Underplatform dampers (UPD) are commonly used in aircraft engines to mitigate the risk of high-cycle fatigue failure of turbine blades. The energy dissipated at the friction contact interface of the damper reduces the vibration amplitude significantly, and the couplings of the blades can also lead to significant shifts of the resonance frequencies of the bladed disk. The highly nonlinear behaviour of bladed disks constrained by UPDs requires an advanced modelling approach to ensure that the correct damper geometry is selected during the design of the turbine, and that no unexpected resonance frequencies and amplitudes will occur in operation. Approaches based on an explicit model of the damper in combination with multi-harmonic balance solvers have emerged as a promising way to predict the nonlinear behaviour of UPDs correctly, however rigorous experimental validations are required before approaches of this type can be used with confidence.In this study, a nonlinear analysis based on an updated explicit damper model having different levels of detail is performed, and the results are evaluated against a newly-developed UPD test rig. Detailed linear finite element models are used as input for the nonlinear analysis, allowing the inclusion of damper flexibility and inertia effects. The nonlinear friction interface between the blades and the damper is described with a dense grid of 3D friction contact elements which allow accurate capturing of the underlying nonlinear mechanism that drives the global nonlinear behaviour. The introduced explicit damper model showed a great dependence on the correct contact pressure distribution. The use of an accurate, measurement based, distribution, better matched the nonlinear dynamic behaviour of the test rig. Good agreement with the measured frequency response data could only be reached when the zero harmonic term (constant term) was included in the multi-harmonic expansion of the nonlinear problem, highlighting its importance when the contact interface experiences large normal load variation. The resulting numerical damper kinematics with strong translational and rotational motion, and the global blades frequency response were fully validated experimentally, showing the accuracy of the suggested high detailed explicit UPD modelling approach.
Motivated by the current demands in high-performance structural analysis, and by a need to better model systems with localized nonlinearities, analysts have developed a number of different approaches for modeling and simulating the dynamics of a bolted-joint structure. However, it is still unclear which approach might be most effective for a given system or set of conditions. To better grasp their similarities and differences, this paper presents a numerical benchmark that assesses how well two diametrically differing joint modeling approaches -a time-domain wholejoint approach and a frequency-domain node-to-node approach -predict and simulate a mechanical joint. These approaches were applied to model the Brake-Reuß beam, a prismatic structure comprised of two beams with a bolted joint interface. The two approaches were validated first by updating the models to reproduce the nonlinear response for the first bending mode of an experimental Brake-Reuß beam. Afterwards, the tuned models were evaluated on their ability to predict the nonlinearity in the dynamic response for the second and third bending modes. The results show that the two joint modeling approaches perform about equally as well in simulating the Brake-Reuß beam. In addition, the exposition highlights improvements that were made in each method during the course of this work and reveal further challenges in advancing the state-of-the-art.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.