AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH

2010, Science Hu, http://www.scihub.org/AJSIR

ISSN: 2153-649X doi:10.5251/ajsir.2011.2.58.68

Advanced seal design for rotating machinery

E. Saber and Khaled M. Abdou
Mechanical Engineering Department, College of Engineering,
Arab Academy for Science and Technology, Alexandria Egypt
ABSTRACT
Labyrinth and more recently brush seals have been used extensively in high speed rotating
machinery. Development is still in progress to reduce the leakage rate, and the frictional
resistance of these seals beside the awareness of their stability characteristics. A seal very
similar to the brush seal geometry is proposed here. It is composed of fine strips replacing the
wires of the ordinary brush seal. A simple theoretical model for this strip seal is put forward here
based on the assumption that the flow through it is steady laminar and incompressible. A
Reynolds like equation is devised, governing the pressure inside the seal. Calculations of the
leakage rate and the friction resistance are carried out for the various parameters considered and
the results are presented and discussed in detail along with comparisons with previous work. It is
shown in this work that the strip angle has a major effect on the performance of the seal as well
as on the friction resistance. It is found that the larger the angle the lesser the leakage rate and
the larger the friction force. The optimum value for minimum leakage is 90o but for mechanical
stability and durability reasons it should be smaller. It is also found that the wider the strips the
lesser the leakage rate for all values of the strip angle. The opposite holds for the friction
resistance. The spacing between the strips has a minor effect on the leakage rate for small
values of the strip angle but for larger values of the angle the increase in leakage becomes
considerable when increasing the spacing for angles of order 70o. Comparisons with previous
works on different types of seals showed that the present seal model can satisfactorily be
implemented in practice.
Keywords: Non-Contact seals, Labyrinth seals, Brush seals, Rotating machinery.
INTRODUCTION
Seal technology plays an important role in controlling
end leakage flow. Although the labyrinth seal
technology is very well developed, leakages are still
high. The need for a sealing technology with good
leakage sealing performance and compact size has
risen. Brush seals have fulfilled such conditions. The
brush seals are designed to contact the rotor. They
are several times better leakage performance, weight
reduction and space requirements than labyrinth
seals. Compared to finned labyrinth seals, brush
seals can maintain a much higher pressure
difference. The outcome is a much more stable and
balanced sealing system that is unlikely to let
leakages take place. Mullen et al [1] modeled the twodimensional flow field in a linear brush seal
configuration and determined the flow field
numerically using the finite element method. They
studied the temporal disturbance of the upstream flow
field. They studied also the effect of tangential flow of
the upstream boundary. From their results the
calculated flow rates were in agreement with previous

experimental results. Braun et al [2] carried out flow

visualization in simulated brush seals using a shining
of a planar laser sheet of light through the region of
interest in the brush thus making visible the
magnesium oxide seed particles that trace the fluid
flow. Their flow visualization technique allowed
definition of both local flow structure inside the voids
of the porous matrix and qualitative and quantitative
flow description at the entry section and at the exit of
porous matrix. They investigated also the pressure
drop between single and two sequentially positioned
brush seals. They introduced a bulk flow model and
compared their results against published engine
brush seal data. Schlumberger et al [3] carried out
experimental investigations on the effects of
eccentricity on brush seal leakage for air at ambient
temperature and saturated steam, both at nonrotational and low rotational speeds. They compared
their results with an annular seal for air and standard
labyrinth seal for steam. They determined that large
eccentricities did not damage the brush seal;
however, the rotor surface was worn, indicating that a

