179

A new practical modal method for rotor balancing

Bingang Xu* and Liangsheng Qu

Research Institute of Diagnostics and Cybernetics, School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University,
People’s Republic of China

Abstract: A new practical modal balancing technique, which uses the modal ratio among mea-
surement points (MRMP coeYcient), has been developed. This new method is an improvement upon
traditional modal balancing when the rotor to be balanced operates at the speed between the ®rst and
second critical speeds. The concept of the MRMP coeYcient is introduced for the ®rst time in this
paper, on the basis of which the rotor±bearing system can be balanced at any one rotational speed
between the ®rst and second critical speeds by decomposing the modal components of unbalance and
response simultaneously. Moreover, only one test run is required in three of the four balancing
schemes provided in this paper to balance the rotor. In the new method, the test weights need not be
orthogonal, so prior modal function knowledge is not necessary for calculation of the test weights, as
required in the traditional modal balancing method. To verify the validity of the new technique, a
balancing experiment using a rotating cantilever rotor is carried out. The results show that the new
method can be applied eVectively in ®eld balancing.

Keywords: rotor, balancing, modal analysis

NOTATION R…s; t† complex shaft de¯ection

R…sAf †; R…sBf † ®rst modal components of responses
a…s† distribution of initial shaft unbalances R…sAc †; R…sBc † second modal components of responses
An …«† nth dynamic ampli®cation coeYcient s location of the horizontal axis of the
B number of isotropic bearings rotor
cn coeYcient of the nth modal component t time
of initial unbalances TC ; TD test weights
dn coeYcient of the nth modal component TCf ; TDf ®rst modal components of test weights
of correction masses TCc ; TDc second modal components of test weights
EC ; ED initial unbalances in the experiment u…s† distribution of total unbalances on the
En nth modal component of unbalances shaft
E 0n nth modal component of initial UC ; U D correction weights
unbalances wn nth shaft natural frequency
EI…s† ¯exural rigidity x…s; t† shaft de¯ection along the x axis
kn nth generalized stiVness y…s; t† shaft de¯ection along the y axis
Kb bth bearing stiVness
l length of the shaft
k adding angle of weights
m…s† mass per unit length ®i;j
n
modal ratio among measurement points
mk correction mass on the kth balancing ¯ delta function
plane ¶n nth modal frequency ratio
Nn nth generalized mass ¹n nth modal damping coeYcient
P number of balancing planes ¿n …s† nth characteristic modal function
PC ; PD correction weights in the experiment ’n …«† nth modal lagging phase angle
r adding radius of weights « rotational speed
rn nth modal component of shaft de¯ections

The MS was received on 25 November 1999 and was accepted after 1 INTRODUCTION
revision for publication on 15 March 2000.
* Corresponding author: Research Institute of Diagnostics and
Cybernetics, School of Mechanical Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong Balancing of ¯exible rotors is an important technique
University, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710049, PR China. in modern mechanical industry. In recent decades it
C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C
180
has been studied thoroughly, and various balancing
techniques have been developed. In general, all these
balancing methods can be classi®ed into two categories:
modal balancing [1, 2] and in¯uence coeYcient balan-
cing [3, 4].
The in¯uence coeYcient method requires no more
assumption other than the linearity of the rotor system
and the measuring system, which makes it well suited to
®eld balancing. In this balancing method, correction
weights are calculated by applying the least-squares
method or weighted least-squares method to solve the
overdetermined linear equation system. Moreover, its
performance can be easily computerized by using both
rotor vibration and test weight information. One dis-
advantage of the in¯uence coeYcient method, however,
is the large number of test runs necessary.
Compared with the in¯uence coeYcient method,
modal balancing has two advantages: only a small
number of test runs is necessary and there is a good
measuring accuracy for higher modes. It is a progressive
or step-by-step balancing method. The modal compo-
nents of unbalance are corrected individually in turn
without aVecting the modes already balanced by
attaching the orthogonal correction weights to the bal-
ancing planes. In this method, prior modal function
knowledge is necessary for calculation of the orthogonal
test weights. Certainly there are some problems with the
modal balancing technique when applied to rotors
running in hydrodynamic journal bearings; for example,
the eigenfunctions are complex and speed dependent
owing to the variation in the ¯uid ®lm coeYcients with
rotational speed. Fortunately, in many practical cases,
the modal balancing theory can be applied successfully
as a working approximation.
The authors’ intention is to propose a new practical
balancing method for high-speed rotating machinery
operating at the speed between the ®rst and second
critical speeds, such as many centrifugal compressors,
steam turbines, etc. The balancing method is an
improvement upon the traditional modal balancing
method when this condition is met. In this method, the
®rst two low modal components of unbalances can be
balanced simultaneously at any one rotational speed
between the ®rst and second critical speeds by decom-
posing the modal unbalances and responses corre-
spondingly. Because the test weights in this method need
not be orthogonal, prior knowledge of the modal shape
of the rotor±bearing system is not necessary for calcu-
lation of the test weights. However, in traditional modal
balancing, prior modal shape knowledge is required to
calculate the orthogonal test weights. More importantly,
only one test run is required in three of the four bal-
ancing schemes presented in this paper to balance the
rotor±bearing system.
To introduce the theory, in Section 2 the authors
®rstly review the well-established theory of modal bal-
ancing. Then, in Section 3, the concept of the modal
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016
B XU AND L QU
ratio among measurement points (or MRMP coeYcient)
is introduced for the ®rst time. In the new method, the
rotor modal unbalances and responses are decomposed
correspondingly, and the ®rst two low modal unbalances
can be corrected simultaneously at any one rotational
speed between the ®rst and second critical speeds. In
Section 4, the feasibility and methods for obtaining the
MRMP coeYcient are analysed, on the basis of which
four balancing schemes are presented.
To verify the validity of the balancing method, in
Section 5, a rotating cantilever rotor was balanced by
using the new method. Experimental results show that
this method can be used eVectively in ®eld balancing
processes.
2 MODAL BALANCING
Before introducing the new balancing technique, the
general theory of modal balancing will be reviewed. A
general ¯exible rotor with arbitrary mass and stiVness
distribution (shown in Fig. 1) is considered. The space-
®xed coordinate system oxys is chosen, so that os passes
the unde¯ected horizontal axis of the rotor in its bear-
ing; ox and oy, which are perpendicular to each other,
are transverse to os. Then, the complex shaft de¯ection
can be expressed as
R…s; t† ˆ x…s; t† ‡ iy…s; t† …1†
Supposing that only the synchronous response of the
system is of interest, the equation of motion, not
including the gyroscopic eVect and shaft bow, can be
expressed as
µ ¶
@2 @ 2R @ 2R X B
EI…s† ‡ m…s† ‡ Kb R¯…s ¡ sb †
@s 2 @s 2 @ 2 t 2 bˆ1
ˆ u…s†« 2 e j«t ; s<l …2†
where m…s† is the mass per unit length, EI…s† is the
¯exural rigidity, Kb is the bth bearing stiVness, B is the
number of isotropic bearings, u…s† is the distribution of
total unbalances on the shaft, l is the length of the shaft,
¯ is the delta function and « is the rotational speed.
Let ¿n …s† represent the characteristic modal functions,
with associated natural frequencies wn for n ˆ 1; 2; . . ..
Fig. 1 General model of a ¯exible rotor±bearing system
C16099 ß IMechE 2001
 A NEW PRACTICAL MODAL METHOD FOR ROTOR BALANCING 181

