Rochester Institute of Technology 1
P14453: Dresser-Rand Compressor Bearing Dynamic Similarity Test Rig
Subsystem Design Review
October 29, 2013
Rochester Institute of Technology
Project Team
October 29, 2013 2
Team Member Major Role
Steve Lucchesi Mechanical Engineering Project Manager
Shawn Avery Mechanical Engineering Good Vibrations
Steve Kaiser Mechanical Engineering Project Engineer
Josh Plumeau Mechanical Engineering Project Engineer
Luke Trapani Mechanical Engineering Project Engineer
Rochester Institute of Technology
Stakeholders
October 29, 2013 3
RIT:
Researchers:• RIT:
Industry Engineers:• Dresser-Rand:
• Dr. Jason Kolodziej Assistant Professor (Primary Customer)• Dr. Stephen Boedo
Associate Professor (Subject Matter Expert)
?• James Sorokes Principal Engineer Financial Support• Scott Delmotte
Mgr. Project Engineering Point of Contact
• MSD1 Team – 14453• Graduate/Masters Students• William Nowak (Xerox)
Rochester Institute of Technology
Subsystem Design Review Agenda
October 29, 2013 4
Objective Statement Review of Functional Decomposition System Design Review Summary Critical Subsystem Identification Design / Analysis Plan Engineering Analysis:
Test Bearing Load Application Lubrication System Structural (Initial – Shaft Design, Support Bearing Selection) Control System (Initial - System model/simulation)
Risk Assessment (Updated) Milestones Chart (Updated)
Rochester Institute of Technology
Objective Statement
October 29, 2013 5
Objective: Develop a bearing dynamic
similarity test rig to more carefully investigate the dynamics of the Dresser-Rand floating ring main compressor bearings.
Design the rig such that it can incorporate all journal bearings for the purpose of fault detection research at RIT.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Functional Decomposition Review
October 29, 2013 6
Rochester Institute of Technology
Functional Decomposition:Running the Test
October 29, 2013 7
Rochester Institute of Technology
P14453 System Design Summary
October 29, 2013 8
Proposition: Direct Actuation using 2
perpendicular EHA Units DC Motor Driven Direct Drive using a vibration
dampening fixed coupling Roller Bearing Support Sleeve Side Lubrication
System Function Component SelectionRotate Journal DC Motor
Apply Load to Bearing EHA(s)
Drive Line Direct
Pressurize Oil Diaphragm Pump
Direct Oil To Bearing Sleeve Side
Monitor Film Thickness Proximity Sensor
Monitor Vibration Accelerometer
Monitor Torque Motor Load Feedback
Monitor Oil Temp Thermocouple
Provide Power Wall OutletInstall Bearing 2 Piece Housing
Install Shaft Chuck
Support Shaft Roller Bearings
Rochester Institute of Technology
P14453 System Design Summary
October 29, 2013 9
Oil Sump
Support Bearings
Hydraulic Cylinders
Bearing Shaft
Test Bearing
Drive Motor
Shaft Coupling
Test Stand
Load Block / Custom Bearing Housing
Rochester Institute of Technology
System Architecture
October 29, 2013 10
Rochester Institute of Technology
Critical Subsystem Identification
October 29, 2013 11
Rochester Institute of Technology
Design/Analysis Plan
October 29, 2013 12
Rochester Institute of Technology
Journal Bearing Analysis
October 29, 2013 13
Initial calculations were performed in order to identify the coefficient of friction using Petroff’s Equation and the Sommerfeld Number which is used to identify bearing performance.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Journal Bearing Analysis
October 29, 2013 14
Further study lead to calculations of Significant Angular Speed, based on Journal angular velocity, Bearing angular velocity, and Load Vector Angular Velocity. This information was used to determine static situation at each of 360 degrees of crank rotation based on actual compressor main bearing load data.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Journal Bearing Analysis
October 29, 2013 15
Dr. Boedo explained that the analytical approach taken would be acceptable for static loading and had previously been used for dynamic loading. However, the mobility method of analysis is needed for dynamic loading order to find the minimum film thickness, or separation between the journal and sleeve.
