Ming-Jong Wang

Associate Professor
e-mail: wang4618@must.edu.tw
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Minghsin University of Science and Technology,
Hsinfeng, Hsinchu County, Taiwan 304 ROC
A New Photoelastic Investigation
of the Dynamic Bending Stress of
Spur Gears
In this paper, the maximum tensile bending stress (MTBS) and the critical point in the root
llet of spur gear tooth during transmission are determined by a digital photoelastic
system involving real time imaging. The behavioral characteristics of the bending stresses
of the gear tooth are analyzed at different rotation speeds, transmitted torques, and
contact points. Then, the dynamic effects, the various critical points and the maximum
tensile bending stresses are compared experimentally and theoretically, and discussed.
Finally, the best approaches for determining the maximum bending stress and its position
in the root llet of spur gear tooth are recommended. DOI: 10.1115/1.1563636
1 Introduction
Gears have long been widely used in machines of all kinds,
with the increasing requirement in recent times for smaller and
lighter designs. Accurately assessing stresses in gear teeth, espe-
cially in the dynamic state is essential. The complexity of gear
proles and the changing load during any loading cycle add to the
problems of determining both maximum bending stress and maxi-
mum contact stress. Because these stresses differ so greatly in
nature, they deserve to be considered separately. The rst to for-
mulate the calculation of the bending strength of gear teeth was
Lewis 1 in 1893. He saw a tooth in terms of a cantilever beam
and conceived the idea of inscribing a parabola of uniform
strength inside it. The most critically stressed position, i.e., the
critical point, on the tooth is located at the point of tangency of the
tooth prole with a parabola inscribed in the tooth prole. Never-
theless, the theory of exure applies only to members of constant
cross-section, and is therefore not directly applicable to determin-
ing stresses in a gear tooth. Niemann 2 and Hofer 3 have
different opinions about the critical point. However, all the above-
mentioned researchers calculated their maximum bending stresses
without considering stress concentration at the root llet. Many
decades ago, Dolan and Brohamer 4 and Allison and Hearn 5
all conducted photoelastic experiments in the static state, but with
the limited technology then available, their experimental models,
including the specimens and the loading conditions, were imprac-
tical and far removed from the real state of a gear in transmission.
Advances and renements in modern gear design call for more
accurate information about the magnitude and the position of the
maximum bending stress in the root llet of the gear tooth and for
modern technology to answer the question. In this paper a digital
photoelastic system with a real time image taking function 6 is
presented to investigate just such stress on spur gear teeth in trans-
mission. The gear specimen and experimental setup simulate a
real gear mechanism. In a dynamic experiment, the dynamic effect
must be considered. When a pair of gears is driven at a given
speed, it is certain that a dynamic load, i.e., an internally gener-
ated gear tooth load due to transmission error, exerts itself. Deter-
mining the dynamic load between gear teeth presents a difcult
problem for the designer. The general conclusion derived from
tests on the dynamic load of spur gear tooth is that exact calcula-
tion is almost impossible. The aim of these experiments is to
determine the maximum tensile stresses MTBS and critical point
in the root llet of the gear tooth. The behavioral characteristics of
gear tooth bending stresses are also compared with one another at
different rotation speeds, transmitted torques, and contact points.
Then, the dynamic effect, different critical point and maximum
tensile bending stress are discussed and compared experimentally
and theoretically. Finally, the best approaches for determining the
maximum bending stress and its position in the root llet of spur
gear teeth are recommended.
2 Determining the Critical Point and the MTBS
During operation, the teeth of two gears remain in contact with
each other during the interval from the points at which the two
addendum circles cross the line of action. For smooth and con-
tinuous operation, that interval must be longer than 1.4 base
pitches. The Lewis equation implies that the teeth do not share the
load and that the greatest force is exerted at the tip of the tooth.
But to achieve a quality gearset, the contact ratio should be some-
what greater than unity, which is 1.58 in this paper. If, in fact, the
gears are cut with sufcient accuracy, the tip-load condition is
none the worse, because in this condition another pair of teeth will
be in contact. Examination of run-in teeth reveals that the heaviest
loads occur near the middle of the teeth carrying the full load, that
is, at a point where another pair of teeth is on the verge of coming
into contact. When a single tooth carries the full load, it has been
generally accepted that the MTBS occurs at the highest point of
the single-tooth contact HPSTC. If the pinion drives, the HPSTC
is one base pitch away from the rst point of contact. A gear tooth
is similarly a cantilever beam. At the base of the beam there is
tensile stress on the loaded side and compressive stress on the
opposite side. When gear teeth break, they usually fail by a crack
at the base of the tooth on the tensile-stress side. So, the focus of
this investigation is only on the MTBS of a single-tooth contact.
2.1 Calculation of Dynamic Load. Dynamic load must be
determined prior to calculating the MTBS for the spur gear tooth
in transmission, but its complex nature has made accurate deter-
mination of it very difcult even to the present moment. The
literature on gear dynamics and dynamic modeling of gear system
is extensive 7. With the wide range of methods available, it
would be impossible to check every mathematical calculation for
the experimental data in this paper. However, the Buckingham 8
and AGMA 9 methods, which are both widely published, are
adopted as two practical and representative means of calculating
dynamic load. The Buckingham calculation is as follows:
M
M
1
M
2
M
1
M
2
(1)
f
1

