Experimental Analysis

of Angled Injection
Julian Le Rouzic
PPRIME Institute,
UPR CNRS 3346,
Universite de Poitiers,
ENSMA ISAE,
Chasseneuil Futuroscope 86962, France
Mihai Arghir
PPRIME Institute,
UPR CNRS 3346,
Universite de Poitiers,
ENSMA ISAE,
Chasseneuil Futuroscope 86962, France
Aerostatic Hybrid Bearings
Counter-rotation angled injection employed for aerostatic hybrid bearings reduces the
cross coupling stiffness that may lead to whirl–whip instabilities at high rotation speeds.
The benefits of counter-rotation injection have been known for years. Theoretical investi-
gations were performed for water or air fed hybrid bearings but experiments were con-
ducted only for water fed bearings. The present work is the first effort dedicated to
angled injection in air fed hybrid bearings. The tests were performed for a simple rotor
supported by two identical hybrid bearings. The hybrid bearings are provided with small
size, shallow pockets and are fed with air via counter-rotation-oriented orifice type
restrictors. An impulse turbine fed with air entrains the rotor. An impact gun applies
dynamic excitations and the rotordynamic coefficients are identified from the equations
of motion of the rotor. Different air feeding pressures are tested as well as high rotational
speeds. Compared to the dynamic characteristics of radial injection hybrid bearings,
the direct stiffness of counter-rotation injection bearings has slightly lower values
and the direct damping is higher but the main impact is the drastic reduction of the
cross-coupling stiffness that may have even negative values. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4037873]

Introduction The tests were performed for a 75.2 mm diameter bearing with
five pockets and provided with orifice injectors. The bearing was
Lubricated bearings and dynamic annular seals may show self-
operated at 25 krpm and fed at pressures up to 50 bar. The identi-
sustained vibrations when operating at high rotation speeds. The
fied rotordynamic coefficients showed the beneficial effect of the
culprit is the inevitable circumferential flow. Its signature is a
counter-rotation injection: the cross-coupling stiffness coefficient
typical cross-coupling stiffness that increases with increasing rota-
and the whirl frequency ratio parameter were drastically dimin-
tional speed. This cross-coupling stiffness tends to entrain the
ished. Theoretical analysis performed in Ref. [3] confirmed these
rotor in a whirl motion with increasing amplitude. Fortunately,
results.
amplitudes are limited because the rotor entrained by the circum-
Other water-lubricated hydrostatic bearings with angled injec-
ferential flow encounters a drag force proportional to the squeeze
tion were subsequently analyzed. Laurant and Childs [4] tested a
velocity. This is the direct damping effect. As long as the direct
near-tangential-injection bearing showing the limits of the benefits
damping effect is larger than the cross-coupling stiffness, the
stemming from the inclined injection. San Andres et al. [5] pre-
rotor-bearing system is stable. However, the cross-coupling stiff-
sented experimental and theoretical results of a particular design
ness increases more rapidly with the rotational speed than the
called the Lomakin bearing. The bearing was provided with a sin-
direct damping. For a certain rotational speed called the stability
gle circumferential groove fed by counter-rotation orifices. Both
threshold, the cross-coupling stiffness effect overwhelms the
experimental and theoretical results showed that the bearing had a
direct damping effect and the rotor-bearing system becomes
low whirl frequency ratio. Theoretical results for the same kind of
unstable. This description of the linear stability of the rotor-
bearings were also presented in Refs. [6] and [7].
bearing system is familiar to all engineers but what is less recog-
The idea of angled, counter-rotation injection was also recently
nized is that the culprit is the circumferential flow. Any means of
adapted to high speed floating ring bearings such as those used in
decreasing the velocity of the circumferential flow would render
turbochargers [8]. The orifices in the floating ring are given a
the rotor-bearing system more stable. Indeed, pressurized systems
counter-rotation inclination. This diminishes the circumferential
as hydrostatic bearings and annular seals show better stability
flow of the inner lubricant film and improves the stability of the
characteristics than the circular journal bearing because the high
bearing.
axial flow rate tends to reduce the circumferential flow. It is then
Although the idea of inclined, counter-rotation injection was
reasonable to imagine that a hydrostatic bearing with counter-
first enunciated for gas journal bearings, there is no published
rotation injection would be even more stable than the same bear-
work around this topic. All the previous citations concerned water
ing with radial injection.
lubricated bearings. The present work is intended to fill this gap
The beneficial effect of the counter-rotation injection is not
by presenting the experimental analysis of an aerostatic bearing
new. It was first mentioned in 1967 [1] as a possibility for stabiliz-
operating with counter-rotation injection. A typical aerostatic
ing aerostatic bearings operating at high speeds (i.e., a hybrid
hybrid bearing with pockets is depicted in Fig. 1. Compared to a
bearing). However, up to now, there are no references in the litera-
hydrostatic bearing, the pockets are shallow (less than ten times
ture of an aerostatic bearing operating with counter-rotation
the radial clearance) and cover at most 20% of the bearing sur-
angled injection. The first bearing operating with counter-rotation
face. Angled injection is obtained by manufacturing counter-
injection was a hydrostatic bearing (i.e., water lubricated) tested
rotation inclined feeding orifices.
by Francheck and Childs in 1994 [2].
The tests were performed on a rig consisting of a rigid rotor
supported by two identical test bearings and entrained by an air
turbine. An impact gun excites the rotor, and the rotordynamic
Contributed by the Structures and Dynamics Committee of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received
coefficients of the bearings are then identified. The paper presents
July 20, 2017; final manuscript received July 21, 2017; published online October 10, the measured torque and rotordynamic coefficients for rotational
2017. Editor: David Wisler. speeds ranging from 0 to 50 krpm and feeding pressures from 3

