Fundamentals of API Rotordynamic Requirements

Fundamentals of API INTRODUCTION
Rotordynamic Requirements  Our objectives with this presentation

• Clarify the intentions of API requirements
2nd Vibration Institute
Middle East Conference • Explain the design objectives
28 October 2020 • Provide an overview of the analytical aspects
necessary to evaluate the design objectives
C. Hunter Cloud
John A. Kocur, Jr.
 This presentation is NOT a tutorial on
 Introduction • How to do rotordynamics analysis
 Lateral Dynamics • All the vibration and testing requirements for different
types of machines
 Torsional Dynamics
 Machine Type Specifics
 Key Points
3241 Plank Road
North Garden, Virginia 22959 USA
2
www.BRGmachinery.com
1 2
INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
 Every individual API machinery specification has  The unpublished Standard Paragraphs (SPs) form
different rotordynamic requirements the basis or starting point for each specification’s
development
• Cannot cover all of them today
• Our primary focus today
API 610 Pumps API 611 GP
API 610 Pumps API 611 GP
Turbines
Turbines
Others API 612 SP
Others API 612 SP
Steam Turbines
Steam Turbines
Standard
API 672 Int. Gear
API 613 SP API 672 Int. Gear Paragraphs
Air Compressors API 613 SP
Gearboxes Air Compressors
Gearboxes
API 617
API 616 API 617
Compressors API 616
Gas Turbines Compressors
Gas Turbines
3 4
3 4
© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 1

Vibration Institute – Second Middle East Conference 2020 – Conference Presentations
 API 684 is a tutorial Lateral vs. Torsional Vibrations

on these SPs’
rotordynamic
requirements
• 684 should NOT
be referred to as a
“specification”
MOTION: MOTION:
RADIAL WHIRLING SHAFT TWISTING
MAIN THREAT: MAIN THREAT:
DAMAGE TO TIGHT CLEARANCES SHAFT FATIGUE FAILURE
5 6
5 6
Coupled Vibrations [1] SPs Design Objectives
 When gears are present, the different  Lateral rotordynamics should:

dynamics are “coupled”: • Meet shop test probe vibration limit
• e.g., a helical mesh couples lateral, • Not encounter resonance problems
Kmesh
torsional and axial • Not damage critical clearances if vibration limit is
not exceeded
LATERAL TORSIONAL AXIAL
• Not encounter any rotor instabilities
URVT
• Be verified with unbalance sensitivity test before
shipment
 Torsional rotordynamics should:
• Not experience fatigue failure due to resonance
• Be able to withstand many startups
Axial vibrations are generally not
considered by API requirements • Be able to withstand electrical faults (at least once)
Some new exceptions 7 8
7 8

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS
Performance Requirements  Undamped critical speed analysis helps estimate
critical speed locations. However,
 In general, we want every machine to operate:
• Various components’ dynamics are not included
1. Away from lightly damped natural frequencies
• Vibration levels are not predicted
o That is, we want good “separation margin” (SM)
• No damping from various sources is included
2. With low vibrations in the operating speed range • No acceptance criteria are associated with the
(OSR) results
3. Without rubbing critical clearances during startup,
shutdown or overspeed
4. Without high non-synchronous vibrations
o Fundamentally, we only want to see 1× vibrations
(associated with unbalance)
First 3 requirements are evaluated using

unbalance response analysis 9 10
9 10

Unbalance Response Analysis Process
 Unbalance response
 Strategy is to excite critical speeds, one by one,
analysis provides more
through choice of different unbalance distributions
accurate estimates of
• 1st critical: Midspan unbalance
• Critical speed locations
• 2nd critical: Quarterspan, out of phase unbalance
• Vibration amplitudes
within the machine • 3rd critical: Coupling unbalance
o Probes & bearings  Total unbalance of each distribution = 2 × Allowable Ur
o Critical clearance • 2× factor provides some margin for additional
locations components not balanced with assembly
o Casing  Three vibration criteria must be met for each
 Design acceptance is distribution and each variation of design parameters
based on this analysis
11 12
11 12

Example Compressor: Undamped Modes Example Compressor:
Unbalance Distributions to Excite Modes of Concern
Mode 1 Mode 2
2×Ur Ur
Ur
Estimated bearing stiffness magnitudes 13 14
13 14

