400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.

org
SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES
2005-01-3806
Contact Fatigue Tests and Life Simulations Using
Computational Fracture Mechanics
Hong Lin, Robert R. Binoniemi, Gregory A. Fett,
Douglas C. Burke and Thomas Woodard
Dana Corporation
Powertrain & Fluid Systems
Conference and Exhibition
San Antonio, Texas USA
October 24-27, 2005
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
By mandate of the Engineering Meetings Board, this paper has been approved for SAE publication upon
completion of a peer review process by a minimum of three (3) industry experts under the supervision of
the session organizer.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.
For permission and licensing requests contact:
SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Fax: 724-776-3036
Tel: 724-772-4028
For multiple print copies contact:
SAE Customer Service
Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-1615
Email: CustomerService@sae.org
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2005 SAE International
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.
Printed in USA
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
Contact Fatigue Tests and Life Simulations Using
Computational Fracture Mechanics
Hong Lin, Robert R. Binoniemi, Gregory A. Fett, Douglas C. Burke and Thomas Woodard
Dana Corporation
Copyright 2005 SAE nternational
ABSTRACT
Computational fracture mechanics based FATIG3D
program was used to simulate contact fatigue life of
rough surface contacts in boundary to mixed lubrication
regimes. Two-rollers contact fatigue tests were
conducted and test results were compared with
calculated contact fatigue lives. Calculated contact
fatigue life agreed with test results well with the selected
set of input data. The effect of several important
parameters in the input data on contact fatigue life was
evaluated computationally using FATIG3D. These
parameters include: oil pressure distribution, crack face
friction, direction of friction, friction coefficient, initial
crack length, Hertzian stress, and residual stress
distributions. The results obtained in this work improved
basic understanding and the application of FATIG3D in
simulating contact fatigue behavior.
INTRODUCTION
Current market drivers for commercial vehicle heavy duty
drive axles are characterized by higher power density,
longer warranty mileage, lube for life, reduced weight
and improved efficiency and fuel economy. One outcome
of these drivers is that drive axle components must have
longer fatigue life under more severe operating
conditions. Drive axle primary gearing is the most critical
component in a drive axle. Axle pinion and gear tooth
could have several failure modes: bending fatigue,
surface wear and surface contact fatigue. In this paper,
we investigate and simulate tooth surface contact fatigue
under high Hertz contact stress, rolling and sliding,
boundary and mixed lubrication regimes.
Surface contact fatigue is a fatigue crack nucleation and
propagation process in which cracks nucleate and
propagate under repeated contact stress until flaking or
spalling occurs. For product design and development
purposes, a reliable quantitative virtual simulation tool will
be useful which can predict contact fatigue life under a
given condition defined by load, speed, temperature,
lubricant, material, surface finish and contact geometry.
A large amount of work has been carried out on the
development of contact fatigue life prediction models.
One classical approach, based on the pioneer work of
Lundberg and Palmgren, was developed to predict rolling
element bearing contact fatigue life many years ago [1-
5]. After more than 50 years of development and
correlation with bearing life test data, this approach has
been widely accepted and has been adopted in roller
bearing design standards. More recently Olver [6], Wang
and Keer [7] has used the bearing life models to predict
gear contact fatigue life by including the effect of surface
roughness and sliding. In terms of fatigue damage
models, the bearing life modeling approach is essentially
a stress-life (S-N) approach which correlates certain
critical stress term with total fatigue life that includes
both crack nucleation and crack growth life. This contact
fatigue modeling approach was evaluated and used by
the authors, and the results were published in a separate
SAE paper, SAE 2005-01-0795.
On the other hand, fracture mechanics approach has
also been used to develop contact fatigue life models
based on the premise that crack propagation life may be
the dominant phase of contact fatigue life [8-20]. The
majority of fracture mechanics related work in contact
fatigue life modeling has been conducted by two
research groups: Murakami and Kaneta of Kyushu
University in Japan [8-11] and Keers group of
Northwestern University of USA [12-16]. Murakami and
Kaneta studied two contact fatigue crack problems
analytically using fracture mechanics: one is an inclined
semi-circular surface crack under Hertzian contact
loading, another is an elliptical crack embedded parallel
to the surface under Hertzian contact loading. The stress
intensity factors and crack opening/closing behavior were
numerically analyzed. Key theoretical conclusions of the
analysis were: (1) oil seepage into a surface crack is a
crucial factor which causes pitting, (2) the crack opening
displacement of a surface crack is controlled mainly by
surface traction, contact pressure, and oil hydraulic
pressure, (3) both the direction and the magnitude of
2005-01-3806
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
surface traction govern the oil seepage into the surface
crack, (4) a sub-surface crack opens even under
compressive surface loading (Hertzian contact loading
with surface traction), (5) a sub-surface crack opens not
only near the trailing tip of the crack behind the contact
load, but also near the leading tip in front of the contact
load.
