This article was downloaded by: [Universitat Politècnica de València]

On: 26 November 2014, At: 01:32

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Tribology Transactions
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utrb20

Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients in Gas

Lubricated Foil Journal Bearings with Corrugated Sub-
Foils
a a
MARC CARPINO & GITA TALMAGE
a
Members STLE, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, PA
Published online: 24 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: MARC CARPINO & GITA TALMAGE (2006) Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients in Gas Lubricated Foil
Journal Bearings with Corrugated Sub-Foils, Tribology Transactions, 49:3, 400-409

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10402000600781416

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Tribology Transactions, 49: 400-409, 2006
Copyright
C Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers

ISSN: 1040-2004 print / 1547-357X online

DOI: 10.1080/10402000600781416

Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients in Gas Lubricated

Foil Journal Bearings with Corrugated Sub-Foils
MARC CARPINO and GITA TALMAGE
Members STLE
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

A finite element foil bearing model that incorporates radial
and circumferential deflections of a corrugated sub-foil into the
prediction of rotor dynamic coefficients is presented. The corru-
gated sub-foil is treated as a continuous structure that supports
the top-foil. Radial and circumferential deflections are coupled
in the sub-foil model. The Coulomb friction between the top-
foil, sub-foil, and the bearing shell is modeled as an equivalent
viscous friction. The foil deflections, the film thickness, and gas
pressure are then perturbed to calculate the rotor dynamic co-
efficients. The results are presented demonstrating the effects of
frequency, orbit size, and friction coefficient on the rotor dy-
namic coefficients and the energy dissipation rate.
KEY WORDS
Gas; Foil; Journal; Bearings; Stability
INTRODUCTION
A significant advantage of gas lubricated foil journal bearings is
their enhanced dynamic performance in rotor systems. The geom-
etry of a typical foil journal bearing is shown in Fig. 1. The bearing
consists of a top-foil that is supported by one or more corrugated
sub-foils. The sub-foils are usually narrow strips wrapped around
the bearing. The bumps may be staggered in the circumferential
direction across the width of the bearing. The bumps may also be
of differing geometry. As the gas pressure on the top-foil changes,
the force is transmitted to the sub-foils, causing them to com-
press radially and expand in the circumferential direction. Energy
dissipation results from sliding with Coulomb friction between
the top-foil, the sub-foil, and the bearing housing. The frictional
dissipation can increase the effective damping of the bearing. Al-
ternatively, the frictional forces may limit the sub-foil deflection
effectively increasing the radial stiffness of the sub-foils. In the
stability analysis of a typical rotor system, the bearings are char-
acterized by their rotordynamic coefficients. With a gas foil journal
bearing, the rotordynamic stiffness and damping coefficients will
depend on the behavior of both the gas film and the foil structure.
Presented at the STLE Annual Meeting
in Toronto, Ontario, Canada
May 17-20, 2004
Manuscript approved February 17, 2006
Review led by Michael Khonsari
The foil structure greatly complicates the process of determining
these coefficients. Accurate predictions of rotor dynamic coeffi-
cients based on fundamental models of these bearings will enable
investigation of rotor system stability and performance and accel-
erate new rotor system design and development.
Static stiffness coefficients were first calculated by Heshmat,
et al. (1) by treating the foil structure as a simple elastic founda-
tion. Peng and Carpino (2) extended the perturbation approach
of Lund (3) to predict stiffness and damping coefficients treating
the foil structure as a simple elastic foundation. In a following pa-
per, Peng and Carpino (4) introduced the concept of equivalent
viscous damping to simulate Coulomb friction in the foil structure.
The foil structure was then modeled as a visco-elastic foundation.
A finite element formulation of the perturbation approach has
been developed by Peng and Carpino (5) that incorporates a com-
plete structural model of the top-foil. The sub-foil was treated as
a simple elastic foundation. Circumferential deflection resulting
from the radial deflection of the sub-foil was used to calculate the
equivalent viscous damping in the model. Ku and Heshmat (6, 7)
developed a model to theoretically predict the stiffness and damp-
ing in the foil structure of a foil journal bearing and subsequently
compared results from their model to experimental results (8, 9).
Although their model included the effects of Coulomb friction in
the foil structure, the shaft was not rotating. Thus, stiffness and
damping effects from the lubricant film were neglected in both
the analysis and the experiments. Most investigators have used
the Reynolds equation to model the lubricant flow. San Andres
(10) used a bulk flow model to predict rotor dynamic coefficients
for a foil bearing in cryogenic applications with turbulent flows.
The foil structure was modeled as an elastic foundation with a
complex stiffness incorporating damping due to Coulomb fric-
tion. Lee, et al. (11) predicted rotor dynamic coefficients for a
gas-lubricated foil journal bearing with the slip flow. They treated
the foil structure as a simple elastic foundation.
An approach to the prediction of rotor dynamic coefficients for
a gas lubricated foil journal bearing will be presented in this pa-
per. In this approach, the solution variables and governing equa-
tions are analytically perturbed with respect to small sinusoidal
displacements of the journal about its equilibrium position. The
perturbed equations are then formulated as a single logical finite
element incorporating both structural and fluid effects. Finally, the
resulting perturbations of the pressure are used to calculate the
rotor dynamic stiffness and damping coefficients.

