A COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED JOURNAL BEARING PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS B.Playfoot Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd.

The crankshaft bearings of a modern automotive engine have to operate under arduous loading conditions, often at high temperatures. Their reliable operation is dependant on a complex interaction between hydrodynamic, structural and metallurgical effects. For the engine designer it is important to have easy to use proven analytical design tools to assist him in the task of designing suitable bearings. For many years Ricardo have used software based on the Mobility method without necessarily going to the complexity of using an Elastrohydrodynamic (EHD) model such as that used in the Ricardo program ORBIT. This article presents work originally performed by Ricardo and Leeds University to develop analytical tools to predict the performance characteristics of journal bearings. In this original study the bearing loads were derived assuming the crankshaft and crankcase were rigid. This article reviews the results of the original study and considers the effect of including the stiffness and dynamic behaviour of the crankshaft. ENGDYN was used to predict the performance characteristics and the results were compared with experimental data. INTRODUCTION The crankshaft bearings of a modern automotive engine have to operate under arduous loading conditions, often at high temperatures. Their reliable operation is dependant on a complex interaction between hydrodynamic, structural and metallurgical effects. The purpose of this study is to compare the predicted main bearing performance characteristics from ENGDYN with experimental data. EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP RICARDO HYDRA ENGINE The experimental data presented in this paper was collected during a research program carried out by G.A.Clayton Ref.[1]. The experimental work was carried out at Ricardo Consulting Engineers. A Ricardo Hydra single cylinder gasoline engine was used for the test, fitted with two fully grooved main bearings. Figure 1 shows a section through the engine. This engine has been specifically designed for research purposes and has several points that make it particularly suitable for this type of work. 1. The engine has only one cylinder and hence the load sharing between the crankshaft main bearings is greatly simplified. 2. The bearing housings and the crankcase are extremely rigid. 3. The main bearings are fixed in rigid bearing housings, which, in turn fit into the crankcase. They may be easily removed and this facilitates their instrumentation.

Figure 1 Section of the Ricardo Hydra INSTRUMENTATION For this study, the front main bearing was instrumented. The use of the front main bearing ensures that the dynamic flywheel effects are minimised, therefore simplifying the bearing loading. In the original engine design, the front main bearing was used to supply oil to the crankshaft main bearing. The crankshaft was therefore modified to enable oil supply from the rear main bearing. Measurements were taken of the following parameters. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Inlet oil temperature and pressure Engine speed Outlet oil temperature Bearing temperature at a number of locations Oil flow rate through the bearing Cylinder pressure

Temperature Measurement
Eight rows of four thermocouples were positioned so that the weld beads lay 0.5mm below the bearing surface. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the axial and angular locations of the K-type (Nickel-Chromium/Nickel-Aluminium) thermocouples, respectively. It can be seen from Figure 2 that the axial positions 2 and 4 were equally spaced on the lands either side of the central groove. This enabled an assessment of the degree of bearing misalignment to be made, reflected as a difference in the temperature of the two lands. In addition, the bearing oil outlet temperature could be compared for both sides of the bearing at axial positions 0 and 01. 2

Figure 2 Axial Bearing Temperature Measurement

Highest Temperatures Mid-Range Temperatures

Lowest Temperatures

Mid-Range Temperatures

Figure 3 Angular Bearing Temperature Measurement The ENGDYN model does not currently incorporate a bearing temperature gradient model. In order that the temperature gradient can be neglected, an effective bearing temperature must

be determined that enables the bearing performance to be accurately predicted. Claytons study considered the following three ways of determining an effective bearing oil temperature. 1. Assume the oil outlet temperature 2. An average of the thermocouple readings at angular positions 1, 5, 6 and 8. This provided and average of the highest (8) and lowest (5) bearing temperatures, with an additional weighting towards the middle range of bearing temperatures. 3. An average of the temperatures of the thermocouples at angular position 5. This gave an effective temperature which is biased towards the lower end of the bearing temperature range.

