Rotational Effects on Lubricant Jet Flow

While attempting to determine the dynamics of a Newtonian fluid (in this case, turbine oil) flowing through a spinning shaft several questions arose as to what the kinematics of such a system would look like. In order to determine the effects of pressure and rotation on a fluid, CFD was employed using a simple model in order to facilitate a more thorough understanding.

Flow Out @ 14.5 psi (Ambient) .05 Orifice

Rotational Direction 2 Inlet

Flow In @ 100 psia

The initial conditions for the CFD were set as follows: Variable Inlet Diameter Outlet Diameter Inlet Pressure Outlet Pressure Rotational Speed Fluid Properties Value 2 in. .05 in. 100 psia 14.5 psia 0 rpm PRF-23699

This system could be described as a non-rotating lubrication bar. This model was then simulated at several pressures against empirical data collected for similar lube bar designs at 2 points: Pressure 100 psia 225 psia 400 psia Analytical Mass Flow .066 lb/s .103 lb/s .139 lb/s CFD Mass Flow .064 lb/s .106 lb/s .146 lb/s % Difference 3.1% 2.9% 4.8%

The results of these trials show a strong correlation between empirical evidence and the CFD analysis. As such, the CFD results were determined to be an adequate data bank for further analysis. The CFD analysis involved rotating the lube bar at various speeds and measuring the change in mass flow rate out of the .05 orifice. Once the flow rate was calculated an effective pressure that is, the pressure that would be required to produce a similar flow rate in a stationary lube bar, was back calculated using Equation 1. Rotational speeds were simulated between 0 and 20,000 RPM in 2000 RPM increments with additional cases of 9,000 RPM and 40,000 RPM. The results are presented in Table 1 shown in Figure 1 and 2. ( )( )

Equation 1

RPM 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 9000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 40000

Dn (50.8 mm X RPM) 0 101600 203200 304800 406400 457200 508000 609600 711200 812800 914400 1016000 2032000

Mass Flow (lb/s) 0.0639 0.0643 0.069 0.078 0.089 0.095 0.102 0.117 0.131 0.149 0.164 0.181 .333
Table 1

Effective Pressure (psia) 100 103 119 152 198 225 258 340 427 552 668 814 2750

Mass Flow VS RPM

0.2 0.18

Mass Flow (lb/s)

0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000

RPM
Figure 1

Effective Pressure VS RPM

Effective Pressure (PSI)
900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000

RPM

Figure 2

The data appears to correlate rotational speed to a squared increase in effective pressure. This phenomenon could potentially be explained through the relationship between centrifugal forces and rotational velocity ( ). As there is no effective compression or change in density of the fluid due to pressure (i.e. it is incompressible), the fluid within the rotating shaft will be fully developed as long as mass flow capacity of the inlet is not exceeded by the mass flow out of the lube bar. Since the rotational speed essentially acts as a flow adder or pressure adder, any designed orifice will have to take into account the effective pressure in order to be sized correctly. In order to try to put these results in perspective an example that relates to the current B2B lube requirements is shown based on the information obtained with the previous results. Alterations in the system are also provided to show the effects of orifice size and rotational speed on the flow through the radial jets. Current System Speed (RPM) Orifice Di. (in) Flow through 12 Orifices (lb/s) Flow through 12 Orifices (gpm) +50% Orifice Di. +50% Speed +50% Orifice & Speed

9000 .05 1.14 9.14

9000 .075 2.57 20.6

13500 .05 1.52 12.2

13500 .075 3.43 27.4

It is apparent that for this example orifice size control plays a much larger role in controlling flow than speed induced pressure increases. In practice, orifices as small as .020 can be used as long if proper filtration is maintained without a significant risk of clogging. Orifices in this size range would allow for even very high speed operation as flows are restricted quite heavily.

System Testing
A test system was developed to experiment with a more realistic rendition of the lubrication setup that would be integrated into the GE test machine. Bearing 2 Lube Bearing 1 Lube

Lube Flow Spline 1 Lube

Figure 3 - Test System Ovewview

Spline 2 Lube

Spline 1: 6 (Six) - .032 Orifices Bearing 1 and 2: 4 (Four) - .030 Orifices Bearing 2: 6 (Six) - .030 Orifices
Figure 4 - Interface Close-Up

Figure 5 - Bearing Lube Jets

Figure 6 End Cap Lube Jets

Variable Inlet Diameter Spline 1 Jet Dia: Spline 2 Jet Dia: Bearing 1 Jet Dia: Bearing 2 Jet Dia: Outlet Pressure Angular Speed (RPM) Fluid Properties

Value .375 6 X .032 6 X.030 4 X .030 4 X .030 14.5 psia 0 9000 PRF-23699

Figure 6 - Test System Parameters

The spline jet diameters were changed slightly between Spline 1 and Spline 2. This is order to take account for the difference in radial location between the two Splines. Notice that the jets for Spline 1 are operating at a smaller diameter than the Spline 2 jets and it was hypothesized that at some angular velocity the pressure adder, and therefore the increased flow, would overcome the flow-reducing effects of the decrease in diameter. Oil Flow Bearing 1 Bearing 2 Spline 1 Spline 2 Total 0.492 0.444 1.056 0.894 2.886 0.52 0.452 1.074 0.876 2.922 0.692 0.64 1.062 0.9 3.294 0.964 0.86 1.086 0.996 3.906 1.24 1.1 1.014 1.074 4.428
Figure 7 - Data Table

RPM 0 2250 4500 6750 9000

Orifice Flow VS RPM

1.4 1.2 1 Volume Flow 0.8 (GPM) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 2000 4000 RPM 6000 8000 10000 Bearing 1 Bearing 2 Spline 1 Spline 2

Figure 8 - Oil Flow VS RPM Test Graph

It can be seen that the results in this experiment correlate very well with those of the initial study. The increase in effective pressure due to rotation causes an increase in flow. The supposed hypothesis also seems to prove true. There is a point where the effective pressure at the orifices set at a larger radius causes the oil flow to overcome the flow of the larger orifices set at a smaller radius. In this particular case, it causes the oil flows to the two different splines to become effectively equal at around 9000 RPM. This could be seen as ideal if a majority of the run time is expected be at that speed.

Figure 9 - Test System Pressure Gradiant

Figure 10 - Test System Pressure Gradient

Figure 11 High Speed Circumferential Velocity Boundary Layer Formation

Figure 12 - Orifice Entrance Close Up