ARTICLE IN PRESS

Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tribology International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint

Tribological study of elastomeric bearings for marine propeller shaft system

Harish Hirani , Manish Verma
Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400076, India

a r t i c l e in f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Elastomeric compounds, due to their favourable properties like sufficient hardness, toughness and
Received 6 August 2007 natural resistance to abrasion and corrosion, are commonly used as bearing material for propeller shaft
Received in revised form system of Indian Coast Guard Ships. Recently unequal and non-uniform wear of these bearings has
18 July 2008
resulted in unscheduled lay off of the Coast Guard Ships. To solve this problem of bearing wear, a mixed
Accepted 29 July 2008
Available online 16 September 2008
lubrication analysis of sea-water lubricated journal bearing has been attempted in the present study. A
computer code was written to estimate lubricating film thickness for a given set of load and speed
Keywords: condition, and to predict the lubrication regime for the specified surface roughness parameters. To
Marine shaft bearing validate the theoretical analysis performed in the present study, the results obtained from the computer
Fluid film thickness
simulation have been compared with the established studies on the water lubricated bearing.
Coefficient of wear
To understand the uneven wear of marine bearings, actual geometric clearances of new and worn
Bearing life
out bearings recorded by the ship maintenance team, and the operational data (load, speed and
operating hours), obtained from the log books of ICGS Sangram (AOPV) of Indian Coast Guard, are listed
in the present paper. The dynamic viscosity of sea water, surface roughness of propeller shaft and
bearings, and particulate contamination has been measured. Finally, the suggestions have been enlisted
for proper operation of shaft-bearing system so as to maintain the wear within the permissible limits
during ship’s operational cycle.
& 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Indian Coast Guard’s Advanced Offshore Patrol Vessels (AOPVs)
are fitted with twin propeller shafts, each powered with 6400 HP
engine. Each propeller shaft is 24 m long, weighs 10 tons and
rotates inside four elastomeric journal bearings which are
lubricated with sea water. These bearings are plain in lower half
and grooved in upper half as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 2 shows the propeller shaft supported in four elastomeric
bearings. Dimensional details of these bearings are mentioned in
Table 1. In addition, Table 1 lists the bearing reactions which are
taken from Ref. [1]. Recently excessive wear of these bearings has
resulted in unscheduled lay off of the Coast Guard Ships. First
ship, ICGS Samar, commissioned in 1995 had successive bearing
failure on both the shafts during two operational cycles (period
between two successive dockings). ICGS Sangram, commissioned
in 1997 had similar failure in both the shafts on two operational
cycles and one shaft (port) in one operational cycle. Similar
failures were seen in ICGS Sarang which was commissioned in
 Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 222 576 7535; fax: +91 222 572 6875.
E-mail address: hirani@iitb.ac.in (H. Hirani).
1999. The aim of the present study is to analyse this problem of
bearing wear, and suggests a remedial action.
Wear down of a water lubricated elastomeric bearing is an
obvious phenomenon. However, elastomeric bearings used in all
three ships (ICGS Samar, Sangram, and Sarang) were specially
designed and fabricated (by Thordon bearings Inc.). In one lab
(David Taylor Research Centre, Bethesda, MD) test, bearing wear
of 0.002 in (0.051 mm) was observed in over 2000 working hours
of propeller shaft running at 10 rpm against designed elastomeric
bearing. Expected life of such a bearing is more than 20 years and
replacement of bearings after wear depth of 4.7 mm is recom-
mended. However, elementary moment analysis [1] reveals that
wearing of bearing 4 redistributes the load, as listed in Table 1,
among bearings. As per the gearbox manufacturer, the load ratio
force on bearing 5=force on bearing 6 should not exceed 1.3. This
constraint is imposed to restrict the impact loading on gear pairs.
At the design stage this ratio was 1.1145 (F5/F6 ¼ 182906/164109).
However, after 0.3 mm wear of bearing 4, load ratio (F5/F6)
increases to (206 453/147401) to 1.4. Therefore, there is a
need to review and establish a new limit on bearing wear
for the replacement of elastomeric bearings compared to believ-
ing on the limit of 4.7 mm wear depth suggested by bearing
manufacturer.

