This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

com

Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 www.elsevier.com/locate/engfracmech

**Investigation of crack propagation scatter in a gear tooth’s root
**

ˇ ˇ ˇ Stanislav Pehan, Janez Kramberger, Joze Flasker, Bostjan Zafosnik ˇ

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maribor, Smetanova 17, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia Received 9 May 2006; received in revised form 27 December 2006; accepted 3 April 2007 Available online 14 April 2007

*

Abstract This paper describes the problem of determining crack initiation location and its inﬂuence on crack propagation in a gear tooth’s root. Three diﬀerent load positions on the gear tooth’s ﬂank were considered for this investigation of crack initiation and propagation. A special test device was used for the single tooth test. It can be concluded from the measurements that a crack can be initiated at very diﬀerent locations in a tooth’s root and then propagate along its own paths. A numerical investigation into a crack initiation’s position and its inﬂuences on its propagation were carried out within the framework of linear fracture mechanics. The inﬂuence of a tooth’s load position, the geometry of the tooth’s root, and the inﬂuence of non-parallel load distribution on the tooth’s ﬂank were considered when investigating the crack initiation’s position. Results show that linear fracture mechanics can be used for determining crack propagation, if better initial conditions for crack initiation are considered. Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Experimental crack propagation; Numerical crack propagation; Linear elastic fracture mechanics; Gear tooth root

1. Introduction The service life of a truck’s gearbox exceeds one and a half million kilometers and, consequently, each component needs to be reliably designed. The most exposed element of the gearbox is the gear itself because it is subjected to very high speciﬁc load. A tooth’s ﬂank is loaded by high contact pressure, which rolls and slides over the surface. The tooth’s root is loaded by extremely high bending. The tooth’s load changes continually, even for constant outer torque, and the load is repeated during each engagement (or meshing) phase. The basic characteristic of two gear meshing is contact load, which moves along a tooth’s ﬂank. Lewicki [1] highlighted the importance of the contact area on a tooth’s ﬂank and its inﬂuences on both crack appearance and propagation. During a tooth’s contact that repeatedly occurs between gear rotations the contact area moves over the tooth’s ﬂank from one extreme point to another. The subject in this paper is a spur gear, which is the simplest type of gear where the contact area moves from the tooth’s root to the tooth’s head. It is

*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +386 2 220 7704; fax: +386 2 220 7794. ˇ E-mail address: bostjan.zafosnik@uni-mb.si (B. Zafosnik).

0013-7944/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.04.005

The most problematic region is a tooth’s root. The internal magnitude of the load depends on the number of teeth in engagement and from the state of engagement. the highest stresses in the tooth’s root are noticed when loading acts in the outer point of single engagement [2]. The overloading of a tooth’s root is much more dangerous than overloading of its ﬂank. The surface layer becomes very problematic and critical due to its brittleness. The surface layer is hard. The pitting failure occurs either when the surface has deteriorated so much that the component no longer functions as designed. such a tooth is sensitive to bending stress. and high accuracy. a crack could initiate in a tooth’s root. or give better geometrical gear accuracy. the gear is thermally treated in order to obtain a ﬁnal high-strength surface material. The core material remains tough and is able to carry the bending load. unfortunately. After manufacturing the teeth using a rotary cutter. It seems to be perfect but. where bending stresses are the highest. gears are frequently treated to grinding. in order to raise the quality. Pehan et al. The described production procedure ensures a perfectly hard surface. in order to withstand rolling-sliding contact loading. 16MnCr5 used in this paper). In the case of the spur gear. The position and magnitude of load on a gear tooth’s ﬂank causes stresses of diﬀerent magnitude on the gear ﬂank directly and on the tooth’s root indirectly. The disadvantage is that thermal treating can cause diﬀerent kinds of distortion. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1267 Nomenclature acent a a0 ac B m r rc E KI KII KIII KIc Kr T x z Da m h h rij rY rhh centre distance crack length initial crack length critical crack length tooth width modulus distance from crack tip critical distance Young’s modulus mode I stress intensity factor mode II stress intensity factor mode III stress intensity factor plain strain fracture toughness speciﬁc circumferential stress intensity factor T-stress addendum modiﬁcation coeﬃcient number of teeth crack extension Poison’s ratio polar angle crack propagation angle stress components yield stress tangential stress desirable that the tooth’s ﬂank edges are not in contact because of the danger of local overloading. In the automotive industry. a tough core. . If the bending stresses exceed the local strength of the material. Slowly but certainly it would lead to a fatal failure of the whole gear pair. During gear meshing the magnitude of the load ﬂuctuates and even the external load torque is perfectly stable. gears are usually made from surface hardened or case-hardened steels (e. The surface can be scratched and with other defects can initiate cracks.S. Locally overstressing could easily lead to crack initiation and propagation. or when the damage becomes severe enough to lead to complete failure. Consequently.g. This hard surface is extended over the gears total area.