Journal Orbit Measurement

Four proximity transducers were used to determine the journal centre orbit within the bearing. The axial position of the transducers relative to the crankshaft can be seen in Figure 2.

Oil Supply Circuit

Figure 4 shows a schematic representation of the oil supply from the engine sump to the bearing. The dotted line encircles the equipment that was added for the purpose of the experimental investigation. The supply pressure to the bearing was set by the position of the manually operated valve and was measured using a dial gauge. To safeguard against accidentally starving the bearing of oil a low pressure cut out was positioned as indicated.

Figure 4 - Schematic Representation of the Oil Supply System

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION During the tests, the influences of the oil supply pressure, engine speed and effective oil temperature (and hence viscosity) on the oil flow rate through the bearing were investigated. Specific tests were undertaken to investigate: 1. The influence of the supply pressure in the oil flow rate for constant engine speeds. 2. The effect of engine speed on the oil flow rate and oil temperature, for a constant supply pressure. For the purposes of this study, data is presented for just one engine oil, Rotella X30.

TECHNICAL BACKGROUND ENGDYN OVERVIEW ENGDYN is a fully-coupled crankshaft, oil film and cylinder block dynamic simulation package. The program provides a number of solution techniques for predicting engine dynamics using models of varying sophistication. The crank train and cylinder block models can be modelled as rigid, compliant or dynamic. In its simplest form, ENGDYN can be used to perform a statically determinate solution, whilst in its most sophisticated form it enables the time-domain response of the 3-dimensional crank train and cylinder block vibrations with non-linear oil films at each of the bearings. An ENGDYN model consists of two components, the crank train and the cylinder block. These components are defined using models of varying degrees of accuracy dependent on the application. Each model can be specified from a finite element model or as user defined lumped masses. ENGDYN reduces the finite element model into a simplified mass elastic system, calculating the system stiffness and distributing the mass at node points. The input loads due to the reciprocating motion of the piston and connecting rod, the rotating motion of the connecting rod and the force due to cylinder pressure are applied to each crankpin and cylinder of the engine. The reaction forces at each of the main journal bearings and at the thrust bearing are calculated according to several solution options. ENGDYN enables three solution types: Statically Determinate The reactions at the main bearings are calculated assuming the crankshaft is pin-jointed at each of the bearings. The journal orbits are calculated from these reactions using the Mobility Method. Statically Indeterminate The crankshaft and cylinder block are assumed to be compliant. The reactions and journal orbits at each of the main journal bearings plus the quasi-static displaced shape of the crankshaft (and cylinder block) are calculated using the Mobility Method at each main bearing. This method accounts for load sharing between bearings.

Dynamic The crankshaft is assumed to be dynamic and includes the non-linear gyroscopic effects. The reactions and the journal orbits at each of the main journal bearings and the 3-dimensional vibratory behaviour of the crankshaft are calculated.

OIL FILM MODEL The journal oil film model used by ENGDYN is a fully non-linear model based on methods by Booker and Kikuchi. For radial motion (axis parallel to the bearing axis) of the shaft in the bearing, the oil film model is based on the mobility method of Booker and using the short bearing approximation. In its usual form, the method is used to determine the shaft eccentricity and attitude angle for a known force. This is the procedure used for the quasi-static solution methods and for the dynamic solution when the cylinder block is compliant. However, when the cylinder block is rigid or dynamic the process is inverted so that the oil film load and its direction can be determined from a known shaft position and velocity. For rotational motion (shaft axis tilting relative to the bearing axis) the short bearing approximation is used to determine the stiffness and damping of the oil film. This is based on the work of Kikuchi who modelled the oil film as a set of radial and rotational springs and dampers. The instantaneous oil flow rate through the bearing and the power dissipated by the oil through the bearing action are calculated by ENGDYN for each journal bearing. These instantaneous values are integrated numerically to estimate the overall cyclic oil flow rate and power loss. ENGDYN also offers the ability to perform solutions where the bearing oil temperature is specified, or alternatively, calculated by performing a thermal balance. For the thermally balanced solution, ENGDYN calculates the power loss at each angular position of the journal then integrates for a complete engine cycle to calculate the total power loss in the bearing. It is then assumed that this energy is used in heating the oil as it flows through the bearing. The oil temperature is used to calculate the operating viscosity of the oil in the bearing. ENGDYN iterates until a converged solution is obtained.

