This article was downloaded by: [CERIST - Trial Account]

On: 22 October 2010

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 924357122]
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Tribology Transactions
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713669620

Comparison of Thermal Effects on the Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with 2-

D and 3-D Energy Equations
Ming-Chang Jenga; Yung-Kuang Yanga
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan

First published on: 01 January 2002

To cite this Article Jeng, Ming-Chang and Yang, Yung-Kuang(2002) 'Comparison of Thermal Effects on the Conical-
Cylindrical Bearing with 2-D and 3-D Energy Equations', Tribology Transactions, 45: 1, 67 — 75, First published on: 01
January 2002 (iFirst)
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/10402000208982523
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10402000208982523

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Comparison of Thermal Effects on the
Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with
2-D and 3-D Energy ~ ~ u a t i o n s @
M I N G - C H A N G J E N G a n d Y U N G - K U A N G YANG
National Central University
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Chung-Li, 32054,Taiwan

This study analyzes the thermal effects of conical-cylindrical formance paranzeters hetween 2 - 0 and 3 - 0 energy equations MIUS
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010

hydrobearing performance parameters by via two-dimensional (2- not significattr. Also, at tlze high vul~tesof piston rod speed ( L I =
,,
D ) and three-dimensional ( 3 - 0 ) energy equations. Eccentricity, factor (a,=
10 nzls), eccentricity ratio (C = 0.6) or nzisaligttt~~ent
nzisulignnzent and thermal effects, including isothermal, adiabatic 0.6),the drfference of bearing perfornzance parameters betn~een2-
and thermohydrodynanzic temperature boundary conditions are D and 3 - 0 energy equations is ~ ~ i t happrosinrately
in 1.2 %.
considered herein. The calculational results reveal that, at the
lower piston rod speed (u,, s 4 rills), the difference of hearing per- KEY WORDS
Bearings; Heat Transfer a n d Velocity

Presented a s a Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers INTRODUCTION

Paper at the STLEIASME Tribology Conference in San Francisco, CA A point-wise balanced, steady-state energy equation with con-
October 21-24,2001
Final manuscript approved September 19, 2001 vective and conductive heat transfer in the fluid film viscous dis-
Review led by Michael Khonsari sipation c a n be fully described by a three-dimensional (3-D) ener-

NOMENCLATURE TP
= temperature in stationary component, ('C)
= thickness of stationary component, (111)
C~
= specific heat of lubricant, (J / kgm O K ) "h = surface h (or cylinder rod) velocity, (111 1 s )
-
d = cylinder rod diameters, (m) u = dimensionless film velocity in .r direction
-
e = eccentricity at one end, ~ = 0 v = dimensionless film velocity in y direction
-
f = tangential (friction) force, (N) W = dimensionless film velocity in z direction
f = dimensionless shear force
3 -
"'2
= normal load carrying capacity, (N)
9.v = volume flow in s direction, (ni / s) w: = dimensionless normal load carrying capacity
-
9, = dimensionless volume flow in s x =coordinate system in the moving direction used in lubricant,
11
- = film thickness, (m) (n1)
h = dimensionless film thickness r = coordinate system used in stationary component, (m)
"C
= convective heat transfer coefficient, = ( W / m2 4() Y = coordinate system in circumferential direction, (111)
= outlet film thickness, (m) z = coordinate system across the film used in lubricant, (111)
h~ = dimensionless outlet film thickness z~ = coordinate system used in stationary component, (nr)
k~ = thermal conductivity of lubricant, (W 1 ni O K )
I7 = absolute viscosity, pa s (or N s / 1n2)
kP = thermal conductivity of stationary component, (W / n~ O K )
70 = absolute viscosity at p=O and constant temperature, pa s
L = length-diameter ratio, (Ild) (or N s / m2)
-
I = length in s direction, (nr) "7 = dimensionless absolute viscosity
3
= shoulder length ratio Po = density of lubricant, (kg,,, / ni )
P
- = pressure, Pa(or N / m2) I3 = temperature-viscosity coefficient, (I / 'C)
P = dimensionless pressure a2 = two independent misalignment factor
r = cylinder rod radius, (nl) /I = friction coefficient
- = dimensionless friction coefficient
Sh = shoulder height, (nr) p
T = film temperature, ("C) dJ
- = circumferential angle, / r)
TO = ambient temperature, ('C) e = dimensionless circumferential angle
'in = lubricant temperature supplied, ('C)

67
 tribution at the bearing offers a normal load canying capacity
since the gap gradually decreases along the motion direction. The
frictional force is also decreased significantly due to oil film filled
between piston rod and bearing.

GOVERNING EQURrlONS
The analysis given below is based on the following assump-
tions:

I. The flow in the film thickness is steady and laminar, and its
velocity components in x, y, and z were simultaneously con-
sidered.
2. The fluid is Newtonian, incompressible, and viscous with the
function of film temperature.
3. The inertial effects are negligible with respect to the viscous
Flg. l-Conical-cyllndrlcal bearing configuration. effects.
4. Piston rod moves along s-direction without circumferential
rotation.
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010

5. Pressure distribution along the direction of film thickness, z-

direction identical.
gy cqi~ntion.The analysis of the two-dimensional (2-D) energy
ciluntion for a finite slider bearing was studied by Rohde and Oh The governing equations are those representing the Reynolds,
(1975). In their paper, the conduction in the direction of motion momentum, continuity, and energy in the oil film, and heat con-
was neglected. This assumption is reasonable and also verified by duction in the bearing solids, as well as the oil film geometric con-
Kohtlc nntl Oh (1975) since, when the relatively high surface figuration. The original governing equations can be referring to
spcctl is considered, the convective heat transfer term dominates Yang and Jeng (2001).
the conductive term except in a very thin boundary layer near the The following transformations were used to nondimensional-
stationnry solid. The 2-D energy equation was applied on the ize the governing equation:
:111nlysisofjournal bearing by Lin and Wang (1990), ~twas applied - -
on the dcsign of tilting-pad bearing by Kim and Rodkiewicz s.~
-
1'
- -1 , L = L d,
x ~- 3 ho=2, h = 1
Sh '
i = shL'
(1991) ns well.
'I -
Xuig and Jeng (2001) studied performance parameters of con-
ical-cylindrical bearing for the hydraulic servo cylinder under
cll'ccts of tlicr~iinland misalignment using a 3-D energy equation.
F=
-
st,'

T = TT - 5, =
sz = s* ShUb

Ta k,8
'
z =
=p
QI
- A
f = noubdl *
~ 8 =~@lr =~a ,
T i , P-Ti, lrd'
From tlie practical viewpoint, the motion of the conical-cylindri-
cnl bearing is alone the s-direction, which results in self-acting
q = .ZL,p= !!l
170 31,
hydrodynnniic effect. Therefore, the film velocity distribut~on
along s-dircction is dominant due to the high-speed motion of the Reynolds Equation
piston rod. Namely, it is not necessary to consider the motion of The configuration in Fig. 1 can be treated as a slider bearing,
circu~nferenti;~l and oil film thickness direction for the piston rod. therefore, the two-dimensional Reynolds equation can be
When effect of eccentric or asymmetric was considered for the expressed as:
pis1011rod, the gap of oil film generated pressure gradient. This
prcssurc gradient niakes the film flow. In general, the film veloc-
ity in the circumference and the film thickness direction are much
smaller than that in the motion direction. Therefore, 2-D energy Equation [la] can be converted into conical-cylindrical bear-
ciluation can be employed to c~nalyzethe bearing performance ing model. Then the two-dimensional Reynolds equation can be
pnrnmctcrs, which decreases the computation time requirements expressed as:
of tlie nurncricol simulation. In this paper, both 2-D and 3-D ener-
gy cquntions are eniployed to analyze the thermal effects on the
performance pnr;~meters of the conical bearing. The different
rcsults for 2-D and 3-D energy equations are discussed. Pressure Boundary Condiriotls
The pressure oil must enter the left-sided plenum and fill up
SCHEMATICS CONICAL-CYLINDRICAL BEARING the bearing clearance for the conical-cylindrical bearing when the
Figure I shows the mechanisms of the conical-cylindrical con- piston rod moves to the right. The pressure inside the clearance of
figuration. Tlic piston rod moves to the right and the oil inside the the right-sided bearing is zero because the oil in the right-sided
right-sided plenum flows back to the reservoir when the oil pres- plenum flows back into the reservoir. The boundary conditions for
sure is applied to the left port of the bearing. Positive pressure dis- the pressure distribution are given as follows:
 Comparison of Thermal Effects on the Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with 2-D and 3-D Energy Equations

Oil Film Velocity Profiles

The piston rod does not rotate and motion in the direction of
film thickness. Therefore, the direction of circumference film
velocity(F)and the direction of thickness film velocity (W) are far
less than film velocity @) of motion direction. The oil film veloc-
ity profiles along x. y and z-directions can be expressed as:

Side View Front View Top View

Fig. 2-The geometry of eccentric and asymmetric.

From this text structure, the authors can find that it lacks up-
pressure boundary condition and low-pressure boundary condi-
tion. Therefore, the other pressure boundary conditions must be
found to meet operation procedure. Which is boundary condition
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010

of circumference direction. Because the initial point and terminal

point of circumference direction are the same positions, the direc-
From Eq. [4], the authors know that three-direction velocity
tion of circumference pressure boundary conditions can be written
distribution and viscosity were related, and the viscosity can be
as:
denoted as the exponential function of film temperature according
to the Reynolds equation as in [5i]. Also the variation of film tem-
perature depended on three boundary conditions, i.e., isothermal,
adiabatic, and thermohydrodynamics.
where AJ is minimum angle of segmentation on the circumfer-
ence direction.
Energy Equation

Oil Film Thickness Geometric Configuration Energy Equation in the Oil Film
A steady-state three-dimensional energy equation as in refer-
The bearing oil film thickness varies along the axial and cir-
ence Ezzat and Rohde (1973), and Jang and Khonsari (1997)
cumferential directions depending on the geometric configuration
expressing a point-wise balance of convective and conductive
of the bearing and the effects of shoulder length ratio, eccentrici- heat transfer with viscous dissipation in the oil film can be
ty ratio, and tilted angles.
expressed as:
The mechanism of Fig. I is an extension of fixed-incline slid-
er bearing as Hamrock (1994). The low-pressure oil enters the
film thickness from the left end of the bearing as demonstrated in
Fig. I . The film thickness linearly decreases from (/lo + sh) to (ho) aii 2 a p 2 a, 2
with a length of 11.4, and the minimum film thickness is lz, with a
[(XI + (z) +(=I I
length of /(I -nS).
and the two-dimensional energy equation as in reference Rohde
The geometry of eccentric and asymmetric film thickness is
and Oh (1975), and Lin and Wang (1990), and Kim and
illustrated in Fig. 2, where E is eccentricity ratio, y , and y2 are the
Rodkiewicz (I 99 I ) can be written as:
tilted angles, and Z = 0 is the reference point at the oil entrance.
Buckholz and Lin (1986), Jang and Chang (1987) also depicted
the film thickness geometry of the journal bearing.
Synthesis illustrates above, the equation of film thickness can
be expressed as:
where:
- so,cosnB + so, sinn8
atOs.Tsn,,jj(O)=O

&(i + ~ c o s n B ) - s ocosnB+~o,sinnB
, The terms on the Left-Hand-Side represent the energy trans-
at 11, S T S l , j j ( l ) = O ported by convection. The first terms on the Right-Hand-Side rep-
resent the heat transfer by conduction and the last term on the
R.H.S. represents the energy generated by internal friction known
where
as viscous dissipation term.
a, = 2(rl.rl,)(lld)tany, In the absence of the convective term in y-direction of the
a, = 2(rlsl,)(l14tany, energy equation by hypothesis of Khonsari and Wang (1991), the
 assumption asserting that the circumference temperature remains
constant, though it can be e;~silyrelaxed, results in considerable
saving in conlputationnl time. The assuniption has less effect to
the bearing performance parameter. Furthermore, it has been con-
firmed in this study. More details are presented in the Appendix.
Tlic boundary cotiditions used for Eqs. 15a] and [5b] are:
CALCULATION OF BEARING PERFORMANCE
PARAMETERS
The pressure distribution can be easily obtained by means of
the two-dimensional Reynolds equation based on the pressure
boundary conditions and film thickness geometry. Hence, the
bearing performance parameters such as normal load carrying
capacity, frictional force and coefficient, and flow rate can also be
calculated.

Normal Load Carrying Capacity

Normal load carrying capacity is the product of pressure dis-
111 adtlition,the thermal boundary conditions at the oil-solid
tribution and bearing cross-area, which can be expressed as:
intcrklcc for the different conditions studied may be expressed as:

(a) Isother~iial(Iso.) boundary:

Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010

(b) Adiabatic (Adia.) boundary:

Friction Force and Coefficient
Friction force is the product of the viscous shear stress and
(c) Cotiiplcte tlicrmoliydrodyna~nic(THD) solution: bearing cross-sectional area, which can be expressed as:

Friction coefficient is the ratio of friction force to normal load

carrying capacity and can be expressed as:
E~rer.~gy
Eqrlcctio~lirr rlre Stcrtio~~ury
Solid
Tlic cquntion governing the heat transfer in the bearing sta-
tionary component is Laplace's equation:
Volume Flow
Volume flow can be expressed as:

Together with the boundary conditions:

-
5
<

,
=,?
TI> i1T
b,, 7;,,(j Bf If= I 'It =O NUMERICAL METHOD
- - Equations [I b], [5a], and ISg] are simultaneously solved by the
-A:,- OF, -
-
I1,,l(TI,- T , ) at -
:cp = 0 finite difference method to yield the pressure and temperature
a7 - - fields. The developed oil film clearance is divided into rectangu-
-k,,% = 11,,l(T,,- T , )at ":
=,1 lar grids, and Eqs. [I b], [5a], and [5g] are written in terms of cen-
- -
aT ' = I I , , % tral finite difference forms, except for the term a T / Z in Eq. 15al
-kl, & ~ (-TT,)
~, at Zp = 1 [5hl where the backward difference is applied. The central finite dif-
ference equations are simultaneously solved by the iterative
method combined with a successive over-relaxation factor (the
'I'hc first of these boundary conditions represents continuity of optimal value ranges between 1.5 to 1.8, 1.7 is applied in the com-
lieat I'lux at the oil-solid interface whereas the second represents putation) to accelerate the pressure field convergence, and an
convcctive heat transfer to the environment. under-relaxation factor (the optimal value ranges between 0.8 to
0.95, 0.85 is applied in the computation) to ensure convergence
Oil Visc.osiry-Ter~rl~e~'~~tr~re
Relurio~r.slril~ for the temperature field. The iterative procedure is stopped to
Tlic eticrgy equation is coupled to Reynolds equation through give the final pressure or temperature distribution when the error
:I nonlinear viscosily-temper:~ture relationship that for tiiost con- in computing the pressure and the temperature in the next iterative
ventional lubricants is: procedure is less than loF5.
When a reversed flow occurs at a large eccentricity ratio, or
tilted angle, and at high piston rod velocity for example, film
 Comparison of 'Thermal Effects on the Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with 2-D and 3-D Energy Equations
Fig. %Maximum temperature as a function of circumferential angle:
(E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, o2= 0.05);
(1: Iso., 2: Adia., 3: THD; u, = 4 mls);
(-): with 3-D energy equation,
(....): with 2-D energy equation
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010
Fig. 4--Maximum temperature as a function of circumferential angle:
(E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, o2= 0.05);
(1: Iso., 2: Adia., 3: THD; u, = 10 mls);
(-): with 3-0 energy equation,
(....): with 2-D energy equation
velocity ii in .v-direction may be negative in the inlet zone of the
filrn and the iterative solutions do not converge. In this case, the
film is divided into two zones. In the first one, which is near pis-
ton rod where ii is positive, the energy equation is solved using
the original iterative process. In the second one, on the above of
the inlet zone, the film velocity ii is opposite to the piston rod
velocity. Namely, when ii > 0, B T / Z term is iterated by back-
ward difference, and when ii < 0, &?/& term is iterated by for-
ward difference, which is suggested by Boncompain, et al. (1986).
Through this treatment, the iterative process can converge very
quickly.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure I displays that the conical-cylindrical bearings studied
herein included the length-diameter ratio I / d = 1, shoulder-length
ratio rls=0.8 and outlet film thickness ratio &=0.8. Both film
clearance energy equations were calculated, respectively. As well,
a cotiiparison of the bearing performance parameter effects, such
as maximum temperature distribution (T,,,), pressure distribu-
tion (F),normal load carrying capacity @:), friction coefficient (
(Tz) and volunle flow (q.v)were analyzed by the numerical method
Fig. %Maximum temperature as a function of velocity:
(E = 0.6, a,= 0.1, a, = 0.05);
(1: Iso., 2: Adia., 3: THD);
(-): with 3-D energy equation,
(....): with 2-D energy equation
Fig. &Maximum pressure distribution:
1: ( g = 0.6, a, = 0.1, a, = 0.05);
2: (E = 0.6, a, = 0.6, a, = 0.05)
-.-
(- Iso., ... Adia., THD; u, = 10 m/s)
with three kinds of different temperature boundary conditions
(isothermal, adiabatic, and thennohydrodynamic).
The results presented in Figs. 3- 12 were obtained for the inputs
listed in Table I.
Figure 3 illustrates the maximum temperature distribution as
well as the circumferential direction of piston rod velocity lr,, = 4
m/s. According to Fig. 3, the maximum temperature distribution
increased with a circumferential direction that ranged from 8 = 0.2
- 0.5. Notably, the 3-Denergy equation contained the film cir-
cumference velocity gradient in the clearance direction (av/8z),
owing to the effect of film viscosity that was produced by internal
friction action, which forced the film temperature to increase. In
an isothermal (Iso.) temperature boundary condition the maxi-
mum temperature distribution value is similar to either a 2-D or 3-
D energy equation.
Figure 4 illustrates the maximum temperature distribution as
well as the circumferential direction for piston rod velocity ti,,= 10
ni/s. Notably, the physical phenomenon and explanation are the
same as those of Fig. 3.
Comparing Figs. 3 and 4 reveals the effect of piston rod veloc-
ity on the maximum temperature distribution. At the same condi-
 Fig. 7-Normal load carrying capacity as a function of veiocity:
(??= 0.6, a, = 0.1, a, = 0.05)
(1: Iso., 2: Adia., 3: THD);
(-): with 3-D energy equation,
(....): with 2-D energy equation
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010
Fig. &Normal load carrying capacity as a function of veiocity:
(??= 0.1, a, = 0.6, a, = 0.05);
(1: Iso., 2: Adia., 3: THD);
(-): with 3-D energy equation,
(....): with 2-0 energy equation
- ture boundary conditions within a 3-D energy equation is higher
tion, the piston rod velocity LI,, effect increases and Tmax as well,
the maximum temperature distribution value of adiabatic (Adia.)
tcmpcrature boundary condition is greater than that of both ther-
noh hydrodynamic (THD) and isothermal temperature boundary
conditions. For instance, under the same condition of E = 0.6, a,
= 0.1, a, = 0.05, the adiabatic temperature boundary condition and
3-D energy equation - with the piston rod velocity effect (u,, = 4
ni/s), the value of T,,,, is 1.0657. However, if the effect - of piston
rod velocity is increased by I(,,= I0 m/s, the value of Tmax increas-
cs horn 1.0657 to 1.4448 (Figs. 3 and 4-curve 2). Under the ther-
~nohydrotlynamictemper:iture boundary condition and 3-D ener-
gy equation - with the piston rod velocity effect, 11, = 4 m/s, the
value of is 1.0257. If the piston
- rod velocity effect is
incrcnsed to rr,, = 10 m/s, the value of T,",, increases from 1.0257
to 1.3 127 (Figs. 3 and 4-curve 3).
Figure 5 indicates the relationship between the maximum tem-
pc~xtureand piston rod velocity. According to Fig. 5, Tmax (Adia.)
> ~ l l l ; l x (THD) > (Iso.), and an increase in the piston rod
velocity rr,,, in turn increases T,,, Furthermore,- when the piston
rod velocity r c , is decreased, thus decreasing the Twax ratio value,
Fig. %--Friction coefficient as a function of velocity:
(E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, a, = 0.05); as in Fig. 7
Fig. 10-Friction coefficient as a function of velocity:
@ = 0.1, a, = 0.6, a, = 0.05); as in Fig. 8
the maximum temperature value of adiabatic and THD tempera-
than in a 2-D energy equation. The maximum temperature value
of the isothermal temperature boundary condition is less signifi-
cant.
Figure 6 demonstrates the maximum pressure distribution, in
which, pmax (Iso.) > F,, (THD) > pmsX (Adia.).
Figure 7 displays the variation of the normal load carrying
capacity vs. the piston rod velocity for @ = 0.6, a, = 0.1, a, =
0.05). As 3-D energy equation contained the film circumference
velocity gradient in the clearance direction ( a v / a z ) owing to the
internal friction action, which forced the film temperature to
increase, both the viscosity and the G, decreased. Within a piston
rod velocity of u, = 10 m/s for isothermal temperature boundary
condition and a 3-D energy equation, the normal load carrying
capacity, Gzis 0.7497. When 2-D energy equation replaces a 3-D
one, the Gz value increases from 0.7490 to 0.7506, and also
increases the ratio slightly by approximately 0.21 %. Within the
same conditions for both the adiabatic and the thermohydrody-
namic temperature boundary conditions, Gz also increased the
ratios by within approximately 0.66 %. However, a decrease in the
piston rod velocity u,, decreases the E,ratio values.
 Conlparison of Thermal Effects on the Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with 2-D and 3-D Energy Equations
Fig. 11-Volume flow as a function of velocity:
(E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, 0,= 0.05); as in Fig. 7
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010
Fig. 12-Volume flow as a function of velocity:
(e = 0.1, a, = 0.6, o, = 0.05); as in Fig. 8
Figure 8 displays the nornial load carrying capacity variation
versus piston rod velocity for (E = 0.1 , a, = 0.6, a2= 0.05), in
which the physical phenomenon and explanation are identical to
those of Fig. 7. Under the condition of piston rod velocity u,,= 10
m/s, isothermal, adiabatic and thermohydrodynamic temperature
boundary conditions all increased the %jz ratio by within approxi-
mately 1.2 %.
Figure 9 illustrates a comparison of frictional coefficient and
piston rod velocity for B = 0.6, a, = 0. I , a2= 0.05. The frictional
coefficient increased due to an increase in piston rod velocity,
which created an increase in film temperature as well as a reduc-
tion in both viscosity and the normal load carrying capacity.
Namely, the frictional coefficient was greater at higher velocities
and lower normal load carrying capacity.
Figure 10 illustrates the frictional coefficient vs. piston rod
velocity for E = 0. I, a, = 0.6, a2= 0.05, in which the physical phe-
nomenon and explanation are identical to those of Fig. 9.
Figure I I reveals the relationship between the volume flow
and piston rod velocity of E = 0.6, a,=0.1, a2= 0.05. Notably, a
piston rod velocity increase produced a simultaneous volume flow
(?jv)increase. Owing to the affect of film circumference velocity
gradient in the clearance direction ( d v l d z ) , which forced the
film temperature to increase, the volume flow value of a 3-D ener-
73
gy equation is higher than it is in a 2-D energy equation. This
resulted in a reduced viscosity and increased film fluidity.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, the thermal performance of a bearing was calcu-
lated using 2-D and 3-D energy equations. Based on those our
results is concluded as follows:
1. As in Rohde, and Oh (1975), at the low piston rod speed
affects the bearing performance parameters only slightly.
When the high value of eccentricity ratio or misalignment
factor and a high piston rod speed were considered under
adiabatic and thermohydrodynamic temperature boundary
conditions, the normal load carrying capacity of a 3 -D ener-
gy equation is lower than a 2-D energy equation. Notably,
the difference is within approximately 1.2 %. According to
reduce the piston rod speed, eccentricity ratio and misalign-
ment factor, the differential ratio is decreased.
2. Regarding the computation time requirements on numerical
simulation of the pressure distribution for the 2-D energy
equation is faster than 3-D energy equation conditions. That
is, the computation time requirements of 2-D energy equa-
tion is less than 10 % of 3 -D energy equation condition.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
given to them by National Science Council, Taiwan, (Grant No.
NSC89-2212-E-008-028, NSC89-2216-E-008-015) during this
research.
REFERENCES
( I ) Boncompain, R., Fillon, M. and Frene, J . (1986), "Analysis of Thermal Effects
in Hydrodynamic Bearings,"ASME Jour. of Trih., 108, pp 219-224.
(2) Buckholz, R. H . and Lin, J. F. (1986), "The Effect of Journal Bearing
Misalignment on Load and Cavitation for Non-Newtonian Lubricants." ASME
Jour. of Trih.. 108, pp 645-654.
(3) Ezzat, H. A. and Rohde, S. M. (1973). "A Study of the Therrnohydrodynamic
Performance of Finte Slider Bearings," ASME Jour. of Luhr. Tech.,95. pp 298-
307.

@I&
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010
Fig. Al-Pressure gradient (Adiabatic):
(E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, a, = 0.05; ub= 1 0 mls)
Flg. A2-Pressure gradlent (Adlabatlc): dj'j/dB
( z = 0 . 6 , a 1 =0.1,a2=0.05; u,= 1 0 mls)
(4) Hanirock. B. J. (International Editions 1994). Fundamenrols of Flrtid Film
L~rbricoriorr,McGraw-Hill Book Co.. Singapore. pp 173-193.
(5) Jung. J. Y. and Chang. C. C. (1987), "Adiabatic Solution for a Misaligned
Jour~lillBe:lring with Non-Newtonian Lubricants," Trib. Inr'l., 20, 5, pp 267-
274.
(6) Jang. I.Y. and Khonsari. M. M. (1997), "Thermohydrodynamic Design Charts
for Slider Bearing." ASME Jour. of Trih.. 119. pp 733-740.
(7) Khonsnri. M. M. and Wang. S. H. (1991). "On The Fluid-Solid Interaction in
Helcrcnce to Thennoelastohydrodynamic Analysis of Journal Bearings," ASME
Jorrr: ifTrih.. 113. pp 398-403.
(8) Kitli. K. W. and Kodkiewicz, C. M. (1991). "On the Thermal Effects in the
I)csig~~ of Tilting-Pad Bearing Subjected to Inlet Pressure Build-Up." ASME
.lortr: of Trih., 113, pp 526-532.
(9) Lin. I. F. and Wang. L. Y. (1990), "Thermohydrodynamic Analysis of Finite-
Width, Perti:ll-Arc Journal Bearings with Non-Newtonian Lubricants: Pan 11."
P i h . Irtr'l.. 23. 3 , pp 21 1-216.
(10) Kohdc. S. M. and Oh, K. P. (1975). "A ThermoelastohydrodynamicAnalysis of
:I Finite Slider Bearing," ASME .lorrr. of Luhr. Tech., 97, pp 450-460.
(11) Yang. Y. K. and Jeng. M. C. (2001), "Analysis of Thermal Effects on the
Misaligned Hydraulic Scrvo Cylinder." Trih. Irlr'l., 34, pp 95-106.
Fig. A3--Temperature distribution in the inner film section of t h e maxi-
m u m temperature:
(Z = 0 3 , a, = 0 . 1 , a 2 ~ 0 . 0 5 ; u, = 1 0 mls);
(-): T - Z; (.....I: T -8
Fig. A4--Temperature distribution in t h e exit f i l m sectlon o f t h e maxi-
mum temperature:
1: Adiabatic: 2: ~ h e r m o h y d r o d ~ n a m l c
APPENDIX
The pressure gradient alone the y-direction was induced by
misalignment factor, it results in the variation of velocity and tem-
perature distribution.
In the absence of the convective term in y-direction of the ener-
gy equation by hypothesis of Khonsari and Wang (1991), the
assumption asserting that the circumference temperature remains
constant, though it can be easily relaxed, results in considerable
saving in computational time. The assumption has less effect to
the bearing performance parameter. Furthermore, it has been con-
firmed in this study.
For example, in the case of E = 0.6, a, = 0.1, a2= 0.05, the
authors explain this case as follows:
1. Pressure gradients under the adiabatic temperature boundary
condition are shown in Fig. A l (for @/&) and Fig. A2 (for
@/dB). The results show that @/dB < @I&
(Contour
Plot).
The velocity boundary conditions from Eq. [4], x-direction
of film velocity twas subject to the external force action of
piston rod velocity ub but the piston rod does not rotate in cir-
cumference direction. Moreover, @Id8 < @/& , there-
7 < t.
fore, i
 Comparison of Thermal Effects on the Conical-Cylindrical Bearing with 2-D and 3-D Energy Equations