Fig. the load (list of torques and densities) was measured on the propeller shaft and then recalculated in order to represent those conditions that are characteristic of the observed gear pair. deep into the core material. The reference proﬁle had an engagement angle of 24° which is bigger than the most common one of 20°. It is presumed that during service life this representative loading spectrum is repeated again and again. The general tension testing machine work place consisted of two base plates: the lower one was ﬁxed and stable. Stresses in the tooth’s root were now formed. Using a specially developed device the load on the actual tooth acted perpendicularly to the outer point of single engagement. 2. Experimental investigation of a tooth’s root crack propagation A pair of 1st step gears for an 11 ton truck were used in order to investigate the crack initiation and propagation. where the load is concentrated in the middle of the tooth. It is obviously a 3-D problem. All three driving conditions were combined into one modiﬁed loading spectrum by considering the following ratios: 50% city drive. The density was recalculated from the measured torques and its durations considered as a geometrical ratio between the propeller shaft and the observed gear pair. in this case. Load concentrated in the middle of tooth’s ﬂank The most common case of a gear tooth’s ﬂank loading is shown in Fig. Finally.1. The norm in the amount of 1000 km was chosen due to expected service life. the initial crack is located on the surface where the tension or principal stresses are the highest. Using the LEFM theory. Theoretical initial crack prediction and experimental measurements need to highlight. The fastening of the gear wheel body onto the basic skeleton was performed by tightening the spindle nut. The result of a bigger engagement angle is a thicker tooth’s root. Actually there is already quite a big diﬀerence already in the position of the initial crack. Due to practical reasons. which is generally recognized [10]. Then. and the upper one had a moving plate. This test device was ﬁxed onto the general tension testing machine.1268 S. In ﬁrst two cases the length of the acting cylinder was 2/3 of the tooth length. In continuation. The wideness of the scatter was even greater than one millimeter. The load from the general testing machine to the tooth was transmitted by the vertical shaft. because the stresses on its teeth’s roots were the highest. The skeleton was fastened to the lower base plate. Two characteristic results of crack path measured are shown in Fig. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 Models based on linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) are widely used for crack initiation and propagation prediction [3–9]. the situation on the pinion was neglected and only the gear wheel was considered. the loading spectrum was normalized as a single 1000 km route. 2. Fig. 1. The load acts at the outer point of single engagement since. In order to improve theoretical models and to make them more reliable. 1 represents the wide scatter of crack initiation position and its path. which can carry higher load than a tooth root’s made using reference proﬁle with a standard engagement angle. The nominal bending stress in the tooth’s root was derived from the tangential load. Crack elongation follows through the tooth’s root. the biggest . 2. In order to analyze crack initiation and propagation in a tooth’s root. The tangential load in the outer point of a single engagement [2] was determined from the torque. The length of this horizontally acting cylinder is usually equal to the gear with (that is equal to the tooth length) or less. (b) it can be located on one side only or (c) it can be distributed evenly along the whole tooth. a special test device was designed. The acting cylinder should represent working pressure distribution that can generally take three diﬀerent characteristic forms: (a) the contact load can be concentrated in the middle of tooth ﬂank. The contact body between the vertical shaft and tooth was a horizontally acting cylinder. 3. Initial crack is always directed perpendicular to the surface. The loading spectrum was measured and then redesigned for three driving conditions. Pehan et al. researchers have tried to modify the theoretical equations of LEFM by adding additional parameters [11]. The presented paper conﬁrms that the already wellknown theoretical formulas work correctly if accurate edge conditions are considered. the nominal bending stress was multiplied by the dynamic coeﬃcient and by other coeﬃcients that were considered for other geometrical deviations. 25% intercity drive and 25% highway drive. The loading spectrum was basically the list of torques and their densities. The density or the frequency of the actual stresses was namely the number of peak stress repetition.

This point is marked as the expected initial crack position. the tooth’s thickness is along the y-axis. 3. The scatter of measured crack path in a tooth’s root: (a) equally distributed loading. the initial crack should appear at the point where the tension stress on the tooth’s surface is the greatest. According to the theory. Next to each gear’s side the tooth’s breaking surface slowly turns upwards to the tooth’s top land. 1. Fig. the wide scatter of the measured crack’s path is noticed.S. Already. The crack front propagates in diﬀerent directions at diﬀerent velocities. The gear wheel width is brought onto the x-axis. and its depth is along the z-axis. at the initial crack’s location there exists the great discrepancy between the theoretical forecast and the practical measurement. 2. Single tooth test rig. . The crack front is not a straight line. bending moment occurs in the tooth’s root. (b) centrally distributed loading. Pehan et al. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1269 Fig. In Fig.

