Numerical comparisons of rotordynamic characteristics for three types of labyrinth gas seals with inlet preswirl

Abstract

Numerical results of frequency-dependent rotordynamic force coefficients and leakage flow rates are presented and compared with three types of labyrinth gas seals, which include a tooth-on-stator (TOS) labyrinth seal, a tooth-on-rotor (TOR) labyrinth seal, and an interlocking-tooth (INT) labyrinth seal. These three labyrinth seals represent the typical labyrinth seal designs used in rotating machinery as shaft seals to limit leakage and ensure a robust rotordynamic design. The three labyrinth seals have the identical rotor diameter, sealing clearance, tooth number, and profile. Using a proposed transient computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method based on the multi-frequency elliptical orbit whirling model, transient CFD solutions were conducted at rotational speed of 7000 r/min, inlet pressure of 6.9 bar, ambient out pressure, and three inlet preswirl ratios up to 1.0. The accuracy and availability of the present transient CFD method were demonstrated with the experiment data of frequency-dependent rotordynamic coefficients of the TOS labyrinth seal with different rotational speeds and inlet preswirl ratios. The rotordynamic coefficients were generally well-predicted by the present numerical method, with direct stiffness and direct damping modestly under predicted (∼67% and ∼34%, respectively). Numerical results compared leakage flow rates and rotordynamic coefficients for three labyrinth seals, while paying special attention to the cross-coupling stiffness, effective damping, crossover frequency, and swirl velocity development along the flow direction in seal. The INT and TOS labyrinth seals consistently leaks less than the TOR labyrinth seal across all preswirl ratios, respectively, by factors of 27% and 5%. The TOS labyrinth seal is relatively most stable, followed by the INT labyrinth seal and then the TOR labyrinth seal. The stability of labyrinth seals can be improved by reducing the swirl velocity at the seal entrance (installing anti-swirl devices) and in the seal cavity (applying “textured” or “pocket” stator surfaces).

Keywords

Labyrinth gas seal rotordynamic characteristics leakage flow inlet preswirl numerical simulation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lakshminarayana

. Fluid dynamics and heat transfer of turbomachinery, New York, NY: Wiley, 1996, pp. 339–347.

Muszynska

. Rotordynamics, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group, 2005, pp. 214–222.

Vance

. Machinery vibration and rotordynamics, New York, NY: Wiley, 2010, pp. 271–278.

Chupp

Hendricks

Lattime

. Sealing in turbomachinery. J Propul Power 2006; 22: 313–349.

Engineering Science Data Unit. Labyrinth seal flow. IHS ESDU, Denver, CO, Document No. ESDU 09004, 2009.

Benckert H and Wachter J. Flow induced spring constants of labyrinth seals. In: IMechE, proceedings of the second international conference, vibrations in rotationg machinery, Cambridge, UK, 2–4 September 1980, pp.53–63.

Wright

. Labyrinth seal forces on a whirling rotor. In: Rotor dynamical instaility, New York, NY: ASME, 1983, pp. 19–31.

Childs

Scharrer

. Experimental rotordynamic coefficient resultsfor teeth-on-rotor and teeth-on-stator labyrinth gas seals. ASME J Eng Gas Turbines Power 1986; 108: 599–604.

Childs

Scharrer

. Theory versus experiment for the rotordynamic coeffcient of labyrinth gas seals: part II—a comparrison to experiment. ASME J Vibr Acoust 1988; 110: 281–287.

10.

Childs DW, Elrod D and Hale K. Rotordynamic coefficient and leakage test results for interlock and tooth-on-stator labyrinth seals. ASME paper 88-GT-87, 1988.

11.

Hawkins

Childs

Hale

. Experimental results for labyrinth gas seals with honeycomb stators: comparisons to smooth stator seals and theoretical predictions. ASME J Tribol 1988; 111: 161–168.

12.

Kwanka

. Improving the stability of labyrinth gas seals. ASME J Eng Gas Turbines Power 1997; 123: 383–387.

13.

Zeidan F, Perez R and Stephenson E. The use of honeycomb sealsin stabilizing two centrifugal compressors. In: 22nd turbomachinery symposium, turbomachinery laboratory, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 14–16 September 1993, pp.3–15.

14.

Childs DW and Vance JM. Annular seals and the rotordynamics of compressors and turbines. In: 26th turbomachinery symposium, Houston, TX, 14–18 September 1997, pp.201–220.

15.

Picardo

Childs

. Rotordynamic coefficients for a tooth-on-stator labyrinth seal at 70 bar supply pressures: measurements versus theory and comparisons to a hole-pattern stator seal. J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2005; 127: 843–855.

16.

Mehta

Childs

. Measured comparison of leakage and rotordynamic characteristics for a slanted-tooth and a straight-tooth labyrinth seal. ASME J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2014; 136: 012501–012501.

17.

Pugachev AO and Deckner M. Analysis of the experimental and CFD-based theoretical methods for studying rotordynamic characteristics of labyrinth gas seals. ASME paper GT2010-22058, 2010.

18.

Childs DW, Mclean JE, Zhang M, et al. Rotordynamic perfaormance of a negative-swirl brake for a tooth-on-stator labyrinth seal. ASME paper GT2014-25577, 2014.

19.

Arthur SP and Childs DW. Measured rotordynamic and leakage characteristics of a tooth-on-rotor labyrinth seal with comparisons to a tooth-on-stator labyrinth seal and predictions. ASME paper GE2015-43242, 2015.

20.

Scharrer

. Theory versus experiment for the rotordynamic coefficientof labyrinth gas seals: part i—a two control volume model. ASME J Vibr Acoust 1988; 110: 270–280.

21.

Pugachev AO and Degen H. CFD-predicted rotordynamic coefficients for a 20-teeth-on-stator labyrinth seal at high supply pressure conditions. ASME paper GT2012-68381, 2012.

22.

Ertas

Delgado

Vannini

. Rotordynamic force coefficients for three types of annular gas seals with inlet preswirl and high differentail pressure ratio. ASME J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2012; 134: 042503–042503.

23.

Vannini

Cioncoini

Vescovo

. Labyrinth seal and pocket damper seal high pressure rotordynamic test data. ASME J Eng Gas Turbines Power 2014; 136: 022501–022501.

24.

Thorat M and Childs D. Predicted rotordynamic behavior of a labyrinth seal as rotor surface velocity approaches mach 1. ASME paper GT2009-59256, 2009.

25.

Vannini G, Thorat M, Childs DW, et al. Impact of frequency dependence of gas labyrinth seal rotordynamic coefficients on centrifugal compressor stability. ASME paper GT2010-22039, 2010.

26.

Yan

. Multiple frequencies elliptical whirling orbit model and transient RANS solution approach to rotordynamic coefficients of annual gas seals prediction. ASME J Vib Acoust 2013; 135: 031005–031005.

27.

ANSYS, Inc. ANSYS CFX-solver theory guide. Release 11.0, Canonsburg, PA: ANSYS, 2006.