that the auxiliary bearings are dry and thus without lubrication. Research made by Wang and Noah  showed also that an increase in the auxiliary bearing damping would help to reduce the whirling amplitude and eliminate the chaotic response. increase the value of friction coefficient. backward whirl occurs shortly after the rotor has dropped to the backup bearings. is between 30 and 100. A support with high stiffness will increase the friction coefficient rapidly and soon lead into full-clearance backward whirling motion of the rotor. He noted that rotor drop dynamics and thermal growth drastically change when the friction coefficient increases from 0. thereby. Coefficient of Friction between Rotor and Retainer Bearing Ecker  noticed that for large values of friction coefficients. the backward whirl does not occur. These kind of constrains. This is important observation because often in magnetic bearing applications a contaminant free environment is required. This is due to wear that can occur during the interaction between the rotor and retainer bearings and. in some cases. which operate for a long time without stops. Therefore. Ishii and Kirk  noted that for small support damping (Cbb/Csh ≤ 5) the maximum rotor response and the maximum contact force are sensitive to the constraint in the rotational movement of bearing. Also Fumagalli and Schwitzer  noted that low coefficient of friction is a good feature for the retainer bearings. could exist for the AMB machinery. the rotor starts backward whirling motion.the shaft in the auxiliary bearing design.30.
the clearance between the rotor and the retainer bearing is about half of the magnetic bearing’s air gap. Thus. i. reducing the friction coefficient is so critical to the stability of the rotor drop dynamics. It is also important to note that the AMB’s magnetic forces are inversely proportional to the square of the air gap. Balancing of Rotor Kirk’s  research concluded that a balanced rotor has a greater assurance that a drop will not initiate a violent whirl. the rotor goes into pendulum like behavior rather than whirling motion. therefore. He also noted that the level of response tends to increase as the level of unbalance increases. Thickness of Inner Race and Support Device’s Mass Cole et al. thereby increasing the race stiffness. could reduce the nonlinear resonances and hence avoid full clearance whirl motion of the AMB rotor that may lead to damage. 8 . Therefore. They noticed that the peak loading of the rolling elements in a bearing can be reduced substantively by increasing the inner race thickness. air gaps between the rotor and retainer bearing can not be chosen without restriction. it is important to find a threshold friction coefficient above of which rotor enters into high-speed backward whirl. Zeng  noticed in his research that suitable heavy backup device mass. it would be preferable if the inner race accelerates as rapidly as possible in order to maximize the energy dissipation of the rotor. mass of the retainer bearing assembly. if it is acceptable in practice. Air Gap between Rotor and Retainer Bearing Fumagalli  showed that the air gap between the rotor and retainer bearing should be large. However. it was clear that violent backward whirling can occur for increased levels of unbalance. Fine surface finish and powder or solid lubricants can be utilized on the contact area. For the hard-mount unlubricated solid bushing case. a thicker race will have a larger moment of inertia and.  used the finite element method to account flexibility of the inner race. and to minimize the likelihood of friction induced rotor whirl. Hence.the first bounce direction becomes closer to the tangential direction of the contact point. On the other hand. if the air gap is large enough. tends to accelerate more slowly.e. Normally. He proved this analytically and experimentally. He noted that.
