Notes15 Gas Film Lubrication

NOTES 15
GAS FILM LUBRICATION

Luis San Andrs http://rotorlab.tamu.edu/me626
Mast-Childs Professor
Turbomachinery Laboratory
Texas A&M University
Introduction 2
Types of gas bearings 3
The fundaments of gas film lubrication analysis 6
Simple slider gas bearings 10
Dynamic force coefficients for slider gas bearings 14
Cylindrical gas journal bearings 17
Thin film flow analysis for cylindrical bearings 19
Frequency reduced force coefficients for tilting pad bearings 24
Some consideration on the solution of Reynolds equation for gas films 26
Example of performance of a plain cylindrical gas journal bearing 29
Gas journal bearing force coefficients and dynamic stability 34
Performance of a flexure pivot tilting pad hydrostatic gas bearing 37
An introduction to gas foil bearings 42
Performance of a simple one dimensional foil bearing 44
Consideration on foil bearings for oil-free turbomachinery 49
References 51
Nomenclature 53
Appendix. Numerical solution of Reynolds equation for gas films 56
Dear reader, to refer this material use the following format

San Andrs, L., 2010, Modern Lubrication Theory, Gas Film Lubrication, Notes 15, Texas A &
M University Digital Libraries, http://repository.tamu.edu/handle/1969.1/93197 [access date]
NOTES 15. GAS FILM LUBRICATION Dr. Luis San Andrs 2010 1
Introduction
Microturbomachinery (MTM)1 demands gas bearings to ensure compactness, lightweight and
extreme temperature operation. Gas bearings with large stiffness and damping, and preferably of
low cost will enable successful commercial applications. Gas film bearings offer advantages of
low friction and reduced heat generation. These advantages enable their successful applications
in air-cycle units for airplane cabins, high-precision instruments, auxiliary power units, and high-
speed MTM. In addition, gas bearing systems do not require costly, complex sealing and
lubricant circulation systems; hence ensuring system compactness, low weight and extreme
temperature operation. Furthermore, these bearings eliminate process fluid contamination and are
environmental friendly. Gas foil bearings are in use; however, their excessive cost, protected
technology and lack of calibrated predictive tools have prevented widespread use in mass-
produced applications.
Gas bearings have a low load carrying capacity and require a minute film thickness to
accomplish their intended function. Thus, their fabrication and installation tends to be expensive
and time consuming. Another disadvantage is poor damping because of the inherently low
viscosity of the gas.
The literature on the analyses of gas bearing analyses is extensive, albeit experimental
verification and successful commercial implementations have not always been reported. Gross
[1] (1962) covers the fundamentals of analysis that span the fast development of gas bearing
technology in the 1960s. Pan [2] gives a serious description of the analysis and performance of
(rigid surface type) gas bearings summing knowledge until 1980. The textbook of Hamrock [3]
(1994) provides comprehensive analyses for the static load performance of both thrust and radial
gas bearings. Czolczynski [4] (1999) gives a comprehensive review of the analyses for prediction
of frequency dependent force coefficients of gas bearings.
The last decade (2000s) has seen a rebirth of gas bearings, in particular gas foil bearings for
MTM [5] and aerostatic gas bearings for spindle machines [6]. San Andrs et al. [7-16] report the
results of a comprehensive research program, experimental and analytical, evaluating and
developing cost effective reliable gas bearings for MTM.
1
As per the IGTI (International Gas Turbine Institute), a microturbomachinery has power < 250 kW.
Types of gas bearings
Bearings in rotating machinery are of two types: (a) radial bearings supporting lateral loads
including rotor weight, and (b) thrust bearings carrying axial loads. See Figure 1 for a few
relevant gas bearing configurations. These loads can be either static or dynamic or both. Gas film
bearings behave as mechanical elements that provide stiffness, damping and inertia force
coefficients that, in conjunction with the structural parameters of a rotor, determine the stability
and dynamic behavior of the entire rotor bearing system (RBS).
In a gas bearing, a film of gas, hereby liberally referred as the lubricant, separates the rotating
component (a journal, for example) from the stationary part (a housing or stator). Hydrodynamic
shear action from the moving component enables the generation of the lubricant wedge where a
hydrodynamic pressure evolves to produce the reaction force opposing the externally applied
load. Gas bearings operating under the hydrodynamic (self-acting) principle are, in general, of
simple construction although at times difficult to manufacture and install because of the required
minute film clearances. Other bearings employ external pressurization supplied through
restrictors (orifices, slots or capillaries) to enable a hydrostatic action that separates the surfaces
thus inducing journal or rotor lift without rotation, for example. Hydrostatic bearings are
mechanically more complex than hydrodynamic bearings because of their additional supply
ports; albeit their major advantage lies on their usage in applications without rotor spinning. This
advantage must be weighed against the extra cost plus the need of an external source of
pressurized gas. More importantly, in a hybrid bearing configuration, i.e., one where both
hydrostatic and hydrodynamic operating principles act jointly, the external supply pressure is
typically used to promote early rotor lift off thus reducing temporary rubs, avoiding wear of
surfaces and extending bearing life.
There are (probably) as many types of gas bearing configurations as there are applications;
that is, a gas bearing is selected to fulfill certain functions while keeping a cost low, including
component fabrication and installation, and of course, operation. The archival literature features
successful applications of gas bearings; often failing to notice that, in contrast to liquid lubricated
bearings, gas bearings have inherent limitations that prevent their widespread usage as load
support elements in (heavy) commercial machinery.
Gases, although chemically more stable than liquids, have an inherent low viscosity one or
two orders of magnitude lower than that of mineral oils for example. Recall that the load
carrying capacity (W) of a self-acting hydrodynamic film bearing is roughly proportional to
AU
2 [3] where is the lubricant viscosity, U is the surface speed, A is the area of action,
hmin
and hmin is the minimum film thickness. Hence, in order to achieve a desired load capacity, a gas
lubricated bearing replacing a similar size oil-lubricated bearing must operate at an exceedingly
high surface speed (U) or with a minute film thickness (h). That is, hydrodynamic gas bearings
are not intended for supporting rotating machinery that operates with relatively low surface
speeds or if the film clearance or gap is too large. Hence, the need for accurate manufacturing of
parts which increases both cost and makes installation complicated. Of course, externally
pressurized (aerostatic) gas bearings can be used efficiently to carry loads at low or even zero
surface speeds. However, aerostatic bearings require a source of pressurized gas which adds cost
and complexity [1,6,10].
To enhance the hydrodynamic action, designers have produced a number of bearing
configurations that exploit geometrical features such as steps, grooves, pockets and dimples, for
example. Figure 1 shows several typical commercial gas bearing configurations. The bearing
types with textured surfaces, known as (spiral) grooved bearings and herringbone journal
bearings have been instrumental to the operation of gyroscopes for aircraft and satellite
navigation [2], enabled non contacting gas face seal technology [7]; and more recently, allowed
the revolution in digital storage hard-drive technology [17]. In these applications, static and
dynamics loads are relatively low. Note that, for optimum load performance giving the maximum
static (centering) stiffness, the depth of the machined steps or grooves or pockets is just equal or
a little larger than the operating film gap or clearance, as will be demonstrated later. Until
recently, these geometrical features were difficult to machine at low cost, except in certain
materials like silicon-carbide for non-contacting face seals. However, current casting and
manufacturing processes allow the manufacturing of these bearings (or seals) at a relatively low
cost and with near identical performance in one or millions of pieces.
Other radial bearing configurations of interest, i.e., undergoing close scrutiny and
commercial development, include bump-type foil bearings [5, 15, 18], flexure pivot tilting pad
bearings [13], and (low cost) metal mesh foil bearings [19].
Flexure pivot tilting pad bearing
Spiral grooved thrust and radial bearings
Bump-type foil bearing Flexure pivot tilting pad bearing with

hydrostatic pressurization
Metal mesh foil bearing Overleaf-type foil bearing
Fig. 1 Typical commercial gas bearings for microturbomachinery
The fundamentals of gas film lubrication analysis
The fluid flow in a hydrodynamic gas bearing or gas face seal is typically laminar and
inertialess, i.e. the Reynolds numbers Re=Uh/ <1, because of the smallness in film thickness
(h) and the low lubricant density (). Gas annular seals, such as labyrinth and honeycomb types,
are notable exceptions, since in these applications large pressure drops, high surface speeds and
large clearances promote flow turbulence accompanied by strong fluid compressibility effects
[20].
Consider, as shown in Figure 2, the flow of an ideal gas in a region confined between two
surfaces separated by the small gap h. The top surface has velocity U along the x direction. For
p
an isothermal process, the gas density () and pressure (p) are related by , with g
g T
and T representing the gas constant and operating temperature, respectively.
Y V=dh/dt+U dh/dx
Gas lubricant Lz
X
h(x,z,t)
Z Lx
Film thickness h << Lx, Lz
Fig. 2 Geometry of a gas lubricated thin film bearing
Table 1 shows a list of the physical properties of the most common gases used as lubricants
in thin film bearings. The gas viscosity () increases with its absolute temperature (T) as
T*
1
o
T0 T where T* and To are reference temperatures and o=(To).
T* To
1
T
Table 1. Viscosity and molecular weight of gases used in thin film bearings
Gas formula Molecular To T*
weight Pa-s K K
Acetylene C2H2 26.036 10.2 293 198
Air O2+N 29.000 17.1 273 124
Ammonia NH3 17.034 9.82 293 626
Argon Ar 39.950 22.04 289 142
Carbon dioxide CO2 44.010 13.66 273 274
Carbon Monoxide CO 28.010 16.65 273 101
Chlorine Cl2 70.900 12.94 289 351
Chloride HCl 36.458 13.32 273 360
Helium He 4.003 18.6 273 38
Hydrogen H2 2.016 8.5 273 83
Hydrogen sulfide H2S 34.086 12.51 290 331
Methane CH4 16.042 10.94 290 198
Neon Ne 20.180 29.73 273 56
Nitrogen N2 28.020 16.65 273 103
Nitric Oxide NO 30.010 17.97 273 162
Nitrous Oxide N2O 44.020 13.66 273 274
Oxygen O2 32.000 19.2 273 138
Steam H20 18.016 12.55 372 673
Sulfur Dioxide SO2 64.070 11.68 273 416
Xenon Xe 131.300 21.01 273 220
Gas constant Rg=(8,314,34 J/kg-K)/MW
Source: http://periodic.lanl.gov/default.htm
Reynolds equation describes the generation of the film pressure within the flow region [2].
h3 p U