Then all the principal modes satisfy the orthonormality Also, the complex de¯ection R…s; t† of the shaft can be
conditions expanded by the orthogonal principal modes in the form
…l ( X
1
0 for n 6ˆ k R…s; t† ˆ rn …t†¿n …s† …9†
m…s†¿n …s†¿k …s† ds ˆ nˆ1
0 Nn for n ˆ k
where the coeYcient rn …t† is the nth modal component of
the shaft de¯ections. Inserting equations (3), (8) and (9)
…l X
B
into (2) gives
EI…s†¿ 00n …s†¿ 00k …s† ds ‡ Kb ¿n …s†¿k …s† " #
0 bˆ1 X1
«2 1 X P

( rn …t† ˆ cn ‡ Uk ¿n …sk † e j«t …10†

0 for n 6ˆ k nˆ1
w2n ¡ « 2 Nn kˆ1
ˆ
kn for n ˆ k In the case of a distributed damping proportional to the
mass and stiVness distribution or small, the steady
…3† unbalance response of the shaft is
X
1
¶2n
where Nn is the nth generalized mass, and kn is the nth R…s; t† ˆ
generalized stiVness. nˆ1
1 ¡ ¶2n ‡ i…2¹n ¶n †
Let a…s† represent the distribution of initial unbalances " #
of the shaft, which can be expressed in terms of the 1 X P

orthogonal principal modes in the form £ cn ‡ Uk ¿n …sk † ¿n …s† e j«t …11†

Nn kˆ1
X
1
where ¶n ˆ «=wn , and ¹n is the nth modal damping
a…s† ˆ cn m…s†¿n …s† …4†
nˆ1
coeYcient.
In order to eliminate the de¯ections of the shaft, it is
where cn is the coeYcient of the modal components of possible to obtain
unbalance. On the basis of the orthogonality conditions
1 X P
(3), it is possible to obtain cn ‡ Uk ¿n …sk † ˆ 0; n ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; 1 …12†
Nn kˆ1
…l
1
cn ˆ a…s†¿n …s† ds …5† If the in¯uence of modal components higher than the
Nn 0 order of the operating speed is negligible, only the ®rst N
modal components are considered, and then
To balance the shaft, let P be balancing planes at loca-
tion s ˆ sk , k ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; P, and let Uk ˆ mk rk e j
k be the 1 X P

correction weight (i.e. correction mass mk is on the kth cn ‡ Uk ¿n …sk † ˆ 0; n ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; N …13†

Nn kˆ1
balancing plane at a radius rk and at an angle
k ). Then,
all the balance corrections can be expressed as Therefore, the correction weights can be calculated by
solving equation (13). This is the balancing method, to
X
P
be called the `N plane method’. In this method, the
U…s† ˆ Uk ¯…s ¡ sk † …6†
modal components of unbalance are corrected in a
kˆ1
progressive or step-by-step way in the vicinity of the
Similar to equations (4) and (5), for correction weights critical speed without aVecting the modes already
there are the relationships balanced. Prior modal function knowledge is necessary
to calculate the orthogonal test weights.
X
1
U…s† ˆ dn m…s†¿n …s†
nˆ1 3 BALANCING THEORY

