# What type of bearing we use in turbocharger of a engine



## sindbaad

Hello, 

I wanted to know that what type of bearings are used in turbocharger.


Advantages of using the same.


----------



## surfaceblow

Most of the turbochargers I have worked on use roller thrust bearings. Very expensive precision ones that come in tins for protection. 

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...1F11ABC0054357A13C86BA4CE2C0&selectedIndex=11

Joe


----------



## oldseamerchant

surfaceblow said:


> Most of the turbochargers I have worked on use roller thrust bearings. Very expensive precision ones that come in *tins for protection. *
> 
> http://www.bing.com/images/search?q...1F11ABC0054357A13C86BA4CE2C0&selectedIndex=11
> 
> Joe


With instructions that they should be opened in the presence of responsible officer.


----------



## borderreiver

oldseamerchant said:


> With instructions that they should be opened in the presence of responsible officer.


Kept in the Fridge


----------



## George Rollinson

I have 4 napier turbos on present ship and all have plain bearings. Whenever I have seen them opened up they have alway been in excellent condition and would always last another service interval with two provisos. One being that you understand the engines operating conditions. We are not flogging the engines to maintain a schedule and secondly a competent person to inspect and calibrate them. Sadly not very often the case now days. Sailed with old MAN turbos again with plain bearings and the manual showed wear pattens on the thrust face. Perfectly acceptable to return to service provided the load bearing surface area did not exceed a certain width. Worked of course with roller bearings but when the manual says change them then change them. Need to keep an eye on the colour of the oil and inspect the changed oil for any debris present. 
George


----------



## hamishb

Hi, MAN Burmiester and Wain turbos use plain bearings, very compact.
See mandieselturbo.com also lobed bearing for info. 
Hamish


----------



## Derek Roger

Brown Boveri used roller bearings ; excellent equipment with very few problems . They had an excellent box of special tools ; bearings ; spare lub oil pump with excellent strip down manual .


----------



## chadburn

Derek Roger said:


> Brown Boveri used roller bearings ; excellent equipment with very few problems . They had an excellent box of special tools ; bearings ; spare lub oil pump with excellent strip down manual .


Along with an excellent set of screwdriver's(Thumb)


----------



## jmcg

(QUOTE=oldseamerchant;661485]With instructions that they should be opened in the presence of responsible officer.[/QUOTE]

Preferably one qualified before STCW 95 ???

It would help if he was also a member of the Nautical Institute(MAD)

He must not, however, be a Sparkie!(Jester)(Jester)

You are such an authority on ER matters I often wonder why you were with the other lot.

J(Gleam)(Gleam)


----------



## Varley

I protest - we were very good at opening cans!

You should be more TOLERANT (as it is surely tolerance that makes the difference between contact bearings lying - usually - unwrapped and brinelling in the bearing bank and those used here).

It's a wonder what you can pick up in a roomfull of plumbers!


----------



## jim.child

ours were in sealed cans full of oil, and old ones were returned for refurbishment.


----------



## 5036

"How we recharge oil in compressor of a refrigerator" and "What type of bearing we use in turbocharger of a engine" both answered correctly. Now you have your Chief Engineer's ticket and are qualified to look after a Maersk E class engine room.

Don't forget your snorkel!


----------



## Abbeywood.

Varley said:


> I protest - we were very good at opening cans!
> 
> You should be more TOLERANT (as it is surely tolerance that makes the difference between contact bearings lying - usually - unwrapped and brinelling in the bearing bank and those used here).
> 
> It's a wonder what you can pick up in a roomfull of plumbers!


So was the Cook with his bench-mounted tin opener. Ideal for Brown-Boveri bearings


----------



## ben27

hi marinegalaxy,8march,2013,14:06.re what bearing to use,i think you will find the answer on google.have a good one ben27


----------



## oldman 80

Derek Roger said:


> Brown Boveri used roller bearings ; excellent equipment with very few problems . They had an excellent box of special tools ; bearings ; spare lub oil pump with excellent strip down manual .


