0
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power | Volume 140 | Issue 3 | research-article
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

An Experimental Investigation of the Dynamics of a Blade With Two Under-Platform Dampers

[+] Author and Article Information
Daniele Botto

Department of Mechanical
and Aerospace Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: daniele.botto@polito.it

Chiara Gastadi

Department of Mechanical
and Aerospace Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: chiara.gastaldi@polito.it

Muzio M. Gola

Department of Mechanical
and Aerospace Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: muzio.gola@polito.it

Muhammad Umer

Department of Mechanical
and Aerospace Engineering,
Politecnico di Torino,
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24,
Torino 10129, Italy
e-mail: muhammad.umer@polito.it

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Structures and Dynamics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received July 13, 2017; final manuscript received July 20, 2017; published online October 17, 2017. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(3), 032504 (Oct 17, 2017) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1356; doi: 10.1115/1.4037865 History: Received July 13, 2017; Revised July 20, 2017
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

Several experimental apparatuses have been designed in the past to evaluate the effectiveness of under-platform dampers. Most of these experimental setups allow to measure the overall damper efficiency in terms of reduction of vibration amplitude in turbine blades. The experimental data collected with these test rigs do not increase the knowledge about the damper dynamics, and therefore, the uncertainty on the damper behavior remains a big issue. In this paper, a different approach to evaluate the damper–blade interaction has been put forward. A test rig has been purposely designed to accommodate a single blade and two under-platform dampers. One side of each damper is in contact with a ground support specifically designed to measure two independent forces on the damper. In this way, both the normal and the tangential force components in the damper–blade contact can be inferred. Damper kinematics is rebuilt by using the relative displacement measured between damper and blade. This paper describes the concept behind the new approach, shows the details of the new test rig, and discusses the blade frequency response from a new point of view.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Topics: Dampers , Blades , Kinematics
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Griffin, J. H. , 1980, “ Friction Damping of Resonant Stresses in Gas Turbine Engine Airfoils,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 102(2), pp. 329–333. [CrossRef]
2
Menq, C. H. , Griffin, J. H. , and Bielak, J. , 1985, “ The Influence of Microslip on Vibratory Response—Part II: A Comparison With Experimental Results,” J. Sound Vib., 107(2), pp. 295–307. [CrossRef]
3
Sextro, W. , Popp, K. , and Wolter, I. , 1997, “ Improved Reliability of Bladed Disks Due to Friction Dampers,” ASME Paper No. 97-GT-189.
4
Sanliturk, K. Y. , Ewins, D. J. , and Stanbridge, A. B. , 2001, “ Underplatform Dampers for Turbine Blades: Theoretical Modeling, Analysis, and Comparison With Experimental Data,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 123(4), pp. 919–929.
5
Szwedowicz, J. , Kissel, M. , Ravindra, B. , and Kellerer, K. , 2001, “ Estimation of Contact Stiffness and Its Role in the Design of a Friction Damper,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0290.
6
Bessone, A. , Toso, F. , and Berruti, T. , 2015, “ Investigation on the Dynamic Response of Blades With Asymmetric Under Platform Dampers,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42597.
7
Firrone, C. , 2009, “ Measurement of the Kinematics of two Underplatform Dampers With Different Geometry and Comparison With Numerical Simulation,” J. Sound Vib., 323(1–2), pp. 313–333. [CrossRef]
8
Pesaresi, L. , Salles, L. , Jones, A. , Green, J. , and Schwingshackl, C. , 2017, “ Modelling the Nonlinear Behaviour of an Underplatform Damper Test Rig for Turbine Applications,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process, 85, pp. 662–679. [CrossRef]
9
Yang, B. D. , and Menq, C. H. , 1998, “ Characterization of Contact Kinematics and Application to the Design of Wedge Dampers in Turbomachinery Blading—Part 2: Prediction of Forced Response and Experimental Verification,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 120(2), pp. 418–423. [CrossRef]
10
