3.2. Linear Stability Analysis: The CB Case
Some check about the reliability of the semi-analytical procedure addressed to the linear stability analysis, as described in the above section, has been carried out with reference to the operation of a rotor on FRBs with outer CB. In this case, the stability responses obtained in both semi-analytical and analytical way (see for example [
5,
6]) have been put in comparison.
Figure 4a shows the results (the analytical curves are reported in black) for three different
values and the remaining parameters fixed as in [
6]. The plots in figure show some differences in the outcomes of both procedures, particularly for the higher branches obtained with
= 1.5 and 2. In this regard, the following remarks are worth to be considered. The analytical curves have been here obtained expressing the inner and outer fluid film forces as well as the inner and outer stiffness and damping coefficients in full analytical way, according to [
5]. On the other hand, the stability borders obtained in semi-analytical way are calculated through a procedure that implies: the integration of the pressure distribution on a finite mesh; the account of cavitation through cut off of the negative values; the calculation of stiffness and damping coefficients by means of numerical derivatives. In both cases, the occurrence of pure imaginary eigenvalues, which is crucial for the determination of the instability threshold, has been carried out numerically. According to these aspects, the differences in the outcomes, as they appear in
Figure 4a, receive some justification.
In
Figure 4a, it may be observed that each
-case is represented by a curve with two distinct branches, so as to organize the whole area under exam in two regions, a left higher stability region (HSR) and a right lower stability region (LSR). The branch in the HSR, at lower values of the bearing modulus
, represents stability loss very likely due to supercritical Hopf bifurcations, whereas the branch in the LSR, characterized by light-load conditions, would very likely represent instability originated by subcritical bifurcations [
6]. These behaviors are due to the play of the eight eigenvalues at varying the rotor speed
s. In this regard, it is worth remarking that: (1) the set of eigenvalues is generally made by real eigenvalues (REs)
,
p = 1,
P, and complex conjugate eigenvalues (CCEs)
,
q = 1,
Q; (2) the number of eigenvalues in each subset can change from
s to
s, on condition, in the present system, that
P + 2
Q = 8. As an example,
Figure 4b,c, which refer to the curve in
Figure 4a numerically obtained for
= 2, illustrate the conditions occurring at the onset of instability when
= 8.13 and
= 0.398, respectively. Both figures show the behavior of the real parts Re
of the eigenvalues (upper diagrams) and that of the imaginary parts Im
in the interval
s = 2 ÷ 10 (for better clarity, only the non-positive Im
have been plotted). Furthermore, owing to the different magnitudes of the eigenvalues parts, only partial data, i.e., those relevant to the Hopf bifurcations under analysis, have been reported. That being said, from
Figure 4b it can be inferred that the loss of stability at
= 8.13, occurs at
s around 2, when the pair
crosses the imaginary axis from the negative to the positive half-plane. It can be seen that, at the same speed, there are a second pair
of CCEs and a RE
, the latter one changing soon after, when
s is about 2.2, into a further pair of CCEs. At the onset of instability, the absolute value of the imaginary part of the eigenvalues that determine the bifurcation, i.e.,
, is higher than that of
. Differently in the HSR, when
= 0.398,
Figure 4c shows that the loss of stability, about
s = 3, is due to the eigenvalue
, which possesses the lowest absolute value of the imaginary part with respect to the further CCEs (two of which, i.e.,
and
, are depicted in the upper and bottom diagrams of the figure). The above conditions, regarding the magnitude of the imaginary parts of the critical eigenvalues, have been observed in [
6] to be frequently associated to sub-critical (
Figure 4b) and super-critical (
Figure 4c) bifurcations. Nevertheless, the same conditions cannot represent a criterion to decide whether the bifurcation is of the former or the latter type, nor in the present analysis are adopted the appropriate tools, like continuation or center manifold analysis, in order to solve the issue.
The change from LSR scenario to the HSR one manifests with a jump, as it can be inferred from the plots in
Figure 4a and can be explained as follows, still making reference to
Figure 4b,c, without providing further data for the sake of conciseness. According to the above remarks, the Hopf bifurcations in the LSR (
Figure 4b) and in the HSR (
Figure 4c) are due to different critical eigenvalues, i.e.,
and
, respectively. As the value of the bearing modulus
is decreased from 10 to 2 (compare
Figure 4b,c), the
remains over the zero axis (i.e., the pair
is continuing to cross the imaginary axis). Differently
diminishes gradually in value, till to abandon the zero axis and to position entirely beyond it. Owing to its slope, when
separates from the zero axis and ceases to be critical (around
), there is a jump from the critical
s value that is due to
, say
this
end value, to the critical
s value that is due to
, say
this
initial value, placed upward in the interval. The difference
-
justifies the discontinuity in the observed threshold curve for
= 2 in
Figure 4a. Similar considerations hold for the remaining curves.
