4.7 Article

An equivalent unbalance identification method for the balancing of nonlinear squeeze-film damped rotordynamic systems

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOUND AND VIBRATION
卷 360, 期 -, 页码 53-73

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2015.08.028

关键词

Rotor balancing; Nonlinear vibration; Squeeze-film damper bearings; Inverse problems

资金

  1. Mexican National Science and Technology Council (CONACYT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The high pressure (HP) rotor in an aero-engine assembly cannot be accessed under operational conditions because of the restricted space for instrumentation and high temperatures. This motivates the development of a non-invasive inverse problem approach for unbalance identification and balancing, requiring prior knowledge of the structure. Most such methods in the literature necessitate linear bearing models, making them unsuitable for aero-engine applications which use nonlinear squeeze-film damper (SFD) bearings. A previously proposed inverse method for nonlinear rotating systems was highly limited in its application (e.g. assumed circular centered SFD orbits). The methodology proposed in this paper overcomes such limitations. It uses the Receptance Harmonic Balance Method (RHBM) to generate the backward operator using measurements of the vibration at the engine casing, provided there is at least one linear connection between rotor and casing, apart from the nonlinear connections. A least-squares solution yields the equivalent unbalance distribution in prescribed planes of the rotor, which is consequently used to balance it. The method is validated on distinct rotordynamic systems using simulated casing vibration readings. The method is shown to provide effective balancing under hitherto unconsidered practical conditions. The repeatability of the method, as well as its robustness to noise, model uncertainty and balancing errors, are satisfactorily demonstrated and the limitations of the process discussed. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据