1 X P
dn ˆ Uk ¿n …sk † 3.1 Modal ratio among measurement points (MRMP
Nn kˆ1 coeYcient)
…7† Consider a simple distributed mass rotor±bearing sys-
tem, as shown in Fig. 2. When the geometrical and
Therefore, the total rotor unbalances, including the physical parameters of the system are given, the char-
correction weights, are acteristic modal function ¿n …s†, n ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; 1, can be
" # obtained. Figure 3 shows the general ®rst two low modal
X1
1 X P
u…s† ˆ m…s†¿n …s† cn ‡ Uk ¿n …sk † …8† shapes of the rotor±bearing system, simply for geometric
nˆ1
Nn kˆ1 illustration of the MRMP coeYcient. As equations (9)

C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C
182 B XU AND L QU

Fig. 2 Unbalance responses of the rotor±bearing system

locations s ˆ sA and s ˆ sB are chosen. Firstly, equation

(11) will be rewritten as
X
1
R…s; t† ˆ An …«†En ¿n …s† e j‰«t‡’n …«†Š …15†
nˆ1

where the nth dynamic ampli®cation coeYcient is

Fig. 3 General ®rst and second modal shapes of the rotor±
bearing system
and (10) show, the unbalance response of the rotor,
R…s; t†, is a sum of in®nite order ¿n …s† multiplying coef-
®cient rn . The de¯ections of the rotor will be the same
shape as those of the nth mode when the rotor runs at the
nth critical speed. For the nth principal mode, the ratio
of modal displacement at location s ˆ si to s ˆ sj , which
is called the modal ratio among measurement points, or
the MRMP coeYcient, in this paper, is de®ned as
¿n …si †
® ni;j ˆ
¿n …sj †
The MRMP coeYcient should be a real number
according to its de®nition in most cases. However, it
may be complex owing to the in¯uence of such factors as
the acute variation in the dynamic characteristic coeY-
cient of the oil-®lm bearing with rotational speed and
some large errors in the measurement. The feasibility
and methods to obtain the MRMP coeYcient will be
discussed in Section 4. In the next discussion it will be
seen that the MRMP coeYcient can be used in the
process of decomposing the modal components of
unbalance and reponse correspondingly.
¶2n
An …«† ˆ q








































…1 ¡ ¶2n †2 ‡ …2¹n ¶n †2
the nth modal component of unbalance is
PP
Uk ¿n …sk †
En ˆ cn ‡ kˆ1
Nn
and the nth modal lagging phase angle is

´
2¹n ¶n
’n …«† ˆ tan¡1
1 ¡ ¶2n
To balance the rotor, only the ®rst two low modal
components of unbalance will be considered if the
in¯uence of higher modal components can be neglected.
Supposing the test weights TC and TD (test weights need
…14†
not be orthogonal, so prior knowledge of the modal
shape of the rotor±bearing system is not necessary for
calculation of the test weights) are added on the balan-
cing planes C and D respectively. Then the net un-
balance responses of measuring planes A and B, only
caused by the test weights at t ˆ 0 and at any one
rotational speed « between the ®rst and second critical
speeds, are
R…sA † ˆ A1 …«†E1 ¿1 …sA † e¡i’1 …«†
‡A2 …«†E2 ¿2 …sA † e¡i’2 …«†
R…sB † ˆ A1 …«†E1 ¿1 …sB † e¡i’1 …«†

‡A2 …«†E2 ¿2 …sB † e¡i’2 …«†

3.2 Decomposition of modal unbalances and responses
TC ¿1 …sC† ‡ TD ¿1 …sD †
Supposing that the rotor±bearing system shown in Fig. 2 E1 ˆ
operates at the speed between the ®rst and second cri- N1
tical speeds. The balancing objective is to correct the TC ¿2 …sC† ‡ TD ¿2 …sD †
®rst two low modal unbalances. Thus, two balancing E2 ˆ
N2
planes C and D at locations s ˆ sC and s ˆ sD , and two
measuring planes A and B closer to the bearings at …16†

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 C16099 ß IMechE 2001
 A NEW PRACTICAL MODAL METHOD FOR ROTOR BALANCING 183

Table 1 Four MRMP coeYcients for measuring and

balancing planes

MRMP Measuring planes Balancing planes

coeYcient A and B C and D

¿1 …sA † ¿1 …sC †
First-order MRMP ®A;B
1
ˆ ®C;D
1
ˆ
¿1 …sB † ¿1 …sD †
¿2 …sA † ¿2 …sC †
Second-order MRMP ®A;B
2
ˆ ®C;D
2
ˆ
¿2 …sB † ¿2 …sD † Fig. 5 Decomposition of the ®rst and second modal
responses