12
p
2 x
p h p h 0 (1)
t
Eq. (1) represents an isoviscous condition without fluid inertia effects. Furthermore, the
derivation of Eq. (1) assumes the gas satisfies the no-slip condition, i.e. it adheres to the
surfaces2. As a boundary condition, the pressure is typically ambient (pa) on the boundary of the
domain.
The gas film Reynolds equation is nonlinear; and hence exact solutions exist for a handful of
limiting conditions [2,3]. The left hand side of the equation is elliptic in character, while the
terms on the right hand side are known as the shear induced flow and squeeze film flow terms.
It is convenient to normalize Eq. (1) in terms of dimensionless variables and parameters. To
this end, let
x z h p
x ; z ; t ; H ; P (2)
L* L* h* pa
where L* is a characteristic length of the bearing surfaces and h* is a characteristic film thickness;
typically the minimum film thickness or the clearance (c) in a radial bearing. Above denotes an
excitation whirl frequency representative of unsteady or time transient effects. With the
definitions given, Reynolds equation is written in dimensionless form as
3 P 3 P
PH PH P H P H (3)
x x z z x
6 U L* 12 L*2
where and (4)
pa h*2 pa h*2
are known as the speed number and the frequency number, respectively [2]. Both parameters
represent the influence of fluid compressibility on the performance of the gas bearing. For and
small, typically < 1, the gas bearing operates as an incompressible fluid film bearing, as seen
next.
For steady state applications, i.e., the film thickness (h) and the pressure (p) do not vary with
time, and hence squeeze film effects are nil (Eq. (3) reduces to
2
As the film thickness (h) decreases into the nano meter scale, its size approaches that of the gas molecular free path
(= 60 nm for air under standard conditions); and hence, slipping effects become significant. Magnetic recording
and digital hard drive applications fall within this category. The Knudsen number (Kn=/h ) aids to distinguish the
flow regime of operation; Kn> 15 denotes molecular flow, 0.01< Kn< 15 represents slip flow, and Kn<0.01 gives a
continuum flow, as in the applications discussed herein [21].
3 P 3 P
PH PH P H (5)
x x z z x
For low speed numbers, <<1, an expansion of the dimensionless pressure as P 1 P ,

and substitution into Eq. (5) gives the simplified Reynolds equation [2]
3 P 3 P)
H H H (6)
x x z z x
which is formally identical to the Reynolds equation for an incompressible lubricant. Hence, its
solution can be easily sought analytically for either the short length or long journal bearings, or
using numerical schemes for finite length bearings of any geometry. Refer to Lecture Notes 4
and 7 for details on the analytical and numerical solution of Eq. (6).
Clearly, the assumed solution is strictly valid for 0 . Hence, the pressure field cannot be
much higher than ambient pressure (pa), and consequently, the bearing load capacity is also small
albeit proportional to the speed number, i.e. it increases linearly with surface speed (U), for
P 1 p pa h*
2
example. Note that the dimensionless pressure P as is typical in mineral oil
6 U L*
lubricated bearings. Analytical solutions to Eq. (5) are available for either the short length or
infinitely long cylindrical journal bearings, for example. Closed form solutions are also available
for simple one-dimensional slider or Rayleigh-step bearing geometries, see Refs. [2, 21] for
example.
On the other hand, for large speed numbers, >>1, Eq. (5) is written as
1 3 P 3 P
PH PH P H (7)
x x z z x
and, in the limit , the left hand side of the equation can be neglected to obtain3
h
P H 0 p pa b (8)
x h( x )
where hb is the film thickness at the boundary where the pressure is ambient. The limiting speed
solution, Eq. (8) above, shows that the pressure within the film is bounded and independent of
the surface speed U. This result is in opposition to that in incompressible fluid bearings where
3
The PH solution is an inner field which must be matched to an outer (boundary) solution satisfying the side
pressure condition (P=1) [2]. For the purposes of this review, the PH solution is adequate.
the generated hydrodynamic film pressure is proportional to the surface speed U. Since the
pressure has a definite limit, it also means that the bearing load capacity has also a limit, i.e. an
ultimate value. In this regard, gas film bearings do show a significant difference with
incompressible fluid (mineral oil lubricated) bearings whose (theoretical) load capacity increases
with surface speed.
Closed form solutions for finite speed numbers () are not readily available. Hence,
predictions of bearing film pressure and its force reaction supporting an applied load must rely
on numerical analysis. For low to moderate speed numbers, finite differences or finite element
methods applicable to elliptical differential equations are quite adequate. However, it is well
known that these numerical methods are inaccurate and numerically unstable for large speed
numbers () since the nature of the Reynolds equation evolves from a (second order) elliptical
form into a (first order) parabolic form. See Ref. [8] for a significant advance that resolves the
issue of pressure oscillations and numerical instability for large speed numbers ()
Simple slider gas bearings

Consider, as shown in Figure 3, three typical one-dimensional4 slider bearing configurations:
tapered, Rayleigh-step, and tapered-flat. In these configurations, the width (B) >> length (L), and
thus the hydrodynamic pressure does not vary along the z-axis. The bearing peak pressure and
maximum load capacity are a function of the ratio between the inlet film thickness (h1) and the
exit film thickness (h2) and the extent of the step or tapered length (L1). Integration of the
pressure field over the bearing surface gives the reaction load that opposes the applied load (W)
L W 1
W B
0
p pa dx or w = P 1 dx
0
(9)
B L pa
4
In this case, the bearing width (B) is much longer than its length (L); and hence the film pressure is only a function
of the coordinate (x). The analysis calls for P P .
z x
L
L=L1 + L2 L1 L2
taper Step or ridge

W W
load load
Gas lubricant
land
h1 y h(x) h1 inlet h(x)
h2 h2
x
U Moving surface U
(a) Tapered bearing (b) Rayleigh step bearing
L
L=L1 + L2 L1 L2
Width B>>L
taper
W
load
exit
flat
h1 h(x) h2
U Moving surface
(b) Taper-flat bearing
Fig. 3 Schematic view of (simple) one-dimensional slider bearings
For small speed numbers incompressible fluid, Table 2 shows closed-form expressions
for the peak hydrodynamic pressure and the bearing reaction force (load) as a function of the
h L
film thickness ratio 1 and the land to length ratio 2 in a Rayleigh step bearing
h2 L
[22]. Simple calculations show that the maximum load wmax requires of thickness ratios on the
order of two, i.e., =2.189 for a tapered bearing ( w =0.0267), and =1.843 for a step bearing
with w =0.034). Hence, the taper height difference or the step height (h1-h2) is of similar
size as the minimum film thickness (h2). In gas bearings, the smallness of the film thickness
required to support realistic loads also poses a difficulty in manufacturing mechanical features
such as ridges and steps. Furthermore, manufacturing processes must ensure a surface roughness
(RMS value) at least one order of magnitude (~1/10) lower than the minimum film thickness
[21].
Table 2. Closed form expressions for peak hydrodynamic pressure and load in one
dimensional tapered bearing and Rayleigh step bearing. Low speed operation

(incompressible fluid approximation) 6 U L pa h22 [22]
h1 h , L2 L
Tapered bearing Step bearing
2
Peak pressure
p pa h22 1 1
p
6U L 4 1 3
1
1
Load
W h22 1 1 1
w ln( ) 2
6 U B L2 1 2 1 2
1
3
1
An example of gas bearing performance follows. Predictions are obtained for a film thickness
h L
ratio 1 =2.2 and length ratio 2 =0.30 for the Rayleigh-step and tapered flat
h2 L
bearings. The parameters used are close to those delivering a maximum reaction force (load
capacity) in an incompressible lubricant slider bearing.
For increasing speed numbers (Figure 4 depicts the evolution of the hydrodynamic
pressure field versus the coordinate (x/L). Note that the peak pressure displaces towards the
minimum film location as increases. Most important is to realize that the peak pressure, see
Fig. 5, is not proportional to the speed, as is the case in incompressible lubricant bearings. The
largest peak pressure cannot exceed that of the limit at high speeds, i.e., pmax = h1/h2.
This feature may entice designers to implement or promote high aspect ratios for the film
thicknesses, However; too large inlet/exit film ratios (>>1) will cause the gas flow to
choke at the bearing exit plane. This is an undesirable operating condition that produces noise
and shock wave instabilities and could cause severe mechanical damage [2].
Figure 6 depicts the (dimensionless) load (w=W/BLpa) versus speed number () for the three
slider bearings. Note that at low speeds, typicallythe load capacity is proportional to the
speed number. However, as increases, the load reaches an asymptotic value. It is important to
note that knowledge derived from incompressible lubrication theory does not extend to gas
lubrication theory. For example, the selected Rayleigh-step configuration offers the largest load
at small speed numbers, i.e. in the incompressible fluid flow region. However, as evidenced in
the predictions, at the highest speed numbers (), the Rayleigh-step bearing produces the
smallest load albeit it shows the largest peak pressure. Note that, see Fig. 4, in the step bearing
the region of pressure generation is confined to the film land with small thickness (h2); while the
rest of the bearing is basically at ambient pressure.
2.4 2.4 =inf

Speed Number
=inf Speed Number
L2/L=0.3
10 10
2.2 2.2
=500 h2
film pressure (P/Pa)

20
=500
20 h2 h1
film pressure (P/Pa)
100 h1 100 U
2 U
=100 2 500
=100
500
infinite infinite
1.8 1.8 =20

=20
1.6 1.6
=10
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
=10
1 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
coordinate x/L coordinate x/L
2.4
Speed Number
=inf
10
maximum pressure (P/Pa)
2.2
20 L2/L=0.3
h2
=500
100 h1
2 500 U =100
infinite
=20
1.8
1.6
1.4
=10
1.2
1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
coordinate x/L
Fig. 4 Pressure field in one-dimensional slider bearings (tapered, Rayleigh step

and tapered-flat) for increasing speed numbers (=2.2, =0.3)
2.4
tapered bearing
maximum pressure (P/Pa)

Step bearing L2/L=0.3
2.2 tapered flat L2/L=0.3
2
L2/L=0.3
L2/L=0.3 h2
1.8 h2
h1
h1
U
U
1.6
1.4
1.2 h1
h2
1
1 10 100 1000
Speed number ()
Fig. 5 Maximum film pressure in one-dimensional slider gas bearings versus

speed number ( (= 2.2, = 0.3)
0.7
tapered bearing
Normalized load capacity [-]
step bearing L2/L=0.3

0.6 tapered flat L2/L=0.3
L2/L=0.3
h2
h1
0.5 U
0.4
0.3 L2/L=0.3
h2
h1
0.2 U
0.1 h1
h2
0
1 10 100 1000
Speed number ()
Fig. 6 Load capacity (w) in one-dimensional slider gas bearings versus speed
number ( (= 2.2, = 0.3)
Dynamic force coefficients for slider gas bearings

Fluid film bearings support both static and dynamic loads. Thus far, the analysis has focused
on the static load capacity. Consider a bearing that undergoes motions of small amplitude (y)
and frequency () about an equilibrium condition with film thickness ho(x). This equilibrium
film thickness renders a static reaction load balancing the external applied load (Wo). The
(dimensionless) film thickness adds the static and dynamic components as5
H H o H ei ; H y (10)
h*
and the film pressure equals the superposition of the equilibrium pressure (Po) and a perturbed,
dynamic or first-order pressure field (P1),
P Po P1 H ei (11)
Substitution of Eqs. (10-11) into Reynolds equation (3) gives, to first-order effects6,
H 3 Po2
Po H o o 0 (12)
x 2 x

H 3 Po P1
P1 H o o

i P1 H o

3H o2 Po
2
i P (13)
x 2 x x Po 2 x o

The bearing reaction force equals
1 1 i w w H ei
w 0 Po 1 dx H 0 P1 dx e o 1 (14)
The real and imaginary parts of w1 give raise to the bearing stiffness (K) and damping (C) force
coefficients, i.e.
B L pa 1
y 0
Z K i C P1 dx (15)
In dimensionless form, the stiffness and damping coefficients become