Over the last two decades, Keers group has developed
a contact fatigue analysis software FATIG3D based on a
three dimensional contact fatigue model. Contact fatigue
phenomenon is simulated by a cyclic Hertzian load
moving across the surface of an elastic half-space
containing several planar cracks. The three modes of
stress intensity factors are determined based on the
body force method [14]. Fatigue crack growth rates are
calculated with a modified Paris law based on materials
crack growth test data. Hertzian stress, oil hydraulic
pressure, surface traction, residual stress, and initial
crack size and angle are all considered and modeled.
Recent developments include multiple crack growth and
coalescence, contact crack growth through thin film
coatings, and rough surface induced stress field [15,16].
In summary, extensive studies have been conducted
using the fracture mechanics approach for contact
fatigue modeling. Many fundamental aspects of the
problem have been modeled, such as oil pressure,
surface traction, residual stress, etc. However, most
analysis results are still in academic theoretical research
stage. The analysis models and life simulations have not
been compared with experimental results yet. Moreover,
several important engineering design related
considerations such as surface finish, sliding speed and
oil film thickness are not directly incorporated in the
analysis software FATIG3D. Obviously more research is
required in this field, especially in generating
experimental data, preparing input data, and validating
the analysis program and simulation results. In this work
we perform two-rollers contact fatigue tests with samples
having different surface roughness levels. Then we
conduct contact fatigue life simulations using the
computational fracture mechanics based program
FATIG3D. The objectives of this work are: (1) to validate
the simulation tool by comparing the calculated contact
fatigue life with contact fatigue test data, (2) to evaluate
the effect of several important factors on contact fatigue
life computationally, such as initial flaw size, Hertz stress,
friction, residual stress, and the direction of surface
friction.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
FATIG3D is a computer program developed for three-
dimensional simulation of propagation and coalescence
of multiple cracks driven by cyclic contact load. The
program performs simulation of contact fatigue failures in
terms of crack growth under sliding and rolling contact
fatigue loading cycles, and coalescence of adjacent
coplanar surface cracks. Stress intensity factors and
energy release rate along the crack fronts are calculated
in the three-dimensional crack analysis. For each
loading cycle, the rate of mixed mode crack growth is
estimated from the stress intensity factors, and the new
crack front is determined by crack growth calculation with
a modified Paris law. The stress conditions modeled
include: Hertzian contact stress, lubricant pressure, and
residual stress. Subsurface stresses obtained by other
programs (such as roughness-induced stresses) can
also be included. The program allows the use of several
material layers with different Paris law coefficients, which
is an important capability to model coatings and case
hardened steels.
A three-dimensional contact fatigue model is considered
as shown in Figure 1, where an elastic half space
containing multiple cracks is subjected a Hertzian line
contact loading moving across its surface. The half-
space initially contains multiple surface planar cracks
with arbitrary shapes and angles of inclination. Under the
cyclic contact loading the cracks can propagate and may
interact with adjacent cracks, then coalesce into a larger
crack, which leads to the formation of a surface pitting
failure.
The body force method is used to formulate the three
dimensional cracks in an elastic half space under contact
load problem. The body force method models a crack as
a distributed eigen-strains, and the stress disturbance
created by the crack is equivalent to the body force
generated by the eigen-strains. By equilibrating the
stress components with the tractions applied on the
crack surface, a system of integral equations for the
cracks problem is derived which relate crack opening
displacement, load, and stress intensity factors of all
three modes. The details of the body force method are
given in [14, 21].
Applied Loads and Stresses
The simulation of loading includes:
(a) Hertzian contact loading. The surface of the half-
space is loaded by normal pressure p and tangential
traction q from the Hertzian line contact. Expressions for
p and q are given by:
p x e p x e c ( , ) ( ) /
1 0 1
2 2
1 =
q(x
1
,e) = f p(x
1
,e)
p
0
= maximum Hertzian contact stress,
c = contact radius,
f = friction coefficient,
e = x
1
coordinate of contact center.
The contact stress field created by the Hertzian line
contact can be found in Smith and Liu [21].
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
(b) Lubricant pressure. To simulate effect of fluid
seepage into the crack, two bounding forms of hydraulic
pressure can be used: uniform hydraulic pressure equal
to the contact pressure at the mouth of the crack, and a
linear pressure distribution equal to the contact pressure
at the mouth and zero at the bottom of the crack.
(c) Residual stress. Residual stresses can be given as a
stress vs. depth profile in the input data. An interpolation
routine is used to calculate the corresponding residual
stresses on the crack surface.