Four MRMP coeYcients (Table 1) for measuring and

balancing planes are introduced. Inserting the four responses given by equation (17). In the new method,
MRMP coeYcients into equation (16) gives prior knowledge of ’1 and ’2 is not necessary. In the
following discussion, the unbalances TC and TD and
R…sA †¡®A;B
2
R…sB † responses R…sA † and R…sB † will be decomposed corre-
spondingly by means of four MRMP coeYcients.
ˆ A1 …«†E1 …®A;B
1
¡®A;B
2
†¿1 …sB † e¡i’1 …«†
Firstly, the unbalance responses R…sA † and R…sB † are
R…sA †¡®A;B
1
R…sB † decomposed as
R…sA † ˆ R…sAf † ‡ R…sAc †
ˆ A2 …«†E2 …®A;B
2
¡®A;B
1
†¿2 …sB † e¡i’2 …«†
R…sB † ˆ R…sBf † ‡ R…sBc †
…TC ®C;D
1 ‡ TD †¿1 …sD †
E1 ˆ Supposing ®A;B
1 ˆ 1:58 and ®A;B
2 ˆ ¡0:55, the decom-
N1
position results shown in Fig. 5 are obtained. It can be
…TC ®C;D
2 ‡ TD †¿2 …sD † seen that R…sA † is decomposed as the ®rst modal com-
E2 ˆ ponent R…sAf † and second modal component R…sAc †.
N2
Similarly, R…sB † is decomposed as R…sBf † and R…sBc †. The
…17† ®rst modal components R…sAf † and R…sBf † are in the
same phase with diVerent amplitudes, and the second
Equation (17) is the theoretical base for decomposing modal components R…sAc † and R…sBc † are in the opposite
the modal unbalances and responses. It can be seen that phase with diVerent amplitudes. If the con®guration of
the response R…sA † ¡ ®A;B2 R…s † is caused by the ®rst
B the rotor±bearing system and the locations of the two
modal unbalance E1 , and the response R…sA † ¡ measuring planes are eudipleural, the measuring plane
1 R…s † is caused by the second modal unbalance E .
®A;B B 2 MRMP coeYcients are ®A;B 1
ˆ 1, ®A;B2
ˆ ¡1. The
Moreover, the modal unbalances E1 and E2 are repre- decomposition results show that R…sAf † and R…sBf † have
sented by the test weights TC and TD in the form of the same amplitude, and so do R…sAc † and R…sBc †.
TC ®C;D
1 ‡ TD and TC ®C;D2 ‡ TD respectively. Therefore, Let the test weights TC and TD be decomposed as
R…sA † ¡ ®A;B R…sB † can be used as the decomposition
2
TC ˆ TCf ‡ TCc
orientation of the ®rst modal response, and
R…sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R…s † as the decomposition orientation of
B TD ˆ TDf ‡ TDc
the second modal response. Similarly, TC ®C;D
1 ‡ TD and
TC ®C;D ‡ TD can be used as the decomposition orien-
2 Supposing ®C;D1 ˆ 2:03 and ®C;D 2 ˆ ¡0:7867, the
tation of the ®rst and second modal unbalances decomposition results shown in Fig. 6 are obtained. It
respectively. Figure 4 shows the phase relationships of can be seen that TC is decomposed as the ®rst modal
the decomposition orientation of modal unbalances and

Fig. 4 Phase relationships of decomposition orientation of Fig. 6 Decomposition of the ®rst and second modal
modal unbalances and responses unbalances

C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C
184 B XU AND L QU

component TCf and second modal component TCc . Equation (20) is the same as equation (13) when N ˆ 2.
Similarly, TD is decomposed as TDf and TDc . The ®rst Therefore, as far as the balancing objective is concerned,
modal components TCf and TDf are in the same phase the new method is the same as traditional modal bal-
with diVerent amplitudes, and the second modal com- ancing. However, they are diVerent in balancing pro-
ponents TCc and TDc are in the opposite phase with cesses: the former method corrects unbalances
diVerent amplitudes. If the con®guration of the rotor± simultaneously at any one rotational speed between the
bearing system and the locations of the two balancing ®rst and second critical speeds by decomposing the
planes are eudipleural, the balancing plane MRMP modal unbalances and responses correspondingly. The
coeYcients are ®C;D
1 ˆ 1 and ®C;D
2 ˆ ¡1. The decom- latter method corrects the unbalances step-by-step in the
position results show that TCf and TDf have the same vicinity of the critical speed without aVecting the modes
amplitude, and so do TCc and TDc . already balanced. Moreover, because the test weights
need not be orthogonal in the new method, prior
knowledge of the modal shape of the rotor±bearing
3.3 Determination of correction masses
system necessary in the traditional modal balancing is
Suppose that the initial modal unbalances of the rotor not required in the new technique for calculation of the
are E 01 and E 02 , and that the net unbalance responses test weights. In addition, only one test run is required in
only caused by initial unbalances are R0…sA † and R0…sB †. three of the four balancing schemes discussed below to
Similar to equation (17), correct the rotor±bearing system.
R0 …sA †¡®A;B
2 R0 …s †ˆ A …«†E 0 …® 1 ¡® 2 †¿ …s † e¡i’1 …«†
B 1 1 A;B A;B 1 B
4 METHODS FOR OBTAINING THE MRMP
R0 …sA †¡®A;B
1 R0 …s †ˆ A …«†E 0 …® 2 ¡® 1 †¿ …s † ¡i’2 …«†
B 2 2 A;B A;B 2 B e COEFFICIENT AND VARIOUS
BALANCING SCHEMES
…18†

