Torsional Vibration Problem in Reciprocating Compressor - Case Study
Torsional Vibration Problem in Reciprocating Compressor - Case Study
Torsional Vibration Problem in Reciprocating Compressor - Case Study
Abstract
Reciprocating compressors are unavoidable classical solutions in the field of natural and process gas
compression with the ability to function over a wide range of operating conditions. The dynamic design of the
reciprocating compressor is complicated due to the large number of conditions that have to be fulfilled. Since
high torsional dynamic stress is often not recognized until damages appear, it is advisable to conduct a detailed
torsional vibration analysis when planning a new drivetrain or modifying an existing one.
In the effort to adapt to the varying demand of the market, natural and process gas facilities revamp fixed
speed reciprocating machines with variable speed drive (VSD) and (active) suction valve unloading devices.
Such a revamp leads to a change (often to the worst) of the dynamic behavior of the drivetrain even though the
components in the train remain unchanged.
The motivation of this article emanates from a practical example, where the torsional vibration of a
reciprocating compressor after installing of a stepless active suction valve unloader led to repeated failures of the
coupling. The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness of torsional vibration problems and to outline an
analytical procedure to follow in the design stage (new or revamp).
A finite-element-model of the complete drivetrain including the non-linear rubber coupling and the periodic
excitation torque (inertial and gas forces) is developed. As will be shown in the paper, the resulting equation of
motion of the drivetrain is a second order differential equation with operation dependent damping matrix. The
solution to the differential equation is then solved in the time domain. In the described practical example, the
analytical and the measurement results are compared with each other. Then, a list of practical recommendations
based on experience is provided to tame the torsional vibration problem during operation.
Nomenclature
Ka - equivalent stiffness of non- G - modulus of rigidity
circular section Lj - length of journal
Kb - stiffness of the base shaft LW - length of crank web
T - thickness of the arm LC - length of crankpin
DS - diameter of the circumscribing Dj - outer diameter of journal
circle of the non-circular shaft dj - inner diameter of journal
Db - diameter of the base shaft DC - outer diameter of crankpin
λ - web construction parameter (= 1 dC - inner diameter of crankpin
for intergral construction, < 1 for DC - outer diameter of crankpin
welded construction W - width of web
mp - piston and piston rod mass R - throw radius
mj - element torsional inertia matrix
ap - piston acceleration
c - element torsional damping matrix
pi e - internal, external cylinder
kt - element torsional stiffness matrix
pressure
Jp - polar moment of inertia of an
Ai e - internal, external piston area
element about the rotational axis
Kt - torsional stiffness of crankshaft c - torsional damping of an element
1 Paper ID 59
kt - torsional stiffness of an element - crankshaft angular displacement
Mj - global torsional inertia matrix Tcs - torque load on crankshaft
Fosc - dyn. forces of the oscillating
C - global torsional damping matrix crosshead and connection rod
Kt - global torsional stiffness matrix masses
Fp - piston rod force
T - global excitation torque vector ψ - relative damping
- vibratory angular displacement Ω - rotational velocity
vector
1 Introduction
In the field of natural and process gas compression reciprocating compressors are preferable choices due to
their ability to function over a wide range of operating conditions. Since their failure is associated with
substantial financial loss and possible loss of human life, the required level of reliability is very high. Hence a
detailed analysis, for example a torsional analysis, is required in the design phase of these machines.
In the torsional analysis of reciprocating compressors all parts in the drivetrain have to be considered. A
typical compressor comprises of a crankshaft, an optional flywheel, a coupling and driving unit (with or without
gear). In addition to the above mentioned parts some compressor manufacturers couple auxiliary pumps to the
non-drive end of the crankshaft.
Unlike lateral and axial vibration, torsional vibration is not simply perceivable unless elements in the
drivetrain lead to a coupled lateral vibration. The measurement of torsional vibration requires the use of either
strain gauges or optical instruments in contrast to lateral vibrations which can be measured using readily
available sensors. Hence, torsional dynamic stress is often not recognised until damages appear.