400
 Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients 401

NOMENCLATURE V = vector of journal surface velocities
W = journal load

= rate of energy dissipation by Coulomb friction
a = vector of nodal variables WC
A = domain of the lubricant film and foil structure Wr , Wθ = sub-foil displacements
Cxx , Cxy , Cyx , Cyy = rotor dynamic damping coefficients WT , = rate of total energy dissipation
Ck = equivalent viscous damping coefficient for the kth x, y = Cartesian coordinates
sliding contact x, y = perturbations of journal position
D̃ = property matrix z = axial coordinate
Et3
D= = bending stiffness of foil
12(1 − ν 2 )
e = eccentricity of journal
E = modulus of elasticity of foil Greek Symbols
Fx , Fy = components of perturbed force of gas film acting δ = variational operator


on bearing ε = generalized strain vector
Fr = radial compressive force in sub-foil θe = eccentricity angle of journal
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

Fθ = circumferential tensile force in sub-foil θ = circumferential coordinate

h = thickness of the gas film θθ , θz = nodal rotations
Et

σ = generalized stress vector
Ks = = membrane or stretching stiffness of foil
(1 − ν 2 ) µ = viscosity of gas, or coefficient of friction
Krr , Krθ , Kθr , Kθθ = sub-foil stiffness coefficients ν = Poisson’s ratio, or whirl frequency
Kxx , Kxy , Kyx , Kyy = rotor dynamic stiffness coefficients

= vector of functionals for the finite element

L = length of bearing F = functional for the foil structure
Lb = pitch of bumps in sub-foil R = functional for Reynolds equation
Ñ = matrix of basis functions h , θ , z = film thickness constraints
P = pressure ω = angular speed of journal
r = radius of the journal
rfoil = nominal radial position of foil surface
rjournal = nominal radial position of journal surface


R = relative displacement vector in foil structure Subscripts, Superscripts, and Special Symbols
t = thickness of foil, or time e = element
T = journal torque j = x, y, ẋ, ẏ = perturbations
ur , uθ , uz = nodal displacements o = steady solution


u = foil structure displacement vector k = index of foil friction surface
V = circumferential component of journal surface T = transpose
velocity || = amplitude

A unique aspect of the analysis presented here is that an equiv-
alent continuous compliant layer will be used to simulate the cou-
pled radial and circumferential expansions of the sub-foil. This
is a reasonable approximation because the bumps are staggered
and/or relatively close together. Equivalent viscous dissipation
will be used to model the Coulomb friction in the foil struc-
ture. In the absence of friction and circumferential constraints,
this model of the sub-foil will behave as a simple elastic foun-
dation. This approach, as with a simple elastic foundation, does
not include any sagging of the top-foil that might occur between
adjacent sub-foil bumps. The top-foil is allowed to lift off of the
sub-foil.
The results will be presented for a typical bearing application
demonstrating the effects of friction, orbit size, and frequency on
the rotor dynamic coefficients.

