Electromagnetic Shaft Currents in

Turbomachinery: An Update
Part I: Status Review
and Shaft Brush Development

Unscheduled shutdowns and serious damage to the machinery can be prevented Dy

demagnetization of all rotating and stationary components of the entire train.

U.S. Sohre
Turbomachinery Consultant
Ware, MA

i.o results from arc-welding, use of mag-

BRIEF REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES
INVOLVED
Reference (l_) or Reference (5) should be
consulted for a detailed explanation of shaft
current generation. In a nutshell, the
process works as follows:
Prerequisites For Electromagnetic
Generation:
The machine must be relatively large,
and/or have a rotor running at high sur-
face speeds, and/or have tight clear-
ances between rotating and stationary
elements.
A major portion of the machine must be
made of a. material which can retain
magnetism.
Residual magnetism must be present, or
the unit must be located in a magnetic
field. The residual magnetism usually
0149-3701/81/4861-1 $02.00 © 1981 AlChE
netic tools, lifting magnets, magnetic
particle inspection, chrome-plating, etc.
If the components are not thoroughly
demagnetized after such operations,
residual magnetism will be present and
this can set up self-magnetization and
shaft current generation when the machine
is operating. See (6) for a very good,
simple explanation of magnetic principles.
.2
Shaft Current Generation
The principle of operation of a generator in
any power plant is the fact that a conductor
traveling through a magnetic field will
generate a voltage at its two ends, one end
being positive, the other negative. If the
ends are electrically connected, a current
will flow. This current will be proportional
to the dimensions of the conductor, the
strength, of the mangetic field, and the
velocity with which the conductor is travel-
ing through the fields. Another mechanism
involves generation of eddy-currents in
stator or rotor, in the same fashion as
with ah eddy-current brake. If the above

