Proc. of 21st IMAC, Paper no. 230, Feb.
2003
MULTI PLANE BALANCING OF A ROTATING MACHINE
USING RUN-DOWN DATA
A. W. Lees, J. K. Sinha and M. I. Friswell*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wales Swansea, Swansea SA2 8PP, UK
(a.w.lees@swansea.ac.uk, mesinhjk@swansea.ac.uk)
*Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK
(m.i.friswell@bristol.ac.uk)
ABSTRACT
Earlier studies have suggested a reliable estimation of the
state of the rotor unbalance (both amplitude and phase) at
multi plane of a flexibly supported machine from measured
vibration data on a machine during a single machine run-
down. Now a method has been proposed that can reliably
estimate both the rotor unbalance and misalignment from
measured vibration during a single machine run-down. For
this identification, it has been assumed that the source of
misalignment in the rotor is the coupling of the multi-rotor
system, and that will generate constant forces and
moments at the couplings depending upon the extent of the
off-set between the two rotors irrespective of the machine
rotating speed. The theoretical concept, and the complete
computational implementation used are presented in this
paper. The method is demonstrated using experimental
data from a machine with 2 journal bearings and a flexible
coupling to the motor.
1. INTRODUCTION
Power station turbogenerators may be considered to
consist of three major parts; the rotor, the fluid journal
bearings and the foundations. In many modern plants,
these foundation structures are flexible and have a
substantial influence on the dynamic behaviour of the
machine. These machines have a high capital cost and
hence the development of condition monitoring techniques
for such rotating machines is important. Perhaps the
vibration-based identification of faults such as rotor
unbalance, rotor bent, crack, rub, misalignment, fluid
induced instability is well-developed [1] and widely used in
practice, however the quantification parts – the extent of
identified faults and their locations - have been active areas
of research for many years. Over the past thirty years,
theoretical models have played an increasing role in the
rapid resolution of problems in rotating machinery. Doebling
et al. [2] gave an extensive survey on the crack detection
methods. Parkinson [3] and Foiles et al. [4] give some
comprehensive reviews on the rotor balancing. Muszynska
[5] gave a thorough review of the rubbing phenomenon.
Edwards et al. [6] gave a brief review of the wider field of
fault diagnosis. However the study on the rotor
misalignment is limited to understanding this phenomenon
[7-13] but none of them have suggested any method for the
direct quantification of misalignment.
In spite of the success of model based estimation of faults,
the construction of a reliable mathematical model is still
impossible. Often a good finite element (FE) model of the
rotor and an adequate model of the fluid bearing [14] may
be constructed. Indeed several FE based software
packages are available for such modelling. However a
reliable FE model for the foundation is difficult, if not
impossible, to construct due to a number of practical
difficulties [15]. Inclusion of the foundation model is very
important as it is observed that the dynamics of the flexible
foundation also contributes significantly to the dynamics of
the complete machine. Many research studies [16-22] have
been carried out to derive the foundation models directly
from the measured machine responses but more research
is needed on their practical application. Hence a complete
mathematical model of a machine is still not available for
condition monitoring in many cases.
Considering the above limitations, an alternate method has
been suggested by Lees and Friswell [23] for the reliable
estimation of the multi plane rotor unbalance using a priori
rotor and bearing models along with the measured
response at bearing pedestals from a single machine run-
down. They estimated the foundation parameters as a by-
product to account for the foundation dynamics. Lees and
Friswell [23] demonstrated the method on a simple
simulated example. The method has been further validated
on a small simple experimental rig [24]. In both the cases
the number of modes of the system were less than the
measured DoF in the run-down frequency range. However
for systems like TG sets the number of modes excited may
be more than the measured DoF in the run-down frequency
range. Thus the estimated unbalance may not account for
all the critical speeds. Hence the method has been modified
further to reliably estimate the rotor unbalance by splitting
the whole frequency range into bands for the foundation so
that the band dependent foundation models account for all
critical speeds. The advantages of the suggested approach
have been demonstrated on a complex simulated example Î Z R,ii Þ Ñ rR,i á Ñf u á
Ô Ô Ô Ô
Z R ,ib 0
and on an experimental rig [25-27]. ÏZ Z R ,bb + Z B - Z B ßß ÒrR ,b â = Ò 0 â
Ï R,bi
(1)
However in a multi-rotor system there is always the ÏÐ 0 - ZB Z B + Z F ßà ÔÓrF ,b Ôã ÔÓ 0 Ôã
possibility of rotor misalignment and it may influence the
machine response and hence the unbalance estimation. where Z is the dynamic stiffness matrix, the subscripts b
The above method has been further modified to estimate and i refer to internal and bearing (connection) degrees of
both the rotor unbalance and misalignment. The general freedom respectively, and the subscripts F, R, and B refer
perception and observation is that the misalignment in to the foundation, the rotor and the bearings. r are the
multi-coupled rotors generates a 2X (twice the rotating responses and fu are the force vectors, which are
speed) component in the response of the machine [8-9] and
assumed to be applied only at the rotor internal degrees of
the effect on the 1X component is assumed to be small.
These features are usually used for the detection of the freedom. The dynamic stiffness matrix of the foundation,
presence of rotor misalignment [28]. Many simple analytical Z F , is defined only at the degrees of freedom connecting
simulations have been carried out to understand this the bearings and the foundation. In practice this will be a
phenomena [7, 10]. However in the present paper the reduced order model, where the internal foundation degrees
identification of rotor unbalance and misalignment has been of freedom have been eliminated [1]. The dynamic stiffness
carried out using the 1X response at the bearing pedestals matrix of the bearings is given by Z B . It has been assumed
of the machine from a single run-down, even though the
that the inertia effects within the bearings are negligible,
direct influence on the 1X response due to misalignment
although these could be included if required.
may be small.
Solving equation (1) to eliminate the unknown response of
For the current identification, it has been assumed that the
the rotor gives,
source of misalignment in the rotor is the coupling of the
Z F rF ,b + Z B P
multi-rotor system. Such a misalignment will generate 1 1
Z R,bi Z R,ii fu
constant forces and moments at the couplings depending
= Z B ÎP Z B - I Þ rF ,b
(2)
upon the extent of the off-set between the two rotors and
Ð à
1
irrespective of the machine rotating speed [7]. The force
vector in the equation of motion was assumed to consist of
both the unbalance forces and the constant forces and where P = Z R,bb + Z B - Z R,bi Z R,ii
1
Z R,ib . It is assumed