THEORETICAL MODEL
The general approach presented by Peng and Carpino (5) will
be used here. Each of the solution variables and the governing
equations will be analytically perturbed with respect to small si-
nusoidal displacements or orbits of the journal position (see Fig. 1).
For example, the pressure will be:

p(θ, z, t) = p0 (θ, z) + px (θ, z)x(t) + py (θ, z)y(t)

Fig. 1—Foil journal bearing geometry. + pẋ (θ, z)ẋ(t) + pẏ (θ, z)ẏ(t) [1]
 402 M. CARPINO AND G. TALMAGE

where the displacements x and y are given by:

x(t) = |x| cos (νt + φ)

[2]
y(t) =
y
sin (νt + φ)

Two sets of coupled equations will result. The first set of cou-
pled equations yields the steady solution. Solution of the steady
equations has been discussed by Carpino and Talmage (12). The
second set of equations is used to calculate the perturbation
components of the pressure, displacement, etc. The perturbed
pressures are then used to calculate the stiffness and damping
coefficients for the bearing. Discussions here will focus on the
perturbed solutions.
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

Foil Structure
The structural model of the foil with frictional effects is con-
structed using the principle of virtual work (Shames and Dym
(13)): Fig. 2—Equivalent continuous foil structure.

  

T
˙
δ

ε
δ
δ

T
0 = δF = σ dA − uT P dA + u C̃ R dA [3] foil structure. The boundary conditions on the top-foil are:
A A A
urj (θ = 2π, z) = 0
The principle of virtual work then expands to the following uθ j (θ = 2π, z) = 0
expression for each of the perturbations: uzj (θ = 2π, z) = 0 [5]
∂urj
   (θ = 2π, z) = 0
∂δuzj 1 ∂δuθ j δurj ∂uzj ∂θ
0 = δFj = ks +ν +ν
A ∂z r ∂θ r ∂z The sub-foil will be modeled as a continuous compliant struc-
   ture as in Fig. 2. This is different from a simple elastic foundation
∂δuzj 1 ∂δuθ j δurj 1 ∂uθ j urj
+ ν + + + in that radial and circumferential deflections of the foil are now
∂z r ∂θ r r ∂θ r
   coupled. The distributed forces in the sub-foil are given by:
1−ν 1 ∂δu zj ∂δu θj ∂u
1 zj ∂u θj
+ + + dA 1 ∂Wθ
2 r ∂θ ∂z r ∂θ ∂z Fr = Krr Wr + Krθ [6]
  2  r ∂θ
∂ δurj 1 ∂ 2 δurj 1 ∂δuθ j ∂ 2 urj
+ D + ν − ν 1 ∂Wθ
A ∂z2 r2 ∂θ 2 r2 ∂θ ∂z2 Fθ = Kθ r Wr + Kθ θ
r ∂θ
 2  2 
1 ∂ δurj 1 ∂δuθ j 1 ∂ urj 1 ∂uθ j where the stiffness coefficients, Krr , Krθ , Kθ r , Kθ θ , are determined
+ 2 (1 − ν) − −
r ∂θ∂z r ∂z r ∂θ ∂z r ∂z from the sub-foil structure using the finite element based proce-
 2  
∂ δurj 1 ∂ δurj
2
1 ∂δuθ j 1 ∂ urj
2
1 ∂uθ j dure described in the Appendix. Both the bending and the tensile
+ ν + − − dA effects are included in the finite element model of the sub-foil.
∂z2 r2 ∂θ 2 r2 ∂θ r2 ∂θ 2 r2 ∂θ
     Generally, the stiffness coefficients of the sub-foil can be a func-
1 ∂Wθ j 1 ∂Wθ j
+ δWrj Krr Wrj + Krθ +δ tion of the position in the bearing. For the purposes of comparison
A r ∂θ r ∂θ
   to a simple elastic foundation, the equivalent radial stiffness of the
1 ∂Wθ j   sub-foil when it is not constrained in the circumferential direction
× Kθ r Wrj +Kθ θ dA − δurj Pj dA
r ∂θ A is given by:

  Kθ r Krθ
+ δuθ j C1 Ṙ1j +δWθj C2 Ṙ2j + δWθ j C3 Ṙ3j dA [4] Kequiv = Krr − [7]
A Kθ θ

where j = x, y, ẋ, ẏ. Equivalent Viscous Dissipation in Foil Structure

This statement of the principle of virtual work is based on mo-
In the last integral of Eq. [4], there are three terms, each repre-
ment, tension, curvature, and strain expressions for cylindrical
senting the virtual work done on the foil structure by the relative
shell deflections given by Timoshenko and Woinowsky-Krieger
sliding between the foils, Rk , as shown in Fig. 3. With these terms,
(14). The first integral represents stretching of the foil. The sec-
the Coulomb friction is modeled as viscous friction based on the
ond integral represents the bending of the foil. The third integral
equivalent energy dissipation per cycle of oscillation. The relative
is due to the elastic deformation of the sub-foil. The fourth inte-
displacements (see Fig. 3) in the foil are perturbed in terms of the
gral is due to the pressure loading on the foil by the gas film and
journal motion:
the ambient pressure. The last integral represents viscous forces
associated with Coulomb friction and the relative motion in the Rk = Rkx x + Rky y + Rkẋ ẋ + Rkẏ ẏ [8]
 Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients 403