the vector of generalized coordinates. Model of the contact. and because of that. useful for this application. for example. The bearing model is detailed. The orientation of the body can be described using. By using generalized coordinates. 3. bearings and contact are presented in this section. (2) where Ai is a rotation matrix that describes the rotation of the local coordinate system with respect to the global coordinate system and u i is the position vector of a particle in the local coordinate system.3 MODELS OF ROTOR AND BACKUP BEARING Models of the rotor. The velocity of an arbitrary particle can be obtained by differentiating Equation (2) with respect to time as follows: & i ui . can be used in mathematic programs as well as in multibody programs. The used model of the ball bearings is presented earlier by Sopanen and Mikkola [16. Euler angles.ADAMS). the motion of each body of the system is described using generalized coordinates. Rodriguez parameters or Euler parameters. The model of the rotor is implemented in a commercial multibody software application  (MSC. For body i.1 Model of the Rotor In this paper. &i +A &i = R r & i ui can be written as where A (3) 9 . 17]. ⎦ (1) where R i is the position vector of the origin of a local coordinate system of the body and θ i is the vector of generalized orientation coordinates. In this approach. qir . the global position of an arbitrary particle. the rotor is modeled using a multibody simulation approach. P. introduced in this study. can be written as  T qir = ⎡ R i ⎣ T T θi ⎤ . on body i can be expressed in the following form: r i = R i + Ai ui .
i ⎥ ⎣ symm. The mass matrix of body i can be obtained from the expression of the kinetic energy as follows: Ti = 1 1 iT i i & iT r & i dV i = q &r M q &r . % i Gi θ A (4) % i is the skew symmetric matrix of vector ui . the system equation of motion can be written as follows  && + CqT λ = Qe + Q v . Mq (6) where M is the mass matrix. Qe the vector of generalized forces and Q v the vector of the quadratic velocity inertia forces.& i ui = − Aiu &i . and matrix Gi depend on the selected generalized orientation coordinates. Matrix Gi defines the relationship where u between the angular velocities in the local body frame and the time derivatives of the orientation coordinates as follows: &i . The mass matrix. By using Lagrange’s equation and an augmented formulation for the kinematic constraints. λ the vector of Lagrange multipliers. mθθ ⎦ i (8) The submatrices can be written as follows miRR = ∫ i ρ i IdV i = mi I V (9) 10 . Ai . can be written as follows: ⎡ miRR miRθ ⎤ M =⎢ . Cq the constraint Jacobian matrix. ρ ir i ∫ V 2 2 (7) where Vi is the volume of body i. M i . ωi = G i θ (5) It is important to point out that the expressions of the rotation matrix.
Ti . The kinematical constraint equations are functions of the system’s generalized coordinates and can be expressed as follows: 11 .% i dV i ⎤ Gi miRθ = − Ai ⎡ ∫ i ρ i u ⎣V ⎦ i i % iT u % i Gi dV i = GiT Iθθ mθθ = ∫ i ρ i GiT u Gi . such as the gyroscopic and Coriolis terms. and moments. ⎦ T (12) where vectors ( Qiv ) and ( Qiv ) can be written as R θ (Q ) (Q ) i v R i v θ & iθ &i % i )2 ⎡ ρ i ui dV i ⎤ + Ai ⎡ ρ i u % i dV i ⎤ G = − Ai ( ω ⎣ ∫V i ⎦ ⎣ ∫V i ⎦ i & i &i ⎤ % i I i ω i + Iθθ = −G iT ⎡ω Gθ . respectively. which contains the terms that are quadratic in the velocities. can be expressed as follows : Qiv = ⎡( Qiv ) R ⎣ (Q ) i v θ ⎤ . F i . Vector uiP defines the working point of the force in the local coordinate system. V (10) (11) i the inertia tensor of the body i. ⎣ θθ ⎦ (13) (14) The externally applied forces must be defined as generalized forces that affect the system’s generalized coordinates. (16) R and ( Qie ) are the vectors of the generalized forces associated with the θ translational and rotational generalized coordinates of body i. can be expressed as  (Q ) i e R i e θ = Ai Fi i i T i i P i i (15) % AF (Q ) = ( A G ) ( A u where ( Qie ) + A i Ti ) . Using the principle of the virtual work. the generalized forces caused by globally applied forces. where I is a 3 × 3 identity matrix and Iθθ The vector of quadratic velocity inertia forces.