K C 1
Re P1 dx ; C Im P1 dx
1 1
K (16)
B L pa 0 3 0
12 B *
L
h*
h*
Unlike bearings lubricated with incompressible fluids, the stiffness (K) and damping (C)
force coefficients of gas bearings are strong functions of frequency [2, 4, 23]. In particular, for
high speeds and high frequency operation ( , ) C 0 ; i.e., damping is lost. Thus,
5
See Lund [23] for the original and most elegant description of the analytical perturbation method for calculation of
dynamic force coefficients in gas bearings.
6
Products of first order terms are neglected, i.e. P1 H2 ~ 0 for example.
gas bearings need to be used with great caution in applications that require mechanical energy
dissipation to ameliorate or reduce vibrations of the mechanical system.
h L
For the tapered-flat slider with 1 =2.2 and length ratio 2 =0.30, Figs. 7 and 8
h2 L
depict the stiffness K and damping C coefficients versus increasing frequency numbers ()
and various speed parameters () . Note two important dynamic force performance features: (a)
the bearing stiffness rises rapidly with frequency, a typical hardening effect of gas bearings, and
(b) damping decreases quickly, as expected7. It is also important to realize that, at low
frequencies ( the (nearly static) stiffness reaches a maximum at a certain speed (),
not increasing further with sliding speed. This is also expected since, as shown in Fig. 6, the load
capacity also reaches its ultimate limit for operation at
1.6
Sp #= 1 K
Stiffness coefficient
Sp #= 5 K
1.4 B L pa
Sp #=10 h*
SP #=20
1.2 Sp #=100
Sp #=500
1

0.8
0.6
0.4
L2/L=0.3
0.2 h1
h2
0
1 10 100 1000
Frequency number ()
Fig. 7 Stiffness coefficient for 1D tapered-flat gas bearing versus frequency

number ( and increasing speed numbers () (= 2.2, = 0.3)
7
Negative damping coefficients are not unusual in stepped gas bearings such as in spiral grooved or herringbone
grooved configurations, see Ref. [7].
3.00E-02
Sp #= 1
Damping coefficient
Sp #= 5
2.50E-02 Sp #=10
SP #=20
Sp #=100
2.00E-02
Sp #=500
1.50E-02
L2/L=0.3
h2
h1
1.00E-02

5.00E-03

0.00E+00
1 10 100 1000
Frequency number ()
Fig. 8 Damping coefficient for 1D tapered-flat gas bearing versus frequency

number ( and increasing speed numbers () (= 2.2, = 0.3)
Cylindrical gas journal bearings

Cylindrical hydrodynamic bearings support radial (or lateral) loads in rotating machinery.
Using gas as the lubricant in the fluid film bearing offers distinct advantages such as lesser
number of parts, avoidance of mineral oils8 with lesser contamination; and most importantly,
little drag friction (minute power losses) and the ability to operate at extreme conditions in
temperature, high or low, since gases are more chemically stable than liquids. On the other hand,
gas bearings suffer from chronic problems including difficulties in their design and analysis, cost
in manufacturing, and issues with installation and operation since bearing clearances are by
necessity rather small.
Figure 9 shows three typical radial bearings of increasing mechanical complexity. The
bearings portrayed are a cylindrical bearing (an idealized configuration), a multiple-pad bearing
with hydrostatic pressurization, and a flexure-pivot bearing with hydrostatic pressurization. The
external supply of pressure extends bearing life by aiding to promote an early lift off journal
speed and reducing hard landings or transient rubs that lead to early wear of surfaces. In
addition, hydrostatic pressurization enables the design and operation of gas bearings with
8
Recall that liquid lubricated bearings may show cavitation, i.e. the hydrodynamic pressure cannot be lower than the
liquid saturation pressure or that of the dissolved gases in the liquid. Gas bearings obviously do not show cavitation.
relatively large clearances, hence reducing their manufacturing costs and difficulties associated
with their installation [10].
Load
Orifice or capillary
bearing gas supply

Pad
gas film
Journal Speed Flexure web

support
(a) Cylindrical (b) Multiple-pad bearing with (c) Flexure pivot tilting pad
journal bearing holes for external bearing with holes for
pressurization external pressurization
Fig. 9 Cylindrical gas bearings some typical configurations
External pressurization through restrictor ports also creates a centering stiffness and thus
decreases the journal eccentricity needed for the bearing to support a load. A hybrid mode
operation (combining hydrostatic and hydrodynamic effects) ultimately results in reduced power
consumption. Disadvantages in gas bearings stem from two types of instabilities [2]: pneumatic
hammer controlled by the flow versus pressure lag in the pressurized gas feeding system, and
hydrodynamic instability, a self-excited motion characterized by sub synchronous (forward)
whirl motions. Proper design of a hybrid bearing system minimizes these two kinds of
instabilities9. Gas bearing design guidelines available since 1967 [24] dictate that, to avoid or
delay a pneumatic hammer instability, externally pressurized gas bearings have restrictors
impinging directly into the film lands, i.e. without any (deep) pockets or recesses.
The analysis herein does not discuss textured or etched bearings, i.e. ones with herringbone
grooves, for example. See Ref. [7] for the appropriate analyses and predictions. The textured
9
A self-excited instability means that a change in the equilibrium or initial state (position and/or velocity) of the
RBS leads to a permanent departure with increasing amplitudes of motion at a certain frequency, usually a natural
frequency. A self-excited instability does not rely on external forces (load condition), including mass imbalance, for
its manifestation.
bearings are still costly to manufacture, offer little improvements in load capacity, and have
severe limitations in terms of rotordynamic stability [12].
For certain static load dispositions, tilting pad bearings can eliminate the typically harmful
hydrodynamic instability by not generating cross-coupled stiffness coefficients. Critical
turbomachinery operating well above its critical speeds is customarily implemented with tilting
pad bearings. The multiplicity of parameters associated with a tilting pad bearing demands
complex analytical methods for predictions of force coefficients and stability calculations [10].
Incidentally, conventional (commercial) tilting pad bearings cannot be easily modified to add
external pressurization (holes through pivots and pads) without constraining severely the pads
motion and adding sealing issues.
The flexure pivot tilting pad bearing (FPTPB), see Fig. 9, offers a marked improvement
over the conventional design since its wire discharge machining (EDM) construction renders an
integral pads-bearing configuration, thus eliminating pivot wear and stack up of tolerances on
assembly [13]. Each pad connects to the bearing through a thin flexural web, which provides a
low rotational stiffness, thus ensuring small cross-coupled stiffness coefficients and avoiding
subsynchronous instabilities into very high speed operation.
Thin film flow analysis for cylindrical bearings [10]

Figure 10 depicts the ideal cylindrical bearing with relevant nomenclature. The journal
rotates at speed () and e X , eY denote the journal displacements within the bearing clearance
(c). The film thickness (h) around the bearing circumference is just
h c e X cos eY sin (17)
Figure 11 depicts a schematic view of a flexure pivot tilting pad bearing. For operation with
external pressurization, a feed orifice is machined through the thin web. A pad extends from l to
t (leading and trailing edge angular coordinates) with three degrees of freedom corresponding
to angular (tilt) rotation (p), radial (p) and transverse displacements (p). The gas film thickness
(h) in a pad is
h c p eX cos eY sin ( p rp )cos( p ) ( p R p )sin ( p ) (18a)
where cP and rp are the nominal machined clearance and pad preload at the offset P angle where
the web is attached.

W, Static load
rotor speed
Bearing center
Bearing
lubricant Y eY
Journal
eX Journal
center
e , journal
h, film thickness eccentricity
h = c+ eX cos eY sin
X , attitude angle
Fig. 10 Geometry of cylindrical gas bearing, coordinate system and

nomenclature

Pad center
with preload
Bearing
center
rP
l Y
e
rotor
Pad
with
flexural P
web
t X Film
Feed orifice Bearing thickness
line housing
Fig. 11 Geometry of a flexure pivot pad bearing, coordinate system and

nomenclature
Note that for a rigid pad with offset angle offset P and preload rp , the film thickness simplifies
to

h c rp cos p eX cos eY sin (18b)
In a radial bearing, Reynolds equation for the laminar flow of an ideal gas and under
isothermal conditions governs the generation of hydrodynamic pressure within the thin film
region, i.e., [2]
h3 p

12
p
2
p h p h m OR gT
t
(19)

OR denotes mass flow through a supply port at pressure pS . The pressure is ambient (pa)
where m
on the sides (z=0, L) of a bearing pad.
For an inherent restrictor, the flow rate is a function of the pressure ratio P por , the
pS
orifice diameter (d) and the local film thickness (h), i.e. from [24],
pS
m OR d h ( P ) (20)
gT
1 1
2 2 1
2 1
2 for P P choke
1 1 1
with
P 1 1
(21)
1
1 P
2 1 2

2 P for P P choke
1
where is the gas specific heats ratio. The orifice restriction is of inherent type10 whose flow is
strongly affected by the local film thickness.
An applied external static load (Wo) determines the journal center to displace eccentrically to
the equilibrium position e X , eY o with steady pressure field po and film thickness ho, and
corresponding pad deflections (P, P, P)o, p=1,Npad.
As shown schematically in Fig. 12, let the journal center whirl with frequency and small
amplitude motions e X , eY about the equilibrium position, The general motion of the journal
center and the bearing pads11 is expressed as,
10
Externally pressurized gas bearings should not be manufactured with pockets or recesses to avoid pneumatic
hammer effects, i.e. a self-excited instability characterized by sudden loss of damping even under static conditions
(low frequencies) [24 ].
11
For rigid cylindrical or multiple-pad bearings, the only displacements kept are those of the journal center
eX , eY ; hence, the analysis is much simpler and straightforward.
e X e Xo e X ei t , eY eYo eY ei t ,
p po p ei t , p po p ei t , p po p ei t p = 1,2,...,Npad (22)
with i 1 . The film thickness and hydrodynamic pressure are also given by the superposition
of equilibrium (zeroth order) and perturbed (first-order) fields, i.e.
h ho h ei t ; p po p ei t (23)
where
h eX cos eY sin P cos ( P ) P R P sin ( P ) (24)
and p p X e X pY eY p P p P p P (25)
Static load
W Y
o
eXo X
X
eo
eY
Y
Journal
center
clearance
circle
Fig. 12 Depiction of small amplitude journal motions about an equilibrium

position
Substitution of Eqs. (24) and (25) into the Reynolds equation leads to a nonlinear PDE for
the equilibrium pressure (po) and five linear PDEs for the first-order fields. For the equilibrium
pressure po,
1 p h3 p p h3 p
2
o o o o o o p h
12 z 12 z 2 o o
(26)
R
See Ref. [10 ] for details on the first-order equations.
The external load vector with components WX , WY acts on the journal. This load has a static
part Wo , 0 and dynamic components WX , WY ei t . The hydrodynamic pressure fields act
on the rotor surface to produce reaction forces FPX , FPY ,

FP cos
X p pa R d dz (27)
FPY sin
which balance the applied load, i.e.
WX Wo WX ei t FPX ,
p
(28)
WY WY ei t FPY
p
The film forces (with opposite sign) also act on each pad to induce a pitching moment (MP),
M P R [ F p X sin P F pY cos P ] (29)
Substitution of the pressure fields, zeroth and first order, into the pad force and moment
equations leads to
e X
FPX FPX o Z Z XY ZX Z X Z X eY
XX

FPY FPX o ZYY ZYX ZX Z X ZY P ei t
(30)

M P M Po Z X Z Y Z Z Z P
P
where Z { K i C }, X ,Y , , (31)
represent the gas film impedances acting on each pad, i.e. 25 stiffness (K) and damping (C)
coefficients. The equations of motion for a pad with angular (P), radial (P) and transverse (P)
displacements are:

P P P M P

M P P K PS P C P
S
P FP

P P P FP
p=1,.Npad (32)
I P 0 0 KS KS S
K CS CS S
C
where M P 0
mP
0 , K PS KS KS S
K S
, C P C
S
CS S
C (33)
0 0 mP KS S
K S
K CS S
C S
C

are matrices representing the pad inertias, and the structural web stiffness and viscous damping
coefficients, respectively.
Frequency reduced force coefficients for tilting pad bearings
Most analyses consider bearings as two degrees of freedom mechanical elements with lateral
forces reacting to radial displacements (x, y). Bearing rotordynamic force coefficients are, by
definition, changes in reaction forces due to small amplitude motions about an equilibrium
position. The linearized model for a gas bearing is
FX KXX KXY x CXX CXY x