Suppose that correction weights U C and UD are added From the above discussions it can be seen that only one
on the balancing planes to correct the initial modal test run is necessary to balance the rotor±bearing system
unbalances. Combining equations (17) and (18) gives when the four MRMP coeYcients are known, so the
number of test runs necessary to balance the rotor
R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
2
R0 …sB † depends on the methods used to obtain the four MRMP
UC ®C;D
1
‡ UD ˆ ¡ …TC ®C;D
1
‡ TD †
R…sA † ¡ ®A;B
2 R…s †
B coeYcients. In this section, various methods are pro-
posed for obtaining the four MRMP coeYcients, on the
E 01 basis of which four balancing schemes are presented
ˆ¡
¿1 …sD † (schemes 3 and 4 are deduced in Appendix 1):
R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R0 …s †
B
UC ®C;D
2
‡ UD ˆ ¡ …TC ®C;D
2
‡ TD † Scheme 1
R…sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R…s †
B
The rotor±bearing system is modelled to calculate the
E 02
ˆ¡ modal function ¿n …s† by transfer matrix or ®nite element
¿…sD † method, so the four MRMP coeYcients can be obtained
…19† from the modal function by equation (14). In this
scheme, only one test run is required, and the rotor can
Equation (19) can be used to calculate the correction be balanced at any one rotational speed between the ®rst
weights. That is to say, the correction weights can be and second critical speeds.
calculated by using test weights TC and TD , net un-
balance responses R…sA †, R…sB †, R0 …sA † and R0…sB † and Scheme 2
four MRMP coeYcients.
Responses R0…sA † and R0 …sB † are the original responses Measure the vibrations both in measuring planes and
at any one rotational speed « between the ®rst and balancing planes at the ®rst and second critical speeds.
second critical speeds, and TC , TD , R…sA † and R…sB † are Then the MRMP coeYcients can be calculated from the
test information in one test run at «, so only one test vibration data. In this scheme, only one test run is
run is necessary to balance the rotor±bearing system if necessary, and the rotor can be balanced at any one
four MRMP coeYcients are known. rotational speed between the ®rst and second critical
From equation (19), speeds.
UC ¿1 …sC † ‡ UD ¿1 …sD † ˆ ¡E 01 N1
Scheme 3
UC ¿2 …sC † ‡ UD ¿2 …sD † ˆ ¡E 02 N2
Only measure the vibrations in balancing planes C and
…20† D. That is to say, the measuring planes are coincident

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 C16099 ß IMechE 2001
 A NEW PRACTICAL MODAL METHOD FOR ROTOR BALANCING 185

with the balancing planes. In this scheme, only one test Table 3 Net responses in balancing
run is necessary. scheme 4
Suppose that the net responses (only caused by the
« ˆ «1
initial and test weights respectively) in the balancing
planes at any two non-critical speeds « 1 and «2 are as Net responses Plane A Plane B
listed in Table 2. Then the balancing plane MRMP
coeYcients satisfy the following equation system: First test run R0 …sA † R0 …sB †
Second test run R00 …sA † R00 …sB †
R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R…s †
D R0 …sC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R0 …s †
D
ˆ 0 0
R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D R…sDD † R …sCC † ¡ ®C;D R …sDD †
2 2
Table 4 Test weights in balancing
0 1 R0 …s †
scheme 4
R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s †
D R …sC † ¡ ®C;D D
ˆ
R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s
DD † R0…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R0 …s
DD †
« ˆ «1

Test weights Plane C Plane D

In this scheme, the measuring planes are coincident with
the balancing planes, so ®C;D
1 ˆ ®A;B
1 and ®C;D
2 ˆ ®A;B
2 .
First test run TC TD
Therefore, only one test run is necessary to balance the Second test run T 0C T 0D
rotor.

Scheme 4 (b) dangerous rotor vibrations at critical speeds in

scheme 2 and
Only measure the vibrations in two measuring planes A (c) no desirable measuring at balancing planes in
and B closer to bearings, but two test runs are required scheme 3.
to calculate the four MRMP coeYcients. Firstly, the two
measuring plane MRMP coeYcients ®A;B 1 and ®A;B
2 can Though scheme 4 requires two test runs, the measuring
be obtained by scheme 3 (using net vibrations in two condition in this scheme is desirable in ®eld balancing.
measuring planes instead of two balancing planes in So the fourth scheme will be used in the next balancing
scheme 3) in the ®rst test run. Then, the second test run experiment.
is needed to calculate two balancing plane MRMP
coeYcients ®C;D
1 and ®C;D
2 at any one non-critical speed
«1 . The parameters used to calculate the balancing 5 BALANCING EXPERIMENT OF A ROTATING
plane MRMP coeYcients are listed in Tables 3 and 4. CANTILEVER ROTOR
Then, ®C;D
1 and ®C;D
2 are the roots of the following
equation system: In this section, a rotating cantilever rotor was balanced
by using the new method. The con®guration of the test
R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
2 R0 …s †
B TC ®C;D
1
‡ TD rig is shown in Fig. 7, where 1 to 5 represent the
ˆ
R00 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
2 R00 …s †
B T C ®C;D ‡ T 0D
0 1
proximating transducers measuring the radial vibrations
of the rotor, 5 is the key phase probe and 1 to 4 are
R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R0 …s †
B TC ®C;D
2 ‡ TD probes to measure the radial vibrations in the two cross-
ˆ
R00 …sA † ¡ 1 R00 …s †
®A;B B T 0C ®C;D
2 ‡ T 0D sections A and B. The two discs C and D are the bal-
ancing planes. The initial unbalances of the rotor are
Comparing the four balancing schemes proposed above, very small and can be ignored in this test. The ®rst cri-
it can be seen that schemes 1 to 3 are desirable for rotor tical speed of the rotor is about 2400 r/min, and the
balancing because only one test run is required. Of operating speed of the rotor is 3100 r/min. The con®g-
course, there are some disadvantages with these balan- uration parameters of the rotor±bearing system are lis-
cing schemes when used in ®eld balancing processes: ted in Table 5 for the theoretical calculation of modal
(a) complex computing work for modelling the rotor± shapes.
bearing system in scheme 1, Scheme 4 was applied to balance the rotor±bearing
system. The balancing speed chosen is «2 ˆ 3100 r/min,
and two speeds are chosen at «1 ˆ 1900 r/min and
Table 2 Net responses in balancing scheme 3 «2 ˆ 3100 r/min to calculate the four MRMP coeY-
cients. The balancing processes are as follows:
« ˆ «1 « ˆ «2
Net 1. The unbalances are put on two discs C and D to
responses Plane C Plane D Plane C Plane D simulate the unknown unbalances: EC ˆ 0:6g

