0
TECHNICAL PAPERS: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

Rotordynamic Coefficients for a Tooth-on-Stator Labyrinth Seal at 70 Bar Supply Pressures: Measurements Versus Theory and Comparisons to a Hole-Pattern Stator Seal

[+] Author and Article Information
Arthur Picardo

 Flowserve Corp.Vernon, CA 90058

Dara W. Childs

Turbomachinery Laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843dchilds@mengr.tamu.edu

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 127(4), 843-855 (Mar 01, 2004) (13 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1924634 History: Received October 01, 2003; Revised March 01, 2004

Rotor dynamic and leakage coefficients are presented for a labyrinth seal that was tested at a supply pressure of 70 bar-a and speeds up to 20,200 rpm. Tests were conducted at clearances of 0.1 mm and 0.2 mm, pressure ratios of 0.10, 0.31, and 0.52, and three preswirls ratios. Comparisons are made between test data and predictions from one-control-volume and two-control-volume bulk-flow models. Generally, theoretical predictions agree poorly with the test results, with the one-control volume model giving better predictions. The one-control-volume model provides a conservative prediction for effective damping; i.e., this parameter is underestimated. Both models under predict leakage rates. Comparisons are also made between rotordynamic coefficients of labyrinth and hole-pattern seals.

Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of one-control-volume and two-control-volume models

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Cross-sectional view of the test rig

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Stator support asymmetry

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Pivot tube location and preswirl rings

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Impedance plots at 10,200 rmp, high preswirl, 16% PR and Cr=0.2mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Effect of change in stator mass on direct stiffness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Predictions versus measured direct stiffness for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Predictions versus measured cross-coupled stiffness for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Predictions versus measured direct damping for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Predictions versus measured cross-coupled damping for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Predictions versus measured seal leakage for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Predictions versus measured effective damping for Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Comparison of effective damping between Cr=0.2 and Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Nondimensional and normalized coefficients, hole-pattern versus labyrinth seal

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Nondimensional and normalized effective stiffness and damping coefficients, hole-pattern versus labyrinth seal

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Normalized effective damping coefficients, hole-pattern versus labyrinth seal, Cr=0.1mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Comparison of leakage, labyrinth versus hole-pattern seals

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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
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
Sign In