You are on page 1of 17

CHAPTER 15

Mechanical Testing

MECHANICAL TESTS are performed to ditions to determine the performance of the spe-
evaluate the durability of gears under load. One cific gear. Both bench and full-scale testing rep-
of the primary uses of gear testing is to generate resent very specific application-oriented testing
performance data, which are used to develop and are usually carried out by the organization
design-allowable stresses. Design-allowable manufacturing a specific product. It is obvious
stresses are used as a guide for determining the that rig testing, bench testing, and full-scale test-
size, geometry, material, manufacturing pro- ing represent increasing orders of cost. Conse-
cess, and process conditions for new designs quently, in most situations, extensive rig testing
during the design process. Gear testing is also is followed by limited bench testing and even
used to compare the performance of a new attrib- more limited full-scale testing. While the testing
ute or characteristic introduced in the gear to a methods described in this chapter are particu-
baseline, which defines the part performance larly applicable to carburized and hardened steel
with the old or existing attributes or characteris- gears, the described techniques are applicable to
tics. These new attributes or characteristics may through-hardened steel and gears fabricated
be related to tooth geometry, gear material, man- from other materials, with modifications.
ufacturing processes, and even process parame-
ters used to manufacture the gear. In the aero-
space industry, gear testing forms the minimum Common Modes of Gear Failure
basis for accepting a change in these characteris-
tics and is usually termed “qualification” of a Gear tooth failures occur in two distinct re-
proposed or recommended change. gions—the tooth flank and the root fillet. Both
Mechanical testing of gears is conducted of these types of failures are briefly described in
under different scenarios. The first scenario is this section. More detailed information can be
termed rig testing, which is extensively dis- found in Chapter 14, “Gear Failure Modes and
cussed and defined in this chapter. In rig testing, Analysis,” and in Ref 1–6.
the gear is subjected to simulated loading that Failure Modes on Tooth Flanks. In order to
exercises a distinct mode of gear failure. While understand the common modes of failure on
this simulation may not always be successful for tooth flanks, it is important to study the kinemat-
a variety of reasons, data on the resistance of the ics of a gear mesh, illustrated in Fig. 1 for a pair
gear to a distinct mode of failure allow the of spur gears. For the direction of rotation
analysis of the specific characteristics that need shown, contact starts at the left side of the figure
to be altered to change its performance. and progresses to the right. Initial contact occurs
After rig testing is complete, it is customary to well below the pitch diameter of the driving
incorporate the gear into a transmission and sub- tooth and well above the pitch diameter of the
ject the transmission to bench testing. In bench driven tooth. There is significant sliding along
testing, the input and output of the transmission with rolling contact at this point. Sliding on the
under test are simulated using various devices surface of the driving gear is in the same direc-
for power input and absorption. After bench test- tion as rolling. As rotation continues, the point of
ing, it is not unusual to subject the transmission contact moves toward the tip of the driving gear
to full-scale testing, where the transmission is and toward the root of the driven gear. Sliding
subjected to controlled but actual operating con- decreases as the point of contact moves toward
312 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

the pitch diameter, reaching zero (pure rolling) Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA)
at the pitch diameter. As the point of contact 2001-C95 (“Fundamental Rating Factors and
moves above the pitch diameter of the driving Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and Heli-
gear, the direction of sliding reverses. At the end cal Gear Teeth”) and International Organization
of contact, significant sliding again occurs. Tests for Standardization (ISO) 6336, base gear per-
have shown that sliding in the same direction as formance on contact and bending stresses. Nom-
rolling (as occurs below the pitch diameter of the inal stresses are determined from first principles
driving gear) has a more severe effect on the sur- and are then modified to allow for the realities of
face durability of the material. manufactured gears running in actual gearboxes.
Failure modes on tooth flanks are caused by This modification approximates a reasonable
this combination of rolling and sliding. The upper limit for the range of stress variation.
more common failure modes are scoring (or ANSI/AGMA 2001-C95 contains factors in
scuffing), wear, and pitting. the fundamental stress formulas for contact and
Failure Modes in Root Fillets. Failure of bending to address overload, gear dynamics,
the gear tooth also can occur in the root fillet. size, load distribution, surface condition (con-
This failure is primarily due to bending fatigue tact only), and rim thickness (bending only).
but can be precipitated by sudden overloading Design-allowable stress numbers are modified
(impact). Sudden overloads can be caused by a by further factors that address intended life,
large foreign object (e.g., a broken tooth) being operating temperature, reliability, safety factor,
drawn through the mesh, the driving or driven and hardness ratio (contact only). It is normal
shafts suddenly stopping, or sudden loss of practice in determining stresses to be reported
alignment (failure of an adjacent bearing). with rig test results to take all of these factors as
unity. The intent of rig testing is to compare the
effect of various attributes or characteristics on
Stress Calculations for Test Parameters performance. Thus, it is reasonable to determine
the actual stress based on a value of unity for
Gear-rating standards, such as American each factor, then determine suitable values for
National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American the factors based on test results.