(d) External stress data. Additional three-dimensional
stresses (such as stresses caused by surface
roughness) can be inputted into the program from
external data files.
Modified Paris Law
The Paris power law is used to model the crack growth.
To account for the mixed mode growth the stress
intensity factors in the Paris law are modified based on
the distribution of the energy release rate along the crack
front [14]. The effective stress intensity factor is defined
as a stress intensity factor that causes an equivalent
magnitude of energy release around the crack:
2 / 1 2 2 2
Im
)
1
1
(
III II ax eff
K K K K A

+ A + = A
v
where AK is the range of the stress intensity factor during
a loading cycle. u is the Poissons ratio of the material.
Therefore, the Paris law for the mixed mode crack
propagation is modified as

A < A
A > A A A
=
th eff
th eff
n
th eff
K K
K K K K C
dN
da
if 0
if ) (
where
da/dN = crack advance per rolling cycle,
C, n = Paris law constants (material constants),
AK
th
= threshold stress intensity factor (material
constant).
Numerical Procedure
The numerical procedure to calculate the growth of the
crack fronts is as follows:
- Determine the stress intensity factors and
energy release rate (AK
eff
) along each crack front
for the current loading cycle,
- Use the modified Paris law to calculate the
growth rate, da/dN, at a finite number of points
along the crack fronts,
- Allow the crack front point with the maximum
da/dN to travel a distance "da" along the normal
to the crack front at that point and determine the
number of cycles "dN." The distances covered
by the other points of the crack contour during
"dN" are also calculated,
- Determine the new shape of the crack fronts;
update the number of loading cycles.
CONTACT FATIGUE TEST
A two-rollers contact fatigue test system designed by
Phoenix Tribology, UK was used in this work to conduct
the contact fatigue tests. A photo of the test machine is
shown in Figure 2. The test machine is designed to
simulate gear teeth contact fatigue and wear under
combined rolling-sliding and high contact stress
condition. The machine has two motors, one to provide
input power, and another to absorb power. Two motors
also provide continuous slide to roll ratio control from 0%
to 100%. Contact load is applied by means of a servo
controlled pneumatic bellows actuator with load
transducer feedback signal for close loop load control.
The upper load roller (5 inch=127 mm diameter) is
mounted in a carrier with bearings supporting on both
sides. The lower test roller (1 inch=25.4 mm diameter) is
mounted in a housing and it is also supported by two
rolling bearings.
An in-line torque transducer is installed on the shaft
connecting the lower test roller and drive motor to
measure the friction torque induced by the contact of the
two rollers. The torque transducer was manufactured by
HBM, Inc. model no. T10F-200Q-SU2-S-0-V0-N. The
torque transducer consists of two parts: the rotor and the
stator. The rotor has a measuring body with strain gages
and an adaptor flange. The adaptor flange provides
connection to the rotating shaft. The strain gages
mounted on the measuring body measure the friction
force. The rotor electronics transmits the measured
signals. An antenna ring on the stator receives the
measured signal and provides voltage signal
conditioning.
An oil lubrication system is included with heating and
cooling capability. Load, motor speed and oil tank
temperature are controlled. There are three temperature
measurements: oil tank temperature, oil inlet
temperature and oil out temperature. A nozzle is used to
spray a jet of oil continuously into the contact zone of the
two rollers. Contact fatigue failure is detected by using
an accelerometer. Failure point is defined by the
appearance of a macro pit with approximate size of 3
mm by 3 mm which corresponds to a certain vibration
level of the two rollers measured by the accelerometer.
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
STEEL, HEAT TREATMENT AND TEST OIL
Both load rollers and test rollers were made of PS17
steel. The chemical composition of the steel was
analyzed by using an ARL 3460 Metals Analyzer (a multi
element, optical emission, and direct readout
spectrometer) and following ASTM E415-99a standard.
The chemical composition of the PS17 steel is as
follows (weight %): C: 0.234%, Mn: 1.01%, Ni: 0.11%,
Cr: 0.55%, Mo: 0.16%, P: 0.093%, S: 0.020%, Si:
0.243%, Cu: 0.177%, Al: 0.029%, Ti: 0.003%, V: 0.005%,
Fe: balance. Load rollers and test rollers were gas
carburized, quenched and then tempered. Roller surface
hardness is normally within 6062 HRc, core hardness is
within 4045 HRc. Effective case depth (depth at which
hardness is 50 HRc) is within 1.021.27 mm (0.040
0.050). Surface carbon after carburizing is normally
between 0.8% and 0.9%. Materials microstructure in the
case is high carbon martensite with 20% retained
austensite.
Test oil is the Roadranger SAE 75W-90 synthetic oil.