. correct one-sided load distribution can be assured at the beginning of crack initialization only. The tooth’s rigidity along the length becomes non-uniform because the initial crack in the toot’s root appears mostly one sided.1270 S. the stiﬀness of the tooth changes signiﬁcantly and it. According to the theoretical stress distribution in the tooth’s root [12]. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 Fig. consequently. where load distribution depends on a tooth’s rigidity. 2. This measurement shows that the actual initial crack (position-5) is not parallel. This acting cylinder is placed into vertical shaft semi-elastic in order to distribute the load equally over the tooth’s ﬂank. One-sided distributive loading A broken tooth loaded with one-side loading is presented in Fig. as presented in the appointed cases). According to the device’s design. Uniformly distributed loading Fig. Pehan et al. the initial crack should be positioned parallel to the tooth’s length. Several tests were done and all the broken teeth displayed approximately the same behavior (some of the teeth indicate even greater discrepancies. dissimilar tooth deformation appears. 3. A wide scattering of crack paths can be observed in Fig. 2. Probably. 5. Consequently. 5 presents a broken tooth subjected to a perfect equally-distributed loading.2. After the initial crack appears. The load is transmitted from the vertically shaft on the tooth’s ﬂank by a horizontally lying acting cylinder. 4. The acting cylinder follows the tooth’s ﬂank and the non-uniform deformed tooth still has equally distributed load over one end of the tooth’s ﬂank.3. Broken tooth loaded with centrally distributed loading. The crack initiation is more or less at the expected location. The discrepancy between the theoretical forecasts and the practical measurements are still abnormally and unexpectedly wide. which is probably a more serious situation as it could happened under real driving conditions. this phenomenon is caused by the load distribution. leads to a change in load distribution.

1. 3. The acting cylinder follows the tooth’s distortion. consequently has an inﬂuence on the back of the acting cylinder. Pehan et al. In the case of one sided loading. It is conﬁrmed that an asymmetrically propagated crack also causes asymmetrical deformation of the loaded tooth. 2. a more rigid acting cylinder bearing would be provided. This phenomenon is investigated after the experiments are done. A broken tooth loaded with a one-sided distributed loading. the elasticity of the acting cylinder bearing is undesirable. investigations focus on the possible reasons for such deviation and the subsequent inﬂuences on crack propagation. The inﬂuence of the test rig push shaft on crack propagation The basic purpose of the semi-elastic acting cylinder bearing on the test device is to ensure evenly distributed loading over the tooth’s ﬂank. 4.14] to the crack propagation are analyzed. Undesired distortion of the horizontally acting cylinder is noticed at one side of the loading. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1271 Fig.4. because it causes unnecessary deviation from normal running conditions. the type of applied loading and the micro. which represents one of the most important stages in the fatigue process. is generally caused by fatigue loading.S. even in a case where a load is theoretically positioned symmetrically to the tooth’s ﬂank. it was shown that a crack in a tooth’s root does not initiate in a region which can be predicted using standards.and macro-geometry of the specimen. The inﬂuences of crack initiation position and the inﬂuence of stresses around the crack’s tip [13. which. Position of crack initiation in a tooth’s root The initiation of a crack in a tooth’s root. . The position and mode of fatigue crack initiation depends on the microstructure of a material. In the present Section. 3. Numerical modelling of crack growth in a tooth’s root In the previous Section. The initiation phase of fatigue life in a virgin material is often assumed to constitute the growth of short cracks up to the transition length of short cracks into long cracks. otherwise in the case of one sided loading.

etc. and the gear shafts are parallel. In DIN standard. In this paper. that the fatigue failures on gears are usually nucleated at the surface. Symmetrically distributed load (Fig. while one-sided load distribution (Fig. machining marks. high strength steels are more adversely aﬀected by a rough surface ﬁnish that softer steel. The inﬂuence of different load positions at the ideal shape of the tooth’s root and parallel gear shafts on the crack initiation’s position areas. [15]. the inﬂuence of surface ﬁnish on fatigue strength is strongly related to the tensile strength of the material. Broadly speaking. Several methods exists for calculating the maximum stress in gear teeth. It is known from the practical applications. The results in Fig. The results also show that the diﬀerent load positions to the tooth’s ﬂank have no inﬂuence on the position of the maximum principal stress along the tooth’s root when it has an ideal shape. Therefore. the highest stress region is considered to be where lines under 30° from the centerline are constructed in such a way that they run tangent to the ﬁllets of the gear tooth. Pehan et al. what is shown in Fig. these regions were predicted in this paper. A broken tooth loaded with perfect equally distributed loading. presented in Section 2. 6a and b) cause symmetrical stress distribution. 5. . Because the tooth root’s is machined. The fatigue crack initiation includes the early development of fatigue damage and is strongly dependent on the size scale of the observation. it is assumed that initial cracks in a tooth’s root appear in the region of maximum principal stress. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 Fig.1272 S. which is the most dangerous for initiating crack propagation. 6 show that the distribution of maximum principal stress along tooth thickness depends on the load distribution on the tooth’s ﬂank. scratches. 7. which aid the process of crack nucleation. pits. three diﬀerent load positions were considered. Normally. Therefore. This means that the shape can deviate from a geometrically perfect shape. inﬂuence fatigue strength by providing additional stress raisers. During the experiment. while in AGMA standard Lewis parabola is considered for its determination. 6c) causes one-sided stress distribution. 6. it is made with tolerances. where DIN and AGMA standards are often used [3]. show in Fig.