There are plenty of literature and books discussing torsional analysis in mechanical systems, some of these
discuss the torsional vibration of reciprocating machines. However, due to a combination of inaccurate
considerations in design and inexperience the torsional problem in reciprocating machines still remains large.
The following literature is particularly recommended to those interested in the torsional analysis of reciprocating
machines [1, 4, 6, 7, 10 and 12].
Piston
E-motor
Pulsation damper
volume
24TL
1
Ka Db2 (1)
Kb 16TL3 T
2
D
2
1 1 31 b
Db DS
4
DS
2.2 Coupling
Couplings are devices for joining two rotating shafts semipermanently at their ends so as to transmit torque
from one to the other. In addition to torque transmission couplings usually compensate for axial and radial
misalignment between the two shafts. In reciprocating compressor drivetrains couplings can be classified into
two general classes – rigid-flexible disc coupling and torsionally-soft elastomeric coupling.
Rigid-flexible disc couplings require no lubrication and maintenance, have high torsional rigidity and can
operate in high temperature environment. But these couplings lead to a relatively high fundamental torsional
natural frequency with interferences with the excitation frequencies and provide no damping to the drivetrain.
On the other hand torsionally-soft elastomeric couplings add additional damping in drivetrain, isolate
excitation between components in the drivetrain and have a low fundamental torsional natural frequency with no
interference with the excitation frequency. The main disadvantage of elastomeric couplings is the limited life of
rubber elements due to heat generation. Hence, elastic couplings with flywheels are usually used in reciprocating
compressor drivetrains. Feese and Hill [6] discussed a number of torsionally soft couplings and presented their
advantages and disadvantages.
In the particular case presented here, a single-row and multi-row rubber coupling are shown. The stiffness,
the torque transmission, the allowable vibratory torque and the allowable thermal loading of the applied
elastomer are usually given in the coupling catalogues. In some particular cases the mass-elastic data of the
couplings are also supplied by the manufacturer.
2.3 Crankshaft
A typical simplified method for the determination of the mass elastic properties of the crankshaft is to follow
the procedure outlined in API 684 [1]. Usually the finite-element-line-model of the crankshaft is modelled with
the nodes at the throws and with torsional stiffness between the throws. The torsional stiffness of the crankshaft
between the throws can be estimated with adequate accuracy using equation (2). This is an average of the
Carter’s and Ker Wilson’s formulae [10]. The variables in this equation are depicted in the simplified sketch of
figure 2 of a typical reciprocating compressor’s crankshaft.
2 L j 0.4 D j 0.8Lw 1.75Lc 0.4 Dc 2.5R 0.2D j d j
G D d
4 4
Dc4 d c4 LwW 3 (2)
Kt
j j
The polar mass moment of inertias lumped at the throws can be determined by summing the mass moment of
inertia of the two journal halves, the crankpin, the two webs, the part of the connecting rod (usually estimated to
be two-third of the connecting rod total mass) and half of the reciprocating mass, which is assumed to be lumped
on the crankpin, about the rotational axis. The reciprocating masses comprise part of the connecting rod (usually
estimated to be a third of the connecting rod total mass), the piston-rod assembly, the crosshead assembly and
any additional reciprocating mass.
3 Paper ID 59
LW LC LW
Crankpin
dC
DC
R
dj
Dj
½ Lj ½ Lj Journal W
The above stated physical parameters can be numerically estimated using the finite-element-method when the
exact technical drawing is available. Here too some reciprocating compressor manufacturers supply the mass-
elastic data instead of technical drawings from which the inertia and stiffness can be calculated. Experience
shows that the data supplied from reciprocating compressor manufacturers are highly accurate.
s(t) Connecting
rod Ft
Piston rod R
Kolben
Piston Fr
FFp K α
P
pAe Fp
st
pii
T
External
äußerer Internal
innerer
Crosshead Journal
volume
Zylinderraum volume
Zylinderraum assembly
Figure 3: Simplified sketch of the cylinder (left) and section of the crankshaft, the connecting rod and the
crosshead assembly (right).