180¯ , ED ˆ 0:6g
45¯ . Then the rotor original
Initial run R…sC ) R…sD † R…sCC † R…sDD †
First test run R0 …sC † R0 …sD † R0 …sCC † R0 …sDD † vibrations are measured at speeds «1 and «2 .
2. The test weights are put on two discs in the ®rst test

C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C
186 B XU AND L QU

Fig. 7 Con®guration of the test rig

Table 5 Con®guration parameters of the rotor±bearing system

Con®guration parameters

Balancing planes C and D Diameter 60 mm, thickness 25 mm, mass 800 g

Bearings StiVness 5:75133 £ 105 N=m, damping 17.51 kg/s
Shaft Diameter 10 mm, density 7800 kg/m3 , modulus of elasticity 2:1 £ 1011 N=m2
Coordinates of nodes L1 ˆ 0 mm, L2 ˆ 32 mm, L3 ˆ 72 mm, L4 ˆ 139:5 mm, L5 ˆ 229 mm, L6 ˆ 306 mm,
L7 ˆ 383 mm, L8 ˆ 423 mm, L9 ˆ 468 mm, L10 ˆ 515:5 mm, L11 ˆ 553 mm

run: TC ˆ 0:3g
225¯ , TD ˆ 0:3g
270¯ . Rotor
vibrations are measured at speeds «1 and « 2 in
the ®rst test run, and then the test weights TC and
TD are taken oV.
3. The test weights are put on two discs in the second
test run: T 0C ˆ 0:4g
90¯ , T 0D ˆ 0:4g
337:5¯ .
Rotor vibrations are measured at speed « 2 in the
second test run, and then the test weights T 0C and
T 0D are taken oV.
4. MRMP coeYcient calculation: the four MRMP
coeYcients are obtained by scheme 4 using the test
weight and net vibration information. To verify the
validity of the MRMP coeYcient, the four theore-
tical MRMP coeYcients are calculated by scheme 1
using the transfer matrix method. Figure 7 shows
the model of the rotor±bearing system, in which the
system is divided into 11 nodes. Nodes (3) and (7)
represent two measuring planes, and nodes (4) and
(10) represent two balancing planes.
5. Correction weight determination: the original
responses, the ®rst test weights in the ®rst test run
and the net responses only caused by the ®rst test
weights can be decomposed at «2 by the four
MRMP coeYcients obtained in the experiment. The
correction weights can be calculated by equation
(19): PC ˆ 0:5987g
¡ 0:17¯ and PD ˆ 0:6586g

¡130:23¯ .
All the detailed vibration data and balancing results in
the experiment are listed in Appendix 2.
6 CONCLUSIONS
A new practical balancing technique using the MRMP
coeYcient is presented in this paper. It is an improve-
ment upon traditional modal balancing when a certain
condition is met. Compared with the traditional balan-
cing method, advantages of this method are as follows:
1. In this new method, the rotor±bearing system can be
balanced at any one non-critical rotational speed
between the ®rst and second critical speeds by
decomposing the modal components of unbalance
and response simultaneously. That is to say, the ®rst
two low ¯exible modes can be corrected simulta-
neously at any one non-critical speed. In the
traditional modal balancing method, the rotor
modes are corrected individually, and the balancing
speeds must be selected in the vicinity of diVerent
critical speeds, so it may be dangerous and undesir-
able to keep the rotor running continuously at the
critical speeds because of large rotor vibrations in
the resonance zone. In addition, the vibration
amplitude and phase measured may be unstable
owing to such factors as ¯uctuant rotational speed
in the resonance zone and so on.
2. Only one test run is required in three of the four
balancing schemes presented in this paper, whereas
two test runs are necessary in the traditional modal
balancing method and at least two test runs are
required in the in¯uence coeYcient method. Redu-
cing test runs directly means considerable balancing
time and cost savings, especially for some large-scale
rotor±bearing systems.
3. Although modal function knowledge, which is
contained in the MRMP coeYcient, is necessary in
the balancing procedures, the test weights need not
be orthogonal (see the test weights in equation (16)
and the experiment). Therefore, prior modal func-
tion knowledge is not necessary for calculation of
the test weights in this new method, which indeed

