An International Conference on Tribology,

TRIBOINDIA-2018
th th
13 -15 December 2018, VJTI, Mumbai, India

Prediction of Stiffness and Damping of Gas Foil Journal Bearing

for High- Speed Rotor
Romi Dhakad, Biren Kumar Pradhan, Jitesh Kumar, Suraj K Behera
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Rourkela 769008, Odisha (INDIA)

AB STR ACT

Contamination-free bearings such as gas bearings are an alternate solution in various high-speed turbomachinery such as turboexpander and
turbocharger. The major limitation of gas bearing is its low dynamic characteristics such as stiffness and damping. Gas foil bearings (GFBs)
are the bearings with elastic spring-like structure in between the runner and the bearing base. These elastic structures in GFB help to tailor
the dynamic coefficients of bearing by modifying foil material and its geometry. A bump type GFB is quite popular among tribologists due
to its ease of fabrication and assembly compared to other types of GFB. In a bump type GFBs, the overall bearing stiffness is due to stiffness
the bump foil, top foil, and the pressurized bearing gas. The overall damping inside the bearing is due to coulombs friction between (i) top
and bump foil and (ii) bump foil and the bearing base. A number of numerical techniques have been successfully developed to predict the
static characteristic, unlike the dynamic characteristics. This paper discusses a perturbation technique to predict the dynamic characteristic
such as overall stiffness and damping of a bump type gas foil bearing. Finite difference formulation is used to determine four stiffness and
four damping coefficients. The four coefficients include two direct and two cross-coupled coefficients. The influence of foil material and its
geometry over the dynamic characteristics are also discussed in the paper.

Keywords: GFB, Reynold’s Equation, Stiffness and Damping Coefficients, Perturbation Analysis

1. Introduction:

Gas bearings are one of the most preferred options for high-speed rotor and contamination free application such as cryogenic turbo-
expander. The gases, unlike liquid lubricated bearings, have low viscosity, which leads to low stiffness and damping. The Stiffness and
damping are being dynamics coefficients of any rotor-bearings system. So low stiffness and damping lead to dynamic instability of rotor-
bearings systems at high operational speed. Gas foil bearing is suitable for such high rotational speed application as it has the ability to tailor
its damping and stiffness coefficient by modifying the geometrical and material properties. Gas foil bearing provides various advantages like
higher load caring capacity, better stability and lower power loss in comparison to traditional journal bearings (Heshmat et al., 1982, 1983).
An elastic foundation was used to support top foil of gas foil bearing. The elastic foundation resists deflection due to load on the journal.
The elastic foundation contains several spring-like beds such as corrugated sub-foils. These sub foils are generally thin and expandable
membrane-like structures wrapped around the bearing and termed as bump foil. On the bearing surface, in the circumferential direction
bumps are arranged along the width of the bearing. The geometry of the bump strips may vary from one to another. The working fluid
analysis was done by using Reynold's equation in the case of compressible gas. Koepsel et al. (1977 was developed a forward iteration
method. He used two methods i.e. a finite difference formulation and a finite element formulation for the fluid model and for the structural
model respectively. Heshmat et al. (1983) were developed an inverse method. In the inverse method, the elastic equation of foil deflection
is put into Reynolds equation and for these equations, finite difference formulas are developed. And these finite difference equations are
solved by a Newton-Raphson method. Later another method was developed by Lund, 1987. This method is a modified method. In this
method find pressure due to the small perturbations and substituted into the Reynolds equation. By collecting same order terms set of
differential equations are obtained. And these differential equations are solved by using the finite difference method and give stiffness and
damping coefficients. Recently, Carpino and Peng (1991) were developed a modified forward iteration method. In this approach, Finite
element formulations are derived for both structural and fluid problems and these formulations are solved iteratively. Many authors predict
the dynamic coefficients (Sternlicht, 1959, Heshmat et al., 1983), on the basis of perturbation approach of the steady state conditions. This
paper predicts the dynamics coefficients i.e. Stiffness and damping coefficients by using a perturbation approach. In the perturbation
approach, a small displacement or velocity perturbation is used in steady-state conditions and in the perturbed state load is calculated. The
stiffness and damping coefficients are yield by partial derivative of this load with respect to the small displacement and velocity
perturbation.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

