Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, (2023), 36(12): 231–246

Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics

& Beihang University
Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
cja@buaa.edu.cn
www.sciencedirect.com

Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a specific

multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing under
thermal-fluid–solid coupling
Qihong GAO, Wenjing SUN *, Jingzhou ZHANG

College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China
Key Laboratory of Thermal Management and Energy Utilization of Aircraft, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China

Received 15 December 2022; revised 19 February 2023; accepted 7 May 2023

Available online 12 August 2023

KEYWORDS
Gas foil thrust bearing;
Thermo-elasto-
hydrodynamic analysis;
Thermal-fluid–solid coupling
simulation;
Adaptive deformation;
Structural stiffness
Abstract Gas foil bearing faces severe and complex thermal-fluid–solid coupling issues when in
ultra-high speed and miniaturized impeller machineries. In this study, a Thermo-Elasto-
Hydrodynamic (TEHD) analysis of a specific multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing on the continuous
loading process within a steady rotational speed is numerically investigated by a three-dimensional
thermal-fluid–solid coupling method. Results indicate that the multi-layer foil exhibits nonlinear
overall stiffness, with the thrust bottom foil serving as the primary elastic deformation structure,
while the thrust top foil maintains a well-defined aerodynamic shape during a loading process,
which helps reduce frictional damage and achieve an adequate loading capacity. For low loads,
the fluctuation of the gas film is extremely sensitive, and it weakens dramatically as the load
increases. The viscous heating and friction torque exhibit a linear relationship with an increasing
bearing load after a rapid growth. Depending on the exact stacking sequence and contact position
of the multi-layer gas foil, the overlapping configuration allows for efficient transfer of viscous-
shearing heat accumulated at the smallest air film through thermal conduction while providing elas-
tic support. Due to the strong inhomogeneity of the viscous heat under varying loads, the temper-
ature distribution on the top foil surface shows pronounced variations, while the difference between
the peak and average temperatures of the thrust plate and top foil surfaces widens substantially with
an increasing load.
Ó 2023 Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd. on behalf of Chinese Society of Aeronautics and
Astronautics. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/4.0/).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wjsun@nuaa.edu.cn (W. SUN). 1. Introduction
Peer review under responsibility of Editorial Committee of CJA.
Gas Foil Bearing (GFB) is a specific class of oil-free bearing with
unique advantages such as simplified structure, low-cost mainte-
nance, high-speed stability, and self-acting, which has important
Production and hosting by Elsevier
applications in micro rotating machinery systems. 1,2 It uses the
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2023.07.035
1000-9361 Ó 2023 Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd. on behalf of Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
232 Q. GAO et al.

Nomenclature

A Area (mm2) v Velocity (m/s)

b Pitch ratio mfoil Poisson’s ratio
Efoil Elastic modulus XP Penetration tolerance
F Bearing capacity (N) x, y, z Directions (mm)
Ff Friction torque (N/mm)
FN Contact pressure (N) Greek letters
FT Tangential friction force (N) a Curvature value
h Heat transfer coefficient (W/(m2
K)) b Wedge-section angle (°)
hmin Minimum film thickness (mm) b0 Interval angle (°)
K Structural stiffness (kN/m) bp Group angle (°)
k Thermal conductivity of air (W/(m
K)) d Thickness of top foil (mm)
kfoil Thermal conductivity of foil (W/(m
K)) dboard Thickness of back board (mm)
ltop Top foil length (mm) dbot Thickness of bottom foil (mm)
p Pressure (Pa) dmid Thickness of middle foil (mm)
p0 Reference pressure (Pa) dR Entrance height of film ramp portion (mm)
Q Viscous heating (W) dRB Ramp portion height (mm)
Ri Gas film’s inner radius (mm) f Ramp height ratio
Ro Gas film’s outer radius (mm) h Zimuthal angle (°)
Rb_i Back board’s inner radius (mm) k Molecular mean free path (mm)
Rb_o Back board’s outer radius (mm) l Dynamic viscosity (N
s/m2)
Rbot_i Bottom foil’s inner radius (mm) lf Friction coefficient
Rbot_o Bottom foil’s outer radius (mm) q Air density (kg/m3)
Rg Gas constant qfoil Foil density (kg/m3)
Rm_i Middle foil’s inner radius (mm) re Equivalent stress
Rm_o Middle foil’s outer radius (mm) s Wall shear stress
Rt_i Top foil’s inner radius (mm) U Viscous dissipation term
Rt_o Top foil’s outer radius (mm) x Rotational speed (r/min)
T Temperature (K)
T0 Reference temperature (K)
t Temperature (°C)

circumferential motion of gas induced by a viscous shearing
action on a high-speed rotating surface to form a self-
lubricating gas film and generate loading capacity, with the elas-
tic effect of foils to improve stability. 3 In pursuit of higher speed,
bigger compact size, and greater efficiency for rotational machin-
ery, GFBs face challenges in structural and aerodynamic charac-
teristics, as well as heat dissipation in high-temperature
environments, which is a complex thermal-fluid–solid coupling
issue.4–7
In order to obtain an in-depth understanding on the load-
ing mechanism of GFBs and to improve the bearing capacity
and stability, several tests and modifications have been per-
formed on various foil bearing constructions. Kim8 compared
two different types of GFB and determined that the overall
bearing shape difference was the most influential factor in
determining the loading capacities in relation to the foil stiff-
ness. DellaCorte et al.9 found a direct relationship between
the complexity of the bearing elastic support structure and
the bearing performance, with the loading capacity of a
second-generation bearing that contained a complex elastic
foundation being roughly double of that of a first-generation
bearing. Lee and Kim10 presented a gas foil thrust bearing
and predicted its static and dynamic performances. Results
showed a greater loading capacity at low rotational speeds
and a smaller frictional torque at the start/stop period. Due
to higher requirements in the quality and size of a gas bearing
rotor system, Hu et al.11 presented a gas foil conical bearing
that could bear radial and axial loads simultaneously, and a
preliminary theoretical study was carried out on its dynamic
and static performances.
For Gas Foil Thrust Bearings (GFTBs) which are designed
to carry the axial loads of rotational machinery systems, great
efforts have been devoted during past decades to enhance the
loading capacity. On one hand, through modifications of foil
surfaces12–14 and use of stacked bump foil or protuberant
foil,15–17 the loading capacity could be effectively improved.
On the other hand, researchers had also conducted many opti-
mizations and innovation studies on the geometric structures
of GFTBs, which achieved many notable accomplish-
ments.18–20 Kim et al.21 conducted a parametric study using
optimization methodology and found that the optimal inclined
angle and ramp height could increase the loading capacity of
GFBs. Hu and Feng22 pointed out that the foil profile had a
significant effect on the hydrodynamic pressure effect. In com-
parison with concave and plane wedges, a convex-type wedge
shape enhanced the effective area for film pressure and the
bearing load. To further improve the loading capacity and sta-
bility of GFTBs, researchers have developed multi-layer foil
structures by stacking several foil layers in a designed
sequence. 23,24 Zheng et al.25 designed and fabricated a series
of multi-layer protuberant foil bearings with various layers,
and found that the loading capacity and structural stiffness
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing 233

