4.7 Article

Numerical analysis of multiple friction contacts in bladed disks

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL SCIENCES
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 224-237

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.01.016

关键词

Friction damping; Shroud contact; Strip damper; Cyclic symmetry; Alternate frequency time domain method; Multiharmonic balance method

资金

  1. Swedish Energy Agency
  2. Siemens Industrial Turbomachinery AB
  3. GKN Aerospace
  4. Royal Institute of Technology through the Swedish research program TurboPower

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The damping potential of multiple friction contacts in a bladed disk is investigated. Friction contacts at tip shrouds and strip dampers are considered. It is shown that friction damping effectiveness can be potentially increased by using multiple friction contact interfaces. Friction damping depends on many parameters such as rotational speed, engine excitation order and mode family and therefore it is not possible to damp all the critical resonances using a single kind of friction contact interface. For example, a strip damper is more effective for the low nodal diameters, where blade/disk coupling is strong. The equations of motion of the bladed disk with multiple friction contacts are derived in the frequency domain for a cyclic structure with rotating excitations. A highly accurate method is used to generate the frequency response function (FRF) matrix. Furthermore, a finite element contact analysis is performed to compute the normal contact load and the contact area of the shroud interface at operating rotational speed. The multiharmonic balance method is employed in combination with the alternate frequency time domain method to find the steady state periodic solution. A low-pressure turbine bladed disk is considered and the effect of the engine excitation level, strip mass, thickness and the accuracy of FRF matrix on the nonlinear response curve are investigated in detail. (C) 2018 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