Three groups of tests were conducted under the same
load, speed and oil tank temperature conditions. The test
roller (25.4 mm diameter) rotational speed is 1400 RPM,
the load roller (127 mm diameter) rotational speed is 399
RPM, oil tank temperature is at 70 degree C. Friction
coefficient was measured at the steady state running
condition. The only difference in the three groups tests is
the surface roughness of the rollers. Rollers in the Group
#1 and Group #2 have turned surface and relatively high
surface roughness levels. Group #3 rollers have
superfinished surface which is very smooth. Three
repetitive tests were conducted in each group. Contact
fatigue test results are summarized in Table 1 below.
Contact fatigue test results in Table 1 show that as the
surface roughness of the rollers decreases, friction
coefficient decreases and contact fatigue life increases.
In Table 1 surface roughness of the rollers are given in
terms of Ra, Rz and composite Rq. Ra is defined as the
arithmetic average deviation of the surface profile to the
mean line over the evaluation area, Rz is the average of
five largest peak to valley heights, and Rq is the root
mean square of the deviation of the surface profile from
the mean line. The composite Rq of the two contact
bodies is defined as:
Composite Rq = ( Rq
1
2
+ Rq
2
2
)
1/2
The Lambda Ratio is defined as the ratio of minimum oil
film thickness to the composite Rq. The minimum oil film
thickness was calculated by using a numerical program
developed by Zhu and Cheng at Northwestern University,
IL, USA [22].
A typical macro pit on a failed test roller is shown in the
Figure 3 below, pit size is approximately 3 mm by 3 mm.
Some micro pits can also been seen near the macro pit.
The sign of the friction coefficients corresponds to the
direction of the surface friction force. Negative friction
corresponds to negative sliding, i.e. test roller has slower
surface speed than that of the load roller.
COMPARISON OF CALCULATED CONTACT
FATIGUE LIFE WITH TEST DATA
When using any computational simulation tool, selecting
and determining input data is very critical, for it
determines the output results, along with the software
algorithm, and sometimes it is difficult to get.
To simulate contact fatigue life, FATIG3D requires
following input data:
---materials properties: shear modulus, Poissons ratio,
Paris law constants C and n, crack growth threshold
value AKth,
---initial cracks: number of cracks, location of the cracks,
crack size and angle,
---stress conditions: maximum Hertzian stress, contact
radius along minor axis of the contact ellipse, coefficient
of friction (COEF), direction of surface friction, oil
hydraulic pressure, crack face friction, residual stress,
and rough surface induced stress.
The following input data is used to calculate contact
fatigue life using the FATIG3D program: steel shear
modulus=79.3 GPa (11500 ksi), Poissons ratio=0.3,
modified Paris Law constants: C= 2.98x10
-9
mm/cycle
(1.173x10
-10
inch/cycle), n=4.19, AKth=0.33 MPa m
1/2
.
These crack growth law constants were obtained from
our own test data. Hertz contact stress=2.7 GPa (390
ksi), radius along contact ellipse minor axis=0.49 mm
(0.01937 inch), uniform oil pressure along crack length,
with crack face friction, as heat treated residual stress,
initial crack length=25 micron (0.001 inch), the inclined
angle of the crack = 30 degree, i.e. 30 degree counter
clockwise from the surface.
Initial crack length in the FATIG3D input data is selected
based on the surface intergranular oxidation (IGO) layer
depth which is normally between 13 micron (0.0005 inch)
and 25 micron (0.001 inch). Figure 4 shows the typical
surface IGO of carburized gear teeth. The three friction
coefficients used in the FATIG3D calculations are
obtained from the measurements in the two roller contact
fatigue tests with three different surface roughness
groups, as shown in Table 1. Contact fatigue life
calculation results with the three different friction
coefficient (-0.068, -0.087, and -0.116) are shown in the
Table 2. From Table 2, one can see that with the
selected input data FATIG3D calculated contact fatigue
lives agree with test data quite well.
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
FATIG3D CONTACT FATIGUE LIFE
SIMULATIONS
In this section, FATIG3D program is used to study the
effect of several input parameters on contact fatigue life
computationally: oil hydraulic pressure, crack surface
friction, coefficient of friction, direction of surface friction,
initial crack size, Hertzian stress and the associated
contact radius along minor axis, and residual stress
distributions along sample depth direction. Crack
inclined angle =-30 degree remains constant for all the
simulations conducted in this section.
The first input parameter studied is the oil hydraulic
pressure in the crack, which has strong effect on crack
growth and contact fatigue life [10, 14]. FATIG3D has
three options with regards to the oil pressure: uniform
pressure along crack length, linear pressure distribution
and no oil pressure. Table 3 shows the contact fatigue
life calculation results with uniform oil pressure and linear
pressure. Initial crack length is 25 micron, and Hertzian
stress is 2.7 GPa.