were highly related to the thickness and layers of the protuber- 2. Computational model
ant foil. Li et al.26 numerically investigated a new overlapped
multi-layer flat foil gas thrust bearing and found that variation 2.1. Physical model of a multi-layer foil thrust bearing
of the foil structure significantly impacted the supporting stiff-
ness and top foil deflection. Studies have shown that through
A typical multi-layer foil thrust bearing is shown in Fig. 1, con-
the use of multi-layer foils, bearing stiffness and loading capac-
sisting of a thrust plate, a multi-layer foil (top foil, back board,
ity might be greatly enhanced, indicating a brighter outlook
middle foil, and bottom foil), and a bearing shell, where the
for future growth.
multi-layer foil has a fixed stacking position through circum-
Due to the intense viscous-shearing heat generated inside
ferential keying. The multi-layer foil structure adjusts the stiff-
the hydrodynamic air layer, the thermal effect has a substantial
ness distribution through elastic deformation, creating an
impact on bearing performance when the rotor is operating at
effective damping effect on the vortex motion of the rotor-
ultra-high speeds. During the long period of operation, the
static subsystem and thus improving rotor stability. The thick-
working temperature will progressively increase due to the lim-
ness of the wedge-shaped top foil gradually increases from the
itation of natural heat dissipation conditions, and factors such
leading edge to the trailing edge until it reaches a stable height.
as thermoelastic instability and bearing-capacity degradation
During operation, when the rotating thrust plate approaches
will significantly affect bearing operation.27–31 Therefore, a
the bearing surface under an axial load, a periodic wedge-
systematic investigation on the aerodynamic thermal charac-
shaped converging gas film gap will be formed between the
teristics of a gas foil bearing is particularly necessary. Peng
thrust plate and the top foil, creating a dynamic pressure effect
and Khonsari32 conducted a numerical investigation of the
that provides an axial load capacity, as shown in Fig. 1(c).
temperature field effect on foil bearing performance and found
Fig. 2 illustrates the particular form of each foil layer. The
that there was an exponential relationship between tempera-
main elastic support structure is a combination of eight top
ture rise and rotational speed. They also noted that operating
foils uniformly distributed on the back board surface, and
temperature had a less effect on bearing capacity at low rota-
the positioning pins on the top foil surface are simplified in
tional speeds, but became more evident at higher speeds. Sim
the modeling process. The middle foil is an elastic element with
and Kim33 investigated the thermal characteristics of compli-
radial grooves and circumferential slits, and its interspersed
ant flexure pivot tilting pad gas bearings and concluded that
bumps on the obverse and reverse sides are laminated to the
the effect of rotational speed on bearing temperature was more
pronounced at a small bearing clearance, while the effect of foil
elastic deformation on the temperature was much less than
that caused by the gas film clearance. Aksoy and Aksit34 estab-
lished a thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic model to analyze the
aerodynamic and thermal characteristics of bump-type foil
journal bearings. They found that the effect of rotational speed
on bearing temperature growth was greater than that of bear-
ing load variation. Zhang et al.35 conducted a numerical inves-
tigation of the thermo-aerodynamic characteristics of GFTBs,
considering both the presence and absence of viscosity dissipa-
tion. Their results indicated that viscous dissipation was
responsible for more than 90% of the aerodynamic heat in
the air film, leading to a significant temperature rise.
For a typical GFTB, the foil deformation affects the gas
film flow, while the gas film pressure in turn affects the loading
capacity, which is a strong fluid–structure-interaction phe-
nomenon. Furthermore, temperature changes under viscous
dissipation within the gas film will affect both the gas and foil
properties, indicating that the thermal influence in the coupling
process is non-negligible. In our earlier research, a novel type
of hydrodynamic multi-layer foil thrust bearing was proposed,
and a multi-objective optimization method was used to deter-
mine the optimal design points of the top foil wedge profile,
which effectively improved its thermal-aerodynamic perfor-
mance. In this paper, the thermal and elastic performances
on the optimized multi-layer foil thrust bearing at a fixed
ultra-high rotational speed have been numerically studied by
a 3-D thermal-fluid–solid coupling method. The multi-layer
foil structure is described in detail, and the interaction between
deformation and heat transfer within foils and gas film is ana-
lyzed by a 2-way coupling method. By analyzing the deforma-
tion distribution of each foil layer under varying bearing loads,
the resulting changes in the characteristic parameters of the gas
film and the elastic, aerodynamic, and thermal characteristics Fig. 1 Schematic of a hydrodynamic multi-layer foil thrust
throughout the loading process are primarily evaluated. bearing.
234 Q. GAO et al.

Table 1 Main geometric parameters.