Q λ 0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ c ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ (21) The acceleration vector and the vector of Lagrange multipliers can then be solved from Equation (21). The geometry. 3.2 Model of the Ball Bearing Sopanen and Mikkola  presented a dynamic model of a deep-groove ball bearing using six degrees of freedom. such as outer and inner diameter of bearing and clearances. Q c = −Ctt − (Cq q (20) Equations (6) and (20) can be combined into one matrix equation as ⎡M ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ Cq T && r ⎤ ⎡Q e + Q v ⎤ Cq ⎤ ⎡ q ⎥⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥. (17) The constraint Jacobian matrix can be obtained by differentiating the constraint equations with respect to the generalized coordinates as follows: ∂C ( q r . and material properties are given as an 12 . To accomplish this. Equation (6) is often solved through the use of the numerical integration approach of ordinary differential equations (ODE).C (qr . The model of the bearing included descriptions of non-linear Hertzian contact deformation and elastohydrodynamic (EHD) fluid film thickness. Cq q (19) By defining the vector Q c as & r )q q & r − 2Cqt q &r . These differential algebraic equations (DAE) are nonlinear. t ) . the constraint equations are differentiated twice with respect to time as follows : && r = −Ctt − (Cq q & r )q q & r − 2Cqt q &r . t ) = 0 . ∂q r Cq = (18) Equation (6) represents the dynamic equations of the constrained system.
The torque around the rotation axis of the bearing is caused by friction and consists of three components. The bearing force and torque components are calculated from the relative displacements and velocities between bearing rings. loaddependent friction torque and seal friction. The sealed bearings are more protected for pollution than the normal ones and because of that potentially better for dropdown situation than normal bearings. For example. can be written as follows 13 . The radial contact force. includes built-in contact models . despite of above-mentioned assumption. it is important to create a contact model that works effectively and foreseeable every moment during the simulation. viscous friction torque. It means that the cage holds the balls in their predefined positions precisely. the bending deformation in the rings was assumed to be negligible. the cage of the bearing was assumed to be ideal. the friction torque was found to play an insignificant role in terms of contact forces and responses. 3. Thirdly. but it makes the determination of the bearing model significantly easier. The last assumption was that no slipping or sliding occurs between the components of the bearing. Furthermore. especially in case of the retainer bearings.ADAMS. they did not notice the centrifugal forces of the balls. Thus. Contact between the rotor and the bearing is modeled using a circle-in-circle contact which is presented in Figure 1. In addition.input to the model. such as MSC. in this way it is possible to create friction model without insignificant parameters. The radial contact Fr is a function of the contact penetration and the penetration velocity. This assumption may not be true all the time. Therefore. For the practical point of view this means that it is useful to select a sealed ball bearing as the retainer bearing. That kind of contact is usually created to be generalized and multipurpose and therefore.3 Model of the Contact Usually commercial multibody programs. However. calculation of contact may require significantly calculation capacity. the force-deflection relationship was fairly complex. In their study. the model proposed by Sopanen and Mikkola is simplified as follows: Firstly. the simulation model have a large number of degrees of freedom and for this reason it will be computationally expensive. if slip velocity is always larger than the stiction transition velocity. A single ball bearing consists of a number of moving parts and when describing responses of each part. which affects on the rotor. it is not necessary to define the static friction coefficient.
damping of the contact. (24) &r = e &x + ey e &y ex e ex + ey 2 2 Clearance in the contact.0 ⋅ max ⎨ . The X. er. 1 Circle-in-circle contact. ⎩0. The exponent e is the force-deflection relationship. e along X and Y axes as follows er = ex + e y 2 2 (23) .and Y-components of the radial contact force Fr can be calculated using the geometry presented in Figure 1. &r . cd .0 (22) where K is stiffness of the contact and C is. C ) ⋅ e &r Fr = −1. 0. (25) ex R ω β Y r Mµ Fr ey X Z Fµ er-cd Fig. cd. between the rotor and the sleeve can be obtained from the displacements and velocity. d . Radial displacement.⎧ K (er − cd )e + f (er . is obtained from radiuses of the rotor r and the sleeve R as follows cd = R − r . respectively. 14 .
