Water Power Peer Review

1
Water Power Peer Review

• The Development of Open, Water-Lubricated
  Polycrystalline Diamond Thrust Bearings for Use
  in Marine Hydrokinetic (MHK) Energy Machines

• Craig Cooley

• US Synthetic / Bearings
• ccooley_at_ussynthetic.com
• Sept. 27, 2011

2
Purpose, Objectives, Integration

• Purpose
• Evaluate the use of Polycrystalline Diamond
  (PCD) Bearings for use in the moving components
  of MHK energy machines
• Motivation
• Reduce operating costs and preserve the marine
  environment from oil based lubricant
  contamination
• PCD bearings are known to operate effectively in
  abrasive and high load situations for thousands
  of hours in oil and gas drilling tools
• Knowledge gap
• Do diamond bearings currently have or can they
  be designed to have the necessary life to work
  for 5 years in an MHK machine?

3
Technical Approach

• Approach
• Conduct three design, build and test iterations
  to arrive at final design for life testing, and
  provide bearings for field evaluation
• Bearing design methodology
• Consultation from Professor Michael Khonsari,
  LSU
• Experience and methods used to design bearings
  for oil and gas tools
• Laboratory testing and evaluation
• Using US Synthetics bearing test facility
• Simulating MHK application by using water as the
  lubricant and appropriate test parameters
• Conduct friction, life, and destructive tests in
  the laboratory
• Prepare prototype bearings for full-scale tests
• Key issue
• Achieving design balance between low friction
  (bearing hydrodynamic performance) and ability to
  transfer heat out of the bearing (mixed mode
  bearing performance)
• s

4
Technical Approach

• Provided there is time, this side and the
  following two slides may be used by the principal
  investigator to explain project results.
• Below are examples of the bearing geometries
  tested.

5
Technical Approach

• Example of a single bearing sets hydrodynamic
  performance

6
Technical Approach

• Failure data for several bearing types

7
Plan, Schedule, Budget

• Schedule
• Initiation date 09/01/10
• Planned completion date 02/29/12
• Currently on schedule

gr

• Green complete, yellow in progress, gray
  planned

8
Plan, Schedule, Budget

• Budget
• Of our planned budget for the first 3 quarters we
  are only over 527.
• Of the 146,984 that we have budged for the DOE
  share for this entire project, we have budgeted
  84,397 for the first 3 quarters of 2011. Of
  that 84,397 we have spent 84,924 for a
  difference of 527.

Budget History Budget History Budget History Budget History Budget History Budget History
FY2010 FY2010 FY2011 FY2011 FY2012 FY2012
DOE Cost-share DOE Cost-share DOE Cost-share
0.00 0.00 119,397.00 36,003.00 27,587.00 9,000.00