0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Rotordynamic Performance of a Negative-Swirl Brake for a Tooth-on-Stator Labyrinth Seal

[+] Author Affiliations
Dara W. Childs, James E. Mclean, Jr., Min Zhang, Stephen P. Arthur

Texas A&M University, College Station, TX

Paper No. GT2014-25577, pp. V07AT31A011; 9 pages
doi:10.1115/GT2014-25577
From:
  • ASME Turbo Expo 2014: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition
  • Volume 7A: Structures and Dynamics
  • Düsseldorf, Germany, June 16–20, 2014
  • Conference Sponsors: International Gas Turbine Institute
  • ISBN: 978-0-7918-4576-9
  • Copyright © 2014 by ASME

abstract

In the late 1970’s, Benckert and Wachter (Technical University Stuttgart) tested labyrinth seals using air as the test media and measured direct and cross-coupled stiffness coefficients. They reported the following results: (1) Fluid pre-swirl in the direction of shaft rotation creates destabilizing cross-coupled stiffness coefficients, and (2) Effective swirl brakes at the inlet to the seal can markedly reduce the cross-coupled stiffness coefficients, in many cases reducing them to zero. In recent years, “negative-swirl” swirl brakes have been employed that attempt to reverse the circumferential direction of inlet flow, changing the sign of the cross-coupled stiffness coefficients and creating stabilizing stiffness forces. This study presents test results for a 16-tooth labyrinth seal with positive inlet preswirl (in the direction of shaft rotation) for the following inlet conditions: (1) No swirl brakes, (2) Straight, conventional swirl brakes, and (3) Negative-swirl swirl brakes. The negative-swirl swirl-brake designs were developed based on CFD predictions. Tests were conducted at 10.2, 15.35, and 20.2 krpm with 70 bars of inlet pressure for pressure ratios of 0.3, 0.4, 0.5.

Test results include leakage and rotordynamic coefficients. In terms of leakage, the negative-swirl brake configuration leaked the least, followed by the conventional brake, followed by the no-brake design. Normalized to the negative-swirl brake configuration, the conventional-brake and no-brake configurations mass flow rate were greater, respectively, by factors of 1.04 and 1.09.

The direct stiffness coefficients are negative but small, consistent with past experience. The conventional swirl brake drops the destabilizing cross-coupled stiffness coefficients k by a factor of about 0.8 as compared to the no-brake results. The negative-swirl brake produces a change in sign of k with an appreciable magnitude; hence, the stability of forwardly-precessing modes would be enhanced.

In descending order, the direct damping coefficients C are: no-swirl, negative-swirl, conventional-swirl. Normalized in terms of the no-swirl case, C for the negative and conventional brake designs are, respectively, 0.7 and 0.6 smaller.

The effective damping Ceff combines the effect of k and C. Ceff is large and positive for the negative-swirl configuration and near zero for the no-brake and conventional-brake designs.

The present results for a negative-brake design are very encouraging for both eye-packing seals (where conventional swirl brakes have been previously employed) and division-wall and balance-piston seals where negative shunt injection has been employed.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Topics: Stators , Brakes

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

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 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