moments at the couplings, and these parameters were

estimated along with the foundation model. The theoretical
concept, and the complete computational implementation
used are presented in this paper. The method is
demonstrated using experimental data from a machine with
two bearings and a flexible coupling to the motor.
that good models for the rotor and the bearings, Z R and
Z B , are known a priori and rF ,b is measured. Thus, the
only unknown quantities in equation (2) are the foundation
model, Z F , and the force vectors, f u .

2.1. PARAMETER ESTIMATION

The force vectors can be defined as
f u = f un + f m , (3)

where f un is the vectors of the unbalance forces and f m is

the vectors of forces and moments at the couplings.

Unbalance Forces: Although the unbalance will be

distributed throughout the rotor, this is equivalent to a
discrete distribution of unbalance, provided there are as
many balance planes as active modes. Suppose the
unbalance planes are located at nodes n1 , n2 , K, n p ,

Figure 1. The abstract representation of a turbogenerator where p is the number of planes. The associated amplitude
system of unbalance (defined as the unbalance mass multiplied by
distance between the mass and geometric centres) and
2. THEORY phase angles are [un1 , un2 , K, un p ]T and

[qn1 , qn2 ,K, qn p ]T respectively. These amplitudes and

Figure 1 shows the abstract representation of a
turbogenerator, where a rotor is connected to a flexible

( )
foundation via oil-film journal bearings. The equations of phase angles can be expressed, for the i th balance plane,
uni exp jqni = er ,ni + j ei ,ni .
motion of the system may be written [1, 26] as
as the complex quantity

2
Hence, the unbalance forces, f un , in the horizontal and To identify the foundation parameters and forces in a least
squares sense, the foundation parameters are grouped into
vertical directions, can be written as [26] a vector v. We will assume that the foundation dynamic

f un = w 2 Te ,
stiffness matrix, Z F , is written in terms of mass, damping
(4) and stiffness matrices. If there are n measured degrees of
freedom at the foundation-bearing interface, then v will take
where e = Î er ,n1 er , n2 ¡ er , n p ei , n1 ei ,n2 ¡ ei , n p Þ and
T
ÐÏ àß
the form,

T is a selection matrix indicating the location of the balance v = ÎÐ k F ,11 k F ,12 K k F ,nn cF ,11 cF ,12 K
(7)
K cF ,nn mF ,11 mF ,12 K mF ,nn Þà
planes. T

z where the elements in v are individual elements of the

structural matrices. With this definition of v, there is a linear
transformation such that
Parallel Misalignment
Z F rF ,b = W v , (8)

where W contains the response terms at each measured

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
frequency [1]. For the q th measured frequency

