103605-7474 Ijmme-Ijens

International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS Vol:10 No:05 1
103605-7474 IJMME-IJENS October 2010 IJENS

I J E N S

Abstract A comparative study of pressure distribution and
load capacity of a cylindrical bore journal bearing is presented in
this paper. In calculating the pressure distribution and load
capacity of a journal bearing, isothermal analysis was carried out.
Using both analytical method and finite element method, pressure
distribution in the bearing was calculated. Moreover, the effects
of variations in operating variables such as eccentricity ratio and
shaft speed on the load capacity of the bearing were calculated.
The analytical results and finite element results were compared.
In order to check the validity, these results were also compared
with the available published results. In comparison with the
published results, generally finite element results showed better
agreement than analytical results.

I ndex Term Analytical Method, Finite Element Method,
Journal Bearing, Load Capacity, Pressure Distribution.
I. INTRODUCTION
Wear is the major cause of material wastage and loss of
mechanical performance of machine elements, and any
reduction in wear can result in considerable savings which can
be made by improved friction control. Lubrication is an
effective means of controlling wear and reducing friction, and
it has wide applications in the operation of machine elements
such as bearings. The principles of hydrodynamic lubrication
were first established by a well known scientist Osborne
Reynolds and he explained the mechanism of hydrodynamic
lubrication through the generation of a viscous liquid film
between the moving surfaces. The journal bearing design
parameter such as load capacity can be determined from
Reynolds equation both analytically and numerically.
Numerical analysis has allowed models of hydrodynamic
lubrication to include closer approximations to the
characteristics of real bearings. Numerical solutions to
hydrodynamic lubrication problems can now satisfy most
engineering requirements for prediction of bearing
characteristics. To analyze the bearing design parameters,
several approximate numerical methods have evolved over the
years such as the finite difference method and the finite