= F = - K z - Cz
KYY y CYX CYY y
(34)
FY KYX
where F={FX, FY}T and z={x(t) ,y(t)}T are vectors of lateral reaction forces and displacements,
respectively. Figure 13 shows a schematic idealized representation of the force coefficients as
mechanical spring and viscous dashpot connections between the rotating journal and its bearing.
Recall that gas bearings due to the fluid compressibility will show force coefficients that are
strong functions of the excitation frequency. In tilting pad bearings, the complicated behavior is
further compounded by the pads radial and tilting motions.
KXX, CXX
KXY, CXY
KYY, CYY
Bearing or
seal

Journal
Y force, FY
KYX, CYX
X
force, FX
Fig. 13 Idealization of bearing force coefficients as viscous damping and stiffness

elements
Clearly, in a tilting pad bearing the number of degrees of freedom equals = 2 (x, y) + 3 x Npad.
Hence, for example, a five pad bearing has 17 degrees of freedom. Clearly, the overabundance of
degrees of freedom complicates the integration of bearing predictive tools into existing
rotordynamic analyses. Hence, it is customary to reduce the bearing force coefficients by
assuming that the pad motions are at the same frequency as the journal center lateral motions
(X,Y). The set of frequency reduced impedance coefficients is [10]
Z XX R Z XY R 1
R Z
Z K R i C R Z XY P Z a P Z p f Zb P (35)
P
YX R ZYYR
The matrix [Z]R contains the frequency reduced stiffness and damping coefficients for rotor
lateral motions (X,Y),
K XX R K XY R C XX R C XY R
K R K KYYR
; C R (36)
YX R CYX R CYYR
In the equation above,
Z XX Z XY Z X Z X Z X
Z Z YY Z Y Z Y Z Y
YX Z Z a 2 x 3
Z P Z X Z Y Z Z Z XY 2 x 2
Z b 3 x 2 Z c 3 x3 P (37a)
Z X Z Y Z Z Z
Z X Z Y Z Z Z P

and Z K i C Z M
P f
S
P
S
P c
2
P (37b)
is the composite (pad plus film) impedance matrix at frequency . For prediction of RBS
imbalance responses, synchronous force coefficients are calculated with . For eigenvalue
RBS analysis, i.e. prediction of damped natural frequencies and damping ratios, iterative
methods allow the determination of the coefficients at frequencies coinciding with the RBS
natural frequencies.
As emphasized earlier, gas bearings (rigid surfaces, tilting pads and foil types) have
frequency dependent force coefficients because of the fluid compressibility and the compliance
of the bearing par surfaces. The dependency on frequency cannot be overlooked!
Some considerations on the solution of Reynolds equation for gas films

Most often the numerical solution of Reynolds equations (equilibrium and its variations for
the dynamic first order pressure fields) is performed using algorithms suited for elliptical-type
differential equations. Note also that Reynolds equation for the generation of gas film pressure is
nonlinear due to the density varying with the pressure. In the case of a hydrostatic bearing
carrying a static load, the equation becomes linear, i.e., Eq. (19) reduces to
h3 2
p 0 (38)
24

This equation can be solved efficiently for (p2) as the independent variable with either central
finite differences or finite element methods.
However, the more general bearing case that includes both hydrodynamic and hydrostatic
effects remains nonlinear. In particular, one must realize that for large rotor speeds
and/or large whirl frequencies , the character of the Reynolds equation
changes from elliptical to parabolic. Recall, in dimensionless form, that the compressible fluid
film Reynolds equation is
3 P 3 P
PH PH P H P H (39)
z z
2 2
6 R 12 R
where and 1
(4)
pa c pa c
2
are the well-known speed and frequency numbers, respectively. At large speed numbers or
frequency numbers 1, 1 , the first order terms on the right hand side dominate the
generation of the hydrodynamic pressure in the gas film region. For low rotational speeds ()
and low frequencies, i.e., , 0 , the expansion P 1 P gives the linearized Reynolds
equation
3 P 3 P H H
H H (40)
z z 1
2
which is elliptical in character and formally identical to the Reynolds equation for an
incompressible fluid. The numerical solution of the linear equation above can be easily
performed using (central) finite differences, for example. More importantly, any predictive
computational tool predicting pressure fields for bearings lubricated with incompressible fluids
(oils) can also be used for gas films operating at low rotational speeds and/or low whirl
frequencies. See Lecture Notes 7 for details on the numerical solution of Eq. (40)
For operation with large speeds, the infinite speed equation for pressure generation
is
h
0 p h p pa a (41)
h
which12 establishes a limit on the generation of hydrodynamic pressure in a radial bearing.

Consequently, the bearing reaction load will also reach a definite limit. The ultimate load
capacity (wu) of the cylindrical gas bearing is, as , [3]
12
This solution is to be taken with caution since it does not satisfy all the boundary conditions, in particular at the
bearing axial edges, i.e., p pa at z L
2
1 1 1 2
1/ 2
W 1 2
cos
wu max
pa L D 2 0 1 cos
d
1 2 1/2
(42)
with the journal static eccentricity (=e/c) is along the direction of the applied load. Figure 14
shows that the ultimate load (wu) grows modestly with journal eccentricity. Most importantly, the
ultimate load is independent of the bearing clearance (c). The prospective user must realize that
gas bearings, unlike liquid lubricated journal bearings, are not able to support heavy loads, as
those typical in large rotating machinery13. The graph shows a recommended safe upper bound
for load capacity selection at wu=2 which renders an eccentricity () 0.60. Note that operation
at any finite rotational speed will produce a higher shaft eccentricity. Furthermore, safe operation
should avoid too large journal eccentricities that can provoke transient rubs and impacts that
could quickly destroy the rotor bearing system.
5.0
4.5 W/(p a LD)
4.0
load, w [-]
3.5
3.0 recommended limit
2.5 for safe operation
Load, W
2.0
1.5 Y

1.0
0.5
X
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
eccentricity (e/c )
Fig 14. Ultimate load capacity (W/paLD) of cylindrical journal bearing. Infinite speed
solution
13
Specific load capacities W
pa L D in oil bearings easily exceed 20 (bar) or more.
Incidentally, for operation with infinite frequency , and for simplicity not
accounting for shear flow effects 0 , the squeeze film pressure is just
h
0 p h p pa a (43)
h ,
Thus, the pressure is in-phase with the film thickness, i.e., solely determined by the
displacements e X , eY and not its time variations, i.e., not a function of the velocity at which the
film thickness changes. These operating conditions thus lead to a stiffening or hardening of the
gas film and absence of squeeze film damping effects. Examples showing this behavior were
introduced for one-dimensional slider bearings.
Importantly enough, high frequency motions of a squeeze gas film can generate a mean
pressure above ambient; and hence the ability to carry a static load (albeit small). See Ref. [2] for
details on this rectification phenomenon.
Example of performance for a plain cylindrical journal bearing

Table 3 shows the geometry and operating conditions of a cylindrical journal bearing
operating with air at ambient condition. The bearing application is typical for a miniature high
speed spindle.
Table 3. Geometry and operating conditions of cylindrical gas bearing
Journal diameter, D 0.0285 m L/D=1
Length, L 0.0285 m
Clearance, c 0.020 mm R/c=712
Lubricant: Air at 26.7 C
Ambient pressure, pa 1.01 bar
Viscosity, 0.0185 c-Poise
Density, 1.16 kg/m3
Specific load, paLD 82 N
Journal speed 10-100 krpm RPM /30
Load W 10 -100 N
To show the bearing performance, define the following parameters:
W N LD R ,
2
6 R L
w , S (44)
pa L D W c pa c 2
which represent the dimensionless load, Sommerfeld number and speed (or compressibility)
number, respectively. Above N is the rotational speed in rev/s. Note that in the design (and
selection) of a gas bearing the Sommerfeld number is (usually) known or serves to size the
bearing clearance14.
Figures 15 and 16 show the static (equilibrium) eccentricity () and attitude angle () versus
Sommerfeld number (S). This angle is between the load vector and the ensuing journal
eccentricity vector. Each graph includes the (unique) curve representative of the operation for the
journal bearing with an incompressible lubricant. With an incompressible lubricant, large
Sommerfeld numbers S , denoted by either a small load W, a high rotor speed , or large
lubricant viscosity , determine small operating journal eccentricities or nearly a centered
operation, i.e. 0 and (90). That is, the journal eccentricity vector e is nearly
orthogonal or perpendicular to the applied load vector W.
A cylindrical (plain) gas bearing does not offer a unique performance curve; albeit the
maximum journal eccentricity is bounded by the solution for the incompressible lubricant. The
specific loads in a gas bearing are, by necessity, rather small. That is, even w=1.50 (see Fig. 15a)
determines large operating eccentricities, in particular when the speed number () is also low.
As per the attitude angle ( , gas bearings show a smaller angle than with incompressible
lubricants, in particular at high speeds, as evidenced by the predictions in Fig. 17 depicting
versus the journal eccentricity.
14
Even to this day, turbomachinery is designed (and built) with little attention to the needs of bearings and adequate
lubrication for cooling and load support, static and dynamic. That is, thermo fluidic and aerodynamic considerations
dictate the speed and size of the rotating elements. Fixed diameter and length for a bearing and the lubricant to be
used, as well as the load to be supported, severely constrain the design space. The bearing designer has only the
bearing clearance (c) to play with.
= 1.17- 11.7
1.0 w=0.244
0.9 w=0.488
eccentricity (e/c)
0.8 w=1.000
0.7
w=1.500
0.6
incompressible
0.5 fluid
0.4 Load, W
0.3 Y
0.2
0.1
X
0.0
0.01 0.10 1.00
Sommerfeld #
Fig. 15(a) Journal eccentricity vs. Sommerfeld # for cylindrical gas journal bearing. Load
(w) increases
w =0.12 - 1.20
1.0 Sp#=11.7
0.9 Sp#=5.64
eccentricity (e/c)
0.8 Sp#=1.17
0.7
Sp#=1.87 sc
0.6
incompressible
0.5 fluid
0.4 Load, W
0.3 Y

0.2
0.1 X
0.0
0.01 0.10 1.00
Sommerfeld #
Fig. 15(b) Journal eccentricity vs. Sommerfeld # for cylindrical gas journal bearing.
Speed # () increases
w=0.244
= 1.17- 11.7
90 w=0.488

Load, W
80 w=1.00
Y
70
attitude angle (deg)

w=1.50
60 incompressible fluid
X
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00
Sommerfeld #
Fig. 16(a) Journal attitude angle vs. Sommerfeld # for cylindrical gas journal bearing.
Load (w) increases
Sp#=11.7
w=0.12 - 1.20
90 Sp#=5.64
Load, W
80 Sp#=1.17
Y
70 Sp#=1.87 sc
X
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.10 1.00
Sommerfeld #
Fig. 16(b) Journal attitude angle vs. Sommerfeld # for cylindrical gas journal bearing.
Speed # () increases
w=0.244

= 1.17- 11.7
90 w=0.488
80 w=1.00

70 w=1.50
50
40 Load, W
30 Y

20
increases
10
X
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
eccentricity (e/c )
Fig. 17 Journal attitude angle vs. eccentricity for cylindrical gas journal bearing. Load (w)
increases
Figure 18 shows the drag friction coefficient, f Torque , is indistinguishable between

cW
incompressible fluid and gas film journal bearings. This is so since the shear stress model is
viscous in character, i.e., not affected by fluid compressibility. The result does not mean a gas
bearing has the same drag torque (and power loss Torque ) as a mineral oil bearing. The
difference in viscosities causes the gas bearing to have a much lower drag coefficient; f is quite
small, two orders of magnitude at least.
f=Torque/ (cW ) = 1.17- 11.7

100.0
Load, W

drag friction
coefficient
10.0

X
w=0.244
1.0 w=0.488
w=1.00
w=1.50
0.1 incompressible fluid

0.01 0.10 1.00
Sommerfeld #
Fig. 18 Drag friction coefficient (f) vs. Sommerfeld number for cylindrical gas journal
bearing. Load (w) increases
Bearing force coefficients and dynamic stability
Figure 19 depicts the bearing stiffness and damping force coefficients evaluated at a
frequency coinciding with the journal rotational speed (). In the example, the dimensionless
load w=0.488 while the journal speed increases from 10 krpm to 100 krpm. Hence, the bearing
Speed number 1.17 to 11.7, and the Sommerfeld number S=0.032 to 0.318. The
3
DL
dimensionless force coefficients are K K , C C ; where C* . See Fig.
C* C* 4c
15(a) for the relation between the journal eccentricity and the Sommerfeld number. Note that the
direct stiffnesses (KXX, KYY) and damping (CXX, CYY) coefficients increase with the journal
eccentricity (). At low eccentricities 0 or high speeds , i.e., S 1 , then KXY=-
KYX and CXY=-CYX.

