THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS

345 E. 47th St, New York, N.Y. 10017 96-GT-365

The Society shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in papers or discussion at meetings of the Society or of its Divisions or
Sections, or printed in its publications. DIsruccion is printed only If the paper is published in an ASME Journal. Authorization to photocopy
material for internal or personal use under circumstance not falling within the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act is granted by ASME to
libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service provided that the base fee of
$0.30 per page is paid directly to the CCC, 27 Congress Street, Salem MA 01970. Requests for special permission or bulk reproduction should be ad-
dressed to the ASME Technical Publishing Department.

Copyright 0 1996 by ASME All Rights Reserved Printed in U.S.A.

ROTORDYNAMIC FORCES DUE TO TURBINE TIP LEAKAGE - PART II:

RADIUS SCALE EFFECTS AND EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION

Seung Jin Song Manual Martinez-Sanchez , 1111111111JY 11111111

partment of Aerospace Engineering Department of Aeronautics/Astronautics
Inha University MIT
Namgu, Inchon, Korea Cambridge, Massachusetts

ABSTRACT rotor thickness

This paper presents a radius scale turbine torque
actuator disc model which describes the flow dynamic head; mass Dow per
response to a whirling/spinning rotor in an unit circumference of turbine
unshrouded turbine. At each azimuth, the mean turbine radius; gas
upstream-downstream flow variables are constant; correlation
matched by the results from a steady blade scale coefficient; turbine reaction
analysis presented in a companion paper, with blade pitch
allowance for mass storage in the stator-rotor radial tip clearance; time
Pregion. The new model can accurately predict relative velocity
the magnitude of both direct and cross excitation direction of minimum gap in
forces as well as their breakdown into work the fixed coordinate system
extraction and pressure effects. The trends axial flow direction
versus the mean flow coefficient and inteiblade
distance are predicted. While underpredicted, a Greek Symbols
trend versus mean rotor tip clearance height is a pitch angle; absolute flow
also indicated. Thus, the new model captures the angle; eigenvalue for
dominant physical effects caused by a downstream perturbations
whirling/spinning rotor in an unshrouded turbine. 2F
ax direct excitation force
Nomenclature (Q14e1H b )
(Symbols common with Part I are omitted from coefficient
this list) 2F
av Cross
Magi DEFINITION (Q112)(ellib )
a constant between 0
excitation force coefficient
and 1 (Eq. 18)
AY imerblade area for azimuthal 0 upstream velocity potential
flow 0= c,J U turbine flow coefficient
absolute flow velocity; axial ratio of specific heats (7=1.12
blade chord for R 12); blade stagger
-

axial distance between the angle

stator trailing edge and the
rotor leading edge
magnitude of rotor offset
eigenvector for downstream
perturbations
F lateral force in the direction of
the offset
lateral force perpendicular
to the direction of the offset
complex amplitude of
flow perturbations
0 azimuthal angle measured in
the direction of rotation from
the minimum gap location
angular velocity of rotor
shaft rotation
angular velocity of rotor
shaft whirl
turbine stage loading factor,
or work coefficient

Presented at the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress & Exhibition
Birmingham, UK June 10-13, 1996
This paper has been accepted for publication in the Transactions of the ASME
Discussion of it will be accepted at ASME Headquarters until September 30, 1996
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
 analysis for a compressor by Horlodc and (1981).
Subscripts A radially averaged (2-0), inviscid,
0- near upstream of the actuator incompressible flow was assumed. The
disc in the radius scale connecting conditions at the disc were provided
analysis by the equations of continuity, momentum, and
0+ near downstream of an empirical correlation for turbine efficiency.
the actuator disc in the The flow redistribution was shown to increase the
radius scale analysis magnitude of the lateral forces above what would
1-9 Casing instrument be predicted on the basis of efficiency variation
stations at x/c=-3.56, - alone. However, the assumption of perfect flow
2.38, -2.08, -021, 0.06, guidance by the blades ignored the effects of the
0.029, 0.53, 1.42 and 2.84 tip gap flow , and, therefore, the predictions were
respectively unsatisfactory.
design value This paper presents a new radius-scale
indicates a force due to analysis which uses the results from the blade
action of nonuniform scale analysis as its coupling conditions. Thus,
pressures this model does not resort to empiricism in
vsd indicates a force due to accounting the bcaled effects (e.g. losses)
tangential variation of associated with the tip clearance flow. A
work extraction comparison of the model predictions with the
experimental data is also given.
Superscripts
non-axisymmetric 2. Analytical Model
perturbation As in the blade scale analysis, the stage
azimuthal is collapsed into an actuator disc (Figure 1). x is
mean, or axisymmetric the through-flow direction, y is the azimuthal
value direction, and z is the radial direction. The axial
A complex amplitude locations of stationsreferred to in the analysis
are as follows. The "actuator disc" consists of a
1. Introduction turbine stage collapsed into a plane at x=0. The
The problem of self-excited vibration in axial stations far upstream and far downstream of
rotor systems, or rotordynamic instability, has the actuator disc, on the radius scale, are
plagued development of various turbomachines. referred to as 03 and 03, respectively. The
The rotordynamic instability caused by stations near upstream and near downstream of
asymmetric tip clearance in turbines has been the actuator disc, on the radius scale, are
the focus of this investigation. The experimental referred to as 0- and 0+, respectively (Figure 4 in
results were presented in Martinez-Sanchez et the companion paper). Although the actuator
al. (1993) and an analytical model for the blade disc is assumed to have zero axial thickness on
scale effects of a finite rotor tip clearance is the radius scale, it actually consists of a full span
presented in a companion paper. stator row and a partial span rotor row as shown
In a turbine with an eccentric rotor, the in the figure.
efficiency is higher in the region with the smaller To model a turbine whirling at some
tip clearance, resulting in a higher local torque. amplitude, e, much smaller than the blade span,
Upon azimuthal integration, the torque Hb , a linear perturbation approximation is used.
asymmetry leads to a force perpendicular to the Thus, the flow variables are assumed to contain a
rotor eccentricity which feeds energy into the small perturbation about the mean, which in this
forward whirling mode (Figure 1 in the companion case is the centered turbine case. The solution
paper). The implicit assumption was that the flow procedure is based on previous efforts by Leung
remains perfectly uniform upstream of the (1991) and Yoo (1993).
eccentric turbine, as'well as downstream of it. In The assumptions of this model are
reality, the presence of an eccentric rotor would equivalent to those found in the blade scale
induce an azimuthal flow redistribution, causing a model, with the obvious exception of the
force variation even without the efficiency relaxation of the axisymmetric flow assumption to
variation. facilitate the analysis of a whirling turbine. Other
Oiu (1985) developed an actuator disc newly incorporated effects include the following:
analysis to examine the azimuthal distribution First, a non-axisymmetric, mass storage effect of
effect on the lateral forces in a turbine with a the axial gap between the stator and the rotor
whirling rotor. This was an adaptation of an was incorporated. Second, the non-