Item Parameter Value
Top foil Thickness d (mm) 0.15
Group angle bp (°) 40
Interval angle b0 (°) 5
Inner radius Rt_i (mm) 12
Outer radius Rt_o (mm) 21.5
length ltop (mm) 9.5
Pitch ratio b = b/bp 0.68
Ramp height ratio f = dR/d 0.1
Curvature value a 0.6
Back board Thickness dboard (mm) 0.15
Inner radius Rb_i (mm) 12
Outer radius Rb_o (mm) 23.5
Middle foil Thickness dmid (mm) 0.52
Inner radius Rm_i (mm) 13.85
Outer radius Rm_o (mm) 20.5
Bottom foil Initial thickness with spring piece (mm) 0.4
Thickness dbot (mm) 0.15
Inner radius Rbot_i (mm) 12
Outer radius Rbot_o (mm) 23.5
Gas film Initial gap (mm) 0.025
Inner radius Ri (mm) 12
Outlet radius Ro (mm) 23.5

The specific contact between the foils is shown in Fig. 3,

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of each foil layer structure.
back board and the bottom foil, respectively. The bottom foil
has warped spring pieces that are pressed to contact the bear-
ing shell, which carries the primary elastic deformation during
preloading and initial operating stages. The outer edges of the
foils have keys for circumferential fixation, which are simpli-
fied in the modeling process. The initial shape of the top foil
is shown in Fig. 2(d), which is derived from our previous work,
with the curvature factor of the wedge section denoted as a, the
pitch ratio denoted as b = b/bp, and the ramp height ratio
denoted as f = dR/d. Through preliminary work, it was deter-
mined that this optimal design of the wedge profile could effec-
tively improve the thermal-aerodynamic performance. The
main geometric parameters for foils and the gas film are sum-
marized in Table 1.
where the middle foil is in touch with the back board and
the bottom foil through bumps on its surface, which are high-
lighted with red regions in Figs. 3(a) and (b). For the bottom
foil and the bearing shell, the contact is only made at the
end of the warped spring piece in the initial state shown in
Fig. 3(c). The contact area is not constant and may vary with
different operating conditions.
The representative working conditions of an actual turbo-
compressor system are selected for numerical computation.
The corresponding boundary types for the computational
domain are specified in Fig. 4, and the detailed boundary con-
ditions are listed in Table 2. A friction effect is considered
between the multi-layer foil contact areas, including between
the back board and top/middle foils, between the bottom
and middle foils, and between the bottom foil and the bearing
shell. Thermal conduction is considered at the contact posi-
tions between the multi-layer foils, allowing an effective trans-
fer of the viscous-shearing heat generated within the gas film to
the underlying foil. As for the remaining solid boundaries that
are in touch with air, convection heat dissipation to the envi-
ronment is considered.
Since gas foil thrust bearings are usually set on both sides of
a thrust plate in pairs, with aerodynamic heat being generated
on each side of the thrust plate. On account of the symmetrical
geometric feature of the thrust bearing structure, the surface of
the thrust plate is considered to be adiabatic, and the temper-
ature rise from friction and dissipation will be transferred
mainly by natural convection of the foil surface and thermal
conduction through the foils. The operating temperature and
pressure are set as p0 = 600 kPa and T0 = 363 K, respectively,
both for the boundary conditions of the fluid part and as a ref-
erence temperature for natural convection on the foil surface.
In the thermal-fluid–solid coupling process, the fluid–solid
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing 235

Table 2 Boundary conditions.

Boundary Part Boundary conditon
type
Fluid-solid Top foil surface Transfer of force and
interface Back board displacement, heat flow rate and
upper surface temperature
Solid-solid Back board and Friction effect
interface middle foil
Middle foil and
bottom foil
Moving Thrust plate Thermally adiabatic, rigid body,
wall free in z direction
Fixed wall Bearing shell T0 = 363 K, fixed, rigid body
Solid wall Back board Heat transfer coefficient
lower surface (h = 1500 W/(m2
K),
Middle foil T0 = 363 K),
surface free in all directions
Bottom foil
surface
Fluid wall Fluid inner T0 = 363 K, p0 = 600 kPa,
surface free in z direction
Fluid outer
surface

2.2. Numerical methodology

In accordance with the physical model, a three-dimensional

Fig. 3 Contact areas of multi-layer foil structures.
Fig. 4 Boundary types.
interface conducts a 2-way transfer of force and displacement,
heat flow rate and temperature. Both the thrust plate and the
bearing shell are considered as rigid bodies, where the thrust
plate operates at a constant speed of x = 1  105 r/min.
The starting distance between the thrust plate and the top foil
surface in the preloaded state is 25 lm, and the gap will be
gradually lowered during the loading process. Considering that
the bearing operates under stable heat dissipation conditions,
suitable heat transfer coefficients (h) are set on the correspond-
ing surfaces of the foil assembly, where the surface temperature
of the bearing shell is considered to be comparable to the
ambient temperature T0.
thermal-fluid–solid coupling analysis is performed in the com-
putational region between the rotating thrust plate and the
bearing sleeve. The 2-way coupling between the foil assembly
and the fluid domain is achieved by data transfer on the top
foil surface and part of the backboard surface, and the specific
calculation flow chart is illustrated in Fig. 5. The following
steps accomplish this conjugate solving process.
Step 1. The deformation and heat transfer of the foil assem-
bly are evaluated by the Finite Element Method (FEM) solver,
after which the node displacement and temperature data is
transferred to the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) sol-
ver via the coupling surface. The data of surface pressure and
heat flow is then transferred to solid zones after the computa-
tion in the deformed flow field. This process is considered as
one iteration step.
Step 2. Repeating the preceding steps until their respective
convergence requirements are satisfied. After convergence, the
rotating surface will approach the top foil surface at a fixed
rate (2 lm each time), which is considered as a stable loading
process. The solution will be repeated for each new state.
Step 3. The calculation procedure is terminated until the
minimum air-film gap reaches 4 lm, which is considered an
extremely thin gas film that is already sufficient for the
required bearing capacity. The calculation procedure is then
terminated, and the bearing performance is evaluated for each
state.
The movement of the thrust plate is achieved through
dynamic-mesh technology, where its axial position moves
towards the bearing shell to provide an adaptive variation of
the bearing clearance. During the calculation, the thrust plate
is continuously squeezed in the z direction, hence increasing
the bearing load by decreasing the gas film.
236 Q. GAO et al.

Fig. 5 Flow chart of iterative calculation.