Fig. 1 Kinematics of a gear mesh


Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 313

The factors that are in essence being ignored these test gears. Many times it may be more fea-
by this approach represent real phenomena that sible to use high-accuracy standard test gears
occur as gears operate. It is critical to address and very stiff (lateral) mounting to ensure uni-
this fact in the design of test rigs and in their form load distribution.
day-to-day operation. For example, it is impor- Contact Stress Computations for Gear
tant to conduct tests in a manner that precludes Tooth Flank. Contact stresses on the surfaces
overloading; in a set of tests intended to evalu- of gear teeth are determined using Hertz’s solu-
ate the effect of overloading, only controlled tion for the stress between contacting cylinders.
overloads can be permitted. Most of the other The equation for contact stress taken from this
factors can be handled in the same manner. solution, reduced to the simplest form applica-
However, gear dynamics and load distribution ble to spur gear teeth, is:
need to be addressed in a more direct fashion
because they both can introduce uncontrolled Contact stress ⫽ 1P¿ ⫻ B2 1>2 ⫻ EF (Eq 1)
variation in a set of test results. where the contact force per unit width, P⬘, is:
Gear dynamics present a problem in deter-
mining the proper stress to be related to per- Pinion torque
formance. Rating standards provide guidance (Eq 2)
Pinion base radius ⫻ effective face width
on dynamic load variations in normal gear-
boxes. Gear test rigs, as described here, load one and
gearbox against another to keep power require-
ments to a minimum. Thus, there are two or R1 ⫹ R2
more sets of dynamic variations, plus their inter- B⫽ (Eq 3)
R1 ⫻ R2
actions, to be considered. If the shafts connect-
ing the gearboxes are quite rigid, the dynamic where B is the geometry factor, R1 is the radius
loading can be greater than the applied loading, of the pinion contact surface at the point of
even when precision gears are tested. Owing to interest, and R2 is the radius of the gear contact
the complexity of the situation, stresses for rig surface at the point of interest.
tests are computed making no allowance for
dynamics. The fact that the dynamics of gear
1 ⫺ y21 1 ⫺ y22 ⫺1>2
test rigs are not the same as real machines that EF ⫽ c p a ⫹ bd (Eq 4)
use gears is a principal reason that bench testing E1 E2
and full-scale testing are required before a given
gear design is adopted for critical applications. where EF is the elasticity factor, E1 is the pinion
The load distribution factor accounts for vari- modulus of elasticity, υ1 is the pinion Poisson’s
ations in alignment due to deflections of teeth, ratio, E2 is the gear modulus of elasticity, and υ2
gearbox, and so on for variations in axial align- is the gear Poisson’s ratio. For pinion and gear
ment of gear teeth, and for variations in load (both steel), the EF is 2290 in U.S. customary
sharing between teeth. Much of the variation in units (P⬘ in lb/in., B in in.–1, and stress in psi),
load distribution can be minimized by straddle and EF is 190.2 in Système International
mounting test gears between bearings so their d’Unités (SI) units (P⬘ in N/mm, B in mm–1, and
axes remain parallel under loading, modifying stress in MPa).
the profiles of test gears to optimize load shar- The most critical combination of contact load
ing and so on. However, concentration of con- and sliding in spur gears occurs on the flank of
tact load at one end of a gear tooth (due to a the driving gear at the lowest point of contact
small variation in axial alignment) produces a with one pair of teeth in mesh (the location
bending stress concentration. To avoid this con- labeled “lowest single tooth contact” in Fig. 1).
dition, one or both test gears can be crowned to The radii of the contact surfaces at this point can
keep the load at the center of the face width. In be determined from the corresponding roll
this condition, the load-distribution factor is angles for the gear and pinion. The radius of
taken as unity for bending stress, and a suitable curvature is the roll angle (in radians) times the
factor is estimated as shown in the following base radius. The radii used in determining the
section for contact stress. However, crowning geometry factor are thus:
adds an additional variable that could affect test
2 ⫻ p ⫻ BRP
repeatability. It may be more expensive to accu- R1 ⫽ 1OR2P ⫺ BR2P 2 1>2 ⫺ (Eq 5)
rately crown (and measure for verification) NP
314 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

R2 ⫽ sin1OPA 2 ⫻ OCD ⫺ 1OR2P ⫺ BR2P 2 1>2 B ⫺0.62


k⫽ a b (Eq 9)
A
2 ⫻ p ⫻ BRG
⫹ (Eq 6) where k is the ratio of ellipse minor to major
NG axis.
contact stress 1crowned2 ⫽ contact stress ⫻
where ORP is the pinion outside the radius, BRP
is the pinion base radius, NP is the number of pin- B ⫻ 1p ⫻ k ⫻ EF ⫻ effective face width2 2 1>2

c1 ⫹ d
48 ⫻ 11 ⫹ k 2 ⫻ P¿
ion teeth, OCD is the operating center distance,
BRG is the gear base radius, NG is the number of
gear teeth, and OPA is the operating pressure (Eq 10)
angle, equal to cos–1 (BRP + BGG)/OCD.
The contact stress returned by Eq 1 is a nom- If the crown radii are small enough in propor-
inal stress and assumes uniform distribution of tion to the contact load and effective face width,
load. With crowned gears this uniform distribu- the contact area will be an ellipse narrower than
tion will not be the case. The contact area the effective face width. The width of the ellip-
becomes an ellipse, or in most cases, the center tical contact area and the corresponding contact
portion of an ellipse, with the highest contact stress for this case can be determined from Eq
stress at the center of the face width and pro- 11, 12, and 13.
gressively lower contact stress toward the ends.
The proportions of the ellipse can be determined pinion torque
contact force ⫽ (Eq 11)
from a more complex form of Hertz’s solution pinion base radius
to the contact stress problem. A second geome-
try factor, A, related to the radius of curvature Width of contact ellipse, EW, is determined by:
along the lead of the gears is needed:
3 ⫻ contact force 1>3
2⫻ c d
B ⫻ 1p ⫻ k ⫻ EF 2 2
(Eq 12)
R1¿ ⫹ R2¿ 1
A⫽ or A ⫽ (Eq 7)
R1¿ ⫻ R2¿ R¿
6 ⫻ contact force
contact stress 1crowned2 ⫽
where R⬘1 is the radius of curvature along the p ⫻ k ⫻ EW 2
pinion lead, R⬘2 is the radius of curvature along (Eq 13)
the gear lead, and R⬘ is the radius of curvature
along the lead (only one gear crowned). These formulas can compute contact stresses
The amount of crown is usually a very small for rig test specimen gears far higher than would
proportion of the face width; thus, the radius of be predicted by the load distribution factors pre-
curvature is large, and the section that can be sented in gear-rating standards. The formulas
measured represents an infinitesimal angular are presented here to permit comparison of per-
segment of the circle. This geometry makes it formance on a stress basis between gears with
difficult for coordinate measuring machines differing crown. Stresses determined in this
(CMMs) to determine the crown radius. A use- manner should be reduced by a typical load dis-
able crown radius can be determined from lead tribution factor before being used to develop
traces and Eq 8: allowable design stresses.
In most cases, there will be variation in con-
crown radius ⫽ tact stress between specimen gears in the same
1effective face width2 2
lot (and from tooth to tooth on each gear) tested
at the same load. The edge break at the ends of
8 ⫻ 1average drop at ends of effective face2
(Eq 8)
teeth is frequently applied in a manual opera-
tion; thus, the effective face width can vary.
The following equations regarding the con- Crown can vary from tooth to tooth on each
tact ellipse are empirical in nature and assume gear. Center distance can vary due to radial
that the ratio B/A is appreciably greater than 20, runout in shafts and bearings. The outside diam-
which will be the case with most crowned gears. eter of gears can vary (as required for manufac-
If this is not the case, a thorough presentation of turing tolerance). It is important, therefore, to
Hertz’s contact solution, such as Ref 7, should determine the mean contact stress and the prob-
be consulted. able range of variance.
Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 315