Cigeroglu, E. , An, N. , and Menq, C. H. , 2009, “ Forced Response Prediction of Constrained and Unconstrained Structures Coupled Through Frictional Contacts,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 131(2), p. 022505. [CrossRef]
11
Berruti, T. , 2010, “ A Test Rig for the Investigation of the Dynamic Response of a Bladed Disk With Underplatform Dampers,” Mech. Res. Commun., 37(6), pp. 581–583. [CrossRef]
12
Szwedowicz, J. , Gibert, C. , Sommer, T. P. , and Kellerer, R. , 2008, “ Numerical and Experimental Damping Assessment of a Thin-Walled Friction Damper in the Rotating Setup With High Pressure Turbine Blades,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 130(1), p. 012502. [CrossRef]
13
Sever, I. A. , Petrov, E. P. , and Ewins, D. J. , 2008, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Rotating Bladed Disk Forced Response Using Underplatform Friction Dampers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 130(4), p. 042503. [CrossRef]
14
Sanliturk, K. Y. , Stanbridge, A. B. , and Ewins, D. J. , 1995, “ Friction Dampers: Measurement, Modelling and Application to Blade Vibration Control,” ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Boston, MA, Sept. 17–20, pp. 1377–1382.
15
Schwingshackl, C. , Petrov, E. , and Ewins, D. , 2010, “ Validation of Test rig Measurements and Prediction Tools for Friction Interface Modelling,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23274.
16
Lavella, M. , Botto, D. , and Gola, M. M. , 2011, “ Test Rig for Wear and Contact Parameters Extraction for Flat-on-Flat Contact Surfaces,” ASME Paper No. IJTC2011-61234.
17
Botto, D. , Lavella, M. , and Gola, M. M. , 2012, “ Measurement of Contact Parameters of Flat on Flat Contact Surfaces at High Temperature,” ASME Paper No. GT2012-69677.
18
Lavella, M. , Botto, D. , and Gola, M. M. , 2013, “ Design of a High-Precision, Flat-on-Flat Fretting Test Apparatus With High Temperature Capability,” Wear, 302(1–2), pp. 1073–1081. [CrossRef]
19
Botto, D. , Campagna, A. , Lavella, M. , and Gola, M. , 2010, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Fretting Wear at High Temperature for Aeronautical Alloys,” ASME Paper No. GT2010-23356.
20
Botto, D. , and Lavella, M. , 2015, “ A Numerical Method to Solve the Normal and Tangential Contact Problem of Elastic Bodies,” Wear, 330–331, pp. 629–635. [CrossRef]
21
Gola, M. M. , Braga dos Santos, M. , and Liu, T. , 2010, “ Design of a New Test Rig to Evaluate Underplatform Damper Performance,” ASME Paper No. ESDA2010-24268.
22
Gola, M. M. , Bragas dos Santos, M. , and Liu, T. , 2012, “ Measurement of the Scatter of Underplatform Damper Hysteresis Cycle: Experimental Approach,” ASME Paper No. DETC2012-70269.
23
Gola, M. M. , and Gastaldi, C. , 2014, “ Understanding Complexities in Underplatform Damper Mechanics,” ASME Paper No. GT2014-25240.
24
Gola, M. M. , and Liu, T. , 2014, “ A Direct Experimental-Numerical Method for Investigations of a Laboratory Under-Platform Damper Behavior,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 51(25–26), pp. 4245–4259. [CrossRef]
25
Gastaldi, C. , and Gola, M. M. , 2016, “ Pre-Optimization of Asymmetrical Underplatform Dampers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 139(1), p. 012504. [CrossRef]
26
NTN, 2009, “ NTN Needle Roller Bearing Handbook,” NTN Corporation, Osaka, Japan, p. 8. http://www.ntnamericas.com/en/website/documents/brochures-and-literature/tech-sheets-and-supplements/needle_roller_bearings_handbook_cat_9013-e_lowres.pdf
27
Johnson, K. , 1985, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 114–118. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed]
28
Yang, B. , and Menq, C. , 1998, “ Characterization of Contact Kinematics and Application to the Design of Wedge Dampers in Turbomachinery Blading—Part 1: Stick-Slip Contact Kinematics,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 120(2), pp. 410–417. [CrossRef]
29
Zucca, S. , Botto, D. , and Gola, M. , 2008, “ Range of Variability in the Dynamics of Semi-Cylindrical Friction Dampers for Turbine Blades,” ASME Paper No. GT2008-51058.
30
Gastaldi, C. , and Gola, M. M. , 2016, “ Testing, Simulating and Understanding Underplatform Damper Dynamics,” Seventh European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering (ECCOMAS), Crete Island, Greece, June 5–10 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315539027_TESTING_SIMULATING_AND_UNDERSTANDING_UNDER-PLATFORM_DAMPER_DYNAMICS.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Overview of the test rig and details

+Overview of the test rig and details
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Overview of the test rig and details
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

View of the subassembly allowing the measurement of the contact forces. R11 and R13 are the forces measured by the load cells LC11 and LC13, respectively.