0301-679X/$ - see front matter & 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.triboint.2008.07.014
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390
Symbols and notations
C radial clearance, m
D journal diameter, m
H; HPmax non-dimensional film thickness, film thickness at
maximum pressure location
h depth of wear, m
h0 minimum thickness of fluid film, m
h̄ EHL film thickness, m
ht effective film thickness, m
K empirical wear factor or Archard’s wear coefficient
L bearing length, m
N journal rotational speed, rpm
P bearing pressure W/(LD), Pa
Pmax maximum pressure, Pa
pf fluid pressure (percent of total pressure)
pa asperity pressure (percent of total pressure)
R journal radius, m
S sliding distance, m
t tilt ratio or non-dimensional tilt, t ¼ m/C,
Bearing wear can be completely avoided by establishing the
hydrodynamic lubrication mechanism in water lubricated journal
bearings. However, the bearing wear observed in the present
study indicates that bearings were operated under mixed and/or
boundary lubricated regimes. One possible reason of mixed
lubrication condition is that all patrol vessels, fitted with two
engines, operate with single engine during patrol. Under such
conditions, the idling shaft speed, which (due to propulsion of the
motoring shaft) ranges between 50 and 70 rpm, may be
insufficient to form hydrodynamic film. To understand this
bearing wear problem, a mixed lubrication analysis of sea-water
lubricated journal bearing is required. Further, to streamline the
analysis, answers to the following questions are essential:
(a) Is hydrodynamic fluid film not getting formed due to:
(i) Low rpm operations and/or
(ii) Increased radial clearance
(b) What are the implications of increased radial clearance of
bearings?
(c) What is the regime of lubrication in which the bearing
operates with the increased radial clearance at a given rpm?
(d) What is the effect of particulate contamination in sea water?
Is it responsible for abrasive and erosive wear of bearing
surface?
(e) What is the effect of surface roughness of bearing and shaft
sleeve?
(f) What is the effect of viscosity of sea water? Is it changing with
rpm and temperature?
(g) Is it possible to control the wear by changing the dimensions
of bearing and shaft?
In the present study a systematic design methodology has
been employed to answer the abovementioned questions and
suggest a suitable remedy to avoid bearing wear in the future.
2. Literature survey
To understand the theoretical aspects of journal bearing
operation two books, ‘Engineering Tribology’ by Stachowiak and
Batchelor [2], and ‘Applied Tribology’ by Khonsari and Booser [3]
were referred. Hirani et al. [4] have used two pressure correction
379
T operating time, s
U journal surface velocity, m/s
V wear volume, m3
W dimensional load capacity, N
We, Wf dimensional load capacity along and perpendicular to
line of centres, N
WZ ratio of dimensional load capacity to viscosity, m2/s
WeZ, WfZ ratio of We, Wf to viscosity, m2/s
z coordinate in axial direction, m
gO, gS pressure correction factors for Ocvirk’s and Sommer-
field bearings
L slenderness ratio (L/D)
e eccentricity ratio
f attitude angle, radian
Z viscosity coefficient of lubricant, Pa s
y coordinate in circumferential direction, radian
sA surface roughness of bearing surface, mm
sB surface roughness of shaft sleeve surface, mm
s combined roughness of two surfaces, mm
l film thickness parameter
factors go and gs to give an analytical expression for maximum
pressure. The design table [4] listed in their paper can be used to
find out film thickness, pressure and load carrying capacity.
However, the formulations in their paper [4] pertained to hydro-
dynamic lubrication regime only. Johnson et al. [5] have stipulated
that provided a major part of the load is carried by elastohydro-
dynamic action, the separation between the two rough surfaces is
given by the film thickness which would exist between two smooth
surfaces under the same conditions of load, speed and lubricant.
Kraker et al. [6] have described a mixed EHL model for finite length
elastic journal bearings. These authors have used commercially
available finite element code SEPRAN to discretise the Reynolds
equation. Bayer [7] has provided algebraic expression for calcula-
tion of depth of bearing wear under aligned and misaligned journal
conditions. Messimo Del Din et al. [8] have used an experimental
set up to investigate the utility of environmentally adapted rape
seed–synthetic ester oil over traditional mineral oil. The wear
measurements evaluate the coefficient of wear using Archard’s
equation of wear. The methodology discussed in the paper pertains
to experimental measurement of wear by difference in weight of
bearing liner before and after the experiment and compares two
different oils. Hsu et al. [9] have given a comprehensive view of
wear under lubricated conditions. As per these authors wear under
lubricated conditions can be classified into two main classes: well-
lubricated systems and marginal lubricated systems. However, the
methodology to determine wear is again experimental in nature.
Rao and Mohanram [10] have presented comprehensive sets of
experiments to study mixed lubrication of journal bearings. The
surface topography changes have been statistically analysed. Safar
[11] has presented an analysis of a journal bearing describing a
maximum allowable value of misalignment at a length to diameter
ratio of unity. The author has opined that journal misalignment
influences load carrying capacity of the bearing. A misaligned
bearing consumes more power due to friction than an aligned one.
El-Butch and Ashour [12] have dealt with analysing the perfor-
mance of a misaligned tilting-pad journal bearing under transient
loading condition. Jakeman [13] has presented a model specifically
intended to represent the dynamically misaligned sterntube
bearing, for the purpose of conducting lateral vibration analyses
of marine propeller shafting.
The methodologies presented in these papers have been duly
taken into account while carrying out the present study.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
380 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390
Fig. 1. Bearing with housing.
3. Approach for analysis of journal bearing parameters
The following approaches have been adopted:
(a) Reynolds equation, simplified for unidirectional velocity
approximation [2,3], has been used. Expression for film
thickness given in the design table of Hirani et al. [4] modified
to take care of the misalignment.
(b) Elastohydrodynamic lubrication film thickness and surface
roughness parameter have been incorporated to predict the
regime of lubrication. With the given load, rpm and radial
clearance each bearing’s film thickness, regime of lubrication
and asperity to fluid pressure ratio has been calculated using
available formulations. The results have been compared with
similar study carried out by Kraker et al. [6] to validate the
approach.
(c) Wear model based on boundary lubrication regime has
been used to assess the depth of wear and associated life of
bearing [7].
(d) Asperity and fluid pressure ratio given by Johnson et al. [5]
have been used and correlated with regime of lubrication.
3.1. Derivation of pressure expression
The closed form solution to Reynolds equation, for infinitely
short bearing (Ockvirk’s solution) and infinitely long bearing
(Sommerfeld solution) is combined using two correction factors go
and gs to approximate the analytical expression for pressure for a
finite bearing [3]. The formulations, given in the design table have
been arrived at considering hydrodynamic lubrication regime.
Misalignment factor has been provided in the film thickness
expression. In misaligned shaft, critical minimum film thickness
will occur at the edge of the bearing, as shown in Fig. 3a. The basic
parameter to describe the tilt of the shaft is the tilt ratio given by
m
t¼ (1)
C
Where t is the tilt ratio or non-dimensional tilt, m is the distance
between the axes of the tilted and non-tilted shaft measured at
the edges of the bearing and C is the radial clearance. Accordingly,
expression for non-dimensional film thickness H ( ¼ h0/C) was
modified as
 