tan 1cos
150
2
1
R
1

1
R
2

MV
2
(2)
Contributed by the Power Transmission and Gearing Committee for publication in
the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received July 2001. Associate
Editor: R. F. Handschah.
Copyright 2003 by ASME Journal of Mechanical Design JUNE 2003, Vol. 125 365
d9.0

W
t
b

1
E
1

1
E
2

(3)
f
2
W
t
e
d

(4)
f
a

f
1
f
2
f
1
f
2
(5)
F
d
f
a
2f
2
f
a
(6)
The dynamic factor K
v
used by AGMA relates the total tooth
load, including the internal dynamic effects, to the transmitted
tangential tooth load.
K
v

F
d
W
t
W
t
(7)
K
v
can be determined by the AGMA standard 9 or by the
Buckingham dynamic load in this paper.
2.2 Determining the Critical Point. The AGMA technical
paper 10 refers to four methods of determining the critical points
in the root llet of a gear tooth. Three of the points are commonly
associated with the slope angle of the root llet. The Lewis for-
mula has already been mentioned above. Niemann proposes mak-
ing a line from the intersection of the action line of the applied
force and the radial centerline of the teeth, i.e., tangential to the
tooth prole at the root llet, and treating that tangential point as
a critical point. On the other hand, the Hofer method of calculat-
ing tooth strength takes the tangency point of a 30-degree angle as
the critical point in the root llet. The Colbourne point is dened
as where the stress function becomes maximal. Equations formu-
lated to nd these four critical points are formed into nonlinear
one-variable equations and to solve these, the Newton-Raphson
numerical iteration method appears to be best suited 10. Once
the critical points are solved, they can be used to draw lines or
parabola on photoelastic images for image processing.
2.3 Formulas for the Bending Stress. The original Lewis
formula was devised for the transverse component of the applied
load. In Fig. 1, it is apparent that the load normal to the tooth
surface has a tangential and a radial component. The radial com-
ponent causes a small compressive stress across the root of the
gear tooth. This causes the tensile stress to decrease by a small
amount, and the compressive stress on the opposite side of the
tooth to increase by a slight amount. In most materials, a tensile
stress is more damaging than a slightly higher compressive stress.
The tensile stress at the llet of this tooth is

6W
t
h
t
2
b

W
r
tb
(8)
To provide more scope for comparison, two popular methods of
estimating bending stresses, namely, Dolans concentration factor
and the AGMA equation for bending stress in gear teeth are used.
Dolans empirical equation 4 is
K
D
0.18