3.3. Linear Stability Analysis: The 2LWB and LB Cases
When the outer bearing is changed from the CB to the 2LWB or LB shapes, the dependence of the stability curves on the bearing orientation
and the level of deviation from the circular shape (respectively represented in both types by the amplitude
B and the ellipticity parameter
) turns out to be apparent.
Figure 5a,b report the stability charts obtained adopting the 2LWB with
B = 0.2,
,
= 1.32 and
= 0.043; the clearance ratio
was given the values of 1 and 2, respectively in both figures. The curves in each figure show similarities to the plots of
Figure 4a and are mostly characterized by the presence of two distinct branches, corresponding to HSR and LSR. In each figure, the threshold curve obtained with the CB layout, operating under the same respective parameter values, has been added in order to allow comparison to the lobe solutions, so that a general increase in stability, gained by the non-circular geometry, may be observed. In fact, the threshold branches corresponding to the 2LWB are higher than in the CB case, with the only exception of the
orientation. This effect is particularly remarkable in the HSR and even more when the clearance ratio
is equal to 1, whereas the dotted-line branches in the LSR turn out to be very close each to the other. Also worth of notice is the broadening of the HSR, at the expense of the LSR, when
is raised from 1 to 2. Yet, comparing in each figure the curves corresponding to different angles, it can be inferred that the apparent improvement of the stable behavior in the HSR is higher the less the slope with respect to the horizontal layout assigned through the
angle. Nevertheless, the orientation angle
yields a some contrasting stability response: (1) poor when
= 1, i.e., worse than that of the CB mount, in a relatively broad interval of
and, moreover, without a distinct separation between HSR and LSR; (2) generally better than the CB response when
= 2, with a threshold even higher than in the whole comparing cases, in a restricted interval of the bearing modulus, placed just downstream the jump up to the higher branch.
Figure 5c–f illustrate the stability charts obtained replacing the 2LWB with an LBmx bearing (
Figure 5c,d) or an LBmn one (
Figure 5e,f). In order to ease the comparison between geometries, the whole set of
Figure 5a–f is organized by rows, i.e., the figures on a same row are obtained with the same parameter values. In the whole cases, it can be seen that the LB curves (
Figure 5c–f) are more gathered, with partial overlapping, and closer to the CB branches than in the 2LWB mount (compare
Figure 5a,b). From comparison, it can also be inferred a general, moderate decrease of the stability thresholds gained by the lemon profiles, as well as the clear similarities to the respective 2LWB results (compare figures on a same row), mainly consisting in similar partitions of the diagram area in HSR and LSR. Some attention may be paid to examining the performances of the different angular orientations, with particular reference to the HSR. The positioning of the LB curves, almost generally above the CB ones, is still to indicate better stability with respect to the circular geometry. Nevertheless, the relative gathering of the branches denotes a weak influence of the
angle in this set of values, even though some differences in the performance quality can be observed comparing the results pertaining to a same given
value in the LBmx and LBmn geometries (compare, for instance, the branches with
in
Figure 5c,d respectively to those in
Figure 5e,f).
A separate analysis is addressed just to the mentioned 2LWB case with
and
= 1, in order to throw light onto the characteristic continuity, i.e., without the typical jump from HSR to LSR or vice-versa, exhibited by the corresponding curve in
Figure 5a.
Figure 6a,b make it possible to assess that
represents the critical eigenvalue both in the LSR and the HSR (compare
Figure 5a). Owing to coalescences between the different eigenvalues, observed in the Re
and Im
diagrams at varying
in its interval,
maintains its position over the zero axis, so that the critical value of
(i.e., the speed at which the pair
crosses the imaginary axis) varies continuously without jumps and intervention of different eigenvalues. It is also worth noticing that
changes its relative magnitude with respect to the other eigenvalues when passing from LSR to the HSR, as it can be inferred comparing the bottom diagrams in
Figure 5a,b.
The effects of an increase in the radius ratio
from 1.32 to 1.5 can be observed from
Figure 7a–f. As in the previous set of figures, in each row it is possible to compare the 2LWB data (left) to the LBmx (center) and LBmn ones (right), obtained under the same parameter values. Observation and comparison of the plots in these figures make it possible to conclude that the above modification in the
value keeps unchanged the characteristics already observed in
Figure 5a–f, while determining an increased stability, as confirmed by the raising of the whole branches. On the other hand, it was observed that a moderate change in the value of the mass ratio yielded no sensible modification in the charts depicted in
Figure 5a–f. Related results to support this remark were obtained assuming
= 0.025 and 0.075 and are not presented here for the sake of brevity.