TECHNICAL APPROACH ENGDYN Model A finite element model of the Hydra crankshaft was generated and read into ENGDYN. This is shown in Figure 5. The data properties for the equivalent reduced mass-elastic system were then calculated by ENGDYN. The Hydra bearing housings and crankcase are extremely stiff, consequently a block model has not been incorporated in the analysis and is assumed to be rigid. The main engine parameters are described in Appendix 1.

Figure 5 Finite Element Model of Crankshaft For this study, all three solution types have been considered (statically determinate, statically indeterminate and dynamic). Each successive solution level offers greater potential accuracy but with a corresponding computational overhead penalty. Since this study is concerned with a single cylinder Hydra engine, there is expected to be little difference between the statically determinate and indeterminate solutions. Analyses have been carried out using both set and thermally balanced bearing temperature solutions. For the specified temperature solution, the bearing oil temperature was set equal to the experimentally measured bearing oil outlet temperature. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Figures 6 to 8 show the results of the determinate solution. Figures 6a and 6c compare the effective temperatures measured by Clayton. This shows that the average temperature (Tave) is approximately 1.5% lower than the bearing outlet temperature (Tout) across the entire engine speed range. As previously discussed, the averaged temperature at angular position 5 (T5) is at the lower end of the temperature range, and is lower than the outlet temperature by up to 5%. A comparison of the ENGDYN predicted flow rates using these temperatures is shown in Figures 6b and 6d. As can be seen, the use of temperature T 5 enables a very good correlation between the experimental and predicted oil flow rates. The oil temperature in the bearing rises rapidly across the bearing lands. The most restrictive region to oil flow is therefore likely to be close to the groove where the oil is cooler and therefore more viscous. Consequently, the use of the lower effective oil temperature (T 5) results in a better oil flow rate correlation. However, the location of the lowest bearing temperature (T5) is largely dependant on the present geometry and loading conditions. Consequently, for the purposes of a thermally balanced solution ENGDYN assumes the effective bearing temperature to be equal to the outlet temperature. This approach allows a standard prediction approach to be maintained for

all bearings. For a realistic comparison between the thermally balanced and set temperature solutions this paper therefore uses Tout for the set effective bearing temperature. Bearing temperatures and oil flow rates were measured across the engine speed range for oil supply temperatures of 55, 70, 85 and 95 oC. A comparison between the ENGDYN set oil temperature and thermally balanced analyses using the determinate solution is made in Figure 7 for all four bearing oil temperatures. It can be seen that the ENGDYN thermally balanced solution slightly under predicts the oil flow rate at all supply temperatures and speeds. The set temperature solution over predicts the oil flow rate by an increasing magnitude of error with speed. The maximum percentage error for each of the four temperatures using both solution types is compared in Table 1. Supply Temperature Set Temperature Thermally Balanced 55 -21.6% -13.3% 70 -14.4% -12% 85 -8.9% -9.3% 95 -6.3% -7.9%