The stability of the rotor-bearing system is of interest. In general, this is an elaborate
procedure that requires the integration of the fluid film bearing reaction forces into a
rotordynamics model. Simple analyses consider a point mass (M) rigid rotor supported on a gas
bearing. The (linearized) equations of motion of the system about an equilibrium conditions
(W=F) are
x K
K XY x C XX C XY x FX e
M XX

y KYX KYY y CYX CYY y FYe
(45)
M
z + K z + C z = Fe
where z={x(t) ,y(t)}T is the vector of dynamic displacements of the journal center. Above,
Fe={FX,FY}T is the external dynamic force vector acting on the system, for example due to mass
imbalance. The stability of the system considers the homogeneous form of Eq. (45) and assumes
an initial state z i , z i away from the equilibrium condition (x=y=0).
K/K* 100.0
Kxx
Bearing stiffnesses
KXX
Kyy
KYY
10.0
Kxy
Kyx
Load, W
1.0
KYX Y
w =0.488
KXY X
0.1
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
eccentricity (e/c )
C/C* 10.0
CXX
Cxx
Bearing damping
CYY
Cyy
Cxy -CXY
1.0
Cyx
Load, W
w =0.488 CYX

X
0.1
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
eccentricity (e/c )
Fig. 19 Synchronous frequency stiffness and damping force coefficients vs. journal
eccentricity for cylindrical gas bearing. Load w=0.488
The solution of the homogeneous form of Eq. (45) is straightforward. Let z=zo est, hence Eq.
(45) turns into the algebraic form
K s 2 M + C s z o = 0 (46)

The roots of the characteristic equation K s M + C s

2
= 0 are s1,2 i . If the real
part < 0, then the rotor bearing system (RBS) is stable; that is, a system that returns its
equilibrium position, z 0 as t . If, on the other hand, > 0, then the RBS is unstable and z
grows without bound15. At the threshold of instability, when = 0, the system will perform self-
excited motions with whirl frequency i.e. z=zo et. Hence, Eq. (46) becomes
Z 2 M z o = 0 where Z K i C (47)
Solution of Eq. (47) is straightforward for incompressible fluid, rigid surface, journal
bearings since their force coefficients are frequency independent. The analysis leads to the
estimation of the system critical mass (MC) and the whirl frequency ratio (WFR) [25]
K XX CYY KYY C XX CYX K XY C XY KYX
M CS2 K eq
C XX CYY
K eq K XX K eq KYY K XY KYX
2
WFR 2 s (48)
C XX CYY C XY CYX
On the other hand, gas bearings have frequency dependent force coefficients, K() and C().
As an example, for the particular operating conditions noted, Fig. 20 depicts the dimensionless
stiffness (Kij)ij=X,Y and damping (Cij)ij=X,Y coefficients versus frequency ratio (where is
the rotational speed; denotes whirl frequency excitation synchronous with the rotational
speed. Note that the direct stiffnesses increase with whirl frequency, a typical hardening effect
due to fluid compressibility. On the other hand, the damping coefficients at high frequencies are
zero, Cij 0 as , also due to fluid compressibility. An iterative method is required to solve
for the characteristic Eq. (47), Z 2 M = 0 . Lund [24] restated Eq. (47) as Z = 2 M ,
and hence the instability threshold occurs at frequency s where the imaginary part of the
complex impedance Ze is zero while its real part must be greater than zero. The equivalent
impedance is
Z
2
1 2

Z e( ) Z XX ZYY 1 4 Z XX ZYY XY ZYX (49)
2
s

Im Z e 0 and Re Z e 0
s
(50)
The first statement above implies the effective damping is nil. For the data shown in Fig. 20,
the RBS critical mass is just Mc=0.968 kg and the WFR=0.48. That is, for operation with journal
15
It is a common misconception that the no bound statement implies system destruction. In actuality, the journal
will whirl with a large amplitude whirl orbit bounded by the bearing clearance. As the motion amplitude grows, the
bearing nonlinearity determines the size of the limit cycle. Of course, sustained operating under this condition is not
recommended.
rotation at 50 krpm (833 Hz), the RBS becomes unstable if is physical mass is greater than Mc. If
the actual system mass M > Mc, the RBS will begin self-excited motions at a frequency equaling
48% of the running speed, i.e. s=400 Hz. This whirl frequency is also the natural frequency of
the RBS for the noted operating condition. Czolczynski . For cylindrical gas bearings of various
types Czolczynski [4] lists tables of rotordynamic force coefficients, critical mass and whirl
ratios.
6 3
Kxx
Cxy
4 2 Cyx
Kyy
Cxx
2 1
Kxy
0 Cyy
0
Kyx
2 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 0.01 0.1 1 10
Frequency ratio Frequency ratio
Kxx Cxx
Kyy Cyy
-Kxy -Cxy
Kyx Cyx
(a) stiffness coefficients, K (b) damping coefficients, C
Fig. 19 Bearing stiffness and damping force coefficients versus whirl frequency ratio
(). Cylindrical gas bearing. Load w=0.488, speed = 50 krpm (5.843), S=0.158
(e/c=0.485)
Performance of a flexure pivot tilting pad hydrostatic gas bearing

Cylindrical hydrodynamic journal bearings are notoriously limited in its load capacity as well
as its dynamic stability. Hence, practice dictates the use of bearing configurations with multiple
pads with a mechanical preload and, if possible, implementing hydrostatic pressurization to aid
early rotor lift off as well as to reduce wear during start up and shut down events. As is well
known in the rotating machinery industry, tilting pad bearings are preferred for high speed
applications because of their excellent rotordynamic stability characteristics.
Figure 21 depicts a flexure pivot tilting pad hydrostatic bearing that has undergone
exhaustive investigation, analytical and experimental [13]. The test set up consists of a 190 mm
rotor, weighing 0.827 kg, supported on a pair of gas bearings. Table 4 lists the geometry and
operating conditions of the gas bearing installed for a load on pad condition. Note that the
bearing pads have no pockets or recesses to eliminate pneumatic hammer effects. The gas feed
orifices impinge directly on the rotor surface. In the application, the DN value= 2.9 million,
where D and N = (journal diameter in mm) (rotating speed in rpm). Note that the static load
(W) on each bearing is low, typical of a high speed spindle motor or a small turbocharger, for
example. Furthermore, compared to the journal bearing analyzed earlier, the current bearing
clearance is larger for easiness in installation.
Table 4. Geometry and operating conditions of four pad flexure pivot, tilting pad
hydrostatic bearing [13]
Journal diameter, D 0.0285 m L/D=1.165
Length, L 0.0332 m
Clearance, c 0.0375 mm R/c=380
Preload, r/c 0.0071 mm r/c=0.20
Pad arc length and pivot offset 72 60%
Orifice diameter 0.62 mm
Pad inertia and stiffness, IP and K 0.253 g-mm2 20 Nm/rad
Lubricant: Air at 26.7 C 1.01 bar Ambient pressure, pa
Viscosity, 0.0185 c-Poise
Density, 1.16 kg/m3
Supply pressure, pS 2.39, 3.77, 5.15 bar
Load, W along X 4.05 N w=W/paLD=0.042

Journal speed, 10-100 krpm RPM /30
Fig. 21 Dimensions of flexure pivot hydrostatic gas bearing (units: mm) [13]
Figure 22 shows the bearing static eccentricity (), attitude angle () and friction coefficient
(f) versus speed number (). The predictions are for speeds from 10 to 100 krpm,
with S=0.234-2.346, with hydrodynamic operation (no external pressurization) and
hydrostatic pressurization with pressure supplies, pS= 2.39, 3.77 and 5.15 bar (absolute) [20, 40,
60 psig]. External pressurization leads to small journal eccentricities () and attitude angle (),
with a minor reduction in friction coefficient (f). In particular, the highest supply pressure gives a
nearly centered journal operation. Figure 23 shows the flow rate (g/s) versus pressure and
comparisons with experimental data. The supplied flow is quite small (max. 14.7 LPM), easily
bleed off from a compressor in an actual RBS without significant penalty in its efficiency.
10 krpm 100 krpm 10 krpm 100 krpm

0.50 70
(e/c) 0.45 Ps/Pa=1
Ps/Pa=1
60 Ps/Pa=2.39
hydrodynamic Ps/Pa=2.39 Ps/Pa=3.77
0.40
eccentricity (e/c )
Attitude angle (deg)
Ps/Pa =1 Ps/Pa=3.77 Ps/Pa=5.15

0.35 Ps/Pa=5.15 50 hydrodynamic
Ps/Pa= 1
0.30 2.39 40
Load, W
supply pressure 2.39 supply pressure

0.25 Y
increases increases
30
0.20
3.77
0.15 3.77 20 X
0.10
10
0.05 Ps/Pa= 5.1
Ps/Pa= 5.15
0.00 0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Speed # () Speed # ()
100 krpm
Load, W 0.5 f=Torque/(cW)
25
hydrodynamic Ps/Pa=1
Y Ps/Pa=2.39 Ps/Pa=1
Ps/Pa =1
hydrodynamic
friction coefficient, f
0.4 Ps/Pa=3.77 20 Ps/Pa=2.39
Ps/Pa=5.15 Ps/Pa= 1
Ps/Pa=3.77
Ps/Pa
X
Ps/Pa=5.15
Ps/P =5.15
0.3 15
a= 5.1
e Y /c 5
speed
increases
0.2 10
Load, W
Ps/Pa =2.39
3.77
supply Y
0.1 5
pressure
increases 2.39
3.77
10 krpm X
0.0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
e X /c Speed # ()
static load
Fig. 22 Static performance of flexure pivot hydrostatic gas bearing versus speed ():
journal eccentricity (e/c), attitude angle (), journal center locus eY vs. eX, and friction
coefficient (f) vs. Load (w) fixed
0.30
g/s
0.25
Mass flow rate
0.20
experimental
data
0.15
Prediction
0.10
Prediction
Experimental (1)
0.05
Experimental (2)
0.00
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Supply pressure/Ambient pressure
Fig. 23 Predicted and measured flow rate for flexure pivot hydrostatic gas bearing versus
supply/ambient pressure ratio
Figure 24 depicts the (dimensionless) bearing force coefficients, synchronous speed reduced
(), versus speed for increasing magnitudes of external pressurization. Note that the cross-
coupled stiffnesses (KXY, KYX ) are a small fraction of the direct stiffnesses (KXX, KYY ), these
growing with the level of supply pressure. The direct damping coefficients (CXX, CYY ), on the
other hand, decrease rapidly with an increasing pressure supply and less steeply with journal
speed.
The drop in damping as speed increases is a typical effect of fluid compressibility. The sharp
reduction in damping with pressurization is problematic since, with the increase in bearing direct
stiffness, it will produce a significant reduction in system damping ratio. Nonetheless, the model
predicts the bearing will have a low whirl frequency ratio (WFR)~0.15, a significant
improvement over the conventional cylindrical journal bearing.