Unbalance Response Analysis Process Results for 3
Unbalance Response Analysis Process Accept. Criteria
 Amount of unbalance applied should be relative to Checks
the allowable residual from shop balancing
• API allowable residual unbalance Ur Select 2×Ur
Select Component
Unbalance
Variation Condition
Distribution
Total rotor 1. Min Clr Perform
1. Midspan
Allowable residual weight (lb) 2. Avg Clr Analysis Steps
2. Qtr Span
unbalance (oz-in) 3. Max Clr
3. Coupling(s)
MCS (rpm) 4. Etc.
4. Etc.
Equates to ISO Grade 0.67

Choose Next
• API specifies unbalance amount in the analysis to be Distribution
Factor attempting to account for Choose Next

additional unbalance encountered Condition
post-balancing & during testing
15 16
15 16

Performance Requirements Design Criterion: Critical Speed Separation Margin
1. Operate away from lightly damped natural frequencies  For every unbalance and design condition, peak
o No resonance problems responses (critical speeds) must have adequate SM
o Must have adequate SM
o Evaluated using
 Unbalance response analysis
 Campbell diagrams (alternative used by some API specs) Critical
Speeds and
High AF High AF AFs from
Poor SM probe Bodes
Good SM
Probe
Vibration OSR
Amplitude 2.5
17 18
Rotor Speed
17 18

2×Ur 2×Ur
Example Compressor: Example Compressor:
Midspan Unbalance (Avg Clr) Midspan Unbalance (Avg Clr)
5363 rpm Points

5955 rpm
AF = 3.6 AF = 5.7 from
probes’
1864 rpm 1864 rpm Bode
1909 rpm AF = 14 1818 rpm
AF = 6.9 plots
AF = 8.1 AF = 5
1636 rpm
AF = 3.1
1636 rpm
AF = 4.9
5545 rpm
AF = 7
19 20
19 20

Performance Requirements Design Criterion: OSR Probe Vibration Limit
2. Operate with low vibrations in the operating speed  For every unbalance and design condition, probe
range (OSR) vibrations must not exceed shop vibration limit in OSR
o Ensure smooth running for long term health
Avl (μm p-p) =
o Evaluated using
.
.
Vibration OSR
Limit
Probe
Vibration
Amplitude
Rotor Speed
21 22
21 22

2×Ur
Example Compressor: Performance Requirements
Midspan Unbalance (Avg Clr)
3. Operate without rubbing critical clearances during
startup, shutdown or overspeed trip
o Normal transients should not damage components and
destroy aerodynamic or hydraulic performance
Out of the 4 probes, this is o Evaluated using
the highest vibration in OSR
Critical
0.35 mils p-p clearances OSR
(8.9 μm p-p) should not
Probe rub at this
Vibration point
Amplitude AVL
23 Rotor Speed 24
23 24

Design Criterion: Critical Clearance Rub Design Criterion: Critical Clearance Rub
 For every design condition, when balance degrades  Rub check using UVL
over time during operation to the probe vibration limit,
critical clearances will not be damaged during
shutdown or overspeed
Will the machine
rub when going 2
Unbalance necessary
Using linearity through this
to reach probe
critical?
vibration limit A VL
Response with 2xUr Response with UVL

25 26
25 26

2×Ur
Example Compressor: Example Compressor: Operating Deflection Shape
Midspan Unbalance (Avg Clr) Midspan Unbalance at First Critical Speed
Major Axis 2.8 (2×Ur)

How much does the unbalance need to be scaled up to Response
reach the vibration limit for the rub check?
Out of the 4 probes, this is

the highest vibration in OSR 2
1.0
2 2 2.8
0.35
0.35 mils p-p
Critical
Clearances 75%
100%
27 28
27 28

Performance Requirements Stability Analysis Process
4. Operate without high nonsynchronous vibrations  Until 2002, API standards had no formal analysis
o No shaft whip or oil whirl rotor instability problems requirements to avoid rotor instabilities
o Evaluated using  Original requirements involved two levels
 Stability (damped eigenvalue) analysis
Level 1 Level 2
Screening Analysis Detailed Analysis
Do the dynamics warrant a Does a comprehensive, state-
more detailed investigation? of-the-art analysis indicate the
machine will have sufficient δ?
 Today, only a detailed (Level 2) analysis is required
UNSTABLE MODE • No simplified screening (Level 1) is necessary
δ,ζ < 0
29 30
29 30