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power FEBRUARY 2018, Vol. 140 / 022504-1
C 2018 by ASME
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 1 Cut view of an aerostatic bearing with typical pockets
Table 1 Operation parameters tested
Feeding pressures 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 bars
Rotational speeds 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 krpm
and to bars (Table 1). The results are presented dimensionless due
to confidentiality restrictions.
Description of the Test Rig
The test rig was previously used for radial injection aerostatic
bearings [9]. It consists of a rotor supported by two identical aero-
static bearings (Fig. 2). The bearings are provided with a row of
small, shallow pockets fed by counter-rotation injection orifices.
As shown in Fig. 2, the bearings are placed at the two ends of the
rotor.
An impulse turbine is placed at midlength between the bearings
and entrains the rotor. The blades of the turbine are manufactured
directly on the rotor surface. Two air injectors blow air at the two
rotor ends and act as an aerostatic thrust bearing.
An impact gun excites the rotor. The head of the impact gun is
provided with a small ball bearing in order to minimize the braking
effect that the impacts may induce [10]. A force transducer mounted
on the stinger of the impact gun measures the impact force. The dis-
placements of the rotor are measured by proximity probes mounted
two by two, in orthogonal directions and very close to the bearings.
Fig. 2 Cut view and side view of the test rig [8]
022504-2 / Vol. 140, FEBRUARY 2018
Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 3 Measured torque of the counter-rotation angled injec-
tion bearing
The rotational speed of the rotor is known, thanks to a keyphasor
(photodiode seeing black and white stripes on the shaft).
The Torque of the Counter-Rotation Angled Injection
Aerostatic Bearing
The first peculiar effect that appeared during tests was that the
torque of the counter-rotation, angled injection aerostatic bearing
is significantly larger compared to the radial injection aerostatic
bearing.
The torque was measured for each feeding pressure by record-
ing the rotor speed during a deceleration from 50 krpm to zero
induced by the counter-rotation, angled injection. The torque is
then estimated from the equation of motion of the rotor
1 dX
T¼ J (1)
2 dt
where the windage losses of the Pelton turbine were neglected.
The dimensionless torque is depicted in Fig. 3. The torque stem-
ming from the Couette wall shear stress was used for the dimen-
sionless values of the torque
lRX
T¼ pLDR (2)
Cr
Transactions of the ASME
 2 3
Due to the counter-rotation, angled injection, the torque is signifi- 0 0 0 0
cantly larger than for radial injection: its values are nonzero for 6 0 0 0 0 7
zero rotational speeds and depend largely on the feeding pressure. ~ ¼6
½G 7 (10)
4 0 Jp =2l 0 Jp =2l 5
The authors obtained similar results for counter-rotating angled Jp =2l 0 Jp =2l 0
injection hydrostatic bearings used in other test rigs. However, if
for hydrostatic bearing the large torque is usual, for aerostatic 8 9 8 9
bearings it was an unexpected result (Fig. 3). >
> fx ðtÞ >
> >
> fimpx > >
>
> > > >
< f ðtÞ >= > < f >
=
y impy
ff ðtÞg ¼ ¼ (11)
The Measurement Procedure of the Dynamic > my ðtÞ >
> > > fimpx limp >
>
> > > > >
>
Coefficients : m ðtÞ >; > : f l
>
;
x impy imp