K XX, 10.0
Load, W
K XY, 1.4
9.0
K YY 8.0
Ps/Pa =5.14 Y XX - K YX 1.2
hydrodynamic
Ps/Pa =1
XY

YY -YX
7.0
1.0 Ps/Pa =2.39
X
6.0
Stiffness, K
Stiffness, K
3.77 0.8
5.0 supply pressure
supply pressure 3.77 increases
4.0 0.6
increases
3.0 Ps/Pa 0.4
2.0 =2.39 Ps/Pa =5.14
hydrodynamic 0.2
1.0
Ps/Pa =1
0.0 0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0

C XX, 3.0
hydrodynamic C YX, 1.0
YX
Ps/Pa Ps/Pa =1
C YY 2.5 = 2.39 XX - C XY 0.8
hydrodynamic -XY
YY Ps/Pa =1
2.0
supply pressure 0.6
Damping, C
Damping, C
increases
1.5 Ps/Pa =2.39
0.4
1.0
3.77
3.77 Ps/Pa =5.14 supply
0.2
0.5 pressure
increases
Ps/Pa =5.14
0.0 0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Fig. 24 Stiffness (K) and damping (C) coefficients of flexure pivot hydrostatic gas bearing
versus speed (). Synchronous speed force coefficients. Load (w) fixed
Figure 25 shows the predicted and measured synchronous rotor imbalance response for
operation with 2.36 bar and 5.08 bar (ab) feed pressure into the bearings. Note the effect of
supply pressure on increasing the system critical speed as well as in reducing the damping ratio.
See Refs. [26,27] for further details on the experimental investigation which includes tests with
external loads to determine the reliability of the gas bearings under intermittent shocks and
periodic forces simulating maneuver loads and uneven road conditions. Furthermore, the test
data in the figure suggests the possibility of controlling the supply pressure to move critical
speeds and avoid the passage through resonances. Ref. [13] discusses and implements a simple
and inexpensive control strategy that demonstrated remarkable results. In brief, external
pressurization is only needed at low rotor speeds, while at high rotor speeds it can be safely
dispensed with.
20
LV 2.36 bar-Test
5.08 bar-Test 2.36 bar-Prediction
LH 5.08 bar-Test
15
Amplitude [um, pk-pk]
rotor left side 5.08 bar-Prediction
2.36 bar-Test
10 5.08 bar-Prediction
2.36 bar-Prediction
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
Rotor Speed [rpm]
Fig. 25 Comparison of predicted and measured imbalance response of rotor

supported on flexure pivot hydrostatic gas bearings. Operation with pS= 2.36 bar
and 5.08 bar (abs) supply pressure [26].
An introduction to gas foil bearings

Oil-free systems have a reduced part count, footprint and weight and are environmentally
friendly with demonstrated savings in long-interval maintenance expenses. Until recently, gas
bearings were constructed with hard or rigid surfaces to reduce friction during start up or shut
down events. However, bearing types such as herringbone groove bearings require tight
clearances (film thicknesses), and with their hard surfaces offer few advantages for use in high
speed MTM.
Gas foil bearings (GFBs) have emerged as a most efficient alternative for load support in
high speed machinery. These bearings are compliant surface hydrodynamic bearings using
ambient air as the working fluid media. Recall Fig. 1 showing two typical GFB configurations,
one is a multiple overleaf bearing and the other is a corrugated bump bearing. Both bearing types
are used in commercial rotating machinery, yet the open literature presents more details on
bump-GFBs, along with measurements and analyses. The corrugated bump foil bearing is
constructed from one or more layers of corrugated thin metal strips and a top foil. In operation, a
minute gas film wedge develops between the spinning rotor and top foil. The bump-strip layers
are an elastic support with engineered stiffness and damping characteristics [5,18].
GFBs offer distinct advantages over rolling elements bearings including no DN16 value limit,
reliable high temperature operation, and large tolerance to debris and rotor motions, including
temporary rubbing and misalignment, Current commercial applications include auxiliary power
units, cryogenic turbo expanders and micro gas turbines. Envisioned or under development
applications include automotive turbocharger and aircraft gas turbine engines for regional jets
and helicopter rotorcraft systems [5]. Alas, GFBs have demerits of excessive power losses and
wear of protective coatings during rotor startup and shutdown events. In addition, expensive
developmental costs and, until recently, inadequate predictive tools limited the widespread
deployment of GFBs into mid size gas turbines. In particular, at high temperature conditions,
reliable operation of GFB supported rotor systems depends on adequate engineered thermal
management and proven solid lubricants (coatings).
Successful implementation of GFBs in commercial rotating machinery involves a two-tier
effort; that of developing bearing structural components and solid lubricant coatings to increase
the bearing load capacity while reducing friction, and that of developing accurate performance
prediction models anchored to dependable (non commercial) test data. Chen et al. [18] and
DellaCorte et al. [5,28] publicize details on the design and construction of first generation foil
bearings, radial and thrust types, aiming towards their wide adoption in industry.
16
DN, the product of journal diameter (mm) times rotational speed [RPM], is a limiting factor for operation of
rolling element bearings (DN= 2 Million in specialized bearings with ceramic balls, for example)
Performance of a simple one dimensional foil slider bearing
Figure 26 depicts a one dimensional tapered foil (bump strip) bearing. The dimensionless
film thickness (H) and Reynolds equation for the hydrodynamic pressure (P) are:
H H R ( x ) S ( P 1) ;

H 3 P P P H P H 0 (51)
x
W (Load)
U
hi ho
LT
L
x
Fig. 26 Schematic view of tapered foil-bump strip bearing (width B)
where x x , t , P p , H h 6 U 2L , 12 2 L , S s pa
2
(52)
L pa h* pa h* pa h* h*
1
hR is the film thickness for a rigid surface bearing and s is the foil support
kb 1 i
compliance or flexibility coefficient17, also accounting for material damping with a loss factor
(). In most applications reported in the literature, the parameter (S) does not exceed a magnitude
equal to 5. Indeed, typical bump foil stiffnesses range from kB = 5 to 100 (MN/m2)/mm [18], and
thus, operation at ambient conditions (pa= 1 bar) with a film thickness of 5 micrometer leads to S
varying from 0.2 to 4 for fixed end and free end bump-foil strips, respectively. Compliance (S)
magnitudes below 0.1 imply an almost rigid surface bearing; while S> 5 correspond to a bearing
too soft to support any practical load.
17
The description is rather simplistic, it neglects the elastic forces of the top foil and assumes that only the local
pressure deforms a bump. Realistic physical models are available, see Ref. [16] for example.
The most difficult issue in foil bearing design relates to the estimation of the actual film
thickness separating the foil from the moving surface. The operating thickness is unknown since
all foil bearings have zero clearance at the stationary condition, i.e. without surface speed. The
issue is resolved in a simple and ingenious manner.
The applied (dimensionless) load on the bearing is w W , where B is the bearing width.
pa L B
At static conditions, the surface speed is U=0 0 , and the bearing supports the load through
the elastic deformation of the bump foil strip along the length (L-LT). The contact pressure is
W w
simply pc ; Pc , which determines the largest deflection on the foil bump
L LT B 1 lT
structure, U 0 pc pa / kb . Clearly, () should be within the elastic region of the elastic sub-
structure (bump strip)18. Note that this simple condition dictates the choice of the foil stiffness
within acceptable engineering practice.
Now consider the bearing operates at an exceedingly large surface speed, U .
This condition reduces Reynolds Eq. (51) to the (PH) limit, i.e.

P H 0 P H 1 H i Po H R S Po 1 Po H o (53)
x
where (Po, Ho) denotes the gas pressure and film thickness in the downstream section of the foil,
and Hi=HT+Ho is the film thickness at the inlet section. This last equation is easily solved with
1
the load constraint w ( p 1) dx , to determine the film thickness Ho. Note that this ultimate film
0
thickness is the largest ever to occur. Thus, actual operating conditions (with finite speed) must
render a smaller film thickness.
Figure 27 shows the foil bearing ultimate load (w) decreases rapidly as the bearing
compliance (S) increases for two inlet film thickness (Hi=3, 6)19. Figure 28 displays the bump
strip elastic deflection, and contact and lift pressures versus the bearing compliance (S). Note that
for operation at infinite speed the foil elastic deflection and lift pressure are smaller than for
the contact condition since the hydrodynamic pressure distributes more evenly over the whole
18
Other constraints also apply. Most notably those related to tip clearances on rotating wheels and on inter-stage
seals within a typical turbomachinery.
19
Even a rigid bearing (S=0) does have an ultimate (speed limited) load capacity due to the gas compressibility. See
prior sections.
bearing surface (see Fig. 29). At U=0, the contact zone conforms to the non-tapered portion of
the bearing.
10
wultimate
Load (dimensionless)
Hi=6
Hi=3
0.1
0.1 1 10
Compliance coefficient (S)
foil Hi=3
contact L1
foil Hi=6 0.5
contact L
Fig. 27 Ultimate load capacity versus compliance (S) for two inlet films. Tapered length
L1/L=0.5
The results demonstrate the ultimate load capacity of a (simple) compliant gas bearing with
non-zero film thickness. Unlike incompressible fluid (liquid) bearings, gas bearings do have a
limited load capacity solely determined by the bearing geometry, the inlet and outlet film
thicknesses, and the compliance parameter. The results in Figs. 27 and 28 are then used to
estimate the operating film thickness since for a desired S parameter, and given the bump strip
stiffness, then h* pa .
kb S
10 6
(pmax/pa)
Elastic deformation (/h*)
Hi=6
5
Hi=6
elastic deformation (d/h*)
Max pressure/Pamb
Max pressure
4 contact
1
3 with film
Hi=3 2
Hi=3
0.1 1
0.1 1 10 0.1 1 10
Compliance coefficient (S) Compliance coefficient (S)
foil Hi=3 foil Hi=3
L1 L1
contact 0.5 contact 0.5
foil Hi=6 L foil Hi=6 L
contact contact
Foil deformation (contact & max lift) Lift and Contact pressures vs. S
Fig. 28 Foil elastic deformation and maximum (contact and lift) pressures versus
compliance parameter (S) for two inlet film conditions
Figure 29 shows the predicted pressure field on the bearing surface for rigid (S=0) and
compliant (S=3) surface bearings at a finite speed condition (=50). The figure also contains the
contact pressure for operation without a hydrodynamic film (=0). The predicted gas pressures
correspond to numerical solutions of Eq. (51) using a fast, accurate and stable algorithm for thin
gas films [8]. The predictions correspond to a load w=0.25, just 20 % below the ultimate load for
the compliant surface bearing. Note the more uniform pressure distribution for the foil gas
bearing on the non-tapered portion of the bump foil strip layer.
Figure 30 displays the predictions of load capacity (w) and minimum film thickness versus
speed number () for a rigid (S=0) and compliant surface bearings (S=3, 6). At low speeds, the
load is nearly proportional to surface speed, though it soon levels off and reaches the ultimate20
load capacity for >100. Note that the predictions based on the simple design formulae, Figs. 27
and 28, match perfectly those of the numerical predictions at high speed numbers.
20
Some foil bearing providers erroneously claim ever increasing load capacities as (surface speed) increases. The
claim has no scientific grounds and merely reflects the commercial aspect of an emerging technology.
1.6
(P/Pa)
a) contact
(p/p
Dim pressure
Pressure
1.4
Rigid surface
1.2
Compliant surface
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x/L
Rigid W 0.25
Compliant S=3 hi 3 HT 2
Contact
50
Fig. 29 Pressure field on bearing surface for speed number =50. Rigid and compliant
(S=3) surface bearings with Hi =3, w=0.25, and contact pressure at =0
10
10
Minimum film thickness