Stability Analysis Process Design Criterion: Minimum Log Decrement
 Basic steps in detailed analysis  For every design condition, modal stability must
Component Models Assembled Model remain above the minimum required level
ROTOR SYSTEM
Conventional Bearings Active Magnetic Bearings
Time or EIGENSOLVER Minimum for ALL
frequency Minimum for 1B
BEARINGS
2B 1F rotor mode 2B rotor modes
domain
1F
SUPPORT 2F 2F
STRUCTURE
3B
SEALS Damped Eigenvalues 1B
& Eigenvectors 3F 3B
0.1 0.1 3F
OTHER 1F
0 0
Modal Parameters All structural modes

31 32
must be stable (δ > 0)
31 32

TORSIONAL DYNAMICS TORSIONAL DYNAMICS
Overview Performance Requirements
 There are several unique characteristics of  In general, we want every train to operate:
torsional dynamics in machinery 1. Away from potential interferences of likely
• Torsional vibrations are not monitored excitations and lightly damped torsional natural
• Torsional related failures often result in safety incidents frequencies (TNF) – 10% separation margin
• Limits are not based on vibration amplitudes but on the 2. With infinite life when avoidance is not possible
induced stress in the train components o Ensure that torsional stresses do not cause cyclic failures
3. With motors/generators, avoid catastrophic
rupture failures
o Accept some cyclic damage (infinite life not required)
For example, specify number of permissible starts for
synchronous motor driven trains
o Examine electrical fault conditions (e.g. short circuits,
synchronization errors)
From [2] 33 34
33 34

API Requirements Analysis Progression
 API analysis requirements are developed based on

Steady State Time Transient
the train configuration & components Undamped TNF
(identify potential
Forced Response (Predict No. of
 Required analyses have three classifications resonance) (assess risk of high starts or survival
cycle fatigue) of short circuit)
• Undamped natural frequency
• Forced response  Undamped TNF
• Transient analysis • Provides accurate prediction of natural frequencies
of the entire, coupled train
 Primary emphasis is on separation of TNF from
• All important rotors, couplings and gearboxes
potential excitations in the operating speed range should be included
• If resonances cannot be avoided, check the • Excitations considered are mechanical (gears)
stresses for safe operation and electrical (motors, generators)
35 36
35 36

Undamped TNF API Requirements
 Campbell Diagram  Enforce 10% separation margin for primary (coupling)

modes with 1X excitations
• Historically these accounted for the vast majority of
Excitations torsional related coupling failures
(E = Electrical) • Evaluated using undamped analysis
TNF
(M = Mechanical)
(1,2 Order)
Characteristics of coupling
modes:
• Typically lowest
Interferences frequency modes
• Primary mode with • Exhibit largest twist
1X excitation amplitude of mode
• Higher order
interference
37 38
37 38

API Requirements SS Forced Response
 All other interferences should preferably have 10%  Analysis setup

SM with OSR Damping level present in train
• High order harmonics
• Body modes (twist occurs within train body)
• Inter-harmonics from VFD Stress concentration factors used
(fillets / keyways)
 Violations of this 10% SM must be shown to have
no adverse effect on machine train
• Stresses from the Steady State Forced Response
analysis must show infinite fatigue life of
o Shaft sections
o Couplings
o Gear teeth Excitations placed at Gears (mechanical) or
Motor/Generators/AFD (electrical) for example.
39 40
39 40

SS Forced Response Transient Analysis
 Stress vs. frequency plot  API requires this for machinery trains including:
Bode Plot of Stress • Synchronous Motors
at One Location • If specified, a fault analysis for Generators and Motors
Infinite Life
 Analysis is used to determine integrity impact of:
• Fault conditions
Resonance of o Short circuits in the generator or motor, synchronization
errors
Concern
• Synchronous motor startup
o Alternating torques at slip frequency
 Similar setup as with forced response
Different  Damage determination and criteria
Levels of SCF • Not typically infinite life
41 42
41 42