Fp ( ) m p a p ( ) pi ( ) Ai pe ( ) Ae (3)
4 Paper ID 59
From the piston rod force Fp and the dynamic force of the crosshead and the reciprocating mass of the
connecting rod (Fosc) one can calculate the radial force Fr and tangential forces Ft (as a function of the crankshaft
angle α) acting on the crosshead pin. The crankshaft angle α(t) (here written as α for simplicity) is a function of
time. Equation 4 gives the torque loading as a result of the tangential force component.
T R Fp Fosc (4)
Figure 4 depicts the piston rod force and the resultant moment load of a single crankshaft of a typical slowly
rotating natural gas reciprocating compressor for one complete crankshaft revolution.
10
15
0 10
-100 5
0
-200
-5
0 100 200 300 360 0 100 200 300 360
Crankshaft angle α [deg] Crankshaft angle α [deg]
Figure 4: Calculated piston rod force and crankshaft moment, variation of a typical natural gas piston
compressor as a function of crank angle for one complete revolution of the crankshaft.
In order to analyse the resulting torsional vibration, the spectrum of the dynamic components of the torque is
generated as shown in figure 5.
6
Moment [kNm]
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Harmonics [-]
Figure 5: Spectrum of excitation torque.
The torque spectrum is composed of a number of harmonics which are multiples of the compressor rotational
speed. The value of these harmonics depends on the operating condition of the compressor.
4 Torsional analysis
The components in the drivetrain can be subdivided into a number of finite elements. From the polar moment
of inertia, the torsional damping and the torsional stiffness of the elements, the element torsional inertia matrix,
torsional damping matrix and torsional stiffness matrix can be determined as shown in equation (5).The works of
Argyris [2] and Irretier [8] has been followed in this paper for the formation of the FE-models.
1
J p 2 1
; c c 2
0
and k t kt
1 1
mj 1 1 (5)
6 1 2 1
0
2
The element matrices (mj, cφ and kt) are then assembled in the global matrices (Mj, Cφ and Kt) which form a
system equation of motion. The equation of motion can be written in matrix form as follows:
5 Paper ID 59
M j C K t T ( ) (6)
Torsionally soft couplings in reciprocating compressors usually use rubber elements which have constant
relative damping ψ. The resulting damping matrix is therefore a function of the rotational velocity (see
equation (7)), which in turn is influenced by the torsional vibration. Hence equation (6) is a non-linear
differential equation of the second order. Beside the non-linear element matrices, the excitation gas forces are
non-linear in nature that depend on operating pressure and temperature, volume flow, compressed medium,
design of pulsation abating devices, number and design of cylinder valves etc.
k t
c (7)
2
5 Case study
6 Paper ID 59
The plant operator replaced the coupling without any further modification and ran the drivetrain. The new
coupling failed after three weeks of operation. Then, the controller of the active stepless suction valve unloader
was modified and the coupling was replaced. The third coupling failed after a single day of operation.
The main task was to determine the particular cause of the drivetrain failure and to suggest an applicable
solution. The drivetrain was investigated with main focus on the effect of the later installed active stepless
suction valve unloading device. Part of the investigation was metrological and theoretical torsional vibration
analysis of the drivetrain for different speeds and suction valve unloader positions.
18000
16000
[kNm]
14000
12000
10
10000
8000
6000
4000 Static moment
2000
0 0
envelope [kNm]
Nm
20
20000
18000
Maximum value
Torque
16000
14000
12000
10
10000
8000
6000
4000 Minimum value
2000
0 0
Alternating torque
Nm
amplitude [kNm]
4
4000
3500
3
3000
2500
2
2000
1500
1
1000
13:30 13:35 13:40 13:45 13:50 13:55
23.2.11
Figure 7: Measured torque for different discharge volumes controlled through the active stepless suction valve
unloader at a motor speed of 600 rpm; top: measured torque trend (including the mean and alternating
component), middle: maximum and minimum torque value, bottom: alternating torque amplitude.