7. 6. A non-ideal tooth root shape made by a manufacturing process can lead to diﬀerent positions for maximum principal stress. 8). (c) one-sided load distribution. . while Fig. where cracks could be initiated. 8a shows maximum principal stress distribution for the ideal shape of a tooth’s root. It is well-known from the gearbox design that the loaded shafts of gears are never parallel. which could be the cause of diﬀerent crack initiation positions (Fig. Fig. The results in Fig. corresponding to the manufactured tooth’s root. Due to radial forces. Fig. while the ideal shape of a tooth’s root causes only one position. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1273 Fig. 8b shows maximum principal stress distribution for the non-ideal shape of a tooth’s root. Inﬂuence of load position on stress position in the tooth’s root: (a) symmetrically. Pehan et al. 9 shows maximum principal stress distribution for ideal tooth root geometry and non-parallel load distribution to the tooth’s ﬂank. The results for maximum principal stress distribution in Fig. 9 show that non-parallel load distribution can cause diﬀerent positions on maximum principal stress. the shaft is deformed and the gear mounted on it is positioned in such a way that the load over the tooth’s ﬂank is not distributed equally and parallel to the axle. (b) symmetrically along 2/3rds of the tooth’s thickness. 8a and b show that the non-ideal shape of a tooth’s root causes several positions of maximum principal stress. Geometry of a tooth’s root after manufacturing [15].S. Fig.

9. The early experimental results of Williams and Ewing [14] show that the inclusion of second term (T-stress) in series expansion for stress distribution around the crack tip (1) can produce an improved correlation regarding fracture prediction for the angle of fracture. T is referred to as T-stress and is a non-singular stress. The elastic stress ﬁeld can be described by a series [8. Inﬂuence of stress distribution around the crack tip The description of a stress ﬁeld around the crack tip using only the singular term of asymptotic expansion is justiﬁed for a distance much smaller than the length of the last rectilinear crack segment. Maximum principal stress distribution for ideal tooth root geometry and non-parallel load distribution to the tooth’s ﬂank.16]. [8]. 3. This approximation is usually insuﬃcient. is independent of r. if it is applied to short or kinked cracks. and proportional to the applied stresses. and the critical stress intensity factor.1274 S. Fig. ð1Þ cos h cos 3h 4 5 2 2 2 2 2pr 2pr h 3h h h 3h rxy sin 2 cos 2 0 cot 2 À cos 2 sin 2 where KI. Positive T-stress increases the crack propagation angle and decreases the apparent fracture . the stress components are given as: Á3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 À rxx 1 À sin h sin 3h À 2 þ cos h cos 3h T 2 2 2 2 h h 6 7 K I cos 6 7 K II sin 6 7 6 7 ryy 5 ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2 4 1 þ sin h sin 3h 5 þ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2 4 þ 4 0 5. 8. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 Fig. Pehan et al. where the number of terms depends on the required accuracy of the solution. (b) tooth root geometry for a manufactured gear.2. In regard to the ﬁrst and second order terms for the asymptotic expansion of elastic stress ﬁelds near the crack tip. Maximum principal stress distribution: (a) ideal tooth root geometry.II are the stress intensity factors and represent geometry and loading dependent quantity. It acts parallel to the crack plane.

Eqs.r) is a speciﬁc circumferential stress intensity factor which represents the intensity of the circumferential stress rhh ﬁeld near the crack tip. According to Erdogan and Sih [19]. Stress intensity factors and T are for h = 0° deﬁned as: pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ K I ¼ lim ryy 2pr r!0 pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ K II ¼ lim rxy 2pr r!0 ð2Þ À Á T ¼ lim rxx À ryy r!0 Eqs. 2 ð6Þ ð5Þ Eq. the critical load case could be determined by using the expression [5]: pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ K r ðh. (4) in Eq. oh r¼rc where rc is the critical length’s parameter.8. Pehan et al. which also considers the inﬂuence of T-stress. . / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1275 toughness. crack extension starts along the radial direction in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the maximum tangential tension stress rhh.17. where the shear stress rrh = 0. rÞ ¼ rhh 2pr. (1) and (2) are valid for traction free boundary conditions along a crack’s surfaces. after rearrangement. gives: ! 1 h 3 2 h rhh ðh. When the element containing a crack is subjected to non-proportional loading. (6) represents a modiﬁed MTS criterion that can be used for determining crack propagation angle h0. when the crack surfaces are traction free. (5) gives. rÞ ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ cos K I cos À K II sin h þ T sin2 h: ð4Þ 2 2 2 2pr The crack propagation angle h0 can be determined from the maximum condition orhh ¼ 0 ) h ¼ h0 .S. • the plastic zone ahead of the crack tip is small when compared to the distance of the crack tip to any boundary member.18]. the following expression: ½K I sin h0 þ K II ð3 Á cos h0 À 1Þ À c sin where c ¼ 16T pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2prc =3: ð7Þ h0 cos h0 ¼ 0. that is if: • the crack length at which the threshold for mode I crack propagation is reached is such that the main microstructural barriers to fatigue crack growth are breached and the crack is assumed to propagate in a continuum. (1) and (2) are valid only under LEFM conditions. The tangential stress can be written in polar co-ordinates as: rhh ðhÞ ¼ rxx sin2 h þ ryy cos2 h À rxy sin 2h: ð3Þ Substituting stress terms in Eq. while negative T-stress decreases the crack propagation angle and increases the apparent fracture toughness [6. ð8Þ where Kr(h.13. (3) with expansion (1). which is explained later. Considering Eq.