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 axisymmetric pressure pattern in the - rotor region where to is the complex amplitude of axial
was identified as another source of lateral
excitation forces and, therefore, was added to velocity perturbation as the flow approaches the
the analysis. disc. Therefore, at x<0-,
Figure 2 illustrates a turbine rotor, with a
mean radius R, simultaneously spinning at R+i(y/Rflt)1
angular frequency 0.) and executing a circular
cx (x, Y.)=Exo +Re[koexl j(5)
whirl of amplitude e at angular frequency Q. XY
is the inertial frame of reference, and X'Y' is the
01 R-11
whirling frame. Whirring in the direction of spin is cy ( z y,t) = Relik oex/R+ (6)
considered positive. The azimuthal location of
the maximum tip gap is flt+p radians from the
inertial X axis. y is the distance from the p(x.Y.1)= P(*)
maximum tip gap in the azimuthal direction
defined as y' y - R fit The flow is steady in a oex/R4-aYIR-121) }
RelPfrx0 inR)K
the whirling frame WY. However, in the inertial
(7)
frame,

From now on, the Re[] notation will be dropped for

a;
-DR
where the rotor's whirling motion introduces
unsteadiness. For small tip gaps (VR 1) with
an offset rotor, due to linear perturbation
approximation, the azimuthal distribution of the
rotor tip gap is given as
r = I+ RePe i(YIR-01 1
where Iis the mean rotor tip gap, and the fixed
frame distance y is from the X axis. Note that e
is real due to the choice of y origin.
2.1 Upstream Flow
At x= Op, the flow is uniform, steady,
and axial. Then, for x<O , the velocity vector can
-
be described as the gradient of a potential f which
obeys Laplace's equation.
(1) convenience.
2.2 Downstream Flow
For LA+, after the completion of radial
redistribution, the flow consists of two distinct
regions. The first region contains the main
passage flow which has traversed the Waded part
of the rotor (denoted by a () superscript) and the
second region contains the undenurned flow
(2) (denoted by a (+) superscript) due to the rotor tip
gap. This splitting of streams is described in
greater detail in the companion paper.
The equations of conservation of mass,
x-momentum, and y-momentum can be written for
each region, assuming radially averaged
properties in each. The mass conservation
equations can be written as
asA a(extd,) , d(4 a)
+ 0 (8)
a

c y )= VO ;V2=0 (3)

with periodic boundary conditions in y,

d(H A) + d(c;(11 A)) + d(cy (H A))

(-0, )= E10 being a given constant, and =o

downstream conditions which match the turbine at ax ay
flow. At x=0-, where the xy redistribution is likely (9)
to have occurred, the assumed axial velocity is
where H is annulus height and D is the thickness
of the undenumed layer. The momentum
equations can be written as

0.11 + +
cx (0 ,y,t) = Re[Exo + Koe

(4) + (E v)e + vp o (10)
at

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abou

 where all vectors are two-dimensional (x,y).
Assuming eccH, c:, c; , , c; , and (-+ .+ -p 5 -
c c, cx
xy c y K.E.i (14)
p can each be expressed as a mean value plus a p i=1
small perturbation, e.g.

where the complex constants ki's have to be

determined.
The perturbation part is assumed to be the first
harmonic of the whirling angle (y/R- fit) with an 2.3 The Upstream-Downstream
exponentially decaying amplitude, associated Coupling
with potential effects. For example, The blade scale analysis relates the flow
variables at x..0- to those at xn0+. xn0- and xn0+
are equivalent to far upstream and far
a'. Re[Ae ca+i(Y/R (12) downstream stations, respectively, on the blade
scale. Thus, the far upstream and far
After substitution of equations such as downstream values of flow variables determined
Eq. (12) into the Eqs. (8)-(10) and linearization of from the blade scale analysis are equivalent to
the resulting equations, a homogeneous set of the same flow variables at x.0- and x.04.,
equations for the eigenvalues a can be obtained. respectively, on the radius scale.
The blade scale analysis shows that the
as aIR 0 O A15 0 nondimensional flow variables depend on three
O 0 a(H-7) i(H -A)/RA, 0 parameters, VII, 0,and cy For
0 0 o 0 a
A31 example, noting that x.0+ is Station 4,
O A42 0 O 0 a n0