As expected, the static torque increased with the discharge volume flow rate. As opposed to that, the
alternating torque tended to decrease when the discharge volume increased. When the volume flow decreased by
use of the active stepless suction valve unloader, the first order alternating stress component increased. This
shows that the torsional loading of the drivetrain was indeed affected by the revamp.
The operational safety of the coupling can only be guaranteed when the measured/expected torsional loading
is below the allowed loading recommended by the manufacturer. Unfortunately, the coupling manufacturer did
not provide an explicit allowable value. Hence, the plant operator decided to use an alternative coupling that met
the requirements of the extended operation condition.
7 Paper ID 59
5.3 Theoretical analysis of the drivetrain – Part 1
A finite-element-model of the drivetrain was developed as described in section 4. In order to validate the
finite-element-model, the simulated results were compared with the measured results. Figure 8 shows the FE-
model and the calculated natural frequencies with their corresponding mode shapes. The Campbell diagram (not
displayed) of the drivetrain showed that the second torsional natural frequency interferes with the 9 th to 15th
harmonics.
In order to validate the FE-model, the fundamental torsional natural frequency and the forced response at the
motor stud were compared with the measured results. The calculated torque on the motor stud while increasing
the position of the active stepless suction valve unloader from 15 % to 100 % at a constant motor speed of
600 rpm is presented in figure 9. The comparison of the measured and the calculated fundamental torsional
natural frequency and the torque levels and trends has shown the accuracy of the FE-model, the excitation torque
and the assumed damping ratio of the system. But as stated in the previous section, it was not possible to suggest
mitigation measures for the present drivetrain due to a lack of information on the allowable torque level from the
coupling supplier.
Figure 8: Calculated torsional natural frequency and corresponding mode shape for the drivetrain (motor:
coupling: and crankshaft: ) – present.
10
10
Static moment
0
0
kNm
Torque envelope
20
20
Maximum value
[kNm]
10
10
Minimum value
00
kNm
44
Alternating torque
amplitude [kNm]
3
2
2
10
5 10 15
t
Increasing load
Figure 9: Calculated torque for different discharge volumes controlled through the active stepless suction valve
unloader at a motor speed of 600 rpm, top: calculated torque trend (including the mean and alternating
component), middle: maximum and minimum torque value, bottom: alternating torque amplitude.
8 Paper ID 59
5.4 Theoretical analysis of the drivetrain – Part 2
As stated in the previous section, the plant operator decided to replace the existing coupling with an
alternative one that met the requirements of the extended operation condition from a list of available suppliers.
Our initial analysis of the drivetrain with the selected coupling for the transmitted torque could not fulfill all the
limits set by the supplier (for example the maximum torque level, heat dissipation etc.). Taking the practicability
limitation set by the plant operator into account a new coupling along with a bigger flywheel was found to be
applicable for the drivetrain with the planned extended discharge volume.
Figure 10 shows the calculated natural frequencies of the drivetrain with the new coupling. Here one can see
that the first three natural frequencies of the drivetrain are torsional natural frequencies within the coupling in
opposition to the original drivetrain where only one natural frequency was mainly in the coupling. This is due to
the series arrangement of three rubber elements in the presently selected coupling whereas the original assembly
had a single rubber element. The first torsional natural frequency moved from 7.6 Hz to 5.3 Hz and hence lay
then significantly below the minimum operation speed of the new drivetrain. The fourth natural frequency,
which was mainly torsional vibration of the crankshaft, remained at 147.6 Hz. Here again the Campbell diagram
(not displayed) of the drivetrain showed that the fourth torsional natural frequency interfered with the 9th to 15th
harmonics.
Figure 10: Calculated torsional natural frequency and corresponding mode shape for the drivetrain (motor:
coupling: and crankshaft: ) – recommended.