0. The parameter d in Equation (22) is the radial displacement when a maximum damping coefficient is achieved.1) . h0 and h1 are the initial and final value of the function. g ≤ g0 ⎧h0 ⎪ 2 f ( g . g1 . ω diff (27) where µ is the coefficient of friction between the rotor and bearings. while g 0 and g1 g1 − g 0 are the starting and ending values of the step. The function is continuous for first derivatives and it is defined as .To avoid discontinuities in the contact force. h1 ) = ⎨h0 + ∆h ⋅ ∆g (3 − 2∆g ) . The step function employs cubic polynomials. where ∆h = h1 − h0 and ∆g = Magnitude of friction force. Parameter ωdiff describes the difference of angular velocities between the rotor and the sleeves and can be written as ωdiff = ω r − ω s . which is defined by Equation (26). at zero penetration. where ωr and ωs are the angular velocities of the rotor and the sleeves. h0 . the velocity-dependent terms are smoothed using step function. (28) 15 . C. it causes a torque which direction is opposite to the direction of rotation and can be defined as M µ = Fµ ⋅ r . ωl . g 0 . 0. which acts to the center of the rotor and is perpendicular to the radial contact force. the damping coefficient. g ≥ g1 ⎩ 1 (26) g − g0 . The parameter ωl describes the threshold angular speed above which the friction coefficient µ achieves the maximum value. Thus. ⎪h . Variable g is an independent variable. g 0 < g < g1 . Correspondingly. is zero. can be calculated as follows Fµ = ω diff ⋅ µ ⋅ Fr ⋅ f (ω diff . Because the friction force is assumed to act into the center of the rotor.
The air gap between the sleeve and the rotor is half of the air gap of AMB. whose rotor is supported by two Active Magnetic Bearings (AMBs). The parameters of the contacts between the rotor and the sleeves are shown in Table 3. The housings are connected to the ground with linear spring-dampers in X. On the inner rings of retainer bearings (RB1 and RB2 in Figure 2) are sleeves that are rigidly connected to the inner rings of the bearings.0·10-3 and a maximum time step of 1. deep-groove ball bearing). which have a vital role in the case of emergency dropdown.direction is prevented by using a spring.0·10-4 s. 16 . Width of the sleeves is same as the width of the bearings. The stiffness coefficients are the same in both directions. The outer rings of the retainer bearings are rigidly mounted to the bearing housings. In the simulation the axial motion in the Z.and Y-directions.67 Hz) around the Z-axis in counterclockwise direction. Unbalance mass UB is located at the middle of the rotor at an angle of 90º from the positive X-axis and at distance of 97. For reason of simplify. the bearing housings have only two degrees of freedom. The rotor has six degrees of freedom and it is made of steel which density ρ is 7801 kg/m3. as well as the damping coefficients. The translational displacements and forces are measured from the both retainer bearings. namely translations in the global X.and Y-directions. Simulation data is recorded at a frequency of 20 000 Hz.4 STUDIED STRUCTURE Studied structure is an electrical motor. Both AMBs (AMB1 and AMB2 in Figure 2) generate independent support forces FAMB1 and FAMB2. Numerical integrator used here is Gear Stiff with an error tolerance of 1. The structure includes also retainer bearings (6016 type. The test rotor can be seen in Figure 2. The model of the electric motor has 27 degrees of freedom. Both support forces will be closing down immediately when a fault situation occurs. The direction of gravity g is the negative Y-direction. which means that the collapsing magnetic field will not generate any forces at all. The dimensions of the motor are shown in Table 1 and properties of the used retainer bearings are shown in Table 2. The rotor’s rotational velocity n is 10 000 rpm (166.5 mm from the rotation axis.