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

distributions of pressure were taken on a non-rotating

experimental rig. They used the experimental data to
estimate the seal porosity. They assumed the overall
porosity constant with a variation in the bristle matrix.
Comparison between these two cases showed some
difference in the distribution of pressure in the bristle
matrix. Their comparisons between measured and
predicted flows through the seal was generally good
considering the overall simplicity of their theoretical
model. Handericks et al [9] carried out experiments
on dual brush and labyrinth compressor discharge
seals in a T-700 engine test.. The test condition
included compressor discharge pressure up to 1
MPa, temperatures 407C, operating speeds up to
43000 rpm, and surface speeds up to 160 m/s with
dry ambient air as the working fluid. The fuel
consumption was less for the dual brush than for the
labyrinth seal. They concluded that the brush seal
leaked less than the labyrinth seal. Chew et al [10]
developed a model of brush seal in which the bristle
pack was treated as an axisymmetric, anisotropic
porous medium with nonlinear porous resistance
coefficients. The equations were solved using
conventional computational fluid dynamics techniques
to give prediction of flow rate, pressure distribution,
velocity field, and bending forces on the bristles. The
bristle aerodynamic forces were used in a separate
calculation to estimate bristle bending and reaction
forces on the shaft and backing plate. Their prediction
for the brush seal were in agreement with
experimental observations. From their results a
nonlinear porous resistance law gave better
agreement with measurement than the linear Darcian
treatment. Sharatchandra and Rhode [11] presented
a numerical study of the effects of rotor induced swirl
velocity on the performance of brush seals. They
used the Navier-Stokes equations in a twodimensional analysis to obtain the velocity and
pressure fields for an idealized brush seal
configuration where the inclination of the bristles was
neglected. Their computations were in good
agreement with measurements for the similar flow
across tube banks. Sharatchandra and Rhode [12]
investigated
the
aerodynamic
bristle
force
distributions in brush seals used in aircraft gas turbine
engines. These forces were responsible for the onset
of bristle tip lift-off from the rotor surface which
significantly affected brush seal performance. In order
to achieve that, they used Navier-Stoke flow
simulation in a streamwise periodic module of bristles
corresponding to the staggered square configuration.
They studied also the effect of bristle spacing and
bristle inclination angle. They found that the lifting

harder surface was required. Shaft rotation did not

affect brush seal performance in air, but it significantly
increased leakage in steam. The brush seal had
lower leakage rates than those predicted for
comparable annular and labyrinth seals. Hendricks et
al [4] discussed design similitude of brush seal with a
bulk flow model based on flows in porous media, and
rub surface coating. Their flow calculations were the
sum of leakage flow through the bristles, the
clearance at the interface between the surface and
bristles, and the clearance between the surface and
backing plate. Their results of flow calculations were
in agreement with the previous experimental results.
Carlile et al [5] investigated the leakage performance
of a brush seal with gaseous working fluids; air,
helium, and carbon dioxide for several bristle /rotor
interference, by using a tapered rotor at static and low
rotor speed conditions. They concluded that the brush
seal reduced the leakage in comparison to the
annular seal, up to 9.5 times. Addition of a lubricant
reduced the leakage by 2.5 times when compared to
a non-lubricant brush seal. Dowler et al [6] presented
a model of bristle bed consisted of a hexagonal
circular cylinder arrangement in order to study the
curvature effects on the leakage flow through the
brush seal. They used a single parameter, effective
brush thickness, to correlate the leakage flow through
the brush seal. The effective brush thickness was
defined as a constant between the journal diameter
and the mean diameter of the brush. They compared
their results against available experimental data for
the same model from different sources. They
demonstrated that the model effectively accounts for
the effect of the seal curvature and the signal
parameter was indicator of brush seal leakage
effectiveness. Chupp and Dowler [7] carried out
experimental investigations on a single stage and
multi stage brush seals, and one reference labyrinth
seal to determine the performance characteristics of
brush seals for application in limited-life gas turbine
engines. They designed and built an elevated
temperature, rotating test rig to test labyrinth and
brush seals in simulated subsonic and supersonic
engine conditions. The results from their tests
demonstrated that brush seals leaked less compared
to labyrinth seals, especially for subsonic, limited-life
engine applications. Thus resulting in significant
engine performance improvements. Bayley and Long
[8] carried out experimental and theoretical studies of
the flow and pressure distributions in a brush seal.
Their model assumed laminar and compressible flow
through porous media. Their measurements of the
mass flow rate together with radial and axial