[20] experimentally and numerically determined a characteristic distance for cleavage fracture in steel for long cracks. The model was discretised with standard quadratic quadrilateral isoparametric elements. Such procedure is used on a real spur gear pair without additional surface treatment (e.5 mm. Furthermore. In this work. the residual stresses have a big inﬂuence on any crack initiation in the surface layer. Quarter point ﬁnite elements were used around the crack tip . Therefore.1 · 105 MPa and Poison’s ratio m = 0. The numerical model has the following geometrical data with the number of teeth z = 39. ð10Þ rc ¼ 6p 2rY where rY is the yield stress. In this method. stresses were considered in the region of constrained yielding [4].3. The material for gears is not homogeneous. The gear material is thermally treated (surface hardened) as follows: heating in a gas atmosphere to 930 °C (diﬀusion of the carbon (C) is between 0. The boundary conditions used in the analysis are shown in Fig. In fact. addendum modiﬁcation coeﬃcients x = 0. Practical application Classical and modiﬁed fracturing criteria have been applied for simulating initial crack propagation in a gear tooth’s root.II and T-stress. the Finite Element Method within the framework of the ABAQUS programme package [21] has been used for determining stress intensity factors KI. For the plane strain condition the critical distance rc can then be determined as [4]: 2 1 K Ic . residual stresses are not considered in this paper. rc Þ ¼ cos ð9Þ 2 2 2 Physical length scale rc presents the distance ahead of the crack tip where the fracturing process is actually initiated.g.g. (4) into Eq. the material parameters used in the computational analysis had been determined previously by appropriate test specimens [12]. In the case of negative residual stresses in the surface layer. There exist diﬀerent defects (e.1 mm/h and 0. Stress intensity factors KI.1276 S.06. shot-peening [22]).II and T-stress must be known for determining crack propagation path. the crack initiation period is longer than in a case where the surface layer is not additional treated. Beside this stress intensity factor for the initial crack in surface layer is smaller as in case when surface is not treated. with the objective of investigating the inﬂuence of diﬀerent crack initiation positions and the inﬂuence of diﬀerent terms in Williams expansion on crack propagation path. Wang et al. inclusions) on and under the tooth root surface. which is very diﬃcult to determine.2 mm/h at the beginning and 0. The distance rc is a material parameter. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 Substituting Eq. 10. and an engagement angle on the pitch diameter an = 24°. tooth width B = 28 mm. the diﬀerence between stress intensity factors for thermal treated and non-thermal treated materials is small [12]. which is weakly dependent on the mesh quality around the crack tip. Pehan et al. It was determined by plane strain fracture toughness KIc. These inclusions inﬂuences on stress distribution in microregion and inﬂuences on crack propagation. (8) for h = h0 and r = rc leads to the modiﬁed formulation of the stress intensity factor Kr(h. It was shown that cleavage fracture ahead of a crack tip can be initiated only in some active zone at certain distance interval. normal module m = 4. When crack propagates in a core region.g. which is subjected to critical plastic strain. centre distance acent = 91. critical stress triaxiality and critical tensile stress. 4. It was assumed that rc is constant.r): ! pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ h0 h0 3 K I cos2 À K II sin h0 þ T 2prc sin2 h0 : K r ðh0 . fracture mechanics parameters are determined using the contour integral method.1 mm/h at the end). The gear is made of high strength alloy steel 16MnCr5 with Young’s modulus E = 2. gear tooth root).5 mm. The inﬂuences of gear geometry on fracture mechanics’ parameters were ﬁrst analyzed using a 3D model. Several models have been proposed for its determination. KI. It is necessary to use alternative methods for more complex geometry (e.II and T can be determined by analytical solutions for simple geometric and loading cases. where the material and thermal treatment (surface-hardening) were the same as for treated gears. Since it is very diﬃcult to determine the critical distance rc.