d 19.80665 m/s2 Table 2 Parameters of the type 6016 retainer bearing 80.0 mm Bore diameter.0 115.04·10-6 Ns/mm2 Viscosity parameter. 2 Diagram of the electric motor under investigation.0 90.3 Viscosity parameter.5 ⌀80.023 mm2/N 0. g 9. ν 0.0 370. dsi 80. DO 125. Rr 0. Id 2.25 Ns/mm Bearing damping coefficient.3 kg Polar moment of inertia of the rotor. Ks 165.05 mm Number of balls. dso Gravity constant. Ks Cs . η0 .0 mm Outer diameter of sleeve. Dimensions are in millimeters.0 UB ⌀195.0 257.6 mm Inner diameter of sleeve. B 22.0 mm Bearing width.0 mm 110. Ip 0.82 kgm2 Air gap between rotor and sleeves 300 µm 60.990.0 RB1 AMB1 AMB2 FAMB1 475. Table 1 Parameters of the studied electric motor Mass of the rotor. cd 15 µm 0.0 660.52 40 000 N Static load rating.0 Y Z Cs .0 FAMB2 Fig. C0 Modulus of elasticity. cb Inner and outer race conformity.39 kgm2 Diameter moments of inertia of the rotor.0 mm Pitch diameter. dB Outer diameter. dm Ball diameter. z 10 Diametral clearance.0 RB2 ⌀60. E 206 000 MPa Poisson's ratio. m 97.0 105. α 0.0 17 ⌀50.
ωl 1·108 N/m 1000 Ns/m 0. is 5000 Ns/m.01 mm 1. C The contact parameter. Figure 3 shows the responses of the rotor at the retainer bearing 1. the effects of the friction coefficient and the mass of unbalance are studied. the circle in Figures 5 and 6. the orbit of the rotor.1 10 rpm 5 SIMULATION RESULTS In this chapter.1 Effect of Friction Coefficient In this section the responses. the responses. is 5·107 N/m and the damping of the support. The unbalance mass.08 seconds of the dropdown. e Threshold angular speed.39. Figures 5 and 6 show that the orbit of the rotor becomes larger as the friction coefficient increases. 18 . In the whirling motion. the stiffness of the support. and the velocities of the sleeve are studied with different friction coefficients µ in these examples. Initial angular velocity of the rotor is 10000 rpm. 5. are stabilizing. mUB. Effects of the stiffness and the damping coefficients of support to responses and contact forces are also examined.e. the contact forces of the support. the responses are presented in the case of friction coefficient of 0. The rotor started to whirl when the friction coefficient between the rotor and the sleeves is 0. This can be seen even before the rotor starts to whirl. is 1 g. In Figure 4. The total time of the simulation is 1 second and AMB's are turned off when the simulation is preceded 0. The largest motion does not occur immediately after the dropdown. i.Table 3 Parameters of the contact Stiffness coefficient of the contact. The orbits of the rotor in various conditions are presented in Figures 5 and 6. After this moment. d Exponent of the force-deflection relationship. K Damping coefficient of the contact. The largest responses occur after 0.1 seconds. Cs. The orbit of the rotor does not stay inside of the static retainer bearing. the orbit of the rotor. like in the cases of lower friction coefficients. after the dropdown. the orbit of the rotor increases significantly. Ks. This is due to fact that the retainer bearings are assembled elastically to the ground and the bearing model describes compression of the bearing as well.40.
Solid line indicates Y-axis and dash line X-axis. Solid line indicates Y-axis and dash line X-axis. 3 Responses of the rotor. 19 . 4 Response of the rotor when the rotor goes into backward whirling motion.Fig. Fig.
the contact forces are approximately same during the deceleration in all cases. This should be accounted in mechanical design. when the rotor started to whirl the contact forces increase significantly. Fig. The coefficient of friction has a vital role for contact forces if the rotor experiences a violent backward whirl. 20 .Fig. If the rotor stays at the bottom of the sleeves. the forces are two times larger than in the case where the rotor stays at the bottom of the sleeves. 6 Orbit of the rotor when the rotor goes into backward whirling motion. as can be seen in Figures 7 and 8. However. 5 Orbits of the rotor.