59

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

configurations with realistically small inter-bristle gaps

and in a staggered fashion. The model showed
reasonable accuracy when compared with available
experimental data. It could be used to evaluate
various seal designs before an expensive testing
process. The model predictions confirmed the trend
of linear pressure drop across the seal thickness.
Turner et al [18] presented experimental investigation
and a CFD mathematical modeling of clearance
brush seals with the rotor to measure the distribution
of axial and radial pressure and their leakage
characteristics. They used 0.27mm and 0.75 mm
clearances, with pressure ratios up to 4, with the seal
flow exhausting to atmospheric conditions. Their
model treated the bristle pack as an axisymmetric,
anisotropic porous region. They calculated from the
CFD analysis the aerodynamic forces on the bristles,
the bristle movements, stresses, and bristle and rotor
loads. The results showed that the flow through a
brush seal was very dependent on the position of the
bristles. If a brush seal was built with a clearance, the
aerodynamic forces will tend to move the bristles
towards the rotor. The movement was very
dependent on the balance between the normal
aerodynamic forces and the friction levels in the
brush pack. Their studies confirmed that the use of a
non-Darican approach gave better agreement to
experimental results. Laos et al [19] described a
recently developed hybrid brush pocket damper seal
that combines high damping with low leakage. The
main objective of their experiments was to measure
the damping and leakage of brush hybrid seals and
six-bladed labyrinth seals of the same working
dimension for comparison. Their test rig was
connected to an electromagnetic shaker. The shaker
contains an impedance head that outputs
acceleration and force signals in time to excite the
seal journal. The flow rate was controlled using a
pneumatic control valve in the pressure range from 1
to 9.2 bars. They concluded that the brush hybrid
pocket damper seal leaked less than the labyrinth
seal while producing two to three times more
damping than the original pocket seal. The aim of the
present work is to design a new type of non-contact
seal introduced as strip seal. The seal is very similar
to the brush seal geometry.

bristle force increased with reduced intra-bristle

spacing and increased inclination angle. The primary
effects of decreasing the bristle inclination angle were
a decrease in the tangential force component and a
slight increase in the axial force component. Short et
al [13] carried out experiments on a single stage
brush seals in order to increase pressure capability
per stage, reduce bristle tip contact pressure and
insuring stable leakage performance of brush seals.
They developed a design for the seal with thicker
bristle diameter, wider bristle pack and wider
clearance between back plate and bristles pack.
Hendricks et al [14] studied and tested a set of inner
diameter /outer diameter bidirectional brush seals to
reduce the leakage losses in case of the leakage flow
changed directions. From their data, they indicated
that the brush seals were capable of sealing positive
or negative pressure drops with respect to the axial
direction and the performance of the machine
increased from 3% to 12%. Chew and hogg [15]
developed a model for predicting leakage flows
through the bristle pack of a brush seal. They treated
the bristle pack as a porous medium. Their
predictions from a one-dimensional model were in
agreement with a wide range of experimental data
available from literature, for seals with a bristle pack
to rotor interference fits. They also predicted a
reasonable estimation of the bristle pack thickness,
and concluded that the leakage flow increased
proportional to the area available between the
backing ring and shaft. ONeill et al [16] carried out
experiments on different designs of brush seal,
multiple seals, and a single brush seal in order to
study the effect of instability on sealing performance
when multiple seals were operated in series at high
pressure loading. Demiroglu et al [17] presented a 2D laminar flow analysis, using the finite element
analysis. Their model predicted flow rate versus
pressure drop for a given flow region. The brush seal
flow domain was divided into representative smaller
cells in which simulation takes place. The cells were
chosen such that together they can represent the
whole seal. A cell is placed in the beginning, a
second one in the middle and four cells at each
corner of a square. Then, other cells were added in
order to extrapolate the results for a full seal. In
parallel to the numerical work, they developed a
simple analytical model. This simplified solution of the
2-D laminar Navier-Stokes equation predicted
pressure drop across two bristles. Their results from
the numerical work were also compared to their
analytical solution. Their results showed that the
presented model was capable of analyzing bristles