element method. The finite difference method is difficult to
use when irregular geometries are to be solved. Nowadays
finite element method becomes more popular and can
overcome these difficulties. Use of elements and interpolation
functions ensure continuity of pressure and mass flow rate
across inter-element boundaries. Booker and Huebner used
finite element method for the solution of hydrodynamic
lubrication problems [1]. Later Hayashi and Taylor used the
finite element technique to predict the characteristics of a finite
width journal bearing [2]. A theoretical investigation was
carried out by Gethin and Medwell using the finite element
method for a high speed bearing [3]. A theoretical study based
on the finite element method was carried out by Gethin and
Deihi to investigate the performance of a twin-axial groove
cylindrical bore bearing [4]. Basri and Gethin worked on the
finite element method for the solution of hydrodynamic
lubrication problems [5]. A theoretical and experimental study
of thermal effects in a plain circular steadily loaded journal
bearing was carried out by Ma and Taylor [6]. In comparing
the global performance characteristics, theory and experiment
exhibited an excellent agreement over a wide range of loads
and rotational speeds. Gethin worked on the thermal behavior
of various types of high speed journal bearings and found good
agreement with theoretical and the experimental results [7].
The effects of variable density and variable specific heat on
maximum pressure, maximum temperature, bearing load,
frictional loss and side leakage in high-speed journal bearing
operation were examined [8]. The combined effects of couple
stress due to a Newtonian lubricant blended with additives and
the presence of roughness on journal bearing surfaces were
examined [9]. It was found that the couple stress effects can
raise the film pressure of the lubricant fluid, improve the load-
carrying capacity and reduce the friction parameter, especially
at high eccentricity ratio. The surface roughness effect is
dominant in long bearing approximation and the influence of
transverse or longitudinal roughness to the journal bearing is in
reverse trend. Hydrodynamic lubrication characteristics of a
journal bearing, taking into consideration the misalignment
caused by shaft deformation were analyzed [10]. Film
pressure, load-carrying capacity attitude angle, end leakage
Study on Pressure Distribution and Load
Capacity of a Journal Bearing Using Finite
Element Method and Analytical Method
D. M. Nuruzzaman
-
, M. K. Khalil, M. A. Chowdhury, M. L. Rahaman
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology, Gazipur, Gazipur - 1700, Bangladesh
-
E-mail: dewan052005@yahoo.com, Phone:+8801911394864
I J E N S
flow rate, frictional coefficient and misalignment moment were
calculated for different values of misalignment degree and
eccentricity ratio. It was found that there are obvious changes
in film pressure distribution, the highest film pressure, film
thickness distribution, the least film thickness and the
misalignment moment when misalignment takes place. The
distributions of pressure, temperature and oil flow velocity of a
journal bearing with a two-component surface layer were
investigated [11]. It was found that a journal with a two-
component surface layer causes a reduction in the bearing load
capacity for high eccentricity ratio. Besides, considerable
velocity changes in oil flow in all directions (circumferential,
radial and axial) were observed particularly, great velocity
changes occurred in the radial direction. Effects of test
conditions on the tribological behavior of a journal bearing in
molten zinc were investigated [12]. It was found that the
bearings appear to have a smoother running condition at higher
rotation speeds and when tested at the same load, reduction of
the speed resulted in higher friction and more wear of the
bearings. Thermohydrodynamic analysis of herringbone
grooved journal bearings (HGJB) showed that the temperature
of the fluid film rises significantly due to the frictional heat,
thereby the viscosity of the fluid and the load carrying capacity
decreases [13]. It is found that HGJB has a better load carrying
capacity and low end leakage as compared to plain journal
bearing. It is also observed that the HGJB is more stable than
the conventional plain journal bearing. Temperature profile of
an elliptic bore journal bearing was investigated [14]. It was
found that with increasing non-circularity the pressure gets
reduced and the temperature rise is less in the case of a journal
bearing with higher non-circularity value. A comparative study
for rise in oil-temperatures, thermal pressures and load
carrying capacity has been carried out for the analysis of
elliptical journal bearings [15] and in this
thermohydrodynamic analysis finite difference method has
been adopted for numerical solution of the Reynolds and
energy equation. It was found that oil film temperature and
thermal pressures in the central plane of the elliptical bearing
increase with the increase in the speed and eccentricity ratio.
Currently, there is very little information about the
comparison between the finite element results and the
analytical results to discuss the pressure distribution and load
capacity of a cylindrical bore journal bearing. So, to
understand this issue more clearly, this paper presents a
comparison between the finite element results and the
analytical results of pressure distribution and load capacity of
a cylindrical bore journal bearing. Moreover, these obtained
results are compared with the available published data.
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND CALCULATION
PROCEDURE
A. Assumptions
i) Newtonian fluid is considered ii) Thermal effects are
neglected iii) Fluid density is constant iv) No slip at the
boundaries
B. Finite Element Method
The finite element method (FEM) has been used for the
numerical modeling of a cylindrical bore journal bearing to
calculate the pressure distribution and load capacity. In this
analysis, to discretize the governing Reynolds equation,
Galerkin weighted residual approach has been adopted. In the
numerical model, a finite element mesh was considered. The
load bearing film was divided into a finite number of eight-
node isoparametric elements of serendipity family. The overall
solution procedure was completed by iteration and pressure
field had converged, and finally the usual bearing design
parameter the load capacity was calculated. These results were
compared with the analytical results. These results were also
compared with the available published results.
Formulation of Governing Equation:
The governing Reynolds differential equation is:

c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c x
h p
x y
h p
y
U dh
dx
( ) ( )
3
12
3
12 2
+ = (1)

Now for Reynolds equation:

0
2 12
3
12
3
= O
}
O
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
d
i
dx
dh U
y
p h
y x
p h
x
|
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c

where |
i
is the shape function.
Writing these equations in general matrix form:

(
(
(
(
(
(
(
8
.
.
2
1
8
.
.
2
1
88
.......
82 81
. . .
. . .
28
.......
22 21
18
.......
12 11
F
F
F
a
a
a
K K K
K K K
K K K
(2)

where K
i j
and F
i
are the stiffness and load term respectively.
Each shape function is a Lagrange quadratic polynomial which
satisfies the interpolation property

| o
j
x
i
y
i j i
( , ) = (3)

The Jacobian matrix is given by:

I J E N S
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
=
) , (
22
) , (
21
) , (
12
) , (
11
) , (
q q
q q
q c
c
q c
c
c
c
c
c
q
J J
J J
y x
y x
J

The determinant of the Jacobian matrix J ( , ) q is called
the Jacobian.
So the stiffness and load integral terms are:

K
i j
= q q
c
| c
c
| c
d d J
x
j
x
i
h
) , (
1
1
1
1
12
3
}

q q
c
| c
c
| c
d d J
y
j
y
i
h
) , (
1
1
1
1
12
3
}
+ (4)

q q d d J
dx
dh U
i
F ) , (
2
1
1
1
1
}
= (5)

Using equations (4) and (5), equation (2) is solved for load
capacity of the bearing.
C. Analytical Method
In the analytical method, the load carrying film was divided
into a mesh of four-node rectangular elements. The coordinate
value of each node was calculated and the film thickness at
each nodal point was determined. The film pressure was
solved at various nodal points. The film geometry was
updated, the new coordinates were determined and the new
film thickness was calculated until the pressure field was
optimized. Finally the usual bearing design parameter such as
load capacity was calculated for a range of eccentricity ratio
and shaft speed. These results were compared with the finite
element results. These results were also compared with the
available published results.
Formulation of Governing Equation:
For a narrow bearing, the pressure gradient along the axial
direction is much larger than the pressure gradient along the
circumferential direction. For this narrow bearing
approximation, the governing one dimensional Reynolds
equation is:

p
U
h
dh
dx
y
L
=
3
3
2
2
4
( ) (6)

This gives the pressure distribution as a function of film
thickness gradient
dh
dx
where the film thickness is defined as:

h e C C = + = + cos ( cos ) u c u 1 (7)
Using equation [6], the bearing design parameter such as load
capacity was calculated for a range of eccentricity ratio and
shaft speed.
III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Figure 1 illustrates the circumferential pressure distribution
against angular position for a fixed eccentricity ratio of 0.4 and
at shaft speed N=5000 rpm, L/R = 1.0 and C/R = 0.004. From
the analytical and FEM results, it was seen that pressure
increased steadily from zero to the maximum value and then
decreased steadily to zero. Both analytical and FEM results
showed similar trends and the agreement between the FEM
and analytical results was quite satisfactory. Figure 2 shows
the mid plane pressure distribution with the shaft turning at
10000 rpm and eccentricity ratio=0.4, L/R = 1.0 and C/R =
0.004. The hydrodynamic pressure profile gradually increased
from zero and reached the maximum and then gradually
decreased to zero. The FEM results were compared with
analytical results and the agreement was good. Figure 3 also
illustrates the pressure distribution for eccentricity ratio = 0.5,
L/R = 1.0, C/R = 0.004 and shaft speed N=5000 rpm. From
the analytical and FEM results, it was seen that the pressure
increased steadily from zero and reached the maximum and
then gradually decreased to zero. Descrepancy was found
between analytical results and finite element results because
the analytical solution used Half-Sommerfeld boundary
condition but the finite element solution used Reynolds
boundary condition. In Figure 4, circumferential pressure
distribution with angular position is shown for shaft speed N =
10000 rpm, eccentricity ratio = 0.5, L/R = 1.0 and C/R =
0.004. From the FEM and analytical results it was seen that
pressure increased gradually from zero and reached the
maximum and then gradually decreased to zero. Descrepancy
was found between analytical results and finite element results
because the analytical solution used Half-Sommerfeld
boundary condition whereas the finite element solution used
Reynolds boundary condition.