t
r

0.15

t
h

0.45
(9)
and the AGMA equation 9 is

F
W
t
K
o
K
v
K
s
1
bm
K
H
Y
J
(10)
3 Specimens and Experimental Setup
3.1 Specimen. Two full-depth spur gears have 20 and 25
teeth, 20 deg pressure angle, the module m6. AGMA quality
No. 10. Both gear specimens, 5.8 mm in face width, are made of
photoelastic material PSM-1 from Measurements Group Co.,
USA. The specimens were cooled in vast oil ow to prevent re-
sidual stresses during the cutting process.
3.2 Gear Mechanism. The said two gears operated on a
center distance 135 mm. An AC motor and a V-belt coupled with
two equal-sized pulleys were used to drive the gear mechanism.
The pinion was connected to the drive shaft of the motor. The
dynamometer in the mechanism provided the required load when
the gear rotated. The entire experiment mechanism is shown in
Fig. 2.
3.3 The Digital Photoelastic System With Function of Real
Time Image Taking. As shown in Fig. 3, the digital photoelas-
tic system provided with a Synchronous Trigger and Continuous
Image Taking was used to take real time photoelastic images of
the gear teeth in transmission. It is similar to the former system
6 except for the following two new parts:
(a) CCD Camera
The replacement CCD camera with 10351320 resolution,
manufactured by Xillix Co., Canada, provides enhanced image
resolution,
(b) Gated Intensier
The gated intensier type VS3-1845, Video Scope Co., USA
discharges the time exposure function for the CCD camera to
Fig. 1 Critical point and applied force on a gear tooth Fig. 2 Photograph of the gear mechanism
366 Vol. 125, JUNE 2003 Transactions of the ASME
which it is attached. It amplies the light intensity and controls the
light gated time, capturing clear images of fast-moving objects.
The gated time can reach 62.5 ns.
4 Experimental Procedures
4.1 Installation of Experimental Setup. To ensure steady
performance and avoid abnormal vibration, a gear drive must be
rigidly supported and the shafts accurately aligned. The following
describes the minimum precautions required to achieve this goal.
Shaft mounted drives are mounted as close to the driven equip-
ment bearing support as possible to minimize bearing loads due to
overhung load. The motor is aligned to the input shaft, using
shims under the feet to provide support, and then bolted to its
foundation. To ensure continuous accuracy during operations, the
gearing must be sustained in accurate alignment and adequately
lubricated.
4.2 Capturing Photoelastic Images. Static images are far
easier to take than dynamic ones. So, before attempting dynamic
image taking, the experimental setup was installed and the digital
photoelastic system calibrated as if in preparation for taking static
images. The calibration of the system 11 is to establish the rela-
tionship between the gray level Z and fringe order N, which is
N
1

sin
1

Z
Z
max

1/2

(11)
where Z
max
is the maximum response of the system and is the
slope of the camera sensitivity curve. A set of N and Z is obtained
by employing the Tardy compensation and least square methods
on an unloaded specimen. Then, the material fringe value of the
test specimen is determined. The real time image taking technique
is similar to that in the authors former research 6. The key
factors to ensuring success with all the required images are the
exact timing between images and the positioning of both the trig-
ger sensor and the marker for the trigger. First, the photoelectric
sensor is properly positioned and then the marker a black sticker
placed on the gear shaft. Image taking begins on receipt of the
trigger signal under software control. If the rst image is triggered
too early or too late, the position of the marker is adjusted accord-
ingly. Once the markers position is decided, the timing between
subsequent images is set. To give the camera enough time, all
images but the rst are taken at the next turn of the pinion. To
vary the pinions rotation speed, the adjustment and regulation is
in accordance with the above procedures.
4.3 Experimental Determination of MTBS and Critical
Point. Aseries of computer programs based on the routine pack-
age residing and previous self-developed programs 12 on the
image analysis system were developed to determine the experi-
mental MTBS and the critical point. With image processing, edge
detection is the rst step in locating the contact point and the
critical point. An upper and/or lower threshold value is introduced
into the image-processing system so that the gray levels above
and/or below the threshold are removed throughout the image.
Because the area around the gear specimen is much darker than
the gear specimen itself, the thresholding operation can easily
distinguish between them. The Laplacian edge enhancement tech-
nique produces sharper edge denition than most other tech-
niques. Edge enhancement processes reduce an image into its
edge. The Laplacian lter operation is then used to distinguish the
prole of the specimen from the thresholded image. After the
operation, a prole of one-pixel width is obtained. Coordinates of
the prole are accordingly recorded for later use. To obtain an
accurate prole of a spur gear, a numerical iteration program,
based on the involute function, using the prole coordinates ex-
tracted from the previous processed images, is run to modify the
prole of the spur gear until it coincides with the actual prole of
the gear specimen. This procedure for detecting the gear prole
must be performed only once on every image. According to two-
dimensional photoelastic theory, the difference of in-plane princi-
pal stresses is

Nf

b
(12)
Along the free boundary of the tooth llet, the principal stress
tangential to the boundary,
E
, i.e., the tensile bending stress, is