185
prerequisites are met, any machine will
generate internal currents. In a turbine-
compressor unit these currents are short-
circuited, the electric energy being trans-
formed into heat in the rotor and stator.
Where the currents travel across the inter-
face between parts -- for example the very
thin oil film at bearings and seals -- or at
any other contact point offering an electrical
resistance, there will be sparking and sur-
face damage. If currents are high -- and
they can reach very high values, of several
thousand amperes -- there can be massive
arc-welding and the machine may destroy
itself.
As contacting points (for example
touching labyrinth points) are consumed by
arcing, clearances will increase. This
raises the electrical resistance at this
given location until another location offers a
lower resistance, and the current will then
change to another path. This process con-
tinues until vibration or leakage becomes
excessive, or a failure occurs in the thrust
bearings, journals, or seals. If the telltale
signs of sparking, welding, electrodischarge
machining, and spark tracks are not observed,
ultimately every seal and bearing in a
machine may be severely damaged, and the
unit may wreck.
The final stage of electric current
generation is reached when s elf-excitation
occurs, i.e. the currents flow through the
machine in a manner which intensifies the
existing magnetic fields, which then cause
higher current to flow, and so on, to the
point of short-circuited self-excitation. This
process may take years to develop, or it may
occur within seconds. The culmination of the
process is reached during the last seconds
or so, when the rotor crashes into the
stator at full speed and with the throttle
valve wide open, for example when a thrust
bearing failure.occurs. The magnetic gap
between the generating components is then
zero and -- sinc'e magnetic field strength is
inversely proportional to the gap -- enor-
mous currents are generated at this time.
The evidence of such extreme currents can
be seen in Part II of this paper.
186
Self-excitation is often initiated by a
shock, or by vibration of the machine, for
example during an episode of oil whirl,
compressor surge, fluid slugging, quick
temperature changes and consequent rotor
bow, etc.
A machine having a small degree of
residual magnetism can build up its mag-
netic fields without any external prompting
-- just sitting there and running steadily.
This' has been documented by field measure-
ments. The process may finally level out at
a certain field strength (which may or may
not cause objectionable damage), or self-
excitation may occur at any time, due to an
unrelated incident, such as shock.
Severe shaft current damage is some-
times experienced with new machines, but
the majority of problems which have been
encountered were with machines which had
been operating several years, most of them
around 6 to 12 years.
The machines most frequently involved
are:
- Ammonia plants: Syngas train; air train;
refrigeration train; CO2 train.
- Methanol plants: Syngas train.
- Ethylene plants: Cracked gas train;
propylene train.
- Oil refining: Air train; H2 compressors;
wet gas compressors.
- Nitric-acid trains.
- Gas turbines.
The list is by no means limited to
these processes. The problem can occur
anywhere if the prerequisites are given.
During the last two years we have seen it in
all kinds of turbomachinery, including oil
field gas reinjection units, oxygen com-
pressors, even a small cryogenic gas
expander which was no more than a few
inches long, having an impeller of
approximately 5" diameter, and running at
50, 000 RPM. This machine was badly
damaged several times. The reason for the
problem was very strong magnetism result-
ing from spot welding, and the very small
clearances in this machine.
2. 0
HISTORY AND STATUS OF WORK
The phenomenon of electromagnetic shaft
current generation has been understood for
a long time, see Reference (5) and the
references listed in ( I ) . However, com-
pressor designers and operators were gen-
erally not aware of the problem. My per-
sonal involvement dates to 1971, when a
very severe case occurred with an air com-
pressor in a 1, 000 ton ammonia plant. At
that time I abstracted some of the references
in (2). More problems of this sort occurred
sporadically, getting more and more severe
and more frequent. It became apparent that
a more organized approach was required,
and this prompted me to get together with
Mr. Nippes (a well-known electrical
machinery designer) and to present the paper
at the 1978 Turbomachinery Symposium (1).
Many of the machines involved had
shaft current problems as long as people
could remember (decades), some of the
machines since they were first installed. The
real cause was never identified, and the parts