Table-1: Nomenclature
Symbols Description Symbols Description Symbols Description Symbols Description

p Pressure over
 Angular coordinate h h C  L
Length of the
the bearing bearing
surface

pa Atmospheric Rb Radius of the bump  Speed of the

rotor(rad/sec)
z Axial
coordinate
pressure
p p pa  hb Bump height 0 Viscosity of
the gas z  z L
Film Young’s
h thickness s Bump pitch e Eccentricity E modulus of
bump material


Radial Eccentricity
C
clearance
lb Half Bump length
ratio  e C  R Journal radius

v Whirl
frequency
 Attitude angle tb Bump foil
thickness W W pa R2 

Compliance Compressibility
 Poisson’s
Ratio
 number,
W
load on
bearing 
Number,
60  R 
3 2
2 pa s  lb 
 (1- )
2
  
CE  tb  pa  C 

2. Methodology:

2.1 Prediction of bearing stiffness and damping coefficients :

To determine the dynamic coefficients, a general approach which is based on a perturbation method has been implemented. Perturbation
theory is one of the mathematical methods which provide an approximate solution to a given problem by an approach from the exact
solution related, simpler problem. To solve the equation resulting from Perturbation theory used a finite difference method and get the
dynamic coefficient. The stiffness to be found here is the bearing stiffness, which is comprised of the stiffness due to the bump foil and
stiffness due to air. Non-dimensional stiffness has been found out, which is linear and constant at every point. The gas pressure P developed
within the film thickness h is expressed by using the Reynolds equation for an isoviscous, isothermal ideal gas and this equation is

  3 P    3 P    Ph    Ph 
 Ph    Ph   6 R  12  (1)
x  x  z  z  x t

Where,  x , z  are the circumferential and axial coordinates on the plane of bearing. Takes the atmospheric pressure Pa at the starting and
end point in the axial direction of the bearing. The boundary conditions for the pressure P are:
P  Pa at   0 and 2 (2)

P  Pa at z  0 and L (3)

In a transitory analysis, both pressure P and the clearance depend on time. But we assumed that viscosity  is not a function of both space
and time i.e. constant. The non-dimensional Reynold’s equation for polar coordinates is given by
Where non-dimensional parameters are given by:

  3 P   R    3 P 
2
  Ph    Ph  (4)
 Ph 
    Ph   2
     L  z  z   

h z   6   R 
2
v e
P 
P
, h , z  , t ,    ,   ,  
Pa C L v  pa   C   C (5)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

Where Pa is the atmospheric pressure, v is the whirl frequency, L is the bearing length, and C is the nominal clearance. Respective
boundary conditions:
P 1 at  0 and 2 (6)

P  1 at z  0 and L (7)

Now the aerodynamic Reynold’s equation is coupled with the structural equation. The foil surface used in the structural model is made up of
a thin and extendable material. In this case, the elastic foundation effect is much more than the bending and membrane effects. So, the
bending and membrane effects are considered to negligible. Therefore, the resulting equilibrium equation for the foil is:
P  ku  bu& 0 (8)

Where K represent the stiffness coefficient of the elastic foundation. The term bu&represents the equivalent viscous damping of the
structure and the Coulomb friction obtains due to the interaction of any foil/ foundation. To simplify the analysis, we assumed that the
damping coefficient is negligible i.e. Zero. And also assumed the mass of the foil is negligible. So no inertial term is obtained in the above
equation. A temporal derivative is represented by using "dot" on the top of a variable. Therefore, the boundary condition for the deflection
of foil is:
u 0 at  0 (9)

The non-dimensional structural equation can be presented as:

P  Ku  0 (10)

Where the non-dimensional parameters are given as:

3
u E  ti  1 1
P 
P
, K 
kC u , k   ,  
2s  L  1  2 
, (11)
Pa Pa C K

The journal forces are calculated by integrating the pressure on the whole bearing surface. From Figure 1, forces are given as:

 Fx 
  L
2 sin  
     0 P  Rd dz (12)
 y
 F  0  cos  

Fig .1 The Coordinate system and sign convention of the journal forces[Heshmat et al., 1983]

When a journal is perturbed by a small displacement,  x , y  and small velocity  x, y  the new journal forces can be expressed in
terms of Taylor series expansion, which is given by:
F F F F
F  F0  x  y  x  y (13)
x 0 y 0 x 0 y 0

Where the subscript " 0 "represents a quantity which occurs in the equilibrium position and the vector F is defined as:
 Fx 
 
F   (14)
 y
 F 

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

Therefore, the partial differential terms in the above equation give the stiffness and damping coefficients of the bearing:

 K xx 
 F
 
 yx 
 K  x 0
(15)

 K yy 
  F
  (16)
 xy 
 K  y 0
And

 Bxx 
  F
  (17)
 yx 
 B  x 0

 Byy   F
  (18)
 Bxy  y 0
Where the K mn ’s are the stiffness coefficients and the Bmn ’s are the damping coefficients of the bearing. Similarly, due to the small-
perturbed motion of the pressure, the clearance and the foil deflection can be expressed as Taylor series expansion:
P  Po  Px x  Px x  Py y  Py y (19)

h  ho  hx x  hy y  hx x  hy y (20)

u  uo  ux x  uy y  ux x  uy y (21)

After normalization, the above equation becomes:

P  Po  Px X  Px X  Py Y  Py Y (22)

h  ho  hx X  hy Y  hx X  hy Y (23)

u  uo  ux X  u y Y  ux X  u y Y (24)

Where normalized parameters are given by

P x y X Y
P  , X  , Y  , X  , Y 
Pa C C   (25)

Putting the expression of P from equation 22 into equation 12 and comparing with equation 13 we get the following two sets of
relationships:
 K xx K xy  C  K xx K xy  L 1 2  Px sin  Py sin  
      0 0  d dz
 K yx K yy  Pa R 2  K yx K yy  R   Px cos   Py cos  
(26)

 Bxx Bxy  C  Bxx Bxy  L 1 2  Px sin  Py sin  

      0 0  d dz
 Byx Byy  Pa R 2  Byx Byy  R   Px cos   Py cos  
(27)

The relationships between the clearances hi and the displacements u i are:

hx  u x  sin  (28)

hy  uy  cos (29)

Once the solution for Pj ’s has been found, the overall stiffness and damping coefficients can be calculated using equations 26 and 27. By
substituting the respective values of Pj , h j and u j in equation 4 and equation 10 we get:
  3 P0   R   
2
3 P0 
  P0 h0 
 P0 h0    P0 h0  (30)
     L  z  z  

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

 P0  K (h0  1   cos  )  0 (31)

  3 ( P0 Px ) P   R    3 ( P0 Px ) P 
2

 h0  3P0 h0 2 hx 0      h0  3P0 h0 2 hx 0 
       L  z  z z 
  P0 hx  Px h0 
  2 ( Px h0  P0hx )
 (32)

Px  K (hx  sin  )  0 (33)

  3 ( P0 Py ) P   R    3 ( P0 Py ) P 
2

 h0  3P0 h0 2 hy 0      h0  3P0 h0 2 hy 0 
      L  z  z z 

  P0 hy  Py h0 
  2 ( Py h0  P0 hy )
 (34)

Py  K (hy  cos )  0 (35)

  3   Px P0  P   R  
2
 3   Px P0  P 
 h0  3P0 h0 2 hx 0      h0  3P0 h0 2 hx 0 
      L  z  z z 
 

  Px h0  P0hx 
  2 ( Px h0  P0hx )
 (36)

Px  Khx  0 (37)

  3   Py P0  P   R    3   Py P0  P 
2
 h0  3P0 h0 2 hy 0      h0  3P0 h0 2 hy 0 
      L  z  z z 
   

  Py h0  P0hy 
  2 ( Py h0  P0hy )
 (38)

Py  Khy  0
(39)

The respective boundary conditions for the above set of equations can be given as:
P0  1 
 at z  0 and 1 (40)
Px  Py  Px  Py  0

P0  1 

h0  1   cos 1 
Px  Py  Px  Py  0 
   (41)
hx  sin 1  at 1

hy  cos 1 

hx  hy  0 


P0  1 
 at   1  2 (42)
Px  Py  Px  Py  0

Finite difference method is used for solving the equation 30-39. By solving both equation 30 and 31 simultaneously, we can find h0 and P0 .
After solving for h0 and P0 the other parameters can be found out.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

 Fig. 2 An exfoliated view of bearing showing the mesh size

For all the partial derivatives present in equation set 31-39, the central difference formula has been used. In Fig. 2, n and m are the
divisions along Z and  respectively. The four adjacent nodes associated with the node  i, j  are  i  1, j  ,  i, j  1  i  1, j  and
 i, j  1 . Now the partial derivatives can be represented as:
Pj Pj  i  1, j   Pj  i  1, j 
 (43)
 2