zt
H ¼1þ  cos y (2)
L
where Z is the axial coordinate and L the length of bearing and h0
the minimum film thickness between smooth surfaces.
The analytical pressure terms given by Ockvirk and Sommer-
feld viz PO and PS and modified with two correction factors go and
gs [3] is given by
1 gO gS
¼ þ (3)
P PO PS
where go and gs are given by [3]
5
g O ¼ 1 þ L1:2 ½e  1 (4)
3
g S ¼ eð1Þ (5)
where L ¼ L=D, is slenderness ratio. To validate the proposed
analytical approach, bearing data given by Sun and Changlin [14]
have been used to obtain and plot the pressure profile at various
angular misalignments. Pressure profiles shown in Figs. 3b–e are
comparable to pressure profiles provided in Ref. [14]. Sun and
Changlin used finite-difference method to obtained pressure
profile. Further, a comparative study between the values of
maximum pressure obtained using the present analytical ap-
proach and finite-difference method is listed in Table 2. These
graphical and tabular results indicate that the proposed analytical
approach can be used to analyze misaligned hydrodynamic
journal bearing.
3.2. EHL film thickness and surface roughness parameter
The elastomeric water lubricated bearing may experience
elastic deformation [6]. Kraker et al. [6] described a mixed
elastohydrodynamic lubrication (EHL) model for finite length
elastic journal bearing. They employed the finite element method
to solve the coupled system of fluid and structural equations to
compute Stribeck curves at constant load. In the present study, an
analytical approach has been used to evaluate pressure profile and
minimum film thickness. To incorporate elastohydrodynamic
model and compare the results with Kracker et al. [6], the EHL
film thickness in transverse direction (relevant to the present
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390 381

Propeller
Weight
UDL
4KN/m 40 KN
Mech. Seal
Gearbox

PROPELLER SHAFT

6 5 4 3 2 1

6m 6m 6m

Fig. 2. Propeller shaft with bearings: (a) Coast Guard Ship in Dry dock, (b) shaft withdrawn and showing location of bearings and (c) schematic of propeller shaft with
bearings.

study) is obtained using [5] surfaces s is given by (s2A+s2B)0.5. The surface roughness parameter
" l is calculated to ascertain the regime of lubrication.
  #
7 s 2
h ¼ h0 1þ (6) h0
6 h0 l¼ (7)
s
where h is the EHL film thickness and ho is the minimum film Bearing is considered to be in boundary lubrication regime
thickness for smooth surface. The combined roughness of two when lp3.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

382 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

Table 1
Bearing dimensions and reactions [1]

Bearing number (PORT and Bearing type Length (mm) Diameter (mm) Dynamic bearing Bearing reactions on
starboard shafting) reactionsa (N) 0.3 mm wear on
bearing no. 4

1 Water lubricated sliding 735 365 60 089 60 216

2 bearings 735 355 27 151 26 414
3 735 350 33 145 35 359
4 735 345 26 123 17 679

5 (gearbox aft) Oil lubricated rolling bearings 190 265 182 906 206 453
6 (gearbox fwd) 190 265 164 109 147401

a
The reactions are considered positive in the downward direction.