were just periodically replaced. The primi-
tive shaft brushes which were sometimes
installed (because electrostatic currents
were suspected) failed relatively rapidly,
and then the people just accepted "wear" in
bearings, seals, governor drive gears, etc. ,
as a fact of life.
In the late seventies, with the in-
creased use of on-deck welding, magnetic-
particle inspection, magnetic tools and
lifting devices, etc. , the failure frequency
in compressor trains reached epidemic pro-
portions. Some of these failures were
extremely severe, and repetitive to the
degree that they would recur within days or
even hours after an overhaul.
The paper ( I ) is quite detailed. Any-
one not requiring so much technical detail
187
will find simpler descriptions in (3) or (4).
An excellent description of the electromag-
netic principles involved and of tests which
had been performed was presented by
Schier in Reference (5). When we published
paper ( I ) , we were not aware of this
reference.
During the last two years, Mr. Nippes
has become involved in the investigation of
many shaft current problems, and he has
developed apparatus and procedures to
detect shaft currents and magnetic fields,
and to demagnetize machines, as he will
explain himself.
As experience was accumulated, it
became quite apparent that relapses could
occur after demagnetization -- and es-
pecially after partial demagnetization -- if
the cur r ent-generation of a machine was not
monitored in some fashion. This was true
especially after partial demagnetization,
when the unit was not completely dis-
assembled, or if magnetism was again
introduced into the train (spare parts,
welding, magnetic particle inspection).
Also, some minor residual magnetism
sometimes survived, and a slowly pro-
gressing damage would develop in the
bearing and seals. Evidently, a good shaft
brush was needed to allow monitoring of
current as well as grounding of such small
residual currents. The brushes which were
available at the time turned out to be un-
suitable and/or unreliable for the purpose.
Most were not adaptable to existing
machinery and/or did not have the features
which the plant engineers required, for
purpose of maintenance, wear detection,
and plant reliability. These brushes had
excessive contact resistance and quit
working altogether after a relatively short
operating time.
Plant operators asked me to design a
suitable brush. To find out exactly what
was required I conducted an extensive
series of tests with brushes of many dif-
ferent materials and configurations. It
became apparent that a new design was
required, which had to be specifically
tailored for the monitoring of voltage and
currents, and for removal of residual
currents. Brushes of this new design have
been in continuous operation since 1979.
The function and features of various
shaft-riding brushes will be described below.
3. 0
SHAFT-RIDING BRUSHES
.1
General Considerations
Brushes cannot eliminate strong shaft
currents and/or prevent self-magnetization
and s e If-excitation of a unit. Their function
is to allow monitoring of the voltages and
currents, and to protect the machine from
damage resulting from residual magnetism
after demagnetization. The important points
to remember when applying shaft brushes
are:
Currents of the electrostatic type will
be effectively eliminated by the application
of one brush per shaft. Although certain
locations are better suited than others, the
brush can in most cases be located wherever
it is most convenient.
Electromagnetic currents: There are
so many possibilities of electromagnetic
excitation that it is impossible to predict
the strength of the currents and the paths
which they may take. There are no brushes
which can protect a machine against all
possible combinations of such currents. Also,
if magnetization is high and currents are
very strong, any brush will deteriorate
fairly rapidly, and frosting and other spark
damage may occur on the shaft surface under
the brush. Heating of the brush and of the
shaft may then occur because of currents.
This is one reason for a cooling-oil require-
ment. If shaft frosting due to excessive
cur rent-transfer has progressed beyond a
certain point, electrical contact of the
brush with the shaft will be lost, the brush
becoming ineffective. This can be detected
by measuring current transfer through the
brush, as will be described later. If the
shaft currents are strong enough to cause
loss of contact within a relatively short
time, it will be necessary to demagnetize
the machine.
188
Summarizing, we can say that the
function of a shaft brush in a magnetically
active machine is to allow monitoring and
to prevent damage to bearings, seals,
couplings, gears, etc. This will be
accomplished in most cases. However, it