Pj Pj  i, j  1  Pj  i, j  1
Similarly,  (44)
z 2z

 2 Pj Pj  i  1, j   Pj  i  1, j   2Pj (i, j )
 (45)
   
2 2

Similarly,

 2 Pj Pj  i, j  1  Pj  i, j  1  2 Pj (i, j ) (46)

z 2  z 
2

Similarly, for other parameters, these can be formulated. After substituting the above differential in equation 30, the following expressions
are found:
A1  P0  i, j    A2 P0  i, j   A3  0
2
(47)

Where A1 , A2 and A3 are constants in terms of  i  1, j  ,  i, j  1 ,  i  1, j 

th th th
and  i, j  1 th
of P0 and h0 .
From equation 31:
h0  i, j   1   cos    P0  i, j  (48)

The equation 47 coupled with 48 can be solved with the Newton-Raphson method. Similarly, for equation 32, the following expressions can
be found:
B1 Px  i, j   B2  0 (49)

Where B1 and B2 are constants in terms of  i  1, j  th,  i, j  1 th,  i  1, j  th and  i, j  1 th of P0 , Px , Px , hx and h0 .

From structural equation 33, we get:
hx   Px  sin  (50)

Numerically Reynold’s equation 32 coupled with structural equation 33 can be solved with a number of iterations until convergence. As we
can see that Px is dependent on Px . Hence, equation 36 and 37, which is to determine, Px is to be iterated simultaneously with the
equations 49 and 50. Hence, for equation 36 the expression is found to be:
C1 Px  i, j   C2  0 (51)

Where C1 and C 2 are constants in terms of  i  1, j  th,  i, j  1 th,  i  1, j  th and  i, j  1 th of P0 , Px , Px , hx and h0 .

From structural equation 37, we get:

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

 hx   Px (52)

Hence, the equations 49 and 51 can be solved numerically with coupled structural equations 50 and 52. MATLAB is used to solve the
equations. The same method can be adapted to solve for Py and Py . Initially for each case Pi is assumed over each grid point as per the
given boundary condition, then the pressure value is iterated until the error falls to a negligible range, which is 10 -6 in this case. After getting
all the perturbed pressure values at each grid point using Simpson’s one-third rule the perturbed pressure is integrated to get the four
stiffness and damping coefficients. The found overall damping coefficient is the equivalent viscous damping coefficient of Coulomb’s
damping. The damping occurs here is due to the friction between bump foil and top foil and bearing base and bump foil. The damping
occurs due to friction is known as Coulomb’s damping.
Fig. 3 represents the algorithm for solving the equation set 30-39.

Start

Initial Input , , , ,

Calculate in terms of

Solve Reynold’s equation for

using FDM

and for any ,Where and

and

No
If

Yes

Calculate and

End

Fig. 3 Flow chart for numerical analysis

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

3. Result and Discussion:

3.1 Variation of bearing stiffness and damping coefficients with various parameters :

The present formulation to predict the variation of normalized bearing stiffness  Kij  with bearing number    at different compliance
number    is represent in Fig. 6 to Fig. 9. These present data compared with the Carpino M and Peng J. P[1991] result is represented in
Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. The four figures (Fig.6 to Fig. 9) represent the different normalized bearing stiffness. It can be observed that the
variation of K ij is negligible while bearing number is less than one    1 . Beyond the range, the variation is drastic. The rate of variation
also depends on the compliance number. As the compliance number increases, the rate of variation is negligible.
.

Fig. 4. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term of  , Fig.5. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term
on K xx , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5 of  ,on K yx , L / D  1,   0.5,  0.5

Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 represent that the variation of normalized bearing stiffness  Kij  with bearing number    at compliance number   1
equal to one is follow approximately the same trend which is follow by Carpino M and Peng J.P[1991] result. Small deviation between
present data and Peng data due to used of different gas as working fluid.