TABLE 1—BEARING PERFORMANCE

Journal radius, rjournal = 25.0 mm
Nominal radius of foil, rfoil = 25.025 mm
Length of bearing, L = 50.0 mm
Journal eccentricity, e = 0.0375 mm
Foil thickness, t = 0.0762 mm
Poisson’s ratio, ν = 0.3
Modulus of elasticity, E = 2.07 × 1011 Pa
Fig. 3—Relative sliding in foil structure. Ambient pressure, PA = 1.014 × 105 Pa
Viscosity, µ = 1.793 × 10−5 Pa-sec
Journal surface velocity, V = 130.9 m/sec
where the perturbed displacements of the top-foil and the sub-foil Journal speed = 50,000 rpm
in the circumferential direction are given by:

uθ = uθ x x + uθ y y + uθ ẋ ẋ + uθ ẏ ẏ [9]

Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

Now in Eq. [4], the relative velocity components will be:

Wθ = Wθ x x + Wθ y y + Wθ ẋ ẋ + Wθ ẏ ẏ
Ṙkx = −ν 2 Rkẋ
The relative velocities from Eq. [8] are:
Ṙky = −ν 2 Rkẏ
Ṙk = Rkx ẋ + Rky ẏ + Rkẋ ẍ + Rkẏ ÿ [10]
Ṙkẋ = Rkx
From Eqs. [2]:
Ṙkẏ = Rky [13]
ẍ = −ν 2 x
[11] The viscous damping coefficient is calculated from the amplitude
ÿ = −ν 2 y of relative motion in the foil structure as follows:
4 µk Fr
The relative velocity is now given by: Ck = [14]
πν |Rk |
Ṙk = −ν 2 Rkẋ x − ν 2 Rkẏ y + Rkx ẋ + Rky ẏ [12] Since:

ẋ = −ν |x| sin (νt + φ) [15]

ẏ = ν
y
cos (νt + φ)

the amplitude of relative motion from Eq. [8] (Peng and Carpino
(5)) is:


2 

2 1

Rkx |x| + Rkẏ ν
y
+ −Rkẋ ν |x| + Rky
y

2
|Rk | =

[16]
Reynolds Equation
The gas film is modeled with the compressible, constant tem-
perature Reynolds equation.


−h3 P V ∂Ph
∇· ∇P + Ph + =0 [17]
12µ 2 ∂t

The perturbed components of the Reynolds equation are:

x − ν 2 P0 hẋ − ν 2 Pẋ h0 = 0

ẋ + P0 hx + Px h0 = 0

y − ν 2 P0 hẏ − ν 2 Pẏ h0 = 0

ẏ + P0 hy + Py h0 = 0 [18]

TABLE 2—STEADY BEARING PERFORMANCE

Journal load, W = 339.8 N
Eccentricity angle, θe = 190.6 degrees
Journal torque, T = 2.55 × 10−2 N-m
Minimum film thickness (at side edge of foil) = 3.73 × 10−6 m
Minimum film thickness (at centerline of foil) = 10.15 × 10−6 m
Fig. 4—Solution procedure.
 404 M. CARPINO AND G. TALMAGE

where

 
1 ∂ −3h20 P0 1 ∂P0 h3 1 ∂P0 h3 P0 1 ∂Pj
j = hj − 0 Pj − 0
r ∂θ 12 µ r ∂θ 12 µ r ∂θ 12 µ r ∂θ
 
∂ −3h0 P0 ∂P0
2
h ∂P0
3
h P0 ∂Pj
3
+ hj − 0 Pj − 0 [19]
∂z 12 µ ∂z 12 µ ∂z 12 µ ∂z
 
1 ∂ V V
+ h0 Pj + hj P0
r ∂θ 2 2

The boundary conditions on the perturbed pressures for the full

width bearing are: Fig. 5—Sub-foil geometry.
 