Bending stress computations for root fil- from the pressure angle at the point of loading
lets are computed based on the assumption that because of the thickness of the tooth). The bend-
the gear tooth is a cantilever beam with a stress ing stress is thus:
concentration at its supported end. AGMA rat-
load ⫻ cos1load angle2 6⫻h
c d Kf
ing standards determine the form of the can- tan1load angle2
2

tilever beam from the solution presented by W. face width s s
Lewis (Ref 8) and use a corresponding stress (Eq 14)
concentration factor. ISO and Deutsche Indus-
trie-Normen (German Industrial Standards) where s is the critical width from the Lewis
(DIN) use different proportions for the beam parabola, h is the critical height from the Lewis
and determine the stress concentration factor in parabola, and Kf is the stress concentration
a different manner. Only the AGMA approach factor:
is discussed here.
H⫹ a b a b
Figure 2 shows a spur gear tooth with a point s L s M
(Eq 15)
load applied at the highest point of single-tooth r h
contact. This point of loading corresponds to the
highest bending stress when there is effective where r is the minimum fillet radius, H is equal
load sharing between gear teeth. Specimen to 0.331 – 0.436 × (nominal pressure angle, in
gears used in rig tests should have effective load radians), L is equal to 0.324 – 0.492 × (nominal
sharing, so this is the appropriate point of load- pressure angle, in radians), and M is equal to
ing for determining bending stress in rig tests. 0.261 + 0.545 × (nominal pressure angle, in
For gears tested in single-tooth bending fatigue, radians).
the actual point of loading established by the Equation 14 is derived from first principles
test fixture should be used in calculating bend- but also can be derived from AGMA standards
ing stresses. by taking the forms of relevant formulas perti-
The Lewis parabola is drawn from the point nent to spur gears and setting all design factors
at which the load line intersects the center of the at unity. While a similar formula could be
gear tooth and is tangent to the root fillet. Meth- developed for helical gears, testing them usually
ods used to lay out this parabola depend on how represents a step between rig testing and bench
the root form is generated, the particulars of testing, and such tests are negotiated between
which are presented in detail elsewhere (Ref 9). the client and the testing laboratory.
The critical height and width are determined
from the Lewis parabola as shown in Fig. 2. The
angle between the load line and a normal-to-the- Specimen Characterization
tooth center is termed the load angle (it differs
Specimen characterization is a critical part of
any fatigue test program because it enables
meaningful interpretation of the results. It is
important to know that the specimens to be
tested meet specifications, where key parame-
ters fall in the specified range, and what the vari-
ations are. Characterizations fall into four areas:
dimensional, surface finish texture, metallurgi-
cal, and residual stress.
Dimensional Characterization. Basic di-
mensional checks include size and alignment of
mounting surfaces, size and alignment of test
surfaces relative to mounting surfaces, and size
and uniformity of edge breaks at the edges of
test surfaces. These checks ensure that the spec-
imens will fit into the test rig and either ensures
that stresses will be consistent or provides data
to determine variations.
The important dimensions to check on rolling
Fig. 2 Layout of Lewis parabola for tooth-bending stress cal-
culation contact fatigue (RCF) specimens are diameters
316 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

of mounting trunnions and test surface, total indi- a statistical analysis. Residual stress gradients
cator reading (TIR) test surface-to-mounting provide more useful information than surface
trunnions, and overall length. The important measurements but at a much higher price. A
dimensions to check on the mating load rollers complete study should include some residual
are inside and outside diameters, TIR inside to stress gradient data. Typical practice is to mea-
outside, crown radius and location of high point sure surface residual stress at six points per vari-
of crown, and thickness. In the case of nonstan- ant and measure the residual stress gradient at
dard specimens where the entire width of the test one or two of these points. Contact fatigue spec-
surface is intended to make contact, the size and imens should be measured at the center of the
uniformity of the edge break needs to be checked. contact surface. Gear specimens should be
The important dimensions to check on gear measured at the tooth half height (or lowest
specimens fall into the areas of mounting sur- point of single-tooth contact) for surface dura-
faces, gear functional charts, and other specific bility tests and at the midpoint of the root fillet
features impacting stress. All of the gear speci- for bending strength tests.
mens described in the following sections are
mounted on their inside diameter. Thus, inside
diameter, length between end faces, and perpen- Tests Simulating Gear Action
dicularity of end faces to inside diameter need to
be checked. For specimens with a splined bore, Tests that simulate gear action are the rolling
the pitch diameter, or inside diameter if so spec- contact fatigue test, the single-tooth fatigue test,
ified, counts as the inside diameter for alignment the single-tooth single-overload test, and the
checks. The gear functional charts are developed single-tooth impact test.
with the gear mounted on the test mounting sur-
Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF) Test
faces. Typical measurements include lead, pro-
file, spacing, index, and runout. Other specific The RCF test simulates the rolling/sliding
items to check include diameter over wires, root action that occurs in a gear mesh, and depending
diameter, and size and uniformity of edge break on the test parameters employed, it can simulate
at tooth ends and along the tip. the most severe condition in the mesh. Because
Surface Finish/Texture Characterization. the specimens are cylindrical, this test is the least
It has been standard practice to specify surface expensive to run in both cost and time. Hence, it
finish and texture in terms of arithmetic average is frequently used as a screening test, and its
surface roughness (Ra). Because it is possible to results are used to plan further gear testing.
manufacture surfaces with widely varying load Test Equipment. Figure 3 shows a sche-
capacity, all with the same Ra, more information matic of the rolling/sliding contact fatigue test.
than Ra is needed to interpret data. At a minimum, The specimen and load rollers are cylindrical.
Rz (a measure of “average” peak roughness) The outside diameter of the load roller is crowned
should also be measured. A preferable method to concentrate the load at the center of contact
would be to examine surfaces with an optical and eliminate the possibility of concentrated
interference system that maps the contour of an loading at the edge of contact due to misalign-
area rather than the traditional line contact. Test ment. A normal load is applied by air pressure.
surfaces to be subject to contact fatigue should Phasing gears, attached to the shafts on which the
also be examined at 10× to ensure they are free of specimen and load rollers are mounted, control
corrosion, dings, scratches, and so on. the extent of sliding at the specimen/load roller
Metallurgical Characterization. Both sur- interface. The amount of sliding is determined by
face hardness and hardness gradients are to the gear ratio and can be fixed at any value (21
meet specification. For gear specimens, hard- and 43% are commonly selected), simulating the
ness should be checked at the tooth half height rolling/sliding action at any desired location on
and at the root fillet. Details of the microstruc- gear teeth. This test is primarily intended to eval-
ture should be characterized at the same loca- uate the resistance of candidate material systems
tions as hardness. Typical practice has been to to surface origin pitting, but other modes of sur-
prepare and document photomicrographs of the face failure can be studied. The surfaces of the
etched structure at 400× to 600×. specimen and load roller are sliding against each
Residual Stress Measurement. Residual other, with lubrication, under high load. There-
stresses vary among a lot of parts; therefore, fore, some indication of the lubricated wear re-
enough measurements should be made to permit sistance of the material being tested can be
Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 317