Nf

b
(13)
It is immediately apparent from Eq. 13 that the maximum tensile
bending stress can be determined if the maximum fringe order N
can be measured. The maximum tensile bending stress at the tooth
llet is located at the brightest point, or the darkest point on the
boundary surrounded by a dark band nearest to the boundary. For
all the experiments performed, the maximum fringe orders on the
tooth llet are usually the fractional fringe orders, and to classify
the orders of the fringes, the distinction of dark and bright zones
in the photoelastic fringes near the boundary is the rst thing to be
considered by a gray level scanning. The end points of the zone
where the maximum fringe orders occurred, intersecting with the
boundary of the tooth llet, were located on the boundary. About
ten boundary points with equal arc length between the endpoints
were chosen. The corresponding fringe order of the boundary
point was determined by converting the measured value of the
gray level into a fringe order by Eq. 11. The same procedure
was repeated for the other boundary points to obtain their fringe
orders. Then, the magnitude and position of the maximum bound-
ary fringe order was then determined by interpolating the fringe
orders and coordinates of the boundary points used, respectively.
The interpolation scheme used was a piecewise cubic-spline
routine.
5 Results and Discussions
The investigation in this paper concentrated on photoelastic im-
aging of the pinion because this is the part more apt to fail. The
images of the gear teeth were all taken in the dark eld. Dynamic
images of such as transmitted torque, contact position, and rota-
tion speed proved very difcult to secure. To ensure covering all
the conditions occurring during the gear meshing process for later
analysis, over three thousand images on a trial and error basis.
Some were stained by lubricant grease. All had the pinion located
on the right hand side and rotating clockwise. In most cases,
analysis by the image processing method was not needed. For
many others, a simple visual examination of the unprocessed im-
age yielded interesting information. The images in Fig. 4 clearly
show that the single-tooth contact has greater MTBS than the
double teeth contact. So, if because of double teeth contact, the tip
Fig. 3 Digital photoelastic system with function of real time
image taking
Journal of Mechanical Design JUNE 2003, Vol. 125 367
Fig. 4 Photograph of photoelastic images for a gear-meshing cycle, n486 rpm and
T250 N-cm
Fig. 5 Photoelastic images for single-tooth contact and different torques in the static state
368 Vol. 125, JUNE 2003 Transactions of the ASME
load appeared not be the worst load, then the point for experimen-
tal investigation should be the single-tooth contact. Figure 5
shows images of different torques for single-tooth contact in the
static state. Apparently, the fringe orders at the tooth llets in-
crease as the torque increases. The static state images are clearer
than the dynamic state images. The images in Fig. 6 were taken at
different speeds and T250 N-cm, and show the dynamic effect
on the gear teeth. The dynamic load comes into effect as the fringe
orders at the tooth llets increase when the rotation speed in-
creases. Only representative images selected for further investiga-
tion were analyzed by image processing. Figure 7 shows a typical
image of various dened critical points being determined by the
image processing. The Lewis stresses are much lower than the
observed experimental MTBS because the concentrations of
stresses are invariably developed at the llets, and their stress
raising effect is not considered in the Lewis equation. The HPSTC
is one base pitch away from the rst point of contact. The contact
point of single-tooth contact varied between 0.58 and 1.0 base
pitch away from the rst point of contact in this experiment. The
location of contact point divided by the base pitch for non-
dimensionalization is used as the abscissa. Figures 8 and 9 show
that MTBS is increased as the contact point is moved toward
HPSTC in both the static and dynamic states. Even in the experi-
mental conditions here, when the contact point is at the same
location, the MTBS is much greater than Dolans MTBS. The
authors experimental MTBS is from 18 to 31 percent greater than
Dolans.
There is little change in the magnitude of MTBS at low rotation
speed. The dynamic load comes into effect obviously when the
rotation speed increases to around one thousand rpm. Figure 10
shows that the MTBS at 950 rpm is 12% higher than the MTBS at
177 rpm. The gure also compares the authors experimental
MTBS with that of both AGMA and Buckingham. The difference
between AGMA and Buckingham MTBS is the calculation of dy-
namic load based on the different approaches. Equation 6, Buck-
Fig. 6 Photoelastic images for single-tooth contact, different speeds and T250 N-cm
Fig. 7 Typical image of determining various dened critical
points by image processing
Fig. 8 Variation of MTBS with location of contact point for T
200 N-cm in the static state
Journal of Mechanical Design JUNE 2003, Vol. 125 369
inghams calculation of dynamic load, is substituted for Eq. 7 to
determine K
v
and AGMA K
v
is determined by the AGMA stan-
dard 9 but Eq. 10 is still used for both to calculate MTBS. All
the factors in Eq. 10 may be treated as a unity except K
v
and Y
J
13 because the experimental setup and specimens are well de-
signed, manufactured and assembled. The AGMA MTBS is most
close to the authors experimental MTBS in all three bending
stresses. The other two are Dolan and Buckingham bending
stresses. Buckinghams MTBS is far greater than that of AGMA
and the MTBS in the authors experiment due to an overestima-
tion of the dynamic load. The experimental data in Fig. 11 indi-