MATHEMATICAL MODEL
Fig.1 shows the strip seal geometry and coordinate
system. In Cartesian coordinate x , y and z , the
Navier-Stokes and the continuity equations for
steady, laminar, incompressible and iso-viscous flow
are,

60

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

(1)

The strip array of strip seal is inclined to the rotor by

an angle . To simplify the equations of motion the
Cartesian coordinate can be transformed to an
oblique type of coordinates. Fig.2 shows the oblique
system of coordinates.
The Cartesian coordinates x , y and z may be
written in terms of the oblique coordinates x, y, z as
follows:

(2)

z = z , y = y sin , x = x + y cos

u
u
u
p
=
u
+ v
+ w

z
x
x
y

2 u 2 u 2 u

+
+
+
x2 y2 z2

v
p
v
v
=
u
+ v
+ w
y
y
z
x
2 v 2 v 2 v

+
+
+
x2 y2 z2

w
p
w
w
=
u
+ v
+ w
z
y
z
x
2
w 2 w 2 w

+
+
+
x2 y2 z2

u v w
+
+
=0
x y z

(5)

The velocity components u , v and w in terms of

u, v and w may be written as.
u = u + v cos , v = v sin , w = w

(3)

( 6)

(4)

Where u , v and w are the velocities in the x ,

y and z directions
respectively.

Fig. 2 System of oblique coordinates

Substituting from the relations (5) and (6) into Eqns.1

to 4, considering the order of magnitudes, = O(1),
b
z = O(1), y = O(1) , u = O(1) , v = O
R

(a) The strip seal configuration and

coordinate system.

L
= O(1) , and neglecting higher order
R

and w = O

terms we get the following dimensionless equations:

2u
y

= sin 2

0=

p
y

2w
y 2

p
R
= sin 2
z
L

Where,
x
y
z
, y= , z=
,
R
b
L
u
v
w
u=
, v=
, w=
,
u0
u0
u0

(b) The strips and rotor.

Fig.1: The strip seal geometry and coordinate system

61

(7)
(8)
(9)

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

and

Figs. 3 and 4 show the seal gap and the strip shape
along with the systems of coordinates.

b2
p
p=
uo R

The boundary conditions of the velocity component

are,
y=0 ,
u=w=0
y=

h
=h
b

u=

R
=k
uo

and

w =0

Integrating Eqns.7 and 8 twice with respect to y and

using the velocity boundary conditions we have,

u=

1 2 p 2
y
sin
y yh + k
2

(10)

w=

1 R 2 p 2
y h y
sin
2 L
z

(11)

Fig.3 The seal gap and coordinate system.

Substituting expressions (10), and (11) into the

continuity Eqn.8 and taking the spatial average by
integrating it w. r. t. y across the film we have,
2

3 p R 3 p
h
+
h

L z z
=

6k h
k h
+ 12 2
sin 2
sin t

(12)

And in the absence of any squeeze velocity (steady

state) we can but

h
=0 .
t

The following Reynolds-like equation governing the

dimensionless pressure distribution inside the seal is
obtained,
Fig.4 Strip shape and coordinate system

2
3 p* R 3 p*
+
h
h
z

L z

=
p*

where,

6 h
sin 2

To order ( e R ), the approximate expression for the

gap width in aligned rigid shaft is,
(13)

x
hg = b + e cos
R

p u o2
p
= =
k b2

Using the transformation:

Eqn.13 is subject to the boundary conditions:

p * ( ,0 ) = p *i
p * ( ,1) = p *e

p * (0, z ) = p * ( 2 , z )
p *i

(15)

hg = h g sin and x = x -

(14)

hg

(16)

tan

Substituting from (15) into (16)

b
h g sin = 1 + c cos + h g cos
R

p *e

Where
and
are the dimensionless pressure at
inlet and exit respectively. Because the shaft may be
eccentric with the seal ring (casing surface), the gap
that exists between the shaft and casing surfaces is
not uniform along the circumference of the casing.
When the width of the gap is measured along the
casing radius, it is referred to as the gap width h .

hg =

hg
b

, c =

c
e
, =
are
b
c

(17)

the dimensionless gap

width, the dimensionless clearance and the

eccentricity ratio respectively. The variation of the
strip width may be written in dimensionless form as,

62

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

(1 c ) sin

H=

shows the variation of the dimensionless friction force

with the dimensionless pressure drop for the same
strip angles selected previously. It is seen that for
small pressure drop values the rate at which the
friction force increases with the increase of pressure
drop is very much larger than that for larger
dimensionless pressure drop values, say larger than
approximately 1.5. This behavior is very much
pronounced for larger values of the strip angle. The
effect of the strip angle on the leakage rate can be
shown more clearly from Fig.7. A tentatively selected
value of dimensionless pressure drop say p * = 1 is
used to produce the relationship for different values of
the dimensionless spacing parameter t g /t s . It is

(18)

sin

where is defined as strip shape factor. A small

value of leads to a thick strip while large one gives
a thin strip. The dimensionless film thickness may
then be written as,

1
b
1 + c cos + h g cos
sin

h=

1
(1 c )sin
sin

(19)

The leakage flow rate through the seal ring takes

place from the high pressure side to the low pressure
side in the axial direction.
h

Q=

wRdyd

2 h

= u o Rb

0 0

Q* =

obvious that the spacing parameter has in general

minor effect on the leakage rate for small values of
the strip angle but for larger values say for 70 o angle
double t g /t s leads to an increase in the leakage rate

w dyd

by approximately 20 percent. A reproduction of this

figure is in Fig.8 which the effect of spacing
parameter on the performance.

0 0

Q
u ob L k

10000

DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

2
p*
1 R
d
= sin 2 h 3
z
12 L

(20)

The friction force on the shaft is obtained by

integrating the shear stress over the shaft surface,
L 2

Ff =

6000

4000

2000

R ddz

0
0

0 0

b
Ff
Ff =

u o RL

0 0

h p* 1
+ d dz

2 x h

DIMENSIONLESS PRESSURE DROP

Fig.5 The variation of the dimensionless leakage

rate versus the dimensionless pressure drop for
different values of the strip angle.

(21)
650

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

1 2

= sin 2

=30
=50
=70

8000

where Ff is the dimensionless friction force.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Fig.5 shows the dimensionless leakage flow rate as a
function of the dimensionless pressure drop for
different values of strip angle. The results show that
the relationship between the dimensionless leakage
flow rate and the dimensionless pressure drop is
linear irrespective of the value of the strip angle. It is
clear that the larger the strip angle the lesser the
leakage rate. The optimum value is the 90 0 angle but
the strip angle should always be less than 90 0 for
mechanical stability reasons. On other hand Fig.6

600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250

=30
=50
=70

200
150
100
50
0
0

DIMENSIONLESS PRESSURE DROP

Fig.6 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the dimensionless pressure drop for
different values of the strip angle.

63

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

300

DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

18000
tg / ts = 1
tg / ts = 1.5
tg / ts = 2

16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000

250

200

150

100

4000
20

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

50

90

20

Fig.7 The variation of the dimensionless leakage rate

versus the strip angle for different values of the
spacing parameter t g /t s .

dimensionless leakage rate

8000

6000

4000
1

1.5

Spacing parameter
(tg/ts)

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

90

Fig.10 shows the variation of the dimensionless

leakage rate with the strip angle for different values of
strip thickness to shaft radius ratio. It seen that this
ratio ( t s /R ) has a minor effect on the performance
irrespective of the value of strip angle . The
opposite holds in Fig.11 for the friction force where
the ratio t s /R has a surprisingly considerable effect
on it. An increase of the ratio t s /R from say 0.002 to
0.005 reduces the dimensionless frictional force
approximately four time, over the whole range of strip
angle .