Identification Method. The identification method is based on

De Santiago’s developments [10] for a rigid rotor supported on
two identical bearings and was also used in Ref. [9]. The equa-
tions of motion of the rigid rotor depicted in Fig. 4 are
q g ¼ ff g þ ffb g  X½Gfq_ a g
½Mf€
where fimp represents the impact force, limp is its axial location,
and f~q g ¼ f x1 y1 x2 y2 gT are the relative displacements in
the bearings measured by the proximity probes mounted on the
bearing housing.
The forces in the bearings are expressed using the stiffness and
(3) damping coefficients.

ffb g ¼ ½Kf~ ~ q~_ g

~ q g  ½Cf (12)
fqg ¼ f x y h U gT (4)
It is supposed that the two bearings are identical1 and their
where x, y, h, and U are the displacements and the rotations of the dynamic forces are described by antisymmetric matrices of rotor-
center of mass in an absolute reference frame. The vectors ff g dynamic coefficients.2
and ffb g represent the external forces and the forces in the bear- 2 3
ings. The last term stands for the gyroscopic effects. For a sym- K k K k
6 K 7
metric rotor, l1 ¼ l > 0 and l2 ¼ l < 0 resulting ~ ¼ 6 k
½K
K k 7 (13)
4 Kl kl Kl kl 5
x ¼ ðx1 þ x2 Þ=2; y ¼ ðy1 þ y2 Þ=2 (5) kl Kl kl Kl
2 3
C c C c
h ¼ ðx1  x2 Þ=2l; U ¼ ðy1  y2 Þ=2l (6) 6 c C c C 7
~ ¼6
½C 7 (14)
4 Cl cl Cl cl 5
The equations of motions are then recast cl Cl cl Cl

This assumption is strictly valid if the static eccentricity of the

½Mfq€~g ¼ ff g  X½Gfq~_ g (7) rotor in the bearings is zero. In the present case, the static force
applied by the weight of the rotor is small compared to the
dynamic forces resulting from residual unbalance and therefore
f~
q g ¼ f x1 y1 x2 y2 g T (8) the rotor whirl is almost centered. Moreover, hydrostatic and aero-
static bearings and annular seals are known to have rotordynamic
2 3 coefficients that do not depend on the static eccentricity if this is
M=2 0 M=2 0
6 0 M=2 0 M=2 7 smaller than 40% [11].
~ ¼6
½M 7 (9) The rotordynamic matrices are injected in the equation of
4 Jt =2l 0 Jt =2l 0 5
motion (7)
0 Jt =2l 0 0
~ q€~g þ ½Cf
½Mf ~ q~_ g þ ½Kf~ ~ q~_ g
~ q g ¼ ff g  X½Gf (15)

After applying the Fourier transform, the equations of motion

in the frequency domain are3
RHS
zfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl}|fflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl{
~ fQgi ¼ fFgi þ ðx2 ½M
½Z ~  jxi X½GÞfQg ~ (16)
i i ii

fQgi ¼ f X1 Y1 X2 Y2 gTi (17)

fFgi ¼ f Fx Fy limp Fx limp Fy gTi (18)

~ is the bearing impedance matrix. The left-hand side of

where ½Z i
the frequency domain equation is further simplified by taking into
account that the bearings are identical (same geometry and same

1
It was verified by metrology that the two bearings are identical.
2
It should be also underlined that rigorously, if the stiffness matrix is
antisymmetric, the damping matrix should be diagonal. However, it will be shown
that a small cross-coupling damping coefficient was identified from measurements;
therefore, the damping matrix was written as in Eq (14).
3
Fig. 4 The rigid rotor and the coordinate system [9] Capital letters indicate the Fourier transform, X1 ¼ FFTðx1 Þ, etc.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power FEBRUARY 2018, Vol. 140 / 022504-3