Rochester Institute of Technology
Journal Bearing Analysis
October 29, 2013 16
Dr. Boedo used parameters that we developed in order to use a program to analyze the dynamics of our bearing.The Parameters: Shaft speed: 360 rpm Bearing Dimensions Oil specifications:
SAE 30 100 °C 7 mPa-s Viscosity
Rochester Institute of Technology
Journal Bearing Analysis
October 29, 2013 17
Dr. Boedo provided us with the following graph, which shows minimum film thickness vs. radial clearance based upon our criteria:
Minimum safe film thickness
Acceptable radial clearance based on film thickness
Rochester Institute of Technology
Load Application Analysis:Hydraulic Cylinders
October 29, 2013 18
Benefits: Load Accuracy Required Analysis (Incompressible Fluid)
Drawbacks: Safety Maintenance
From PRP and Markus’s Thesis: Up to 900lbs (4000N) applied force Up to 2000 rom shaft speed (33Hz) Journal to sleeve clearance: 35 to 95 microns Compressor Operating Rpm: 360rpm (Dr. Kolodziej)
Rochester Institute of Technology
Load Application Analysis:Hydraulic Cylinders
October 29, 2013 19
Parker Electro-Hydraulic Actuator (EHA) Hybrid combining benefits of hydraulic cylinder and electric servo Self-contained unit Speed and Load Range Size
Rochester Institute of Technology
Load Application Analysis:Hydraulic Cylinders
October 29, 2013 20
Calculations for Parker EHA (w/ Motor B and 0.327 gear): Distance for Piston to move (conservative):
95µm=0.00374"; 0.00374"*2=0.00748“ ≈ 0.01" (cushion)
Piston Speed from Graph ≈ 1.8in/s Cycle time:
(0.01in)/(1.8 in/s)*2(extend & retract)=0.011secs/cycle
Actuator Frequency:1/(0.011 secs/cycle)=
90 cycles/second = 90Hz
Rochester Institute of Technology
Load Application Analysis:Hydraulic Cylinders
October 29, 2013 21
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400-8000
-6000
-4000
-2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Load History for Main Crank Bearing
Force XForce Y
Crank Angle (degrees)
Forc
e (N
)
Rochester Institute of Technology
Load Application Analysis:Hydraulic Cylinders
October 29, 2013 22
Shaft Operating RPM 360RPM
Shaft Cycle Time 0.1667s
Shaft Frequency 6Hz
EHA Piston Velocity 1.8 in/s
EHA Piston Displacement 0.01 in
EHA Displacement Time 0.0056s
EHA Cycle Time 0.0111s
EHA Frequency 90Hz
EHA X-Direction Force Cycles 2cycles/rotation
EHA X-Direction Force Frequency 12Hz
EHA Y-Direction Force Cycles 4cycles/rotation
EHA Y-Direction Force Frequency 24Hz
Challenges:• Are EHA’s load input based or displacement input based?• Response time to inputs• Piston Velocity varies with load• Extension load, as opposed to retract (Additional actuator(s)?){$$$}
Rochester Institute of Technology
Lubrication System analysis:
October 29, 2013 23
Oil PressureAdjustable from 10 – 25 psiMeasure 0 – 25+ psi
Oil Flow rate:Estimated .36 GPH + flow
Oil Temperature:-10°F - 135°F Input
Oil Storage/Capacity:Up to 7 quarts
Oil Path:Oil and chemical resistant pumpOil and chemical resistant plumbingSeparate path with/without oil filter
Journal Housing
Oil reservoirOil pumpOil filter
Oil pressure transducer
Path branches
Rochester Institute of Technology
Lubrication System analysis:
October 29, 2013 24
Oil Pressure: Pump must supply 25psi + path head losses. From initial calculations pump must supply
26.58 psi total. The path is restrictive however the low flow velocity (0.0172 fps) means the losses are
minimal. This pressure and flow rate is well within the selected pump’s operating parameters.
( 𝑃1
⍴1
+𝑉 1
2
2+𝑔𝑧 1)−( 𝑃2
⍴2
+𝑉 2
2
2+𝑔𝑧2)=h𝑙𝑡
( 𝑃1
1.77+ 0.01722
2+0)−( 25
1 .77+ 0 .01722
2+32.17∗4)=h 𝑙𝑡
( 𝑃1
1.77 )−( 2 51 .77
+128.68)=34.500.01722
2
𝑃1=26.58𝑝𝑠𝑖
Rochester Institute of Technology
Lubrication System analysis:
October 29, 2013 25
SHURflo SLV10-AA41: This pump operates within the desired
operating range with an automatic start at 25 psi and automatic shutoff at 40psi.