the sleeve accelerates more rapidly than if its rotation velocity is near to rotation velocity of the rotor. 8 Contact force of the support when the rotor goes into backward whirling motion. the sleeves accelerate much faster than in the case when the rotor stays bottom of the sleeves. This behavior causes steps to the curve describing angular 21 . 7 Contact forces of the support.Fig. Angular velocities of the sleeves are presented in Figures 9 and 10. Angular velocity depend on two parameters. When the rotor starts to whirl. If the discrepancy between rotation velocities of the rotor and the sleeves is large. the rotor bounces back and forth as can be noted in Figures 5 and 6. the friction coefficient and the skid between the sleeves and the rotor. The reason for this kind of behavior is the constant contact between rotor and sleeves. Fig. Immediately after the dropdown.
12 and 13 show effects of the unbalance on responses. chaotic. Variations of the unbalance are 5 and 10 grams. The reason for this 22 . and contact forces. It can be concluded from the results that larger mass of unbalance makes the orbit of the rotor more unexpected.2 Effect of Mass of Unbalance Figures 11. at this time. orbits. This may be unreal. Figure 13 presenting the contact forces between rotor and sleeves shows that in the case of mUB=5 g the contact forces are during the first drop larger than in the case of mUB=10 g. This can be seen especially in such situation where the rotor becomes to whirl (Figure 10). In the simulation. Fig. Also a vibration grows depending on mass of unbalance. This can be seen clearly in Figure 12 and 13. 9 Angular velocities of the sleeves. The other parameters remain same.25 all of the time when effects of unbalance are examined. 10 Angular velocity of the sleeve when the rotor goes into backward whirling motion. it is assumed that the friction coefficient between the rotor and the sleeves is the same all of the time during the simulation. because friction coefficient changes depending of rotor’s and sleeves’ temperatures and wearing.velocities of sleeves. but do not change it significantly. The value of the coefficient of friction is 0. Figures 11 and 12 present that the mass of unbalance affects the behavior of the rotor. 5. Fig.
After the drop down the contact forces are larger when mUB=10 g which is expected.kind of behavior is a phase angle of unbalance which affects the behavior of the rotor. 23 . 11 Responses of the rotor with various mass of unbalance. like Swanson et al. noted in their examination . Solid line indicates Y-axis and dash line X-axis. 12 Orbits of the rotor with various mass of unbalance. Fig. Fig.
13 Contact forces of the support with various mass of unbalance.Fig. The contact forces in the case of Ks=5·108 N/m are two times larger than in the case presented in Figure 7 and almost five times larger than in softer supported case. it is valid to define stiffness coefficient of 24 . The orbits of the rotor with various stiffness coefficients of support are presented in Figure 15. This leads to a problem that is presented in Figure 16. the stiffness of the support determinates the behavior of the rotor after the dropdown. Because the responses are directly dependent on the support’s stiffness and the contact forces on the responses. Thus. This is especially when the friction coefficient is smaller than the threshold friction. In this case. the responses stabilized quickly unlike in the case of harder supported rotor. like in this case (µ=0. 5. because the air gaps of the AMBs were 600 µm. This is absolutely the maximum acceptable value of the responses. Cs=5000 Ns/m). Figure 15 shows that displacements of the stiffer case are minimal compared to softer case. In Figure 14 can be seen that the largest response of the rotor in Y-direction with Ks=5·106 N/m comes immediately after the dropdown of the rotor and its value is near to 600 µm.3 Effects of Stiffness and Damping Coefficients of Support Figure 14 that presents the rotor’s responses with stiffness coefficient of support Ks=5·106 N/m and Ks=5·108 N/m displays clearly that stiffness of the support have a vital role when defining the response.25. This happened despite the fact that the value of relative damping was same in both cases.