The stability charts obtained with the same parameter values of
Figure 5a–f, but adopting a further set of angular positions, i.e.,
, are reported in
Figure 8a–c and
Figure 9a–f. The values
= 1 and
= 2 were respectively adopted in the former and the latter set of figures. A general decay of stability, partly lessened at higher loads, is shared by the different curves, which show substantial similarities in the three, compared geometries. It is apparent that, whatever the noncircular bearing shape, when
= 1 the threshold curves for
and
are positioned quite below the CB curve. Differently, some higher branches of the curves calculated with
and
overstep the CB stability border when
is about less than 0.2. Similar behavior characterize the data for
with restriction to the LBmx and LBmn profiles (
Figure 8b,c). A further remark can be made about the shape of the curves, which are deprived of distinct separation between the HSR and LSR, with the only exception of the 2LWB and LBmx branches at
.
When
= 2 (
Figure 9a–f) a higher spread, with respect to the results of
Figure 8a–c, is observed in the stability performances. Angular positions with
and
yield a remarkable lowering of the limit curves. This circumstance is particularly evident for the LBmn profile. Conversely, the best performance pertains to the
orientation: this horizontal layout of the outer bearing, makes the stability borders in
Figure 9b,d,f comparable to the higher branches depicted in
Figure 5b,d,f, respectively. Even in this case, this outcome appears more evident when the LBmn shape is adopted. A further comment is to be addressed to the discontinuities exhibited in
Figure 9b,f, which could represent, at first glance, numerical artifacts. Nevertheless, an inspection into the behavior of the critical eigenvalues clarifies the point.
Figure 10a–e show the partial portraits of the eigenvalues obtained in the interval of rotor speed
s, taken at different, close values of the bearing modulus. In particular,
Figure 10a–c, relative to a sequence of
values around 3.5, show how the critical eigenvalue is initially represented by
(
Figure 10a,b, top) and successively (
Figure 10c, top) by
. The passage from the one eigenvalue to the other takes place with a jump in the critical value
s* of
s, which justifies the right discontinuity in the
curve of
Figure 9b. Further downward, when
is around 0.54 another jump takes place, as confirmed by the left discontinuity in the
curve of
Figure 9b. Differently from the previous case, the jump in the critical value
s* from 6.7 c.a. to 4.2 c.a. when
is due to the only
eigenvalue, as confirmed by the behavior summarized in the top diagrams of
Figure 10d,e.
3.4. Non-Linear Analysis with Brute-Force Method
The above analysis of stability suffers from the limits due to the several simplifying hypotheses that have been assumed, among which the linearization of the fluid film forces is a distinctive feature. The brute-force approach, based on the numerical integration of the system’s ODE, represents a first, classic tool at disposal to get further insight into the dynamics under analysis [
23], especially in the post-bifurcation scenario, before recurring to possible different methods, like continuation analysis or center manifolds analysis [
6,
18,
19]. However, it is worth remarking that the brute-force method can cast light on the investigated dynamics, though restricting to the stable solutions and on condition to evaluate suitably the sensibility to initial conditions, so as to detect the presence of possibly coexisting solutions. Nevertheless, regarding the investigation carried out in the above section, this approach can effectively play a supporting role, mainly consisting in a survey of the bifurcation dynamics predicted through the linear stability analysis. Particularly, the stability loss can be verified by observing the positions occupied by the journal and ring centers within their respective clearances, as the speed is gradually increased in the low values range. In fact, when the bifurcation manifests, their equilibrium point-status is replaced by a motion condition as an effect of the onset of a limit cycle. Both the speed at which the transition sets in and the way the orbits’ size increase can be suitably appraised through the numerical simulation.
On these premises, two examples have been chosen from the case-studies presented in the above section, in order to show the use of the brute-force procedure in the present context. In each example, for a given set of
,
,
, and
values, the rotor speed is assigned in steps within a suitable interval. At each step, the numerical integration of Equation (8), written in the absence of unbalance, is carried out by means of an ode15s MATLAB routine, up to attaining a steady condition after that the initial transient is damped out. This procedure is repeated for different FRB layouts, whose responses are eventually compared in terms of journal and ring center orbits, minimum film thickness, and
SI index. The last quantity is specifically related to the orbits. Besides contrasting the orbits obtained from a layout to the other at some chosen
s values, the said index, defined as
where
and
and
are the
x and
y coordinates of the orbit points, makes it possible to evaluate approximatively the orbit dimensions along the examined interval of speed.
The two selected examples are characterized by the following sets of parameters:
Set (1)
= 0.1,
= 2,
= 1.32,
= 0.043, layouts: CB, 2WLB with
rad (reference to
Figure 5b and
Figure 9b);
Set (2)
= 0.22,
= 1,
= 1.32,
= 0.043, layouts: CB, 2WLB with
rad (reference to
Figure 8a).
