0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

Eddy Current Damping: A Concept Study for Steam Turbine Blading

[+] Author and Article Information
Jacob Laborenz1

Institute of Dynamics and Vibration Research, Leibniz Universität Hannover, 30167 Hannover, Germanylaborenz@ids.uni-hannover.de

Christian Siewert, Lars Panning, Jörg Wallaschek

Institute of Dynamics and Vibration Research, Leibniz Universität Hannover, 30167 Hannover, Germany

Christoph Gerber, Pierre-Alain Masserey

 ALSTOM Power, Steam Turbines and Generators, 5401 Baden, Switzerland

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 132(5), 052505 (Mar 05, 2010) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3205032 History: Received April 08, 2009; Revised April 15, 2009; Published March 05, 2010; Online March 05, 2010

In gas and steam turbine applications a common approach to prevent the blades from high cycle fatigue failures due to high vibration amplitudes is the usage of friction damping elements. Besides the intended amplitude reduction this procedure also features some possibly unwanted side effects like a shift in resonance frequencies due to stiffening effects caused by the contact. Thus, as an alternative an eddy current based noncontacting damping concept for the application in turbomachinery is investigated. In this paper two different types of eddy current dampers are considered. Theoretical models for both are established by applying electromagnetic-mechanical theory. The theoretical models are compared with forced response measurements that are performed at a stationary test rig.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by ALSTOM
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic sketch of first damping configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic sketch of second damping configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Numerically estimated equivalent viscous damping for both configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Numerically estimated equivalent stiffness coefficient for second damping configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Test rig consisting of two dummy blades, hydraulic clamping, shaker, laser vibrometer, and damping element in two configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Repeatability of measurements: amplitude and phase of first configuration with an air gap of a1=1 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison of measurements and simulations: forced response functions for different static air gaps in first damping element

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

First bending modes of dummy blades. Left: first setup (117.6 Hz and 117.9 Hz) and right: second setup (115.008 Hz and 115.068 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of measurements and simulations: forced response functions for different static air gaps in damping element using the second set up

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