is possible that more current is generated
than the brush can handle. In this case
brush wear will be excessive, heating may
occur, a'nd the brush will cease to function
properly.
The above pattern of behavior has
been observed during extensive testing,
with several different types of brushes and
with several different materials. The
tests were run at 10, 000 RPM, on a 5 inch
shaft surface. The shaft material was
4340, which is a common material used for
turbomachinery shafting.
JJ
Definition Of Function
The brush must remove electricity from
shaft surfaces running with 250 ft. I see.
to approximately 500 ft. /sec. , with a
minimum of electrical resistance, and
without interruption of current flow during
a revolution, for example because of the
brush jumping off the surface. Acetylizing
materials may be unacceptable. Environ-
ment of the brush and its holder may be a
hazardous atmosphere. Malfunction or
failure of this device must not precipitate
an accident or a shutdown of the unit.
The degree of wear of the brush must
be determined from the outside, and the
brush must be capable of being raised and/
or removed and replaced without the risk
of a spark or rub against rotating com-
ponents. Brush wear must be limited to a
point where no shaft damage can occur,
and there must be provisions for a wear
indicator and alarm, as even short periods
of operation without the brush could cause
severe damage or failure of the machinery,
and a worn brush will cause sparking,
excessive heat, and shaft damage.
TTie brush itself may be exposed to a
strong oil flow which discharges from the
bearings and seals, or it may be working
dry, or in an oil vapor environment. Leak-
age of significant amounts of gas or oil
through the brush mounting to the outside
may not be acceptable.
The operating life of the brush should
preferably be long enough to allow replace-
ment at scheduled shutdown only. This
means at least one year of continuous
operation.
Surface irregularities and slight pitting
or surface roughness should not have a
significant effect on brush performance,
although it will obviously accelerate wear
of any brush.
The brush assembly should be capable
of operating in environments from -60°F to
about 300°F (to be specified by user). Pro-
truding brush components may see 500°F
(gas and steam turbines).
In most cases there is only approxi-
mately 1 inch of axial shaft surface accessi-
ble for the brush, for example between the
coupling and bearing case, or on a (integral)
coupling hub, or inside a bearing. For these
reasons, axial movement of the brush must
be extremely limited, to avoid contact with
rotating or stationary parts during service.
This would cause either a rub (spark,
damage to rotating parts), or a short-circuit
of the rotor against the casing (spark, un-
controllable electrical loops with possibility
of self-excitation).
The accessible shaft location deter-
mines the mounting requirements of the
brush. Since many installations are on
existing machinery, there is usually only
one choice of location, and this is often in a
very inaccessible area, for example in the
end cover of a barrel-type compressor.
Also, the type of mounting varies with each
machine, and so does the distance between
the mounting surface of the brush and the
centerline of the rotor, which determined the
length of the brush assembly. Some mounting
surfaces are cylindrical, others are flat
(either in a horizontal or vertical plane) or
the brush assembly may have to be mounted
against the face of a bearing case or seal.
189
The mounting area is often obstructed by
piping and other mechanical and electrical
components, and the space availability for
removing the brush assembly may be
extremely limited.
For the above reasons, a design was
selected which has sufficient flexibility to
accommodate these varying conditions. The
device shown in Figure 1* consists of a
brush with wire bristles of a special
material, which are protruding from a very
narrow, rectangular cartridge which can be
mounted in a variety of ways, and which can
be modified in length to suit individual
conditions. The brush is removable from
the outside of the machine.
.3
Grounding of Shaft Brushes
-1 General considerations and safety.
Shaft currents may reach high voltages and
high current densities. This can occur
suddenly and unexpectedly. Arcing and
electrical shock to personnel may occur if
proper precautions are not taken. There-
fore a switch should be provided to dis-
connect the brush terminal from the ground
before the brush is raised from the shaft
or before it is lowered, to prevent arcing.
A suitable grounding arrangement is shown
in Figure 2.
The suitability of the switch should be
checked for the given environment, and for
the voltage and current to be used. If there
