Alignment of pump and motor couplings
Thread Content
Dear experts, I need help. Alignment of the pump and motor coupling: since it is a double-diaphragm coupling, the single-gauge alignment method is used for calculation. First, check the upper and lower areas: when the magnetic gauge frame is used to connect the motor shaft to the pump shaft’s rear wheel, the measurement is -0.35 mm from top to bottom; whereas when the magnetic gauge frame is used to connect the pump shaft to the motor shaft’s rear wheel, the measurement is 0.55 mm from top to bottom. The distance between the two rear wheel hubs is approximately 140 mm. The distance from the front mounting bolt of the motor to the rear wheel hub on the motor shaft is about 320 mm, while the distance between the front and rear mounting bolts of the motor is approximately 460 mm. In the calculation, we take h1 = -0.35/2 ≈ -0.17 and h2 = 0.55 ≈ 0.27. The thickness of the shims to be used with the front foot bolts of the motor is x = (320 + 140)/140 * (h1 + h2) – h1 ≈ 0.5 mm. The thickness of the shims for the rear foot bolts is y = (460 + 320 + 140)/140 * (h1 + h2) – h1 ≈ 0.83 mm. Considering potential errors in the measurement values as well as the actual characteristics of the copper shims, an additional 0.3 mm shim was used with the front foot bolts, and an additional 0.5 mm shim was used with the rear foot bolts. After adding the shims, the motor foot bolts were tightened appropriately. The motor shaft of the magnetic gauge holder is connected to the pump shaft’s rear pulley, and the reading from top to bottom is actually negative by a little over two millimeters. Could everyone please check whether the data calculations are correct? Also, after adding shims under the motor feet, the values became even larger – significantly so. What could be the reason for this? (Note: Before adding the padding, the end face was also marked as shown in the table below, that is, the upper opening. There are shims that were added previously at the motor feet. ) What are some good practices for using timing methods to measure coupling alignment data, in order to ensure that the errors remain small?
Is there such an algorithm? I only know the formula for calculating with two tables
For most unit equipment, alignment is achieved by using a dial indicator; first, a straightedge is used for a rough adjustment, followed by adjusting the axis to make the end face vertical, and then adjusting it radially.
I often do alignment checks, but I’ve rarely calculated things this carefully before: L
It should be possible to calculate it, but in practical applications, who goes through the calculation like that? It’s all based on experience. Try it yourself and you’ll see that relying on this alone isn’t enough:lol
Companies use lasers for marking; it’s simple, convenient, and fast；
I’ve really never tried your method, nor have I seen it before. Normally, this kind of alignment requires two or three tables. There is some error in the calculation, but it’s not significant. I’m not sure if there’s something wrong with your method, as I haven’t tested it myself.
I’ve never used a single-table method, but if the calculations are correct yet the accuracy still suffers, then there’s some issue that needs to be addressed first. As for how to eliminate this issue using the table-marking method, I don’t know either; I only know that using a laser alignment tool is very convenient, haha
What to do without a laser device? Just 2 watches; P