Case Study –

„Use of the right bearing technology“ 1

Project information

ETZEL- EGL (Etzel Gas Lager) – 1986, PHASE 1:

Capacity: 1300 billion m³
max. cavern pressure: 180 bar
Injection rate: up to 0,9 million m³/h

ETZEL-EGS (EON Gas Storage) – 2010, PHASE

2+3:
capacity: 2000 billion m³
max. cavern pressure: 200 bar
Injection rate: up to 2,25 million m³/h

2
High Speed Parallel Shaft Gearbox Motorcompressor

Operation in: Gas Storage Plant

BHS Customer: GE Nuovo Pignone, ITA

Operator: Eon Ruhr Gas, Etzel, GER

Application: between VFD electrical motor

and compressor

Power: 17,200 kW
Speeds: 1,800 to 13,444 rpm

Gear Unit type: FD90-1

Year of delivery: 2011
Comment:
High circumferential speeds (toothing 150 m/s with shrunk wheel,
bearing 100 m/s (rated; max. 120 m/s);
WN 518834 X-tra Cool Bearings
(low temp., low oil flow)

3
Risk allocation at gearing
Power [kW] / PLV [m/S]

50000

40000

30000
Power [kW]

<c
20000

10000

0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
PLV [m /S]

 Gearing is within the limit, not in critical area.

4
Risk allocation at bearing technology
Speeds [m/s] / Load [N/mm2]

110

100

90

80

70
Speeds [m/s]

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
2,5 2,7 2,9 3,1 3,3 3,5 3,7 3,9
Load [N/m m 2]

 Bearing is in critical area.

5
Problem definition

• Gearbox creates bottle-neck for compressor train

• Bearings on HSS are very critical due to high speed
• Potential risks by high bearing temperatures:
– accelerated aging of oil  Coking
– Shut-downs due to temperature peaks
– Increased oxidation and reduction of
additives´properties
– Risk of scuffing on gears due to decreasing
oil quality
 Which bearing design can meet challenges
 Tilting pad design or fixed profile design
 Separate testing of bearings required

6
Bearing testing on BHS-Bearing test bed

Purpose of testing:
1. Ensuring bearing reliability by testing under operating
conditions.
2. Comparison of bearing types:
• Oil consumption at increasing load
• Bearing temperature while increasing load
• Bearing temperature while increasing speed
• Power losses while increasing speed

7
Measuring points and set up scheme

8
 Testing 1: Oil flow vs. Bearing load

Finding 1:
Fixed profile bearing needs less oil independent from load condition.

9
Testing 2: Pad temperature vs. Bearing load

Curve at same oil consumption

like BHS nearly 10°C higher.

Finding 2:
Fixed profile bearing are cooler and need less oil under increasing
load.
10
Testing 3: Pad temperature vs. Journal velocity

Finding 3:
Fixed profile bearings show lower temperature at increasing oil
consumption during speed increasement, but still 25% less than other
the bearing design. 11
Result 4: Bearing losses vs. Journal velocity

Bearing losses vs. Journal velocity

no load; pzu = 2,5 bar; T zu = 50 °C

140
Bearing losses P V [kW]

120
BHS-Festsegmentlager

RMT-4-
100 Kippsegmentlager

80

60

40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

velocity speed uL [ms-1 ]

Findings:
Fixed profile bearings show lower power losses while increasing
journal velocity.
12
Bearing tests on test rig
Evaluation of results
Evaluation of the results
 Performance of bearing temperature over load & journal velocity
 Oil flow over load
 Performance of power losses over journal velocity

Tilting pad BHS Ultra Cool Bearing

Oil Consumption 0 1
Pad temperature 0 1
Power losses 0 1
0 3

Additional findings:
1. Sudden temperature peak at tilting pad bearing due to unpredictable oil whips
under tilting pads lead to shut down alarm.
2. Better damping behaviour due to improved tailor made profiling of fixed
bearing design according operating conditions.
13
Summary and final decision
 Enduser and OEM decided to use BHS fixed profile „X-tra Cool Bearings“
because of:
1. Seperate testing opportunity of critical bearings
2. Better damping behaviour due to tailor made profiling
3. Avoidance of potential shut down due to unpredictable oil whips
4. Better behaviour of BHS bearings in terms of
1. Lower temperature
2. less oil consumption
3. higher efficiency

14
15