A Study of Lubricant Inertia Effects for Squeeze Film Dampers Incorporated into High-Speed Turbomachinery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work proposes a numerical model that incorporates the effect of lubricant inertia on the hydrodynamic pressure distribution, fluid film reaction forces, and the fluid velocity component profiles for finite-length open-ended squeeze film dampers (SFDs). Firstly, the thin film flow equations for the SFD in presence of fluid inertia effects are introduced. Furthermore, a small first-order perturbation by means of the expressions for the fluid film velocity components and the lubricant pressure distribution that are expanded in power series of the squeeze film Reynolds number is applied to the flow equations. Subsequently the developed lubricant flow equations are solved to develop expressions for the velocity component profiles and the hydrodynamic pressure distribution in SFDs. The pressure expression is numerically solved by using Gauss–Seidel method with finite difference discretization. Moreover, the fluid film reaction forces are determined by numerically integrating the hydrodynamic pressure expressions over the journal surface. Additionally, the proposed pressure distribution expression and the numerical SFD forces are incorporated into a simulation model and the simulation results are compared with the existing models in the literature under different operating conditions, including eccentricity ratios and inertia effects (i.e., Reynolds numbers). The simulation results demonstrate the significant influence of both convective and temporal (i.e., unsteady) lubricant inertia terms on the SFD hydrodynamic pressure distribution and the fluid film reaction forces. Furthermore, the proposed SFD model is incorporated into a multi-mass flexible rotordynamic model to evaluate the effect of SFD fluid inertia on the mass unbalance induced steady-state vibrations of the rotor and the nodal transient orbits by implementing finite element method and transient modal integration with predictor–corrector solver. The results of the analysis demonstrate the significant effect of fluid inertia on the resonance frequencies of the rotor and the steady-state vibration amplitudes and the transient orbits at the resonance zone.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".