Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
(OP)
Is balancing correction an acceptable practice to extend motor-pump service life when upper vibration increase is caused by down pump components wear?
On our vertical turbine pumps (Filtered water @ 80°F, 15 stages, 3600 rpm, 1000 HP, 30000 BPD, TDH= 1500 psi) we check motor uncoupled readings and take typical vibration baseline (motor-pump coupled) to confirm dynamic condition is acceptable after a unit replacement or corrective maintenance: i.e. Upper and lower cross/inline overall vibration below 0.1 ips, shaft radial movement below 3.0 Mils, acceleration in pump casing below 1.0 G's and others parameters like pressures, temperatures, motor amps, etc.
We have noticed that after some runtime (say 1 year) the 1X increases and then an inpection is scheduled to check basics at the surface level(loose components, upper bearing assembly, coupling, misalignment, throat bushing clearance, etc). If all is find OK and there isn't an appreciable change in performance (pump flow / head, motor amps), we consider it caused to pump shaft deflection due to higher clearances on pump wear rings and bearings. Then a trim balance is performed to return system (motor-pump) to above indicated overall vibration levels.
As performance and vibration are 24/7 monitored on these pumps, concept is to safely extend the service life of the units without major failure. Also, when a pump is removed and sent to shop for inspection/repair, normally all pump wear rings and berings are replaced.
Current balancing correction is intended to keep motor-pump vibration at low/acceptable levels but not sure what may be the hidden effects of trying to stabilize the motor-pump system from the upper end?
On our vertical turbine pumps (Filtered water @ 80°F, 15 stages, 3600 rpm, 1000 HP, 30000 BPD, TDH= 1500 psi) we check motor uncoupled readings and take typical vibration baseline (motor-pump coupled) to confirm dynamic condition is acceptable after a unit replacement or corrective maintenance: i.e. Upper and lower cross/inline overall vibration below 0.1 ips, shaft radial movement below 3.0 Mils, acceleration in pump casing below 1.0 G's and others parameters like pressures, temperatures, motor amps, etc.
We have noticed that after some runtime (say 1 year) the 1X increases and then an inpection is scheduled to check basics at the surface level(loose components, upper bearing assembly, coupling, misalignment, throat bushing clearance, etc). If all is find OK and there isn't an appreciable change in performance (pump flow / head, motor amps), we consider it caused to pump shaft deflection due to higher clearances on pump wear rings and bearings. Then a trim balance is performed to return system (motor-pump) to above indicated overall vibration levels.
As performance and vibration are 24/7 monitored on these pumps, concept is to safely extend the service life of the units without major failure. Also, when a pump is removed and sent to shop for inspection/repair, normally all pump wear rings and berings are replaced.
Current balancing correction is intended to keep motor-pump vibration at low/acceptable levels but not sure what may be the hidden effects of trying to stabilize the motor-pump system from the upper end?





RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
It sounds like you (like almost everyone else) are monitoring the vibration of the pump from the readings above ground. Of course, as your OP mentions, the source of vibration is below ground and the readings above ground therefore have some limitations.
If I understand what you are doing correctly, it sounds like you are making a balance correction above ground for the below ground vibration. I suspect the downside might be that you are simply making your vibration readings look better when nothing down in the pump (where the wear is happening) has really changed.
Is it an acceptable practice? I don't know. When your pumps fail, how much damage is there? Does it look like you are going beyond normal wear (whatever that is) on your internal components before you pull the pump?
Alternatively, do you want to have a better means of monitoring these pumps, make them last longer, reduce the vibration, or are you happy with the current system and just want to know you are doing the right thing?
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
There may be some papers covering this approach but haven't found any yet. With a spare unit available and a good moitoring system, economics drive the decision process.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
Keep in mind that the below ground wear is still causing increased forces and loading on those components. At some point that wear and the resulting loads/movements will reach a critical level.
However since you have now "reset" the vibration baseline with your trim balance how are you going to know when the below ground wear becomes severe enough to warrant a shutdown ?
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
The link between above ground vibration and below ground vibration was tenuous to begin with. Primarily we look for change in observed behavior as indication something has changed in the machine. How severe was that change is much more difficult to quantify.
Balancing certainly will not hurt anything and will reduce stresses in certain parts of the machine near the top that now have reduced vibration. The fact that you are not addressing probable causes in less accessible areas is a calculated risk.
=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
Removal, shipping, repair time, almost all details and cost will be similar if pump is removed before reaching the last end of the PF curve (Catastrophic). 6 Months to a year extension in unit service life may have a positive impact in production.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
Wear rings clearance degradation will be detected by your hydraulci performance. That seems to be the main focus of your strategy.
Shaft concern - I don't think that change in 1x vibration creates much concern for the shaft. The reason is that it rotates with the shaft, so there is no fatigue occuring. If you have subsynchronous vibration, then shaft is flexing and I have more concern for the shaft. The reason for increase in 1x vibration is presumably...
Sleeve type bearing wear is likely cause of increasing vib over time. What happens as wear continues I'm not sure. At some point the shaft deflection becomes big enough to contact at another location. Then you'll hopefully see some distinct signs on vibration (?). Is it possible there is some seal/lub water flow path whose flow/dp can be monitored as indication of bearing condition?
=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
If you did and got some vibration trend data, that might be the best way to make decisions in when to pull the unit.
0.1 in/s is a pretty low vibration level. Consider that the current API 610 allowable limit for vibration on vertical pumps is 0.2 in/s and for shaft movement is 4 mils peak to peak.
Personally (If I had no other past history or other site information), I'd set a maximum level before pull out at 2x this.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
First case was subsynchronous vibration and 1st stage was found with broken wear rings and some parts got stuck (flow restriction). Pump head dropped 300 psig so it was a good call.
Second case vibration suddenly increased (jumped) and at same time pump head dropped 200 psig. Pump shaft broke at the third stage impeller key area. Area showed typical fatigue failure and crack initiation in the groove. Cycles, propagation and final break.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
It sounds like monitoring the pump head is at least as good an indicator of the failure as vibration.
You didn't say what vibration levels you saw at and just before the time of failure, so its hard to say if these would be helpful in future trending and prediction of when to pull the pump.
However you bring up one good point. In the first failure you saw subsynchronous vibration. This is almost always a good indication that wear ring/bearing clearances are getting too high. This vibration should hopefully trend well against wear ring and bearing wear.
Something to consider anyway.
On your second failure, the fact that the fatigue failure was not near the final stages (where the shaft is most highly stressed in torsion), suggest that the failure may have at least as much due to a manufacturing defect, than to the increased vibration in the pump.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
I'll report here any other finding. It may take some time until we confirmed it can be a good practice in the long term.
Thanks for all the inputs.
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out
Did you know that 76.4% of all statistics are made up...
RE: Vertical Turbine Pump: Balancing correction vs Components wear out