From the results shown in Table 3, it is obvious that
uniform oil pressure must be used in FATIG3D
simulations. Linear pressure could not generate crack
growth, which does not agree with the test data shown.
Obviously, the option of no oil pressure will not generate
realistic results either.
The second parameter studied is crack face friction
which is related to crack closure effect. Crack closure
occurs when crack face friction exists. Table 4 shows the
simulation results with a 25 micron length crack, under
2.7 GPa Hertz stress and with uniform oil pressure.
The simulation results show that crack face friction has
some effect on contact fatigue life. Longer contact
fatigue lives are obtained with crack face friction due to
the crack closure effect. And the effect of crack face
friction is more significant as fatigue life becomes longer,
especially when contact fatigue life N is larger than 5
million cycles.
The third study is to evaluate the effect of initial crack
length and friction coefficient on contact fatigue life,
under 2.7 GPa Hertz stress, uniform oil pressure and
with crack face friction. The simulation results are shown
in Table 5 and also plotted in Figure 5.
From Table 5 and Figure 5, it is clear that both initial
crack length and friction coefficient has strong effect on
contact fatigue life. Higher friction and longer initial crack
length reduce contact fatigue life, which is expected from
both fracture mechanics and tribology theories. Also their
influence becomes stronger as contact fatigue life
becomes longer.
The fourth study is on the effect of the direction of
surface friction (traction), initial crack length, and Hertz
stress on contact fatigue life with uniform oil pressure
and crack face friction. The simulation results are shown
in Table 6 and 7 below.
The simulation results show that generally no crack
growth under positive friction except when initial crack
length is large, i.e. 100 micron (0.002 inch) and friction
coefficient is relatively large, i.e. 0.12. The combination
of the inclined angle of a surface crack, the direction of
movement of the Hertzian contact pressure, and the
direction of surface traction (friction) is schematically
illustrated in Figure 6. Basically, the combination of crack
angle and the direction of friction determines the stress
state and the opening of the crack. In FATIG3D, if the
crack angle and the friction coefficient has the same
sign, i.e. both positive or both negative, crack face will
subject to tensile stress and the crack will open, which
will produce much shorter contact fatigue lives than
those with positive friction and negative crack angle, as
shown in Table 6 and 7. Moreover, negative crack angle
together with negative friction produced contact fatigue
lives in good agreement with the test data as shown in
Table 2.
Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9 shows the effect of
Hertzian stress and friction coefficient on contact fatigue
life with as carburized residual stress. These three plots
may be viewed similar to the traditional S-N fatigue life
curves. Initial crack length is 25 micron (0.001 inch) and
13 micron (0.0005 inch) respectively. These three plots
cover a wide range of contact fatigue lives from 100,000
cycles to 1 billion cycles and some typical rough surface
EHL contact situations with Hertz stress range 1.7 3.3
GPa, friction coefficient range -0.06 to -0.12, and initial
crack length range 13 to 25 microns. As explained in the
DISCUSSION section, these parameter ranges
correspond to wide range of operating conditions in
terms of surface roughness, sliding speed, rolling speed,
contact stress and temperature.
Figure 10 and Figure 11 shows the effect of residual
stress distribution on contact fatigue life, with initial crack
length = 25 micron, and friction coefficient equals to
0.09 and 0.12 respectively. Residual stress from shot
peening improves contact fatigue life significantly,
especially at long life regime when friction and contact
stress is relatively low. A contact fatigue endurance limit
is also observed with shot peened residual stress, which
did not exist for all other simulations with as carburized
residual stress distribution. The shot peened residual
stress and as carburized residual stress distributions are
given in the Appendix.
DISCUSSION
From the contact fatigue simulation results using
FATIG3D shown in the section above, one can see that
several factors in the input data have very strong
influence on pitting life. These factors include: oil
pressure distribution along crack face, crack face friction,
direction of friction, friction coefficient, Hertzian stress,
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
initial crack length, and residual stress distribution.
However, most of these factors, except Herzian stress
and residual stress, are not clearly linked to a typical
contact fatigue operating environment. In other words,
some key contact fatigue controlling parameters are not
directly represented in the FATIG3D input data, such as
surface speed, surface roughness, hardness, test oil
properties such as viscosity and viscosity index, and
temperature. This is a very important issue in using
FATIG3D for contact fatigue life prediction and product
design.
Currently, these operating related parameters can only
be represented indirectly in FATIG3D program through
friction coefficient, initial crack length and crack growth
properties. Friction coefficient depends on sample
surface speeds, sample surface roughness, test oil,
temperature, and sample material in a complex manner.
