Professional Documents
Culture Documents
To address this challenge there needs to be a seal between the shaft and the
pump housing that can contain the pressure of the process being pumped and
withstand the friction caused by the shaft rotating.
Traditional Methods
• The friction of the shaft rotating wears away at the packing over time,
which leads to increased leakage until the packing is adjusted or re-
packed.
• The friction of the shaft also means that packing also needs to be
flushed with large volumes of water in order to keep it cool.
• Packing needs to press against the shaft in order to reduce leakage –
this means that the pump needs more drive power to turn the shaft,
wasting energy.
• Because packing needs to contact the shaft it will eventually wear a
groove into it, which can be costly to repair or replace.
The stationary part of the seal is fitted to the pump housing with a static seal –
this may be sealed with an o-ring or gasket clamped between the stationary
part and the pump housing.
(Highlighted in red below, left the stationary part and right the rotary portion)
The rotary portion of the seal is sealed onto the shaft usually with an O ring.
This sealing point can also be regarded as static as this part of the seal
rotates with the shaft.
The mechanical seal itself is the interface between the static and rotary
portions of the seal.
One part of the seal, either to static or rotary portion, is always resiliently
mounted and spring loaded to accommodate any small shaft deflections, shaft
movement due to bearing tolerances and out-of-perpendicular alignment due
to manufacturing tolerances.
Sealing Points
The surfaces of the seal faces are super-lapped to a high degree of flatness;
typically, 2-3 Helium light-bands (0.00003” / 0.0008mm).
If the seal faces rotated against each other without some form of lubrication
they would wear and quickly fail due to face friction and heat generation. For
this reason, some form of lubrication is required between the rotary and
stationary seal face; this is known as the fluid film
The need for a fluid film between the faces presents a design challenge –
allowing sufficient lubricant to flow between the seal faces without the seal
leaking an unacceptable amount of process fluid, or allowing contaminants in
between the faces that could damage the seal itself.
This is achieved by maintaining a precise gap between the faces that is large
enough to allow in a small amounts of clean lubricating liquid but small
enough to prevent contaminants from entering the gap between the seal
faces.
The gap between the faces on a typical seal is as little as 1 micron – 75 times
narrower than a human hair. Because the gap is so tiny, particles that would
otherwise damage the seal faces are unable to enter, and the amount of liquid
that leaks through this space is so small that it appears as vapor – around ½ a
teaspoon a day on a typical application.
This micro-gap is maintained using springs and hydraulic force to push the
seal faces together, while the pressure of the liquid between the faces (the
fluid film) acts to push them apart.
Without the pressure pushing them apart the two seal faces would be in full
contact, this is known as dry running and would lead to rapid seal failure.
Without the process pressure (and the force of the springs) pushing the faces
together the seal faces would separate too far, and allow fluid to leak out.
Leakage
When we talk about leakage we are referring to visible leakage of the seal.
This is because as detailed above, a very thin fluid film holds the two seal
faces apart from each other. By maintaining a micro-gap a leak path is
created making it impossible for a mechanical seal to be totally leak free.
What we can say, however, is that unlike gland packing, the amount of
leakage on a mechanical seal should be so low as to be visually
undetectable.