cate that the MTBS increases considerably as the transmitted
torque increases. The transmitted torque is found to have a pri-
mary effect on the magnitude of MTBS compared with the other
two factors of rotation speed and contact point. The general con-
clusion to be drawn from test work on dynamic load is that exact
calculation is nearly impossible. Both Figs. 10 and 11 show that
the difference between the authors experimental MTBS and that
of AGMA is below 10% and that the authors experimental MTBS
is lower than that of AGMA. For a complicated dynamic problem,
the accuracy with which AGMA MTBS ts the authors experi-
mental data is quite satisfactory.
For convenient comparison of the positions of the four critical
points, the intersection of the action line of the applied force and
the radial centerline of the tooth serves as the common base point,
i.e., the vertex of the Lewis parabola shown in Fig. 1. The angle
between the centerline of the tooth and the line made from the
common base point to each critical point is dened as the position
of the critical point. The smaller the angle, the closer the MTBS is
to the gear blank. The numerical method combined image pro-
cessing technique was used to locate the theoretically weakest
section for each tooth and for each contact point load position.
An examination of Figs. 1215 shows that the position of the
MTBS obtained from the photoelastic analysis of the pinion speci-
men is not located at the weakest section as dened by Lewis, but
in general occurs at a point lower closer to the gear blank on the
llet contour. The AGMA technical paper 10 concluded that the
Lewis point was the highest farthest from the gear blank of the
four critical points, i.e., the Hofer, Lewis, Niemann and Colbourne
points, and that the Colbourne point was presumed best for deter-
mining the critical point. Nevertheless, the stress function used to
determine the Colbourne point, which is still based on a simple
cantilever stress analysis, is impractical for an actual gear. The
Lewis and Colbourne points always lie close to each other, ac-
cording both to the results in the AGMA paper and to the authors
Fig. 9 Variation of MTBS with location of contact point for n
177 rpm and T250 N-cm
Fig. 10 Variation of MTBS with rotation speed for HPSTC and
T250 N-cm
Fig. 11 Variation of MTBS with transmitted torque for HPSTC
and n950 rpm
Fig. 12 Variation of position of MTBS with location of contact
point for T200 N-cm in the static state
Fig. 13 Variation of position of MTBS with location of contact
point for n177 rpm and T250 N-cm
370 Vol. 125, JUNE 2003 Transactions of the ASME
calculation. Therefore, the Colbourne point is not included in the
gures featured in this paper. Figures 1215 also show that the
Niemann point is closest to the experimental point and that the
difference in the position between the two points is within 1%.
There is no doubt that Niemann is the best of the four methods for
determining the critical point.
It is notable in Figs. 1213 that as the load position moved
toward the HPSTC of a tooth, the MTBS increased but moved
position toward the root llet. The trend was the same as in the
Dolan experiments. Figure 14 shows no evidence for the rotation
speed affecting the position of the MTBS, because any change in
the position of the MTBS produced by changing the rotation
speeds of the pinion is quite small. Figure 15 shows that an in-
crease in the magnitude of load may cause the position of the
MTBS to move slightly higher away from the root. In this experi-
ment, the only factor inuencing the position of the MTBS is the
location of the contact point during gear meshing.
6 Conclusions
The experimental MTBS for every contact point during the pro-
cess of gear meshing can be determined owing to the establish-
ment of this self-developed system in this paper. No new approach
for determining the magnitude of the MTBS or the critical point in
the root llet is required, because the experimental data can be
tted by the existing methods. The AGMA standard is the most
satisfactory for determining the magnitude of MTBS according to
the experimental results in this paper, but not for determining the
critical point. The Niemanns critical point is the most accurate for
these experimental results. Although the AGMA and Niemann ap-
proaches have been around for years, this is the rst time that their
accuracy for the dynamic bending stress problem of a spur gear
tooth in the root llet by a photoelastic method has been proven.
The methods that have been tested in these experiments may be
condently employed by gear designers or manufacturers to de-
termine the magnitude of MTBS and the critical point for spur
gear teeth in transmission.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by the National Science
Council Grant No. NSC-87-2212-E-159-003 of the Republic of
China. The author wishes to thank Professor Wei-Chung Wang of
National Tsing Hua University for the loan of equipment.
Nomenclature
C the common base point used to dene the position of
MTBS
E
1
modulus of elasticity of pinion
E
2
modulus of elasticity of gear
F
d
dynamic load
K
D
Dolans concentration factor
K
H
load distribution factor
K
o
overload factor
K
s
size factor
M effective mass inuence at pitch line of gears
M
1
effective mass acting at pitch line of pinion
M
2
effective mass acting at pitch line of gear
N fringe order
R
1
pitch radius of pinion
R
2
pitch radius of gear
T transmitted torque
V pitch-line velocity of gears
W
t
applied tangential force
W
r
applied radial force
Y
J
geometry factor
b face width of gears
d deformation of teeth at pitch line under applied load
W
t
e measured error in action of gears
f
1
force required to accelerate the masses as rigid bod-
ies
f
2
force required to deform teeth amount of effective
error
f
a
acceleration load on gear teeth
f