obtained. In addition, the resistance of the mate- localized scoring), burnishing, or wear to occur
rial/surface finish/lubricant system to scuffing under full load.
can be studied. Tests are conducted at very high Tests are stopped periodically, and the con-
overload to promote failure in real time; thus, it is tacting surfaces of the specimen and load roller
possible to introduce plastic deformation (rip- are inspected for signs of surface distress. The
pling) on the contact surface. With specially diameter at the center of the specimen is also
adapted equipment, these tests can be conducted measured to provide an indication of wear. The
at different temperatures up to 400 °F. Speci- formation of large, progressing pits produces a
mens and load rollers can be designed for a vari- strong vibration signal, which, in turn, shuts
ety of testing requirements, depending on the down the test. Lubricant temperature, lubricant
exact material and objective of the test. pressure, and air pressure (to apply the contact
Test Procedure. The lubricant stream to the load) are also monitored, and the test is stopped
specimen/load roller interface is aimed at the if irregularities are detected.
discharge side of the mesh (to cool the surfaces The results of contact fatigue tests exhibit
after contact). The lubricant flow rate is adjusted more scatter than is typical with other fatigue
(typically to about 2 L/min, or as specified for the tests. One gage of scatter is the Weibull slope, a
project), with the lubricant at test temperature. measure of the increase in rate of failure with
Alignment of the specimen and load roller is increasing life. For many fatigue tests, a Weibull
checked as each test is set up. One method often slope of six or more is typical. A Weibull slope
used is to coat the surface of the load roller with of six can be roughly translated into practical
a thin layer of layout blue and ensure that con- terms as follows. If 20 samples were randomly
tact occurs uniformly at the center of the load selected from a large group of theoretically iden-
roller. Before the start of testing at load, a break- tical parts and tested to failure under identical
in run is typically conducted. This procedure is conditions, the longest test would, on the aver-
accomplished by running the machine for 10 age, last about twice as long as the shortest. For
min at each of a series of increasing loads up to contact fatigue testing with current ultraclean
the full test load. The intent of the break-in run steels, a Weibull slope of 1.5 is typical. In this
is to gently polish away asperities on the con- example, if the Weibull slope were 1.5, the
tacting surfaces that might cause scuffing (i.e., longest of the 20 tests would last approximately

Fig. 3 Schematic of a rolling/sliding contact fatigue (RCF) test


318 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

20 times as long as the shortest. The impact on measure is that four or more tests can be con-
test programs is that many tests have to be con- ducted with each gear specimen.
ducted to develop enough data to make statisti- Test Equipment. A gear is placed in a fix-
cally meaningful comparisons. The minimum ture so that one tooth at a time can be loaded
number of tests with each variant (at each load) while another tooth supports the reaction. The
to enable reasonable comparisons has typically test is usually done in an electrohydraulic, ser-
been considered to be six. With six tests for each vocontrolled universal test machine. The pri-
of two variants and Weibull slopes of 1.5, the mary object of this test is to determine fatigue
G50 life of one variant would have to be twice properties in bending. However, the same setup
that of the other to conclude that it is better. If the can be used to determine single overload prop-
comparison were made on the basis of G10 life, erties (ultimate bending strength) as well. Fre-
the ratio would have to be 5 to 1. quently, enough teeth are tested to develop a
Test Results. An example set of data, repre- stress-cycles diagram to define the bending
sentative of the results of rolling/sliding contact fatigue characteristics of the material system.
fatigue testing, is shown in Table 1. In addition to Several arrangements for loading can be con-
specimen identification, load, and life to failure, sidered. One fixture arrangement is shown in
other information is reported to aid in the inter- Fig. 5. This illustration shows the Boeing flex-
pretation of results. Several test parameters can ural design, which appears to have found favor
be varied as needed; thus, the actual values are re- with the aerospace sector. This fixture is
ported with the results. These parameters include designed for a 32 tooth, 5.333 diametral pitch
lubricant, lubricant bulk temperature, nominal (DP). 8 mm (⅜ in.) face width spur gear with sev-
filter size, test speed, and phasing gear set/slide eral teeth removed to provide access to test and
ratio. Also reported for each test are data regard- reaction teeth. The gear is rigidly supported on a
ing surface roughness, ratio of elastohydrody- shaft. Load is applied through a carbide block
namic lubricant film thickness to composite contacting the test tooth at the highest point of
roughness, wear, and wear rate. A Weibull statis- single-tooth contact. The loading block is held in
tical analysis of this set of results is shown graph- the specified orientation to the gear by a flexural
ically in Fig. 4. Comparisons between variants loading arm. This flexural design ensures accu-
are made on either a G10 life or a G50 life basis. rate loading of the gear tooth with minimal
migration of the point of loading. Reaction is
Single-Tooth Fatigue (STF) Test carried through a block contacting the reaction
tooth at the lowest point of single-tooth contact.
The STF test is used to generate a statistically Load is cycled from the specified test load to a
significant quantity of bending fatigue data at a minimum load high enough to keep the slack in
comparatively low price. Teeth are tested one at the system taken up (usually 10% of the test
a time with a fixed loading point, allowing the load). While most testing is conducted at 20 Hz,
generation of bending fatigue data at compara- other frequencies also are possible. The fatigue
tively high cycles without risk of losing tests to test machine is instrumented to monitor instanta-
other modes of failure. Another cost-saving neous loads and tooth deflections. Changes in

