1 / 17

Analysis of Alternate Approach Data (Round 9.2)

Analysis of Alternate Approach Data (Round 9.2). 1 December 2004 jar. Average upper bearing weight loss using valid references with 820-2 shows significantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9).

edric
Download Presentation

Analysis of Alternate Approach Data (Round 9.2)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analysis of Alternate Approach Data(Round 9.2) 1 December 2004 jar

  2. Average upper bearing weight loss using valid references with 820-2 shows significantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9)

  3. Average upper bearing weight loss using valid references with 820-2 shows significantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9.1)

  4. Average upper bearing weight loss using valid references with 820-2 shows significantly lower results on valid original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9.2)

  5. Putting together bearing difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb with original design bearings as a function of average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9) • Modeled Pb = prediction from adjusted BWL to Pb • based on template8 commercial data • where BWL is adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.0156 (ABWLU x 220 / 119) • - 0.000017858 x (ABWLU x 220 / 119) 2) • = exp(0.603 + 0.029 ABWLU • – 0.000061 ABWLU2), • if UBWL ≤ 245 • = 58, if UBWL > 245

  6. Putting together bearing difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb with original design bearings as a function of average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9.1) • Modeled Pb = prediction from adjusted BWL to Pb • based on template8 commercial data • where BWL is adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.0156 (ABWLU x 220 / 131) • - 0.000017858 x (ABWLU x 220 / 131) 2) • = exp(0.603 + 0.026 ABWLU • – 0.000050 ABWLU2), • if UBWL ≤ 245 • = 58, if UBWL > 245

  7. Putting together bearing difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb with original design bearings as a function of average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9.2) • Modeled Pb = prediction from adjusted BWL to Pb • based on template8 commercial data • where BWL is adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.0156 (ABWLU x 220 / 141) • - 0.000017858 x (ABWLU x 220 / 141) 2) • = exp(0.603 + 0.024 ABWLU • – 0.000043 ABWLU2), • if UBWL ≤ 245 • = 58, if UBWL > 245

  8. Delta in differential IR from 250 to 300 hours using valid references with 820-2 shows significantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9)

  9. Delta in differential IR from 250 to 300 hours using valid references with 820-2 shows marginally significantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9.1)

  10. Delta in differential IR from 250 to 300 hours using valid references with 820-2 shows insignificantly lower results on original design bearings than original bearings (Round 9.2)

  11. Putting together bearing and delta dIR difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb2 with original design bearings as a function of delta dIR and average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9) Modeled Pb250300 = prediction from adjusted BWL and adjusted dIR250300 to Pb250300 • based on template8 commercial data where BWL and dIR250300 are adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.029 (dIR250300*144/67 ) + 0.045 * (ABWLU x 220 / 119) = -5.9 + 0.062 dIR250300 + 0.083 ABWLU

  12. Putting together bearing and delta dIR difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb2 with original design bearings as a function of delta dIR and average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9.1) Modeled Pb250300 = prediction from adjusted BWL and adjusted dIR250300 to Pb250300 • based on template8 commercial data where BWL and dIR250300 are adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.029 (dIR250300*144/88 ) + 0.045 * (ABWLU x 220 / 131) = -5.9 + 0.047 dIR250300 + 0.076 ABWLU

  13. Putting together bearing and delta dIR difference seen in references with relationship from commercial tests, we model Pb2 with original design bearings as a function of delta dIR and average upper bearing weight loss (Round 9.2) Modeled Pb250300 = prediction from adjusted BWL and adjusted dIR250300 to Pb250300 • based on template8 commercial data where BWL and dIR250300 are adjusted for change in bearings • based on reference tests with 820-2 Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.029 (dIR250300*144/94 ) + 0.045 * (ABWLU x 220 / 141) = -5.9 + 0.044 dIR250300 + 0.070 ABWLU

  14. What happens to test run to date on original design bearings?

  15. Summary (Round 9) • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.029 ABWLU – 0.000061 ABWLU2), if ABWLU ≤ 245 = 58, if ABWLU > 245 • Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.062 dIR250300 + 0.083 ABWLU

  16. Summary (Round 9.1) • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.026 ABWLU – 0.000050 ABWLU2), if ABWLU ≤ 245 = 58, if ABWLU > 245 • Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.047 dIR250300 + 0.076 ABWLU

  17. Summary (Round 9.2) • PbM = exp(0.603 + 0.024 ABWLU – 0.000043 ABWLU2), if ABWLU ≤ 245 = 58, if ABWLU > 245 • Pb250300M = -5.9 + 0.044 dIR250300 + 0.070 ABWLU

More Related