Table 1 Oil Flow Rate Percentage Error As can be seen, the percentage error reduces with an increase in supply temperature. The maximum error for the thermally balanced solution being only 13.3%. Figure 8 compares the variation of predicted and measured oil flow rate with oil supply pressure at three engine speeds (1500, 2500 and 3500 rev/min), with the bearing temperature specified and using a thermally balanced solution. It can be seen that a good correlation is achieved with both solution types, particularly at the lower engine speeds. The largest errors are 15% for the set temperature solution at 3500 rev/min and 2.4 bar oil supply pressure and 21% at 2500 rev/min and 3.1 bar. Figure 9 compares the predicted bearing temperatures and oil flow rates for both determinate and indeterminate analysis solutions. This shows both analyses produce very similar results, with the indeterminate solution being slightly more accurate across the engine speed range. An improvement in accuracy would be much more noticeable with the indeterminate solution when analysing a multi-cylinder engine, where load sharing between the main bearings becomes apparent. Figure 10 compares the results of the dynamic analysis using set temperature and thermally balanced solutions with the experimental and determinate analysis results. This shows that although the dynamic analysis thermal balance solution predicts a similar bearing oil temperature to the determinate solution this analysis method under predicts the oil flow rate at all speeds and lower than that predicted by the determinate analysis. However, the slope of the curve for the dynamic analysis is more consistent with the experimental result than the determinate analysis at all speeds. This result suggests, given that the predicted temperatures are similar, that the predicted oil film is significantly different between the quasistatic and dynamic analyses. Figures 11 and 12 shows this to be the case. Figure 11 compares the journal orbit for the dynamic and determinate analyses at 3000 rev/min with the oil supplied at 85oC. The orbit for the indeterminate analysis is very similar to the determinate result and has not been presented for clarity. Figure 12 compares the maximum pressure and minimum film thickness for the oil for each of the three analyses against speed at the same oil

supply temperature. The larger minimum oil film thickness for the dynamic analysis is consistent with the lower predicted oil flow rate shown in Figure 10. SUMMARY A good correlation between the determinate and indeterminate analyses and the experimental results has been presented. The results have shown that ENGDYN over-predicts the oil flow rate when the effective bearing oil temperature is specified. Likewise, with the thermally balanced solution, ENGDYN under-predicts the oil flow rate at all engine speeds. The ENGDYN predicted bearing oil temperatures are generally lower than measured, the difference increasing with engine speed. For the statically determinate analysis, very close agreement is obtained between predicted and measured oil flow rates as the oil supply pressure is varied. The results of the indeterminate analysis show a slight improvement in accuracy. The dynamic analysis predicts lower oil flow rates than the quasi-static analyses but shows similar trends to the experimental measurements. The predicted lower oil flow rates are due to the larger oil film thickness predicted using this method. REFERENCES 1. Engine Bearing Analysis and Design, G. A. Clayton, PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Leeds, February 1990.

a
Bearing Temperature (oC)

70 C Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar

105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500

b
Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

70 C Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 1500

2500

3500

4500

5500

2500

3500

4500

5500

Engine Speed (rev/min)

o

Engine Speed (rev/min)

c
Bearing Temperature (oC)

85 C Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar

110 105 100 95 90 85 80 1500 2500 3500 4500 5500

d
Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

85 C Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar

19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 1500

2500

3500

4500

5500

Engine Speed (rev/min)

Engine Speed (rev/min)

Experiment (Tout) 20 ENGDYN - Set Temperature (Tout) 10 15 25 35 45 55 ENGDYN - Set Temperature (T5) 00 00 00 00 00 ENGDYN - Set Temperature (Tave)

Figure 6 Comparison of Set Temperatures Determinate Solution

10

55oC Oil Supply Temperature

90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 1500 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC)
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

55oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

70oC Oil Supply Temperature

105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC)
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

70oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

85oC Oil Supply Temperature

Bearing Temperature (oC) 105 100 95 90 85 80 1500 2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min) 5500
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

85oC Oil Flow Rate

18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 1500

110

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

95oC Oil Supply Temperature

115 Bearing Temperature (oC) 110 105 100 95 90 1500
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

95oC Oil Flow Rate

21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 1500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

90 ENGDYN - Set Temperature 40 ENGDYN - Thermally Balanced 0 2000 4000 6000 Experimental Supply Temp

Figure 7 Comparison of Thermally Balanced and Set Bearing Temperatures for Determinate Solution (3.103 bar Oil Supply Pressure).