14 Responses of the rotor with various stiffness coefficient of support. Solid line indicates Y-axis and dash line X-axis. Fig. 25 . Fig.support and like this way have an estimation how the system will behave after the emergency dropdown. 15 Orbits of the rotor with various stiffness coefficient of support.
Cs=2790 Ns/m. This means that vibrations and noises are also smaller in more damped case than in low damped case.Fig. the importance of damping coefficient with stiffness coefficient is significant. In the more damped case. Cs=27900 Ns/m. As can be seen in Figures 17 and 18. the contact forces stabilize faster in the more damped case than in the low damped case. 16 Contact forces of the support with various stiffness coefficients of support. Based on before mentioned. the large support’s damping coefficient leads to more stable chaotic response of the rotor after the dropdown. 26 . Correspondingly. the orbit of the rotor is smoother than the low damped case.
27 . Fig. 18 Orbits of the rotor with various damping coefficients of support. Solid line indicates Y-axis and dash line X-axis. 17 Responses of the rotor with various damping coefficients of support.Fig.
Particularly. The examination of AMB system implies that the multibody simulation approach is a capable procedure for the rotor-retainer bearing simulation. the bearing model and the contact models in the multibody approach are efficient and suitable for dropdown simulation. This is due to the inaccuracies in the friction model. The results of this paper are in good agreement with studies available in the literature.Fig. inaccurate friction 28 . it is possible that in practical experiments the rotor can experience whirling motion with lower threshold friction than in the simulations. two AMBs and two retainer ball bearing which included sleeves on the inner rings. the effects of retainer bearing parameters on system vibration were examined. 6 CONCLUSIONS In this study. The studied structure includes the rotor. From practically point of view. Using this model. The AMB system under investigation needs a high friction coefficient between rotor and sleeves in order cause full backward whirling motion of the rotor. dynamics of the AMB system during rotor dropdown in the failure incident was investigated using the multibody simulation approach. However. 19 Contact forces of the support with various damping coefficients of support. This is in agreement with previous examination of AMB .
29 . This research introduces important information for the design of the physical prototype of retainer bearings. In the studied system. On the other hand. unbalance. Particularly. It is important to note that preload of bearings makes behavior of the rotor during drop down situation more predictable and may prevent bearing damages. Unbalanced mass effected to the behavior of the rotor by slightly deteriorating vibration problem. the stiffness coefficient and the damping coefficient of the support play a vital role in behavior of rotor during and after the rotor’s dropdown. For this reason. The simulation results also shed a light on the magnitude of the contact forces during the dropdown of the rotor. the preload can make the orbit of the rotor more chaotic and consequently increase contact forces. in the dropdown situation. preload of retainer bearing was ignored since it typically increases the stiffness of bearings. The prototype of the studied structure is currently under examination and the results of this research will be verified experimentally in the near future. stiffness and damping coefficients. Thermal growing compensates the clearance in the bearing during the drop down. the contact forces between the rotor and the retainer bearings are dependent on the stiffness of the support. The most important results were the critical values for the friction. the rotors unbalance was within the limits of rotor’s production precision.model is due to the use a constant friction coefficient which did not account the increase of the friction coefficient resulting from thermal growing and wearing in sleeves . Multibody simulation proved to be an effective tool when studying the contact dynamics between the rotor and the retainer bearings. In this study.