The formulations given in Eqs. (2)–(7) and those given in or

Ref. [4] have been used to calculate the load carrying capacity of
the bearing. The calculated load is compared with the given load
and till the time it matches within the prescribed limits, iterations
are continued by incrementing the eccentricity ratio. The flow
chart for MATLAB code is shown in Fig. 4. To check the correctness
of programme, bearing data provided in Ref. [6] and listed in
Table 3 were tried out. Output results are listed in Tables 4 and 5
and plotted in Figs. 5 and 6. Logarithmic plots have been
presented depicting change in surface roughness parameter and
coefficient of friction with increasing radial clearance and
increasing composite rms surface roughness values of tribo-pair.
The results generated by the computer code used in the present
study tally, both quantitatively and qualitatively, with the plots
published by Kraker et al. [6].
3.3. Wear model
Having established the correctness of computer code for
journal bearing parameters, the study was extended to estimate
the bearing life. Journal bearing’s wear and performance are
usually related to the increase in clearance between the journal
and the bearing. Archard’s equation defines depth of wear h as a
function of bearing load W and sliding distance S. Coefficient of
wear K in the Archard’s equation is a proportionality constant,
indicating that wear follows linear relationship. Wear model
suggested by Bayer [7], although takes linear relationship
between volume of wear V, and K and the depth of wear h has
non-linear relation with length L, radius R and volume of wear V.
The expression for wear volume V and h is given by
V ¼ UTKW a
where U is the sliding speed in m/s, T the time in s, K the wear
coefficient in m2/N and Wa the asperity load in N. The empirical
equation for localized depth of wear h, proposed by Bayer [7] for
aligned shaft is given by
h ¼ 0:66R 1=3 2=3
L V 2=3
where R and L are radius and length of bearing, respectively. In
this wear model, the underlying assumption is that negligible
wear occurs in the journal. With the known values of
depth of wear h, surface velocity U, time T and load shared by
asperities Wa, the coefficient of wear K for individual bearings
using Eqs. (8) and (9) can be calculated by substitution and
rearrangement:
ð1:5hÞ3=2 R1=2 L
K¼
2pRNTW a
ðhÞ3=2 L
K ¼ 0:2924 (10)
1=2
R NTW a
3.4. Asperity and fluid pressure ratio
In many instances of EHL, direct contact between the deformed
asperities will still occur in spite of the presence of EHL film. If the
lubricating film separating the surfaces is such that it allows some
contact between the deformed asperities then this type of
lubrication is called mixed or partial lubrication. Johnson et al.
[5] have propounded that, provided a major part of the load is
carried by elastohydrodynamic action, the separation between the
two rough surfaces is given by the film thickness which would
exist between two smooth surfaces under the same conditions of
load, speed and lubricant. The authors have shown that an
increase in total load is carried by an increase in fluid pressure and
a small increase in asperity contact pressure. The fluid pressure to
total pressure is given by following expression [5]:
 6:3
pf h0
¼ (11)
p h
The pressure shared by the asperity can be deduced as
pa p
¼1 f (12)
p p
These equations have been used to ascertain pressure sharing
between fluid and asperity at various rpm/radial clearance
conditions. Under mixed lubrication conditions use of Eqs. (11)
and (12) is required to find out the fraction of load (Wa) bared by
asperities. Calculated Wa can be used in Eqs. (10) to determine the
(8) wear constant for mixed lubrication.
4. Experiments
Elastomeric bearings, used in Indian Coast Guard’s Advanced
(9) Offshore Patrol Vessels (AOPVs), are lubricated with sea water that
may contain particulates. Further, for reliable mixed lubrication
analysis the measurement of dynamic viscosity of sea water and
surface roughness of propeller shaft and bearings is essential.
Therefore, it was necessary to perform particle analysis to check
the influence of particulate contamination in sea water (for
erosive and abrasive wear), to measure the dynamic viscosity of
sea water and its thixotropic behaviour and to determine the
surface roughness of bearing and shaft surface. Experiments for
viscosity and particulate contamination were conducted at IIT
Labs with sample of sea water taken from Naval Dockyard
Mumbai, India. Pertometer M2, available at Instrumentation Lab
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390 383

Fig. 3. Misaligned hydrodynamic journal bearing: (a) misaligned shaft in a journal bearing [1], (b) pressure profile for aligned bearing, (c) pressure profile for 0.0041
misalignment, (d) misalignment equal to 0.0071 and (e) pressure profile for 0.011 misalignment.

of IIT was used to check the surface roughness of bearing sample 4.1. Measurement of surface roughness by perthometer M2
obtained from M/S Vanson Mumbai. The details of readings and
its possible influence on wear analysis are elucidated in forth- The surface roughness of the bearing samples was measured
coming paragraphs. using perthometer M2 in IIT machine tool lab. The summary of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

384 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

various surface roughness parameters for the bearing surfaces is
listed in Tables 6 and 7. Roughness value of 15 mm for bearing
surface and 3 mm for shaft sleeve surface has been considered in
the present study, which is standard roughness limit stipulated
prior fitment in ship.
4.2. Measurement of viscosity of sea water
Viscosity of sea water was measured at ONGC JRC Lab at IITB.
The equipment used was Brookfield make Rheometer. The read-
ings taken during the experiment is given in Table 8. The average

Table 2
Values of the maximum fluid pressure in misaligned hydrodynamic journal
bearing Table 3
Design parameters of reference bearing
Misalignment Present study Finite difference % difference
(deg) (MPa) method (MPa) [14] Description Parameter Value Units

0.000 34.75 33.06 4.86 Bearing radius R 25 mm

0.004 43.91 39.60 9.82 Bearing length L 100 mm
0.007 73.96 63.58 14.03 Radial clearance C 0.125 mm
0.01 412.51 415.35 0.69 Composite surface roughness Sq or s 0.424 mm

Start

Get film
thickness
parameter
Acquire
parameters

λ>3 λ≤3
Initialise
eccratio

Increment
ecc ratio

Preset
Calculate ‘max h’
Load by
integrating
Pressure
term twice
Mixed/BL L
Y Regime E
e HDL Calculate S
regime Get depth of wear
s S
Compare bearing
calculated parameters
load with
given Load

Compare
‘h’ with
‘max h’

Equal
Difference >
terminating
residual
Get the bearing life

No

END
Get min film
thickness

Fig. 4. Flow chart for programme rpm_vs_ecc_regime.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390 385

Table 4
Results of computer code for design parameters at different rpms (s ¼ 0.43 kept constant)