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 feeding pressure) and operate close to centered working condi-
tions. This is a plausible assumption for aerostatic bearings work-
ing with relative eccentricities lower than 40%. The left-hand side
of Eq. (16) then yields
2 3
X1 þ X2 Y1 þ Y2  
6 ðX1 þ X2 Þ 7
~ fQgi ¼ 6 Y1 þ Y2
½Z 7 Z (19)
i 4 lðX1  X2 Þ lðY1  Y2 Þ 5 z i
lðY1  Y2 Þ lðX1  X2 Þ
|fflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl{zfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflfflffl}i
½Pi i
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
where Zi ¼ K þ jxi C, zi ¼ k þ jxi c, and j ¼ 1.
The bearing impedances are calculated in least-square sense
 
Z
¼ ð½PTi ½Pi Þ1 ½PTi RHS (20)
z i
Fig. 6 Displacement x1 versus time for Ps 5 3 bar and X 5 10
krpm
The resolution raises no problems because rank½Pi ¼ 2 and

ðX1i þ X2i Þ2  ðY1i þ Y2i Þ2 6¼ 0
The impedances are averaged over n measurements
1 X
n
1X n
Zi ¼ Zil z i ¼ zil
n n l¼1
l¼1
and the dynamic coefficients are finally obtained from
Ki ¼ <ðZi Þ; Ci ¼ =ðZi Þ=xi ; etc:
It is to be underlined that the coordinates used for calculations
correspond to the bearing midplanes. Corrections from the prox-
imity probes to the bearings midplanes were systematically
performed.
Experimental Procedure. The test procedure has been carried
out as follows:
 Feed the air bearing with the desired pressure Ps.
 Activate the Pelton turbine until the rotor reaches the desired
speed and wait for stabilization.
 Apply successively 100 impacts on the rotor. The hammer
impact force is adjusted in such a way that the induced dis-
placement of the rotor does not exceed 40% of the radial
clearance. Each impact is detected by the force transducer
mounted on the impact gun and triggers the recording of all
signals (impact force, 4 displacements sensors, keyphasor)
during 1 s with a pretriggering time of 0.1 s at a sampling
(21) frequency of 215 Hz. An example of the measured applied
force by the impact gun is depicted in Fig. 5. The oscillations
of the dynamic forces after the impact are due to the inertia
of the spring supported stinger of the impact hammer and
(22) were discarded.
The identification procedure is also based on an accurate mea-
surement of the displacement signals after impact. However, due
to a remnant imbalance of the rotor, a synchronous pseudo-
vibration (once-per-revolution rotor whirl) occurs within the
(23) same order of magnitude as the displacement response to impact
(Fig. 6). This makes the displacement response difficult to extract.
A digital time-filtering approach has been used to get rid of the
pseudo-vibration, as proposed in Ref. [10].
As the impact triggers the recording of all signals, the pretrig-
gering time is long enough to record at least one period of rota-
tion. The period length is known thanks to the keyphasor. Then
for each displacement sensor, a one period-long sample of the
signal is recorded before the impact. This sample is point by
point subtracted forward in time to the displacement signal until
a few periods after the impact, when the response to the impact
has vanished. An example of displacement signals at low speed,
before and after digital filtering, is given in Figs. 7 and 8. This
shows that the digital filtering has been efficient in this case.
However, at higher speeds, the synchronous pseudo-vibration is
more difficult to remove (Figs. 9 and 10).
At least 100 validated impact recordings are used for each
pressure/velocity configuration in the identification procedure.
After filtering the signals, the dynamic coefficients are calculated

Fig. 7 Displacement x1 after impact versus time for Ps 5 3 bar

Fig. 5 Impact force versus time for Ps 5 3 bar and X 5 40 krpm and X 5 10 krpm (before filtering)