L
pj (θ = 0, z) = pj (θ = 2π, z) = pj θ, z =
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

2 determined from the generalized strains. The vector of elemental

  variables is:
−L
= pj θ, z = =0 [20]
2
T
=

anode1 ;

anode2 ;

anode3 ;

T T T T
ae anode4 [26]
The Galerkin form of Eqs. [18] is (Zienkiewicz and Taylor (15)):
where the variables at each of the nodes is given by:

 
0 = δRx = δPx x − ν 2 P0 hẋ − ν 2 Pẋ h0 dA
T
anode =

ax ;

T
ay ;

T
aẋ ;

T
aẏ
T
[27]
A
0 = δRẋ = δPẋ ( ẋ + P0 hx + Px h0 ) dA
A 
  [21] ∂urj 1 ∂urj 1 ∂Pj ∂Pj 1 ∂hj ∂hj
0 = δRy = δPy y − ν 2 P0 hẏ − ν 2 Pẏ h0 dA aTj = urj ; uθ j ; uzj ; ;− ; Pj ; ; ; hj ; ; ;
A ∂z r ∂θ r ∂θ ∂z r ∂θ ∂z
  
0 = δRẏ = δPẏ ẏ + P0 hy + Py h0 dA 1 ∂Wrj ∂Wrj 1 ∂Wzj ∂Wzj
A Wrj ; ; ; Wzj ; ; [28]
r ∂θ ∂z r ∂θ ∂z

Finite Element Formulation Film Thickness

The general finite element formulation is very similar to that The thickness of the gas film is related to the foil deflection and
used for the steady solution (Carpino and Talmage (12)): the position of the journal by the following expression:

δ

ε D̃

T
0̄ = δ 
¯ = ε dA + δh + δθ + δz h (θ, z, t) = rfoil (θ, z) − rjournal (θ, z, t) + ur (θ, z, t) [29]
elements Ae nodes nodes nodes
[22] where rfoil is the initial unloaded foil position, ur is the radial de-
flection of the foil, and the radial position of the journal surface is
The generalized strains, ε̄ , include contributions for all of the
T
given by:
perturbation components as follows:

T rjournal (θ, z, t) = r + e cos (θe ) cos (θ ) + e sin (θe ) sin (θ)

ε =

εx ;

εy ;

ε ẋ ;

T T T T
ε ẏ [23]
+x(t) cos(θ) + y(t) sin(θ ) [30]
    
1 ∂uθ j urj ∂uzj ∂uθ j 1 ∂uzj After h and ur in Eq. [29] are perturbed with respect to the jour-
ε̄jT = urj ; + ; ; + ;
r ∂θ r ∂z ∂z r ∂θ nal motion, the relationships between the perturbed film thick-
  nesses and the perturbed radial foil deflections are:
1 ∂ 2 urj 1 ∂uθ j ∂ 2 ur
− 2 + ;− 2 ;
r ∂θ 2 r ∂θ ∂z hx = urx − cos(θ)
 
2 ∂ urj
2
2 ∂uθ j 1 ∂Pj ∂Pj hy = ury − sin(θ )
− + ; Pj ; ; ; hj ; Wrj ; Wθ j ;
r ∂θ ∂z r ∂z r ∂θ ∂z
 hẋ = urẋ
1 ∂Wθ j
; uθ j ; Ṙ1j ; Ṙ2j ; Ṙ3j [24]
r ∂θ hẏ = urẏ [31]

Within each of the elements, the generalized strains are calculated

from the nodal variables using: TABLE 3—SUB-FOIL STIFFNESS

Krr = 1.0849 × 1011 N/m3

ε = B̃

ae = L̃Ñ

ae [25]
Krθ = −4.4290 × 108 N/m2
Kθ r = −4.4290 × 108 N/m2
The matrix Ñ represents the basis functions for the element.
Kθ θ = 1.9566 × 106 N/m
Cubic basis functions are used for urj , hj , Pj , Wrj ,and Wθ j . Linear
Kequiv = 8.234 × 109 N/m3
basis functions are used for uθ j and uzj . The operator matrix L̃ is
 Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients
These relations [Eqs. 31] are then used to form penalty con-
straints in the finite element formulation.
Solution
The finite element formulation results in a system of nonlin-
ear equations for the perturbed displacements, pressures, and film
thicknesses that are solved following the procedure in Fig. 4. The
static solution is first calculated using the approach developed by
Carpino and Talmage (12). The perturbed deflection, film thick-
ness, and pressure distributions are then calculated iteratively for
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014
Fig. 6—Effect of orbit frequency, µ = 0.1, |∆x| = |∆y| = 2.5 × 10−6 m.
405
chosen values of orbit size and frequency. In each iteration, the
equivalent viscous damping coefficients, Ck , for the sliding con-
tacts in the foil structure are first calculated using Eq. [14]. With
Ck held constant, the resulting equations are linear and the new
perturbed deflection, the film thickness, and the pressure distribu-
tions are found using a direct solver. The stiffness and damping co-
efficients are calculated from the perturbed pressure distribution
following the approach discussed in the next section. If the stiffness
and damping coefficients have not converged, the deflection, the
film thickness, and the pressure distributions are under-relaxed,
and the iteration is repeated.
 406 M. CARPINO AND G. TALMAGE