True, very True.
They run very well until some creep shuts the oil supply off them, the big red button doesn't work. or isn't used, and the reserve header tank fails to drop. !!!!!
It get very expensive then, exceedingly inconvenient and somewhat disturbing depending upon your location.
Not nice in war zones at all.


----------



## Duncan112

IIRC Brown Boveri blowers had an integral sump with the bumps driven off the end of the blower shaft ensuring an oil supply as the blower ran down, it tended to be blowers with sleeve type bearings that had the external oil header tank ensuring lubrication in the event of the external LO pump failure.


----------



## oldman 80

Duncan112 said:


> IIRC Brown Boveri blowers had an integral sump with the bumps driven off the end of the blower shaft ensuring an oil supply as the blower ran down, it tended to be blowers with sleeve type bearings that had the external oil header tank ensuring lubrication in the event of the external LO pump failure.


Dont know about IIRC type - they must have been a later or earlier model I suppose.
Oh no - maybe I'm wrong on that one - it might indeed have been the sleave/shell type that you mention, yes indeed - some scraping was needed I recall, so it must have been.
Lub Pump didn't fail tho - the system was badly designed - the header dropped down (*Only it didn't*) on the wrong side of the interchangeable filter box. The change over lever Filter A to Filter B, was two positional ie Filter A or Filter B.
Only in this instance it wasn't - the swing lever "stops" were *worn/ground down* thus making it three positional, (which it shouldn't have been) namely Filter A, Filter B or in this case Position 3 - the one in the middle, namely No Filter , l which equated to no bloody lubrication at all ( drop down line on wrong side of filter box).
Had the plumbing been such that the header drop down was piped in after the filter box ie between it and the T/c then the incident would possibly not have occured. 
What a mess !!! and very expensive - serious damage to No. 1 T/C casing as well. 
So much for designers - but they don't have to sail on 'em do they.
The Managers had apparently advised the owners previously, but the owners just didn't give a damn. Who paid the bills for that one I don't know, and it could have resulted in a missile attack as well, - but it didn't . I feel that could have been the intention all along. She was "getting on" a bit, and scrap values were incredibly low.
A Sitting Duck for 24 hours, very swetty, very uncomfortable indeed.
2 T/C' s but only one set of spare bearings on board - proceeded slowly on passage with one T/C - Brown Boveri attended 3 weeks later (approx) transiting Capetown. No 1 Rotor off by chopper, to engineering works in Cape Town, repaired then choppered back again, whilst temporary repairs to No 1 casing done by BB technicians on board.
Mandela must have got a good view from Robben Island.
Took about three days if my memory serves me correctly. 
Very late arriving disport - Charterers Fuming.
Those designer guys really should pay a bit more care and attention so they should.
(Ouch)

Edit:- Header tank was up in the funnel.


----------



## Boatman25

Aye aye Marinersgalaxy is now Sindbaad


----------



## oldman 80

Boatman25 said:


> Aye aye Marinersgalaxy is now Sindbaad


How do you know that ?


----------



## Duncan112

IIRC - If I Recollect Correctly - 

The ship you had your unfortunate experience on - was it Mitsubishi built/designed - I can remember a peculiar design of lub oil system filter on their turbo system which could easily end up with no oil and no low level alarm.

On the same tack one of P&O's container ships wiped all its crosshead bearings on builders trials because the crosshead booster pump disintegrated, and as the pump took suction from the main LO pump discharge after the main filters it was not thought necessary (and reduced build cost) not to have a discharge filter on the crosshead pump - the result was the disintegrated pump rotor passing through the crossheads. Severe loss of face in the land of the rising sun!!


----------



## Boatman25

By reading his old posts and he did ask how to change his name a day or so ago, simples, changing his name wont hide him


----------



## oldman 80

Duncan112 said:


> IIRC - If I Recollect Correctly -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ship you had your unfortunate experience on - was it Mitsubishi built/designed - I can remember a peculiar design of lub oil system filter on their turbo system which could easily end up with no oil and no low level alarm.
> 
> 
> 
> On the same tack one of P&O's container ships wiped all its crosshead bearings on builders trials because the crosshead booster pump disintegrated, and as the pump took suction from the main LO pump discharge after the main filters it was not thought necessary (and reduced build cost) not to have a discharge filter on the crosshead pump - the result was the disintegrated pump rotor passing through the crossheads. Severe loss of face in the land of the rising sun!!
Click to expand...

