Effects of different rub models on simulated rotor dynamics
Albert F. Kascak, John J. Tomko, United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Scientific and Technical Information Branch, United States. Army Aviation Systems Command
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Scientific and Technical Information Branch, 1984 - Science - 9 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
abradable model low-energy Abradable Rub Model abradable seal amplitude of backward Amplitude of displacement backward whirl began bouncing began to differ blade loss blade tip force blades contacted center disk ceramic seal contacted the seal disk after blade disk as function displacement of center dry friction model dry friction rub eight rotations energy per volume Envelopes of rotor forward to backward forward whirl direction frequency frictional force Full scale equals gas turbine loss for abradable loss for smearing loss was simulated mass eccentricity material removed maximum interference metal seal mN s/m2 molten metal normal force Orbit of center orbit stabilized orbital response radial clearance reference rotor centerline rotor dynamics rotor response rotor rubs rotor spiraled rotor-bearing model rotor-bearing system scale equals 130 scale equals 75 seal substrate shear stress shown in figure smeared layer smearing model low-viscosity tangential blade tip tip and seal viscosity volume of material