W w q = Î W0 w q W1 w q W2 w q Þ ,
Ð à
(9)
 

Angular Misalignment
where, if all elements of the foundation mass, damping and
z stiffness matrices are identified,

ÎrFT,b (wq ) 0 Þ
Ï ß
x 0 L

( )
Ï 0 rFT,b (wq ) 0 ß
Wk (wq ) = jwq Ï ß , (10)
k
Combined Misalignment
Ï ß
Ï ß
M M O M
Figure 2 Schematic of rotor with misalignment at a coupling ÏÐ 0 0 L rFT,b (wq )ßà

for k = 0, 1, 2 . Equation (6) then becomes

Misalignment Forces and Moments: It has been assumed

[W(w q ) R(w q ) ( )]
Ñvá
( )
that the misalignment in the rotor exists at the couplings
Ô Ô
Rm wq Ò e â = Q wq ,
between the multi-rotors. The nature of the rotor
(11)
Ôe Ô
misalignment could be parallel, angular or combined as
Ó mã
shown in Figure 2, but all of them would generate forces
and moments. Let us assumed that there are c couplings
in the rotor located at nodes m1 , m2 , …, mc . The where the form of R, R m and Q may be obtained by
associated amplitude of the forces and moments are comparing equations (6), (10) and (11), as
e m = ÎÐ f z , m1 , f y , m1 , M y , m1 , M z , m1 , f z , m2 , f y , m2 , K
R (w q ) = w 2q Z B P 1 (w q ) Z R,bi (w q ) Z R,ii
1
(w q ) T (12)
 

f y , mc , M y ,mc , M z , mc Þ , where the subscripts

T
à
K f z , mc ,
Q(w q ) = Z B (w q ) Î P 1 (w q ) Z B (w q ) - I Þ rF ,b (w q ) (13)
Ð à
y and z represent the horizontal and vertical directions and f


and M are forces and moments respectively. Hence, the

misalignment force, f m , can be written as [1] R m (w q ) = Z B (w q )P 1 (w q )Z R,bi (w q )Z R1,ii (w q )Tm (14)
 

f m = Tm e m , (5)
Clearly there is an equation of the form of (11) at every
frequency. The equations generated may be solved in a
where Tm is the transformation matrix indicating the
least squares sense directly, although the solution via the
location of the couplings. Substituting equations (4) and (5) singular value decomposition (SVD) is more robust. Such

[ ]
into equation (2) produces, an equation error approach does not optimise the error in
Ñe á
the response directly, and thus the accuracy of the
Z F rF ,b + Z B P 1 Z R ,bi Z R1,ii w 2 T Tm Ò â predicted response is not assured. The great advantage is

[P - I] r
Óe m ã
 

that the equations are linear in the parameters. However a

(6)
non-linear optimisation (output error) may be performed,
= ZB 1
ZB starting with linear estimated parameters, if a more accurate


F ,b
prediction of the response is required [1, 22]. In the present

3
paper, only the equation error approach has been misalignment magnitudes expected. Truncated SVD was
considered in order to concentrate on the influence of used to solve the equations [30].
frequency range subdivision. Furthermore, the unbalance
and misalignment seems to be estimated robustly by the Other physically based constraints may be applied to the
equation error approach, even if the foundation is relatively foundation model to improve the conditioning. For example,
inaccurate [24]. the mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the foundation
may be assumed to be symmetric, therefore reducing the
2.2. SPLITTING THE FREQUENCY RANGE number of unknown foundation parameters. Other
constraints could be introduced, such as a diagonal mass or
Suppose that the frequencies at which the response is
measured are w q , q = 1, K , N . Let us assume that the
damping matrix, or block diagonal matrices if bearing
pedestals do not interact dynamically.
run-down frequency range is split into b frequency bands.
The vectors of the foundation parameters are identified in 3. THE EXPERIMENTAL EXAMPLE
each frequency band, and are denoted v1 , v 2 ,…, vb . Figure 3 shows a photograph of the rig. Each foundation of
Hence combining the frequency band dependent foundation this rig, shown in Figure 3, consists of a horizontal beam
models and the global unbalance and misalignment similar (500mm x 25.5mm x 6.4 mm) and a vertical beam (322mm
to the unbalance estimation [26], gives from equation (11), x 25.5mm x 6.4mm) made of steel. The horizontal beam is
bolted to the base plate and the vertical beam to the
v1 bearing assembly as seen in the photograph. A layer of
 

acrylic foam (315mm x 19mm x 1mm) was bonded between

Wband_1 0 0 R band _ 1 R m, band _ 1

 

v2

the vertical beam and thin layers of metal sheet (315mm

 