is a risk of fire or explosion, an inert-gas
purge or oil purge may be provided at each
brush casing,
-2 Grounding arrangements. If mag-
netically induced currents are present, it
will be necessary to have a brush on each
end of each magnetically active machine.
*Patents are applied for. Therefore no
detailed illustration can be published at
this time. If additional information is
desired, please contact the author.
This means that each body in the train needs
two brushes once magnetism has permeated
the entire train. The question is now how to
close the electrical loop across the brushes
in a way which will minimize current recir-
culation, magnetization, spark damage,
power loss, and local heating. Obviously,
the brush will not prevent the currents from
being generated, but it can prevent spark
damage to critical parts.
The grounding arrangement will be
different for each installation, depending on
where and how the currents are generated.
For this reason it would be advisable to
consult an electrical expert to prescribe the
best arrangement for each individual case.
At the present time it seems that in most
cases where the entire unit is generating
currents, the most effective way of grounding
will be as shown in Figure 2, connecting all
brushes to a common lead, with a ground
lead near the middle of the unit. This ground
lead should be connected to a separate, good,
and well-maintained ground. Each brush
should also have a switch in its lead to permit
disconnecting individual brushes from the
grounding system, for check-out and for
maintenance.
Needless to say, it is necessary to
review all casing grounds in the train and in
the baseplate and concrete foundation rein-
forcements. Make sure that they are pro-
perly designed and in good operating condi-
tion and that no voltage differential exists
between any of the grounding points.
-3 Installation checkout.
1, Before the unit is started, the brushes
should be checked with the ground switch
open for:
- Resistance to casing with brush raised.
This should be infinite.
- Resistance from terminal to shaft with
brush down. This should be zero.
With ground switch closed, check for
proper operation of all switches.
2. Startup:
- Start with all brushes raised.
- At speed, with ground switches open,
lower one brush at a time and, using
190
an oscilloscope, measure the voltage
across the ground switch. This is the
shaft voltage being generated. It will
usually show up as a series of near-
vertical spikes across the screen of
the scope, often giving indications of
running frequency, or multiples
thereof (see Ref. (1_) ).
_._4
Measuring Shaft Voltage and Current
Measure current, as shown in Figure 3,
using a non-induetive resistance, of
approximately 1 ohm from the brush to
the ground, and measuring voltage-drop
across this resistance using the oscillo-
scope. This voltage drop can then be
converted into current, using the for-
mula I (amp) = voltage drop/O, where
ÎÏ = resistance. The measured current
is the current discharged by the voltage
spikes from the rotor to the ground. It
is obviously not possible to measure the
current strength of these spikes, which
last only a few milliseconds, by means
of conventional ammeters.
If voltage and current are within reason
and no signs of distress are noted, the
ground switch can be closed. However,
if current reaches several amperes,
shutdown and demagnetization should be
scheduled, because brushes and machin-
ery may deterioTate rapidly.
- Observe effect of each brush upon voltage
and current of all other brushes. Of
course, it is necessary to keep detailed
records of the readings made at startup
and at periodic intervals.
- Watch for any evidence of excessive heat
being generated in the vicinity of the
brush, due to eddy-currents in the shaft.
Feel the casing area, watch for oil
smoke from breathers, oil temperature
rise, etc. Pull the brush and feel for
heat if the situation looks questionable.
Often, a good idea of the heat being
developed can be had by feeling the area
of the casing where the oil throw-off
from the brush hits the casing walls.
Brush Checkout
-1 Ohmmeter readings.
While an ohmmeter is not a suitable instru-
ment to check brush contact resistance (the
interface between the brush and a rotating
shaft is of a quite different nature than an
electrical resistance), it can be used to get
a fair idea of brush effectiveness. This can
be done as follows (see Figure 4):
- Open ground switches of the two brushes
on a rotor.
Connect the ohmmeter across the terminal
of the two brushes, which must be on the
same shaft, with no couplings or other
resistance in between. The meter will
probably fluctuate, but if the average
reading is below 50 ohm, the brushes are
operating properly. Reverse meter leads.