RPM Radial clearance 0.00025 m Radial clearance 0.000125 m Radial clearance 0.0000625 m Radial clearance 0.00003125 m
R/C ¼ 0.01 R/C ¼ 0.005 R/C ¼ 0.0025 R/C ¼ 0.00125

h t/ s m ht/s m ht/s m ht/s m

10 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.11

20 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.08
30 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 2.24 0.08
40 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 3.04 0.06
50 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 1.38 0.114 3.93 0.04
70 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 2.07 0.09 5.5 0.02
100 1.388 0.11 1.388 0.11 3.61 0.05 7.8 0.01
200 1.388 0.11 1.87 0.1 7.97 0.01 15.8 0.004
300 1.388 0.11 4.73 0.03 11.9 0.004 23.5 0.002
400 1.388 0.11 7.28 0.01 15.8 0.004 29.2 0.001
500 1.388 0.11 9.63 0.009 19.7 0.003 – –
600 1.4 0.11 11.85 0.007 23.7 0.002 – –
700 2.18 0.09 13.99 0.005 27.8 0.002 – –
800 3.75 0.04 16.06 0.004 – – – –
900 5.28 0.02 18.09 0.003 – – – –
1000 6.75 0.01 20.1 0.0025 – – – –
1100 8.16 0.005 22.1 0.001 – – – –

Table 5
Results of computer code for design parameters at different rpms (radial clearance C ¼ 0.000125 m kept constant)

rpm sA ¼ 0.1, sB ¼ 0.2, s ¼ 0.22 sA ¼ 0.2, sB ¼ 0.4, s ¼ 0.43 sA ¼ 0.3, sB ¼ 0.8, s ¼ 0.85

ht/s m ht/s m h t/ s m

10 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11

30 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11
50 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11
70 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11
100 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11 1.38 0.11
200 3.7 0.04 1.87 0.1 1.38 0.11
300 9.53 0.009 4.73 0.03 2.45 0.08
400 14.63 0.004 7.28 0.01 3.78 0.04
500 19.3 0.003 9.63 0.009 5.0 0.03
600 23.8 0.002 11.85 0.007 6.16 0.02
700 28.01 0.002 13.09 0.005 7.28 0.016
800 – – 16.06 0.004 8.36 0.012
900 – – 18.1 0.003 9.4 0.01
1000 – – 20.1 0.003 10.4 0.009
1100 – – 22.1 0.003 11.49 0.007
1200 – – – – 12.51 0.006

value of viscosity at 150 rpm was 0.96 mPa s, at 250 rpm it was
1.08 mPa s and at 500 rpm the average value of viscosity was 1.50.
In the present study a curve fit equation
 rpm 2
0:8331 þ 0:0006 rpm þ
1000
has been used to represent the water viscosity as a function of
rotational speed of shaft.
4.3. Measurement of particle size in sea water using particle size
analyser
The variation in particle size diameter indicates inconsistency
of particulate contamination in sea water. The particulate
contamination varies depending upon depth, distance from shore
line and turbulence level of sea. It was observed that particulate
contamination is high during rough weather when sea is
turbulent. The particle size in sea-water sample had mean
diameter of 40–120 nm and the average speed (at 250 rpm of
shaft speed) of particle is less than 3 m/s, which is not of any
appreciable consequence as far as wear of marine shaft bearing is
concerned. The particulate contamination was therefore, not
considered in the present study.
5. Data collection
Having obtained the values of characteristic parameters,
it was time now to obtain operational data from a ship. It was
decided to analyze the wear of propeller shaft bearing of
Indian Coast Guard Ship Sangram, an AOPV, which had experi-
enced problems of unequal and unsymmetrical wear in its
shaft system bearings. Initial and final radial clearances recorded
during the construction of ship, CGS Sangram, at Goa Shipyard
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

386 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

C = 0.01 C = 0.005 C = 0.0025 C = 0.00125

24

Surface Roughness
20

Parameter
16
12
8
4
0
1 10 100 1000 10000
RPM
Sigma = 0.22 Sigma = 0.43 Sigma = 0.85
24
Surface Roughness
Parameter (Sigma)

20

16

12

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
RPM

Fig. 5. Variation of surface roughness parameter with (a) increasing radial clearance of bearing and (b) increasing composite rms value (s) of tribo-pair (data refers to
Table 4).

C = 0.00025 C = 0.000125 C = 0.0000625 C = 0.00003125

0.12
Coeff of friction

0.08

0.04

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
RPM
Sigma = 0.22 Sigma = 0.43 Sigma = 0.85

0.12
Coeff of friction

0.08

0.04

0
1 10 100 1000
RPM

Fig. 6. Variation of coefficient of friction with (a) increasing radial clearance of bearing and (b) increasing composite rms value (s) of tribo-pair (data refers to Table 5).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390 387

Ltd and during its two successive docking ships are registered
in Table 9. The recorded clearances were diametric and for
the present study they have been converted into radial clearance.
The exploitation pattern and hours of sailing, obtained from
ICGS Sangram’s Main Engine Room Log Book, are listed in
Table 10.
6. Results and discussions
Table 10 shows that water lubricated bearings undergo
transient phenomena of starts and stops (i.e. 304 time shaft was
Table 6
Readings of perthometer M2 for shaft sample
Parameter Reading 1 Reading 2 Reading 3
started/stopped during May 97 to June 2000). Mokhtar et al. [15]
studied the starting behaviour of journal bearing and observed a
rapid build up of hydrodynamic film in all the cases. They
concluded that hydrodynamic film formed in a very short time,
after which shaft moved in a spiral shaped whirling locus
to the steady state operating position. Similarly they studied
stopping motion and reported that during shutting down the
shaft followed a typical hydrodynamic locus until rotation
ceased and then a squeeze film trajectory to final resting
position was observed. These results indicate that start/stop
transient phenomena does not cause major wear on the
bearing surface. Under proper load conditions, shaft takes lesser
than half rotation to lift off from bearing surface. Therefore,
in the present study it is assumed that starts/stops do not
affect bearing life significantly. However, excessive load, large
clearance and low rotational speed may have affected the bearing
life and estimating wear constant may indicate the source of
bearing wear.
Reading 4

