0
Research Papers

Adaptive Microslip Projection for Reduction of Frictional and Contact Nonlinearities in Shrouded Blisks

[+] Author and Article Information
Mainak Mitra

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
e-mail: mitram@umich.edu

Stefano Zucca

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

Bogdan I. Epureanu

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
e-mail: epureanu@umich.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received April 21, 2015; final manuscript received February 15, 2016; published online May 12, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Sotirios Natsiavas.

J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam 11(4), 041016 (May 12, 2016) (15 pages) Paper No: CND-15-1104; doi: 10.1115/1.4033003 History: Received April 21, 2015; Revised February 15, 2016

Reduced order models (ROMs) of turbine bladed disks (blisks) are essential to quickly yet accurately characterize vibration characteristics and effectively design for high cycle fatigue. Modeling blisks with contacting shrouds at adjacent blades is especially challenging due to friction damping and localized nonlinearities at the contact interfaces which can lead to complex stick–slip behavior. While well-known techniques such as the harmonic balance method (HBM) and Craig–Bampton component mode synthesis (CB-CMS) have generally been employed to generate ROMs in the past, they do not reduce degrees-of-freedom (DoFs) at the interfaces themselves. In this paper, we propose a novel method to obtain a set of reduction basis functions for the contact interface DoFs as well as the remaining DoFs called “adaptive microslip projection” (AMP). The method is based on analyzing a set of linear systems with specifically chosen boundary conditions on the contact interface. Simulated responses of full order baseline models and the novel ROMs under various conditions are studied. Results obtained from the ROMs compare very favorably with the baseline model. This study addresses the case of a shrouded blisk in microslip close to stick. The AMP procedure may be possibly applied to other systems with Coulomb friction contacts, but its accuracy and effectiveness will need to be evaluated separately.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Contact-surfaces S1 and S2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Reduction strategy

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Frequency versus number of nodal diameters plot for stuck tuned blisk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

ROM (based on full reduction AMP) responses for different AMP basis sizes, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

FR ROM error versus no. of amps, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

FE models of sector and full blisk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Shroud and contact patch

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

EO 1 AMP ROM responses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

EO 12 AMP ROM responses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

NLR ROM error versus no. of amps, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

FR ROM responses for different AMP basis sizes, EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Eigenvalues of POMs for EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

ROM (based on full reduction AMP) responses for higher harmonics, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Natural frequencies of stuck mistuned blisk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Stuck response of mistuned blisk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Response of mistuned blisk in microslip

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

ROM responses of mistuned blisk

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Eigenvalues of POMs for EO1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

eθj for unconditioned AMPs, EO1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

eθj for conditioned AMPs, EO12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

eθj for unconditioned AMPs generated from first family stuck modes, EO12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

eθj for unconditioned AMPs generated from second family stuck modes, EO12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

EO 1 POM ROM responses, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

EO 12 POM ROM responses, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

ε for POMs, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104 at resonance (877.6 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

ε for POMs, EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103 at resonance (2,093.2 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

ε for AMPs, EO 1 response, μ|F0|/|F|=1.35×104 at resonance (877.6 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 28

ε for conditioned AMPs, EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103 at resonance (2093.2 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 29

ε for unconditioned AMPs generated from first familystuck modes, EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103 at resonance (2093.2 Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 30

ε for unconditioned AMPs generated from second family stuck modes, EO 12 response, μ|F0|/|F|=2.70×103 at resonance (2093.2 Hz)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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