=30

=50

=70

0.5

30

Fig.9 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the strip angle for different values of
the spacing parameter t g /t s .

12000

10000

tg / ts = 1
tg / ts = 1.5
tg / ts = 2

2.5

16000

DIMENSIONLESS AXIAL LEAKAGE

Fig.8 The variation of the dimensionless leakage

rate versus the spacing parameter t g /t s for different
values of the strip angle.

The effect of the spacing parameter on the

dimensionless friction force is given in Fig.9.
Increasing the value of the spacing parameter t g /t s
leads to a considerable decrease in the friction force
and this is very much pronounced at smaller values of
the strip angle .

ts / R = 0.002
ts / R = 0.003
ts / R = 0.004
ts / R = 0.005

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000
20

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

90

Fig.10 The variation of the dimensionless leakage rate

versus the strip angle for different values of
dimensionless strip thickness.

64

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

ts / R = 0.002
ts / R = 0.003
ts / R = 0.004
ts / R = 0.005

250

300

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

300

200

150

100

50

200

150

100

50

20

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

90

20

Fig.11 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the strip angle for different values of
dimensionless strip thickness.

50

60

70

STRIP ANGLE

80

90

DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

14000

L / D = 0.02
L / D = 0.03
L / D = 0.04
L / D = 0.05

12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
20

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

90

Fig.14 The variation of the dimensionless leakage

rate versus the strip angle for different
dimensionless strip width.

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

600

C / b = 0.05
C / b = 0.1
C / b = 0.15

12000

40

16000

16000

14000

30

Fig.13 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the strip angle for different values of
the dimensionless clearance.

The clearance between the strip and the shaft is seen

from Fig.12 to have a little effect on the leakage rate.
Although the value of the dimensionless clearance
c/b does not affect the leakage it does affect the
friction force to a great extent as can be seen in
Fig.13. Increasing the value of c/b from 0.05 to 0.15
results in a decrease from about 50 % at = 90 0 to
less than 10 % of the original value at = 20 o .
Fig.14 shows the variation of the dimensionless
leakage rate with the strip angle for various strip width
to shaft diameter ratio. It is clear that the wider strip
the lesser the leakage rate for all the values of . The
opposite effect is true for the dimensionless friction
force for all values of as seen as in Fig.15.
Reproductions of Fig.14 and 15 are given in Fig.16
and 13 respectively. It is quite clear that for relatively
wide strip the leakage rate is very for all values of .
The relationship between the friction force and the
strip width is found to linear for all values of .
DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

C / b = 0.05
C / b = 0.1
C / b = 0.15

250

10000

8000

6000

L / D = 0.02
L / D = 0.03
L / D = 0.04
L / D = 0.05

550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50

4000
20

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

20

90

30

40

50

60

STRIP ANGLE

70

80

90

Fig.15 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the strip angle for different
dimensionless strip width.

Fig.12 The variation of the dimensionless leakage

rate versus the strip angle for different values of
the dimensionless clearance.

65

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

1800

12000

DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

DIMENSIONLESS LEAKAGE RATE

=30

=50

=70

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
0.02

0.04

0.06

L/D

0.08

1300
1200
1100
1000
900

0.1

0.2

100

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.04

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

700

0.02

0.3

ECCENTRICITY RATIO ( e / c )

Fig.18 The variation of the dimensionless leakage

rate versus the eccentricity ratio for different
values of the strip angle.

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

DIMENSIONLESS FRICTION FORCE

1400

0.0

=30
0
=50
=70

=30
=50
=70

1500

800

1000

800

1600

0.10

Fig.16 The variation of the dimensionless

leakage rate versus the dimensionless strip
width for different values of the strip angle.