For the CFD solver,36 the unsteady, compressible turbulent @v k2 @ 2 v

Vslip ¼ k 
ð4Þ
Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations are @y 2 @y2
used, and the main governing equations are as follows:
where y is the normal distance from the wall, and k is the
@q molecular mean free path.
þ r
qV ¼ 0 ð1Þ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
@t 16 lðTÞ Rg T
k¼
ð5Þ
5 p 2p
@
ðqVÞ þ qðV
rÞV ¼ rp þ r
ðs Þ ð2Þ where l is the dynamic viscosity, T is the absolute temperature,
@t
p is the pressure, and Rg is the gas constant.
@ ðqHÞ
þ rðqVHÞ ¼ r
ðkrT þ s
VÞ ð3Þ (3) The second-order upwind scheme is used for the spatial
@t
discretization of convective terms in the conservation
where q and k are the density and thermal conductivity of air,
equations. The PRESTO (Pressure Staggering Option)
respectively. V is the velocity vector, and s is the viscous shear
scheme is used for the discretization of the pressure gra-
stress tensor. In the energy transport equation, H is the
dient term in the momentum equation. The SIMPLE
enthalpy, and the term s
V reflects the viscous dissipation
(Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure-Linked Equation)
effect. The following treatments are applied during the solu-
algorithm is adopted in the pressure–velocity coupling.
tion process.
The turbulence model is selected as the Shear Stress
Transport (SST) k-x two-equation turbulence model.
(1) The working fluid is treated as an ideal gas with a com-
During the computational process, the convergence cri-
pressible effect consideration. Its temperature-dependent
terion for computations is set as that all normalized
thermal physical parameters are set as those of ideal gas
residuals are less than 105.
based on density, kinetic theory based on specific heat
and thermal conductivity, and Sutherland law based
Using the Finite Element Method (FEM) solver38 to
on viscosity. The viscous dissipation term is considered
describe the structural system, the overall equilibrium equation
in the energy transport equation.
and the energy equation in the solid field are illustrated as
(2) Considering that the film layer thickness is very thin and
the Knudsen number (Kn) is normally of an order in Ku ¼ F ð6Þ
102, a slip flow approximation is adopted near the sur-
face for an accurate prediction of flow characteristics rðkfoil rTÞ ¼ 0 ð7Þ
and viscous heat generation.37
where K, u, and F are the total stiffness matrix, the nodal dis-
placement vector, and the nodal load vector, respectively. kfoil
In the current study, a classical second-order slip flow
is the thermal conductivity of the solid structure. With the
approximation is adopted, such as
pressure distribution at the gas film, force is transferred to
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing
the foil side through the top foil surface and part of the back
board surface, which generates elastic deformation. The rela-
tionship between stress and strain is
r ¼ De el
ð8Þ
where r and D are the stress vector and the elasticity matrix,
respectively. eel is the strains that cause stresses which can be
shown as eel = Bu, where B and u are the strain–displacement
matrix evaluated at the integration point and the nodal dis-
placement vector, respectively.
Considering the complexity of the contact and deformation
problem between the top foil, the back board, the middle foil,
the bottom foil, and the bearing shell, augmented Lagrange
contact formulation is used to improve the compatibility in
the contact interface. Meanwhile, the Coulomb friction model
is considered at the contact interface. The contact formulation
and the friction model are shown as follows:
FN ¼ KN
XP þ k0 ð9Þ
FT ¼ lf FN ð10Þ
where FN and KN are the contact pressure and the contact stiff-
ness between the contact surfaces, respectively. XP is the pen-
etration tolerance, which is set to 0.1 times the thickness of
the near-wall mesh cell in this paper. An additional term k0
is inserted to reduce the sensitivity of the contact pressure to
the contact stiffness. In the friction model, FT is the tangential
friction force, and lf is the friction coefficient. In this paper,
the friction coefficient between the foil assembly is selected
as 0.1 based on previous works.39–42
The foils are made of Inconel-718. The density, elastic mod-
ulus, and Poisson’s ratio are qfoil = 7890 kg/m3, Efoil =
2.1  1011 Pa, and mfoil = 0.3, respectively. The thermal con-
ductivity (kfoil) is determined from the following fitting rela-
tion, presented by Sweet et al.43:
kfoil ¼ 11:45 þ 1:156  102 t þ 7:72  106 t2 ð11Þ
where t is the temperature (unit: ℃).
The vector force transferred from the flow field to the solid
field through the fluid–solid coupling surface is given by the
following equation:
Fcouple ¼ ðp  p0 ÞAn þ Fviscous ð12Þ
where p is the local surface pressure, and An and Fviscous are the
normal vector at the coupling position and the vector force
caused by the viscous force, respectively. Based on the pressure
at the top foil surface, the axial bearing load is calculated from
the following integral equation:
Z h 2 Z Ri
F¼N ðp  p0 Þdhdr ð13Þ
h1 Ro
where N represents the number of top foils in the circumferen-
tial direction, which is N = 8 in this study.
Due to the wall shear stress distribution on the thrust plate
surface, the friction torque that the bearing exerts on the rotor
surface is expressed as
Z bearing sizes. Meanwhile, the characteristic parameters of the
Ff ¼ srdA ð14Þ
A
where s is the wall shear stress on the thrust plate surface.
237
2.3. Computational mesh and example validation
The computational grids in fluid and solid domains are shown
in Fig. 6(a1), both using hexahedral meshes to improve com-
putational accuracy. A mesh-independent test is given by com-
paring the bearing capacity of multiple grids under typical
working conditions, as shown in Fig. 6(a2), where the thrust
plate is kept at a fixed position. To determine the number of
grids in the fluid domain, the grids in the solid domain are kept
encrypted and constant, and the bearing capacity is compared
under different fluid domain grids. The same method is used to
determine the solid domain grids, i.e., by keeping the fluid
domain grid quantity constant. A suitable grid number is
finally determined with approximately 1 million and 0.5 mil-
lion grids in fluid and solid domains, respectively. More than
ten layers of grids are arranged within the air film gap to cap-
ture flow details.
In order to validate the current fluid–structure-interaction
numerical method, an example of a bump-type foil journal
bearing operating at 45000 r/min with an average clearance
of 0.0318 mm was verified in advance, which was taken from
the work of Ruscitto et al.44 The computational model for val-
idation is established consistent with the technical report,
along with the same fluid–solid coupling method as in this
paper. Fig. 6(b1) presents the validation model and computa-
tional meshes, where 0.3 million and 0.2 million grids are used
for fluid and solid domains, respectively. The inner surface of
the top foil and the outer surface of the gas film are set as the
coupling surface for data transfer, and the frictional effects
between the foils and the bearing sleeve are considered. For
thermal boundary conditions, viscous heating is dissipated
by natural convection through the surfaces where the bearing
sleeve and foils are in contact with air, respectively, with a
constant temperature of 310 K and a convection heat transfer
coefficient of 15 W/(m2
K). A comparison between present
computed results and published results is given in Fig. 6(b2).
The minimum air film thickness is compared for different
bearing loads at middle (z/L = 1/2) and edge (z/L = 1/6)
positions along the circumferential direction. By comparing
foils deformation caused by different loads, the 2-way cou-
pling method in this study can be verified. It can be seen that
the thicknesses of the gas film at both the edge and mid posi-
tions decrease with an increasing load, with a more pro-
nounced deformation at the mid position. The validation
shows that the numerical results correspond well with the pub-
lished experimental data, and the current numerical methodol-
ogy is trustworthy.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Elastic features of foil assembly
As the gas film is squeezed to a relatively small value during
the numerical process, the loading capacity of the multi-layer
gas foil thrust bearing is progressively increased to nearly
100 N, which indicates a high loading capacity for the current
gas film and the foil deformation undergo substantial changes
during loading. Firstly, coordinated deformations on foil lay-
ers under various loading circumstances are investigated.
238 Q. GAO et al.