Dimensionless Load [-] and film thickness [h]
1
S=0
1 rigid
Load, w S=3
S=6
0.10.1
W S=0
Hi=3 W S=3
W S=6
LT/L=0.5
Hmin, S=3
Hmin, S=6
0.0010.01
1 10 100 1000
1 10 Speed number 100 1000
Speed number
Fig. 30 Load capacity (w) and minimum film thickness versus speed number () for rigid
(S=0) and compliant surface bearings (S=3, 6). Hi =3.
Dynamic force coefficients representative of small amplitude motions about an equilibrium
condition are of importance to determine the dynamic forced response and stability of a
mechanical system. Figure 31 depicts the predicted (dimensionless) stiffness and damping
coefficients for rigid (S=0) and compliant surface (S=3) bearings at =50, with film inlet Hi=3
and load w=0.25. The force coefficients are displayed as functions of increasing frequency
numbers (), i.e. as the excitation frequency grows, and two loss factors, = 0 and 1,
representative of low and high values of material damping within a foil bump strip, respectively.
0.6 0.002
S=3, =1
=1 =1
Stiffness [-]
S=3, S=3,=1
Damping [-]
coefficient
coefficient
S=3,
S=3, =0
Compliant S=3, =0 rigid
0.4
Dimensionless
Dimensionless
rigid 0.001
S=3, =0
S=3, =0
Damping
Stiffness
0.2
0 3
1 10 100 1 10 0 3
1 10 100 1 10
Frequency Number
Frequency number Frequency number
Fig. 31. Stiffness and damping force coefficients for rigid and compliant surface bearings
versus frequency number (). Effect of loss factor () on dynamic force coefficients. Hi=3,
=50, w=0.25
The stiffness coefficient (KB) shows a typical hardening effect as the frequency of excitation
grows, while the damping coefficient (CB) decreases rapidly. However, the compliant surface
bearing with a large loss factor (=1) has more damping capability than the rigid surface bearing.
The results demonstrate that foil bearings may be tuned (designed) to give desirable dynamic
force characteristics to control the placement of critical speeds and enhanced damping in
operating regions of interest.
Ref. [14] shows a similar (simple) analysis giving the limit or ultimate load capacity of radial
foil bearings.
Considerations on foil bearings for oil-free turbomachinery

Until recently GFB design was largely empirical, each foil bearing being a custom piece of
hardware, with resulting variability even in identical units, and limited scalability. At present,
the advances in radial GFB technology (design, construction and predictability) permit OEMs
and end users to implement radial GFBs for deployment into novel MTM or to upgrade and
improve outdated rotating machinery. That is, there is enough published know-how on materials,
guidelines for design and construction of radial GFBS including engineered coatings for high
temperature applications, a reliable data base of GFB forced performance (static and dynamic),
and computational tools benchmarked to test data.
Research on radial GFBs for lateral support of oil-free rotating machinery has steadily
progressed with comprehensive analyses accounting for most relevant physical aspects to
accurately predict GFB static and dynamic load performance, power loss, and the management
of thermal energy in high temperature applications. Empirical research has gone beyond showing
a few instances of acceptable mechanical performance, to demonstrate GFB multiple-cycle
repeatable performance in spite of persistent large amplitude whirl motions at low frequencies,
typically coinciding with the system natural frequencies. Many developmental efforts have
attempted to fix or suppress these undesirable motions. One could hastily attribute the sub
harmonic whirl motions to a typical rotordynamic instability induced by hydrodynamic effects of
the gas film, i.e. generation of too large cross-coupled stiffness coefficients that destabilize the
rotor-bearing system. However, as learned from the measurements [29], rotor imbalance triggers
and exacerbates the severity of subsynchronous motions. The subsynchronous behavior is a
forced nonlinearity due to the foil bearing strong nonlinear (hardening) stiffness characteristics,
as is demonstrated in Ref. [30]. The predictions and measurements validate the simple FB model,
i.e. a minute gas film with effective infinite stiffness, with applicability to large amplitude
rotordynamic motions.
Challenges for gas FBs include intermittent contact and wear at startup and shut down, and
potential for large amplitude rotor whirl at high speeds. Subsynchronous motions are common in
FBs due to their strong structural hardening nonlinearity. Incidentally, the ultimate load capacity
of a gas foil bearing depends mainly on its support structure. Hence, engineers must pay close
attention to the bearing structural components (design, fabrication and assembly).
Luis San Andrs, Mast-Childs Professor

Texas A&M University, Turbomachinery Laboratory
First draft: August 2010, Revision: February 2012
References
[1] Gross W.A., 1962, Gas Film Lubrication, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY.
[2] Pan, C.H.T., 1980, Gas Bearings, Tribology: Friction, Lubrication and Wear, Edited by
A.Z. Szeri, Hemisphere Pub. Corp., Wa
[3] Hamrock, B.J., 1994, Fundamentals of Fluid Film Lubrication, Chaps. 16-17, McGraw-
Hill, Inc., NY.
[4] Czolczynski, K., 1999, Rotordynamics of Gas-Lubricated Journal Bearing Systems,
Springer Verlag, Inc., NY.
[5] DellaCorte, C., Radil, K. C., Bruckner, R. J., and Howard, S. A., 2008, Design,
Fabrication, and Performance of Open Source Generation I and II Compliant
Hydrodynamic Gas Foil Bearings, STLE Tribol. Trans., 51, pp. 254-264
[6] Belforte, G., Raparelli, T., Viktorov, V., Trivella, A., and Colombo, F., 2006, An
experimental study of high-speed rotor supported by air bearings: test rig and first
experimental results, Tribology International, Vol. 39, pp. 839-845
[7] Zirkelback, N., and L. San Andrs, 1999, "Effect of Frequency Excitation on the Force
Coefficients of Spiral Groove Thrust Bearings and Face Gas Seals, ASME Journal of
Tribology, Vol. 121, 4, pp. 853-863.
[8] Faria, M., and L. San Andrs, 2000, On the Numerical Modeling of High Speed
Hydrodynamic Gas Bearings, ASME Journal of Tribology, Vol. 122, 1, pp. 124-130
[9] San Andrs, L., and D. Wilde, 2001, Finite Element Analysis of Gas Bearings for Oil-
Free Turbomachinery, Revue Europenne des Elments Finis, Vol. 10 (6/7), pp. 769-790
[10] San Andrs, L., 2006, Hybrid Flexure Pivot-Tilting Pad Gas Bearings: Analysis and
Experimental Validation, ASME Journal of Tribology, 128, pp. 551-558.
[11] Wilde, D.A., and San Andrs, L., 2006, Experimental Response of Simple Gas Hybrid
Bearings for Oil-Free Turbomachinery, ASME Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines
and Power, 128, pp. 626-633
[12] Zhu, X., and L. San Andrs, 2005, Experimental Response of a Rotor Supported on
Rayleigh Step Gas Bearings, ASME Paper GT 2005-68296
[13] San Andrs, L., and Ryu, K., 2008, Hybrid Gas Bearings with Controlled Supply
Pressure to Eliminate Rotor Vibrations while Crossing System Critical Speeds, ASME
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 130(6), pp. 062505-1-10
[14] Kim, T.H., and L. San Andrs, 2006, Limits for High Speed Operation of Gas Foil
Bearings, ASME Journal of Tribology, 128, pp. 670-673.
[15] Kim, T.H., and L. San Andrs, 2008, Heavily Loaded Gas Foil Bearings: a Model
Anchored to Test Data, ASME Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol.
130(1), pp. 012504
[16] San Andrs, L., and Kim, T.H., 2009, Analysis of Gas Foil Bearings Integrating FE Top
Foil Models, Tribology International, 42(2009), pp. 111-120
[17] Carnes, C., 2004, Hard-driving Lubrication, Tribology & Lubrication Technology,
Nov., pp. 32-38
[18] Chen, H. M., Howarth, R. Geren, B., Theilacker, J. C., and Soyars, W. M., 2000,
Application of Foil Bearings to Helium Turbocompressor, Proc. 30th Turbomachinery
Symposium, Turbomachinery Laboratory, Texas A&M University, Houston, TX, pp.
103-113.
[19] San Andrs, L., Chirathadam, T., Ryu, K., and Kim, T.H., 2010, Measurements of Drag
Torque, Lift-Off Journal Speed and Temperature in a Metal Mesh Foil Bearing, ASME J.
Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 132 (in print)
[20 Childs, D., 1993, Turbomachinery Rotordynamics, Chap.5, Rotordynamic Models for
Annular Gas Seals, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., NY
[21] Szeri, A. Z., 1998, Fluid Film Bearings: Theory & Design, Chap. 11, Cambridge
University Press, UK.
[22] San Andrs, L., 2006, Modern Lubrication Theory, One Dimensional Slider Bearing,
Rayleigh Step Bearing, and Circular Plate Squeeze Film Damper, Lecture Notes No. 2,
Open source: http://rotorlab.tamu.edu/me626
[23] Lund, J. W., 1968, Calculation of Stiffness and Damping Properties of Gas Bearings,
ASME J. Lubr. Tech., 90, pp. 793-803.
[24] Lund, J. W., 1967, A Theoretical Analysis of Whirl Instability and Pneumatic Hammer
for a Rigid Rotor in Pressurized Gas Journal Bearings, ASME J. Lubr. Tech., 89, pp.
154-163.
[25] Lund, J.W., 1965, The Stability of an Elastic Rotor in Journal Bearings with Flexible
Damped Supports, ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics, p. 911-920.
[26] San Andrs, L., and Ryu, K., 2008, Hybrid Gas Bearings with Controlled Supply
Pressure to Eliminate Rotor Vibrations while Crossing System Critical Speeds, ASME J.
Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 130(6), pp. 062505 (1-10)
[27] San Andrs, L., Niu, Y., and Ryu, K, Dynamic Response of a Rotor-Hybrid Gas Bearing
System Due To Base Induced Periodic Motions, ASME paper GT2010-22277
[28] Dykas, B., Bruckner, R., DellaCorte, C., Edmonds, B., Prahl, J., 2009, Design,
Fabrication, and Performance of Foil Gas Thrust Bearings for Microturbomachinery
Applications, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 131, p. 012301
[29] San Andrs, L., Rubio, D., and Kim, T.H, 2007, Rotordynamic Performance of a Rotor
Supported on Bump Type Foil Gas Bearings: Experiments and Predictions, ASME J.
Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 129, pp. 850857
[30] San Andrs, L., and Kim, T.H., 2008, Forced Nonlinear Response of Gas Foil Bearing
Supported Rotors, Tribology International, 41(8), pp. 704-715
Nomenclature
B Bearing width [m]
c Radial clearance in journal bearing [m]
cP Machined clearance in a tilting pad bearing [m]
C Damping coefficients [Ns/m]; X,Y. C C/C*
3
DL
C* . Factor for damping coefficient in radial bearing
4c
C
C Dimensionless damping coefficient (slider bearing)
3