Sampling length (mm) 5.6 17.5 5.6 17.5

6.1. Coefficient of wear
Lc (mm) 0.8 2.5 0.8 2.5
Ra (mm) 0.88 0.968 0.279 0.401
Rz (mm) 3.82 4.85 2.62 3.92 There are two approaches to find the wear coefficient. In the
Rmax (mm) 4.41 5.25 3.51 6.92 first approach it is assumed that there are only two lubrication
Rt (mm) 4.41 5.81 3.88 6.92
domains: hydrodynamic and boundary. In the hydrodynamic
regime (l43), bearing wear is zero and the applied load is bared
by full-fluid film. In the boundary regime (lp3), applied load is
Table 7 carried by asperities and bearing wear is definite. The value of l
Readings of perthometer M2 for bearing sample can be determined by computer simulation of algorithm given in
Fig. 4 and Eq. (7). By employing this approach, MATLAB code was
Parameter Reading 1 Reading 2 Reading 3 Reading 4
run with input data of load, bearing length and diameter as listed
Sampling length (mm) 5.6 17.5 5.6 17.5 in Table 1, and different radial clearances. Fig. 7 shows that at
Lc (mm) 0.8 2.5 0.8 2.5 radial clearance greater than 0.6 mm, all four bearings operate in
Ra (mm) 1.510 2.790 1.750 2.02 boundary lubrication regime, meaning thereby that hydrody-
Rz (mm) 9.80 18.6 10.5 13.0
namic film does not form even at the highest operating rpm (254).
Rmax (mm) 12.7 22.2 16.4 14.3
Rt (mm) 14.2 22.7 16.4 16.5
However, when the radial clearance is reduced to 0.4 mm for
bearing 2, 3 and 4, the average minimum rpm for hydrodynamic

Table 8
Viscosity measurement readings

rpm First run Second run Third run Fourth run Fifth run

Dynamic Shear stress Dynamic Shear stress Dynamic Shear stress Dynamic Shear stress Dynamic Shear stress
viscosity (Pa) viscosity (Pa) viscosity (Pa) viscosity (Pa) viscosity (Pa)
(mPa s) (mPa s) (mPa s) (mPa s) (mPa s)

150 0.974 0.736 0.954 0.721 0.952 0.720 0.952 0.719 0.954 0.727
250 1.083 1.364 1.075 1.354 1.077 1.356 1.078 1.358 1.080 1.361
500 1.510 3.805 1.504 3.790 1.5 3.779 1.502 3.783 1.504 3.789

Table 9
Radial clearances of bearings

Radial clearances Bearing no. 1 (mm) Bearing no. 2 (mm) Bearing no. 3 (mm) Bearing no. 4 (mm)
recorded from
Installed May 1997 After 3 years Installed May 1997 After 3 years Installed May 1997 After 3 years Installed May 1997 After 3 years

Port 0.75 1.58 0.725 0.9 0.675 1.4 0.8 1.05

Stbd 0.7 1.6 0.775 0.9 0.625 1.15 0.8 0.95

Initial Oct 2000 Final Dec 2002 Initial Oct 2000 Final Dec 2002 Initial Oct 2000 Final Dec 2002 Initial Oct 2000 Final Dec 2002

Port 0.775 1.65 0.65 1.0 0.75 1.175 0.5 0.755

Stbd 0.575 1.025 0.45 0.7 0.4 0.625 0.5 0.755

Initial May 2003 Final Sep 2004 Initial May 2003 Final Sep 2004 Initial May 2003 Final Sep 2004 Initial May 2003 Final Sep 2004

Port 0.525 0.775 0.275 0.53 0.75 0.9 0.5 0.67

Stbd 1.025 1.64 0.7 0.8 0.625 1.28 0.575 0.85
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

388 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

Table 10
Exploitation pattern of ship for 03 operational cycles

Description May 97–Jun 2000 (H) Oct 2000–Dec 2002 (H) May 2003–Sep 2004 (H)

Total engine running hours 4109 5129 3264

Total engine running hours in clutched condition 3800 4714 3198
Number of starts and stops 304 191 122
Hours at engine rpm 500 (shaft rpm 130) 549 – –
Hours at engine rpm 550 (shaft rpm 143) 67 368 366
Hours at engine rpm 600 (shaft rpm 156) 140 15 25
Hours at engine rpm 650 (shaft rpm 170) 472 613 189
Hours at engine rpm 700 (shaft rpm 182) 1709 2447 1677
Hours at engine rpm 750 (shaft rpm 195) 618 28 –
Hours at engine rpm 800 (shaft rpm 209) 177 864 753
Hours at engine rpm 850 (shaft rpm 221) 64 375 173
Hours at engine rpm 900 (shaft rpm 235) 01 04 14
Hours at engine rpm 950 (shaft rpm 247) 02 – 01
Hours at engine rpm 975 (shaft rpm 254) 01 – –