0 Wband_2 0 R band _ 2 R m, band _ 2



 

x19mm x 350mm) to increase the damping. In fact the



 

vb
     

modal experiment confirms that the damping of the

 

foundation increased to 1.4% from a value of 0.6% at the

0 0 Wband_ b R band _ b R m, band _ b e

 

 

first lateral mode. A 12mm OD (d) steel shaft of 980mm

em

length is connected to these flexible supports and is

Q band_ 1
 

coupled to the motor through a flexible coupler. One flexible

Q band_2

foundation is connected at 15 mm and other at 765 mm

from the right end of the shaft through self-lubricating ball
 

bearings. The shaft also carries two identical balancing

Q band_ b disks of 75mm OD and 15mm thickness and placed at 140

(15) mm and 640 mm from the right end of the shaft. Disk A is
near to the Motor.
Let us assume that the stiffness of an ith coupling is K c,i
then the linear misalignment, Dyi &
An FE model was created for the rotor using two-noded
zi , and the angular Timoshenko beam elements, each with two translational


misalignment, Dq y,i & Dq z,i at the i th coupling in the and two rotational degrees of freedom. Sinha [1] gives
details of the dynamic characterization of the rig by modal
horizontal and the vertical directions can be calculated as tests and FE analysis.
[7]

Ñ Dz i á Ñ f z ,i á
Ô Ô Ô Ô
Ô Dy i Ô 1 Ô f y ,i Ô
Ò â = [K c ,i ] Ò â
Ô Dq y , i Ô
(16)
ÔM y ,i Ô


Ô Dq z , i Ô Ô M z ,i Ô
Ó ã Ó ã

2.3. REGULARISATION
Equation (15) is a least-squares problem, and its solution is
likely to be ill-conditioned [21]. Generally two types of
scaling, namely row scaling and column scaling, may be
applied to least squares problems [29]. Column scaling is
necessary because of the different magnitudes of the
elements of the M F , C F and K F matrices, and the
Figure 3 Photograph of the rig in Swansea (UK)
scaling factors used here were 1, w and w 2 respectively,
where w is the mean value of the frequency range. The Different run-down experiments were performed with the
scaling of the columns of R and R m depend upon rotor speed reducing from 2500 RPM to 300 RPM for
different combinations of added masses to the balance
engineering judgement based on the unbalance and disks A and B listed in Table 1. Runs 1 and 4 were the

4
residual runs-down i.e., without any added mass to the single run-down or run-up of the machine. The method also
disks. The order tracking was performed such that each set estimates the frequency band dependent foundation
of the run-down data consisted of the 1X component of the parameters to account for the dynamics of the foundation.
displacement responses in the frequency range from The suggested method has been applied to a small
5.094Hz to 40.969Hz in steps of 0.125Hz. experimental rig and the estimated results were excellent.
Hence the suggested method seems to be reliable for the
Four critical speeds (two in the horizontal and one each in estimation of both rotor unbalance and misalignment and
the vertical and axial directions) of the machine were needs to be tested on real machines, such as a TG set, to
present in the run-down frequency range of 5.094Hz to further enhance the confidence level in the approach.
40.969Hz. The unbalance and misalignment estimation was
carried out by the suggested method for individual runs 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
assuming misalignment forces and moments at the coupling
of the rotor with the motor. The frequency range was split The authors acknowledge the support of EPSRC through
into three bands; 5.094Hz to 12.094Hz, 12.094Hz to grant number GR/M52939. Jyoti K. Sinha acknowledges
27.469Hz, and 27.469Hz to 40.969Hz based on the Mr R. K. Sinha, Associate Director, RD & DG of his parent
observation that the estimated responses were a close fit to organization B.A.R.C., India for consistent support and
the measured responses. The estimated results are listed in encouragement.
Table 1 and Figure 4 compares typical measured and
6. REFERENCES
estimated responses.
1. SINHA, J. K., Health Monitoring Techniques for
Figure 4 shows that the fit of the estimated response is Rotating Machinery, PhD Thesis, University of Wales
close to the measured. Table 1 also shows that the Swansea, 2002.
estimated unbalance is excellent and close to the actual
2. DOEBLING, S. W., FARRAR, C. R. and PRIME, M. B.,
values and the estimated misalignment in the rotor at the
A Summary Review of Vibration-based Damage
coupling is quite consistent for each run. The order of the
Identification Methods, Shock and Vibration Digest
estimated misalignment (approximately 0.1 and 0.2 mm in 30(2), 91-105, 1998.
the horizontal and vertical directions and their related
angular misalignment is 0.4 and 0.2 degrees respectively) is 3. PARKINSON, A. G., Balancing of Rotating Machinery,
very small and such a misalignment is quite possible during IMechE Proceedings C – Journal of Mechanical
the rig assembly. The small deviation in the estimation may Engineering Science, 205, 53-66, 1991.
be because of noise in the measurements, however the 4. FOILES, W. C., ALLAIRE, P. E., and GUNTER, E. J.,
estimation seems to be quite robust. Hence this Review: Rotor Balancing, Shock and Vibration 5(5-6),
experimental example confirms that an accurate estimation 325-336, 1998.
of both the rotor unbalance and misalignment is possible 5. MUSZYNSKA, A., Rotor to Stationary Element Rub-
using measured responses from a single run-down of a Related Vibration Phenomena in Rotating Machinery –
machine. Literature Survey, Shock and Vibration Digest 21(3), 3-
−2
10
11, 1989.
6. EDWARDS, S., LEES, A.W. and FRISWELL, M.I.,
Horizontal Displ., m