11

3500 rev/min, 80oC Oil Temp out Set Temperature

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 Oil Supply Pressure (bar)
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0

3500 rev/min, 80oC Oil Temp out Thermally Balanced

Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

Oil Supply Pressure (bar)

2500 rev/min, 80oC Oil Temp out Set Temperature

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 Oil Supply Pressure (bar)

2500 rev/min, 80oC Oil Temp out Thermally Balanced

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 Oil Supply Pressure (bar)

Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

1500 rev/min, 100oC Oil Temp out Set Temperature

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 Oil Supply Pressure (bar) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

1500 rev/min, 100oC Oil Temp out Thermally Balanced

Oil Supply Pressure (bar)

ENGDYN 20 0 Experimental 0 5

Figure 8 Relationship between Oil Supply Pressure and Flow Rate (Determinate Solution

12

55oC Oil Supply Temperature

90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 1500 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

55oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

70oC Oil Supply Temperature

105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC)
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

70oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

85oC Oil Supply Temperature

110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC)
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

85oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

95oC Oil Supply Temperature

Bearing Temperature ( oC) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s) 115 110 105 100 95 90 1500 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 1500

95oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

18 17 16 ENGDYN 15 14 Indeterminate 0 5000 ENGDYN - Determinate Experimental

Figure 9 Comparison of Indeterminate and Determinate Solutions(3.103 bar Oil Supply Pressure).

13

55oC Oil Supply Temperature

90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 1500 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 1500 Bearing Temperature (oC) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

55oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

70oC Oil Supply Temperature

105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 1500 Bearing Temperature ( oC) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

70oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

85oC Oil Supply Temperature

110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 1500 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 1500 Bearing Temperature ( oC) Oil Flow Rate (cm3/s)

85oC Oil Flow Rate

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

95oC Oil Supply Temperature

Bearing Temperature ( oC)
3 Oil Flow Rate (cm /s)

95oC Oil Flow Rate

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 1500

115 110 105 100 95 90 1500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

o

5500

2500 3500 4500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

5500

95 C Oil Flow Rate(balanced) ENGDYN - Dynamic

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12

ENGDYN - Dynamic (set)

150 250 350 450 550 Experiment 0 0 0 0 0 ENGDYN - Determinate Engine Speed (rev/min)

Figure 10 Comparison of Determinate and Dynamic Solutions (3.103 bar Oil Supply Pressure)

14

Figure 11 - Comparison of Journal Orbits at 3000 rev/min (85OC Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar Oil Supply Pressure))

Maximum Film Pressure (MPa)

50 40 30 20 10 0 1500

2500

3500 Engine Speed (rev/min)

4500

5500

Minimum Film Thickness (microns)

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1500

2500

3500

4500

5500

Engine Speed (rev/min)

Figure 12 Comparison of Oil Film Pressure and Thickness (85OC Oil Supply Temperature, 3.103 bar Oil Supply Pressure)

15

1500 4500

10 Determinate 5 0 Indeterminate

Dynamic

APPENDIX 1 TABLE 1 - Ricardo Hydra Test Engine Data Units Engine Bore Stroke Piston Mass Connecting Rod Length Mass Inertia about c.g. Big end to c.g. distance Flywheel Mass Inertia XX Main Bearings Length Diameter Radial Clearance Groove Width Feed Type Pin Bearings Length Diameter Radial Clearance Feed Type Oil Hole Diameter Oil Hole Angular Position Crankshaft Material

mm mm

85.7 88.9

kg

0.3566

mm kg kgm2 mm

0.158 0.9162 5.08E-03 52.67

kg kgm2

31.2 0.45

mm mm mm mm -

27.96 57.139 0.044 5.4 Full Groove

mm mm mm mm deg

20 47.66 0.03 Oil Hole 6 25

Steel

Table 1 Engine Parameters 16