Fig. 6 Computational meshes and example validation.

Fig. 8 Variation of foil compression with an enhanced bearing

Fig. 7 Variation of combined stiffness with an enhanced bearing
load.
load.

ing loads. The axial loading F drives deformation of each foil

The structural stiffness is introduced to evaluate the defor- layer, where the total axial displacement is defined as Dz. The
mation behavior of the foil thrust bearing under different bear- structural stiffness K is represented as
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing
Fig. 9 Schematic diagrams of foil deformation under different
loading conditions.
Fig. 10 Effects of loading capacity on foils deformation
contours.
239
Fig. 11 Effects of loading capacity on foils equivalent stress
contours.
K ¼ F=Dz ð15Þ
Figs. 7 and 8 show the structural stiffness and the axial
compression of foil layers with respect to the bearing loads,
respectively. During the continuous loading process, the foil
assembly shows a tiny increment of stiffness at about
F < 20 N. When the load increases, the stiffness tends to
increase linearly. In conjunction with Fig. 8, it can be shown
that the thrust bottom foil undergoes the greatest deformation
at low loads, with the axial compression exceeding 200 lm at a
load of around 20 N, after which deformation slows down.
During the following loading process, the thrust middle foil
is compressed to some extent and becomes the main elastic
support component under medium and high loads together
with the bottom foil. In contrast, the thrust top foil and the
back board have a lower degree of axial compression in com-
parison. The results show that the thrust bottom and middle
foils are the dominant elastic deformation units and that the
current foil assembly can produce a more extensive axial defor-
mation under a low load-bearing force, which is beneficial to
improve the stability during operation. This nonlinear stiffness
characteristic of the multi-layer foil thrust bearing allows a low
stiffness during the start/stop phase to reduce collisions and
friction, while a high stiffness during steady operation to
obtain a sufficient loading capacity.
240
Fig. 12 Variation of top foil deformation distribution under different bearing loads.
The structural deformation schematic in Fig. 9 provides a
better understanding of the structural evolution of multi-
layer foils during the loading process. During the process of
loading increasing, the warped spring piece in the bottom foil
becomes the first part to deform, which is related to the rapid
change of Dzbot in the beginning stage shown in Fig. 8. The
spring piece is quickly flattened under light loading, resulting
in a large axial displacement with only a small change in load,
which plays an important role in providing elastic support.
When the force reaches some intensity (F > 20 N), the middle
foil is also deformed by heavy loading due to the staggered
structure, and the position where it meets the top foil and
the back board is squeezed and warped. For the top foil and
the back board, the partial overhang between them and the
middle foil lacks support and generates a slight squeeze under
the effect of gas film pressure, which, from the perspective of
gas film characteristics, increases the wedge angle between
the top foil and the rotating disk to a certain extent, which is
beneficial to the formation of a fluid dynamic pressure effect.
Figs. 10 and 11 present the local surface deformation and
structural stress for each foil layer under three typical loadings
Q. GAO et al.
to better analyze the elastic characteristics. The deformation is
calculated based on the initial condition of each foil in order to
determine its surface deflection under various loads. On the
basis of the strength theory, an analysis of the structural stress
is performed with the equivalent stress re, also known as Von
Mises stress, shown as
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2  2
rx  ry þ ry  rz þ ðrz  rx Þ2
re ¼ ð16Þ
2
where rx, ry, and rz are the stress components in accordance
with the x, y, and z directions, respectively.
For the different layers of foils, their deformation and force
patterns under different loadings are significantly varied. As
seen in Fig. 10, the increasing bearing load on the top foil
and the back board causes the top foil leading edge (wedge-
shaped inclined section) to expand and form a more prominent
wedge structure. Based on the well-formed aerodynamic pro-
file of the initial condition, the global deformation of the top
foil stays modest (<6 lm). The thrust middle foil acts as a
counterbalance to the forces on the foil assembly. The defor-
mation of the middle foil bumps becomes more pronounced
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing
Fig. 13 Pressure contours on foil surface.
as the bearing load increases. The thrust bottom foil is the
main supporting component, whose deformation rule is rela-
tively consistent under different loadings, which can play an
important role in stiffness adjustment under small loads.
As can be vividly seen from Fig. 11, the equivalent stress
distribution clearly demonstrates the local stresses on the foil
layers surface. For the thrust top foil, the region with the
strongest surface stress is where the back board and the middle
foil happen to separate, corresponding to the minimum gas
film thickness in the fluid domain, which is under a higher load
in the high-pressure zone. The significant stress zone of the
middle foil lies in the meeting area of the individual bumps,
due to an increased deformation caused by the compression
of the bumps. The grooves in the radial direction of the middle
foil effectively relieve the stresses during deformation. For the
bottom foil, the warped spring piece is undoubtedly the most
strained area in the entire system, where the intersection of
the spring piece and the plate is the stress concentration area.
By comparing the deformation under different loads, it can be
seen that the structural strength of the foil assembly is essen-
tially adequate when the loading capacity is low, and that
the construction of the spring can additionally effectively mit-
igate any frictional issues resulting from abrupt loading
241
changes. When the stress increases, the thrust middle foil exhi-
bits outstanding deformation resistance.
Fig. 12 shows the top foil surface deformation to better
capture the response of the wedge-shaped gas film during the
loading process, where Fig. 12(a) compares the thickness dis-
tribution with the aim at analyzing the variation of the top foil
(as well as the gas film) in the thickness direction, while Fig. 12
(b) shows the height on the mid-diameter line under different
loads. r/ltop = 0.6 is chosen as the position for radial contrast
in Fig. 12(b), with a circumferential angle of 5°–45° for zones
of the top foil, and the remaining part of the back board. The
top foil initially produces a more obvious deformation in the
radial direction during the loading process, which is mani-
fested by the compression at the low-radius position as shown
in Fig. 12(a2). However, the surface springs back to its original
shape after the loads reach 96 N, demonstrating superior self-
regulation ability. Although the foil layer has a significant dis-
placement in the axial (or z) direction under different bearing
loads which can be seen from the circumferential height in
Fig. 12(b), there is no noticeable change in the wedge shape
of the top foil surface along the flow direction. It can be seen
that the forces have a less effect on the circumferential defor-
mation of the air film, which allows the top foil to maintain
242 Q. GAO et al.

a more aerodynamic shape and has a greater impact on

enhancing the loading capacity and decreasing viscous heating.