Brg 1 Brg 2 Brg 3 Brg 4

(11) and (12) and employ the calculated load to determine the
wear constant using Eqs. (8) and (9). To understand this approach
600 let us consider that total applied, 60089 N as shown in Table 1, on
500 the bearing 1 is shared by fluid film and asperity contact.
Determine the asperities pressure and calculate the load bared
400 by asperities by area integration of asperity pressure. For bearings
RPM

300 1, 2 and 4 under different speed and clearance conditions, asperity

200
100
0 0.35  1011 mm2/N, the maximum value equal to 1.7  1011
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Radial Clearance (mm)
Fig. 7. Rpm below which bearing performs under boundary lubrication.
film to form is 160–190. Bearing 1 continues to operate in
boundary lubrication regime even at radial clearance of 0.4. Effect
of increased radial clearance on regime of lubrication can be seen
in graph shown in Fig. 8. Surface roughness parameter (l) below 3
indicates bearing operates in boundary lubrication regime. This
analysis suggests that all four bearings operate under boundary
lubrication regime and Eq. (10) can be employed to evaluate the
wear constant K. The calculated values of K are listed in Tables 11
and 12. The wear depth of bearings of both shaft lines of one ship
for three operational cycles has been obtained by subtracting
initial clearance from final clearance. However, referring to
Tables 11 and 12, it can be seen that value of K is not consistent
for different bearings within the same operational cycle and for
same bearing within different operational cycles. For bearing 1,
the variation in K is largely dependent upon initially set radial
clearance; for bearing 2, K is quite consistent irrespective of
initial set radial clearance; and for bearings 3 and 4, K is
inconsistent irrespective of initially set radial clearance.
Hence, the average of 24 values of K listed in Tables 11 and 12
(0.226  1017 m2/N) cannot be used to estimate the life of water
lubricated bearing. However, the results obtained using this
approach indicates that bearing 1 is severely loaded and more
prone to wear damage.
The second approach for wear analysis of water lubricated
bearing is to first evaluate the load shared by asperities using Eqs.
loads are listed in Table 13. The results of this table indicate that
asperity load will decrease with increasing rotational speed of the
shaft. Further, the minimum value of wear constant equal to
0.9 mm2/N, and average value equal to 1.0  1011 mm2/N have been
estimated. These results indicate more than 50% variation in the
value of wear constant. One possible reason for such variation is
that the individual bearing (i.e. bearing 1, bearing 2) has been
analyzed as a component that is subject to a particular load and
speed condition. In reality load shared by all four bearings is
completely coupled and dynamic. Larger clearance in one bearing
increases the load on other bearings and vise-versa. Table 9 clearly
indicates that radial clearance for bearing 1 in first load cycle was
200 mm greater than the clearance provided in third load cycle.
Similarly radial clearance for bearing 2 was 500 mm greater in first
load cycle compared to clearance in third load cycle. Such high
variation in radial clearance drastically changes the load capacity
of bearings.
In hydrodynamic journal bearing often radial clearance (C) in
the range of 0.00075 to 0.001 times shaft radius is preferred. The
radial clearances shown in Table 9 demonstrate that two to four
times higher clearance was provided for water lubricated bear-
ings. The load capacity of such bearings is proportional to 1/C2
therefore load capacity can be increase by decreasing radial
clearance, which is shown in Table 14. This table indicates that if
radial clearance of bearing is approximately equal to 0.001 times
shaft radius, then there is significant decrease in asperity load.
Hence, it can be concluded that major problem in elastomeric
bearing used in the Indian Coast Guard Ships is radial clearance of
the bearing. Radial clearance between 0.00075 and 0.001 times
shaft radius should be maintained for longer life of all four
bearings.
7. Conclusions
Unequal and non-uniform wear of elastomeric bearings, used
in Indian Coast Guard Ships, have been analyzed. Following
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390 389

@ 150 RPM

Bearing 1 Bearing 2 Bearing 3 Bearing 4

Surface Roughness
3
Parameter
2

0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Radial Clearance (mm)
@ 185 RPM
Bearing 1 Bearing 2 Bearing 3 Bearing 4

5
Surface Roughness

4
Parameter

0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Radial Clearance (mm)

Fig. 8. Effect of increased radial clearance on surface roughness parameter.

Table 11 conclusions can be drawn from the experimental and theoretical

coefficient of wear (port shaft) study presented in the paper:

Bearing Coefficient of wear K (m2/N) (  1017)

number  Sea water shows thixotropic behaviour and its dy-
Operational cycle Operational cycle Operational cycle namic viscosity increases with increase in rotational
1 2 3 speed.
1 0.506 0.366 0.092
 Particle size of sea-water contamination is very small
2 0.187 0.231 0.212 (40–120 nm). Such small size of particles does not cause
3 0.159 0.255 0.079 bearing wear.
4 0.198 0.024 0.101  All four elastomeric bearings, used to support propeller shaft,
operated in mixed lubrication at operating conditions provided
in Table 10.
Table 12  All four bearings have unplanned excessive radial clearance,
Depth of wear and coefficient of wear (Stbd Shaft) which reduce their load capacity and result uneven rapid wear.
Bearing Coefficient of wear K (m2/N) (  1017)
 Bearing life can be enhanced by proper selection of radial
number clearance for all four bearings.
Operational cycle Operational cycle Operational cycle
1 2 3
Acknowledgement
1 0.587 0.15 0.354
2 0.090 0.134 0.05
Our sincere thanks to Indian Coast Guard Ship Sangram, from
3 0.47 0.098 0.717
4 0.092 0.024 0.247 where valuable and dependable data of shaft clearance and engine
running hours were provided.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

