Comparison of the Steady-State and Dynamic Performance of Two Fixed-Geometry Journal Bearings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper evaluates two different journal bearings: a cylindrical bore plain journal bearing and a tri-lobe taper land bearing. Each bearing has the same nominal diameter (89mm) and aspect ratio (L/D = 0.7). The shaft rotational speed ranged from 6krpm to 14krpm and the bearing specific load from 700kPa to 2800kPa. The bearings’ steady-state performance is evaluated according to relative bearing and shaft displacement, bearing operating temperature and power loss. A frequency-domain analysis is used to determine bearing rotordynamic coefficients — it treats the bearing as a mass-spring-damper system. Excitation frequencies range between 20Hz and 350Hz. Ultimately, the tri-lobe taper land bearing offers better stability whereas the cylindrical bore plain journal bearing has a lower eccentricity and runs cooler for a given operating condition. The dynamic properties of the two bearings are found to be similar, although the higher stability of the tri-lobe taper land bearing is also reflected in the dynamic coefficients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".