Transient Analysis Transient Analysis
 Examples of excitations  Output / Requirements

3 Phase Short • Cumulative fatigue analysis should be done on resulting
• All are time dependent Circuit Torque
torque/stress vs. time to determine startup life
o No specific requirements on fatigue life criteria
o Startup life to be agreed upon:
Based on expected # of starts over the life of the
motor
Synchronous Motor Start
43 44
43 44

TORSIONAL DYNAMICS MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS
Summary Overview
 Torsional vibrations are of great concern  Each class of machinery has some unique aspects regarding
• Failure is often catastrophic w/o warning the API requirements for dynamic behavior.
 Torsional vibration leads to cyclic stress
Gas Turbines
• Fatigue is the concern
 A torsional system has natural frequencies and
corresponding modes → just like a lateral system
 Excitations come from compressor, gear, motor/generator,
etc.
• Mechanical & electrical Centrifugal
• Steady state & time transient Compressors
 High stress level at resonance
• Highly amplified due to low damping Steam
 3 types of analysis to mitigate the risk of fatigue failure Turbines
• Undamped natural frequency, SS forced response, transient Centrifugal Electrical
Pumps Motors
45 46
45 46
MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS

Centrifugal Compressors Centrifugal Compressors
& Axial Flow Machines & Axial Flow Machines
 API requirements for lateral analysis are  API 617 has the most stringent
identical requirements regarding lateral and
• Undamped analysis torsional analysis
• Unbalance response analysis • The torsional analysis is performed by the
vendor with train responsibility
• Stability analysis
• For +90% of the compressor trains, this
 Only difference is the type of resides with the compressor vendor
destabilizing force used in the stability • One exception may be with gas turbine driven
analysis trains
o Gas turbine vendor may have unit responsibility
• Centrifugal compressors – internal seals due to the cost of the GT, but the compressor
& aerodynamic forces vendor typically performs the torsional analysis
• Axial machines – Alford’s force at blade reflecting the compressor vendor’s experience
with this analysis
tip & laby seals for HP
• Steam turbine vendors will have torsional
responsibility with STG trains
47 48
https://www.flickr.com/photos/curtismoeckel/91548514/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/curtismoeckel/91548514/
47 48

Centrifugal Pumps Centrifugal Pumps
 Similar considerations as compressors
 API 610’s primary means of assessing pump unbalance
response performance is through the use of Campbell diagrams
• Balance piston design and location
• Operating condition variations
 Pump wear ring effects can be strong
• Can dominate over bearings’ dynamics
• API requires SM criteria be met with
o New clearances in H2O
o New clearances in service fluid
o Twice new clearances in service fluid
 Structural resonances are important Absence of 1×
intersections indicate
• “Reed” frequencies of vertical pumps can be
important that no critical speeds
will be encountered
 Consideration given to stiff shaft or identical
pumps
• Analysis not required All modes in closest
proximity to the OSR are
heavily damped
49 50
49 50

Centrifugal Pumps Centrifugal Pumps
 Campbell diagram information is then translated over to a  Unbalance response is only calculated if SM requirements are
Separation Margin diagram violated
1× • Amplitude must be < 35% of running clearance
H2O 1× Clearances
SU/SD under
Maximum design clearance
dry conditions
can damage DRY
H2O 2× Clearances wear rings
when going
through first H2O 2× Clr
critical speed
(Vibration >
Clearance)
H2O 1× Clr
51 52
51 52

Centrifugal Pumps Electrical Motors
 Torsional dynamics of most pump trains Courtesy of Rexnord  Rotordynamic standards in the
do not pose a high reliability risk electrical standards are
• Typically low speed, direct drive trains
notoriously incomplete
• Early editions of the API
• No excitations originating in the gear standards required lateral
• Additional damping arising from the analysis only when specified
fluid in the pump  Vendor reference to “stiff
o Due to the low speeds (and for catalog equipment) low power, shaft” designs is actually
elastomeric couplings are frequently used subcritical
o Prior publications stating the lack of need to perform torsional • Motor operates below the 1st
analysis with AFD trains critical (no regard to amplification factor)
 Exceptions arise with high power, high pressure centrifugal  For critical designs, recommendation is for motors to meet
pumps requirements in 617 with regards to SM & AF
• Pump vendor performs analysis  Motor vendors rarely perform torsional analysis
 Additional torsional analysis for AFD driven trains
53 54
53 54
MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER

Gas Turbines  Resonances
• Lateral
 Gas turbines tend not to be o OSR should avoid lightly damped critical speeds
“designed-for-purpose” SM is a function of AF (damping level)
• Specific models that cover a • Torsional
power range o OSR must have no 1× interferences with coupling modes
o Any other interferences (SM < 10%) should pose no high
 Lateral analysis for these can cycle fatigue threat
represent the GT model  Stresses should indicate infinite life
 New models (or modified) require a lateral analysis
• Lateral analysis is similar to compressors with minor  Vibration Amplitudes
variations to the stability analysis • Lateral
• Requirements are basically the same for response and o OSR amplitudes must be low
stability levels API 617 and 612 specify ≤ 25 μm p-p
 GTG trains may require the GT vendor to perform the o Levels must not rub critical clearances during normal
transients
torsional analysis
• Torsional
o Not typically measured (no requirements)
55 56
55 56

KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER
 Stress Amplitudes  Axial vibrations are receiving greater attention
• Lateral • Next edition of API 617 has vibration limits
o Not typically of concern (not calculated)
• Still no rotordynamic analysis requirements for
• Torsional conventional bearing machines
o Electrical faults should not cause catastrophic failure
Train must survive one event
o Fatigue damage due to synchronous motor startup must  Additional resources / training
allow expected # of starts relative to motor life • More in-depth analysis training
 Rotor Instabilities o Various symposia (Texas A&M, Vibration Institute, etc.)
• Lateral o Various courses (consultants, universities, etc.)
o 1F mode must have adequate log dec • Rotordynamic verification testing [3]
o AMBs require special attention o Provides confidence in the model’s predictions for
• Torsional conditions that cannot be shop tested
o Not typically of concern (not calculated)
57 58
57 58
REFERENCES
1. Prashant, S., 2012, Dynamic Modeling of Double-Helical Planetary Gear Sets, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Ohio State University.
2. Kocur, J.A., and Muench, M.G., 2011, “Impact of Electrical Noise on the Torsional
Response of VFD Compressor,” Proceedings of the First Middle East Turbomachinery
Symposium, Texas A&M University.
3. Kocur, J.A., and Cloud, C.H., 2016, “Shop Rotordynamic Testing – Options, Objectives,
Benefits & Practices,“ Proceedings of the Asia Turbomachinery & Pump Symposium,
Texas A&M University, Singapore.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
ANY QUESTIONS?
59
59


Fundamentals of API Rotordynamic Requirements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fundamentals of API Rotordynamic Requirements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fundamentals of API INTRODUCTION

Rotordynamic Requirements  Our objectives with this presentation

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 1

 API 684 is a tutorial Lateral vs. Torsional Vibrations

 When gears are present, the different  Lateral rotordynamics should:

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 2

First 3 requirements are evaluated using

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 3

Estimated bearing stiffness magnitudes 13 14

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

Equates to ISO Grade 0.67

Factor attempting to account for Choose Next

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 4

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

5363 rpm Points

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 5

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 6

Response with 2xUr Response with UVL

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

Major Axis 2.8 (2×Ur)

Out of the 4 probes, this is

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 7

LATERAL DYNAMICS LATERAL DYNAMICS

Modal Parameters All structural modes

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 8

TORSIONAL DYNAMICS TORSIONAL DYNAMICS

 API analysis requirements are developed based on

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 9

 Campbell Diagram  Enforce 10% separation margin for primary (coupling)

TORSIONAL DYNAMICS TORSIONAL DYNAMICS

 All other interferences should preferably have 10%  Analysis setup

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 10

TORSIONAL DYNAMICS TORSIONAL DYNAMICS

 Examples of excitations  Output / Requirements

Synchronous Motor Start

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 11

MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 12

MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 13

MACHINE TYPE SPECIFICS KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 14

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

© 2020 BRG Machinery Consulting, LLC 15

You might also like