Probably one reading is quite high,
because a semiconductor effect seems to
exist across the brush interfaces. The
lower reading should be used for judging
brush conditions.
- Raise each brush briefly and make sure
that the resistance goes to infinity, indi-
cating there is no short against the ground.
Observe the reading after the brush has
been lowered again. It will take a few
minutes to stabilize the reading.
-2 Voltage drop.
Using a DC voltmeter or, preferably, an
oscilloscope, check the voltage of a small
battery with the rotor in series with the
instrumentation, as shown in Figure 5.
Repeat this test with the leads reversed. If
the measured voltage drop across the
brushes and rotor is about 2 to 3 volts, both
brushes are in good condition.
Caution: Do not connect the above
battery circuit or the ohmmeter to the brush
terminal for any longer than necessary
(about 5 seconds per reading), because even
a small battery current can generate sub-
stantial eddy currents in the shaft under-
neath the brush, with consequent shaft
heating and brush contact surface deteriora-
191
tion can occur quite rapidly, within a few
minutes.
Brush condition and wear should be
checked daily at first, later in weekly
intervals, once satisfactory operation has
been established.
4.0
TESTING OF SHAFT BRUSHES
Note: For space reasons, most of this
chapter had to be eliminated for this edition.
Refer to Ref. (8) for a detailed description
of the tests.
±l_
Description of Test Rig
5 inch shaft section driven by 10, 000
RPM AC/DC motor. The test brush
rides on this surface.
- Shaft brushes for voltage input to the
rotor: one "spark plug" type ("Bendix")
stranded copper-wire brush (Figure 1,
Reference ( I ) ) at the shaft-end face,
approximately 1/8" from shaft center-
line. This brush deteriorated during
testing, resistance exceeding 150 ohm,
and a second input brush had to be
installed at the other end of the shaft.
This brush was of the metal-bristle type
and accessible from the outside for
manipulation, so good contact could be
verified during operation.
Oil supply: To simulate the environment
of a bearing case, a large, high-pressure
oil pump supplied approximately 15 GPM
of turbine oil into the enclosure, splash-
ing against adjacent shields on both sides
of the brush, but not directly contacting
the brush.
A separate, small oil pump supplied
a 1/8" stream of oil directly to the
brush, approximately 1. 5 inches up-
stream of the shaft center line.
The oil being used on most tests was
a new turbine oil. This oil was identical
to the oil being used in an ammonia
Syngas compressor train.
 During the test the oil temperature at
the tank was normally between 90°F and
120°F, which is' approximately the inlet
temperature of oil used on turbomachinery.
_^
Test Results
-1 General observations and conclusions.
Over a period of several months, hundreds
of test runs were performed, with different
brush arrangements, different test condi-
tions, different types of currents, and dif-
ferent current densities. Thirty-two basic
test series were performed, evaluating
promising arrangements and their perfor-
mance versus time. The criteria to evaluate
brush performance were:
1. Contact resistance, using the criteria
described above.
2. Contact-pressure requirements.
3. Deterioration of shaft surface.
4. Deterioration of brush contact area.
5. Brush wear rate.
6. Brush friction.
7. Brush and shaft heating. Oil heating.
We had hoped that such an extensive
test program would not be necessary, feeling
that we had a promising design which should
function well, perhaps with some minor
fine-tuning. Although this finally turned out
to be the case, the initial results were
extremely disappointing, as the contact
broke down within days or even hours of
operation, and the cause of this was very
difficult to determine, requiring major
modifications of the test apparatus. Great
refinement of the test procedures was
necessary and, of course, major revisions
of brush design and testing of other types of
brushes had to be performed.
Because of the difficulties initially
experienced, we contacted four highly re-
garded experts in electrical brush design,
and sample brushes were manufactured by
192
four manufacturers, each involving several
configurations and a variety of material
(carbon, graphite, metal, metal-impreg-
nated). To compound the difficulties, it
was found that the reference brush feeding
the currents into the rotor deteriorated
and falsified the readings. This brush was
of the so-called "Bendix" type, or spark
plug-type, which is shown in Figure 1 (1).
The operating conditions to which the
brushes were exposed were well within
stated limits.
^_3
Conclusions (Preliminary)
-1 The type of shaft currents we are deal-