Fig. 6. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term of Fig. 7. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term
 , on K xx , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5 of  ,on K yy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

 Fig. 8. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term of Fig. 9. Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term
 , on K xy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5 of  , on K yx , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5

For example, in the Fig. 6 to Fig. 9 when the compliance number is 5   5  , the slope is almost zero. In contrary, when the compliance
number is close to zero   0.2  the variation is drastic. The same pattern can be seen in all four normalized stiffness. In the case of K xx
K xy K yx and K yx the trend of the curves are strictly increasing (Fig. 6, Fig.8 and Fig. 9) up to bearing number 10    10  when the
compliance number is less than one   1 . Beyond that, the normalized stiffness tends decrease. Negative-stiffness value is seen in case of
K yy while bearing number is less than 5    5  . The negative values are close to zero

Fig. 10 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term Fig.11 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term
of  , on B yy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5 of  , on Bxy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5

Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 represent that the variation of normalized bearing damping  Bij  with bearing number    at compliance number

  1 equal to one is follow approximately the same trend which is follow by Carpino M and Peng J.P[1991] result. Small deviation
between Present Data and Peng Data due to use of different gas as working fluid

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

Fig.12 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term Fig. 13 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term of
of  , on Bxx , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5
 , on B yy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5

Fig. 14 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term Fig. 15 Effect of foil material and geometry of bearing in term of
of  , on Bxy , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5  , on Byx , L / D  1,   0.5,   0.5

Fig. 12 to Fig. 15 represents normalized bearing damping  Bij  variations with bearing number    at different compliance values    .
The four figures (Fig. 12 to Fig. 15) represent the different normalized bearing damping coefficients. It can be observed that the variation of
Bxx and Byx (Fig. 12 and Fig. 15) is negligible while the bearing number is less than one    1 whereas, beyond this range, the variation is
significant. The rate of variation also depends on the compliance number. As the compliance number increases, the rate of variation is
negligible. For example, in Fig. 12 to Fig. 15 when compliance number is 5   5  , the slope is almost zero. In contrary, when the
compliance number is close to zero   0.2  the variation is drastic. For all damping coefficients, it can be observed that the variation is
negligible when compliance number is five   5  irrespective of the bearing number. In the case of Bxx and Byx the trend of the curves are
strictly increasing (Fig. 12 and Fig. 15) up to bearing number 10    10  when the compliance number is less than one   1 . Beyond
that, the normalized stiffness tends decrease. The characteristics of the curves in case of, B yy is quite sinusoidal. It has both increasing and
decreasing trend. The peak of the sinusoidal curve depends on the compliance number    . As for lower compliance number, the peak is
low whereas for higher compliance number the peak is higher. Negative damping coefficients are obtained in case of Bxy .
4. Conclusion:

For rotodynamic analysis of the bearing system, bearing stiffness and damping coefficients are essential. Again, for stability analysis
damping also plays an important role. So in this work, dynamic coefficients are found and variation with different parameter has been
discussed in the result and discussion section. In the present work following conclusion can be drawn.
  
The overall normalized bearing stiffness K ij curves have an increasing trend when compliance number has low value. With
 
increasing compliance number  , the rate of increase in K ij reduces and almost tends to zero for compliance number five
 5 . 

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537

   
The normalized bearing damping coefficient Bij curves show the same pattern when the compliance number has a higher value
 
  5 . In contrary, Bxx has strictly increasing trend when compliance number has a lower value. The rate of variation of Bij
with different bearing number    depends on compliance number   .
 The nature of curves for Bxx and B yx are found to be sinusoidal. Variation of peaks depends upon compliance number at
different bearing numbers.
 During calculation of perturbed pressures from Reynold’s equation using MATLAB and FDM, SOR (Successive Over -
Relaxation) method of factor 0.7 has been used which was quite helpful for faster convergence.
 A better result can be obtained for normalized bearing stiffness and damping coefficients if experimental work is done.

Reference:

Heshmat H., Walowit J. A., Pinkus O. "Analysis of Gas-Lubricated Foil journal Bearings," ASME Journal of Lubrication Technology 1983, Vol.
105, pp. 647-655.
Carpino M., Peng J. P. "Theoretical Performance of Foil Journal Bearings," presented at the AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE 27th Joint Pro pulsion
Conference 1991, paper no. AIAA-91-2105.
Sternlicht B. "Elastic and Damping Properties of Cylindrical Journal Bearings," ASME Journal of Basic Engineering 1959, Vol. 81, pp. 101 -108.
Carpino M, Talmage G. "A Fully Coupled Finite Element Formulation for Elastically Supported Foil Journal Bearings" Tribology Transactions 2003,
Vol. 46(4), pp. 560–565.
Koepsel W. "Gas Lubricated Foil Bearing Development for Advanced Turbomachines" U. S. Air Force Aero Propulsion Laboratory 19 77, Vol. 1, 2,
Rep. AFAPLTR-76-114.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3313537