Figure 26: Variation of pressure with angular position.
0
2
4
6
8
0 45 90 135 180
Angular position (degree)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Analytical
FEM
Fig. 1. Variation of pressure with angular position (N=5000 rpm, =0.4)
I J E N S

In Figure 5, the mid plane pressure distribution at different
angular position is shown for eccentricity ratio = 0.8, L/R =
1.0, C/R = 0.004 and Re = 500. The results are shown in
dimensionless form. The analytical solution used Half-
Sommerfeld boundary condition and only positive pressure
region was considered. From the results, it was found that the
hydrodynamic pressure profile increased steadily from zero
and it changed very rapidly in the area of the smallest film
thickness and reached to a maximum. In this region the film
was convergent. The pressure then gradually dropped to zero.
When the analytical results were compared with Gethin and
Deihis results, about 75% accuracy was achieved. This
descrepancy was found because the analytical solution used
Half-Sommerfeld boundary condition but Gethin and Deihi
used Reynolds boundary condition. Figure 6 illustrates the mid
plane pressure distribution at different angular position for
eccentricity ratio = 0.8, L/R = 1.0, C/R = 0.004 and Re = 500.
The finite element results are shown in dimensionless form.
The solution used Reynolds boundary condition and only
positive pressure region was considered. The results showed
that the hydrodynamic pressure profile increased steadily from
zero and it changed very rapidly in the area of the smallest film
thickness and reached to a maximum. In this region the film
was convergent. The pressure then gradually dropped to zero.
In order to check the validity, when these results were
compared with Gethin and Deihis results, a strong
resemblance was obtained and about 90% accuracy was
achieved.

0
2
4
6
8
0 45 90 135 180
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Analytical
FEM
0
2
4
6
8
0 45 90 135 180
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Analytical
FEM
0
2
4
6
8
0 45 90 135 180
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Analytical
FEM
Figure 12: Variation of dimensionless pressure with angular position
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 45 90 135 180
Angular position
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Gethin and Deihi
Analytical
Fig. 5. Variation of dimensionless pressure with angular position (Re=500,
=0.8)
Figure 19: Variation of dimensionless pressure with angular position
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 45 90 135 180
Angular position
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Gethin and Deihi
FEM
=0.8)
I J E N S
Figure 7 exhibits the circumferential pressure distribution at
different angular position for a fixed eccentricity ratio = 0.8,
L/R=1.0, C/R = 0.004 and Re = 500. Analytical and FEM
results are shown in dimensionless form. Only positive
pressure region was considered. The hydrodynamic pressure
profile increased steadily from zero and it changed very
rapidly in the area of the smallest film thickness and reached to
a maximum. In this region the film was convergent. The
pressure then gradually dropped to zero. When analytical and
FEM results were compared with Gethin and Deihis results, it
was apparent that FEM results showed better agreement than
analytical results. Figure 8 shows the circumferential pressure
distribution with angular position for R = 40 mm, eccentricity
ratio = 0.87, L/R = 1.27, C/R = 0.008 and shaft speed N =
1000 rpm. Only positive pressure region was considered. The
hydrodynamic pressure increased very steadily from zero and
it changed very rapidly in the area of smallest film thickness

and reached to a maximum. In this region the film was
convergent. The pressure then gradually dropped to zero. The
graphs for analytical and FEM results showed similar trends of
variation and when these results were compared with those
obtained experimentally by Gethin and Medwell, it was quite
clear that although the shape of the experimental pressure
distribution followed that predicted by hydrodynamic theory,
the magnitudes of the pressures were much less than those
predicted. Peak pressure by experiment was less than those
predicted by approximately 30%. During the experiment, the
bearing continued to run in thermal conditions and thermal
gradients in the lubricant film are responsible for the
discrepancies between the experimental data and those
predicted from the hydrodynamic model that assumes an
isothermal film.
The variation of load capacity with eccentricity ratio is
illustrated in Figure 9 for L/R = 1.0, C/R = 0.004 and speed N
= 10000 rpm. From the FEM and analytical results, it was seen
that the load capacity of the bearing increased gradually with
eccentricity ratio. A comparison between the FEM and
analytical results showed that the agreement was satisfactory.
Figure 10 also illustrates the variation of load capacity with
shaft speed ranging from 5000 rpm to 20000 rpm. In this case,
eccentricity ratio = 0.6, L/R = 1.0 and C/R = 0.004. The results
indicated that the load capacity increased with the increase of
shaft speed. Further comparison of FEM results with analytical
results showed similar trends of variation and a good
agreement was achieved.

Figure 42 :Variation of dimensionless pressure with angular position
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 45 90 135 180
Angular position
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
Gethin and Deihi
FEM
Analytical
=0.8)
Fig. 8. Circumferential pressure distribution with angular position (N=1000
rpm, =0.87)
Figure 49 :Circumferential pressure distribution with angular position
0
1
2
3
0 50 100 150 200
Angular position
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
N
/
s
q
.
m
m
)
Exp.(Gethin and Medwell)
FEM
Analytical
Figure 31: Variation of load capacity with eccentricity ratio
0
20
40
60
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Eccentricity ratio
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
k
N
)
Analytical
FEM
Fig. 9. Variation of load capacity with eccentricity ratio (N=10000 rpm)
Figure 33: Variation of load capacity with rpm.
0
20
40
60
5000 8000 11000 14000 17000 20000
rpm
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
(
k
N
)
Analytical
FEM
Fig. 10. Variation of load capacity with shaft speed (=0.6)
I J E N S
A systematic series of calculations was computed for the
dimensionless load variation at different eccentricity ratio for
R = 50 mm, C/R = 0.004, L/R = 1.0 and Re = 1000. The
analytical results are shown in Figure 11. From the graph it is
clear that at low eccentricity ratio, the dimensionless load
increases gradually but it is greatly increased with high
eccentricity ratio. In comparison with the results obtained by
Gethin and Deihi, the analytical results showed similar trends
and about 80% accuracy was achieved. Figure 12 illustrates
the variation of load capacity with shaft speed ranging from
5000 rpm to 20000 rpm for R = 50 mm, L/R = 1.0, C/R =
0.004 and eccentricity ratio = 0.7. It was apparent from
analytical results that load capacity increased gradually with
the increase of shaft speed. When these results were compared
with those presented by Gethin and Medwell, 65% accuracy
was obtained.

Figure 13 illustrates the dimensionless load variation at
different eccentricity ratio for R = 50 mm, C/R = 0.004, L/R =
1.0 and Re = 1000. From the finite element results it was
apparent that at low eccentricity ratio, the dimensionless load
increased gradually but it was greatly increased with high
eccentricity ratio. The comparison of these results with Gethin
and Deihis results showed very good agreement and about
90% accuracy was achieved. Figure 14 shows the variation of

load capacity with the shaft speed ranging from 5000 rpm to
20000 rpm for R = 50 mm, L/R = 1.0, C/R = 0.004 and
eccentricity ratio = 0.7. From the finite element results it was
clear that the load capacity increased gradually with the
increase of shaft speed. The comparison of these results with
those presented by Gethin and Medwell showed good
agreement and about 80% accuracy was obtained.
Figure 15 shows that a systematic series of calculations was
computed for the dimensionless load variation at different
eccentricity ratio for R = 50 mm, C/R = 0.004, L/R = 1.0 and
Re = 1000. From FEM and analytical results, it was seen that
at low eccentricity ratio the dimensionless load increased
steadily and it was greatly increased with high eccentricity
ratio. The results from FEM and analytical method were
compared with the results obtained by Gethin and Deihi, a
strong resemblance was achieved. Moreover, it was quite clear
that in comparison with the published results, FEM results
showed better agreement than analytical results. Figure 16
illustrates the variation of load capacity with shaft speed
ranging from 5000 rpm to 20000 rpm for R = 50 mm, L/R =
1.0, C/R = 0.004 and eccentricity ratio = 0.7. It was apparent
Figure 13: Variation of dimensionless load with eccentricity
ratio.
0
20
40
60
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Eccentricity ratio
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