Initial crack length depends on surface material
microstructure and surface roughness. Sample hardness
is characterized indirectly by the crack growth data of the
material. In general, mode I fatigue crack growth rates
increase as sample hardness increases. However, it is
still not clear yet how Mode II and Mode III crack growth
behavior is related to hardness of the material. The three
modes of crack growth have been defined in many
textbooks on fracture mechanics [23]. Mode I is the
opening mode where the displacements of crack
surfaces are perpendicular to the crack plane. Mode II
refers to the in-plane shear mode where the
displacement of crack surfaces is in the plane of the
crack and perpendicular to the leading edge of the crack.
Mode III refers to the out of plane shear mode where the
displacement of crack surfaces is in the crack plane and
parallel to the leading edge of the crack.
Another issue is that FATIG3D only models crack growth
life. However, crack nucleation life may be dominant
under certain circumstances. Therefore crack nucleation
life modeling may need to be investigated and developed
for contact fatigue. Finally, crack closure is considered in
this work, and a very small AKth= 0.33 MPa m
1/2
is used
to account for the short crack effect.
CONCLUSION
Computational fracture mechanics based FATIG3D
program was used to simulate contact fatigue life of
rough surface contacts in boundary to mixed lubrication
regimes. Two-rollers contact fatigue tests were
conducted and test results were compared with
calculated contact fatigue life. Calculated contact fatigue
life agreed with test results well with the selected set of
input data. The effect of several important parameters in
the input data on contact fatigue life was evaluated
computationally using FATIG3D. Based on the
simulation results, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. Uniform oil pressure along crack length needs to
be used in FATIG3D simulations in order to get
meaningful results.
2. Crack face friction also affects contact fatigue
life, especially when life is longer than 5 million
cycles.
3. Direction of friction is extremely important
Negative friction with negative crack angle
together produces contact fatigue life results
close to test data.
4. Initial crack length and Hertzian stress both
strongly affect contact fatigue life. Higher
Hertzian stress and longer initial crack length
reduces contact fatigue life, which is consistent
with the traditional S-N approach and fracture
mechanics approach used in modeling fatigue
damage.
5. Residual stress distribution has very strong
effect on contact fatigue life. Residual stress
produced by shot peening improved contact
fatigue life significantly.
6. A contact fatigue endurance limit exists with the
highly compressive residual stress generated
from shot peening. No endurance limit exists in
other simulations conducted, which might be due
to the small AKth value used.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Dana Corporation is acknowledged for supporting this
work. Northwestern University Center for Surface
Engineering and Tribology is acknowledged for providing
the FATIG3D program.
REFERENCES
1. Lundberg G., Palmgren A., Dynamic Capacity of
Roller Bearings, Acta Polytechnica 7, 1947,
Stockholm
2. Zaresky E.V., Life Factors for Rollin Bearings, STLE
SP-34, STLE, 1999
3. Zaresky E.V., Comparison of Life Theories for
Rolling-Element Bearings, Tribology Transactions,
1996, 2, 237-248
4. Charles Moyer, Fatigue and Life Prediction of
Bearings, ASM Handbook, Vol. 19, 1996, 355-362.
5. Ioannides E., Life Prediction in Rolling Element
Bearings, Proc. 1
st
World Tribology Congress, 1997,
Mechanical Eng. Publications, London, 281-289.
6. Kim T.H., Olver A.V., Fatigue and Brittle Fracture
Analysis of Surface Engineered Materials in Rolling
contact, Elastohydrodynamics 96, Proceedings of
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
the 23
rd
Leeds-Lyon Symposium on Tribology, 1997,
37-48.
7. Epstein D., Yu T., Wang J.Q., L. Keer, Hong Lin,
Dong Zhu, Mixed Lubrication and fatigue life
Prediction of Engineered Surfaces in a rolling/sliding
contact, WCCM6, 6
th
World Congress in
Computational Mechanics, Beijing, 2004.
8. Murakami Y., Kaneta M., Yatsuzuka H., Analysis of
Surface Crack Prapagation in Lubricated Rolling
Contact, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 28, 1985, 60-68.
9. Kaneta M., Murakami Y., Okazaki T., Growth
Mechanism of Subsurface Crack due to Hertzian
Contact, Transactions of ASME, J. Tribology, Vol.
108, January, 134-139.
10. Murakami Y., Kaneta M., Fracture Mechanics
Approach to Tribology Problems, ASTM STP 1020,
Fracture Mechanics: Perspective and Directions,
1989, 668-687.
11. Murakami Y., Sakae C., Ichimaru K., Three
Dimensional Fracture Mechanics Analysis f Pit
Formation Mechanism under Lubricated Rolling-
Sliding Contact Loadings, ASLE Trans., Vol. 37,
1994, 445-454.