ing with in this test setup will cause rapid
deterioration of any brush if the shaft
currents get high, and/or if a given current
starts generating secondary currents and
magnetic fields in the rotor. Such "fields
and currents evidently have much more
effect upon the brush than the passage of an
AC or DC current of known characteristics.
-2 The behavior of the brushes is entirely
different from behavior of commonly used
brushes in electric machinery.
-3 Within these limitations, the new brush
design functioned very well.
-4 If currents exceed certain limits, rapid
deterioration of the contact surface will
occur and the brush will cease to function.
This can be detected with the unit in opera-
tion by using the methods described pre-
viously, especially the ohmmeter method
or the battery voltage method. If currents
are so high that the brushes deteriorate
rapidly, there is no other remedy than to
demagnetize the equipment.
-5 Commonly used solid brushes of carbon,
graphite, metal, and metal-impregnations
failed within a verv short time, causing
shaft damage.
The test program will be continued,
to find the most suitable materials and
arrangements.
In the meantime, the wire bristle
brushes are considered suitable for field
installation. Within the stated limits, they
should reduce or eliminate shaft current
damage to the machinery, and they will per-
mit accurate measuring of shaft voltages and
currents, thereby allowing monitoring of
detrimental magnetic activity.
^4
Field Operation
A set of 4 brushes was placed in continuous
operation in 1979, being periodically (every
2 hours) checked for wear and contact resis-
tance. The bristles are of two different
materials. Surface speed is up to 204 ft. /sec.
This unit (33, 000 HP propylene compressor)
had a 9 year history of severe shaft current
problems, dating back to original startup.
Had bearing failures in 3 to 5 month intervals,
finally 1 month intervals. Babbitt was 20
mils, exposing the bronze backing. The
"sagging" of the shaft into the bearings was
monitored with the gap voltage of the vibra-
tion probes. See (I) for details. The unit
had two spark plug-type brushes, at the shaft
ends, which were not capable of maintaining
electrical contact, see above. The unit was
demagnetized and four brushes were installed.
Results to date (1981):
- No increase in contact resistance.
- No noticeable brush wear. It is estimated
that no brush replacement will be re-
quired for many operating years.
- No increase in gap voltage of the vibration
probes due to spark-erosion of bearings.
- Bearings running significantly cooler.
- Maximum currents going through brushes
are about 0. 065 amp AC and 0. 075 amp
DC, measured by using the l ß resistor +
oscilloscope method. Occasionally cur-
rents go to 0. 12 A.
- No evidence of shaft current damage to the
unit.
- The "phone pickup" signals are now much
lower. This is a result of the demagne-
tization. There are definitely no more
"crackling" signals in the bearing area.
There are a number of additional
brushes in field operation, but it was diffi-
cult to obtain meaningful operating data.
5. 0^
PERMISSIBLE SHAFT CURRENT LEVELS
There is practically no information available
on this subject -- as far as experience with
193
process equipment is concerned. Reference
(T) contains a very good explanation of the
shaft current problem experienced with
electric generating units, and it also des-
cribes copper-braid grounding devices
which work well in these large machines.
However, those machines have ample space
for such devices and they can be shut down
for inspection and for replacement, while
process equipment is usually required to
run continuously for several years. This
very useful instruction pamphlet contains
the following recommendations:
"Shaft Voltage Measurement;
The voltage from shaft to ground should
be checked at least once a month, to be
sure that the grounding devices are
functioning properly. Because knowing
the characteristic wave shape and peak
voltage are important troubleshooting
tools, the recommended method of
measurement is an oscilloscope. The
leads should be short and the oscillo-
scope should be grounded to the turbine
pedestal where the shaft voltage is being
measured. Measurements are to be taken
at the exposed shaft between the turbine
and the generator and at the front stand-
ard through the shaft stick hole. The
oscilloscope must be AC and DC coupled
so that both voltage components can be
observed. The maximum instantaneous
voltage must not exceed 6 volts zero to
peak while the oscilloscope is in the DC
coupled mode. Voltage levels in excess
of 6 volts can dissipate enough energy in
a point contact to damage bearings. A
scope camera is also a good method to
record the data if one is available.
If for some reason an oscilloscope is