     
RESULTS Cxx Cxy L/2 θ2 Pẋ cos θ Pẏ cos θ
= rdθdz [33]
The nonlinear system of coupled equations resulting from the Cyx Cyy −L/2 θ1 Pẋ sin θ Pẏ sin θ
finite element formulation is solved iteratively for specific values
of orbit size and orbit frequency. The rotor dynamic stiffness and For a cylindrical orbit of fixed size, the rate of energy being
damping coefficients are then calculated from perturbed compo- dissipated by the Coulomb friction in the foil structure will be:
nents of the pressure by the following expressions: 
4ν
WC = (µ1 Fr |R1 | + µ3 Fr |R3 |) dA [34]
A π
     
Kxx Kxy L/2 θ2 Px cos θ Py cos θ where the magnitude of the relative sliding motion is given by
= rdθdz [32]
Kyx Kyy −L/2 θ1 Px sin θ Px sin θ Eq. [16].
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

Fig. 7—Effect of orbit size, µ = 0.1, ν = 5237 rad/s.

 Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients 407

The rate of the total energy dissipated in the bearing by the Then the rate of the total energy dissipation is:
rotor as it whirls with an orbit of a fixed size will be: ν
WT = [νCxx |x|2 + νCxx |y|2 + (Kyx − Kxy )|x||y|] [37]
   2
t= 2π t= 2π
ν ν ν
WT = Fx d (x) + Fy d (y) [35] where the rotor is moving in a cylindrical orbit. This is not the
2π t=0 t=0
same as the energy dissipated by steady viscous shearing of the gas
between the journal and the bearing. The orbits used to calculate
Since the rotor dynamic coefficients are assumed to be constant
the dissipation rates correspond to the perturbed orbits of the
throughout an orbit, the forces due to stiffness and damping are:
journal motion as in Equations [1] and [2]. The results presented
in this paper are limited to circular orbits.
Fx = Kxx x + Kxy y + Cxx ẋ + Cxy ẏ [36]
The approach presented has been used to study the effects of
Fy = Kyx x + Kyy y + Cyx ẋ + Cyy ẏ orbit frequency, orbit size, and friction coefficient on rotor dynamic
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

Fig. 8—Effect of friction coefficient, ν = 5237 rad/s, |∆x| = |∆y| = 2.5 × 10−6 m.
 408 M. CARPINO AND G. TALMAGE

TABLE 4—EFFECT OF SOLUTION MESHES µ = 0.1, |X| = |Y| = 2.5 × tal energy dissipation increases with the square of the frequency
10−6 M, ν = 5237 RAD/S while the rate of energy dissipation by the Coulomb friction in-
Rotor 32 Circumferential 64 Circumferential creases only linearly with the frequency. At low frequencies, the
dynamic elements elements total dissipation is negative, indicating that the cylindrical orbits
coefficient 2 axial elements∗ 4 axial elements∗ would not be stable at those frequencies. In Fig. 7, the Coulomb
dissipation rate is initially very small and increases dramatically
Kxx 3.7619 × 107 N/m 3.8267 × 107 N/m
with the orbit size to the point where it approaches the total dissi-
Kxy 0.1912 × 107 0.1770 × 107
pation. When the orbits are small, most of the dissipation is due to
Kyx 0.38920 × 107 0.3806 × 107
Kyy 2.1989 × 107 2.1930 × 107
oscillations in the thickness of the gas film. With large orbits, the
Cxx 454.12 N-s/m 442.92 N-s/m effective stiffness of the gas film will be large and the deflections
Cxy −148.62 -129.27 in the foil structure will be large, providing greater dissipation
Cyx 61.22 38.56 by the Coulomb friction. As the coefficient of friction in Fig. 8
Cyy 761.76 743.34 increases, the stiffness coefficients, damping coefficients, and dis-
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014