The pressure sensing capabilities of the pump coupled with valving allows the feed pressure to be controlled (adjustable from 10 – 25 psi).
Polymer valving and diaphragms have good resistance to degradation from oil and other chemicals.
Pump can run dry and is self priming for worry free oil changing.
0 10 20 300
0.51
1.52
2.53
Flow (GPM) vs. Pressure
Pressure (Psi)
Flow
Rat
e (G
PM)
PERFORMANCE @ 12V DCPRESSURE FLOW CURRENT
PSI GPM AMPS0 13 0.9
10 0.7320 0.6230 0.49
4
Rochester Institute of Technology
Lubrication System analysis:
October 29, 2013 26
Pressure adjustment: Accomplished via pressure reduction valve,
when feed side pressure reaches the desired pressure the valve closes.
The closed valve causes pressure to increase in the pump side pipe, at 40 psi the pump shutoff is triggered. As the oil feeds into the bearing the changing pressure causes the valve to re-open. This may cause small pressure fluctuations.
A hydraulic reservoir (pressurized) compartment can be used to prevent short-cycling. This will also reduce pressure fluctuations (if any exist).
From Pump
To S
yste
m
Nominal PressurePump-side PressureSystem-side Pressure
Rochester Institute of Technology
Lubrication System analysis:
October 29, 2013 27
Oil path: Paths will be made of specialized Excelon
tubing. This transparent tubing is specially formulated to be resistant to oils and fuels, prevent plasticizer and chemical leeching, and maintain it’s flexibility.
The flow path will be divided and rejoined using two tee or vee branches.
Each branch will have a ball-valve to open or close the path, one path will be a straight path to the test bearing housing while the other runs oil through an oil filter before proceeding to the test bearing housing.
OIL FILTER
From Pump
To Housing
Rochester Institute of Technology
Structural Analysis
October 29, 2013 28
Initial calculations on were done on the following:
• Reaction forces on the support bearings
• Support bearing life rating
• Support bearing load rating
Rochester Institute of Technology
Structural Analysis
October 29, 2013 29
Support Bearings (Cylindrical roller bearing)• Maximum size = 2.75• Basic Dynamic Load Rating = 11,000 lbf = 48930 N• Limiting Speed = 360 rpm
Rochester Institute of Technology
Structural Analysis
October 29, 2013 30
Rochester Institute of Technology
Control System Schematic
October 29, 2013 31
Rochester Institute of Technology
Control System Simulation
October 29, 2013 32
Rochester Institute of Technology
Updated Risk Assessment
October 29, 2013 33
Rochester Institute of Technology
MSD1 Milestones Chart
October 29, 2013 34
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4September October November
Problem Definition
System Design
Sub-System Design
Detailed Design & Component Selection
Rochester Institute of Technology
MSD1 Milestones
October 29, 2013 35
• Problem Definition [09/10/13]:– Define problem
– Define customer requirements
– Define engineering requirements
– Plan project
• System Design Kick-Off [09/17/13]:– Problem definition completed
– Begin concept development
– Decomposition analysis
– Risk assessment
– Benchmarking concepts
• System Design Review [10/01/13]:– System design completed
– Meet with guides/panels/stakeholders
– Select feasible system
• Sub-System Design [10/08/13]:
– Subsystem design and interactions
– Requirement flow-down
– Next level of decomposition analysis
– Feasibility analysis
• Subsystem Design Review [10/29/13]:– Subsystem design completed
– Meet with guides/panels/stakeholders
• Detailed Design & Component Selection Kick-Off [10/31/13]:– Fully completed drawings
– Component list
– Any FEA/Simulations
– Risk assessment
– Benchmarking plans
• Preliminary DDR [11/19/13]:– Meet with guides/panels/stakeholders
– Ensure that all design components are complete
Rochester Institute of Technology
MSD1 Detailed Design Milestones
October 29, 2013 36
• Preliminary DDR [11/14/13]– Analysis to support design complete
– All factors affecting design considered
– Drawings, schematics and flow charts complete
– Perform next level of risk assessment
• Complete Design [11/21/13]:– Full drawing package complete
– Complete BOM
– Simulation models complete
– Risk assessment and mitigation complete
– MSD II plan first draft complete
• Final Detail Design Review [12/5/13]:
– Proof of robust design provided
– Expected performance vs. engineering reqs supplied
– Test plan to verify performance
– Identification of most complex sub-systems for build phase
– Member specific weekly MSD II schedule complete
• Gate Review [12/12/13 - 12/17/13]:– Budget prepared
– Final design complete
– Receive approval of customer to proceed with design
Rochester Institute of Technology
Questions?