0 0 O 0 a + +
A53
O 0 0 A 0 YR ciA = t cy (0-. y))
64 (15)
U U H

where where a local flow coefficient is introduced as

--; cy 0 _ cx(OmY) (16)

A15 = A31 = A42 = ac z R - 0)

cv The value of t/H is the 'local value

A53 = A64 = acx +i(= 42) -
corresponding to the azimuthal location, y.
and Cy (0-,y)IU are functions of y to be
cv
A25 = -acx - - CI) determined from matching. Then the perturbation
quantities on the radius scale at x.0+ are related
Upon determination of eigenvalues, ai, to those on the blade scale at Station 4 as shown
and eigenvectors, E, the non-trivial below:
homogeneous solution to the system of
equations above can be written as

c
x4
+
c 4

&(O - ) d + ey(0-) a +( e) d ex4

U afr U d ry, H )d cy4
A
x= 0+ VP)
(1 7)

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abou

 where the partial derivatives are to be calculated
from the blade-scale analysis. Moreover.
E(o-)/u= iC o lU and
and the partial derivatives with respect to 5 0
are all zero, even though E 0 is not zero
Now, Eqs. (14) and (17) can be set equal
to each other. Then, the terms due to (BIN act
as forcing terms which determine the particular
complex amplitudes kis, Subsequently, the
six perturbation quantities at Station 4, or x-0+,
can be determined.
maximizing this effect. On the other hand, if d is
mostly covered by the (fixed) stator hub, then the
value of a would be closer to 0.
For a differential volume with the cross
sectional area Ay and unit depth in the y
direction (Figure 4), the continuity and the
momentum equations in the y direction can be
written as:
d d
[pd(H + af)l+
at
(19)

2.4 Formulation for Interblade Gap

[PO + al(52. 4. ey2r)j = q2s - q2r
Effect
This section presents an extension of
-a
di- [pd(H + ar s)(Ey2r + c; 2j]
the analysis to incorporate the effects of
interblade distance, d, on the lateral forces.
2
In the companion paper, where blade-
scale effects were analyzed, the perturbations in [Pc101+ att) (52r cyr 2r )
flow variables such as local mass flow rate and ay (20)
velocity at the rotor inlet (2r) were assumed to be
equivalent to those at the stator exit (2s). q2r(Ey2r cyt 2r) . 4242s +
However, in an eccentric turbine, the azimuthal
flow area, A y (Figure 3), varies azimuthally. The
J(H + atr) 2r = 0
strongly swirling flow in the axial gap can aY
accommodate this change in the flow area by
either changes in the tangential velocity, c, or where qt, is the mass flux per unit depth into the
local imbalances between the boal flow rates control volume from the stator and q2, is the
entering from the stator (2s) and exiting to the
mass flux out of the control volume to the rotor.
rotor (20. 11 the latter dominates, the azimuthal Linearizing and expressing each variable as
pressure non-uniformity required for such an y = A ) ei(y/R-ni)
imbalance generates a cross force. This effect is , the two equations above
similar to that suggested by Millsaps (1992) for become
whirling labyrinth seals. Consequently, the
perturbations at the rotor inlet are different from i
those at the stator exit in magnitude and phase.
R Pda kyr
c2 nR )e R Pdlicy2 r = q2 s r
As the tip gap increases from I to
(21)
i+e, Ay is also increased. Thus,

A' = add' (18) i - OR i pdH

42R ja y2r i2
R y2. pdH y2s

where d is the inter-blade distance between the

stator and the rotor, and a is a constant whose i A (22)
value ranges from 0 to 1 because only parts of Rp
the rotor and stator hubs are involved. The exact
value of a would depend the stator hub geometry
downstream of the stator trailing edge and the
Here 4,
= pHex, - is related to the axial velocity
perturbation at x=0-on the radius scale. We
rotor hub geometry upstream of the rotor leading
have written p2 for p2, since we assume
edge. If most of the axial gap d is taken up by the
rotor hub, the value of a would be closer to 1, = /52y , both varying with y. Note also that,
if the star trailing edge angle is a2 , we have
ey2y = ex tan a2 . Thus, Eqs. (21) and (22)
,

1 po in the last equation in Eq. (19) is time relate ear , &I , 42,, and /32 to gap variations,
dependent and is given by Eq. (8).

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abou

 . An additional equation can be obtained as = 1+ tan 2 a2 iW
follows: From Eqs. (5) and (7), the total pressure
perturbations upstream of the stator we related
to those of the axial flow by
1.2 = . R a2 41)

DR
(23)

and across the (quasi-steady, ideal) stator, Notice that in the limit d/R ) O.
= Pn. i.e., 1/2, /47 and
exlies0
E tana = For finite stator-
y2r11 2 y2s
LOAE + +E o = a- +
x2sz1 y2s y2s rotor axial gap, d, this formulation introduces
P differences between stator exit and rotor inlet
2 1 velocity components.
exO( 1 4- tan c t 2 )e xl
2.5 Calculation of Rotordynamic
Or Coefficients
The excitation force coefficients can be
obtained from the perturbation quantities.
112 = 2 . nR - Defining the tangential force exerted on the
cs0 1+ tall - cx1 (24)
co turbine per azimuthal length, fy , as the sum of
x )
forces by the underturned flow and the bladed
Using Eqs. (21), (22) and (24), the flow quantities flow,
can be solved for in terms of el H and one of the
unknowns. Since 42
, = pHe2 , connects 1y = 42r (52r c'y+3) +0
directly with the x-z analysis of a centered rotor,
(28)
q2 , is chosen as this remaining parameter. The
results are: Then the azimuthal mean and the perturbation of
fy are , respectively
+ f Olaf2 ! +
=
H
(25) 1Y 42r( ry2r c3) + 0- 472r(52.
d 2 (29)
x 1 i()W + ( 7? ) fi