∗2
or 4 elements were used to model symmetric half of bearing. Re-
sults are for a full width bearing.
coefficients and rotor dissipation of a typical bearing described by
the parameters in Table 1. The nominal performance predicted
by the steady analysis is given in Table 2. Although the friction
coefficient can vary with either the location or the specific sliding
interface, the same value was used throughout the foil structure.
The geometry and the stiffness coefficients for the sub-foil are
given in Fig. 5 and Table 3. Calculated results of rotor dynamic
coefficients and energy dissipation are presented in Figs. 6, 7, and
8. These results are centered about the case where ν = 5237 rad/s
(synchronous), µ = 0.1, and |x| = |y| = 2.5 × 10−6 m.
In all of the cases presented in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 for this bearing,
the direct stiffness coefficients are substantially greater than the
cross stiffness coefficients. In Fig. 6, the damping coefficients go
to zero as the orbit frequency, ν, increases. This is to be expected
at higher frequencies because the gas is being compressed faster
than it can be squeezed out of the bearing, reducing the amount of
viscous damping in the gas film. Also, as the frequency increases
(Fig. 6), the total dissipation rate becomes substantially greater
than the Coulomb dissipation. This is because the rate of the to-
sipation rates approach asymptotic values. As the coefficient of
friction in the foil structure becomes large, the relative sliding and
deflection in the foil structure becomes smaller. The bearing then
behaves as if the foil structure were locked or rigid. The dissipation
caused by the Coulomb friction approaches zero as the friction co-
efficient increases. In general, the effect of Coulomb friction on
the rotordynamic coefficients of the bearing depends on the spe-
cific geometry of the sub-foils and the resulting sub-foil stiffness
matrix in addition to the friction coefficient.
The results presented in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 were calculated using
one symmetric half of a bearing with a grid composed of 32 ele-
ments in the circumferential direction and 2 elements in the axial
direction. Rotor dynamic coefficients calculated with this mesh
and a mesh consisting of 64 by 4 elements are given in Table 4
for the base case. The stiffness and direct damping coefficients
demonstrate generally good agreement, and that the coarse mesh
is sufficient. While the relative errors between the cross damping
coefficients appear large, they are significantly smaller in magni-
tude than the direct components. An example of the iterative con-
vergence of the rotor dynamic coefficients, Kxx and Cxx , is shown
in Fig. 9. Between iterations, the perturbed displacements, film
thickness, and pressure were underrelaxed with a factor equal to
0.95.

Fig. 9—Convergence example, µ = 0.1, ν = 5237 rad/s, |∆x| = |∆y| = 2.5 × 10−6 m.
 Prediction of Rotor Dynamic Coefficients 409

CONCLUSIONS
A finite element approach for the prediction of rotor dynamic
coefficients in gas lubricated foil journal bearings has been pre-
sented. The approach is unique in that it incorporates a contin-
uous structural model for the sub-foils that couples radial and
circumferential deflections. The results were presented for a spe-
cific bearing to demonstrate the effects of frequency, orbit size,
and friction coefficient. In this specific case it was found that the
Coulomb damping as measured by the rate of energy dissipation is
small unless either the journal orbits are large or the coefficient of
friction is small. Increased friction coefficients do not necessarily
increase the amount of damping and may in fact cause the bearing
to behave as if it had a rigid surface.
Downloaded by [Universitat Politècnica de València] at 01:32 26 November 2014
(13) Shames, I. and Dym, C. (1985), Energy and Finite Element Methods in
Structural Mechanics, Taylor and Francis, p 114.
(14) Timoshenko, S. and Woinowski-Krieger, S. (1959), Theory of Plates
and Shells, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, pp 432, 507-
512.
(15) Zienkiewicz, O. C. and Taylor, R. L., 1989, The Finite Element Method,
Vol. I, Fourth Edition, McGraw Hill, New York, ch. 9.
APPENDIX
A finite element model is used to calculate the stiffness co-
efficients in Eqs. [6] of the sub-foil structure. Since the height of
the foil corrugations or bumps is generally small compared to the
radius of the bearing, the curvature effects have been neglected,
and it is assumed that the sub-foil is between two flat plates. It is
also assumed that variations in deflections and geometry between