12. Keer L.M., Bryant M.D., A Pitting Model for Rolling
Contact Fatigue, ASME J. Lubrication Technology,
1983, Vol. 105, 198-205.
13. Miller G.R., Keer L.M., Cheng H.S., On the
Mechanics of Fatigue Crack Growth Due to Contact
Loading, Proc. Roy. Soc., London, Ser. A, A397,
1985, 197-209.
14. Hanson, M. T., and Keer, L. M., 1992, "An Analytical
Life Prediction Model for the Crack Propagation in
Contact Fatigue Failure," ASLE Trans., Vol. 35, pp.
451-461
15. Kuo, C. H., and Keer, L. M., Bujold M.P., "Effects of
Multiple Cracking on Crack Growth and Coalescence
in Contact Fatigue," Journal of Tribology, Vol. 119,
1997, pp. 385-390.
16. Polonsky I.A., Keer L.M., Numerical Analysis of the
Effect of Coating Microstructure on Three-
Dimensional Crack Propagation in the Coating under
Rolling Contact Fatigue Conditions, Trans. ASME, J.
Tribology, Vol. 124, 2002, 14-19.
17. Kim T.H., Olver A.V., Pearson P.K., Fatigue and
Fracture Mechanisms in Large Rolling Element
Bearings, Tribology Trans., Vol. 44, 2001, 4, 583-
590.
18. Tsushima N., Rolling Contact Fatigue and Fracture
Toughness of Rolling Element Bearing Steels, JSME
Int. J., Ser C, Vol. 36, 1993, 1-8.
19. Otsuka A., Sugawara H., Shomura M., A Test
Method for Mode II Fatigue Crack Growth Relating to
a Model for Rolling Contact Fatigue, Fatigue
Fracture Engng. Mater. Struct., Vol. 19, 1996, 1265-
1275.
20. Glodez S., Flasker J., Ren Z., A New Model for the
Numerical Determination of Pitting Resistance of ear
Teeth Flanks, Fracture Engng. Mater. Struct., Vol.
20, 1997, 71-83.
21. Smith, J. O., and Liu, C. K., 1953, "Stresses Due to
Tangential and Normal Loads on an Elastic Solid
with Applications to some Contact Problems," ASME
Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 32, pp. 157-166.
22. Zhu D., and Cheng H.S., 1989, An Analysis and
Computational Procedure for EHL Film Thickness,
Friction and Flash Temperature in Line and Point
Contacts, Tribology Transactions, Vol. 32, 3, 364-
370.
23. Broek D., 1991, Elementary Engineering Fracture
Mechanics, fifth printing, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht, page 8-9.
24. Lin H., Binoniemi R.R., Fett G.A., 2005, Contact
fatigue tests and contact fatigue life analysis, SAE
paper 2005-01-0795.
FIGURES
Rolling Direction
Hertzian Load
p
f*p 2c
e
x3
x2
x
1
o1
o2
o
n
Figure 1. The three-dimensional contact fatigue model,
where rolling and sliding contact of gear teeth is
simulated by a Hertzian contact loading moving across
the surface of an elastic half-space.
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
Figure 2. A photo of the two-rollers contact fatigue test
machine.
Figure 3. Typical macro pitting on a failed test roller, pit
size is about 3 mm by 3 mm.
Figure 4. Backscatter electron image of typical IGO at
the carburized surface, nital etch.
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
10
9
0
20
40
60
80
100
I
n
i
t
i
a
l
C
r
a
c
k
L
e
n
g
t
h
(
m
i
c
r
o
n
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
Herzt Stress=2.7 GPa
As carburized RS
COEF=-0.06
COEF=-0.12
Figure 5. Initial crack size vs. contact fatigue life, at Hertz
stress 2.7 GPa (390 ksi), negative friction, and 30
degree crack angle, as carburized residual stress.
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
Figure 6. A schematic plot shows the direction of friction
and its effect on crack opening.
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.6
H
e
r
t
z
i
a
n
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
G
P
a
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
Friction Coefficient
- 0.06
- 0.09
- 0.12
Figure 7. Hertz stress vs. contact fatigue life, effect of
friction coefficient, initial crack radius = 25 micron (0.001
inch), as carburized residual stress, uniform oil pressure.
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
10
9
10
10
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
H
e
r
t
z
i
a
n
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
G
P
a
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
Friction Coefficient
-0.06
-0.09
-0.12
Figure 8. Hertz stress vs. contact fatigue life, effect of
friction coefficient, initial crack radius = 13 micron
(0.0005 inch), as carburized residual stress, uniform oil
pressure.
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.6
H
e
r
t
z
i
a
n
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
G
P
a
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
COEF= -0.09
Initial Crack Length
13 micron
25 micron
Figure 9. Hertz stress vs. contact fatigue life, effect of
initial crack length, friction coefficient=-0.09, as
carburized residual stress, uniform oil pressure.