1; = 42r(F y2 r 51-3)
fr2 xl
A- (26)
cy' 22. c;+3 (30)
/x43 exo

[ f q2r cy2. 5+3 i

tan a2 E
_ xl (27) +0 IT)(72r (5y2r c3)
EsO 1 +12 Ex0
A' + 9121: + c ; 2r c r
y3
where
[
1 a q2r ey2r E. -3
y

The perturbation in fy contains the combined

effects of flow redistribution on the radius scale
and non-uniform flow turning, both of which are
caused by an eccentric rotor. Both Thomas
(1958) and Alford (1965) assumed that the former

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 did not occur and considered only the latter in
their formulation. Thus, from the fluid mechanics
perspective, the expression above provides a
more complete solution to the problem of non-
uniform tangential force in an eccentric turbine.
As in the experimental data section, these lateral
forces, caused by the tangential force variation,
are denoted by ( ) wd subscript (for 'work defect).
Another contribution to flow forces is the
direct effect on the turbine hub. of the non-
axisymmetric pressure which causes the
tangential flow redistribution. Note that the
redistribution leading to these variations is on a
scale much larger than blade length, and, hence,
p' is nearly the same at the hub as at the casing.
Here, the pressure acting on the rotor hub is
approximated as the average of pressures at
stations 2r and 3 on the blade scale (inlet and exit
of the rotor), (p).
/ + P3 (P2 P3)
p2
2 2
(31)
1 /2-[(c tan 2 y
P2 x3 P3 l c 2r lc
22
The perturbation in (p) is
(P) = 2
2-
(32)
[tan 2 /3 3eacxr3 ( ey2r O cly2r]
where p; is given by Eq. (24). Upon projection of
the pressure forces on the X, Y axes (Fig. 2), the
total excitation force coefficients, or the
rotordynamic coefficients, are
it(13)
(a + ia (33)
k "Mal
Eq. (33) summarizes the results of the theory,
and its linear nature makes it straightforward in
application. Parametric variations and specific
comparisons to experimental data (including the
net forces and flow perturbations) will be
presented in the next section.
3. Model Predictions
This part presents predictions from the
model. First, the predicted values for a baseline
case are discussed. Second, the sensitivity of
the model's predicted excitation force
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
coefficients, a x and a1 . to various parameters
is examined for the steady condition of a
statically offset rotor. The parameters can be
categorized into those of the turbine design, the
turbine operating conditions, and the turbine
geometry.- Third, the -influence of the unsteady
.whirling effects (ow
* 0) on the predicted
coefficients is examined. Finally, predictions
from the current model are compared with the
experimental data from Martinez-Sanchez et al.
(1993).
The turbine design parameters include
the design flow coefficient, OD: the design
reaction, RD , and the design work coefficient,
VD . The turbine operating parameters include
the mean flow coefficient, tp, and the mean work
coefficient, IV. The turbine geometry
parameters are the interblade distance, dIR,
and the mean rotor tip gap, IIH. Due to the
linear nature of the model, the predicted
excitation force coefficients are proportional to
the whirling eccentricity of the rotor, e, and,
therefore, this dependence is not otherwise
examined.
The baseline set of parameter values
are close to one of the configurations tested in
the MIT Afford Force Test Facility (AFTF)
(Martinez-Sanchez et al, 1993). When the
turbine design parameters are varied, the mean
turbine operating parameters are assumed to be
at the design value. Thus, off-design effects are
examined only for the selected baseline turbine.
For the sensitivity analysis, one parameter is
varied while the remaining parameters are held
constant at their baseline values.
Parameter Value
00 0.580
RD 0.208
1.508
lifo
0.580
-i)
I71 1.508
MN 0.000
dIR 0.050
FIR 0.020
sic 0.547
i -26'
Table 1: The turbine parameter values se acted
for the baseline case calculation.
 The excitation force coefficients, ar
and ay ,are computed from Eq. (33). They are
split here between the work defect contributions
(a vid) and nonuniform pressure contributions
Ca p).
For the baseline case, the predicted
excitation force coefficients are as shown in
Table 2. The cross force is positive, and,
therefore, destabilizing to forward whirl. The
direct . force is negative, and, therefore,
stabilizing. Also, the magnitudes of the direct
and cross forces are comparable.
Direction a rid aP ato&
X -0.9 -1.8 -2.7
Y +1.8 +1.4 +3.2
Table 2: Predicted excitation force coeffic'ents
due to non-axisymmetric tangential force and
non-axisymmetric pressure for the baseline
case. The entries are a a aa
yid '
etc
,
1 rotor inlet introduces more tangential momentum
For both direct and cross forces, a w and al,
have the same sign and, thus, add to each other.
Moreover, roughly 70% of the direct force and
40% of the cross force are due to the pressure
non-axisymmetry with the remainder coming from
the tangential force variation. The tangential
force perturbation is plotted versus azimuthal
angle 8, measured from the minimum gap, in
Figure 4.
The forces due to the pressure non-
uniformity in Table 2 result from a perturbation in
the rotor inlet axial velocity, which, in turn, is a
result of azimuthal flow redistribution caused by
the rotor offset. This redistribution actually
begins far upstream of the stator row, and,
without it, the pressure forces would vanish.
/ 2 /
(p) pU kern) and 01(e1H) we plotted
vs. e in Figures.
The cross force due to non-uniform
pressure pattern results from an interaction
between the non-uniform rotor tip gap distribution
and the stator blade row. As the upstream flow
senses the rotor eccentricity, the flow
preferentially migrates toward the maximum gap
region. Thus, locally, the axial velocity increases -
while that near the minimum gap region
decreases. This preferential migration by itself
would result in a pressure distribution with a
minimum at e =180. However, since the
stator introduces swirl into ' the flow,
Cyz, r= C21 tart a2 , increased axial velocity
means more tangential momentum entering the
