Analysis of Rotor Blades Using FEM
Analysis of Rotor Blades Using FEM
Abstract
Two analytical methods, the Transfer Matrix method (TMM) and the Finite Element method
(FEM), are discussed for evaluating the lateral natural frequencies of a shaft rotor system.
Hypothetical cases are considered for evaluating fundamental and higher frequencies. A
MATLAB program is developed for the Finite Element method. It may be useful for evaluating
the frequencies of the system's higher modes as well as the fundamental frequency.
Introduction
Consider a rotor shaft system in which the operating speed matches the frequencies of the
higher mode. In this case, it is necessary to evaluate the higher frequencies of the system. It is
necessary to know the higher frequencies while taking the rotor through a critical speed to an
operational speed. To avoid failures of shafting, the general practice in the design of rotors is to
determine the bending critical speeds as well as higher frequencies. For most rotors, it is the
fundamental mode which falls in the running speed zone. There are several methods of
calculation of the critical speed:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Dunkerley method
Rayleigh method
Transfer Matrix method
Finite Element method
The first two methods are suitable for estimating the fundamental frequency by hand calculation.
The transfer matrix method and FEM would require the use of computers. The third and fourth
methods are also useful for evaluating the higher frequencies. In this paper, higher frequency
methods are discussed, specifically the Transfer Matrix method and Finite Element method.
w
w1
w2
EI
2
x
Input Data
The major input parameters needed for the finite element analysis program are:
2
6l 2l 2
EI 6l 4l
[ K] =
l 3 12 6l 12 6l
2
6l 4l 2
6l 2l
(1)
2
13l 3l
54
13l
13l 3l 2
156 22l
22l 4l 2
(2)
0
0
0
0
0 m/2
0
0
0
0
0
(3)
2
0
0
ml 78
0
(4)
Application of Constraints
The boundary condition of the simply supported shaft rotor system is applied to the global mass
and stiffness matrices, i.e. the deflection at each simply supported node point is zero.
Solving for the eigenvalues
Once the system matrices are modified than simply using following command line in MATLAB
software, we can evaluate the eigenvalue of the system.
= sqrt ( eig ( K , M ))
This two methods are demonstrated by solving the following three problems.
Problem - I
A uniform shaft with two disks and supported bearings is shown in Figure 2. Evaluate the
natural frequencies of the system.
Problem - II
A stepped shaft with one disk and supported bearings is shown in Figure 3. Evaluate the
natural frequencies of the system.
Problem - III
A uniform shaft with three disks and supported bearings is shown in Figure 4. Evaluate the
natural frequencies of the system.
Solution
The Transfer Matrix Method and modified computer program are used to obtain the natural
frequencies shown in Table 1. The table also shows the natural frequencies using FEM.
6, 4, and 4 beam elements are considered for evaluating the frequencies of problems I,
II and III, respectively. Typical FEM models for the above three problems are shown in
Figures 5, 6 and 7. In these figures, Roman letters denote the number of elements. The length
of each element is also given. All problems are evaluated using consistent, lumped and diagonal
mass matrix. The results are shown in Table 2. Table 1 shows a comparison of the Transfer
matrix method and the Finite element method using a lumped mass matrix.
m1 = 30 kg
m 2 = 50 kg
25
125
250
250
m1 = 90 kg
31.75
25
250
250
m 2 = 400 kg
m1 = 100 kg
m 3 = 200 kg
100
500
500
500
500
II
62.5
62.5
III
IV
125
125
VII
125
125
II
125
125
III
IV
125
125
Node point
Rotor mass added in the node
Element
II
500
500
III
IV
500
500
Node point
Rotor mass added in the node
Element
Table 1: Comparison of natural frequencies using transfer matrix method with FEM
Problem
Transfer Matrix Method
Finite Element Method with
Lumped Mass Matrix
fn 1(Hz)
fn 2 (Hz)
fn 3 (Hz)
fn 1 (Hz)
fn 2 (Hz)
fn 3 (Hz)
I
18.34
78.06
*
18.42
77.24
873.36
II
24.26
*
*
24.31
906.09
1320.00
III
16.52
88.87
167.52
15.70
81.23
151.67
III
15.54**
79.24**
147.85
15.70
81.23
151.67
* - unable to evaluate using developed program due to divergence problem.
** - shaft mass is added into rotor mass for transfer matrix method.
1,2,3 - denotes first, second, and third mode frequencies respectively.
10
Table 2: Comparison of natural frequencies using FEM with different mass matrix
Problem
No.
fn
1(Hz)
I
II
III
18.41
24.32
15.70
fn 2
(Hz)
fn 3
(Hz)
77.31
1026.18
81.42
1009.03
1804.68
153.77
fn 1
(Hz)
fn 2
(Hz)
fn 3
(Hz)
18.42
24.31
15.70
77.24
906.09
81.23
873.36
1320.00
151.67
fn 1
(Hz)
18.41
24.29
15.69
fn 2
(Hz)
fn 3
(Hz)
77.18
1162.11
80.84
1113.09
1526.99
150.88
Conclusion
Both the Transfer Matrix method and the Finite Element method are suitable for evaluating the
fundamental as well as higher frequencies. The Transfer Matrix method gave very similar results
to the Finite Element model with lumped mass for the fundamental frequency, as shown in Table
1.