−4
10 Fault diagnosis of rotating machinery, Shock and
Vibration Digest, 30(1), 4-13, 1998.
−6
10
Experimental
7. GIBBONS, C. B., Coupling Misalignment Forces,
th
Est. found., unb. & misalignment Proceedings of the 15 Turbomachinery Symposium,
−8
10
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Gas Turbine Laboratory, 111-116, Texas, 1976.
Frequency, Hz 8. DEWELL, D. L., and MITCHELL, L. D., Detection of a
−3
10 Misaligned Disk Coupling using Spectrum Analysis,
Experimental
Est. found., unb. & misalignment Transactions of the ASME - Journal of Vibration
Vertical Displ., m

−4
10
Acoustics Stress and Reliability in Design 106(1), 9-16,
−5
10 1984.
−6
10
9. EHRICH, F. F. (Editor), Handbook of Rotordynamics.
NY: McGraw-Hill, 1992.
−7
10
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 10. SEKHAR, A. S., and PRABHU, B. S., Effects of
Frequency, Hz
Coupling Misalignment on Vibrations of Rotating
Figure 4 Measured and estimated responses at bearing A, Machinery, Journal of Sound and Vibration 185(4),
for run 2 for the experimental rig 655-671, 1995.
11. SIMON, G., Prediction of Vibration Behaviour of large
4. CONCLUSION Turbo-machinery on Elastic Foundations due to
Unbalance and Coupling Misalignment, Proceedings of
An estimation method for both the state of rotor unbalance
the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C –
(amplitude and phase) and the misalignment of a rotor-
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 206(C1),
bearing-foundation system has been presented. The
29-39, 1992.
estimation uses a priori rotor and bearing models along with
measured vibration data at the bearing pedestals from a