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
inter-blade region (Figure 3) near the maximum
gap. Per unit depth in y, the tangential
momentum equation for the flow through the rotor
can be vMtten as
q3(c x tan a 3 ) q2Acx2r tan a2)
ap
-4Hb 4- 1)
(34)
-frotor
flit assumed, for now, that the perturbations in
q3 (C, tan a3 ) and f, are small compared to
that in q27 (c 2, tan a2 ), Eq. (34) can be
approximated as
al (35)
(q2rc22r tan a2) = L (Hb + 1 )
dY
Essentially, the axial velocity perturbation at the
to the maximum gap region than to the minimum
gap region. This non-axisymmetric tangential
momentum influx is accommodated (in part) by a
non-axisymmetric pressure, with its minimum at
0= 90*, generating the destabilizing cross
force. Thus, the competing effects of the
preferential flow migration towards the maximum
gap and the asymmetric tangential momentum
influx at the rotor result in a pressure asymmetry
with its minimum around 13 =150.
The sensitivity of the model's
predictions to various parameters under steady
conditions is discussed next. To examine the
effects of OD , the absolute velocity at the rotor
exit is assumed to be axial, which is often the
case for single stage turbines or the last stage of
multi-stage turbines. The axial exit flow condition
is also a good approximation for the MIT turbine
which has a design absolute rotor exit flow angle
of -X. For a fixed value of RD, an increasing
OD reduces flow turning in both stator and rotor.
Figure 6 illustrates the excitation force
coefficients versus the design flow coefficient,
. The solid lines are the total excitation force
coefficients (a &a ) and the dotted
lines are the parts due to pressure (a, ,, & arip ):
All of the coefficients decrease in magnitude as
OD increases. Moreover, the differences
between the total and pressure coefficients, or
the effects of tangential force variation
( ax.s &ar., ), also decrease as OD increases.
Such sensitivity of cross forces to the incoming
 swirl has been well documented, experimentally
and theoretically, for labyrinth seals (Mil[saps,
1992). Thus, even though the mechanisms are
different, the overall trend of decreasing cross
forces with decreasing swirl coming into the rotor
is similar in both turbines and labyrinth seals.
Figure 7 shows the effects of off-design
operation (i.e. fixed geometry with varying
operating point) on the excitation force
coefficients. Their magnitudes also decrease
with increasing mean flow coefficient, 0, except
for ax, which is practically insensitive to 0 .
The turbine operating point can be
alternatively represented by the mean . work
coefficient, 8/, given by
= fy init/ (36)
The dependence of the excitation force
coefficients on 8/ is shown in Figure 8.
Figure 9 shows the influence of the
distance between the stator and rotor blades ,
d/R, on the excitation force coefficients. For
these calculations, the value of a in Eq. (18) is
assumed to be 1. Therefore, Figure 9 shows the
maximum sensitivity of excitation coefficients to
the iMerblade distance, d/R. Figure 9 shows that
this azimuthal flow redistribution within the
interblade gap, d, increases the lateral forces
due to tangential force variation; it also rotates
the lateral forces due to non-axisymmetric
pressure, decreasing the direct force while
increasing the cross force. 2
The predicted influence of the mean
height of the rotor tip gap, 1111, on the
excitation force coefficients is illustrated in
Figure 10. AU of the coefficients decrease as
TIN is increased; however, the direct force
coefficients are more sensitive to FIR than the
cross force coefficients, and, as will be shown,
both trends are weaker than those seen in the
data.
Figure 11 shows the calculated effects
of unsteady whirring motion on the total excitation
force coefficients. The f2RIU range of -1.0 to
1.0 spans the frequency ratios from backward
synchronous whirl to the forward synchronous
whirl. The restoring nature of the direct force and
2 This "mass storage" effect was originally
described by Millsaps (1992) in relation to the
lateral forces which arise due to whirling motion
of labyrinth seals.
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab
forward whirling nature of the cross force are not
affected by the whirling motion. The slopes of the
curves of ax , ay can be interpreted as damping
coefficients. In particular, the negative slope of
ay indicates positive damping of the forward
whirling forces
Figure 12 shows graphs of excitation
force coefficients due to the pressure ( a 's) and
work extraction variations ( ad 's) vs. OR/U.
Again, the restoring nature of direct forces and
the forward whirling nature of the cross forces
remain unaltered. The la I shows an inertia-
like parabolic dependence on OR/U. laxd
increases throughout most of the frequency
range.
lar,I decreases almost linearly
throughout the frequency range, vanishing near
the forward synchronous whirl frequency. lax, '
is insensitive to backward whirl and increases
with whirl frequency. The tangential momentum
balance, which was used to explain the cross
force due to non-axisymmetric pressure in a
turbine with a statically offset rotor (Eqs. 34-35),
can again be invoked here. In the frame X'Y'
whirling with the rotor, Eq. (35) becomes
(q2re12r Lan a2 q2rnR)
(37)
=4 1/ +i
b
42'
With increasing OR, C12r tan a2 OR
decreases almost linearly. Consequently, the
azimuthal pressure gradient dpi dy is reduced,
and layd is decreased. Thus, the damping
effect is seen to be due to the kinematics of the
rotor whirling motion.
The slope of cross excitation force
coefficient is an indication of direct damping,
which along with cross stiffness, determines the
stability of the rotor system. Figures 11 and 12
make clear that the damping effect is provided
primarily by the pressure force. The work
extraction forces actually show negative
damping for MN less than +0.3, but the cross
force due to workextraction variation remains a
destabilizing force for forward whirl.
 4. Comparison of Model Predictions and Experimental Data