12 B
L*

h*
d Orifice diameter in externally pressurized bearing [m]
D Journal or rotor diameter [m]
eX, eY Components of journal eccentricity vector [m]. =e/c
FX, FY Components of bearing reaction force [N].
f Torque/cW. Drag friction coefficient in journal bearing
h Film thickness [m].
H h/h*, h/c. Dimensionless film thickness
K Damping coefficients [Ns/m]; X,Y. K K/K*
K* C*. Factor for stiffness coefficient in radial bearing
K
K Dimensionless stiffness coefficient (slider bearing)
B L pa
h*
kb Foil bearing stiffness/unit area [N/m/m2]
Kn (/h). Knudsen number. > 15 for continuum flow.
L Length of bearing [m]
MP Pad moment [Nm]
m OR Orifice mass flow rate [kg/s]
M Rigid rotor mass [kg]
Mc Critical mass of rigid rotor-bearing system [kg]
N Rotational speed [rev/s]
npe Number of nodes in finite element
p Pressure [Pa]. P=p/pa
pa, pS Ambient and supply pressures [Pa]
p0, p1 Zeroth and first order pressure fields. [Pa], [Pa/m]
q Flow normal to an element
rP Machined preload in a multiple pad and tilting pad bearings [m]
R D. Journal radius
Re Uh/Shear flow Reynolds number
g Gas constant [J/kgK]
2
S Sommerfeld number. N LD R
S
W c
S (s pa/h*). Foil bearing compliance number
1
s Foil bearing compliance parameter [m3/N]
kb 1 i
s s i . Eigenvalue of characteristic equation
t Time [s]
T Temperature [K]
Torque Drag torque [Nm]
U Surface speed [m/s]. R in journal bearing
W Load [N]. w= W/(BLpa), W/(LDpa)
WX, WY Components of load acting on bearing [N].
WFR (). Whirl frequency ratio
X,Y Inertial coordinate system for journal bearing analysis
x, y, z Coordinate system in plane of bearing
z {x(t) ,y(t)}T . Vector of journal center dynamic displacements [m]

Z Complex impedance [N/m]; Z = (K + i C), i 1
y Small amplitude motion [m]

eX, eY Small amplitude journal center motions [m]
(h1/h2). Ratio of inlet to outlet film thickness in slider bearing

(L2/L). Ratio of lengths in Rayleigh step and tapered-flat slider bearings
Material loss coefficient in foil bearing
Gas specific heats ratio
e Element boundary
ngle between load vector and journal eccentricity vector [deg]
t. Dimensionless time
Coordinates for pad tilt, radial and transverse displacements
(e/c). Journal eccentricity ratio
x/R. Circumferential coordinate fixed to stationary
P Angular location of pad pivot
Gas molecular free path [m]
2
6 U L* 6 R
Speed number. ,
pa h*2 pa c
Gas viscosity [Pas]
Gas density [kg/m3]
12 L*2
Frequency number.
pa h*2 1
2
i
n pe
1
Shape functions within the finite element
Frequency of dynamic motions [rad/s]
Whirl frequency of unstable dynamic motions [rad/s]
(2N). Rotor or journal speed [rad/s]
e Finite element sub-domain
Subscripts
o Zeroth-order
1 First-order
* Characteristic value
P Pad
u Ultimate limit at
Acronyms
FPTPB Flexure pivot tilting pad bearing
GFB Gas foil bearing
RBS Rotor-bearing system
Appendix Numerical solution of Reynolds equation for gas films
There are numerous methods for the numerical solution of the gas film Reynolds equation,
including finite differences, finite elements, control-volume methods and boundary element
methods. Prior to 1990, finite difference methods were favored. However, into the present day,
the finite element method has gained in popularity because of its ability to seamlessly tackle
complex configurations, including textured (spiral groove) geometries, and including supply
ports. However, recall that the compressible fluid Reynolds equation is non linear, hence
requiring of iterative methods Newton-Raphson like- to achieve convergence to a unique
solution. Moreover, the character of the equation changes from elliptical to hyperbolic as the
speed or frequency (numbers) increase. As the literature extensively reports, predictions under
these conditions using central difference schemes of finite elements with linear interpolation
functions show numerical oscillations and eventually numerical instability.
Fortunately, nowadays there is a method that avoids such difficulties by using interpolation
or shape (analytical) functions that seamlessly transition from elliptic to parabolic flow
conditions as the speed increases. See Ref. [8] for this important development that allows
prediction of gas film static and dynamic force characteristics for arbitrarily high-speed gas
bearing numbers.
The flow domain in a pad is divided into four-noded rectangular finite elements

e : l xe
1 e L / Lx
,l y
where N x , N y is the global number of elements in the circumferential
Nx Ny
and axial directions, respectively. Within an element the zeroth- and first-order pressures are
functions of the nodal pressures and shape functions { i }i 1..4 , i.e.,

e
4 4
P0e ie P0ei , Pe ie Pei ; X ,Y (A.1)
i 1 i 1
These equations are substituted into the Reynolds equation, which is further multiplied by an
identical set of weight functions and integrated over an element domain. The Petrov-Galerkin
method leads to the following set of zeroth- and first-order finite element equations (not
including a source of external pressurization)
k eji Poie rje q ej ;
ke ji Pei rej qe j ; i , j 1..4; X ,Y (A.2)
where k eji Po
e

H o3 ie, x ej , x ie, z ej , z H o ie ej , x d e ,

e
r je 0 ; q ej ej me d e (A.3)
e
and
P0e H 03 ie, x ej , x ie, y ej , y ie H 03 Po , x ej , x Po , y ej , y

k e
ji .d e

e H
0 i
e
e
j,x i H
0 i
e
e
j

r ej 3 P0e H 02 P0, x ej , x P0, y ej , y Po ej , x i P0 ej .d e (A.4)

e
qe j ej m ed e
e
ke represents the element fluidity matrix, and re and qe denote the vectors of shear and squeeze
flows, and nodal mass fluxes ( m e ) through the element boundary e , respectively.
1 e e 1 e and natural coordinates

Within a finite element e : x e lx , y ly ,
2 2
, 1,1 , the advanced shape functions are [8]
e e
e e

1e
1
1 ee e e ;
2e
1
1 e e ee

2 e e 2 e e
(A.5)
e e
e e

3e
1
1 e e ee ;
4e
1
1 ee e e

2 e e 2 e e
lxe
where e is a local Peclet number showing the ratio of convection (shear) flow to
Poe H e2
diffusion (Poiseuille) flow. At low bearing speed numbers ( e 0 ), the novel shape functions
reduce to the well known bilinear interpolation functions. For high speed numbers where fluid
convection dominates the film flow, e , the shape functions produce a full upwinding
fluidity matrix with negligible diffusive terms (artificial viscosity)
Eq. (A.2) are constructed for each element, assembled over the flow domain, and then
condensed by enforcing appropriate boundary conditions, including the source terms arising
from any external (orifice) pressurization. The resultant global set of equations is
k G PoG = QoG + R oG (A.6)
Nem Nem Nem
where k G k e ; R G r e ; QoG qe + qsources for the equilibrium pressure field. A similar
e 1 e 1 e 1
equation set follows for the first-order pressure fields. The asymmetric global fluidity matrix kG
is nonlinear since its elements depend on the zeroth-order pressure field ( PoG ).
Earlier developments relied on the continuous evaluation, assembly and decomposition of the
global fluidity matrix. Presently, a line solver with successive under-relaxation is used. The
procedure assembles the finite element equations along a line (constant axial coordinate) and
solves them using the TDMA algorithm. The method is faster than the full matrix decomposition
procedure since new pressures are immediately updated in the iterative procedure. Good
convergence rates are found by selecting appropriate under relaxation factors (0.7 typically).
See Refs. [8-10] for further details on the method implementation, including external
pressurization (supply ports) and tilting pad bearings.

Notes15 Gas Film Lubrication

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes15 Gas Film Lubrication

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes15 Gas Film Lubrication

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NOTES 15

GAS FILM LUBRICATION

Dear reader, to refer this material use the following format

Bump-type foil bearing Flexure pivot tilting pad bearing with

Metal mesh foil bearing Overleaf-type foil bearing

Fig. 1 Typical commercial gas bearings for microturbomachinery

and T representing the gas constant and operating temperature, respectively.

Fig. 2 Geometry of a gas lubricated thin film bearing

For low speed numbers, <<1, an expansion of the dimensionless pressure as P 1 P ,

Simple slider gas bearings

taper Step or ridge

(a) Tapered bearing (b) Rayleigh step bearing

(b) Taper-flat bearing

Fig. 3 Schematic view of (simple) one-dimensional slider bearings

2.4 2.4 =inf

film pressure (P/Pa)

1.8 1.8 =20

Fig. 4 Pressure field in one-dimensional slider bearings (tapered, Rayleigh step

maximum pressure (P/Pa)

Fig. 5 Maximum film pressure in one-dimensional slider gas bearings versus

step bearing L2/L=0.3

Dynamic force coefficients for slider gas bearings

In dimensionless form, the stiffness and damping coefficients become

Fig. 7 Stiffness coefficient for 1D tapered-flat gas bearing versus frequency

Fig. 8 Damping coefficient for 1D tapered-flat gas bearing versus frequency

Cylindrical gas journal bearings

Journal Speed Flexure web

Fig. 9 Cylindrical gas bearings some typical configurations

Thin film flow analysis for cylindrical bearings [10]

Fig. 10 Geometry of cylindrical gas bearing, coordinate system and

Fig. 11 Geometry of a flexure pivot pad bearing, coordinate system and

center and the bearing pads11 is expressed as,

Fig. 12 Depiction of small amplitude journal motions about an equilibrium

part Wo , 0 and dynamic components WX , WY ei t . The hydrodynamic pressure fields act

on the rotor surface to produce reaction forces FPX , FPY ,

which balance the applied load, i.e.

FX KXX KXY x CXX CXY x

Fig. 13 Idealization of bearing force coefficients as viscous damping and stiffness

Some considerations on the solution of Reynolds equation for gas films

which12 establishes a limit on the generation of hydrodynamic pressure in a radial bearing.

Example of performance for a plain cylindrical journal bearing

To show the bearing performance, define the following parameters:

attitude angle (deg)

attitude angle (deg)

Figure 18 shows the drag friction coefficient, f Torque , is indistinguishable between

f=Torque/ (cW ) = 1.17- 11.7

0.1 incompressible fluid

KYX and CXY=-CYX.

The roots of the characteristic equation K s M + C s

(a) stiffness coefficients, K (b) damping coefficients, C

Performance of a flexure pivot tilting pad hydrostatic gas bearing

Load, W along X 4.05 N w=W/paLD=0.042

Attitude angle (deg)

Ps/Pa =1 Ps/Pa=3.77 Ps/Pa=5.15

supply pressure 2.39 supply pressure

Supply pressure/Ambient pressure

10 krpm 100 krpm 10 krpm 100 krpm

10 krpm 100 krpm 10 krpm 100 krpm

rotor left side 5.08 bar-Prediction

Fig. 25 Comparison of predicted and measured imbalance response of rotor