Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

The Relevance of Damper Pre-Optimization and Its Effectiveness on the Forced Response of Blades

[+] Author and Article Information
Chiara Gastaldi

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

Teresa M. Berruti

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

Muzio M. Gola

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

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 4, 2017; final manuscript received November 4, 2017; published online April 5, 2018. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(6), 062505 (Apr 05, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1539; doi: 10.1115/1.4038773 History: Received October 04, 2017; Revised November 04, 2017

The purpose of this paper is to propose an effective strategy for the design of turbine blades with underplatform dampers (UPDs). The strategy involves damper “pre-optimization,” already proposed by the authors, to exclude, before the blades-coupled nonlinear calculation, all those damper configurations leading to low damping performance. This paper continues this effort by applying pre-optimization to determine a damper configuration which will not jam, roll, or detach under any in-plane platform kinematics (i.e., blade bending modes). Once the candidate damper configuration has been found, the damper equilibrium equations are solved by using both the multiharmonic balance method (MHBM) and the direct-time integration (DTI) for the purpose of finding the correct number of Fourier terms to represent displacements and contact forces. It is shown that contrarily to non-preoptimized dampers, which may display an erratic behavior, one harmonic term together with the static term ensures accurate results. These findings are confirmed by a state-of-the-art code for the calculation of the nonlinear forced response of a damper coupled to two blades. Experimental forced response functions (FRF) of the test case with a nominal damper are available for comparison. The comparison of different damper configurations offers a “high-level” validation of the pre-optimization procedure and highlights the strong influence of the blades mode of vibration on the damper effectiveness. It is shown that the pre-optimized damper is not only the most effective but also the one that leads to a faster and more flexible calculation.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Griffin, J. H. , 1980, “ Friction Damping of Resonant Stresses in Gas Turbine Engine Airfoils,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 102(2), pp. 329–333. [CrossRef]
Srinvasan, A. V. , and Cutts, D. G. , 1983, “ Dry Friction Damping Mechanisms in Engine Blades,” ASME J. Eng. Power, 105(2), pp. 332–341. [CrossRef]
Cameron, T. M. , Griffin, J. H. , Kielb, R. E. , and Hoosac, T. M. , 1990, “ An Integrated Approach for Friction Damper Design,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust., 112(2), pp. 175–182. [CrossRef]
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. [CrossRef]
Siewert, C. , Panning, L. , Wallaschek, J. , and Richter, C. , 2010, “ Multiharmonic Forced Response Analysis of a Turbine Blading Coupled by Nonlinear Contact Forces,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 132(8), p. 082501. [CrossRef]
Pennacchi, P. , Chatterton, S. , Bachschmid, N. , Pesatori, E. , and Turozzi, G. , 2011, “ A Model to Study the Reduction of Turbine Blade Vibration Using the Snubbing Mechanism,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 25(4), pp. 1260–1275. [CrossRef]
Berruti, T. , and Maschio, V. , 2012, “ Experimental Investigation on the Forced Response of a Dummy Counter-Rotating Turbine Stage With Friction Damping,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 134(12), p. 122502. [CrossRef]
Chen, J. J. , Yang, B. D. , and Menq, C. H. , 2000, “ Periodic Forced Response of Structures Having Three-Dimensional Frictional Constraints,” J. Sound Vib., 229(4), pp. 775–792. [CrossRef]
Berger, E. , 2002, “ Friction Modeling for Dynamic System Simulation,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 55(6), pp. 535–577. [CrossRef]
Panning, L. , Sextro, W. , and Popp, K. , 2003, “ Spatial Dynamics of Tuned and Mistuned Bladed Disks With Cylindrical and Wedge-Shaped Friction Dampers,” Int. J. Rotating Mach., 9(3), pp. 219–228. [CrossRef]
Berruti, T. , Firrone, C. M. , Pizzolante, M. , and Gola, M. M. , 2007, “ Fatigue Damage Prevention on Turbine Blades: Study of Underplatform Damper Shape,” Key Eng. Mater., 347, pp. 159–164. [CrossRef]
Petrov, E. P. , and Ewins, D. J. , 2007, “ Advanced Modelling of Underplatform Friction Dampers for Analysis of Bladed Disk Vibration,” ASME J. Turbomach., 129(1), pp. 143–150. [CrossRef]
Petrov, E. P. , 2008, “ Explicit Finite Element Models of Friction Dampers in Forced Response Analysis of Bladed Discs,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 130(2), p. 022502. [CrossRef]