Author i ar (model) a r,, 0.0 ;MAL (Nwanva)

Afford - +1.0-+1.5 +1.9 +3.5
(range recommended) _
Experimental +2.5 +1.9 +3.5
drild(111)
Traupel +0.8-+0.9 +1.9 +3.5
Farokhi +1.0 +1.9 +3.5
Dunham 8 Came +1.7 +1.9 +3.5

Table 3: Comparison of cross force predictions from existing correlations and the data from Configuration 4
[Ref. 131 at IP =0.58.
mechanism was assumed to our 180 ' out of
This section presents a comparison of phase with the clearance distribution. Thus, zero
the experimental data and the analytical direct force was predicted.
predictions. First, the experimental data are
compared against predictions from the pre- Author aX (roxkl) aIcs (meanue ) aXmrAdaseanwed
existing models. Then, the newly predicted and
measured magnitudes and the composition of
forces are compared. h is to be noted that no Afford 0.0 - 0.6 - 3.4
data exist for dynamic (whirling) conditions. In Traupel 0.0 - 0.6 - 3.4
view of the significant predicted damping, this Farokhi 0.0 - 0.6 - 3.4
should be a priority for further testing. Dunham 8 0.0 - 0.6 - 3.4
The experimental data are compared Came _
against predictions from a few widely used
correlations and models for efficiency loss due to
Table 4: Comparison of direct force predictions
clearance effects, which were available before
the development of the current model. The from existing correlations and the data from
implied assumption is that the work loss and the Configuration 4 (Song, 1995) at = 0.58.
efficiency loss are equal. This is not accurate
because, as shown by the new model, the Next, the same experimental data are
pressure drop (a factor in the efficiency compared to the predictions from the new model.
definition)is also strongly affected by clearance Table 5 shows a comparison of the predictions
changes. The correlations of Alford (1965), and the dynamometer measurements. a tow
Traupel (1958), Farokhi (1988), and Dunham 8 represents the sum of the pressure and blade
Came 3 (1970) were selected. The equations for force contributions.
the correlations are listed in Song [13]. Table 3
presents a comparison of the cross excitation
Direction ,(model) total (measured)
force coefficient. While the prediction of Dunham
and Came's correlation is better than others, it X - 2.7 - 3.4
misses the pressure contribution, and because +3.2 +3.5
of this, the experimental value is still twice the
predicted value. Thus, Table 3 shows the poor Table 5: Comparison of the predicted and the
state of existing predictive capability. measured total excitation force coefficients from
Table 4 shows the comparison of direct
forces. The azimuthal redistribution of flow due Configuration 4 (Song, 1995) at = 0.58.
to a rotor offset was previously neither
recognized nor modeled, and the work defect While the model still underpredicts excitation
coefficients, the predictions of both cross and
direct excitation force coefficients are within 20%
3 This correlation is an adaptation of the of the measured values
correlation originally developed by Ainley au The new model 's prediction of the total
Mathieson (1951) As noted by Demon (1993) force in each direction consists of those due to
this correlation has been widely used by the non-axisymmetric pressure and work extraction.
engine manufacturers.