That's an interesting point Duncan 112.
I cannot remember for sure - it was 29 years + ago now, but it is highly likely. When new, the ship, a very large one, was Japanese built for Japanese Owners ie her first name had been xxxxxx Maru.
Whether Mitsuibishi or not though I cannot be certain, but suggest it was highly likely.
The BB engineers attending the vessel told me that those particular T.C.'s were the largest every built at that time. The rotors alone I recall were 1400 Kgs each and at sea speed (economical steaming) rotated at 5300 rpm. It doesn't take much imagination to realise the chaos and havoc caused by disrupting the Lub oil supply under those cir***stances.
There was a big red button between No's 1 & 2 T.C.'s, and just below them. It appeared no engineer used it - on reflection who could blame them - they were high tailing it away from the scene, (perhaps a crime scene i.m.o.). 
But what the hell - the owners were "criminal", or shipping gangsters in fact. "Trading insolvent" also, - in all probability.

Edit:- Vessel in question was built around mid to late 1960's for Sanko - I think


----------



## oldman 80

Boatman25 said:


> By reading his old posts and he did ask how to change his name a day or so ago, simples, changing his name wont hide him


Thanks for that info


----------



## oldman 80

Varley said:


> I protest - we were very good at opening cans!
> 
> 
> 
> You should be more TOLERANT (as it is surely tolerance that makes the difference between contact bearings lying - usually - unwrapped and brinelling in the bearing bank and those used here).
> 
> It's a wonder what you can pick up in a roomfull of plumbers!
Click to expand...

Hmm - I see.
I wouldn't argue with that one at all.
(Pint)


----------



## Duncan112

Sounds similar - my ship was built in 1970 by Mitsubishi (Kobe) with a B&W 9K98FF engine and 3 B&W turbochargers which were loosely based on a BB design - and indeed BB engineers tended to do the servicing - the rotational speed sounds about right too.

As an aside some years later I sailed on a Bulk Carrier with BB blowers built under licence by a Japanese concern - sadly the Japanese licencee had changed the material specification for the impellor rotor to an aluminium alloy that suffered from creep - eventually the impellor made contact with the casing at full sea speed (from memory the blower was doing about 17,000 rpm) and the blower disintegrated explosively - fortunately there was no one adjacent to the blower at the time but some pieces of the casing that I could barely lift had ended up on the gallery 2 decks above the blower platform. 

I attended a lecture a couple of years later and asked the BB presenter if he would care to comment on the reason for failure - he declined in the auditorium but approached me later and explained that following the incident the licencee's status had been changed from licencee to "Partner Company" - sounds better but what it meant was that they could have no input into specification changes etc. 

Somewhere I've got photos and video of the debris - I'll see if I can find them.


----------



## oldman 80

Duncan112 said:


> Sounds similar - my ship was built in 1970 by Mitsubishi (Kobe) with a B&W 9K98FF engine and 3 B&W turbochargers which were loosely based on a BB design - and indeed BB engineers tended to do the servicing - the rotational speed sounds about right too.
> 
> As an aside some years later I sailed on a Bulk Carrier with BB blowers built under licence by a Japanese concern - sadly the Japanese licencee had changed the material specification for the impellor rotor to an aluminium alloy that suffered from creep - eventually the impellor made contact with the casing at full sea speed (from memory the blower was doing about 17,000 rpm) and the blower disintegrated explosively - fortunately there was no one adjacent to the blower at the time but some pieces of the casing that I could barely lift had ended up on the gallery 2 decks above the blower platform.
> 
> I attended a lecture a couple of years later and asked the BB presenter if he would care to comment on the reason for failure - he declined in the auditorium but approached me later and explained that following the incident the licencee's status had been changed from licencee to "Partner Company" - sounds better but what it meant was that they could have no input into specification changes etc.
> 
> Somewhere I've got photos and video of the debris - I'll see if I can find them.