  Cole.. Active Magnetic Bearings Basics. 2000. 1998. Zeng.REFERENCES  Ishii. M.” Proceedings of MAG’95... and Nordmann. R.. August.  Ecker. G. September. pp. T.  Raju. 118. ETH Zurich. Swiss Institute of Technology. and Kirk. K. Keogh. pp.   Orth. pp. ”The Dynamic Behavior of a Rolling Element Auxiliary Bearing Following Rotor Impact. V. 79-89.” Dynamics of Vibro-Impact Systems: Proceedings of the Euromech Colloquium: 15-18 September 1998. 154-163.. 124. 406-413. R. S. Ramesh. and Burrows. “Motion of AMB Rotor in Backup Bearings. United Kingdom. S.. Springer Verlag. 1996. 2002. August. S.” ASME Journal of Tribology. 1994. Alexandria. 1997. Bleuler. C.. Loughborough.... G. A. H. pp.. Zurich. pp. USA.. and Traxler.” Proceedings of 7th ISMB. P. Properties and Applications... Switzerland. 2002. ”Nonlinear Stability Analysis of a Single Mass Rotor Contacting a Rigid Backup Bearing. Erb. Zurich. Technomics Publishers Co..” ASME Journal of Vibration and Acoustics.  Fumagalli. 124. A. “Transient Response Technique Applied to Active Magnetic Bearing Machinery During Rotor Drop. R. vdf Hochschulverlag AG. Swanson. O. G. M. K. T.. M. Zurich. E. Modelling and Measurement Analysis of the Contact Interaction between a High Speed Rotor and its Stator. 460-464. H. “Simulation of AMB Turbomachinery for Transient Loading Conditions. 1995.” ASME Journal of Vibration and Acoustics. Doctoral Dissertation. pp. E. 33-38. R.. Schweitzer.. 30 .. “Investigations of the Behavior of a Magnetically Suspended Rotor during Contact with Retainer Bearings. R. 227-235. and Kirk.
” ASME Journal of Vibration and Acoustics.. and Mikkola. “Rotor Drop and Following Thermal Growth Simulation Using Detailed Auxiliary Bearing and Damper Models. 156-161... “AMB Rotor Drop Initial Transient on Ball and Solid Bearings.  Zeng.G. 1995.. and Noah. Kanazawa. 120. Technomics Publishers Co. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. J. J. 509-514. “Nonlinear Dynamics of a Magnetically Supported Rotor on Safety Auxiliary Bearings. Part I. pp.. Kirk. USA. 505-517. R. version 12.  Fumagalli.” Proceedings of MAG'95. 217.0.. and Schweitzer. 2001. S.. 1998.  Sopanen. R. Journal of systems & control engineering. pp. Alexandria. Mechanical Dynamics. 121. August. ”Evaluation of AMB Turbomachinery Auxiliary Bearings. E.. 334-359. M. pp.. pp. ”Dynamic Model of a Deep Groove Ball Bearing Including Localized and Distributed Defects. Japan. 2003.  Wang. Journal of Multi-Body Dynamics.. X.. and Wang. pp. 596-606. 1996. 2006. G. 31 . 289. 201-211. pp. "Motion of Rotor in Rigid Retainer Bearings. 217(K). G. Ann Arbor. USA." Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Magnetic Bearings.  Sun.  ADAMS Online Documentation. 2003. Part 1: Theory”. 207-216.” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. S.. 1999. A..  Kirk. G. E. August. pp.” ASME Journal of Vibration and Acoustics. Swanson. Inc.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. Michigan. “Modelling and Experimental Study of the Transient Response of an Active Magnetic Bearing Rotor during Rotor Drop on Back-Up Bearings.
New York. 2nd Edition. "Nonlinear Transient Modeling of Active Magnetic Bearing Rotors during Rotor Drop on Auxiliary Bearing. A. John Wiley & Sons. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part 2: Implementation and Results”. A.. 2nd Edition. and Allaire. Sopanen.. pp. New York. W. Technomics Publishers Co. A.. Shabana. 154-163. August.. A. 1998. Shabana. J.. 2003. A. 32 . Journal of Multi-Body Dynamics. Dynamics of Multibody Systems." Proceedings of MAG'97. P.. Alexandria.    Foiles. John Wiley & Sons. 217(K). USA. pp. and Mikkola. 2001. 1997. Computational Dynamics. C. ”Dynamic Model of a Deep Groove Ball Bearing Including Localized and Distributed Defects. 213-223. E.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.