not available, a vacuum tube voltmeter
is better than not taking the required
measurement. Voltage spikes will not be
seen by a meter, however, and the de-
gree of assurance is considerably dimin-
ished. The voltage is to be measured at
the same locations listed above and be
AC and DC coupled. The maximum volt-
age must not exceed 1 volt RMS. Any
voltage over the maximum established
value will require corrective action. "
 This may serve as a temporary guide-
line on voltage potential, until information
on turbocompressors becomes available.
Concerning currents, we know even
less. The demagnetized propylene com-
pressor mentioned above has approximately
1 volt peak-to-peak voltage (with all brushes
grounded), as measured with the oscillo-
scope, and up to 0. 15 amps peak-tó-peak
(as meaaured across the 1 ohm resistor by
means of oscilloscope) at the-#1 (turbine
front) bearing. This is for normal opera-
tion, and it varies from day to day with
operating conditions and perhaps even
ambient conditions. The #4 brush (com-
pressor outboard) has 0. 04 amps. With the
brush at the #4 position raised, the #1
brush current increases to 1.2 A, and the
#2 brush goes from 0. 05 A to 0. 3 A. It can
be seen that the situation is far from
straightforward.
While this example does not provide
much help, it does give an indication of the
orders of magnitude to be expected,
6.0
CONCLUSIONS
While we are still very much in the dark
concerning electromagnetic shaft currents,
we at least have learned how to deal with
them in a manner which can prevent un-
scheduled shutdowns and serious damage to
the machinery. This is done by demagneti-
zation of all rotating and stationary com-
ponents of the entire train -- including the
structural steel baseplates (if used). When
the unit is put in service after demagneti-
zation, shaft current buildup is monitored
by means of the telephone pickup technique
described in (1), by measurement of static
magnetic fields using the Gaussmeter, and
by monitoring of shaft voltages and currents
with the shaft brush. Residual electromag-
netic currents are grounded by means of
shaft brushes, one at each bearing, if
possible.
Although there were a few notable
relapses, the experience so far has been
quite good where machinery was completely
194
demagnetized -- provided the demagne-
tizing job was done by experienced special-
ists, with special tools for the measure-
ment of fields and for the demagnetizing
operation.
7.0
REFERENCES
*(l)Sohre, J.S. , and Paul I. Nippes,
"Electromagnetic Shaft Currents and
Demagnetization on Rotors of Turbines
and Compressors", presented December
1978, at the 7th Turbomachinery Sym-
posium, Texas A&M University, College
Station, Texas.
*(2)Sohre, J.S., "Shaft Currents in Rotating
Equipment. Electromagnetic and Moving
Particle Induced", an informal review
of literature. October 19, 1971.
*(3)Sohre, J.S. , "Are Magnetic Currents
Destroying Your Machinery?", Hydro-
carbon Processing, April 1979, page
207 to 212.
*(4)Sohre, J.S. , "Shaft Currents Can Des-
troy Turbomachinery", Power, March
1980, page 96 to 100.
(5) Schier, V . , "Selbsterregte Unipolare
Gleichstrome in Maschinenwellen",
Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift, November
12, 1965 (in German). A translation of
this article was prepared by the Asso-
ciated Electrical Industries, Ltd. ;
Power Group, Research Laboratory,
Trafford Park, Manchester 17, United
Kingdom. Translation #3925 "Self-
excited homopolar direct currents in
the shafts of machines".
(6)"Magnetic Particle Flaw Detection",
Part HI. VIGILANCE, the Journal of
National Vulcan Engineering Insurance
Group Ltd. , Winter 1979, Volume III,
No. 11, pages 143 & 144.
(7) "Shaft Grounding Device -- Copper
Braid. Instructions", General Electric
Steam Turbine Dept. , Schenectady, New
York, Publication No. GEK-72291 (new
information, August 1979).
 WEAR ALARM (g>— ALARh, COUPLING;
SWITCH
-—TURBINE
—^^^
BRUSH P1VOT\ COMPRESSOR
GROUNDING SWITCH _f —±T
-t î_ r\
L ~
(1
1!
^jlita
1X .v'^J!
-u. ^ (NORMALLY CLOSED) t
^x_ '

U ' / f
{
r
i
PLUG-IN RECEPTACLES
FOR SCOPE, TO MEASURE
VOLTAGE, CURRENT AND
RESISTANCE.
L
Figure 2. Grounding arrangement: switches all nor-
PATENTS APPLIED FOR
mally closed.
Figure 1. Rotor grounding brush electrical arrange-
ment. COMPRESSOR
COUPLING

OPEN SWITCH TO MEASURE VOLTAGE.

CLOSE TO MEASURE CURRENT.
BRUSH CUOUND SWITCH
(NORMALLY CLOSED)
OSCILLOSCOPE
BRUSH

NON-1NPUCT1VK RESISTANCE
( 1 TO i
TO GROUND -«*-

Figure 3. Arrangement to measure flashing current. Figure 4. Checkout schematic for brush contact
resistance.

COM PR ESS OR N

DC VOLTMETER
-HI IM -BRUSH

(VACUUM-TUBE, BATTERY J
OR OSCILLOSCOPE) '(9V EVEREAETY
522)

^-TO GROUND

Figure 5. Checkout schematic for voltage-drop SOHRE, J.S.

across brushes.

195