In a core region where a plane strain fracture toughness of 2650 MPa mm1/2 and yield stress of 750 MPa were determined experimentally. and its magnitude. further investigations were done using 2D plane strain models. As discussed in Section 3.5 mm for crack length longer than a = 2. which follow from an experimental investigation for a hardened and carburized gear tooth ﬂank layer [12]. the critical distance rc = 0. It is assumed that change in load magnitude during the experimental test (Section 2). had no inﬂuence on the crack propagation path.S. KII and T-stress. the crack increment size was gradually increased from Da = 0.166 mm was considered. while eight collapsed quadrilateral quarter point ﬁnite elements were used around the crack’s tip. 10 presents the boundary conditions for a three-dimensional numerical model with an initial crack of a0 = 1 mm. A crack length of a0 = 1 mm was considered in a 3D model in order to investigate the inﬂuence of gear geometry on fracture mechanics’ parameters. Pehan [12] investigated the inﬂuence of a number of teeth on stress distribution in a tooth’s root. but it follows from the experimental results [12] where it was found that the initial crack which it was possible . 10. Analyses of crack propagation for different initial crack positions were carried out where the cracks are positioned in the plane perpendicular to the maximum principal stress. because coarse discretisation can have an inﬂuence on maximum stress position. A two-dimensional plane strain model was discretised with standard quadratic quadrilateral isoparametric elements. Special care was taken to mesh quality in the tooth’s root region. Pehan et al.3 mm for a crack length of a = 1 mm up to a = 2 mm to the Da = 0. where stress intensity factor KI exceeds plane strain fracture toughness KIc for the core region. a critical distance rc = 0. diﬀerent parameters have an inﬂuence on the position of crack initiation in a tooth’s root which then causes initial cracks to appear in many places. The inﬂuence of T-stress on the crack propagation path was analyzed using a model with initial crack length of a0 = 1 mm. The analysis was stopped for critical crack length ac. Due to the negligible inﬂuence of tooth thickness on stress intensity factors KI. During numerical simulation. A load of 1738 N/mm was considered in the analysis. Numerical model with an initial crack of a0 = 1 mm.74 lm was determined from equation (10) with the assumption that it is equal to the plastic zone size determined with plane strain fracture toughness KIc. Fig. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1277 Fig. to simulate rÀ1/2 stress singularity and r1/2 displacement variation at the crack tip. The value of a0 = 1 mm was not taken arbitrarily. He showed that the inﬂuence of using only one gear tooth in the analysis is negligible on stress distribution. which are the biggest in the region under plane strain conditions.9 mm. Due to available data for a plane strain fracture toughness of 521 MPa mm1/2 and estimated yield stress of 2200 MPa (assuming no cyclic hardening or softening).

KII. while the highest stress intensity factors KII and KIII occur at the free surface. The thickness of the surface layer was equal to 1 mm. 11 that the stress intensity factors KI. KII. Distribution of stress intensity factors KI. [23] which found that increasing crack length on a specimen with edge crack subjected to bending. 11. KIII and T-stress along the gear’s thickness (coordinate z). A comparison between the results done using the 3D model and the results done using the 2D plain strain model show good agreement. 12 show that T-stress is negative at the beginning of crack propagation and its value increases with crack propagation. Results for the 3D model in Fig.2D KII . KIII and T-stress are almost constant in the region where the plane strain conditions prevail. KII. 12 shows the distribution of T-stress during crack propagation. The results in Fig. are presented in Fig. The minimum T-stress stress is in the middle of the gear’s tooth. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 -50 KI.3D KI . Usually this inﬂuence in the gear’s tooth root is neglected.3D KII . propagates immediately to the region between surface and core material where the crack propagation is slower than in the surface layer. Therefore. The inﬂuence of T-stress on crack propagation path is presented in Fig. 13. Fig. The results are presented for an initial crack length of a0 = 1 mm and compared with crack propagation determined with stress intensity factors KI and KII (Eq. 11. The results show that the stress intensity factor KI is much higher than KII. where plane stress condition is dominant. 12 agree with the results of Bilby et al. It can be observed from Fig. Deviation is observed in the transition region from plane strain to plane stress (at free surface).2D T .3D KIII . (6) with rc = 0).1278 1200 1000 800 S.3D T . The results in Fig. . The results in Fig. KII. Distribution of stress intensity factors KI. 11 show that T-stress is negative and small along the tooth’s thickness. Negative T-stress inﬂuences on the stability of a crack propagation’s path and increases apparent virtual fracture toughness [13]. The appearance of stress intensity factor KIII can lead to crack propagation in tearing mode. increases T-stress from negative to positive values. KIII [MPamm1/2 ] -80 600 400 200 -110 0 -200 -400 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 -140 28 T [MPa] KI . A comparison between 3D numerical analysis and 2D plane strain conditions was done to evaluate the correctness of using a 2D model. Comparison with the 2D plane strain model was done due to the higher values for stress intensity factor KI which is the most dangerous for cracked mechanical elements occurring in the middle of the gear’s tooth. to determine.2D B [mm] Fig. where the plane strain conditions prevail. starting from an initial crack length of a0 = 1 mm. KIII and T-stress along a tooth’s thickness for crack length a0 = 1 mm. Negative T-stress inﬂuences on the stability of the crack propagation’s path and increases apparent plane strain fracture toughness [13]. the fracture toughness KIc can be considered as the critical value of K and the appropriate crack length can be taken as the critical length ac. 11 show that the highest stress intensity factor KI occurs in the region of plane strain conditions. Pehan et al.