900

1700

0.06

L/D

0.08

0.10

Fig.17 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the dimensionless strip width for
different values of the strip angle.

=30
=50
=70

90
80
70
60
50
40
30

For all the results considered so far the shaft and

strips pack inner diameters are concentric. Fig.18
shows the variation of the leakage rate with
eccentricity ratio for various strip angles. It can easily
be argued that the eccentricity ratio has no sensible
effect on the leakage rate for all values of , but in
Fig.19 has a noticeable effect on the friction for
eccentricity ratio greater than approximately 0.4 for
the values of considered here.

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

ECCENTRICITY RATIO ( e / c )

0.7

0.8

Fig.19 The variation of the dimensionless friction

force versus the eccentricity ratio for different
values of the strip angle.

CONCLUSIONS
In this work the following conclusions are drawn:
1- The strip angle has a major effect on the
performance of the seal as well as on the
friction force. Since the larger the strip angle
the lesser the leakage rate and the larger the
friction force. The optimum value for
0

but for
minimum leakage rate is 90
mechanical stability and durability reasons it
should be less than that.
2- The spacing between the strips has a minor
effect on the leakage rate for small values of
the strip angle but for larger values say for

70 0 angle the increase in leakage rate

66

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

reaches approximately 20 percent when the

spacing is doubled.
3- The strip thickness has a minor effect on the
performance irrespective of the value of the
strip angle.
4- The clearance between the strip and the
shaft has a little effect on the leakage rate but
increasing the clearance results in a
considerable decrease in the friction force
which approximately reaches 50 percent for

Dimensionless velocity component in ydirection, v = v/u o

w
Velocity component in z -direction, m/s.
w
Velocity component in z -direction, m/s.
Dimensionless velocity component in zw
direction, w = w/u 0 .
Cartesian co-ordinate system.
(x , y, z )
(x ,y ,z)
Oblique co-ordinate system.
dimensionless oblique co-ordinate system,
( , y, z )
= x/R, y = y/b, z = z/L
Greek Symbols

Strip angle.

Eccentricity ratio, = e / c .
Strip
shape factor.

90 0 strip angle.
5- The wider the strip the lesser the leakage
rate for all values of strip angle opposite
holds for the friction force.
NOMENCLATURE
b
the seal gap length, m.
c
radial clearance, m.
c
dimensionless clearance,
e
eccentricity, m.
friction force, N.
Ff

c =c/b

oblique gap width, h g = h g /sin , m.

hg

dimensionless oblique gap width, h g = h g /b.

h
h
k
L
p
p

film thickness, m.
dimensionless film thickness, h =h/b
Velocity ratio, k = R/u o .
strip width, m.
pressure, Pa.

Q*

dimensionless pressure, p = p u o R / b 2
Characteristic dimensionless

[2] M. J. Braun, R. C. Hendricks and V. A. Canacci NonIntrusive

Qualitative
and
Quantitative
Flow
Characterization and Bulk Flow Model for Brush
SealProceedings of the Japan Inter. Tribology Conf.
Nagoya, 1990.
[3] J. A. Schlumberger, M. P. Proctor and R. C. Hendricks
Eccentricity Effects on Leakage of Brush Seal at Low
Speed NASA, TM 105141, 1991.
[4] R.C. Hendricks, S. Schlumberger, M.J. Braun, F. Choy
and R.L. A Bulk Flow Model Of A Brush Seal System
ASME, Paper No. 91-GT- 325, 1991.

Leakage flow rate through the seal, m 3 / s .

Dimensionless leakage flow rate through the

[5] J. A. Carlile, R. C. Hendricks and D. A. Yoder Brush

Seal Leakage Performance With Gaseous Working
Fluids at Static and Low Rotor Speed Conditions J. of
Gas Turbine and Power, vol. 115, pp. 397-403, 1993.