Table 1 Example of rolling/sliding contact fatigue test data


Lubricant, automatic transmission fluid. Bulk temperature, 90 °C (194 °F). Filter, 10 mm (nominal). Test speed, 1330 rpm. Phasing
gear set, 16 tooth/56 tooth. Slide/roll ratio, 43%. Contact stress, 400 ksi. Load, 3000 lb.
Test duration Ra(a)

Test No. Specimen No. 106 cycles h Specimen Load roller λ(b) Wear(c), in. Wear rate(d) Comments

1.173 14.7 13.5 3.8


3 10-9/LR 1 1.603 20.2 8.5 ... 0.58 0.0002 12 Surface origin pitting
8 10-11/LR 5 7.332 92.3 9.3 ... 0.56 0.0001 1.4 Surface origin pitting
12 10-4/LR 13 7.565 95.3 ... 5.0 0.57 0.0008 12 Surface origin pitting. Severe
exfoliation and wear at
center of wear track
18 10-2/LR 17 5.267 66.3 9.0 6.8 0.51 0.0002 3.8 Surface origin pitting
22 10-3/LR 22 6.322 79.7 ... 5.0 0.56 0.0003 4.7 Surface origin pitting
(a) Ra, arithmetic average surface roughness measured in axial direction. µin. (b) λ, ratio of elastohydrodynamic film thickness to composite surface roughness. In cases
where surface roughness was not measured for a particular specimen or load roller. λ is based on average surface roughness for group. (c) Diametral wear (i.e., change
in diameter) on specimen. (d) Change in diameter, in. × 10–5/cycles × 106
Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 319

compliance can be used for monitoring crack ini- monitor catastrophic tooth failure. Typical
tiation and propagation in the root fillet region. fatigue load capacity of such types of equipment
In addition, a crack wire can be incorporated to is in the range of 10 to 20 kips, although higher
loads, up to 110 kips, can be used for single over-
load tests.
A second fixture arrangement (Fig. 6) appears
to have found favor with many other industry
segments. This fixture utilizes a 34 tooth, 6 DP,
25 mm (1 in.) face width spur gear and is derived
directly from the Society of Automotive Engi-
neers (SAE) Division 33 STF fixture. Fatigue
test loads up to about 15 kips are feasible with
this fixture, and single overload tests up to about
50 kips can be accommodated. These STF fix-
tures are compact enough to be immersed in
heated fluid; thus, fatigue testing can be con-
ducted at elevated temperatures (up to 400 °F).
Test Procedure. Special concern must be
taken with regard to safety in conducting the
STF test (in addition to general lab safety pro-
cedures). Setting up the test requires moving the
hydraulic load ram while lining up the fixture,
bypassing safety features, such as a light curtain
to stop the machine, and so on, and considerable
caution needs to be exercised during setup. Peri-
odic calibration of the test fixture is important
because there are many closely fitted parts that
can wear and change the bending stress in spec-
imen gears. A calibration gear is made from a
standard specimen with strain gages fit at key
points in the root fillets. This calibration gear is
Fig. 4 Weibull analysis with RCF test data installed in the fixture and loaded to set loads
periodically to ensure consistent loading. If
specimens for a specific test program differ
from the standard design established for the fix-
ture, one of these specimens should also be fit-

Fig. 5 Flexure arm single-tooth fatigue (STF) test fixture Fig. 6 SAE division 33 single-tooth fatigue (STF) test fixture
320 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

ted with strain gages, and calibrations should be ducted at the same frequency, which is usually
conducted with both gears. Typical calibration set at slightly less than the maximum for the
intervals are from every six to every thirty tests, highest anticipated load.
or any time the fixture is cleaned and repaired. The other procedural item that can affect test
Other set-up items that can affect test results results is the method used to detect failure and
are mounting of the fixture on the universal test stop the test (and stop counting cycles). All sys-
stand, tuning of the test-stand controller, and tems can be set up to stop if the load goes out of
test frequency. If the SAE type fixture is used, it the specified range. This deviation will happen
is important to ensure that the fixture floats when compliance changes, usually as a result of
freely on an oil film before starting each test. a crack in the root fillet. Many systems incorpo-
Other fixture designs can be bolted to the ma- rate a linear variable differential transformer
chine base, provided proper alignment between and can be set up to stop if the load ram moves
the load ram and loading point on the load arm beyond the specified range (also an indication of
is maintained. The feedback control should be tooth failure). A limit switch can be set to trip
tuned to suit test fixture and specimen compli- when the load ram moves too far. Other failure
ance. Some systems do this automatically each detection devices, such as a crack wire bonded
time the machine is turned on; with others; this near the root fillet so that it will break when the
tuning may have to be done manually. At a min- tooth cracks, or an ultrasonic system to detect
imum, tuning should be verified as often as fix- cracking, can be used to stop the test. At least
ture calibration. Some systems provide a feature two of these methods should be employed to
to automatically adjust tuning as compliance ensure that the machine stops cycling load when
changes. This feature should be turned off when the tooth breaks. If a computer is used to control
running STF tests—a significant change in loading during tests, one of the failure detection
compliance is proof of failure. The maximum systems should be connected directly to the uni-
frequency for STF testing is limited by the versal test-stand controller to guarantee that the
capacity of the system to maintain a satisfactory machine stops if the computer crashes.
load waveform. An inability to maintain peaks Test Results. Table 2 summarizes results
on the unload side of the wave at the specified from a typical set of STF tests. Testing was con-
value is a sign of testing at too high a frequency. ducted in three phases. Initial searching tests
All of the tests for a given project should be con- were conducted to establish loads that would

Table 2 Results from a typical set of gear single-tooth fatigue tests showing overall testing
sequence, including modified staircase (“up and down”) tests
Legend: X, failure; O, runout.
Specimen serial numbers 2, 4, and 6. Specimens cut from bar stock, hobbed roots. R, loading; R = 0.1. Frequency, 25 Hz
Gear/ Life, cycles
⫻106

0.263
0.152
0.324
0.270
0.918
Run out
Run out
Run out
0.521
0.461
Run out
Run out
Run out