material fringe value

m module
n rotation speed
h height of load position above the weakest section
r radius of circular llet
t thickness of tooth at Lewis weakest section
pressure angle
angle dening the position of MTBS
Lewis computed combined stress at HPSTC

E
experimental maximum tensile bending stress

F
AGMA bending stress at HPSTC

1
in-plane principal stress

2
in-plane principal stress
References
1 Lewis, W., 1893, Investigation of the Strength of Gear Teeth, Proc. Engrs
Club Phila., 10, pp. 1623.
2 Niemann, G., 1978, Machine Element Design and Calculation in Mechanical
Engineering, Vol. II, Gears, Translated by K. Lakshminarayana et al.,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, New York.
3 DIN 3990, 1972, Calculation of Load Capacity of Spur, Helical and Bevel
Gears, Deutsche Norm., Berlin.
4 Dolan, T. J., and Broghamer, E. L., 1942, A Photoelastic Study of the
Stresses in Gear Tooth Fillet, University of Illinois Bull. 335.
5 Allison, I. M., and Hearn, E. J., 1980, A New Look at the Bending Strength
of Gear Teeth, Exp. Mech., pp. 217226.
6 Wang, M. J., and Wang, W. C., 1995, Investigation of Contact Stresses of a
Rotating Cam by a Digital Photoelastic Method, Strain J. Brit. Soc. Strain
Measurement, 311, pp. 1724.
Fig. 14 Variation of position of MTBS with rotation speed for
HPSTC and T250 N-cm
Fig. 15 Variation of position of MTBS with transmitted torque
for HPSTC and n950 rpm
Journal of Mechanical Design JUNE 2003, Vol. 125 371
7 O

zguven, H. N., and Houser, D. R., 1988, Mathematical Models Used in

Gear Dynamics-A Review, Sound Vib., 1213, pp. 383411.
8 Buckingham, E., 1949, Analytical Mechanics of Gears, McGraw-Hill Book
Company, New York.
9 AGMA 2101-C95, 1995, Fundamental Rating Factors and Calculation Meth-
ods for Involute Spur and Helical Gear Teeth, American Gear Manufacturers
Association, Alexandria, Virginia.
10 AGMA 94FTMS1, 1997, Computer-Aided Numerical Determination of
Hofer, Lewis, Niemann and Colboune Points, American Gear Manufacturers
Association, Alexandria, Virginia.
11 Wang, W. C., and Chen, T. L., 1989, Half-fringe Photoelastic Determination
of Opening Mode Stress Intensity Factor for Edge Cracked Strips, Eng. Fract.
Mech., 32, pp. 111122.
12 Wang, M. J., and Wang, W. C., 1994, Transient Thermal Stress Analysis of a
Near-edge Elliptical Defect in a Semi-innite Plate Subjected to a Moving
Heat Source, Press. Vessels & Piping, 57, pp. 99110.
13 AGMA 908-B89, 1997, Geometry Factors for Determining the Pitting Resis-
tance and Bending Strength of Involute Spur, Helical and Herringbone Gear
Teeth, American Gear Manufacturers Association, Alexandria, Virginia.
372 Vol. 125, JUNE 2003 Transactions of the ASME