l
o
a
d
Gethin and Deihi
Analytical
Fig. 11. Variation of dimensionless load with eccentricity ratio (Re=1000)
Figure 14: Variation of load capacity with rpm
0
20
40
60
5000 8000 11000 14000 17000 20000
rpm
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
k
N
)
Gethin and Medwell
Analytical
ratio.
0
20
40
60
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Eccentricity ratio
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

l
o
a
d
Gethin and Deihi
FEM
0
20
40
60
5000 8000 11000 14000 17000 20000
rpm
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
k
N
)
Gethin and Medwell
FEM
I J E N S
from the FEM and analytical results that load capacity
increased with the increase of shaft speed. When these results
were compared with those presented by Gethin and Medwell,
it revealed that FEM results showed better performance than
analytical results.

Figure 17 illustrates the variation of load capacity with
eccentricity ratio for R = 36.7 mm, L/R = 1.0, C/R = 0.002 and
N = 20000 rpm. Analytical and FEM results showed similar
trends of variation and at low eccentricity ratio load capacity
was low but at high eccentricity ratio it increased remarkably.
These results were compared with those obtained

experimentally by Gethin and Medwell and from the graphs it
is apparent that at very high surface speed, the agreement
deteriorates as the eccentricity ratio increases. At eccentricity
ratio 0.8, load capacity by experiment was approximately 45%
less than those predicted. At high surface speed thermal
gradients set up in the lubricant film are responsible for the
discrepancies between the experimental results and those
obtained by the isothermal hydrodynamic theory. Figure 18
also shows the variation of load capacity with shaft speed
ranging from 20000 rpm to 26000 rpm. From the graphs it is
seen that analytical and FEM results show similar trends and
load capacity increases with the increase of shaft speed. In
comparison with the experimental results, it is very clear that
beyond the speed 22000 rpm, load capacity by experiment
decreased with the increased shaft speed and at speed 26000
rpm, load capacity by experiment was approximately 50% of
those predicted. This is due to the severe deterioration of the
lubricant viscosity with increased frictional heat generation at
higher surface speed.
IV. CONCLUSION
Pressure distribution and load capacity of a cylindrical bore
journal bearing were calculated using finite element method
and analytical method. In the calculation, isothermal analysis
and Newtonian fluid film behavior were considered. In the
numerical method, a finite element mesh was considered and
Galerkin weighted residual approach has been adopted. In the
analytical method, the load carrying film was divided into a
mesh of four-node rectangular elements. For fixed shaft speed
and eccentricity ratio, fluid film pressures at different
circumferential positions of the bearing were calculated. When
the finite element results and analytical results were compared,
in general, the agreement was found quite satisfactory.
Moreover, the effects of variation in eccentricity ratio and
shaft speed on the load capacity of the bearing were
calculated. The finite element results and analytical results
were compared and the agreement was found satisfactory.
When these results were compared with available published
results, good resemblance was achieved which confirms the
ratio.
0
20
40
60
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Eccentricity ratio
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s

l
o
a
d
Gethin and Deihi
FEM
Analytical
0
20
40
60
5000 8000 11000 14000 17000 20000
rpm
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
k
N
)
Gethin and Medwell
FEM
Analytical
Figure 50: Variation of load capacity with eccentricity ratio.
0
2
4
6
8
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Eccentricity ratio
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
k
N
)
FEM
Analytical
Fig. 17. Variation of load capacity with eccentricity ratio (N=20000 rpm)
0
2
4
6
8
20000 22000 24000 26000
rpm
L
o
a
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
k
N
)
FEM
Analytical
I J E N S
numerical model. As a whole, with comparison to available
published results, finite element results showed better
agreement than analytical results.
NOTATION