October 29, 2013 37
Rochester Institute of Technology
BACK-UP SLIDES
October 10, 2013 38
Rochester Institute of Technology
Customer Needs
October 5, 2013 39
Objective Number Customer Objective Description ImportanceCN 1.1 Measures Shaft Speed 9CN 1.2 Measures Load 9CN 1.4 Measures Bearing Dynamics 9CN 1.7 Measures Vibration 9CN 1.8 Measure Gap Between Journal & Sleeve 3CN 1.9 Measures Oil Flow Rate In/Out 3
CN 1.11 Measure Oil Pressure at Points in the Bearing 3CN 2.1 Controls shaft speed 9CN 2.2 Allows for variable load profile 9CN 2.3 Allows for dynamic load profile 3CN 2.4 Controls oil pressure 9CN 2.5 Able to isolate bearing vibration from machine vibration 3CN 3.1 Displays acquired data 3CN 3.2 Allows for Input of test parameters 9CN 3.3 Records test data 9CN 4.1 Test rig has a small footprint 3CN 4.2 Quick bearing replacement 9CN 4.3 Simple oil replacement 3CN 5.1 Bearing Oiling System is contained 9CN 5.2 Guarded Rotating Assembly 9CN 5.3 Hot Surfaces are to be insulated 9CN 6.1 Fits within budget 3CN 6.2 Low cost repairs 3CN 6.3 Low cost replacement 3CN 6.4 Low maintenance 3CN 7.1 Compatible with existing DAQ equipment 9CN 7.2 Minimum of 2 system sensors 3CN 7.3 Variable bearing size/design accomodations 3CN 7.4 Allows for replication of current ESH-1 compressor oiling system 3
Rochester Institute of Technology
Engineering Requirements
October 5, 2013 40
Req. # Importance CN Source Function Engr. Requirement (metric) Unit of Measure
ER 1 9 4.2 Read/Select Load Profile Yes/No, Time Min.
ER 2 9 2.1 Control Shaft Speed Measurement Range, Accuracy rpm
ER 3 9 2.2, 2.3 Control Load Measurement Range, Accuracy Lbf
ER 4 9 2.4 Control Oil Pressure Measurement Range, Accuracy Psi
ER 5 9 1.1 Measure Shaft Speed Measurement Range, Accuracy rpm
ER 6 9 1.2 Measure Load Measurement Range, Accuracy Lbf
ER 7 3 1.6 Measure Oil Pressure at Bearing Inlet/Outlet Measurement Range, Accuracy Psi
ER 9 9 1.7 Measure Bearing Vibration (Frequency & Amplitude) Measurement Range, Accuracy Hz, in.
ER 10 3 1.8 Meaure Journal to Sleeve Clearance Measurement Range, Accuracy in.
ER 11 3 1.9 Measures Oil Flow Rate In/Out Measurement Range, Accuracy in3/s
ER 12 3 1.10 Measure Torque Transmitted in the Fluid Film Measurement Range, Accuracy lbf-in
ER 14 3 1.12 Measure Speed of the Floating Ring Measurement Range, Accuracy rpm
ER 16 9 1.1, 2.1, 4.1 Display Shaft Speed Refresh Rate Hz.
ER 17 9 1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 4.1 Display Load Refresh Rate Hz.
ER 20 9 1.7, 2.5, 4.1 Display Bearing Vibration Refresh Rate Hz.
ER 21 9 1.7, 4.1 Display Journal to Sleeve Clearance Refresh Rate Hz.
ER 22 3 5.2 Replace Bearings Time Min.
ER 23 3 5.2 Replace Shaft Time Min.
ER 24 3 5.3 Replace Oil Time Min.
ER 25 9 Implied Provide Component Power Voltage Range V
ER 26 9 4.3 Record/Save Data Delay Time Sec.
ER 27 3 7.3 Vary Test Specimen Size Measurement Range In
Rochester Institute of Technology
Pareto Analysis
October 5, 2013 41
*link to House of Quality upon request: https://edge.rit.edu/edge/P14453/public/Problem%20Definition
Top Related