3.2. Flow and thermal features

In this section, the flow field characteristics during the loading

process are discussed. When the thrust plate rotates at a high
speed, the shear flow induced by the rotating plate surface
forms a significant circumferential pressure gradient in the cir-
cumferential wedge-shaped gas film between the thrust top foil
and the rotating plate. As shown in Fig. 13, as the gas flow
approaches the circumferential position of the minimum gas
film thickness, the dynamic flow pressure in the wedge-
shaped channel causes the flow to be sharply compressed,
which results in a sharp increase in the local pressure. In the
step channel downstream from the minimum gap (the gap
between adjacent top foils), flow expansion causes a pressure
drop. During the loading process, the air film gap is signifi-
cantly reduced, which enhances the dynamic compression
effect at this gap location, resulting in a significant expansion
of both the maximum pressure and the ranges of the high-
pressure zones at the smallest gap, which improves the load-
carrying capacity. Comparatively, due to the stable configura-
tion of the top foil, the high-pressure region is concentrated in
the minimum gas film under different loads, with no significant
variation in the distribution trend.
The influence of the bearing load on the minimum gas film
thickness, viscous heating generated in the air gas film, with
the friction torque of the rotating thrust plate is presented in
Fig. 14. The gas film is continuously compressed as the load
intensity grows, while the viscous heating maintains at a high
level. For the friction torque, the changing law is basically Fig. 14 Effects of loading capacity on static characteristics.
the same as that of the viscous dissipation strength, and the
enhanced requirements for the loading capacity also lead to
a significant increase in the surface friction stress. The varia-
tion slope of the minimum air film gap becomes smooth as
the load increases, and the heat dissipation and friction torque
show a nearly linear increase at medium- and high-load condi-
tions. It is interestingly found that when the bearing load is
raised from 10 N to 50 N, the compression of the minimum
gas film reaches about 10 lm, and the heat dissipation
increases by about 20 W. Nevertheless, when the bearing load
is increased from 50 N to nearly 100 N, the gas film changes by
just approximately 2 lm, and the increase in viscous heating
remains at 20 W. It indicates that under high-loading condi-
tions, the multi-layer foil thrust bearing has a greater capacity
for adjusting the changing loads. However, an increase in
loads will inevitably result in a steady increase in pneumatic
heating, which poses significant heat dissipation issues.
Fig. 15 shows the radial velocity distribution on the outer
and inner ring surfaces in radial positions of the air-film gap,
as well as the local flow trajectories colored by the local pres-
sure on the top foil surface for two typical loading conditions.
On the top foil surface, the airflow is driven by the pressure
gradient, deflected toward the radial position under high pres-
sure and exiting at the radial air film gap, which is more signif-
Fig. 15 Local flow trajectories near top foil surface and radial
icant under high-loading conditions. On the high-radius ring of
velocity at film-layer circular sections.
the top foil, a significant end leakage of airflow occurs near the
location of the minimum gap (Vradial > 0 m/s), while the exter-
nal fluid replenishes the air film layer mainly through the gap ring of the top foil, similarly, a significant end leakage of air-
between adjacent top foils (Vradial < 0 m/s). On the low-radius flow (Vradial < 0 m/s) occurs near the minimum gap, with
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing
Fig. 16 Viscous dissipation term contours with different loading capacities.
the airflow being replenished in the gap between adjacent top
foils (Vradial > 0 m/s). At a greater radial pressure differential,
the flow rate via the end leakage in the air film and replenish-
ment between the top foil gap is also greater when the loading
is heavy.
Owing to the tiny circumferential displacement of the foil,
the circumferential airflow in the gas film layer has a significant
axial velocity gradient. The viscous dissipation term (U) for the
fluid kinetic energy is introduced to evaluate the effect of dis-
sipation at high velocity gradients, which is described as
 2  2
l @ui @uj 2 @ui
U¼ þ  l ð17Þ
2 @xj @xi 3 @xi
Fig. 16 shows the distribution of the viscous dissipation
term in a natural logarithmic way (lnU) on the top foil surface
and the thrust plate surface. It is obvious that the dissipative
heat generation mechanisms under different loads exhibit sig-
nificant differences. At light loading, the viscous heating at
the high-radius position of the top foil and the thrust plate is
significantly higher than that in the other regions due to the
243
strong shearing effect caused by high-speed rotation. At the
same time, the air film is not fully compressed, and the
dynamic pressure has not yet been generated at the minimum
gap, so dissipation is not obvious. When the load is increased,
the thickness of the air film decreases sharply, resulting in a
large velocity gradient in the axial direction, which, together
with the strong dynamic pressure effect, leads to a significant
growth of the viscous dissipation intensity in the minimum
air film. At this moment, the primary heat-generating region
of the bearing shifts from the high radius to the minimal gas
film layer.
The surface temperature distribution of the rotating thrust
plate and foil surfaces under different loads is then shown in
Fig. 17. The temperature of the bottom foil is not shown here
because it is similar to the ambient temperature under suitable
cooling conditions. Under varied loading situations, the tem-
perature distribution changes dramatically and is highly
related to the distribution of the viscous dissipation term. At
light loading, the highest-temperature region is located in the
high radius of the top foil, which is caused by a strong shear
244
Fig. 17 Temperature contours on thrust plate and foil surfaces.
effect at high rotational speeds. Under heavy loading condi-
tions, the highest-temperature region moves to the high radius