10

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 To verify each effect's relative contribution, the
model predictions are compared to the data from
the pressure taps and the multi-hole
probes(Martinez-Sanchez et al, 1993). Table- 6
lists the excitation coefficients from the
aerodynamic measurements and the model
predictions. Though still underpredicted, the
contributions of different effects are well
captured. Tables 5 and 6 show that the current
modePs cross force prediction is more accurate
than the direct force prediction in both the total
magnitude and the separation of effects. The
theoretical pressure force excitation coefficient
is determined from the average of pressures at
the rotor inlet and exit. The experimental
pressure force excitation coefficient is
determined from only the - rotor inlet pressure due
to lack of rotor exit pressure data. Figure 14
shows the predicted and measured pressure
perturbations at the rotor inlet.
Figures 13 and 14 display, respectively,
the graphs of predicted and measured
perturbations in tangential force and rotor inlet
pressure vs. azimuthal angle for the baseline
case. The agreement between theory and
experiment is good in both cases. The
magntudes of the perturbations, which are
determined by the prescribed eccentricity, are
accurately predicted. More importantly, the
phases of the perturbations are also well
predicted. The phases are important for the
following reasons: first, the component of
tangential force perturbation 90' out of phase
with eccentricity contributes one third of the total
direct force; second, the pressure perturbation
component 90' out of phase with eccentricity
contributes about 40% of the cross force.
Overall, the model captures the dominant
physical effects in flows through a turbine with an
eccentric rotor.
Table 5: Comparison of the predicted and the
measured total excitation force coefficients from
Configuration 4 (Song, 1995) atto
i = 0.58.
-1.8 -0.9
+1.4 +1.8
Table 6: Comparison of the predicted and the measured rotordynamic coefficients (from the aerodynamic
data) from Configuration 4 (Song, 1995) at 0 =
Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
Figure 15 shows a comparison of the
variation of the measured and predicted total
excitation force coefficients, a gowis, with the
mean flow coefficient, 0. Qualitatively, the
model predicts the correct trends of direct and
cross force coefficients versus 0. However,
the predicted a y is more sensitive to 0 than
the actual data. This is probably because, in real
machines, increased losses occur at the off-
design points. Thus, the actual torque extracted
by the machine is less than the ideal value
assumed in the model. Since the forces are
normalized by the actual torque, the measured
data are likely to be larger in magnitude than the
- predicted ones. Therefore, this discrepancy is
worse at 0 = 0.83 where the off-design effects
are likely the largest.
Figure 16 shows the predicted and
measured dependence of the awkil 's on the
interblade distance, 61112. Though the
sensitivity is weak, the prediction and the
measured data show similar trends. The
predicted results show the maximum possible
sensitivity to dIR, and the actual sensitivity is
likely to be weaker. Urlichs (1983) also found a
similar trend, though with higher sensitivity.
Figure 17 shows plots of the measured
and predicted awds versus the mean rotor tip
clearance, IIH. The model predicts the correct
trend of decreasing magnitude of aw.I 's with
increasing TM; however, the predicted
sensitivity is much weaker than that of the actual
data. One reason is the linearized nature of the
model which neglects the nonlinear effects. The
physically more important reasons are most likely
due to the unmodeled effects of viscosity and
endwall motion which affect the tip clearance
flow, especially in turbines, where the inviscid
gap flow concepts used in the theory may be
invalid ((Chen (1991)), Heyes and Hodson,
(1992), Graham (1985), Yaras and Sjolander
(1992)).
awd data at data
-2.7 -0.6 -3.2
+3.2 +1.6 +1.9 +3.5
0.58.
11
 5. Conclusions Chen, G.T., 'Vortical Structures in
The comparison of predictions and Turbomachinery Tip Clearance Flows",
experimental data shows that the new model can Ph.D. Thesis, Department of
accurately predict both direct and cross Aeronautics and Astronautics, M.I.T.,
excitation force coefficients as well as their 1991.
breakdown into work extraction and pressure
effects. Also, the trends versus mean flow Denton, J.D., 'Loss Mechanisms in
coefficient and interblade distance are predicted. Turbomachinee, Transactions of the
However, the model underpredicts the effects of ASME, Journal of Turbomachinerv Vol.
the mean rotor tip clearance height. 115, October 1993, pp. 621-656.

Thus, the main conclusions from this Dunham, J., and.- Came,. P.M.,
investigations include the following: 'Improvements to the Ainley-Mathieson
Method of Turbine Performance
1)An actuator disc based approach can Prediction', ASME Paper 70 GT 2, - -

predict the radius scale flow response to an 1970.

eccentric turbine rotor.
2)In addition to the Thomas-Afford Farokhi, S., 'Analysis of Rotor Tp
mechanism, a significant contribution to the Clearance Loss in Axial-Flow Turbines',
cross forces comes AIAA Journal of Pronulgion, Vol. 4, No.
from a non-uniform pressure pattern 5, Sept.-Oct. 1988, pp. 452-457.
which develops over the rotor. Graham, J.A.H., 'Investigation of a Top
3)This pressure pattern is responsible Clearance Cascade in a Water Analogy
for almost all of the restoring force which is much Rig', ASME Paper No. 85-IGT-65, 1985.
larger in
magnitude than previously expected. Hayes, F.J.G., and Hodson, H.P., 'The
4)This pressure pattern extends over Measurement and Prediction of the Tip
axial lengths on the order of the turbine radius, Clearance Flow in Linear Turbine
which Cascades', ASME Paper No. 92-GT-
indicates that this effect is due to 214, 1992.
tangential flow redistribution caused by the rotor
offset. Horlock, J.H., and Greitzer, E.M., "Non-
5)Both the direct and cross force Uniform Flows in Axial Compressors due
coefficients increase- as the flow coefficient is to Tip Clearance VariationP. Proc. Inst.
decreased. Mech. Engrs., Vpl. 197C.
6)The excitation forces increase with
separation between stator and rotor. Leung, E.K.Y., 'SD Turbine Tip
7)The theory predicts significant Clearance Flow Redistribution due to
damping effects. Pb experimental data on this Gap Variation', S.M. Thesis,
effect exist. Department of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, M.I.T., 1991.
6. Acknowledgements
Martinez-Sanchez, M. Jaroux, B.,
This work was performed under NASA Song., S.J. and Yoo, S., 'Measurement
Grant NAS 8-35018. Glenn E. Wilmer, Jr. is the of Turbine Blade-Tip Rotordynamic
Technical Monitor. Excitation Forces; ASME Paper No.
93-GT-125, 1993.
7. Bibliography
Ainley, D.C., and Mathieson, G.C.R., 'A Millsaps, K.T., "The Impact of Unsteady
Method of Performance Estimation for Swirling Flow in a Single Gland Labyrinth
Axial Flow Turbines', British ARC, R & M Seal on Rotordynamic Stability: Theory
2974, 1951. and Experiment', Ph.D. Thesis,
Department of Aeronautics and
Alford, J.S., 'Protecting Astronautics, M.I.T., 1992.
Turbomachinery from Self-Excited Rotor
Whirr.1211MaLatinairsefinsit2L-B25121. Qiu, Y.J., "An Investigation of
October 1965, pp. 333-344. Destabilizing Blade Tip Forces for

12

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 MilIsaps, K.T., 'The Impact of Unsteady
Swirling Flow in a Single Gland Labyrinth
Seal on Rotordynamic Stability: Theory
and Experiment', Ph.D. Thesis,
Department of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, M.I.T., 1992.

Qiu, Y.J., 'An Investigation of

Destabilizing Blade Tp Forces for
Shrouded and Unshrouded Turbines',
S.M. Thesis, Department of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, M.I.T.,
1985.