5
 12. XU, M., and MARANGONI, R. D., Vibration Analysis of
a Motor-Flexible Coupling-Rotor System subjected to
Misalignment and Unbalance, Part I: Theoretical Model
and Analysis, Journal of Sound and Vibration 176(5),
663-679, 1994.
13. XU, M., and MARANGONI, R. D., Vibration Analysis of
a Motor-Flexible Coupling-Rotor System subjected to
Misalignment and Unbalance, Part II: Experimental
Validation, Journal of Sound and Vibration 176(5), 681-
691, 1994.
14. HAMROCK, B.J., Fundamentals of Fluid Film
Lubrication, McGraw-Hill, Inc., NJ, 1994.
15. LEES, A.W. and SIMPSON, I.C., The dynamics of
turbo-alternator foundations, IMechE Conference
Paper C6/83, 37-44, 1983.
16. LEES, A.W., The Least Squares Method Applied to
Identified Rotor/Foundation Parameters, IMechE
Conference on Vibrations in Rotating Machinery,
Paper C306/88, 209-216, 1988.
17. ZANETTA, G. A., Identification Methods in the
Dynamics of Turbogenerator Rotors, IMechE
Conference on Vibrations in Rotating Machinery, Bath
Paper C432/092, 173-181, 1992.
18. FENG, N. S. and HAHN, E. J., Including Foundation
Effects on the Vibration Behaviour of Rotating
Machinery, Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing 9, 243-256, 1995.
19. VANIA, A., Estimating Turbo-Generator Foundation
Parameters, Politecnico di Milano, Dipartimento di
Meccanica, Internal Report 9-96, 1996.
20. PROVASI, R., ZANETTA, G. A., and Vania, A., The
Extended Kalman Filter in the Frequency Domain for
the Identification of Mechanical Structures excited by
Sinusoidal Multiple Inputs, Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing 14(3), 327-341, 2000.
21. SMART, M.G., FRISWELL, M.I. and LEES, A.W.,
Estimating Turbogenerator Foundation Parameters –
Model Selection and Regularisation, Proceedings of
the Royal Society A 456, 1583-1607, 2000.
22. SINHA, J. K., LEES, A. W., FRISWELL, M. I., and
SINHA, R. K., The Estimation of Foundation Models of
rd
Flexible Machines, Proceedings of 3 International
Conference – Identification in Engineering Systems,
300-309, Swansea, UK, April 15-17, 2002.
23. LEES, A.W. and FRISWELL, M.I., The Evaluation of
Rotor Unbalance in Flexibly Mounted Machines,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 208, 671-683, 1997.
24. EDWARDS, S., LEES, A.W. and FRISWELL, M.I.,
Experimental Identification of Excitation and Support
Parameters of a Flexible Rotor-Bearing-Foundation
System from a Single Run-Down, Journal of Sound
and Vibration, 232(5), 963-992, 2000.
25. SINHA, J. K., LEES, A. W., and FRISWELL, M. I.,
Estimating the Unbalance of a Rotating Machine from
th
a Single Run Down, Proceedings of 19 International
Modal Analysis Conference, Florida, 109-115, 2001.
26. SINHA, J. K., FRISWELL, M. I., and LEES, A. W., The
Identification of the Unbalance and the Foundation
Model of a Flexible Rotating Machine from a Single
Run Down, Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing 16 (2-3), 255-271, 2002.
27. LEES, A. W., SINHA, J. K., and FRISWELL, M. I., The
Identification of the Unbalance of a Flexible Rotating
Machine from a Single Run-Down, Proceedings of
ASME Turbo Expo Conference, ASME paper GT-
2002-30420, Amsterdam, Holland, 3-6 June, 2002.
28. JORDAN, M. A., What are Orbit plots, anyway?, Orbit,
8-15, Bently Nevada Corporation, USA, Dec., 1993.
29. GOLUB, G.H. and VAN LOAN, C.F., Matrix
rd
Computations. John Hopkins, 3 edition, 1996.
30. HANSEN, P.C., Regularisation Tools: A MATLAB
Package for Analysis and Solution of Discrete ill-posed
Problems, Numerical Algorithms, 6, 1-35, 1994.

Table 1 Estimation of both the rotor unbalance and misalignment from the experimental run-down data

Estimated Estimated Misalignment Added Unbalance (g@ deg.)

Hori., Dy Vert., Dz
Actual
Unbalance
Dq z (deg.)
Unbalance
Dq y (deg.)
Run Disk Hori. Angle Ver. Angle With respect With respect
(g @ deg.) (g @ deg.) to Run 1 to Run 4
(mm) (mm)
A Residual 1.84 @ 130 0.10 0.21 0.40 0.69 ----- -----
1
B Residual 1.46 @ 350
A Residual 1.99 @ 127 0.09 0.18 0.32 0.20 ----- -----
4
B Residual 1.44 @ 341
A 0.76 @ 180 2.48 @ 144 0.14 0.20 0.75 0.45 0.82 @ 181 0.82 @ 190
2
B 0.76 @ 0 2.33 @ 354 0.88 @ -4 0.98 @ 14
A 1.52 @ 180 2.75 @ 158 0.14 0.18 0.42 0.16 1.41 @ 191 1.46 @ 202
3
B 1.52 @ 0 2.96 @ 1 1.55 @ 11 1.67 @ 18
A 0.76 @ 45 2.54 @ 114 0.08 0.21 0.24 0.17 0.95 @ 79 0.76 @ 76
5
B 0.76 @ 225 1.34 @ 323 0.66 @ 236 0.45 @ 228