+View of the subassembly allowing the measurement of the contact forces. R11 and R13 are the forces measured by the load cells LC11 and LC13, respectively.
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
View of the subassembly allowing the measurement of the contact forces. R11 and R13 are the forces measured by the load cells LC11 and LC13, respectively.
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

FRF for (a) the free blade without dampers and (b) with dampers loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, (b) different forcing levels |FE| have been investigated, and (c) measured and simulated hysteresis loops at the cylindrical side of the damper, corresponding to the working conditions highlighted in Fig. 3(b)

+FRF for (a) the free blade without dampers and (b) with dampers loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, (b) different forcing levels |FE| have been investigated, and (c) measured and simulated hysteresis loops at the cylindrical side of the damper, corresponding to the working conditions highlighted in Fig. 3(b)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
FRF for (a) the free blade without dampers and (b) with dampers loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, (b) different forcing levels |FE| have been investigated, and (c) measured and simulated hysteresis loops at the cylindrical side of the damper, corresponding to the working conditions highlighted in Fig. 3(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The test rig setup (a) with measured and applied forces, the laser setup (b) to record the blade platform in-plane motion, and the laser setup (c) to measure tangential relative displacement at the flat-on-flat and cylinder-on-flat contacts

+The test rig setup (a) with measured and applied forces, the laser setup (b) to record the blade platform in-plane motion, and the laser setup (c) to measure tangential relative displacement at the flat-on-flat and cylinder-on-flat contacts
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The test rig setup (a) with measured and applied forces, the laser setup (b) to record the blade platform in-plane motion, and the laser setup (c) to measure tangential relative displacement at the flat-on-flat and cylinder-on-flat contacts
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Static equilibrium of the forces on the damper

+Static equilibrium of the forces on the damper
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Static equilibrium of the forces on the damper
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Comparison of FRF and (b) hysteresis loops at the damper cylindrical contact with different initial conditions, and (c) Damper force equilibrium; force scale shown in the figure. In the comparison, the dampers were loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, and the blade was excited with a force |FE| = 20 N.

+(a) Comparison of FRF and (b) hysteresis loops at the damper cylindrical contact with different initial conditions, and (c) Damper force equilibrium; force scale shown in the figure. In the comparison, the dampers were loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, and the blade was excited with a force |FE| = 20 N.
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Comparison of FRF and (b) hysteresis loops at the damper cylindrical contact with different initial conditions, and (c) Damper force equilibrium; force scale shown in the figure. In the comparison, the dampers were loaded with CF = 4.6 kg, and the blade was excited with a force |FE| = 20 N.
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Reconstruction of the in plane motion of the blade: (a) free blade with excitation force |FE| = 5 N, (b) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 5 N, and (c) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N (c)

+Reconstruction of the in plane motion of the blade: (a) free blade with excitation force |FE| = 5 N, (b) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 5 N, and (c) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N (c)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Reconstruction of the in plane motion of the blade: (a) free blade with excitation force |FE| = 5 N, (b) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 5 N, and (c) damper loaded with CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N (c)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

FRF of the blade-dampers system: (a) dampers loaded with CF = 2.6 kg and (b) dampers loaded with CF = 6.6 kg (b)

+FRF of the blade-dampers system: (a) dampers loaded with CF = 2.6 kg and (b) dampers loaded with CF = 6.6 kg (b)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
FRF of the blade-dampers system: (a) dampers loaded with CF = 2.6 kg and (b) dampers loaded with CF = 6.6 kg (b)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Tangential over normal force ratio, (b) hysteresis loop at the cylinder-on-flat contact (excitation force |FE| = 100 N; dampers load CF = 4.6 kg), and (c) Comparison between the slopes of the hysteresis loops at the cylinder-on-flat contact obtained on two different and independent test rigs

+(a) Tangential over normal force ratio, (b) hysteresis loop at the cylinder-on-flat contact (excitation force |FE| = 100 N; dampers load CF = 4.6 kg), and (c) Comparison between the slopes of the hysteresis loops at the cylinder-on-flat contact obtained on two different and independent test rigs
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Tangential over normal force ratio, (b) hysteresis loop at the cylinder-on-flat contact (excitation force |FE| = 100 N; dampers load CF = 4.6 kg), and (c) Comparison between the slopes of the hysteresis loops at the cylinder-on-flat contact obtained on two different and independent test rigs
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Numerical model of the damper

+Numerical model of the damper
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Numerical model of the damper
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11(a)

Measured and (b) simulated contact forces on the damper for CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N

+Measured and (b) simulated contact forces on the damper for CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Measured and (b) simulated contact forces on the damper for CF = 4.6 kg and |FE| = 100 N

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Axial-Flow Compressor Blade Profiles
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 4
Two-Dimensional Blade-to-Blade Flow through Cascades of Blades
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 5
Aerodynamic Performance Analysis
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 9
Quasi-Three-Dimensional Blade Passage Flow Field Analysis
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 12
Other Components and Variations
Axial-Flow Compressors> Chapter 13
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
Sign In