of the wedge-shaped convergence section and the minimum gas
film region. On one hand, this is attributed to the progressively
increasing dissipation capacity at the minimum air film. On the
other hand, it is also related to the arrangement of the foil
assembly. Based on the dissipation intensity distribution in
Fig. 16, it can be seen that the theoretical high-temperature
region should extend to the low radius of the minimum air film
during the loading process. However, in practical application,
as the back board and the middle foil meet at the smallest air
gap, a large amount of dissipated heat is transferred to the
middle foil due to thermal conductivity between the solids,
allowing better cooling in the smallest gas film gap which
would otherwise be a high-temperature zone. When the heat
is absorbed by the middle foil, it is evacuated by natural con-
vection and thermal conductivity to the bottom foil. It is evi-
dent that the present foil configuration can not only meet the
requirements for aeroelastic qualities, but also outperform in
heat evacuation.
The temperature distribution on the thrust plate and top
foil surfaces during the loading process is illustrated in
Fig. 18. The average temperature here refers to the spatially
average temperature over the whole surface of the bearing sec-
tion (the plate or the top foil). Since the foil thrust bearing is
Q. GAO et al.
Fig. 18 Effects of loading capacity on surface temperatures.
operated at a constant rotating speed of x = 1  105 r/min,
there is already a high temperature rise in the gas film under
the effect of viscous dissipation even in the initial phase of
loading. Based on the cooling modes in this paper, which
mainly act between the foils and on the bottom foil’s back side,
it is clear that the surface temperature of the thrust plate is
much higher than that of the top foil. As the load increases,
the highest temperature gradually migrates from r/ltop = 1
to the lower-radius position (r/ltop = 0.9). The peak tempera-
ture of the plate and foil surface increases by 40 K while the
mean temperature is about 34 K, indicating that increasing
the bearing load causes a significant rise in the operating tem-
perature environment of the gas foil thrust bearing, which is
more significant for the peak temperature. Meanwhile, due
to the increasing intensity and non-uniformity of viscous-
shearing heat generation inside the gas film under heavy load-
ing, the range between the average and peak temperatures
increases from 20 K for moderate loads to more than 40 K
at F = 96 N. Therefore, how to use a reasonable cooling
method to reduce the temperature and improve the uniformity
of distribution under high loading is an issue that needs further
investigation.
4. Conclusions
In the present study, a specific multi-layer gas foil thrust bear-
ing is introduced based on a thermal-fluid–solid coupling mod-
eling methodology to analyze its aeroelastic, aerodynamic, and
thermal characteristics, by assuming that the bearing works
Thermo-elasto-hydrodynamic analysis of a multi-layer gas foil thrust bearing
stably at a fixed rotational speed of 1  105 r/min. The axial
motion of the thrust plate is managed in order to consider a
gradual loading process. A 2-way coupling method is used at
the intersection of the gas film with the top foil surface and
part of the back board surface to transfer data between the
solid and flow fields. This work contributes to a deeper under-
standing of multi-layer gas foil thrust bearings. Main conclu-
sions are summarized as follows.
(1) In terms of aeroelastic characteristics, multi-layer foils
show a favorable promise to accommodate bearing
deformation and expand the axial load ranges of
GFTBs. The top foil maintains an exemplary aerody-
namic configuration, with its middle and bottom foils
performing the main role of coordinated deformation
during the loading process, which helps in achieving a
sufficient loading capacity and minimizing rubbing dam-
age. Additionally, the overall stiffness of the bearing
varies nonlinearly with the bearing load, which con-
tributes to the stability of operation.
(2) The minimum air film gap tends to gradually level off
with an increasing loading capacity, while viscous heat-
ing and friction torque grow sharply and show a linear
relationship at high loads. The temperature distribution
of the top foil surface differs noticeably under light and
heavy loadings, illuminating the diverse viscous heat
generating methods under differing bearing loads. The
contact between the back board and the middle foil at
the minimum gas film position allows effective evacua-
tion of viscous heating through thermal conduction, fol-
lowed by convection heat removal in the foil gap.
(3) Due to the increased intensity and non-uniformity of
viscous-shearing heat generation inside the gas film
under heavy loading, the temperature of the thrust plate
and top foil increases rapidly and exhibits a non-
uniform distribution during load lifting. At F = 96 N,
the peak temperature has a 90 K difference with respect
to the mean temperature on the thrust plate and a 58 K
difference on the top foil surface. Additionally, the tem-
perature difference between the thrust plate and the top
foil increases during the loading process, indicating that
effective thermal management methods require further
study.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors are gratefully for the financial supports provided
by the Natural Science Fund of Jiangsu Province, China (No.
BK20200448) and the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of
China (No. 2020TQ0143).
245
References
1. Heshmat H. Advancements in the performance of aerodynamic
foil journal bearings: High speed and load capability. J Tribol
1994;116(2):287–94.
2. Dellacorte C, Valco MJ. Load capacity estimation of foil air
journal bearings for oil-free turbomachinery applications. Tribol
Trans 2000;43(4):795–801.
3. Wang GP, Cheng SA, Hao HN. Recent progress on the structural
styles of journal foil gas bearings. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng
2018;439:042016.
4. Samanta P, Murmu NC, Khonsari MM. The evolution of foil
bearing technology. Tribol Int 2019;135:305–23.
5. Zhou Y, Shao LT, Zhang C, et al. Numerical and experimental