0.557

0.299
Run out

0.220

0.783

Run out

Run out

Run out

0.209

0.310

0.425

0.165

0.232

0.105

0.128
tooth

2/10
2/1
4/1
6/1
2/2
4/2
6/2
2/3
4/3
6/3
2/4
4/4
6/4
2/5

4/5

6/5

2/6

4/6

6/6

2/7

2/8

4/7

2/9

6/7

4/8

4/9

6/8

6/9

Load 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Failure rate

10,000 lb ...
9,500 lb ...
9,000 lb X X X X X 100%
8,500 lb X X X X X 100%
8,000 lb X X O X X O 80%
7,500 lb X O X O O X 50%
7,000 lb X O O O 25%
6,500 lb O O O 0%
6.000 lb ...
Load 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Failure rate

Searching tests Modified staircase test sequence Finite life and confirmation tests
Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 321

result in failure in reasonable time. A “modified of these analyses as a guide. Results are reported
staircase sequence” of tests was conducted to in terms of load versus cycles, and load can be
develop data at a series of loads representing converted to stress using the method discussed
zero to 100% failure. Further tests were con- previously. Comparisons can be made between
ducted to fill in the stress cycles relationship. groups of gears with the same geometry on a
Searching tests are started at a high load to load-cycles basis or between gears with differ-
ensure starting with a failure, then stepped down ing geometry on a stress-cycles basis. When
until the tooth survives the specified number of converting to stress for comparison with running
cycles (here, 5 million cycles has been selected gear data, consideration must be given to the dif-
as a run-out limit). The modified staircase ferent stress ranges applied to STF gears and
sequence is conducted by testing three speci- running gears. Also, consideration must be
men gears in sequence. If the tested tooth breaks given to the statistical difference between four,
before the specified limit, the next test is con- eight, or more data points from a single STF
ducted one load step lower. If it does not break specimen gear compared with one data point
by the specified limit, the next test is conducted from a running gear specimen set.
one load step higher. After the modified stair-
case sequence is completed, additional tests are Single-Tooth Single-Overload
conducted to ensure that all the specimen gears and Impact Testing
are tested at the lowest load. More tests are con-
ducted to develop enough data for Weibull The single-tooth impact test is used to inves-
analysis at two loads resulting in 100% failure. tigate impact strength of gear steels. Impact
The load-cycles diagram shown in Fig. 7 was strength is an important property for steels to be
developed from the data in Table 2. Results at used in high-speed gear drives or transmissions
9000 and 8500 lb were analyzed via Weibull sta- for off-highway equipment, which can be sub-
tistical analyses (similar to that shown in Fig. 4) jected to significant shock loading. It has been
to determine lives to 10, 50, and 90% failure. The suggested that fatigue strength can be related to
failure rates at 5 million cycles for loads from impact strength; however, results of tests to sup-
6500 to 8500 lb were analyzed using normal port this suggestion have been mixed.
probability concepts to determine 10, 50, and Single overload tests are used to investigate
90% failure loads. The curves labeled G10, G50, the ultimate strength of gear materials. The re-
and G90 were then fit visually using the results sults are useful in selecting loads for fatigue

Fig. 7 Load cycles diagram constructed from STF data. See Table 2 for load-cycles relationship for data
322 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

tests and in constructing allowable stress-range oscilloscope is set up to record a single event
diagrams (e.g., for use in comparing STF results using a change in signal as a trigger. Usually
with bending fatigue data developed from run- three to six tests per variant are conducted.
ning gear tests). For single-overload tests, the STF fixture is
Test Equipment. Figure 8 shows a closeup installed in the universal test stand as for fatigue
of the test area of a 4.5 m (15 ft) drop tower for testing, and a preload is applied. For the SAE
single-tooth impact testing. A single-tooth fixture, 1800 kg (4000 lb) is used, and for other
fatigue test fixture, without loading block, load fixtures the load should be high enough to take
arm, and so on, is placed on a load cell and the slack out of the system. The function gener-
arranged so that the striking surface of the drop ator is set up to ramp up the load to break the
weight hits the load point on the test gear tooth. tooth in approximately 30 s for slow bend tests
Stops are provided to prevent the forces required and in approximately 0.050 s for fast bend tests.
to stop the drop weight after the test tooth frac- One slow bend and three fast bend tests usually
tures passing through the load cell. A high-speed are conducted per variant.
digital oscilloscope captures the signal from the Test Results. A load deflection trace for a
load cell. single-tooth impact test is shown in Fig. 9.
Single-tooth, single-overload tests are ac- Results from fast and slow bend tests are simi-
complished with the same equipment used in lar. This trace shows load increasing linearly
STF testing. The only change is that a high- with deflection up to 5900 kg (13,000 lb), then
speed digital oscilloscope captures the signal increasing at a slower rate until tooth breakage
from the single event. at 9000 kg (20,000 lb). This result is typical for
Test Procedure. The single-tooth fatigue many materials and is possibly related to the
test fixture, without loading block, loading arm, onset of plastic flow prior to fracture. Based on
and so on, is placed on a load cell and installed this, the stress corresponding to the change in
under the drop weight. The striking surface on slope of the load deflection (or load time) trace
the drop weight is adjusted to the correct angle to corresponds to the ultimate bending strength of
strike the test tooth at the load point. This point is the material at the critical point in the case.
verified by coating the tooth with a thin layer of Maximum load, or energy required to break the
layout blue and allowing the drop weight assem- tooth, represents the strength of the core rather
bly to contact the tooth statically. The digital than the strength of the case.