p Film pressure
h Film thickness
U Surface speed of shaft
Re Reynolds number
L Bearing axial length
R Journal radius
C Radial clearance
N Shaft speed
e Eccentricity
c Eccentricity ratio
u Angular position of shaft
O Domain of calculation
|
j
Shape function
K
i j
Stiffness matrix term at i j ,
F
i
Load matrix term
J( , ) q Jacobian matrix
Lubricant viscosity
REFERENCES
[1] J.F. Booker and K.H. Huebner, Application of Finite Elements to
Lubrication: An Engineerimg Approach, Journal of Lubrication
Technology, Trans. ASME, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 313-323, 1972.
[2] H. Hayashi and C.M. Taylor, A Determination of Cavitation Interfaces
in Fluid Film Bearings Using Finite Element Analysis, Journal
Mechanical Engineering Science, vol. 22, no. 6, pp.277-285, 1980.
[3] D.T. Gethin and J.O. Medwell, An Investigation into the Performance
of a High Speed Journal Bearing with two Axial Lubricant Feed
Grooves, Project Report, University of Wales, 1984.
[4] D.T. Gethin and M.K.I. EI Deihi, Effect of Loading Direction on the
Performance of a Twin Axial Groove Cylindrical Bore Bearing,
Tribology International, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 179-185, 1987.
[5] S. Basri and D.T. Gethin, A Comparative Study of the Thermal
Behaviour of Profile Bore Bearings, Tribology International, vol. 4, no.
12, pp. 265-276, 1990.
[6] M.T. Ma and C.M. Taylor, A Theoretical and Experimental Study of
Thermal Effects in a Plain Circular Steadily Loaded Journal Bearing,
Transactions IMechE, vol. 824, no. 9, pp. 31-44, 1992.
[7] D.T. Gethin, Thermohydrodynamic Behaviour of High Speed Journal
Bearings, Tribology International, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 579-596, 1996.
[8] S.M. Chun, Thermohydrodynamic lubrication analysis of high-speed
journal bearing considering variable density and variable specific heat,
Tribology International, vol. 37, pp. 405-413, 2004.
[9] H.L. Chiang, C.H. Hsu, J.R. Lin, Lubrication performance of finite
journal bearings considering effects of couple stresses and surface
roughness, Tribology International. vol. 37, pp. 297-307, 2004.
[10] J. Sun, G. Changlin, Hydrodynamic lubrication analysis of journal
bearing considering misalignment caused by shaft deformation,
Tribology International, vol. 37, pp. 841-848, 2004.
[11] J. Sep, Three dimensional hydrodynamic analysis of a journal bearing
with a two component surface layer, Tribology International, vol. 38,
pp. 97-104, 2005.
[12] K. Zhang, Effects of test conditions on the tribological behavior of a
journal bearing in molten zinc, Wear, vol. 259, pp. 1248-1253, 2005.
[13] M. Sahu, M. Sarangi, B.C. Majumdar, Thermohydrodynamic analysis
of herringbone grooved journal bearings, Tribology International, vol.
39, pp. 1395-1404, 2006.
[14] P.C. Mishra, R.K Pandey, K. Athre, Temperature profile of an elliptic
bore journal bearing, Tribology International, vol. 40, pp. 453-458,
2007.
[15] A. Chauhan, R. Sehgal, R.K. Sharma, Thermohydrodynamic analysis
of elliptical journal bearing with different grade oils, Tribology
International, vol. 43, pp. 1970-1977, 2010.

103605-7474 Ijmme-Ijens

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

103605-7474 Ijmme-Ijens

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS Vol:10 No:05 1

103605-7474 IJMME-IJENS October 2010 IJENS

S-ar putea să vă placă și