022504-4 / Vol. 140, FEBRUARY 2018 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Fig. 8 Displacement x1 after impact versus time for Ps 5 3 bar
and X 5 10 krpm (after filtering)
Fig. 9 Displacement x1 after impact versus time for Ps 5 3 bar
and X 5 50 krpm (before filtering)
Fig. 10 Displacement x1 after impact versus time for Ps 5 3 bar
and X 5 50 krpm (after filtering)
as a function of the excitation frequency for each impact and the
average is taken for the 100 impacts.
Results and Discussion
As an example, the dynamic coefficients for a feeding pressure
of 3 bar and a rotational speed of 40 krpm are plotted as a function
of the excitation frequency in Figs. 11–14. Due to confidentiality
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 11 Direct stiffness K versus frequency for Ps 5 3 bar and
X 5 40 krpm
Fig. 12 Cross-coupling stiffness k versus frequency for Ps 5 3
bar and X 5 40 krpm
Fig. 13 Direct damping C versus frequency for Ps 5 3 bar and
X 5 40 krpm
restrictions, the stiffness and the damping coefficients are given
dimensionless. The standard deviation calculated from 100
impacts is also given. The global average (dotted line) is taken for
a frequency range of 100–400 Hz. It can be seen that the standard
deviations are quite low, which indicate a repeatable identification
procedure.
As expected, K, C, and c are approximately constant in the fre-
quency range of 100–400 Hz. However, more surprisingly, the
FEBRUARY 2018, Vol. 140 / 022504-5

Fig. 14 Cross-coupling damping c versus frequency for Ps 5 3
bar and X 5 40 krpm
Fig. 15 Direct stiffness K versus Ps for different speeds for
angled injection
Fig. 16 Direct damping C versus Ps for different speeds for
angled injection
cross-coupling stiffness k changes with the excitation frequency.
The same trend has been observed for all pressure/rotation
speed configurations. The average of dynamic coefficients in the
frequency range of 100–400 Hz has been calculated for each con-
figuration and the results are summarized in Figs. 15–18.
In order to compare radial and angled injection, the average of
dimensionless dynamic coefficients for radial injection (obtained
022504-6 / Vol. 140, FEBRUARY 2018
Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 17 Cross-coupling stiffness k versus Ps for different
speeds for angled injection
Fig. 18 Cross-coupling damping c versus Ps for different
speeds for angled injection
Fig. 19 Direct stiffness K versus Ps for different speeds for
angled and radial injection [9]
from Ref. [9]) are plotted in Figs. 19–22 with those for angled
injection. The following observations can be made on the values
obtained for angled injection:
 The direct stiffness increases linearly with pressure; it has
more than doubled from 3 to 11 bar. The rotor speed tends to
reduce the direct stiffness (particularly at high pressure).
 The direct damping also increases linearly with pressure.
The rotational speed does not seem to have any influence.
The curve obtained at zero speed is very different from those
at all other speeds.
Transactions of the ASME
 The comparison with the radial injection results enables several
comments:
 The direct stiffness values for angled injection are slightly
lower than those obtained with radial injection (between 10
and 20% lower). The higher the pressure is, the bigger the
difference is. This was expected as the radial injection pro-
vides logically more load-bearing capacity.
 The direct damping values for angled injection are higher
than those obtained with radial injection in all test configura-
tions. At low pressure, it is twice higher.
 Contrary to angled injection, radial injection values are
always positive and increase with pressure. The cross-
coupling stiffness values are much lower than with radial
bearing due to the counter-rotation angled injection, particu-
larly at low speed.
Fig. 20 Direct damping C versus Ps for different speeds for
angled radial injection [9]
Summary and Conclusions
For the first time, aerostatic hybrid bearings with counter-rotation,
angled injection were experimentally tested on a dedicated rig.
Impacts were applied on a rotor and have enabled to extract the
dynamic coefficients of the bearings for feed pressures from 3 to
11 bar and rotor speeds from 0 to 50 krpm. As expected, the direct
damping is higher and the cross-coupling stiffness is significantly
reduced compared to air bearings with radial injection. At low
speeds, the cross-coupling stiffness even has negatives values.
The counter-rotation angled injection increases the effective
damping in the bearing by increasing the direct damping and
decreasing the cross-coupling stiffness. This confirms that it is
likely to reduce the circumferential flow and whirl–whip instabil-
ities in aerostatic bearings.

