## 3 Results and Discussion
### Thermal Analysis of the JWR System  
Figure 11 compares the circumferential, axial, and radial temperature distributions yielded by the deflected shaft case and the aligned shaft case. Figure 11a illustrates the circumferential temperature distribution of the JWR system at the section containing the maximum water film temperature node. As shown, the temperature of the groove region is obviously smaller than that of the pressured region because the water flow in the groove region can facilitate heat dissipation. Furthermore, the distribution trend simulated by the deflected shaft case is similar to that simulated by the aligned shaft case; however, the maximum temperature predicted by the deflected shaft case is obviously smaller than that predicted by the aligned shaft case. More specifically, the maximum temperature of the misaligned shaft case is about 11.5 degC higher than that of the aligned shaft case.  
The axial temperature distribution of the water film is shown in Figure 11b, and the radial temperature distribution of the JWR system at the maximum temperature section is shown in Figure 11c. As shown in Figure 11b, compared with the aligned shaft case, the maximum temperature zone generated by the misaligned shaft case is closer to the water outlet side. The results demonstrate that inaccurate FSH predictions may be yielded if the deflection of the propeller shaft is ignored. As shown in Figure 11c, the shaft exhibits a lower temperature compared with the water film and the rubber bushing owing to the higher thermal conductivity coefficient (Table 1) compared with the other two. It is noteworthy that, as shown in Figure 11d, the temperature of the misaligned shaft case is lower than that of the aligned shaft case for \(z/L\) in the range from 0 to 0.58 and that the maximum water temperature is located nearby the water outlet for both aligned and misaligned shaft  
Figure 10: Distribution of deformations and pressure when deflection of the propeller shaft is considered: (**a**) water film pressure; (**b**) contact pressure; (**c**) elastic deformation; (**d**) thermal deformation.  
cases. These discrepant results between the two cases prove that the deformation of the propeller shaft, resulting from the propeller self-weight, the hydrodynamic force of water film, and contact force of the journal-rubber interface, cannot be neglected in the thermal analysis of WLRSBs.  
The results shown in Figure 12 are the temperature distributions in the circumferential direction for three different axial sections: the maximum temperature section, the middle section (z/L = 0.5), and the end face of the bearing (z/L = 1). As shown for the case of the z/L = 0.5 section, the maximum water film temperature of the aligned shaft case is slightly higher than that of the misaligned shaft case. However, Figure 12b,c show that for the cases of the maximum temperature section and the z/L = 1.0 section, the water film temperature yielded by the misaligned shaft case is obviously higher than that yielded by the aligned shaft case. These results indicate that the thermal performance of the WLRSB depends highly on the fluid-solid coupling effects of the outlet water side when the deflection of the shaft has been considered.  
Figure 11: _Cont._  
Figure 11: Comparisons of the thermal distribution in the circumferential section, axial direction, and radial section obtained with a misaligned shaft and an aligned shaft: (**a–c**) are the temperature distribution in the circumferential section, axial section, and radial section, respectively: (**d**) is the temperature distribution at the maximum water temperature section in the axial direction.  
Figure 12: \(Cont.\)