Fig. 8 Test area of an impact test tower


Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 323

Gear Power-Circulating Test Equipment. A test and a torque-


(PC), or Four-Square, Tests reversing gear set are mounted at opposite ends
of the test bed. One shaft connects the test and
A gear failure map is shown in Fig. 10. This torque-reversion pinions, and another connects
map indicates that by varying load and speed, the torque-reversing and test gears. One gear-
failure by any of several different modes can be box is loaded against the other by twisting the
induced. Thus, PC gear tests can be used to eval- shafts to lock in torque. This rig is known as a
uate bending fatigue strength, surface durability power (re-) circulating, or four-square, test rig
with regard to pitting, or scoring resistance. A and is schematically illustrated in Fig. 11. The
limiting factor is that tests targeted at one of the locked-in torque, which is fixed at various val-
failure modes may have to be terminated ues to create the required tooth load, can be gen-
because of failure by another mode. For exam- erated mechanically or hydraulically. The entire
ple, bending fatigue tests conducted at a compar- loaded arrangement is driven by an electric
atively low load, targeting failure in several mil- motor at the required speed, and the motor need
lion cycles, may have to be terminated due to only supply the friction losses. Significant trans-
pitting failure. Consequently, PC gear testing is mitted power can be simulated in this system
more expensive than the tests simulating gear with comparatively little power input. Data
action previously discussed. It is, however, less from these tests can be directly translated for
expensive than bench testing, and several stan- design use.
dard specimen designs are available to allow In a four-square test rig, the tooth accuracy of
tests targeted at particular failure modes. the torque-reversing gears, and their transmis-
sion error, has a significant impact on the dy-
namic loads on the test-gear pair. These dynamic
loads due to torque reversing gear inaccuracy
can be further amplified or attenuated by the
longitudinal and torsional frequency response
characteristics of the four-square-test rig. This
intensification is of particular significance in
high-speed testing where operating frequencies
will be close to or at torsional and/or longitudinal
natural frequencies of the four-square system.
However, high-accuracy torque-reversing gears
are expensive. Consequently, the PC test rigs can
be classified into two categories. The first cate-
gory of PC test rigs have low power, operate at
low speeds, and generally have AGMA quality
class Q9 or Q10 gears in the torque-reversing

Fig. 9 Load deflection trace from single-tooth impact test

Fig. 10 Gear failure map Fig. 11 Schematic of a power (re-) circulating (PC) test rig
324 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

gearbox that are quite adequate for many indus- In programs to evaluate materials for aerospace
try segments. The second category of PC test rigs gearing, runout can be set as high as 400 million
operate at high power, high speed, and incorpo- cycles for surface durability tests, making the
rate high-accuracy torque-reversing gears that project a lengthy exercise. In this case, obtaining
are essential for gear testing in certain industry two data points in one run can be a significant
segments, such as the aerospace industry. Test- benefit. Figure 14 shows another PC test rig with
ing costs associated with each of the two cate- a 90 mm (3.5 in.) center distance, capable of
gories of test rigs are significantly different. operating at 10,000 rpm and simulating trans-
The low-speed PC test rig illustrated in Fig. mission of up to 700 hp. Torque-reversing gears
12 nominally operate at 900 rpm but can be in these high-power rigs are in AGMA quality
adapted to operate at 1500 rpm. The standard class Q13 and Q14. Load is applied via a servo-
center distance is 100 mm (4 in.), which can be controlled hydraulic system and can be varied as
modified if necessary, although there are some required during tests. Torque is monitored con-
costs associated with doing so. These test rigs tinuously by a noncontact torque cell. This mon-
can simulate the transmission of up to 100 hp itoring permits interpretation of test results in
when driven with a 3 hp motor. Load is applied light of the actual load signature. Based on input
via a mechanical loading arm and locked in with lubricating oil temperature and load, surface
a special coupling that can be set at any angle. durability (pitting), bending, and scoring tests
Thus, load cannot be varied as the rig is running. can be conducted on these PC test rigs. Spray
Depending on specimen design, contact stresses lubrication, to either side of the mesh, is stan-
of up to 450 ksi at the lowest point of single- dard; oil-mist lubrication can be provided.
tooth contact and bending stresses up to 160 ksi Test Procedures for Surface Durability
can be generated. Splash lubrication is standard, (Pitting) and Root Strength (Bending) Test-
and spray lubrication to either side of the mesh ing. One or both gears in the specimen set are
can be provided. These rigs can be adapted to coated with a thin layer of layout blue prior to
conduct scoring tests. installation in the test machine. After the gears
Figure 13 shows a PC test rig with a 155 mm are installed, they are run briefly at low load
(6 in.) center distance that can operate up to 8000 with room-temperature lubricant to determine
rpm and simulate the transmission of up to 1400 the contact pattern. The low-speed test rigs
hp. This test rig has two test gearboxes so that allow some alignment adjustment to optimize
two pairs of gears can be tested simultaneously. contact pattern. The specimen mountings in the