Compressive
Tensile
Faster
Slower
Traction
Forces
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
10
9
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.6
H
e
r
t
z
i
a
n
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
G
P
a
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
COEF = -0.09
Initial Crack length 25 micron
No residual stress
As carburized RS
Shot peened RS
Figure 10. Effect of Residual stress on contact fatigue
life, initial crack radius 25 micron (0.001 inch), friction
coefficient=-0.09, uniform oil pressure
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
10
8
10
9
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.6
H
e
r
t
z
i
a
n
S
t
r
e
s
s
(
G
P
a
)
Contact Fatigue Life (cycles)
Initial crack length=25 micron
COEF = -0.12
No residual stress
As carburized RS
Shot peened RS

Figure 11. Effect of Residual stress on contact fatigue
life, initial crack radius: 25 micron (0.001 inch), friction
coefficient=-0.12, uniform oil pressure
TABLES
Table 1. Two-rollers contact fatigue test results
GROUP #1 #2 #3
Test roller
Ra (micron)
1.7 1.0 0.05
Test Roller
Rz (micron)
9.1 6.8 0.90
Rollers
Composite
Rq (micron)
2.3 1.5 0.11
Hertzian
Stress
(GPa)
2.7 2.7 2.7
The
Lambda
Ratio
0.15 0.21 3.0
Friction
Coefficient
- 0.116 - 0.087 - 0.068
Test Life
(million
cycles)
0.126,
0.228,
0.252
1.64, 2.38,
2.40
8.96, 14.52,
30*
Average
Test Life
(million
cycles)
0.202 2.14 17.8
* test was stopped at 30 million cycles without pitting
Table 2. Comparison of contact fatigue life, FATIG3D
Calculations vs. Test Data
FRICTION
COEFFICIENT
FATIG3D LIFE
(MILLION
CYCLES)
AVE TEST LIFE
(MILLION
CYCLES)
-0.116 0.42 0.202
-0.087 1.57 2.14
-0.068 4.92 17.8
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
Table 3. Contact Fatigue Life (million cycles) vs. friction
coeffcient, 25 micron crack, 2.7 GPa Hertz Stress
COEF UNIFORM
PRESSURE
LINEAR
PRESSURE
TEST DATA
-0.125 0.29 no crack growth No data
-0.116 0.42 No growth 0.202
-0.087 1.57 No growth 2.14
-0.068 4.92 No growth 17.8
-0.050 29 No growth No data
Table 4. Crack face friction effect on contact fatigue life
(million cycles), 25 micron crack, 2.7 GPa Hertz Stress,
uniform oil pressure
COEF WITH CRACK FACE
FRICTION
NO CRACK FACE
FRICTION
-0.125 0.29 0.25
-0.116 0.42 0.36
-0.087 1.57 1.36
-0.068 4.92 3.68
-0.050 29 12
Table 5. Effect of Initial Crack Length on Contact
Fatigue Life with two friction coefficients, Hertz
Stress=2.7 GPa
INITIAL CRACK
LENGTH (MICRON)
LIFE N @
COEF=-0.06
LIFE N @
COEF=-0.12
102 15800 7790
51 0.59 million 67200
38 2.45 million 0.138 million
25 10.8 million 0.34 million
13 67.5 million 1 million
6.4 400 million 27 million
Table 6. Contact Fatigue Life under 2.7 GPa, as
carburized RS, uniform oil pressure, crack angle=-30
degree
INITIAL CRACK
LENGTH (MICRON)
LIFE N@
COEF=- 0.12
LIFE N@
COEF=+ 0.12
102 7790 29000
51 67200 No crack growth
Table 7. Contact Fatigue Life with crack length=25
micron, as carburized RS, uniform oil pressure, rack
angle=-30 degree
HERTZ STRESS
(GPA)
LIFE N @
COEF=-0.09
LIFE N @
COEF =+0.09
3.41 360,000 No crack growth
3.12 600,000 No growth
2.7 1.24 million No growth
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM
APPENDIX
TYPICAL RESIDUAL STRESS AFTER
CARBURIZING, QUENCH AND TEMPERING
DEPTH (MM) RESIDUAL STRESS (MPA)
0.0 -138
0.0254 -172
0.0508 -138
0.102 -103
0.152 -69
0.254 -35
TYPICAL RESIDUAL STRESS AFTER SHOT
PEENING
DEPTH (MM) RESIDUAL STRESS (MPA)
0.0 -414
0.0254 -552
0.0508 -621
0.076 -414
0.102 -241
0.127 -241
0.254 -241
Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Wednesday, January 22, 2014 06:49:24 AM