S. 14 and 15 show that crack propagation. 13. and can be negligible. 13) has a negligible inﬂuence on stress intensity factor KI and has little inﬂuence on stress intensity factor KII. The results in Fig. Inﬂuence of stress intensity factors KI. The results also show that T-stress has a small inﬂuence on the crack propagation path started in a gear tooth’s root. 14 and 15.5 81 80. x [mm] Fig. KII. and T-stress on crack propagation path. KII. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 20 0 -20 -40 1279 T [MPa] -60 -80 -100 -120 -140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a [mm] Fig. T-stress distribution.5 T 82 coord. 83 K 82. y[mm] 81. Distribution is compared with stress intensity factors KI and KII for crack propagation where the inﬂuence of T-stress is unconsidered in the analysis (marked with K). Negative T-stress causes a smaller kink-angle which leads to a crack propagation below that determined with stress intensity factor KI and KII.5 80 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 coord. The distribution of stress intensity factors KI and KII for crack propagation where the inﬂuence of T-stress (marked with T) on crack propagation is also considered in the analysis is presented in Figs. determined with T-stress (Fig. . The results in Figs. Pehan et al. 12. 13 show that crack path determined by the inﬂuence of T-stress is parallel to the crack path determined by stress intensity factors KI.

17 and 18. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 2600 2400 2200 K I [MPamm1/2 ] 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 K T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a [mm] Fig. 14) exceeds the plane strain fracture toughness KIc = 2600 MPa mm1/2. 15. where the stress intensity factor KI (Fig. which lead to a tooth’s breakage occurs after the tooth’s symmetry. Pehan et al. 14. 3–5. The distribution of stress intensity factor KI and stress intensity factor KII for diﬀerent positions of initial cracks in a tooth’s root. -20 -40 ] KII [MPamm 1/2 -60 -80 -100 K -120 T -140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a [mm] Fig.1280 S. 16. The inﬂuences of diﬀerent initial crack positions in a tooth’s root on crack propagation is presented in Fig. . The results for the crack propagation path agree with experimental results in Figs. 16 show that during propagation. for the core region. In all cases the cracks are positioned in the plane perpendicular to the principal stress.5 mm. those initial cracks which started from diﬀerent initial crack positions. which agrees with the experimental results. This means that the stress intensity factor KII of initial cracks positioned below the centre crack should be bigger than the stress intensity factor KII of the crack positioned above the centre crack. Results are presented for cracks which propagate from an initial crack length a0 = 1 mm to a crack length of acr = 6. Distribution of stress intensity factor KII during crack propagation. The results in Fig. is presented in Figs. propagate near to each other. It is also shown that any unstable crack propagation of a crack. Distribution of stress intensity factor KI during crack propagation.

Distribution of stress intensity factor KI during crack propagation. which leads to a smaller kink-angle during crack propagation (Fig. 17. 17 show that initial cracks positioned above the centre crack cause bigger stress intensity factor KI than initial cracks positioned below the centre crack. The results in Fig. 17) is 24% higher than KI for lower initial crack (2À in Fig. the diﬀerence decreases to 18%. Crack propagation paths depending on the positions of the initial cracks. the diﬀerence decreases to 25%. Pehan et al. 18) is four times higher than KII for upper initial crack (2+ in Fig. Stress intensity factor KII for lower initial crack (2À in Fig. while at critical crack length. 16. 17). / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1281 Fig. 18).S. On the other hand. initial cracks that are positioned above the centre initial crack cause a smaller stress intensity factor KII than initial cracks positioned below the centre crack. Stress intensity factor KI for upper initial crack (2+ in Fig. 18). . It can be concluded that initial cracks positioned above the centre crack are more open in Mode I than initial cracks positioned below the centre crack. while at critical crack length. 3000 2800 2600 2400 KI [MPamm1/2] 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 1 2 3 4 5 6 centre 1+ 2+ 127 a [mm] Fig.

mixed-mode stress intensity factors. [5] Kaneta M. and crack initiation angles in functionally graded materials: a uniﬁed approach using the interaction integral method. ASLE Trans 1985. Yatsuzuka H. [4] Ewalds HL. Murakami Y. Numerical methods for determining stress intensity factors vs crack depth in gear tooth ˇ roots. ˇ [7] Pehan S. . Flasker J. Hellen TH. [6] Kim JH. J Mech Design 1981.1282 S. 18. A non-local stress and strain energy release rate mixed mode fracture initiation and propagation criteria. Due to central load distribution and uniform load distribution on the gear tooth’s ﬂank.103:447–9. Due to tolerances when manufacturing the gears and shafts. ASME. Beuth Verlag. T-stress. 1987. Engng Fract Mech 1998. Compliance and stress sensitivity of spur gear teeth. [8] Seweryn A. The results for crack initiation show that perfect tooth root geometry and parallel loaded gear shafts have no inﬂuence on crack initiation in a tooth’s root for diﬀerent positions of load along the tooth’s width.59(6):737–60. the crack front is asymmetrical during crack propagation.19(10):677–85. Experimental tests with three diﬀerent load positions on the tooth’s ﬂank were done. Handschuh RF. 5. Glodez S. References [1] Lewicki DG. The results show that cracks initiate over a wide region of the tooth’s root and not in the region where it could be expected. GMBH. Conclusions This paper presents the problem of crack initiation location and its propagation in the gear tooth’s root. The crack propagation path can be modelled accurately enough when only stresses described with stress intensity factors are considered. Consideration of moving tooth load in gear crack propagation predictions. Wanhill RJH. Mechanism of crack growth in lubricated rolling/sliding contact. Co-publication of Edward Arnold.192(11–14):1463–94. Spievak LE. Fracture mechanics. A comparison between the experimental and numerical results when considering diﬀerent crack positions in the tooth’s root showed good agreement for crack propagation which means that linear fracture mechanics can be used for crack propagation in a gear tooth’s root. according to the theory. NASA/TM 2000:210–27. Tragfahtigkeitsberechnungen von Stirnradern. Paulino GH. The results for the inﬂuence of stress distribution around the crack tip showed that T-stress can be neglected for crack propagation in the tooth’s root.28(3):407–14. Distribution of stress intensity factor KII during crack propagation. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 0 -50 KII [MPamm1/2 ] -100 -150 centre 1+ 2+ -200 12- -250 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a [mm] Fig. Comput Methods Appl Mech Engng 2003. [2] DIN 3990. Numerical analyses were done to investigate any possible reasons for the wide region of crack initiation in the tooth’s root and inﬂuences on its propagation discovered during the experiments. a crack’s front is symmetrical during crack propagation. and imperfections during the assembly of the gear box lead to diﬀerent initiation positions for the crack in the tooth’s root. Pehan et al. Int J Fatigue 1997. ¨ ¨ [3] Cornell RW. while for a tooth’s load which is distributed on one side of the tooth’s ﬂank. 1989.