Fig. 12 Low-speed (4 in. center distance) PC test rig


Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 325

Fig. 13 High-speed (6 in. center distance) PC test rig

Fig. 14 High-speed (3.5 in. center distance) PC test rig


326 / Gear Materials, Properties, and Manufacture

high-speed test rigs are rigid, so the only rem- scoring, both of which can affect the appearance
edy for nonuniform contact is to change speci- of the contact surface in ways similar to some of
men gear sets. the stages of pitting development. A composite
A break-in run is generally conducted before failure criterion has to be adopted that specifies
the start of the test run. On the low-speed the level of damage in each of these categories
machines this run is accomplished by applying that constitutes failure. A typical failure crite-
one-half of the test load and running for ½ h at rion for pitting is one pit 4 mm (0.16 in.) wide
test speed starting with room-temperature lubri- or several smaller pits with slightly greater total
cant. The friction of the meshing gears warms area. Typical failure criteria for micropitting is
the lubricant to near test temperature in this time. micropitting over half of the contact width of all
On the high-speed machines, load and speed are the teeth and for wear, a loss of 12 µm (0.0005
increased in a set pattern to accomplish break-in. in.) at any point on the profile.
As described previously, break-in is expected to A test program evaluating bending and sur-
increase the life of the gears. Thus, all specimens face durability performance of candidate mate-
tested in a given project should be broken in rials would include 24 tests with each material.
using the same method. For root strength (bend- Six tests would be conducted at each of two
ing fatigue) tests, break-in may not affect bend- loads intended to result in bending failure; the
ing fatigue life but may delay the onset of pitting balance of the tests would be conducted at two
long enough to allow the gear to fail in bending. loads intended to result in pitting failure. The
In general, the main difference in surface results of tests at each of the four loads are ana-
durability (pitting) and root strength (bending) lyzed with Weibull statistical analysis (as illus-
tests is the load. Most of the standard specimen trated in Fig. 4). A load-cycles diagram is then
gear sets are designed to allow surface durabil- constructed showing loads corresponding to 10,
ity testing at loads high enough to produce fail- 50, and 90% failures at various lives for both
ure in less than 10 million cycles. Root strength bending and surface durability. Comparisons
tests, therefore, have to be conducted at loads are made on the basis of life to 50% (or 10%)
high enough to produce failure in less than failures at a given load, or the load correspon-
1 million cycles to avoid surface durability fail- ding to 50% failures at a given life. It is useful
ures. Thus, unless specially designed specimens to construct a stress-cycles diagram (determin-
are tested, the results of this test can only be ing contact stress as described here) to compare
compared to the lower-life portion of the stress- surface durability results obtained from speci-
cycles relationship developed in the STF test. mens having differing crown.
Surface durability gear tests have similar Test Procedures for Scoring (or Scuffing)
problems with scatter as those previously de- Testing. Scoring is typically most severe in the
scribed for RCF tests. However, each specimen dedendum of the driving gear (at the start of con-
gear has 18 or more teeth; therefore, the result of tact) and at the tip of the driven gear. Therefore,
a single PC surface durability test represents the to facilitate observation of scoring, the gears and
lowest performance of 18 or more items tested. loading are set up so that the specimen is the
This statistical difference causes the results of driven gear. Scoring is more probable at high
PC surface durability tests to exhibit less scatter speed, high load, and/or high-lubricant tempera-
than those of RCF tests, and Weibull slopes are ture. Because of this probability, the test machine
generally three or higher. Six tests are still gen- is set up to run at high speed and high-lubricant
erally conducted with each variant at each load, temperature. Resistance to scoring is then mea-
the reduced scatter being used to allow more sured by the load that will precipitate scoring.
statistically reliable comparison of the results Load is increased in comparatively small steps
rather than to reduce the number of tests. A sim- until scoring starts. Because small variations in
ilar statistical difference exists between the lead or crown can produce as much variation in
results of STF tests and PC bending tests, and unit loading at the most heavily loaded area as
this difference must be considered when com- one or more load steps, specimens used for scor-
paring STF and PC bending results. ing should be those with the most consistent
Test Results. The end point of a surface- geometry that can be selected from the lot to min-
durability test may be somewhat ambiguous. imize scatter. Gear alignment should be adjusted,
Several points in the development of surface if possible, to obtain the best contact pattern.
origin pitting may be considered failure. Test Break-in is a particularly critical part of this
gear teeth are also subject to wear and localized test. Therefore, all specimens should be broken
Chapter 15: Mechanical Testing / 327

in using an identical process, and control speci- 4. “Appearance of Gear Teeth—Terminology


mens should be included in the project test of Wear and Failure,” ANSI/AGMA 1010-
matrix to benchmark the results for comparison E95, American National Standards Insti-
with prior tests. Typically, break-in is started at tute/American Gear Manufacturers Associ-
low load in room-temperature oil and run-in one ation
to four load steps lasting 20,000 to 50,000 load- 5. R. Errichello, Friction, Lubrication, and
ing cycles each. The lubricant temperature is Wear of Gears, Friction, Lubrication, and
allowed to slowly rise due to the friction of the Wear Technology, Vol 18, ASM Handbook,
meshing gears during break-in. The condition of ASM International, 1992, p 535–545
the lubricant also can affect the outcome of the 6. L. Alban, Systematic Analysis of Gear Fail-
test; thus, lubricant should be changed prior to ures, American Society for Metals, 1985
the start of each test. 7. A.P. Boresi and O.M. Sidebottom, Ad-
Test Results. After break-in, the surface vanced Mechanics of Materials, 4th ed.,
roughness (Ra) is measured in the axial direction John Wiley & Sons, 1985
at the tips of several teeth on the specimen gear, 8. W. Lewis, Investigation of the Strength of
and the surface condition is documented. The Gear Teeth, Proc. Eng. Club, Philadelphia,
load is increased, and the lubricant temperature PA, 1893
is raised to test temperature. The gear set is run 9. “Information Sheet: Geometry Factors for
20,000 to 50,000 loading cycles for each load Determining the Pitting Resistance and
step. After each load step, surface roughness Bending Strength of Spur, Helical, and
and surface condition are examined and re- Herringbone Gear Teeth,” AGMA 908-
corded. The appearance of score marks, or an B89 (R1995), American Gear Manufactur-
abrupt increase in surface roughness, indicates ers Association, 1995
scoring failure. Typically, three tests are con-
ducted per variant. Comparisons between vari-
ants are made on the basis of the load that pre- SELECTED REFERENCES
cipitates scoring. Contact stress considered
alone has little influence on scoring; conse- • C.W. Bowen, Review of Gear Testing
quently, comparisons made on the basis of con- Methods, Gear Manufacture and Perfor-
tact stress may be misleading. mance, American Society for Metals, 1974,
p 137–162
• D.H. Breen, “Physical and Analytical Mod-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT eling of Contact Fatigue Pits from
Rolling/Sliding Tests,” Technical Paper
This chapter was adapted from D.R. McPher- 87-FTM-8, American Gear Manufacturers
son and S.B. Rao, Mechanical Testing of Gears, Association, 1987
Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, Vol 8, • L. Flamand, D. Berthe, and M. Godet, Sim-
ASM Handbook, ASM International, 2000, p ulation of Hertizian Contacts Found in Spur
861–872 Gears With a High Performance Disk
Machine, Trans. ASME, Vol 102, Jan,
1981, p 204
REFERENCES • D. Medlin, G. Krauss, D.K. Matlock, K.
Burris, and M. Slane, “Comparison of Sin-
1. E.E. Shipley, “Failure Modes in Gears,” gle Gear Tooth and Cantilever Beam
presented at Forum on Gear Manufacture Fatigue Testing of Carburized Steel,”
and Performance, 19 Oct 1973 (Detroit), Technical Paper 950212, SAE Interna-
American Society of Mechanical Engineers tional, 1995
2. D.W. Dudley, Gear Wear, Wear Control • M.B. Slane, R. Buenneke, C. Dunham, M.
Handbook, M. Peterson and W. Winer, Ed., Semenek, M. Shea, and J. Tripp, “Gear
American Society of Mechanical Engi- Single Tooth Bending Fatigue,” Technical
neers, 1980 Paper 821042, SAE International, 1982
3. G. Niemann and H. Winter, Getriebeschä- • M.N. Webster and C.J.J. Norbart, An
den und Abhilfe, Entwicklungstendenzen, Experimental Investigation of Micropitting
Maschinen-elemente, Vol 2, 2nd ed., Using a Roller Disk Machine, STLE Trib.
Springer-Verlag (Berlin), 1983 Trans., Vol 38, 1995, p 883

You might also like