Ok - all sounds quite plausible to me but that 17000 RPM sounds a bit frightening if the rotors were anything like the size of the ones I was refering to. 
1400 Kgs @ 17000 Rpm Oh boy - that's verging into aviation territory I suggest. Maybe even "ballistic" - if you know what I mean.
As for your last comment re BB rep and the Licencee' etc., - Yes I can understand that one for sure. 
BB were pretty good after all, and I doubt many would argue with that.
"Under Licence" always seemed to create problems of some kind, maybe large maybe small. I think the worst example I can recall was Victor Pirate "under licence" - Burmah Enterprise/Venturer - the 457000 Dwt ULCC's. There was a bit of a problem there - every machine ripped out and the head replaced, - just in time, before the warranty period expired. It was close.
When C/O I did the initial COW survey clean for those two vessels. That was mid to late 1979. DoT, Lloyds and many others were in attendance incl USCG. COW was the greatest thing that ever happened to tankers, in my view - along with IG of course. What a difference it made. Got myself a bit of a commendation for that job, from USCG, DoT and Class - which did me no harm at all, I don't think. (Wave)


----------



## muldonaich

is there some reason that after all these years nobody will put a name to these ships instead of xxxx maru for example brgds kev.


----------



## Hamish Mackintosh

Duncan112 said:


> Sounds similar - my ship was built in 1970 by Mitsubishi (Kobe) with a B&W 9K98FF engine and 3 B&W turbochargers which were loosely based on a BB design - and indeed BB engineers tended to do the servicing - the rotational speed sounds about right too.
> 
> As an aside some years later I sailed on a Bulk Carrier with BB blowers built under licence by a Japanese concern - sadly the Japanese licencee had changed the material specification for the impellor rotor to an aluminium alloy that suffered from creep - eventually the impellor made contact with the casing at full sea speed (from memory the blower was doing about 17,000 rpm) and the blower disintegrated explosively - fortunately there was no one adjacent to the blower at the time but some pieces of the casing that I could barely lift had ended up on the gallery 2 decks above the blower platform.
> 
> I attended a lecture a couple of years later and asked the BB presenter if he would care to comment on the reason for failure - he declined in the auditorium but approached me later and explained that following the incident the licencee's status had been changed from licencee to "Partner Company" - sounds better but what it meant was that they could have no input into specification changes etc.
> 
> Somewhere I've got photos and video of the debris - I'll see if I can find them.


Aye the trouble with that is what does not explode, implodes, and ends up in the uppey downey parts of the engine, then she starts to make very expensive noises


----------



## oldman 80

muldonaich said:


> is there some reason that after all these years nobody will put a name to these ships instead of
> 
> 
> 
> xxxx maru for example
> 
> 
> 
> brgds kev.
Click to expand...

Well for my part, I just can't remember the xxxx bit - there were a lot of Maru s about.
I was on the ship 29 years ago - she had a different name then having already changed ownership & name several times. However *when new* she was xxxx (something) maru - and that would have been some 20 years prior to when I was on her - i.e. some 50 years ago in total.


----------



## Duncan112

Hamish Mackintosh said:


> Aye the trouble with that is what does not explode, implodes, and ends up in the uppey downey parts of the engine, then she starts to make very expensive noises


As one of my lecturers JR Williams used to describe it "Tinkle tinkle....oh dear!"


----------



## oldman 80

Duncan112 said:


> As one of my lecturers JR Williams used to describe it "Tinkle tinkle....oh dear!"


Ah Ha, Ah ha :-
Oh dear, Tinkle, Tinkle, indeed !!!!
Now gents please consider:-
Scrap values are low, the ship is old, no longer economical although still quite operational, and more than just beginning to fall apart. Her automation equipment suppliers have long gone out of business and those spare parts are virtually impossible to obtain. There's a glut of tonnage as well - much of it laid up all around the world.
She is large, about 300,000 Dwt.
How much will it cost to re-engine such a vessel and will the underwriters agree to it ?
(Pint)


----------



## muldonaich

oldman 80 said:


> Well for my part, I just can't remember the xxxx bit - there were a lot of Maru s about.
> I was on the ship 29 years ago - she had a different name then having already changed ownership & name several times. However *when new* she was xxxx (something) maru - and that would have been some 20 years prior to when I was on her - i.e. some 50 years ago in total.


what was the name of the ship when you were on her???? kev.