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 C16099 ß IMechE 2001
 A NEW PRACTICAL MODAL METHOD FOR ROTOR BALANCING 187

simpli®es the balancing procedures. By contrast, idea is to use the vibration data measured at two non-
orthogonal test weights, which are calculated from critical speeds to establish the equation system. The
the prior modal functions before balancing, are de®nition of parameters is the same as that in Section 4.
necessary in the traditional modal balancing method
in order to calculate reasonable orthogonal correc- Scheme 3
tion masses.
When the rotor operates at «1 and the initial modal
The given balancing method is very suitable for balan- unbalances are E 01 , E 02 , then
cing ¯exible rotor±bearing systems running at rotational
2 R…s †ˆ A …« †E 0 ¡i’1 …« 1 †
speeds between the ®rst and second critical speeds, and R…sC †¡®C;D D 1 1 1 ¿1 …sD †…® C;D ¡®C;D † e
1 2

the main balancing objective is to correct the ®rst two low

1 R…s †ˆ A …« †E 0 ¡i’2 …« 1 †
¯exible modes. The balancing experimental results for a R…sC †¡®C;D D 2 1 2 ¿2 …sD †…® C;D ¡®C;D † e
2 1

rotating cantilever rotor show that the proposed techni-

…21†
que can be used eVectively in ®eld balancing processes.
When the rotational speed is «2 , then

REFERENCES R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D

2
R…sDD † ˆ A1 …«2 †E 01 ¿1 …sD †…®C;D
1
¡ ®C;D
2
†

£ e¡i’1 …«2 †
1 Bishop, R. E. D. and Parkinson, A. G. On the isolation of
modes in balancing of ¯exible shafts. Proc. Instn Mech.
Engrs, 1963, 177, 407±426. R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1
R…sDD † ˆ A2 …«2 †E 02 ¿2 …sD †…®C;D
2
¡ ®C;D
1
†
2 Kellenberger, W. Should a ¯exible rotor be balanced in N
or …N ‡ 2† planes? Trans. ASME, J. Engng for Industry, £ e¡i’2 …«2 †
1972, 94, 548±560.
3 Goodman, T. P. A least-squares method for computing …22†
balance corrections. Trans. ASME, J. Engng for Industry,
1964, 86, 273±279.
Combining equations (21) and (22) gives
4 Tessarzik, J. M., Badgley, R. H. and Anderson, W. J.
R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R…s †
D A1 …«1 † e¡j’1 …«1 †
Flexible rotor balancing by the exact point±speed in¯uence ˆ
coeYcient method. Trans. ASME, J. Engng for Industry, R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R…s
DD † A1 …«2 † e¡j’1 …«2 †
1972, 94, 148±158.
5 Parkinson, A. G., Darlow, M. S. and Smalley, A. J. A R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s †
D A2 …«1 † e¡j’2 …«1 †
ˆ
theoretical introduction to the development of a uni®ed R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s
DD † A2 …«2 † e¡j’2 …«2 †
approach to ¯exible rotor balancing. J. Sound Vibr., 1980,
68, 489±506. …23†
6 Zorzi, E. S. and Pragenau, L. G. Modern rotor balan-
cingÐemerging technologies. Mech. Engng, 1985, 25±31. Similar to equation (23), for the ®rst test weights TC and
7 SteVen Jr, V. and Lacerda, H. B. The balancing of ¯exible TD in the ®rst test run, the following are also obtained:
rotors. Modal Analysis, 1996, 11, 96±105.
8 Saito, S. and Azuma, T. Balancing of ¯exible rotors by the R0 …sC† ¡ ®C;D
2 R0 …s †
D A1 …«1 † e¡j’1 …«1 †
complex modal method. Trans. ASME, J. Vibr., Acoust., ˆ
Stress, and Reliability in Design, 1983, 105, 94±100. R0…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R0 …s
DD † A1 …«2 † e¡j’1 …«2 †
9 Tan, S.-G. and Wang, X.-X. A theoretical introduction to
low speed balancing of ¯exible rotors: uni®cation and R0 …sC† ¡ ®C;D
1 R0 …s †
D A2 …«1 † e¡j’2 …«1 †
ˆ
development of the modal balancing and in¯uence R0…s CC † ¡
1 R0 …s
®C;D DD † A2 …«2 † e¡j’2 …«2 †
coeYcient techniques. J. Sound Vibr., 1993, 168, 385±394.
10 Gnielka, P. Modal balancing of ¯exible rotors without test …24†
runs: an experimental investigation. J. Sound Vibr., 1983,
90, 157±172. Combining equations (23) and (24) gives
11 Lee, C.-W., Joh, Y.-D. and Kim, Y.-D. Automatic modal
balancing of ¯exible rotors during operation: computer R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
2
R…sD † R0 …sC† ¡ ®C;D
2
R0 …sD †
controlled balancing head. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Part ˆ
R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R…s
DD † R0 …sCC † ¡ ®C;D
2 R0 …s
DD †
C, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 1990,
204(C1), 19±28. R…sC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s †
D R0 …sC† ¡ ®C;D
1 R0 …s †
D
ˆ
R…sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R…s
DD † R0 …sCC † ¡ ®C;D
1 R0 …s
DD †

APPENDIX 1 …25†

Schemes 3 and 4 for obtaining the four MRMP coeY- Therefore, the two MRMP coeYcients ®C;D
1 and ®C;D
2 are
cients discussed in Section 4 will be deduced. The main the roots of equation system (25).

C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C
188 B XU AND L QU

Scheme 4 Therefore, the balancing plane MRMP coeYcients ®C;D

1

and ®C;D are the roots of equation (28).