In the examples, intervals: 1.18 ÷ 15.4 (10 ÷ 130 krpm) or 1.18 ÷ 21.3 (10 ÷ 190 krpm) of the s rotor speed, in steps Δs = 0.355 (3 krpm), have been assumed.
Figure 11a,b depict the behavior of the
SI index respectively for the above Set1 and Set2 conditions. Each curve in the diagrams starts at a speed value that is generally not coinciding with the exact critical one, but turns out to be placed just downstream of it, owing to the step resolution and the fact that the index assumes null values in the presence of equilibrium points. The
SI behavior shown in the plots makes it possible to infer that:
- -
The orbits described by the ring center in the outer bearing are larger than those described by the journal center. In particular, the orbits of the ring center for the CB are generally larger than in the other layouts. An opposite outcome appears when comparing the orbits of the journal bearing, which are, for the circular geometry, smaller than in the 2LWB examples.
- -
Under the Set 1 conditions, the bifurcation manifests at rotor speeds that are quite different each to the other (
Figure 11a). The 2WLB,
layout presents a critical speed about
s = 15, remarkably higher than those that occur about
s = 6 and
s = 4, respectively for the CB and the 2WLB −
cases. This outcome is quite congruent with the predictions that can be deduced from
Figure 5b and
Figure 9b for these three layouts.
- -
Adopting the Set 2 (
Figure 11b), the critical speeds obtained for the different FRBs are closer than in the Set 1 conditions. The lowest one, at about
s = 4.5, is obtained when the outer bearing, i.e., the FRB housing, has a lobe profile with a
slope. In the other two cases, represented by the CB and 2WLB −
layouts, the transition to the limit cycle manifests at about
s = 5. Comparison to
Figure 8a makes it possible to assess a sufficient congruence between the data in these conditions too, despite the jump exhibited in the same figure by the threshold curve relative to the lobe bearing with
slope.
An insight into the results presented in
Figure 11a,b can be achieved through inspection of the trajectories described by the journal and ring centers at different speeds and depicted in
Figure 12a,c,e, for conditions of Set 1, and in
Figure 12b,d,f for the Set 2 ones. A first indication about the stability performances that pertain to the different layouts, is obtained by noticing the long-lasting permanence of the equilibrium point at speed increase, which manifests in some cases with respect to the other ones. This remark complies particularly with the behavior of the 2WLB −
reported in
Figure 12e. The wide orbits of the centers, detected for
s = 16, contrast with the minute orbits obtained when
s = 15. Differently, the other two geometries analyzed under the same Set 1 conditions (
Figure 12a,c) turn out to exhibit big orbits well before, when
s = 7.
The data of
Figure 12a,c,e also confirm that the trajectories of the ring center in the CB layout are on average closer to the housing wall with respect to the compared lobe geometries, as inferred from observation of the
SI curves in
Figure 11a. The opposite result, relative to the magnitude of the journal bearing orbits, which appears to be relatively lesser in the CB case than in the compared geometries, is also verified.
Figure 12b,d,f depict the trajectories obtained when conditions are those of Set 2. The critical speed occurs for
s values between 4 and 5 in the whole three bearing types. Yet, the transition to the precession motion appears slightly anticipated by the 2WLB −
layout with respect to the CB and the 2WLB −
ones. Furthermore, comparing the data obtained at
s = 4 and 5 in
Figure 12d,f to those relative to
s = 3.5 and 4.5 in
Figure 12c and
s = 15 and 16 in
Figure 12e, it can be said that the transition in the Set 2 cases manifests very likely some more gradually than in the Set 1 examples. Further observation of the data in
Figure 12a–f makes it possible to notice the presence of higher harmonics that affect, at some degree, the journal orbits downstream of the stability loss, particularly under the Set 2 conditions.
The brief portrait given in the present section is completed here below with an observation of the minimum thickness behavior, as reported in
Figure 13a,b. The whole curves in the plots present an initial branch that raises with the rotor angular velocity, from the initial
s = 2 value up to the critical speed. This behavior is justified by the gradual centering of the steady equilibrium points within the bearing clearances, which evolves as far as the speed is increased. The difference in the loading conditions from Set 1 and Set 2 explains the different range of values pertaining to the curves reported in the lower part of
Figure 13a,b and relative to the inner bearing. It is worth observing that the minimum thickness assumes practically the same values, whatever the FRB layout in the examples. The curves shows quite clearly the jump that is due to the stability loss, with indications that agree with those inferred from
Figure 11 and
Figure 12. The significant jumps that affect the minimum film thickness in the inner bearing under Set 1 are also worth of remark. This outcome appears to be reasonably explained in terms of the said equilibrium point-centering and load condition effects. The example represented by the 2WLB −
case in
Figure 13a is representative in this regard.