Hohn BR. Mech. [19] Erdogan F. In: Size eﬀect in fracture. London. Musiol CJ. Flasker J. [21] ABAQUS/Standard.8(4):416–41. Dissertation. Inﬂuence of residual stresses on fatigue behaviour of surface treated gears. User’s manual. Int J Fract 2002. Pavier MJ. Slightly curved or kinked cracks. Engng. [20] Wang GZ. Oster P. Slovenia. ASME J Basic Engng 1963. DGMK 623/FVA 371/II. Ewing PD. Crack propagation in spur gear tooth’s root on the base of the contact area (in Slovenian). [18] Cotterell B. ASAE Publication Number 9130202. Chen JH. 2002. Inﬂuence of shot peening on bending tooth fatigue limit of case hardened ¨ gears. [16] Williams ML. Sih GC.24:109–14. Cardew BA.S. Germany: FZG Institute. Liu GH. Ren Z. Int J Fract 2005.118:57–76. Int J Fatigue 2002. Version 6. Goldthorpe MR. J Appl Mech 1957. in: Agricultural equipment technology conference. [22] Benedetti M. Munich. Italy: Convegno Nazionale AIAS – Alghero (SS).5-1. [14] Williams JG. Tobie T. 1994. / Engineering Fracture Mechanics 75 (2008) 1266–1283 1283 ˇ ˇ [9] Zafosnik B. 1976.24:137–50. Howard IC. p. Pavier MJ. The role of T-stress in brittle fracture for linear elastic materials under mixed-mode loading. Modelling of surface crack growth under lubricated rolling-sliding contact loading. [23] Bilby BA. Mode I cracks subjected to large T-stresses. Missouri. Ayatollahi MR. [17] Smith DJ. On the stress distribution at the base of a stationary crack. Mishuris G.85:525–7. Oster P. 2001. Maribor. 2006. 37–46. . [15] Hergesell M. On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and transverse shear. Fracture under complex stress – the angled crack problem. Int J Fract 1972. Developing a durable product. Int J Fract 2002. A ﬁnite element investigation of the eﬀect of specimen geometry and the ﬁeld of stress and strain at the tip of stationary crack. Fontanari V. Tobie T.134:127–49. UK: Inst. On the characteristic distance and minimum fracture toughness for cleavage fracture in a C–Mn steel. [13] Ayatollahi MR. Smith DJ. Int J Fract 1980. Fontanari V. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 2001.24:1127–36.117:159–74. [10] Plaskitt RJ. Abstract in English. Pehan et al. Rice JR.16(2):155–69. Kansas City. [11] Benedetti M. 2005. [12] Pehan S.

- Fracture Mechanics Handbook
- A Finite Line Crack in a Pressurized Spherical Shell-folias
- 14 Fracture Mechanics
- Broek David - Elementary Engin
- Chapter 4 Epfm
- griffith and irwins work
- Fracture mechanics project
- Evaluation of the Non-Linear Fracture Parameters J and C* with ANSYS
- FM
- 12cr Steel
- STP381 Foreword
- Ridzuan Shah Razi Varathau Rajoo
- Longitudinal Cracking in Pavement - R Luo
- Successful Inspection of Critical Stainless Steel Pipeline Using NDT Techniques and Engineering Critical Assessment
- FEA Analysis of Flat Plates in Torsion
- Failure Analysis Methodology Thepetrostreet
- finite width correction factors-Journal of Composite Materials-1988-Tan-1080-97 (3).pdf
- Gear
- Sd Article 46
- Gears
- Pubs_Feb
- gear rack drive.pdf
- MIT Screws and Gears GW
- Chapter_13_Solutions Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design 9th Edition Solutions Manual
- Carburizing Microstructures and Properties
- Worm Gear Calculation
- Automatic Transmission
- j22
- Generalized Cycloid Drive Equations9.xlsx
- Determining Wall Thickness for Deepwater Pipelines

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd