FoRTeS IIForced Response Testing System II

Andrew S. Meyer

Scott E. Schrinner

Anthony W. Taphorn

Faculty Advisor: Joseph C. Slater, Ph.D.

AFRL Advisor and Project Sponsor: Charles J. Cross, Ph.D.

Presentation Outline

• Goals

• Apparatus

• Evaluation Methods / Data

• Summary

Goals

• Design and construct a testing system that will cause a travelling wave forced response in a modeled turbine engine stage

• Precise computer control of motor for testing rig

• Investigate the vibration in tuned and de-tuned bladed disc assemblies

Apparatus

Driving Fan

Motor Plate and Shaft

Evaluation Methods

• Bench tests• Impact hammer excitation

• In rig tests• Travelling wave excitation• RPM Sweeps

• Correlation of data

Bench Test Natural Frequencies

N.F. #1 N.F. #2 N.F. #3

57.00 247.50 352.20

56.75 248.75 350.60

56.50 247.50 348.13

56.25 246.88 349.38

56.50 248.75 348.13

56.50 248.75 348.75

56.50 247.50 346.25

56.75 247.50 345.00

56.25 248.75 348.13

Inter BladePhase Angle

PSD Travelling Peak

PSD Travelling Peak

Normalized Maximum PSD1st Natural Frequency

Normalized Maximum PSD 2nd Natural Frequency

Normalized Maximum PSD

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900

RPM

Amplitude (Nromalized))

Blade 1

Blade 8

Blade 2

Blade 5

Blade 6

Blade 9

Blade 3

Blade 7

Blade 4

Summary

• Successful completion of testing rig that causes a travelling wave forced response in a modeled turbine engine stage

• Precise computer controlled motor for testing rig

• Verification of in-rig testing via bench testing

Acknowledgements

• Special thanks to• Dr. Charles J. Cross for sponsoring the project,

advice, and input• AFRL & UTC for funding and time extension• Dr. Joseph C. Slater for advice and input• Rockwell Automation, Twist, and Valeo for

material donations and academic discounts• WSU Machine Shop for manufacturing assistance