390 H. Hirani, M. Verma / Tribology International 42 (2009) 378–390

Table 13
Asperity load and wear constant for bearings 1, 2 and 4

rpm Load shared by asperities of bearing 1, Wa (N) Load shared by asperities of bearing 2, Wa (N) Load shared by asperities of bearing 4, Wa (N)

Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3

130 52 467 – – 20 887 – – 20 708 –

143 51767 51 942 49 081 20 341 19 764 13 307 20 242 17 778 17 778
156 51 098 51 294 48 199 19 784 19 142 12 320 19 811 17 116 17 116
170 50 349 50 582 47 215 19 228 18 554 11 259 19 244 16 412 16 412
182 49 658 49 951 46 421 18 732 17 995 10 342 18 813 15 831 15 831
195 48 951 49 279 – 18 185 17 452 – 18 342 15 208 –
209 48 257 48 500 44 543 17 606 16 809 8556 17 840 14 507 14 507
221 47 574 47 922 43 674 17 125 16 260 7715 17408 13 937 13 937
235 46 822 47 135 42 693 16 502 15 707 6647 16 923 13 248 13 248
247 46 125 – 41885 16 029 – 5925 16 470 – 12 671
254 45 690 – – 15 704 – – 16 207 – –
2 11
Wear constant (mm /N) (  10 )
1.7 1.43 0.35 0.44 1.0 1.6 0.76 0.73 0.49

Table 14
The effect of clearance reduction on asperity load

Description May 97–Jun 2000 Load shared by asperities of bearing 1, Wa (N) Load shared by asperities of bearing 4, Wa (N)
(h)
Bearing clearance Bearing clearance Bearing clearance Bearing clearance
(0.75 mm) (0.175 mm) (0.8 mm) (0.175 mm)

Total engine running hours in clutched 3800

condition
Hours at engine rpm 500 (shaft rpm 130) 549 52 467 36 933 20 708 8807
Hours at engine rpm 550 (shaft rpm 143) 67 51767 35 032 20 242 7477
Hours at engine rpm 600 (shaft rpm 156) 140 51 098 33 669 19 811 6176
Hours at engine rpm 650 (shaft rpm 170) 472 50 349 31157 19 244 4811
Hours at engine rpm 700 (shaft rpm 182) 1709 49 658 29 736 18 813 3667
Hours at engine rpm 750 (shaft rpm 195) 618 48 951 27 905 18 342 2452
Hours at engine rpm 800 (shaft rpm 209) 177 48 257 25 972 17 840 1172
Hours at engine rpm 850 (shaft rpm 221) 64 47 574 23 877 17408 366
Hours at engine rpm 900 (shaft rpm 235) 01 46 822 22 109 16 923 0
Hours at engine rpm 950 (shaft rpm 247) 02 46 125 20 044 16 470 0
Hours at engine rpm 975 (shaft rpm 254) 01 45 690 18 304 16 207 0

References
[1] Allais B. Calculations of bending moments and bearing reaction calculation.
A Technical Note from M/S acbLIPS company, 1991.
[2] Stachowiak GW, Batchelor AW. Engineering tribology. 2nd ed. USA: Butter-
worth-Heinemann; 2001.
[3] Khonsari MM, Booser RE. Applied tribology. Wiley; 2001.
[4] Hirani H, Rao TVVLN, Athre K, Biswas S. Rapid performance evaluation of
journal bearings. Tribol Int 1997;30:825–34.
[5] Johnson KL, Greenwood JA, Poon SY. A simple theory of asperity contact in
elastohydrodynamic lubrication. Wear 1972;19:91–108.
[6] Kraker Alex de, van Ostayen Ron AJ, Rixen Daniel J. Calculation of stribeck
curves for (water) lubricated journal bearings. Tribol Int 2007;40:459–69.
[7] Bayer RG. Engineering design for wear. 2nd ed. New York, USA: Marcel Dekker
Inc.; 2004.
[8] Massimo Del Din, Kassfeldt Elisabet. Wear characteristics with mixed
lubrication conditions in a full scale journal bearing. Wear 1999;232:192–8.
[9] Hsu SM, Munro RG, Shen MC, Gates RS. Boundary lubricated wear.
Wear—materials, mechanisms and practice. New York: Wiley; 2005.
[10] Rao AR, Mohanram PV. A study of wear characteristics of journal
bearings operating under mixed-lubrication conditions. Wear 1994;172:
11–22.
[11] Safar ZS. Energy loss due to misalignment of journal bearings. Tribol Int
1984;17:107–9.
[12] El-Butch AM, Ashour NM. Transient analysis of misaligned elastic tilting-pad
journal bearing. Tribol Int 2005;38:41–8.
[13] Jakeman RW. Non-linear oil film response model for the dynamically
misaligned sterntube bearing. Tribol Int 1989;22:3–10.
[14] Sun J, Changlin G. Hydrodynamic lubrication analysis of journal bearing
considering misalignment caused by shaft deformation. Tribol Int 2004;
37:841–8.
[15] Mokhtar MOA, Howarth RB, Davis PB. The behaviour of plain hydro-
dynamic journal bearings during starting and stopping. ASLE 1977;20(3):
183–90.