investigation on dynamic performance of bump foil journal
bearing based on journal orbit. Chin J Aeronaut 2021;34
(2):586–600.
6. Xu ZN, Li CL, Du JJ, et al. Load-carrying characteristics of
bump-type gas foil thrust bearings. Int J Mech Sci
2023;244:108080.
7. Li Y, Duan FH. Interference torque of a three-floated gyroscope
with gas-lubricated bearings subject to a sudden change of the
specific force. Chin J Aeronaut 2019;32(3):737–47.
8. Kim D. Parametric studies on static and dynamic performance of
air foil bearings with different top foil geometries and bump
stiffness distributions. J Tribol 2007;129(2):354–64.
9. DellaCorte C, Radil KC, Bruckner RJ, et al. Design, fabrication,
and performance of open source generation I and II compliant
hydrodynamic gas foil bearings. Tribol Trans 2008;51(3):254–64.
10. Lee D, Kim D. Design and performance prediction of hybrid air
foil thrust bearings. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2011;133(4):042501.
11. Hu HY, Feng M, Ren TM. Study on the performance of novel gas
foil conical bearings. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J 2021;235
(5):883–900.
12. Fowell MT, Medina S, Olver AV, et al. Parametric study of
texturing in convergent bearings. Tribol Int 2012;52:7–16.
13. Zhang H, Liu Y, Hafezi M, et al. A distribution design for circular
concave textures on sectorial thrust bearing pads. Tribol Int
2020;149:105733.
14. Guenat E, Schiffmann J. Performance potential of gas foil thrust
bearings enhanced with spiral grooves. Tribol Int 2019;131:438–45.
15. Hu HY, Feng M, Ren TM. Study on the performance of gas foil
thrust bearings with stacked bump foils. Ind Lubr Tribol 2020;72
(6):761–9.
16. Xu F, Dong Z, Chu J, et al. Experimental analysis of influence of
double-layer bump foils on aerodynamic thrust foil bearings
performance. Ind Lubr Tribol 2022;74(1):127–33.
17. Guo Y, Hou Y, Wang Y, et al. Numerical analysis of aerodynamic
lubricated double-decked protuberant foil thrust bearing. J Adv
Mech Des Syst Manuf 2019;13(3):JAMDSM0056.
18. Zhang CB, Ao HR, Jiang HY. Static and dynamic bearing
performances of hybrid gas dynamic bearings. Tribol Int
2021;160:107036.
19. Park DJ, Kim CH, Jang GH, et al. Theoretical considerations of
static and dynamic characteristics of air foil thrust bearing with tilt
and slip flow. Tribol Int 2008;41(4):282–95.
20. Li H, Geng HP, Qi L, et al. Effects of wedge curvature on
performances of foil thrust bearing and the profile design in
compressor system. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J 2021;235
(9):1868–78.
21. Kim TH, Park M, Lee TW. Design optimization of gas foil thrust
bearings for maximum load capacity. J Tribol 2017;139(3):031705.
246
22. Hu HY, Feng M. Influence of wedge shape on the performance of
air foil thrust bearings. Ind Lubr Tribol 2019;73(1):23–32.
23. LaTray N, Kim D. Design of novel gas foil thrust bearings and
test validation in a high-speed test rig. J Tribol 2020;142(7):071803.
24. Lai TW, Guo Y, Wang W, et al. Elastro-hydrodynamic lubrica-
tion model of multi-decked foil thrust bearing with copper wire
support. J Mech Sci Technol 2017;31(9):4371–9.
25. Zheng YQ, Lai TW, Chen ST, et al. Static characteristics of six
pads multilayer protuberant foil thrust bearings. Proc Inst Mech
Eng Part J 2017;231(2):158–64.
26. Li CL, Du JJ, Yao YX. Modeling of a multi-layer foil gas thrust
bearing and its load carrying mechanism study. Tribol Int
2017;114:172–85.
27. Ryu K, San AL. On the failure of a gas foil bearing: high
temperature operation without cooling flow. J Eng Gas Turbines
Power 2013;135(11):112506.
28. Xiong C, Xu B, Yu HR, et al. A thermo-elastic-hydrodynamic
model for air foil thrust bearings considering thermal seizure and
failure analyses. Tribol Int 2023;183:108373.
29. Zhang Y, Chen GD, Wang L. Thermoelastohydrodynamic anal-
ysis of misaligned bearings with texture on journal surface under
high-speed and heavy-load conditions. Chin J Aeronaut 2019;32
(5):1331–42.
30. Chalkiopoulos M, Charitopoulos A, Fillon M, et al. Effects of
thermal and mechanical deformations on textured thrust bearings
optimally designed by a THD calculation method. Tribol Int
2020;148:106303.
31. Gao QH, Sun WJ, Zhang JZ, et al. Fluid-solid coupled simulation
on thermal management of hydrodynamic gas foil bearing with an
axial cooling throughflow. Case Stud Therm Eng 2022;37:102238.
32. Peng ZC, Khonsari MM. A thermohydrodynamic analysis of foil
journal bearings. J Tribol 2006;128(3):534–41.
33. Sim K, Kim D. Thermohydrodynamic analysis of compliant
flexure pivot tilting pad gas bearings. J Eng Gas Turbines Power
2008;130(3):032502.
Q. GAO et al.
34. Aksoy S, Aksit MF. A fully coupled 3D thermo-elastohydrody-
namics model for a bump-type compliant foil journal bearing.
Tribol Int 2015;82:110–22.
35. Zhang JY, Qiao XY, Chen WD, et al. Numerical investigation of
Thermo-aerodynamic characteristics of gas foil thrust bearing.
Therm Sci Eng Prog 2022;31:101296.
36. ANSYS Inc. ANSYS Fluent 14.0 user’s guide. Canonsburg:
ANSYS Inc.; 2012.
37. Lee YB, Kwak HD, Kim CH, et al. Numerical prediction of slip
flow effect on gas-lubricated journal bearings for MEMS/MST-
based micro-rotating machinery. Tribol Int 2005;38(2):89–96.
38. ANSYS Inc. ANSYS workbench release 11.0. Canonsburg:
ANSYS Inc.; 2008.
39. Hoffmann R, Liebich R. Experimental and numerical analysis of
the dynamic behaviour of a foil bearing structure affected by metal
shims. Tribol Int 2017;115:378–88.
40. Fatu A, Arghir M. Numerical analysis of the impact of manufac-
turing errors on the structural stiffness of foil bearings. J Eng Gas
Turbines Power 2018;140(4):041506.
41. Chen R, Zhao Y, Yao JK, et al. Research on the performance of
foil thrust bearings under dynamic disturbances. Tribol Int
2022;174:107744.
42. Zywica G, Baginski P, Bogulicz M, et al. Numerical identification
of the dynamic characteristics of a nonlinear foil bearing structure:
effect of the excitation force amplitude and the assembly preload. J
Sound Vib 2022;520:116663.
43. Sweet JN, Roth EP, Moss M. Thermal conductivity of Inconel 718
and 304 stainless steel. Int J Thermophys 1987;8(5):593–606.
44. Ruscitto D, McCormick J, Gray S. Hydrodynamic air lubricated
compliant surface bearing for an automotive gas turbine engine. I.
Journal bearing performance. Washington, D.C.: NASA; 1978.
Report No.: CR-135368.