Acknowledgment
The authors are grateful to Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales
Fig. 21 Cross-coupling stiffness k versus Ps for different (CNES) and to Airbus Safran Launchers for supporting this work.
speeds for angled radial injection [9]

Nomenclature
C, c ¼ direct and cross-coupling damping (Ns/m)
Cr ¼ radial clearance (m)
D¼ diameter (m)
f¼ force (N)
[G] ¼ gyroscopic matrix
Jt , J p ¼ transverse and polar moment of inertia (kgm2)
K, k ¼ direct and cross-coupling stiffness (N/m)
l¼ length (m)
L¼ journal bearing length (m)
m¼ moment (Nm)
M¼ rotor mass (kg)
Patm ¼ atmospheric pressure (Pa)
Ps ¼ supply pressure (Pa)
[P] ¼ matrix defined by eq. (16)
{q} ¼ variables vector
R¼ radius (m)
Fig. 22 Cross-coupling damping c versus Ps for different <; = ¼ real, imaginary part
speeds for angled radial injection [9]
T¼ torque (Nm)
x, y ¼ coordinates and displacements (m)
 The more interesting fact is the behavior of the cross-coupling Z¼ bearing impedance (N/m)
stiffness. The values are very low. Indeed, at zero speed and h, U ¼ rotation angles (rad)
10 krpm, it is even negative and decreases with pressure. At l¼ dynamic viscosity (Pas)
20 krpm, it is almost zero at any pressure. At higher speeds, it X¼ rotational speed (rad/s)
becomes positive and increases with pressure. These values x¼ excitation speed (rad/s)
should be taken with caution as the cross-coupling stiffness
was not constant on the frequency range of 100–400 Hz.
Subscripts
 The values obtained for the cross-coupling damping are
unclear and no distinct tendency emerges, except a slight imp ¼ impact
increase with pressure. 1, 2 ¼ first, second bearing

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power FEBRUARY 2018, Vol. 140 / 022504-7

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


References
[1] Tondle, A., 1967, “Bearings With a Tangential Gas Supply,” Gas Bearing Sym-
posium, Southampton, UK, Apr. 25–28, Paper No. 4.
[2] Franchek, N., and Childs, D., 1994, “Experimental Test Results for Four
High-Speed, High Pressure, Orifice-Compensated Hybrid Bearings,” ASME J.
Tribol., 116(1), pp. 147–153.
[3] San Andres, L., and Childs, D., 1997, “Angled Injection—Hydrostatic Bearings,
Analysis and Comparison to Test Results,” ASME J. Tribol., 119(1), pp. 179–187.
[4] Laurant, F., and Childs, D., 1999, “Rotordynamic Evaluation of a Near-
Tangential-Injection Hybrid Bearing,” ASME J. Tribol., 121(4), pp. 886–891.
[5] San Andres, L., Soulas, T., Challier, F., and Fayolle, P., 2002, “A Bulk-Flow
Model of Angled Injection Lomakin Bearings,” ASME Paper No. GT2002-
30287.
[6] Helène, M., Arghir, M., and Fr^ene, J., 2004, “Combined Navier–Stokes and
Bulk-Flow Analysis of Hybrid Bearings: Radial and Angled Injection,” ASME
J. Tribol., 127(3), pp. 557–567.
022504-8 / Vol. 140, FEBRUARY 2018
Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[7] Arghir, M., Helène, M., and Fr^ene, J., 2005, “Analysis of Tangential-Against-
Rotation Injection Lomakin Bearings,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power,
127(3), pp. 781–790.
[8] Tamunodukobipi, D., Kim, C. H., and Lee, Y.-B., 2014, “Dynamic Perform-
ance Characteristics of Floating-Ring Bearings With Varied Oil-Injection
Swirl-Control Angles,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 137(2), p.
021002.
[9] Rudloff, L., Arghir, M., Bonneau, O., Guingo, S., Chemla, G., and Renard,
E., 2012, “Experimental Analysis of the Dynamic Characteristics of a
Hybrid Aerostatic Bearing,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 134(8), p.
082503.
[10] De Santiago, D. O. C., 2002, “Identification of Bearing Supports’ Force
Coefficients From Rotor Responses Due to Imbalances and Impact Loads,”
Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
[11] Amoser, M., 1995, “Stromungsfelder und Radialkrafte in Labyrinthdichtungen
Hydraulischer Stromungsmaschinen,” Ph.D. dissertation, ETH Zurich, Z€ urich,
Switzerland.
Transactions of the ASME