This general approach facilitates the development and inves- neighboring corrugations are sufficiently small such that one half
tigation of new gas foil journal bearings since it allows bearing of a symmetric corrugation or bump can be analyzed (see Fig. 10).
designers to predict the dynamic performance of bearings based A finite element model of the sub-foil structure results in the fol-
on the actual geometry and physical properties of the bearing. Fur- lowing system of linear equations:
thermore, it provides both a quantitative and a qualitative insight


into the effects of property variations and operating conditions. K̃feUfe = Ffe [A1]

where K̃fe is the global stiffness matrix. If a nonlinear, large dis-

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
placement finite element model is used, then the tangent or instan-
The research presented here was performed under NASA taneous stiffness matrix should be used. The global compliance
Grant No. NAG 3-2656. The authors would like to thank Drs. matrix is given by:
Samuel Howard and Christopher DellaCorte for their continued  −1
support. α̃fe = K̃fe [A2]

A reduced compliance matrix is then calculated from:

REFERENCES
(1) Heshmat, H., Walowit and J. A., Pinkus, O. (1983), “Analysis of Gas- α̃ = S̃T α̃fe S̃ [A3]
Lubricated Foil Journal Bearings,” ASME Journal of Lubrication Technol-
ogy, 105, pp 647-655. S̃ is an N by 2 matrix. All of the values of S̃ are zero except
(2) Peng, J.-P. and Carpino, M. (1993), “Calculation of Stiffness and Damping for one position in each column corresponding to the Y1 and X3
Coefficients for Elastically Supported Gas Foil Bearings,” ASME Journal
of Tribology, 115, pp 20-27. degrees of freedom respectively. The reduced stiffness matrix is:
(3) Lund, J. W. (1987), “Review of the Concept of Dynamic Coefficients for  
KY1 Y1 KY1 X3
Fluid Film Journal Bearings,” ASME Journal of Tribology, 109, pp 37-41. = α̃ −1 [A4]
(4) Peng, J.-P. and Carpino, M. (1994), “Coulomb Friction Damping Effects in KX3 Y1 KX3 X3
Elastically Supported Gas Foil Bearings,” Tribology Transactions, 37, pp
91-98. The stiffness coefficients for the sub-foil are now given by:
(5) Peng, J.-P. and Carpino, M. (1997), “Finite Element Approach to the Pre-
diction of Foil Bearing Rotor Dynamic Coefficients,” ASME Journal of
   
Tribology, 119, pp 85-90. 2
Krr Krθ KY1 Y1 −KY1 X3 
(6) Ku, C.-P. Roger and Heshmat, H. (1994), “Structural Stiffness and Coulomb  = L
 b  [A5]
Damping in Compliant Foil Journal Bearings: Theoretical Considerations,” Kθ r Kθ θ Lb
Tribology Transactions, 37, pp 525-533. −KX3 Y1 KX3 X3
2
(7) Ku, C.-P. Roger and Heshmat, H. (1994), “Structural Stiffness and Coulomb
Damping in Compliant Foil Journal Bearings: Parametric Studies,” Tribol-
ogy Transactions, 37, pp 455-462.
(8) Ku, C.-P. Roger (1994), “Effects of Static Load on Dynamic Structural Prop-
erties in a Flexible Supported Foil Journal Bearings,” ASME Journal of
Vibration and Acoustics, 116, pp 257-262.
(9) Heshmat, H. and Ku, C.-P. Roger (1994), “Structural Damping of Self-
Acting Compliant Foil Journal Bearings,” ASME Journal of Tribology, 116,
pp 76-82.
(10) San Andres, Luis (1995), “Turbulent Flow Foil Bearings for Cryogenic Ap-
plications,” ASME Journal of Tribology, 117, pp 185-195.
(11) Lee, N. S., Choi, D. H., Lee, Y. B., Kim, T. H. and Kim, C. H. (2002), “The
Influence of the Slip Flow on Steady-State Load Capacity, Stiffness and
Damping Coefficients of Elastically Supported Gas Foil Journal Bearings,”
Tribology Transactions, 45, pp 478-484.
(12) Carpino, M. and Talmage, G., (2003), “A Fully Coupled Finite Element
Formulation for Elastically Supported Foil Journal Bearings,” Tribology
Transactions, 46, pp 560-565. Fig. 10—Sub-foil model for calculation of stiffness coefficients.