Cigeroglu, E. , An, N. , and Menq, C. H. , 2008, “ Forced Response Prediction of Constrained and Unconstrained Structures Coupled Through Frictional Contacts,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 131(2), p. 022505. [CrossRef]
Laxalde, D. , Thouverez, F. , and Lombard, J.-P. , 2010, “ Forced Response Analysis of Integrally Bladed Disks With Friction Ring Dampers,” ASME J. Vib. Acoust., 132(1), p. 011013. [CrossRef]
Firrone, C. M. , Zucca, S. , and Gola, M. M. , 2011, “ The Effect of Underplatform Dampers on the Forced Response of Bladed Disks by a Coupled Static/Dynamic Harmonic Balance Method,” Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 46(2), pp. 363–375. [CrossRef]
Krack, M. , Salles, L. , and Thouverez, F. , 2017, “ Vibration Prediction of Bladed Disks Coupled by Friction Joints,” Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., 24(3), pp. 589–636. [CrossRef]
Pesaresi, L. , Salles, L. , Jones, A. , Green, J. S. , and Schwingshackl, C. W. , 2017, “ Modelling the Nonlinear Behaviour of an Underplatform Damper Test Rig for Turbine Applications,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 85, pp. 662–679. [CrossRef]
Gastaldi, C. , and Gola, M. M. , 2016, “ Pre-Optimization of Asymmetrical Underplatform Dampers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 139(1), p. 012504. [CrossRef]
Lavella, M. , 2016, “ Contact Properties and Wear Behaviour of Nickel Based Superalloy René 80,” Metals, 6(7), p. 159. [CrossRef]
Gastaldi, C. , and Gola, M. M. , 2016, “ On the Relevance of a Microslip Contact Model for Under-Platform Dampers,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 115–116, pp. 145–156. [CrossRef]
Cardona, A. , Coune, T. , Lerusse, A. , and Geradin, M. , 1994, “ A Multiharmonic Method for Nonlinear Vibration Analysis,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 37(9), pp. 1593–1608. [CrossRef]
Zucca, S. , and Firrone, C. M. , 2014, “ Nonlinear Dynamics of Mechanical Systems With Friction Contacts: Coupled Static and Dynamic Multi-Harmonic Balance Method and Multiple Solution,” J. Sound Vib., 333(3), pp. 916–926. [CrossRef]
Gastaldi, C. , 2017, “ Vibration Control and Mitigation in Turbomachinery,” Ph.D. thesis, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Bessone, A. , and Toso, F. , 2015, “ Investigation on the Dynamic Response of Blades With Asymmetric Under Platform Dampers,” ASME Paper No. GT2015-42597.
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]
Cameron, T. , and Griffin, I. , 1989, “ An Alternating Frequency/Time Domain Method for Calculating the Steady-State Response of Nonlinear Dynamic System,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 56(1), pp. 149–154. [CrossRef]
Botto, D. , Gastaldi, C. , Gola, M. M. , and Umer, M. , 2017, “ An Experimental Investigation of the Dynamics of a Blade With Two Under-Platform Dampers,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 140(3), p. 032504.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Sketch of undesirable damper behaviors: (a) jamming, (b) rolling-lift off, and (c) one-side detachment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Damper main geometrical parameters. (b) Damper equilibrium in case of upward IP motion of the platforms. The left contact force FL falls 5%d away from the lower edge, thus barely avoiding the upper left contact point lift-off.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Example of an IP damper map

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) Design areas in the 3D parameter space for IP and OOP motion. (b) Force trajectory diagram for a given damper. The gray-shaded area contains all possible force equilibria the damper may verify for different platforms relative motion.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Admissible design region, common to both IP and OOP motion

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Damper numerical model including contact elements. (b) Single 3D contact element.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Calculated hysteresis cycles for different asymmetric dampers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Test rig for forced response measurement. (b) The damper Dnom. (c) Representative scheme of the HBM blade–damper iterative scheme.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Forced response of the blades. Comparison of simulated (different dampers) and experimental results. Excitation on the left blade. Mode 2. CF= 40 kg, |fEB|= 113 N.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

(a) Left (flat-on-flat contact) and (b) right (cylinder-on-flat contact) calculated hysteresis cycles for different dampers at the resonance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Scheme representing absolute and relative platform displacements. Mode 2. Left: excitation on the left blade only. Right: excitation on both blades.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Numerical FRF and hysteresis cycles at resonance. Excitation on both blades. Mode 2. CF= 40 kg, |fEB|= 113 N.



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