TABLEA ]-THE VARIATION

OF NORMAL
LOADCAPACITYDUETO CONVEC~VE
TERMIN Y IN THE LHS OF
EQ. [5a]
ENERGY

u, = 10 m/s u, = 10 m/s ' u, = 2 m/s

with v(dT/@) 0.75063 0.55682
without u(dT/@) 0.74897 0.55680
Deviation ratio (%) 0.22 0 0.01

1
I
- -
ENERGY
EQUATION Adia. e = 0.6, a, = 0. I, e = 0, a, = 0, e = 0.6, a, = 0.1,
a, = 0.05 a, = 0.05 a, = 0.05
u, = 10 m/s u, = 10 m/s U, = 2 m/s

with Z ( d T / @ ) 1 0.67560 0.50623 0.794 1 1

without F(dT/djj) 0.66965 0.50621 0.79366
Deviation ratio (%) 0.88 0 0.06

ENERGY
EQUATION THD. e = 0.6, a, = 0.1,
-
-
e = 0, a, = 0,
~ e = 0.6, a, = 0. 1,
-
Downloaded By: [CERIST - Trial Account] At: 19:49 22 October 2010

a, = 0.05 a, = 0.05 a, = 0.05

u, = 10 m/s u,= 10rn/s U, = 2 m/s

with F(dT/@) 0.70396 0.52795 1 0.82026

without v(dT/@) 0.70048 0.53788 0.81918
Deviation ratio (%) 0.49 0.0 1 0.13

' Devia~ionratio (%) = withP(aT/a~)-~ith~~tP(aT/ay)

withv(aT/ay)
x 100%

2. Figure A3 shows the value of maximum temperature of oil
film inner, which distributes alone Z and 8 direction.
Temperature distribution in 5-direction was raised from
temperature of oil film entrance started from T = 1.
Namely, dT/@ < dT/&. Figure A4 shows the maxi-
mum temperature value of oil film exit, which distributes
alone 5 and 8 direction. From Fig. A4, it is obvious that
dT/@ < dT/&. As stated above and from the analysis
of numerical data, it can be confirmed
v(dT/@)<< ~ ( d T / f i ) .
3. The p(dT/@) is convective term and it dissipates heat.
Moreover, it reduces the distribution of temperature and
increases normal load canying capacity C,.
The authors utilize the numerical simulation again for
F(dT/@)term. The normal load capacity (E,) variation
is shown in Table A1 for the cases of being with F(dT/@)
term and without v(dT/@)term. Table A1 illustrates that
the parameters of eccentricity, temperature boundary condi-
tions and the convective term in the y-direction in the LHS
of energy Eq. [5a] affect the performance of normal load
capacity @,). For the case of being with ti(dT/@)term,
the temperature of oil film slightly decreased more than that
in the case of being without F(dT/@)term, due to the
existence of the film velocity and temperature gradient
along the circumference direction, and under the condition
of adiabatic at F = 0.6, a, = 0.1, u2= 0.05 and u,, = 10 m/s.
Also TI, slightly increased by approximately 0.88 %. For
other conditions (please refer to Table Al), the differences
of w, between the cases of being with p(dT/@) and
without v(dT/@)are minute. Therefore, the assumption
of being without p(dT/@) term for energy equation in
Khonsari and Wang (1991) is reasonable and is verified
again in this paper.