Strip thickness, m.

Velocity component in x'-direction, m/s.

Velocity component in x-direction, m/s.
Dimensionless flow velocity component in xdirection, u = u/u o .
Reference velocity, m/s

Shear stress over the shaft surface, N/ m .

Angular velocity, rad/s.

pressure, p * = p / k .
shaft radius, m.
Reynolds number, R e = u o b/ .

ts

Density, kg/ m 3 .

[1] R. Mullen, M. Braun, and R. Hendricks Numerical

Modeling of Flow in Simulated Brush Seal
Configurations AIAA, Paper No. 90-2141, 1990.

tg

uo

Angle coordinate in circumferential, = x R

REFERENCES

seal, Q * = Q/u o b L k .
The gap between the strips, m.

u
u

Kinematic viscosity m 2 /s

hg

R
Re
Q

h g

p*

viscosity, Pa s.

dimensionless friction force,

Ff = Ff / (u o RL/b)
gap width, m.

Ff

[6] C. A. Dowler, R. E. Chupp and G. F. Holle ''Simple

Effective Thickness Model for Circular Brush
SealsAIAA, Paper 92-3192, 1992.
[7] R. E. Chupp and C. A. Dowler Performance
Characteristics of Brush Seal for Limited- Life Engines
Trans. ASME, Vol. 115, pp. 390-396, 1993.
[8] F. J. Bayley and C. A. Long A Combined Experimental
and Theoretical Study of Flow and pressure
Distributions in a Brush Seal Trans. ASME, Vol. 115,
404-410, 1993.

Velocity component in y -direction, m/s.

Velocity component in y -direction, m/s.

67

Am. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 2011, 2(1): 58-68

[14] R. C. Hendricks, J. Wilson, T. Wu and R. Flower

''Bidirectional Brush Seal" NASA, TM-107451, 1997.

[9] R. C. Handericks, T. A. Griffin and T. R. Kline Relative

Performance Comparison Between Baseline Labyrinth
and Dual-Brush Compressor Discharge Seals in a T700 Engine Test, NASA, TM-106360, 1994.

[15] J. W. Chew and S. I. hogg Porosity Modeling of Brush

Seals Journal of Tribology, Vol. 119, pp. 769-775,
1997.

[10] J. W. Chew, B. L. Lapworth and P. J. Millener

Mathematical Modeling of Brush Seals Int.J. Heat and
Fluid Flow, Vol. 16, pp. 493-500, 1995.

[16] A. T. O'Neill,P. A. Withers, S.I. Hogg, and T. V. Jones

Multiple Brush Seals in Series ASME, Paper No. 97GT-194, 1997.

[11] M. C. Sharatchandra and D. L. Rhode Computed

Effects of Rotor Induced Swirl on Brush Seal
Performance Part 1 : Leakage Analysis Trans.
ASME Vol. 118, pp.912-918, 1996.

[17] M. Demiroglu, M. F. Aksit, and J. A. Tichy, A

Numerical Study of Brush Seal Leakage Flow AIAA,
Paper No. 98-3173, 1998.

[12] M. C. Sharatchandra and D. L. Rhode Computed

Effects of Rotor Induced Swirl on Brush Seal
Performance Part 2 : Bristle Force Analysis Trans.
ASME , vol.118, pp.920-926, 1996.

[18] M. T. Turner, J. W. Chew and C. A. Long

Experimental
Investigation
and
Mathematical
Modeling of clearance Brush Seals, ASME, Journal of
Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 120, pp.
573-579, 1998.

[13] J. Short, P. Basu, A. Datta, R. Loewenthal, and R.

Prior Advanced Brush Seal Development AIAA,
Paper No. 96-2907, 1996.

[19] H. E. Laos, J. M. Vance, and S. E. Buchanan Hybrid

Brush Pocket Damper Seal for Turbomachinery Trans.
ASME, Vol.122, pp. 330-336, 2000.

68