The Transfer Matrix method for problem II was only able to obtain the fundamental frequency.
It was unable to converge at higher frequencies. When the number of elements is increased
from 2 to 4, the values of higher frequencies is obtained, as shown in Table 1. The Transfer
Matrix method and FEM give nearly same values of the frequencies when the mass of the shaft
is negligible.
Problem III gives a better idea of neglecting mass and adding mass on the system with TMM.
The effect of mass matrix in FEM is also observed in Table 2. For higher modes, TMM takes
more computation time due to iterations, but that is not case with FEM. If engineers take more
elements in the same system, then it will take more time for computation otherwise it is faster
than TMM. Sometimes more elements are required for increasing precision of eigenvalues to
achieve exact solution and mode shapes.
The Rayleigh Ritz method also gives the higher frequencies, but it requires judgement of the
mode shape. It is tedious and time consuming.
11
FIRST MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
300
400
500
600
400
500
600
400
500
600
x (mm)
SECOND MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
300
x (mm)
THIRD MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
300
x (mm)
12
FIRST MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
300
400
500
300
400
500
300
400
500
x (mm)
SECOND MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
x (mm)
THIRD MODE
Displacement
0.10
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.10
100
200
x (mm)
13
FIRST MODE
Displacement
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
500
1000
1500
2000
1500
2000
1500
2000
x (mm)
SECOND MODE
Displacement
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
500
1000
x (mm)
THIRD MODE
Displacement
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
500
1000
x (mm)
14
Appendix A
Stiffness Matrix
A two-node beam element having four degree of freedom is shown in Figure 1 [3]. Rotation
is assumed to be small, so that = dw / dx.
Four degree of freedom define a cubic lateral displacement field,
w = [ N][ w1 1 w2 2 ] T = [ N]{ d}
(5)
where,
[N] = assumed shape functions is corresponding to cubic lateral displacement and are given
in Table 3,
1
2
w1
w2
= rotation at node 1,
= rotation at node 2,
= lateral displacement at node 1,
= lateral displacement at node 2,
15
x=0
x=l
1
(a)
1
(b)
1
(c)
1
(d)
Figure 11:
Typical shape functions of a cubic fitted to ordinates and slopes at x = 0 and at x = l
16
Table 3:
Typical shape functions of a cubic fitted to ordinates and slopes at x=0 and at x= l.
Figure
Shape function
At x = 0
At x = l
Ni
Ni , x
Ni
3
3x 2 2 x
+ 3
l2
l
2x 2 x 3
+ 2
l
l
3
2
2x
3x
N3 = 2 + 3
l
l
2
x3
x
N4 =
+ 3
l
l
11a
N1 = 1
11b
N2 = x
11c
11d
Ni , x
4l 2 6l
EI 6l
T
[ K ] = [ B ] EI [ B ]dx = 3
l 12 6l 12
2l 2 6l
6l
[ B] =
6 12
[
N
]
=
2 + 3
l
dx 2
l
d2
6l
2l 2
6l
4l 2
4 6 x 6 12x 2 6x
+
+ 2
l l2 l2 l3
l l
(6)
(7)
Mass Matrix
A mass matrix is a discrete representation of a continuous distribution of mass. A consistent
mass matrix is defined by
22l
156
22l
4l 2
m
T
[ M ] cons = [ N] [ N]dV =
13l
420 54
2
13l 3l
54
13l
13l 3l 2
156 22l
22l 4l 2
(8)
17
It is termed consistent because [N] represents the same shape functions as are used to
generate element stiffness matrix. A simpler and historically earlier formulation is the lumped
mass matrix, which is obtained by placing particle masses M i at nodes i of an element, such
that mi is the total element mass. Particle lumps have no rotary inertia unless rotary
inertia is arbitrarily assigned. A lumped mass matrix is diagonal, but a consistent matrix is
not. Historical lumped mass matrix is given by Lumped mass matrix,
m / 2
0
[ M ] Lumped =
0
0
0
0
0
0 m/ 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
(9)
2
m 0 4l
[ M] =
420 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
156 0
0 4l 2
0
18
(10)
m
[m]
s
(11)
0
0
0
m 2
0
2
ml 78
0
0
[ M ]diag =
0
0
m 2
0
2
0
0
ml 78
0
(12)
References
[1] J. S. Rao. Rotor Dynamics. Wiley Eastern Ltd., 1983.
[2] Y. W. Kwon and H. Bang. The Finite Element Method using MATLAB. CRC press,
1997.
[3] R. D. Cook, D. S. Malkus, and M. E. Plesha. Concepts and Application of Finite
Element Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, 1989.
19