In order to determine the expected torsional vibration of the drivetrain through the compressor operation, an
operational vibration analysis of the drivetrain in the time domain was conducted. Figure 11 shows the calculated
torque of the coupling rubber elements for the actual and recommended coupling and flywheel. The calculation
results show that the new coupling and flywheel reduces the load at the coupling. Hence, based on the simulation
results a bigger flywheel and another rubber coupling were recommended. Until the coupling was modified as
stated above, deactivating the active stepless suction valve unloader was recommended.
9 Paper ID 59
Actual_600rpm: Coupling_1st_row Actual_speed_runup: Coupling_1st_row
Recommended_600rpm: Coupling_1st_row Recommended_speed_runup: Coupling_1st_row
Recommended_600rpm: Coupling_2nd_row Recommended_speed_runup: Coupling_2nd_row
Recommended_600rpm: Coupling_3rd_row Recommended_speed_runup: Coupling_3rd_row
kNm kNm
Alternating torque [kNm]
3.5 3.5
3.0 3.0
Actual
2.5 2.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
Recommended Recommended
0.0 0.0
20 40 60 80 100 600 700 800 900 1000
rpm
Active suction valve unloader position [%] Speed [rpm]
Figure 11: Comparison of the dynamic torque in the coupling for the drivetrain with the actual and the
recommended coupling and flywheel, left: motor speed of 600 rpm for 15 % and 100 % volume flow, right:
motor speed run-up from 600 rpm to 1,000 rpm with inactive suction valve unloader.
7 Conclusion
Torsional vibration at reciprocating compressors cannot be identified on site with simple measuring methods
like e. g. measurement of the casing vibration. Often high torsional dynamic stress is not recognised until
damages appear. Hence, it is advisable to conduct a detailed torsional vibration analysis when planning a new
drivetrain or modifying an existing one. There are different methods to influence the torsional vibration
behaviour of a reciprocating compressor. We recommend to check the results of the analysis by measurement to
ensure the safety of the plant. From the torsional loading point of view, a trouble-free operation of the
compressor system can be ensured by a combination of calculation and measurement.
10 Paper ID 59
References
[1] API Publication 684 (2005): Tutorial on the API Standard paragraphs covering rotor dynamics and
balancing: An introduction to lateral critical and train torsional analysis and rotor balancing. American
Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.
[2] Argyris, J., Mlejnek, H.P. (1986): Die Methode der Finiten Elemente. Band I-III, Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn,
Braunschweig.
[3] Childs, D. (1993): Turbomachinery Rotordynamics. Wiley-Intersciences, New York.
[4] Corbo, M.A. and Malanoski, S.B. (1996): Practical design against torsional vibration. Proceedings of the
twenty-fifth turbomachinery symposium, College Station, Texas, Sept., pp. 189–222.
[5] Dukkipati, R.V. (2009): MATLAB for Mechanical Engineers. New Age Science Limited, UK.
[6] Feese, T. and Hill, C. (2009): Prevention of torsional vibration problems in reciprocating machinery.
Proceedings of the thirty-eighth turbomachinery symposium, Houston, Texas, Sept. 14-17, pp. 213–238.
[7] Frenkel, M. I. (1969): Kolbenverdichter. VEB Verlag Technik, Berlin.
[8] Irretier, H. (2007): Maschinen- und Rotordynamik: Lecture Manuscript. 5th edition. Institute of
Mechanics, University of Kassel, Kassel.
[9] Isakower, R.I. (1979): Design charts for torsional properties of non-circular shafts. Final technical report
ARMID-TR-78001, US Army Armament research and development command, NJ.
[10] Nestorides, E.J.( 1958): Handbook of Torsional Vibration. B.I.C.E.R.A. Cambridge University Press,
New York.
[11] Tondl, A. (1965): Some Problems of Rotordynamics. Chapman and Hall, London.
[12] Wachel,J. C. and Szenasi, F. R. (1993): Analysis of torsional vibration in rotating machinery.
Proceedings of the twenty-second turbomachinery symposium, College Station, Texas, Sept. 14-16,
pp. 127–152.
11 Paper ID 59