2
Let two measuring planes A and B and two balancing
planes C and D be chosen. Firstly, the two measuring
plane MRMP coeYcients ®A;B 1
and ®A;B
2
can be calcu-
lated by equation (25) in scheme 3 (using the net
vibrations in two measuring planes instead of two bal- APPENDIX 2
ancing planes in scheme 3) when the ®rst test weights are
put on. Then the second test weights are put on to cal- The groups of coordinates necessary in the experiment
culate the balancing plane MRMP coeYcients ®C;D 1 and are ®rstly de®ned (Fig. 8). At this moment, the timing
®C;D in the second test run.
2
mark of the shaft is just coincident with the phase sensor
In the ®rst test run, when the rotational speed is «1 , 5. The coordinate o¹² is the phase scale on the discs for
then the weights (initial unbalances, test weights or correction
R0 …sA †¡®AB
2
R0 …sB † ˆ A1 …«1 †…TC ®C;D
1
‡TD †¿1 …sD †¿1 …sB † masses), and the coordinate oxy is de®ned as the phase
scale for the measured vibrations. The phases of the
…®A;B
1 2 † e¡i’1 …«1 †
¡ ®A;B weights on the discs and measured vibrations in the
£ experiment refer to their own coordinates. When the
N1
calculation involves both vibrations and weights, the
R0 …sA †¡®A;B
1
R0…sB † ˆ A2 …«1 †…TC ®C;D
2
‡TD †¿2 …sD †¿2 …sB † two diVerent kinds of phases should be uni®ed in one
coordinate …o¹² or oxy†. In the experiment, the adding
…®A;B
2 1 † e ¡i’2 …«1 †
¡ ®A;B radius of weights on the discs is ®xed, i.e. r ˆ 28 mm.
£
N2 All the vibrations measured in diVerent rotor runs are
listed in Table 6. Because the vibrations are diVerent
…26† from the net responses (only caused by initial unba-
In the second test run, when the rotational speed is «1 , lances or test weights) de®ned in Section 4, the measured
then vibrations should be transformed into the net vibrations.
Supposing Omj is the original vibration in the mth
R00 …sA †¡®A;B
2
R00 …sB †ˆ A1 …«1 †…T 0C ®C;D
1
‡T 0D †¿1 …sD †¿1 …sB † measuring plane at the jth rotational speed, and Vimj is
2 † e¡i’1 …«1 † the vibration measured in the ith test run at the same
…®A;B
1 ¡ ®A;B
£
N1

R00 …sA †®A;B

1
R00 …sB † ˆ A2 …«1 †…T 0D ®C;D
2
‡ T 0D †¿2 …sD †¿2 …sB †
1 † ¡i’2 …«1 †
…®A;B
2
¡ ®A;B e
£
N2
…27†

Combining equations (26) and (27) gives

R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
2 R0 …s †
B TC ®C;D
1
‡ TD
ˆ
R00 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
2 R00 …s †
B T C ®C;D ‡ T 0D
0 1

R0 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R0 …s †
B TC ®C;D
2 ‡ TD
ˆ
R00 …sA † ¡ ®A;B
1 R00 …s †
B T 0C ®C;D
2 ‡ T 0D

…28† Fig. 8 Two groups of coordinates in the experiment

Table 6 Vibrations measured in diVerent rotor runs

«1 ˆ 1900 r/min «2 ˆ 3100 r/min

Vibrations
(mV) Plane A Plane B Plane A Plane B

Initial run 38:8
¡ 75:8 36:8
¡ 65:9 39:6
81:3 37:7
101:5
First test run 47:3
¡ 71:6 42:9
¡ 59:9 37:9
120:2 42:7
133:3
Second test run Ð Ð 51:1
104:5 46:8
125:1

Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 C16099 ß IMechE 2001
 A NEW PRACTICAL MODAL METHOD FOR ROTOR BALANCING 189

plane and speed as those of Omj , then the net vibration
only caused by the test weights is
Rimj ˆ Vimj ¡ Omj
Figure 9 shows the modal shapes of the rotor±bearing
system, calculated by the transfer matrix method using
the parameters listed in Table 5, where ® represents
the ®rst modal function and 4 represents the second
modal function. The four MRMP coeYcients
obtained from scheme 4 and theoretical calculation or
scheme 1 are listed in Table 7. It can be seen that the
MRMP coeYcients calculated by scheme 4 are cor-
rect.
The arrangements of sensors and the locations of the
initial and correction weights are shown in Fig. 10, in
which * represents the initial unbalances and ~ repre-
sents the correction masses. It can be seen that the
correction masses are accurate.

Fig. 9 First two modal shapes of the rotor±bearing system Fig. 10 Balancing results of the rotor±bearing system

Table 7 Four MRMP coeYcients obtained from the experimental and theoretical calculations

Two measurement planes Two balancing planes

MRMP ®A;B
1
®A;B
2
®C;D
1
®C;D
2

Scheme 4 1:0193 ¡ 0:2323i 1:4374 ‡ 0:0784i ¡0:7402 ¡ 0:1952i 1:5794 ¡ 0:1822i

Theoretical calculation or scheme 1 1.2848 1.5216 ¡0:5636 1.5657

C16099 ß IMechE 2001 Downloaded from pic.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 3, 2016 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 215 Part C