----------



## oldman 80

muldonaich said:


> what was the name of the ship when you were on her???? kev.


Sorry - can't disclose that on here, it would compromise renewed on going enquiries if I did.
In any case, I believe the ship foundered about a year or so later.
Greek "Gangster Types" as owners and brokers.
Also it's a machinery issue - so it could have been any of a lot of possible ships.


----------



## Duncan112

oldman 80 said:


> Ah Ha, Ah ha :-
> Oh dear, Tinkle, Tinkle, indeed !!!!
> Now gents please consider:-
> Scrap values are low, the ship is old, no longer economical although still quite operational, and more than just beginning to fall apart. Her automation equipment suppliers have long gone out of business and those spare parts are virtually impossible to obtain. There's a glut of tonnage as well - much of it laid up all around the world.
> She is large, about 300,000 Dwt.
> How much will it cost to re-engine such a vessel and will the underwriters agree to it ?
> (Pint)


Bearing in mind that the ships structure and plumbing tends to fail well before the machinery (Excepting disaster areas like the Ruson AO) it is probable that it would not be financially viable to re-engine an old ship - better to scrap and purchase more modern laid up tonnage - which brings us neatly to what I suspect the thrust of your question is is it better to have an insurance claim on a vessel and cargo that will bring in more than the scrap value of the vessel like the "Salem" - if you are planning to go down this route it would be preferable to ensure your crew don't bring packed suitcases and duty free into the lifeboats.


----------



## oldman 80

Duncan112 said:


> Bearing in mind that the ships structure and plumbing tends to fail well before the machinery (Excepting disaster areas like the Ruson AO) it is probable that it would not be financially viable to re-engine an old ship - better to scrap and purchase more modern laid up tonnage - which brings us neatly to what I suspect the thrust of your question is
> 
> 
> 
> is it better to have an insurance claim on a vessel and cargo that will bring in more than the scrap value of the vessel
> 
> 
> 
> like the "Salem" - if you are planning to go down this route it would be preferable to ensure your crew don't bring packed suitcases and duty free into the lifeboats.
Click to expand...

Well I think you have made an excellent point there Duncan.
My thrust wasn't really a question, it was a sort of statement of fact,
Namely:-
Confirmation that it is better to have an insurance claim on a vessel and cargo that will bring in more than the scrap value of the vessel.
I was simply trying to be a bit more "diplomatic" than you.


----------



## sindbaad

Boatman25 said:


> By reading his old posts and he did ask how to change his name a day or so ago, simples, changing his name wont hide him


i did not got, what is the meaning of that....is sindbaad a bad name


----------



## Varley

oldman 80 said:


> Well I think you have made an excellent point there Duncan.
> My thrust wasn't really a question, it was a sort of statement of fact,
> Namely:-
> Confirmation that it is better to have an insurance claim on a vessel and cargo that will bring in more than the scrap value of the vessel.
> I was simply trying to be a bit more "diplomatic" than you.


Experience (vicarious!) suggests this stratagem can only succeed if the evidence rests at a sufficient depth to evade subsequent expert examination.


----------



## Duncan112

Or only a portion of the evidence is available for the experts to view http://www.estoniaferrydisaster.net/pdf/Enclosure10.pdf

I remember reading that the visor locking pin was retrieved from the wreck but one of the "Experts" said it was of no value to the investigation, too heavy for the helicopter and dropped it back over the side before it could be properly examined - any one shed any more light on this?


----------



## John King

While in Vancouver on the laurentic it was decided to overhaul one of the turbos,we were supposed to be there far 10 days when it was stripped we found out sailing date had been brought forward and the engs had 3 days to assemble it they were using the manual they managed and seemed happy but a day after full away there was a terrible rumbling noise from said turbo,it was decided to lock it( I don't know how they did that) and take some covers off and let those cylinders suck their own air in oh dear we had two three scavenge fires every watch I remember ore carriers passing us it took about 40 days to get to London. John K


----------