Song, S. J., 'An Investigation of Tp

Clearance Fbw Excitation Forces in a
Single-Stage Unshrouded Turbine',
Sc.D. Thesis, Department of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, M.I.T.,
1995.

Traupel, W., Therm ische Figure 1: A radius scale view of the actuator disc
lushomakckumen. Vol. 1, Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, 1958. (Yoo, 1993)

Urlichs, K., Turch Spaltstromungen

hervorgerufene Querkrafte an den
Laufem Thermischer Turbomaschinen
(Clearance Flow-Generated Transverse
Forces at the Rotors of Thermal Y (fixed)
Turbomachines)', NASA TM-77292,
1983.

Variationfltfachints. Vol.
197c, 1983, pp. 173-178.

Yaras, M.I., and Sjolander, S.A.,

'Effects of Simulated Rotation on Tp
Leakage in a Planar Cascade of Turbine
Blades: Part I-Tip Gap Flow',
Transactions of the ASME Journal of
Thitmiachtra, Vol. 114, July 1992,
pp. 652-659.

Yoo, S., 'Modeling of Alford Force and

Tp Clearance Fbw for Turbine Blades',
S.M. Thesis, Department of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, M.I.T., 1993.

figure 2: Coordinate system used in the unsteady

actuator disc analysis (Yoo, 1993)

13

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 6

f; A

thU(e/M2

-6
Figure 3: Tangential cross-sectional flow area. Ay. 0 90 180 270 360

between the stator and the rotor. Figure 4: Predicted nondimensional tangential force
perturbation vs. azimuthal angle (maximum gap at 180).

6
. - , i1 .. 6
c ./u(a1H) .
4
.
. I -
. - - (11,)/oui(eni) 4 :
.
I
2 . i . -" "
2 . I Cirtotal)
Ir. ...', .. ... ! ...
.... .. ..7 ....;I
0 ...
, .. . . . . .. .
.- I ......... I ........................ 1 . c.11.12)....:
-- . . 0
i I
I I
.. ......... I ..
- .... t.--
2 I
.
-"..-. .--.

2
. .. 1 aXacaD:
I 1. I .
i -4

. I1 I1 I I :
6
-6
0 90 180 270 360
04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Figure 5: Predicted perturbations in the upstream SD
axial velocity (station 1 on the blade scale) and Figure 6: Predicted total and pressure excitation
the rotor region pressure (average of inlet and exit)
vs. azimthal angle (maximum gap at 180). force coefficients vs. design flow coefficient

6 6

4 4

2 2
. .
I
... .......... ..
... *: ...
. 1 I
0 1
a lto ) ; i: i sY(p)
X(p) -
-2 . I lux(r4
i
%ran:
4 4


, . .
I I
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Os 0.5 2 23 3 33
0.4
13

Figure 7: Predicted total and pressure excitation Predicted total and pressure excitation
Figure 8:
force coefficients vs. mean flow coefficient force coefficients vs. mean work coefficient

14

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abou

 6 i 6
1 aY(tool) .
-
I i
4 I I aY(toca1)
4
1 ago
.. ..... ...... .

2 .,......- .. .
.
,

,
2. . ...... _
! I
..... -- t
ir
,
-

0 0 ; aY(14
- .... t .. I 1 aX(p)
-2 : .... .........-- .
.....
. ag 1
- 4
1
I I anon!)
,
' .
4 1 I
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
dat
VET
Figure 9: Predicted total and pressure excitation Figure 10: Predicted total and pressure excitation
force coefficients vs. interblade distance. force coefficients vs. mean radial tip gap.

6 6

4 4
' aNIP)
czY(toor) ..... .......
...
2 2

aY(wd)
0

2 -2
: ago
4
ax()
;
4 -6
-OS 0 0.5 -03 0 0.5 1
MVO fllt/U
Figure 11: Predicted total excitation force Figure 12: Predicted pressure and tangential excitation
coefficients vs. whirling frequency. force coefficients vs. whirling frequency.
Tkeay 7bemy
Expeiwaau Experiment
P:
PU2
0.04 0.04

0.02 0.02

0

-OM

-0.04 -0.04

-0.06 .0.06
0 90 180 270 360 0 90 180 210 360
Figure 13: Measured and predicted tangential force Figure 14: Measured and predicted rotor inlet
perturbation vs. azimuthal angle for pressure perturbation vs. azimuthal angle for
Configuration 4 at if) = 0.58 & embso.oi (maximum gap at 1801. Configuration 4 at 4,) = 0.58 &
(maximum gap at 180).

15

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab

 n un & Entfif
ax accal)
ay() n omy & &palm=

6 .

4

1
2
1
0

-2
1.
.:
I
P I
4. 1
. .
4
0.4 0.7
OS 0.8 03
0.6 .
ti
Figure 15: Measured and predicted total force excitation coefficients vs. mean flow coefficient for
Configuration 4.

& Experiment
aX(total) neer/
ty(toad) them & Experiment

I
4
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 - 0.1
Wa
Figure 16: Measured and predicted total force excitation coefficients vs. interblade distance
(Configurations 1 & 2 at = 0.58).
aX(extd) Thttry & Experiment
chtr(mul) Theory at Exeeriman

4
i 1

2 i
. I
0
.
i
I I
. 1 .

2
.
.
. 1
.

I I
1
I '

4
0 0.01 O. 0.03 0.04 0.05
ifit
Figure 17: Measured and predicted total force excitation coefficients vs. mean radial tip gap
(Configurations 2 & 4 at ot) = 0.58).

16

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/82210/ on 02/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/ab