An exact analytical solution of the Reynolds equation for the nite journal

bearing lubrication
D. Sfyris
a
, A. Chasalevris
b,n
a
University of Aegean, Aegean 81400, Greece
b
Darmstadt University of Technology, Darmstadt 64287, Germany
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 3 February 2012
Received in revised form
15 May 2012
Accepted 18 May 2012
Available online 29 May 2012
Keywords:
Lubrication
Hydrodynamic
Analytical
Journal
a b s t r a c t
The Reynolds equation for the pressure distribution of the lubricant in a journal bearing with nite
length is solved analytically. Using the method of separation of variables in an additive and a
multiplicative form, a set of particular solutions of the Reynolds equation is added in the general
solution of the homogenous Reynolds equation thus a closed form expression for the denition of the
lubricant pressure is presented. The Reynolds equation is split into four linear ordinary differential
equations of second order with non-constant coefcients and together with the boundary conditions
they form four SturmLiouville problems with the three of them to have direct forms of solution and
one of them to be confronted using the method of power series. The mathematical procedure is
presented up to the point that the application of the boundaries for the pressure distribution yields the
nal denition of the solution with the calculation of the constants. The current work gives in detail the
mathematical path with the help of which the analytical solution is derived, and ends with the pressure
evaluation and a comparison with past numerical solutions and an approximate analytical solution for
a nite bearing. The resultant pressure distribution presents slight differences compared to this of the
numerical solution and the approximate analytical solution in the values of maximum and minimum
pressure but also in the domain of lower values of pressure.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The exact analytical solution of Reynolds equation for lubrica-
tion of journal bearings [1] is up to nowadays a problem under
investigation. Most investigators have achieved to dene func-
tions of pressure distribution P(y,x) under approximate analytical
solutions of Reynolds equation, in the form of Eq. (1.1) or in
similar forms, considering both the squeeze lm and the wedge
lm effect. However, numerous works in the numerical solution
of the Reynolds equation have been made:
@
@x
h
3
6m
@Px,y
@x
_ _

1
R
2
@
@y
h
3
6m
@Px,y
@y
_ _
O
@h
@y
2
@h
@t
1:1
The approximate analytical solutions of the Reynolds equation
are based on the assumptions that one of the two terms in the left
side of Eq. (1.1) can be neglected. The rst term can be neglected
when the journal bearing is considered as a bearing with high
length to diameter ratio (long bearing, L/Db1 [2]) and the second
term when the journal bearing is considered as a bearing with
low length to diameter ratio (short bearing L/Do1 [38]). Such
solutions for pressure distribution give considerably simplied
mathematical expressions. They are exact solutions in the sense
that they satisfy Eq. (1.1) for the case of innite axial length or of
innite short bearing. However they are regarded as approximate
solutions when they are used to determine the pressure distribu-
tion in bearings of nite length.
The research contributions in the analytical calculation of the
pressure distribution in a journal bearing with nite length are
not many and have not been made recently. Kingsbury [9]
determined the pressure distribution by an experimental elec-
trical analogy. Christopherson [10] determined the pressure
distribution by utilizing the mathematical model of relaxation.
Vogelpohl [1113] achieved to give closed forms of the functions
for the pressure distribution along both directions of the journal
bearing, axial and circumferential. He also [1113] assumed a
partial solution of the Reynolds equation that corresponds to a
long bearing approximation and then used the technique of
separation of variables for the solution of the homogenous
Reynolds equation. By adding the two solutions, the pressure
distribution was dened in closed form. Cameron and Wood [14]
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint
Tribology International
0301-679X/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2012.05.013
Abbreviations: ODE, Ordinary differential equation; BC, Boundary condition;
BVP, Boundary value problem; PSM, Power series method; FDM, Finite difference
method; CFD, Computational uid dynamics
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: 49 6151 16 3461; fax: 49 6151 16 3668.
E-mail address: chasalevris@sdy.tu-darmstadt.de (A. Chasalevris).
Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658
had extended the work of Christopherson [10] to show the effect
of length to diameter ratio on eccentricity ratio, attitude angle
and friction coefcient. In all cases, these solutions express
natural phenomena in the oil lm on the basis of Reynolds
assumptions regarding lubrication, the most important assump-
tion being that certain terms in the generalized NavierStokes
equations for ow in a viscous uid may be neglected.
In the current work the Reynolds equation of the form of
Eq. (1.1) is treated similarly to the path that Vogelpohl [1113]
followed, but there are crucial differences that have to do with the
way that the particular solution is obtained and with the solu-
tions of the ordinary differential equations that are yielded during
the procedure. In the beginning of the current work the Reynolds
equation is classied. As expected it turns out that it is an elliptic
equation, which is reasonable since it denes a static problem
(the time is not considered as an independent variable but as a
parameter that gives the eccentricity and its rate of change). The
strategy for obtaining the analytical solution is based in the
application of the powerful method of separation of variables.
The crucial step is splitting of the solution into two parts. The one
satises the homogeneous Reynolds equation; namely, Reynolds
equation without the second part that the pressure does not
interfere. For solving this part we assume a multiplicative
separation of the independent variables so we obtain two
SturmLiouville problems. In this point, the contribution of the
current work is that the power series method is used in order to
obtain the eigenfunctions of the one SturmLiouville problem
while in the literature the corresponding confrontment of this
problem is made with the linear approximation of the uid lm
thickness function and the expression of the eigenfunctions using
Bessel functions or normal sinusoidal functions. In the current
work, the easy SturmLiouville problem is solved and the
eigenvalues of it are incorporated in the functions dened with
power series.
The second part is a particular solution of the Reynolds
equation itself. For nding a particular solution we assume an
additive splitting of the independent variables and two Sturm
Liouville problems are obtained. The rst has to do with the
pressure distribution along the circumferential coordinate and it
has a direct solution with a closed form expression taken from the
literature for ODE treatment. The other problem has to do with
the pressure distribution along the axial coordinate and the
boundary conditions which are chosen to yield a trivial solution,
without this the further progress of the solution is going to be
problematic. The current particular solution is also a contribution
of the current work since it is actually a set of particular solutions
that can be different from the solution of the innitely long
bearing as used in [11]. The current particular solution yields the
long bearing pressure distribution as a sub case.
The paper is organised as follows: Section 2 contains the basic
ingredients of Reynolds equation together with the classication
of it and the crucial step where the unknown pressure P is split
into two functions g and u. Section 3 is related with the evaluation
of the particular solution of the Reynolds equation, u. In Section 4
we present an analysis for evaluating the function g using again
the method of separation of variables, but now in a multiplicative
form. The treatment with the Bessel functions and the approx-
imating analytical solution is also given. The last section, Section
5, deals with the boundary value problems. The resulting pressure
is evaluated for a specic set of values of the physical and
geometrical journal bearing characteristics and is compared with
the analytical approximate solution for the nite bearing and two
numerical solutions, the one using the nite differences method
and the other with a very recent 3D-CFD analysis. The article
concludes in Section 6 where also the forthcoming results of the
future work are described.
The current work is considered to be the rst and initial step
for the analytical confrontment of the analysis and design of the
plain nite journal bearing. A future upcoming work that is based
in the analytical pressure denition presented in this paper, uses
the current exact analytical function for pressure distribution and
after analytical procedures gives the closed form denition of the
main operational characteristics for the nite journal bearing,
such as stiffness and damping coefcients, load carrying capacity,
location of the maximum pressure, location of the minimum uid
lm thickness etc. The fact that the uid lm forces can be
expressed analytically for the nite journal bearing is based in the
evaluations presented in the current work. The general concept of
analytically simulating other types of nite journal bearings, for
example non circular, or grooved can be reconsidered after the
solution presented in the current work.
2. Reynolds equation: classication and splitting of the
solution
The problem of the lubrication of journal bearings with nite
length is dened in this work as the calculation of the pressure
distribution of the Newtonian lubricant that is assumed to ow
under laminar, isoviscous, and isothermal conditions in between
the rotating journal and the static bearing. The journal of radius R
and length L
b
is assumed to be rotating with a constant rotational
speed and to be constantly located in a point of eccentricity e with
respect to the geometric centre of the bearing of radius Rc
r
and
length L
b
after an application of a virtual vertical load W as shown
in Fig. 1. The load is not used as a parameter in this work since no
forces are evaluated or expressed and the unique inputs in the
pressure evaluation are considered to be the eccentricity e and its
rate of change _ e. The journal and the bearing are supposed to be
in parallel (aligned bearing) and the uid lm thickness h
becomes a function of the unique independent parameter y for
a time moment of constant e and _ e which means that the function
Nomenclature
P resulting pressure of the lubricant
u pressure of the particular solution
g pressure of the homogeneous solution
x axial coordinate of the bearing
y angular coordinate of the bearing
y
n
angular location of zero pressure
h uid lm thickness
h
n
approximate uid lm thickness
R journal radius
O journal rotational speed
m lubricant dynamic viscosity
j
0
attitude angle of the journal
c
r
bearing radial clearance
e journal eccentricity
_ e journal eccentricity rate of change
e journal eccentricity ratio
_ e journal eccentricity ratio rate of change
W external bearing load
L
b
bearing/journal length
c
18
constants of integration
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 47
for the uid lm thickness is h c
r
e cosy and its time
derivative is @h=@t _ e cosy. The dynamic viscosity of the lubri-
cant is assumed to be constant and equal to m through the entire
control volume (notied with shadow in Fig. 1) that is dened
from the bearing and the journal surfaces. The attitude angle of
the journal is dened as j
0
with respect to the vertical coordinate
axis (see Fig. 1). The starting point is the equation of Reynolds
which is expressed as
@
@x
h
3
6m
@Px,y
@x
_ _

1
R
2
@
@y
h
3
6m
@Px,y
@y
_ _
O
@h
@y
2
@h
@t
2:1
After substituting the uid lm thickness function of Eq. (2.2)
into Eq. (2.1) and performing the derivations one will arrive at
Eq. (2.3):
h c
r
e cosy 2:2
c
r
e cosy
3
6m
@
2
Py,x
@x
2

3c
r
e cosy
2
e siny
6mR
2
@Py,x
@y

c
r
e cosy
3
6mR
2
@
2
Py,x
@y
2
eO siny2_ e cosy 2:3
Eq. (2.3) is the one that we are going to work with. This is a
non homogenous linear partial differential equation of the second
order for the unknown function P(x,y) with trigonometric coef-
cients. Before embarking on the core of our analysis we classify
Eq. (2.3). For doing so we need to evaluate the discriminant:
DB
2
AGh
3
=6mh
3
=6mR
2
h
6
=36R
2
m
2
o0 2:4
Whatever the expressions of h, R, m are, it is Do0 so we speak
about an elliptic partial differential equation.
The crucial step for obtaining the solution is based on the
following splitting of the solution. We assume that the unknown
function can be written in the form::
Px,y ux,y
..
particular
gx,y
..
homogeneous
2:5
The function u(x,y) is a particular solution of Eq. (2.3) while the
function g(x,y) describes the set of solutions for the homogeneous
Reynolds equation, namely, Eq. (2.3) without the right hand side
terms. In order to see more clearly that instead of seeking P(x,y)
we can seek for the functions g(x,y) and u(x,y) one may write the
differential operator of Reynolds equation as in the following
equation:
c
r
e cosy
3
6m
@
2
@x
2

3c
r
e cosy
2
e siny
6mR
2
@
@y

c
r
e cosy
3
6mR
2
@
2
@y
2
2:6
If one applies this operator to both sides of Eq. (2.5) he can
immediately verify that equivalently one may seek for the
functions g(x,y) and u(x,y).
For treating the boundaries, it is assumed that P(x,y) equals to
a known function P(x,y) on the boundary of the lubricants control
volume @L as shown in the following equation:
Px,y9
@L
Px,y 2:7
Then, the splitting according to Eq. (2.5) renders Eq. (2.8). Later
on, it is assumed that the pressure vanishes on the boundary
and that u(x,y) has to be equal to g(x,y) at the boundary, see
Eq. (2.9).
ux,y9
@L
gx,y9
@L
Px,y 2:8
ux,y9
@L
gx,y9
@L
2:9
It is also worth stressing that in the solution adopted in this
paper, the Dirichlet boundary condition is throughout utilized.
The pressure eld is assumed to be known at the boundaries and
to be set equal to zero, so as to correspond to the physical status
that the developed uid lm pressure is much higher from the
atmospheric pressure. At any case the boundary pressure P(x,y)
can be dened in correspondence to the demands that are set
from the physical problem. If one is willing to tackle the Neumann
problem then he has to specify the directional derivative of the
pressure along the boundary. The mathematical strategy for
obtaining the solutions can be applied equally well to Dirichlet,
Neumann or mixed boundary conditions, since the directional
derivative is a linear operator.
3. Evaluation of the particular solution
3.1. Additive separation of variables and direct solution
In order to evaluate the function u(x,y) a particular solution of
Eq. (2.3) is needed. For doing so we assume that u(x,y) can be split
in the following additive form:
ux,y jy cx 3:1
When the function u(x,y) is known at the boundary @L we
obtain from the above separation that ux,y9
@L
jy9
@L

cx9
@L
.
We are looking for a solution where the independent variables
can be split in the above form. If we substitute Eq. (3.1) in Eq. (2.3)
after some calculations Eq. (3.2) is obtained:

d
2
c x
dx
2

1
R
2
d
2
j y
dy
2

3e siny
R
2
c
r
e cosy
djy
dy

6meO siny
c
r
e cosy
3

12m_ e cosy
c
r
e cosy
3
3:2
By inspecting the above equation one observes that the right
hand side is a function of y while the left hand side is a function of
x only. So, the equality will be feasible only when both sides are
equal to the same constant C. From the latter equation we obtain
two equations for the functions j(y) and c(x). These are ordinary
differential equations written as in Eqs. (3.3) and (3.4):

d
2
cx
dx
2
C 3:3
1
R
2
d
2
jy
dy
2

3e siny
R
2
c
r
e cosy
dj y
dy

6meO siny
c
r
e cosy
3

12m_ e cosy
c
r
e cosy
3
C
3:4
Fig. 1. Denition of the coordinate system and of the parameters of operation and
design in a plain cylindrical journal bearing.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 48
Eq. (3.3) can be solved directly to give Eq. 3.5:
cx Cx
2
=2c
1
xc
2
3:5
The constants c
1
, c
2
are arbitrary constants of integration.
For solving Eq. (3.4) one observes that we talk about a linear
ordinary differential equation with non-constant coefcients
where the unknown function j(y) is not present explicitly. So,
by setting z(y) as in Eq. (3.6), instead of Eq. (3.4) we may solve the
following linear ordinary differential equation dened in Eq. (3.7)
of the rst order for the function z(y):
djy
dy
zy 3:6
1
R
2
dzy
dy

3e siny
R
2
c
r
e cosy
zy
6meO siny
c
r
e cosy
3

12m_ e cosy
c
r
e cosy
3
C
3:7
The generic set of solutions of the last equation is given in
Eq. (3.8) [20]:
zy e
_
3e siny=cr e cosydy
c
3

_
e

_
3e siny=cr e cosydy
_
_

6OmR
2
e siny
c
r
e cosy
3

12OmR
2
_ e cosy
c
r
e cosy
3
C
_ __
dy
_
3:8
All the integrals in Eq. (3.8) can be evaluated using direct
closed form expressions. By evaluating the integrals that appear
in the expression for z(y) one can integrate the outcome one time
and obtain the function j(y):
jy
_
zydyc
4
3:9
The sum of j(y) and c(x) renders classes of particular solu-
tions by choosing values for the constants C, c
1
, c
2
, c
3
, c
4
. By
choosing C0 we obtain Eqs. (3.10) and (3.11):
cx c
1
xc
2
3:10
jy c
4

1
2

2B18c
r
e
2
R
2
mO2c
2
r
e
2
c
3

c
2
r
e
2

5=2
_

3e2c
2
r
R
2
m Oc
r
c
3
siny
c
2
r
e
2

2
c
r
e cosy

12c
2
r
e
2
_ eR
2
me
2
6c
r
R
2
m Oc
3
siny
c
2
r
ee
3
c
r
e cosy
2
_
3:11
3.2. Boundary conditions for the particular solution and evaluation
of the function
For the pressure distribution expressed from the particular
solution, the boundary conditions are setting the pressure equal
to zero at the both ends of the bearing in axial direction, x7L
b
/2
and at the circumferential beginning y0 and end of the uid
lm y2p. The boundary conditions in the axial direction are
given in Eqs. (3.12) and (3.13):
cL
b
=2 0 3:12
cL
b
=2 0 3:13
The constants c
1
and c
2
are then dened as zero and the
solution for c(x) becomes trivial. Since the particular solution
u(x,y) is expressed as in Eq. (3.1) the trivial solution c(x)0
expresses the case of no variation of the pressure in the axial
direction (Long bearing approximation). In the case that Ca0, the
boundaries of Eqs. (3.12) and (3.13) would yield a parabolic
distribution in the axial direction that in comparison to the
distribution of the circumferential direction would be negligible,
even for high values of C. In the case that the boundaries of
Eqs. (3.12) and (3.13) would be different (not zero) then the
boundaries of the homogenous solution g(x,y) would be different
also in order to yield the zero pressure in the ends of the bearing.
In other words, the boundaries for the particular solution come to
a correspondence with those of the homogenous solution so as
the resulting pressure P(x,y) to be bounded under the physical
explanation for the lubricant ow.
The constants c
3
and c
4
that are incorporated in the circumfer-
ential distribution can be dened using Eqs. (3.14) and (3.15):
j0 0 3:14
_
2p
0
jydy 0, _ e 0
lim
_ e-0
_
2p
0
jydy 0, _ e a0
_

_
3:15
Eq. (3.15) is a two case formula, for the static (_ e 0) and for
the dynamic problem (_ e a0). In the static case it expresses the
symmetry of pressure distribution j(y) to the horizontal axis
(j0) of Fig. 2. The physical result agrees with the Sommerfeld
BC since it also yields j(p)0. In the dynamic case, Eq. (3.15)
incorporates the _ e as a parameter and the fact that the expression
is analytical gives the possibility to solve for c
3
and c
4
so as the
integral
_
2p
0
jydy to tend to become zero for small values _ e.
The cases that are studied considering the values of _ e extend up to
_ e=OR 0:001. In the dynamic case the result of the location of
zero pressure y
n
is in a good agreement with this of the Reynolds
BC but since djy=dy9
y y
n a0 it cannot be said that the formula
of Eq. (3.15) corresponds to Reynolds BC. The benet of using
Eq. (3.15) is that when _ e a0, instead of predening the angle y
n
and use it as a boundary of zero pressure it is let to be dened by
the pressure distribution through y during pressure calculation. In
the static case the pressure distribution is evaluated with Eqs.
(3.14) and (3.15) to give the Sommerfeld BC and these results are
compared with the literature in Section 5. The values of y
n
as a
function of _ e are presented in Section 5 because y
n
is lightly
effected also from the values of the pressure yielded by the
homogeneous solution g(x,y) that is added to j(y). The constants
Fig. 2. Pressure distribution along the angular coordinate y given from the
particular solution j(y).
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 49
c
3
and c
4
are given in Eqs. (3.16) and (3.17):
c
4

6_ eR
2
m
ec
r
e
2
3:17
The current particular solution corresponding to the pressure
distribution developed in an innitely long bearing is shown in
Fig. 2 for some cases of the eccentricity rate of change _ e.
The current particular solution gives a further contribution in
Reynolds equation treatment because the additive separation of
variables can yield the solutions of the long or of the short
bearing, depending on the BC assumptions for c(x)and j(y)
without the need of erasing the one of the two left hand terms
in Eq. (2.1).
As shown in Fig. 2 the pressure distribution of the particular
solution becomes zero at the angle y
n
that is a function of the
eccentricity rate of change. The pressure distribution of the
particular solution is affected from _ e and obtains much higher
maximum values even for small values of _ e such as _ e=OR 0:001,
while the domain with negative pressure has an increment in
its minimum pressure. The particular solution u(x,y) is presented
in Fig. 3.
4. Evaluation of the homogeneous solution
The evaluation of g(x,y) of Eq. (2.5) is performed in this section.
As claimed this should be the generic set of solutions for the
homogeneous Reynolds equation, namely:
c
r
e cosy
3
6m
@
2
gx,y
@x
2

3c
r
e cosy
2
e siny
6mR
2
@gx,y
@y

c
r
e cosy
3
6mR
2
@
2
gx,y
@y
2
0 4:1
We assume that the independent variables of the function
g(x,y) can be separated in the multiplicative form:
gx,y f ymx: 4:2
When the function g(x,y) is known at the boundary @L we
obtain from the above separation that g(x,y)9
@L
f(y)9
@L
m(x)9
@L
.
By using this assumption in Eq. (4.2) one will arrive at the
following outcome:

m
00
x
mx

1
R
2
f
00
y
f y

1
R
2
3e siny
c
r
e cosy
f
0
y
f y
4:3
By inspecting the latter equation one realizes that the left hand
is a function of x while the right is a function of y only. So, in order
for this equality to be feasible both sides should be equal to the
same constant, say l. We thus obtain Eqs. (4.4) and (4.5):

m
00
x
mx
l 4:4
1
R
2
f
00
y
f y

1
R
2
3e siny
c
r
e cosy
f
0
y
f y
l 4:5
The primes denote ordinary derivative with respect to the
functions arguments. For treating Eq. (4.4) we distinguish the
following cases:
(a) If l0 Eq. (4.4) becomes as in Eq. (4.6) which can be solved to
give Eq. (4.7).
m
00
x 0 4:6
mx c
5
xc
6
4:7
(b) If l40 then lk
2
and the solution is as in Eq. (4.8):
mx c
5
coskxc
6
sinkx 4:8
(c) If lo0 then lk
2
and one will nally arrive to the
following solution:
mx c
5
e
kx
c
6
e
kx
4:9
Eq. (4.5) can be very easily solved if l0 so as to make
Eq. (4.5) a rst order differential equation (using the correspond-
ing transformation as in Eq. (3.6)) and then to be treated as
Eq. (3.7). Such an assumption would yield linear distribution of
the pressure through the axial coordinate, since it would be
m(x)c
5
xc
6
, thus the case of l0 is not accepted.
If la0 then the differential equation of Eq. (4.5) has no direct
closed form of solution. Vogelpohl in [11] incorporates in detail
the treatment of the homogenous Reynolds problem with the
assumptions made by Michell [5] and Dufng [15] for the
linearization of the uid lm thickness function so as to make
Eq. (4.5) solvable. Sections 4.1 and 4.2 show how the current
problem was treated in the past and how it is treated in the
current paper.
Fig. 3. Pressure distribution along both angular and axial coordinates given from
the particular solution u(x,y).
c
3

6R
2
m p 2c
r
e
2

c
2
r
e
2
_
_ e 3c
r
e
3
O Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _
Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _ _ _ _ _
3c
r
e
3
Oarc cos
cr
e
_ _
Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _
Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _ _ _ _ _
e2c
2
r
e
2
p Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _
Log
cr e

c
2
r
e
2
p
_ _ _ _
arc cos
cr
e
_ _
Log

c
2
r
e
2
p

e
p
cr e
p
_ _
Log

c
2
r
e
2
p

e
p
cr e
p
_ _ _ _ _ _
3:16
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 50
Two ways are presented in this paper in order to continue with
solving Eq. (4.9) rewritten as Eq. (4.10). The rst way is to
approximate the trigonometric coefcients, introduced by the
term 3h
0
/h in Eq. (4.10), with a linear function of rst order as
Michell [5] and Dufng [15] did, so as to obtain a solution using
Bessels functions. This approximation is presented in Section 4.1
with the use of a linear function for h. The second way is to use
the power series method and to give the exact solution of
Eq. (4.10) as a sum of innite series. This way is presented in
detail in Section 4.2.
f
00
y
3h
0
h
f
0
ylR
2
f y 0 4:10
4.1. Linear approximation of the uid lm thickness and use of
Bessels functions for the denition of f(y)
Michell in [5] used the formula hconst.y in order for
Eq. (4.10) to become as Eq. (4.11) and its solution to be feasible
using Bessel functions:
f
00
y
3
y
f
0
ylR
2
f y 0 4:11
Dufng in [15] used also a linear varying uid lm
thickness; he used the transformation f(y)w(y)/H, with H
2
h
3
/
m; and using these transformations Eq. (4.10) was written as
Eq. (4.12). Since H
2
const.y
2
a
2
y
2
, this yields H
00
0 and then the
eigenfunctions of Eq. (4.12) can be of the form w
i
sinl
i
y.
w
00
y lwy
H
00
H
wy 4:12
In the analysis of this section the trigonometric function h is
approximated with the linear function h
*
that is dened in
Eq. (4.13) and shown in Fig. 4.
h
n
c
r
e2ey=p 4:13
With the use of h
*
the solution of Eq. (4.10) is feasible using
Bessel functions and the general solution is presented in Eq. (4.14)
for both cases of positive and negative value of l.
f y
c
7
BesselJ 1,
icr ekpR
2e
ikRy
_ _
cr pep2ey
c
8
BesselY 1,
icr ekpR
2e
ikRy
_ _
cr pep2ey
, l k
2
c
7
BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
cr pep2ey
c
8
BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
cr pep2ey
, l k
2
_

_
4:14
Since no imaginary solution can be accepted, only the case for
lk
2
is accepted. The solution of Eq. (4.10) given by Eq. (4.15)
will form a boundary value problem with results plotted together
with those from the exact solution given by the Power Series
Method, presented in what follows:
f y c
7
BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
c
r
pep2ey
c
8
BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
c
r
pep2ey
4:15
4.2. The use of the method of power series for the denition of f(y)
The method of the Power Series [18,19] is used in this section
in order to dene a solution for Eq. (4.10). The rst step is to
convert Eq. (4.10) from a linear ODE with trigonometric coef-
cients to a linear ODE with polynomial coefcients. For this
reason the transformation cosy x is used and we are looking
for a function f y
~
f x. The rst and the second derivative of
~
f x are dened in Eqs. (4.16) and (4.17) correspondingly:
df
dy

d
~
f
dx
siny f
0
x

1x
2
_
4:16
d
2
f
dy
2

d
2
~
f
dx
2
sin
2
y
d
~
f
dx
cosy
~
f
00
x1x
2

~
f
0
xx 4:17
By substituting the last two expressions into Eq. (4.10) the
following differential equation in Eq. (4.18) is obtained:
ax
3
bx
2
axb
~
f
00
x4ax
2
bx3a
~
f
0
x3agx3bg
~
f x 0
4:18
The constants a, b, and g are dened as
a e=3, b c
r
=3, g 2lR
2
4:19
4.2.1. Study of
~
f x in the ordinary points
For all the ordinary points [18,19] of the differential equation
in Eq. (4.18) we assume that the solution can be written in the
form of Eq. (4.20):
~
f x

1
n 0
d
n
x
n
4:20
The rst and the second derivative of the function
~
f x are
dened in Eq. (4.21) and (4.22) correspondingly:
~
f
0
x

1
n 1
d
n
nx
n1
4:21
~
f
00
x

1
n 2
d
n
nn1x
n2
4:22
By substituting the last three expressions to the differential
equation one will nd out that the constants that appear in
the power series expansion are determined by the following
formulas:
an
2
an23gad
n1
bn
2
d
n
an
2
4an3ad
n1
_ Fig. 4. The trigonometric function of uid lm thickness h and the linear
approximation of it, h
*
, as a function of the angular coordinate y.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 51
bn
2
3nb2bd
n2

1
n 0
x
n
_ _
2a3agd
1
0
d
1
0an
2
an23gad
n1
bn
2
d
n
an
2
4an3ad
n1
bn
2
3nb2bd
n2
0 4:23
4.2.2. Study of
~
f x in the singular points
The differential equation of Eq. (4.18) is now written in the
form of Eq. (4.24):
~
f
00
xx1x1axbf
0
xxaxb 3ax1x1

~
f x3daxb 0 4:24
The term multiplied with the higher order derivative has the
following roots as in Eq. (4.25):
x 1, x 1, x b=a 4:25
The rst corresponds to the value y0, while the second to the
value yp. The third one is not accepted because it yields
cosy o1. So, we have two singular points, in the values
x71. For them, a separate analysis has to be performed.
For the singular point x1 we have that it is a normal singular
point since analytic functions A
0
(x), A
1
(x) exist such that Eq.
(4.26) is to be satised:
x1xaxb 3ax1x1 x1x1axbA
1
x
x1
2
3gaxb x1x1axbA
0
x 4:26
The series expansions of the functions A
0
(x), A
1
(x) are as in Eq.
(4.27):
A
1
x

1
n 0
x1
2
_ _
n1

1
2

1
n 0
x1
2
_ _
n1
3

1
n 0
a
ab
x1
_ _
n1
A
0
x 3g

1
n 1
x1
2
_ _
n1
4:27
So, the indicative equation of this normal singular point is
given in Eq. (4.28) with the two roots of Eq. (4.29):
pl l
2

1
2
l 4:28
l
1
0, l
2

1
2
4:29
For this singular point the solutions will be of the form of Eq.
(4.30).
~
f
1
x

1
n 0
d
n
x1
n
~
f
2
x x1
1
2

1
n 0
e
n
x1
n
4:30
After a similar procedure as the one described for the ordinary
points, one will be led to the following formulas of Eq. (4.31), for
the calculation of the constants of the above power series in
Eq. (4.30):
d
1
0
1na2gn1
2
d
n1
n1bna3gn3n
2
d
n
12naband
n1
0 4:31
For the coefcients of the other independent solution one will
be led to the following formulas:
e
1
0
a
13
4
3g6nn
2
_ _
e
n1

1
4
13ab12ag12bg32a4bn
_
12a4bn
2
_
e
n
ab
3
2
n
_ _
e
n1
4:32
For the normal singular point x1 we have the following
independent solutions of Eqs. (4.33) and (4.34):
~
f
1
x

1
n 0
d
n
x1
n
4:33
~
f
2
x 9x19
3=2

1
n 0
e
n
x1
n
4:34
For the denition of the constants in Eqs. (4.33) and (4.34), the
formulas of Eqs. (4.35) and (4.36) are used correspondingly:
d
1
0
1na33g3nn
2
d
n1
3ag
2
bn
2
a3bgn3n
2
d
n
1n2aban2bnd
n1
0 4:35
e
0
e
1
0
1
2
3agna
1
2
n
_ _ _ _
e
n1
a
11
2
3g8n2n
2
_ _ _
b
9
4
3g3nn
2
_ __
e
n

1
4
52n4a2an4b2n
_ _
e
n1
0 4:36
5. Boundary conditions for the pressure distribution and
evaluation of the resulting pressure
This section starts with two boundary value problems yielded
by the homogeneous solution dened in detail in Section 4. The
rst has to do with the distribution of the pressure g(x,y) in
the axial direction of the bearing m(x) and the second with the
distribution in the circumferential direction f(y). The boundary
value problem for m(x) is dened from the ODE in Eq. (5.1) and
the BCs of Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3).
m
00
xk
2
mx 0 5:1
mL
b
=2 1 5:2
mL
b
=2 1 5:3
The explanation for the BCs in Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) is that the
resulting pressure at both ends of the bearing P(7L
b
/2,y) has to
be equal to zero (the atmospheric pressure is set zero) and thus
u(7L
b
/2,y)g(7L
b
/2,y), that means j(y)m(7L
b
/2)f(y).
The general solution of Eq. (5.1) is given in Eq. (5.4).
The general solution in Eq. (5.4) is substituted in the BCs of
Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) and one can dene the constants c
5
and c
6
and
obtain the solution. The eigenfunctions m
n
(x) are written as in
Eq. (5.5) with k
n
to be the eigenvalues of the problem of
Eqs. (5.15.3).
mx c
5
e
kx
c
6
e
kx
5:4
m
n
x
e
L
b
kn=2
1e
L
b
kn
e
knx

e
L
b
kn=2
1e
L
b
kn
e
knx
, 5:5
The boundary value problem for f(y) is treated in the two
following Sections 5.1 and 5.2 for the cases that f(y) is dened
using Bessel functions (Section 4.1) and the Power Series Method
(Section 4.2) correspondingly.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 52
5.1. Boundary value problem for f(y) using Bessel functions
The boundary value problem consists of the ODE of Eq. (5.6)
and the BCs of Eqs. (5.7) and (5.8):
f
00
y
3h
n
0
h
n
f
0
yk
2
R
2
f y 0 5:6
f 0 0 5:7
f p 0 5:8
The BCs in Eqs. (5.7) and (5.8) express that in the beginning of
the oil lm (y0) the pressure P(x,0) has to be zero. Thus
j(0)m(x)f(0). Since j(0) is chosen to be zero (see section of
the particular solution) then f(0)0. Also, since f(y) is the
homogenous solution there is no inuence from _ e (this means
y
*
p) and the pressure yielded from the homogeneous problem
becomes also zero at yy
*
p. The general solution of Eq. (5.6) is
given in Eq. (5.9):
f y c
7
BesselJ 1,
c
r
ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
=c
r
pep2ey
c
8
BesselY 1,
c
r
ekpR
2e
kRy
_ _
=c
r
pep2ey
5:9
The substitution of the general solution in the boundary
conditions gives the system of equations in Eq. (5.10):
c7 BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
_ _
=crpep
_ _
c8 BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
_ _
=cr pep
_ _
0
c7 BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRp
_ _
=cr pep
_ _
c8 BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRp
_ _
=cr pep
_ _
0
_
_
_
5:10
The constants c
7
and c
8
can be determined as the solution of
the system of Eq. (5.10) as in Eq. (5.11):
c
7

BesselY1,c
r
ekpR=2e
BesselJ1,c
r
ekpR=2e
c
8
1 5:11
The characteristic equation of the system in Eq. (5.10) is given
in Eq. (5.12) and is plotted in Fig. 5 as a function of k for a specic
set of values for geometrical and physical properties of the journal
bearing. The eigenvalues k
n
are determined as the roots of it and
for the current set of values they are very well approximated by
the formula k
n
20n. The eigenfunctions f
n
(y) are given in
Eq. (5.13) together with the eigenvalues k
n
for the current set of
values.
BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
_ _
=cr pep BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
_ _
=crpep
BesselJ 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRp
_ _
=cr pep BesselY 1,
cr ekpR
2e
kRp
_ _
=cr pep

0
5:12
f
n
y c
7
BesselJ 1,
c
r
ek
n
pR
2e
k
n
Ry
_ _
=c
r
pep2ey
_ _
c
8
BesselY 1,
c
r
ek
n
pR
2e
k
n
Ry
_ _
=c
r
pep2ey
_ _
5:13
5.2. Boundary value problem for
~
f y using Power Series
The current boundary value problem consists of the ODE of
Eq. (5.14) and the boundary conditions of Eqs. (5.15) and (5.16):
ax
3
bx
2
axb
~
f
00
x4ax
2
bx3a
~
f
0
x3agx3bg
~
f x 0
5:14
~
f 1 0 5:15
~
f 1 0 5:16
The explanation of the current boundary conditions is the
same as that of Eqs. (5.7) and (5.8). Using the solution of Eq. (4.20)
and the eigenvalues k
n
np/L
b
, n1,2,... the eigenfunctions
~
f
n
cos y are dened using the iterative formula Eq. (4.23) and
the two BCs for every n1,2,.... For the current evaluation a total
number of n100 was used. The analysis around the singular
points is used also in the evaluation of the eigenfunctions
~
f
n
cos y when higher eigenvalues are incorporated.
The normalized eigenfunctions of both problems (for m(x)and f(y))
are given in Eqs. (5.17) and (5.18) with the constants a
n
or ~ a
n
and b
n
to be dened in Eqs. (5.19) and (5.20) correspondingly [18,19]:
f
n
y a
n
f
n
y or
~
f
n
y ~ a
n
~
f
n
y 5:17
m
n
y b
n
m
n
y 5:18
_
p
0
a
n
f
n
y
2
dy 1, n 1,2,. . . or
_
p
0
~ a
n
~
f
n
y
2
dy 1, n 1,2,. . .
5:19
_
p
0
b
n
m
n
y
2
dy 1, n 1,2,. . .: 5:20
5.3. Evaluation of the resulting pressure
The homogeneous solution g(x,y), can now be written as in
Eq. (5.21). The constants d
n
are dened in Eq. (5.23) using the
boundary condition for zero resulting pressure at both ends
of the bearing which yields j(y)m(7L
b
/2)f(y) or since
m(7L
b
/2)1, f(y)j(y) see Eq. (5.22):
gx,y

1
n 1
d
n
f
n
m
n
or ~ gx,y

1
n 1

~
d
n
~
f
n
m
n
5:21
d
1
f
1
ym
1
L
b
2
_ _
d
2
f
2
ym
2
L
b
2
_ _
d
3
f
3
ym
3
L
b
2
_ _
jy for f or
~
f and d or
~
d: 5:22
d
n

_
2p
0
jyR
2
h
n
f
n
ym
n
L
b
2
_ _ _ _
dy or
Fig. 5. Values of the characteristic determinant of the boundary value problem for
f(y) as a function of constant k, for the case of use of Bessel functions.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 53
~
d
n

_
2p
0
jyh
~
f
n
ym
n
L
b
2
_ _ _ _
dy: 5:23
The pressure distribution dened in Eq. (5.21) is plotted in
Figs. 68 for both cases of the eigenfunctions f
n
y (Bessel
functions) and
~
f
n
y (Power Series Method). As it can be seen in
Figs. 6 and 7 the Bessel functions yield differences in the pressure
distribution along both the axial and circumferential coordinate.
The two distributions have similar maximum and minimum
pressure value but in different locations of y. The differences in
the pressure distribution are more intense in the domain around
the axial centre of the bearing (x0) but both distributions tend
to be equal near the axial ends of the bearing (x7L
b
/2) and this
is because in these locations both distributions are forced to tend
to j(y). As shown in Figs. 68 it can be realized that the
difference between the pressure calculated with Bessel functions
and PSM affects the resulting pressure especially in the axial
locations near the centre of the bearing.
The comparison of the pressure yielded by the homogenous
solution using linearization of the uid lm thickness function to
this of the trigonometric uid lm function can be made in Fig. 6
by looking in detail the pressure distribution in the axial location
of x0. There, the approximate solution yields pressure distribu-
tion with a minimum to be around the 1051 while the exact
solution yields a pressure with a minimum around the 1401.
These locations are example for L/D1, e0.7 as in Fig. 6. Both
solutions yield the minimum pressure (homogenous) near the
value of 2 (dimensionless) and considering the corresponding
maximum value of the particular pressure, see Fig. 2, that is of
dimensionless value of 7.5 near the 1501 it is shown that the
homogenous pressure decreases the particular pressure by
adding a negative value to it around the domain of the maximum
particular pressure. In the current example with L/D1, e0.7,
the exact resulting pressure, see Fig. 10, obtains a maximum of
4.75 while the approximate has the corresponding value around
4.7. The contribution of the homogenous pressure goes for all
the domain of the circumferential dimension that is why in Fig. 10
the differences in the resulting pressure between the approximate
and the exact solution are extended in all the angular domains of
y. The homogenous pressure alters the value and the location of
the particular pressure, in order the resulting pressure to
become close to the real one, also certied by the numerical
solutions, see Figs. 9 and 10, and one can say that the approximate
pressure is slightly different form the exact pressure with these
slight differences to affect the entire domain of angular domain of
y. Regarding the quality of the approximate homogenous pres-
sure, and by looking in Fig. 6, it is shown that the approximate
pressure follows a more sinusoidal distribution than the exact
homogenous pressure that follows a distribution more corre-
spondent to this of the particular pressure.
The resulting uid lm pressure distribution is then dened
explicitly as in Eq. (5.24) and is plotted in Figs. 9 and 10 through
angular coordinates, together with past numerical results from
Wada [16] and the very recent numerical results (CFD) from
Gertzos [17]. Also, numerical results obtained during the current
work from the solution of Eq. (1.1) using the Finite Differences
Method are presented in order to use the results of FDM for a
comparison in the cases that _ e a0. Also the Short and Long
bearing approximations [21] where used in order to produce
the pressure prole and to compare it with the exact analytical.
The resulting pressure distributions shown in Figs. 9 and 10 are
Fig. 8. The pressure distribution g(y,x) given from the homogenous solution using
the Power Series Method as a function of angular and axial coordinates.
Fig. 6. Pressure distribution along the angular coordinate y given from the
homogenous solution g(x,y) for different axial locations.
Fig. 7. The pressure distribution along the axial coordinate x given from the
homogenous solution g(y,x) for variable values of angular coordinate y.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 54
obtained using the half-Sommerfeld boundary condition.
Px,y jycx

1
n 1
d
n
f
n
ym
n
x approximate analytical
Px,y jycx

1
n 1

~
d
n
~
f
n
ym
n
x exact analytical:
5:24
In Figs. 911 it can be seen that the exact analytical resultant
pressure distribution is in a very good agreement with the results
of the other numerical methods and the approximate analytical
method. There are slight differences in the values of maximum
pressure but also in the domain of lower values of pressure.
Comparing now the exact analytical result with the numerical-
FDM result for the dynamic case, the divergence in the value
of the maximum pressure becomes more intensive when the
parameter of eccentricity rate of change obtains higher values
(see Fig. 11) while the minimum pressure value is not affected as
much as this of the maximum. Having a close look through the
Figs. 9 and 10 it is quite difcult to make a general remark about
the differences of the exact pressure with the pressure from the
numerical solutions. Also, the numerical solutions have differ-
ences to each other (see Fig. 9b and c). The differences of the exact
pressure in comparison to the numerical solutions are minimal
for all of these four cases of eccentricity ratio, which correspond
to a heavy loaded bearing, to a lightly loaded bearing and also to
intermediate cases. The exact solution seems to slightly under-
estimate the pressure in the domain of 2011001, in the case of
e0.7 (Fig. 9c), while in the case of e0.5 (Fig. 9b) the exact
solution seems to overestimate the pressure, with the approx-
imate analytical solution to present almost an absolute conver-
gence with numerical ones. In the case of e0.3 the exact
pressure comes to an absolute convergence with the FDM result
(see Fig. 9a) and in the case of e0.9 there is some divergence in
the value of the maximum pressure. However, in all cases, the
Fig. 9. The resulting pressure distribution P(y,x) along the angular coordinate y in the axial centre of the bearing (x0) for variable cases of eccentricity ratio and
comparison with results from numerical solutions. (a) e0.3, (b) e0.5, (c) e0.7, and (d) e0.9. L/D1 in all diagrams.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 55
Fig. 10. The resulting pressure distribution P(y,x) along the angular coordinate y in the axial centre of the bearing (x0) for variable cases of eccentricity ratio and
comparison with results from the short and long bearing approximation theory and the numerical FDM. (a) e0.5 and L/D0.25, (b) e0.5 and L/D4, (c) e0.7 and
L/D0.25, (d) e0.7 and L/D4, (e) e0.9 and L/D0.25, (f) e0.9 and L/D4.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 56
analytical solutions (exact and approximate) converge to each
other very well. These slight differences presented between the
pressure distributions could be explained as a matter of the
differences in the nature of the solutions (FDM, CFD, FEM,
analytical exact, analytical approximate). As it was stated also in
the beginning of Section 2, the assumptions in the current
problem of lubrication consider, isothermal, laminar, isoviscous
uid ow. The literature used for comparison in the charts of
Fig. 9 has the same assumptions with those used in the current
lubrication problem. It has to be mentioned that during the
analytical evaluation of the pressure, different cases of number
of sum terms (Eq. 5.24) where examined. A number of 5 terms is
already enough to achieve convergence and the pressure proles
incorporating 5 terms is the same with this of the use of 10 terms
in the sense that no changes are notied in a chart. In Fig. 10 two
cases of L/D ratio corresponding to a short (L/D0.25) and a long
(L/D4) bearing are presented with evaluating the pressure
prole under the use of the exact analytical solution, the FDM,
and the Short/Long bearing approximation for three different
cases of e0.5, e0.7 and e0.9. As shown in Fig. 10b, d and f,
the long bearing approximation yields results of almost absolute
agreement with the exact analytical solution and with slight
differences to the numerical results. The short bearing approx-
imation, see Fig. 10a, c and e, appeared with a very good
agreement in cases of eccentricity ratio e0.5 and e0.7, and
only slight differences are noticed in the maximum pressure of
the heavy loaded short bearing in Fig. 10e. The numerical results
with FDM appeared with some divergence that gets higher with
the eccentricity ratio.
The resulting pressure distribution through the axial coordinate
is plotted in Fig. 12 for the two cases of evaluation. The differences
become more intensive for values of x where the pressure tents to
maximize (around the axial centre of the bearing).
A three dimensional plot for the resulting pressure distribution
is given in Fig. 13. Having also a look in Figs. 3 and 8 one can
realize how their distributions contribute in the resulting pres-
sure of Fig. 13. Using Eq. (5.24) the values for the angles of the
maximum and the minimum resulting pressure can be calculated
Fig. 11. The resulting pressure distribution P(y,x) along the angular coordinate
y in the axial centre of the bearing (x0) for variable values of _ e.
Fig. 12. The resulting pressure distribution P(y,x) along the axial coordinate x for
variable values of angular coordinate y when _ e 0.
Fig. 13. The resulting pressure distribution P(y,x) yielded from the exact analytical
solution, as a function of the angular and the axial coordinate for _ e 0.
Fig. 14. Values of the angles of the maximum ymax, of the minimum y
min
, and of
the zero y
*
resulting pressure in x0 as a function of the eccentricity rate of
change _ e.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 57
by nding the roots of Eq. (5.25), while the roots of Eq. (5.26) are
the angles of the zero resulting pressure. The roots of Eqs. (5.25)
and (5.26) are evaluated numerically and they are plotted in
Fig. 14 as a function of the parameter _ e for two cases of study.
The two cases of evaluation have differences in where the
pressure obtains the maximum and the zero pressure especially
as _ e takes higher values.
d
dy
jycy

1
n 1

~
d
n
~
f
n
ym
n
y
_ _
0 5:25
jyc0

1
n 1

~
d
n
~
f
n
ym
n
0
_ _
0 5:26
6. Conclusions, contribution and future concepts
The current work gives a path of obtaining the exact analytical
solution of the Reynolds equation for the lubrication of journal
bearings with nite length. The contribution of the current work
can be described with the following comments which highlight
the differences to the solutions given in the past.
(a) A set of particular solutions of the Reynolds equation is given
with a sub case of them to correspond to the pressure
distribution of the innitively long bearing without the
demand of excluding any partial derivative in Reynolds
equation. This means that a particular solution that describes
either the innitely long or the innitely short bearing can be
dened regarding the boundary conditions that are applied in
the function of the particular solution for the nite bearing.
(b) The homogeneous Reynolds equation is treated without the
use of any approximating function for the uid lm thickness
and the use of Power Series yield a closed form solution for
the homogeneous Reynolds equation for the nite bearing.
(c) The analytical expression of the resulting pressure as a
function of eccentricity rate of change _ e gives the ability to
dene a formula that together with the initial condition for
the pressure distribution in the circumferential beginning of
the lm lets the angle of zero pressure to be self dened.
An additional benet is that there exist closed form formulas
for the denition of the angles of maximum and minimum
pressure of the lubricant in the nite bearing.
A study of the pressure distribution under the approximation of
the uid lm thickness function with a linear function was
motivated from the literature in order to show the differences
between the approximate analytical solution using Bessel functions
and the exact analytical solution using the method of power series.
Two linear ordinary differential equations of 2nd order and
with trigonometric coefcients were solved in this work. They
were extracted and formed under the proper assumptions of
splitting the solutions and the independent variables. The trigo-
nometric coefcients that were introduced by the function for the
uid lm thickness introduced the great difculty in solving
the Reynolds equation. Since one of them, which corresponds to
the particular solution, has direct form of solution whatever the
thickness function is, and the other, which corresponds to
the homogenous solution, can be tackled using the power series
method, a new concept comes up and has to do with the
introduction of a different function for the uid lm thickness
that corresponds to a worn journal bearing.
The current paper was planned to give the formulas of the
pressure distribution of the lubricant in a nite journal bearing.
These formulas happen to have functions that can be integrated in
space domain with closed form expressions so as to give the
resulting impedance forces of the lubricant to the bearing. This
fact gives the ability to dene the closed form expressions for
the stiffness and damping coefcients of the lubricant lm and
of the other operational characteristics and parameters of design
for the nite journal bearing. An upcoming future work gives the
path for the analytical denition of the main design parameters of
the nite journal bearing, such as load carrying capacity, attitude
angle, maximum pressure location etc. Also, the fact that the
current analytical solution, because of the use of PSM can
confront the lubrication problem of nite journal bearings of also
other uid lm functions (not only simply trigonometric), gives in
the current analysis a wider contribution in the journal bearing
design, since it introduces the analytical path for confronting the
lubrication problem of journal bearings of non circular cross
section, for example lobe bearings, grooved etc.
Acknowledgements
Dr.-Ing. Athanasios Chasalevris gratefully appreciates the
Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung foundation for the nancial
support for postdoctoral research. The authors would also like to
thank Prof. Dr.-Ing. Richard Markert, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Chris Papado-
poulos, Dr. techn. Fadi Dohnal and Dipl.-Ing Wolfgang K ohl for
their contribution in the procedure of this work.
References
[1] Reynolds O. On the theory of lubrication and its application to Mr. Beau-
champ Towers experiments, including an experimental determination of the
viscosity of olive oil. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
London, Series A 1886;177:157234.
[2] Pinkus O, Sternlicht B. Theory of hydrodynamic lubrication. NY: McGraw-Hill
Book Co.; 1961.
[3] Sommerfeld A. The hydrodynamic theory of lubrication friction. Zeitschrift
f ur Angewandte Mathematik und Physik 1904;50(1 and 2):97155.
[4] Harrison W. The hydrodynamical theory of lubrication with special reference
to air as a lubricant. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society
1913;22(3):3954.
[5] Michell A. Progress in Fluid lm lubrication. Transactions of ASME
1929;51:15363 (MSP-51-21).
[6] Gardullo F. Some practical deductions from theory of lubrication of short
cylindrical bearings. Transactions of ASME 1930;52:14353 (MSP-52-12).
[7] Ocvirk F, Dubois G. Analytical derivation and experimental evaluation of
short bearing approximation of full journal bearings. NACA, Technical Report
1957;1953.
[8] Kirk R, Gunter E. Stability and transient motion of a plain journal mounted in
exible damped supports. Journal of Engineering for Industry 1976:57692.
[9] Kingsbury A. Problems in theory of uid lm lubrication with experimental
method of solution. Transactions of ASME 1931;53:5974 (APM-53-5).
[10] Christopherson D. A new mathematical method for the solution of lm
lubrication problems. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
(London) 1941;146(3):12635.
[11] Vogelpohl G. Zur Integration der Reynoldsschen Gleichung f ur das Zapfenlager
endlicher Breite. Ingenieur Archiv 1943 [in German].
[12] Vogelpohl G.

Uber die Tragf ahigkeit von Gleitlagern und ihre Berechnung.
Westdeutscher Verlag/K oln und Opladen; 1956 [in German].
[13] Vogelpohl G. Beitr age zur Kenntnis der Gleitlagerreibung. VDI-Forsch.-Heft
1937;386:35 In German.
[14] Cameron A, Wood W. The full journal bearing. Proceedings of the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers (London) 1949;161:5972 (W.E.P. nos. 4754).
[15] Dufng G. Die Schmiermittelreibung bei Gleit achen von endlicher Breite.
Hanbuchder phys. U. techn.; Mechanik von Auerbach-Hort, Bd. 5. Leipzig;
Barth; 1931. P. 83950. [in German].
[16] Wada S, Hayashi H, Haga K. Behavior of Bingham solid in hydrodynamic
lubrication. Part 3, application to journal bearing. Bulletin of JSME
1974;111(17):118291.
[17] Gertzos K, Nikolakopoulos P, Papadopoulos C. CFD analysis of journal bearing
hydrodynamic lubrication by Bingham lubricant. Tribology International
2008;41:1190204.
[18] Courant R, Hilbert D. Methods of mathematical physics, vol. II. Wiley-VCH; 1989.
[19] Boyce W, DiPrima R. Elementary differential equations and boundary value
problems. J. Wiley; 1997.
[20] Polyanin A, Zaitsev V. Handbook of exact solutions for ordinary differential
equations. Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2003.
[21] Lee. CW. Vibration analysis of rotors. Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1993.
D. Sfyris, A. Chasalevris / Tribology International 55 (2012) 4658 58