Static and rotordynamic coefficients are measured for a rocker-pivot, tilting-pad journal bearing (TPJB) with 50 and 60% offset pads in a load-between-pad (LBP) configuration. The bearing uses leading-edge-groove direct lubrication and has the following characteristics: 5-pads, 101.6 mm (4.0 in) nominal diameter, .0814–.0837 mm (.0032–.0033 in) radial bearing clearance, .25 to .27 preload, and 60.325 mm (2.375 in) axial pad length. Tests were performed on a floating bearing test rig with unit loads from 0 to 3101 kPa (450 psi) and speeds from 7 to 16 krpm. Dynamic tests were conducted over a range of frequencies (20 to 320 Hz) to obtain complex dynamic stiffness coefficients as functions of excitation frequency. For most test conditions, the real dynamic stiffness functions were well fitted with a quadratic function with respect to frequency. This curve fit allowed for the stiffness frequency dependency to be captured by including an added mass matrix [M] to a conventional [K][C] model, yielding a frequency independent [K][C][M] model. The imaginary dynamic stiffness coefficients increased linearly with frequency, producing frequency-independent direct damping coefficients. Direct stiffness coefficients were larger for the 60% offset bearing at light unit loads. At high loads, the 50% offset configuration had a larger stiffness in the loaded direction, while the unloaded direct stiffness was approximately the same for both pivot offsets. Cross-coupled stiffness coefficients were positive and significantly smaller than direct stiffness coefficients. Negative direct added-mass coefficients were obtained for both offsets, especially in the unloaded direction. Cross-coupled added-mass coefficients are generally positive and of the same sign. Direct damping coefficients were mostly independent of load and speed, showing no appreciable difference between pivot offsets. Cross-coupled damping coefficients had the same sign and were much smaller than direct coefficients. Measured static eccentricities suggested cross-coupling stiffness exists for both pivot offsets, agreeing with dynamic measurements. Static stiffness measurements showed good agreement with the loaded, direct dynamic stiffness coefficients.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.