See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/222191455

Spalling formation mechanism for gears

Article in Wear · November 2003

DOI: 10.1016/S0043-1648(03)00126-1

CITATIONS READS

112 9,553

2 authors, including:

Yan Ding
RMIT University
40 PUBLICATIONS 353 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Yan Ding on 16 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317

Spalling formation mechanism for gears

Yan Ding a,∗ , Neville F. Rieger b
a Department of Mathematics, RMIT University, City Campus GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001, Australia
b Stress Technology Incorporated, Rochester, NY, USA

Accepted 24 February 2003

Abstract
Though the basic phenomenon of wear on gear tooth contact surfaces is the removal of a piece of material from the working surface, the
sizes of the wear debris may be different, due to the different physical causes in their formation processes. No common definitions have
been established to distinguish spalling from pitting in the literature. This is probably due to the fact that the physical causes of pitting
and spalling have not yet been established. In this paper, a brief literature review is presented with the intention to differentiate spalling
from pitting. Three types of wear phenomena are defined. Furthermore, the results of a recent experimental study of gear tooth spalling
formation in AISI 4340 gears in a test rig are also presented to demonstrate a possible process of spalling due to the development of cracks
beneath the tooth contact surfaces and crack linkages in plastically-collapsed metal ligament between the crack tip and the adjacent tooth
contact surface. These experimental results substantiated the ligament collapse spalling mechanism proposed by Ding et al. [Y. Ding, R.
Jones, B.T. Kuhnell, Elastic–plastic finite element analysis of spall formation in gears, Wear 197 (1996) 197–205; M. Heems, F. Lagarde,
R. Courtel, P. Sorin, C. R. Acad. Sci. 257 (3) (1963) 3293].
© 2003 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.
Keywords: Spalling; Subsurface cracks; Crack failure; Ligament collapse

1. Introduction Spalling appears as deeper (typically 20–100 ␮m) cavities

Gearing is an essential component of many machines.
From aerospace to high-speed automation, from missiles to
submarines, few machines can operate without gears. Since
gears transmit motion and power through the surface con-
tact, good gearing performance depends on the durability
of their teeth surfaces. Generally, there are four basic wear
modes: contact fatigue, adhesion, abrasion and corrosion.
Under normal operating conditions, contact fatigue is one
of the most common failure modes for gear tooth surfaces.
Gear tooth interaction causes mild adhesive wear throughout
the life of the gear drive. This is called normal rubbing wear
and is characterised by particles smaller than 10 ␮m. This
is seen as a smoothing of the gear tooth surfaces as a result
of mild plastic deformation of asperities. This type of defor-
mation causes a very thin work-hardened surface layer. The
thickness of this work-hardened layer is roughly of the order
of the asperity widths, i.e. typically less than 10 ␮m [2,3].
Generally, there are two types of surface contact fatigue,
namely, pitting and spalling. Pitting appears as shallow
craters at contact surfaces. The maximum depth of a pit is
about the thickness of the work-hardened layer (≈10 ␮m).
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61-3-9925-2283; fax: +61-3-9925-1748.
E-mail address: maths@rmit.edu.au (Y. Ding).
at contact surfaces with a depth of 0.25 to 0.35 of the half
contact width (usually denoted as “c” in fracture mechanics
literature). Fig. 1 illustrates the phenomena of pitting and
spalling.
It must be noted here that no common definitions have
been established to consistently distinguish spalling from
pitting in the literature. In much of the literature, spalling
and pitting were used indiscriminately, and in some liter-
ature, spalling and pitting were used to designate different
severities of surface contact fatigue [4,5]. Tallian [6] defined
“spalling” as macro-scale contact fatigue caused by fatigue
crack propagation and reserved “pitting” as surface damage
caused by sources other than crack propagation. One of the
reasons for the confusion in the definitions is probably due
to the fact that the physical causes of pitting and spalling
have not yet been convincingly established. This is one of
the major reasons for performing the study described here.
In order to discuss the issue on a consistent ground, for this
paper, pitting and spalling are defined according to the ob-
served phenomena as discussed above. Pitting is taken to be
the formation of shallow craters (<10 ␮m) that are mainly
developed from surface-defects, and spalling is taken to be
the formation of deeper cavities that are mainly developed
from subsurface-defects. Though both spalling and pitting
are the common forms of surface contact fatigue, compared

0043-1648/$ – see front matter © 2003 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

doi:10.1016/S0043-1648(03)00126-1
1308 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of pitting and spalling phenomena.
to pitting, spalling results in more rapid deterioration of
surface durability, and often induces early failure by se-
vere secondary damage. It has been often reported as the
most destructive surface failure mode of a gear (e.g. [4]).
A detailed understanding of spalling is not only essen-
tial for detecting incipient gear failure, before it becomes
disastrous and causes expensive secondary damage, but
is also central for planning preventative maintenance for
gear components. Furthermore, it can also be used to deter-
mine the critical parameters for designing gears that satisfy
special requirements. One instance is the design of gears
with the maximum capacity and the minimum size and
weight, for high-speed automation or aerospace power trans-
missions.
Although there has been considerable research devoted
to this area over the last half-century, there is still lack of
a thorough understanding of the spalling formation process
on gears. Most of the relevant previous work concentrated
on symmetrical contact problems. The knowledge of sub-
surface crack behaviour with non-symmetrical contact ge-
ometry is very limited. The majority of the previously re-
ported research has focused on either metallurgical studies
of the worn material, or on the theoretical analysis of the be-
haviour of subsurface cracks. There appears little published
work aimed to achieve a mutual agreement from the results
of these two aspects of the research. Neither much study
was focused on the stress state change of the material be-
tween the contact surface and subsurface crack tips, which
is of great practical interest in regard to the physical pro-
cess of spalling formation. The objective of this research is
to investigate the spalling mechanism in gears by studying
the behaviour of subsurface cracks. The behaviour of sur-
face cracks under contact loading is controlled by a different
mechanism and needs to be studied separately.
2. Previous research on crack propagation and failure
Three stages are involved in the formation process of
a spall: crack initiation, crack propagation and failure. It
has been well documented that crack initiation is resulted
from an inclusion or a hard particle, as well as material
defects such as flaws and pre-existing dislocations. After
a crack initiates, the cyclic contact stress produced by re-
peated rolling or rolling–sliding contacts drives cracks to
grow. Eventually, failure of cracks will take place and result
in some kind of surface contact damage, such as spalling,
pitting, or delamination. In general, the study of surface con-
tact damage reported in literature may be divided into two
groups: surface-defect-origin contact fatigue and subsurface-
defect-origin contact fatigue, which are discussed in follow-
ing subsections.
2.1. Existing theories of surface-defect-origin
contact fatigue
For decades, there has been a dominant opinion in lit-
erature regarding spalling/pitting formation, which consid-
ered that, as surface cracks driven by a liquid lubricant,
spalling/pitting was the result of surface crack propagation
in the direction of contact travel. This opinion was based on
Way’s hypothesis [7], which postulated that lubricating oil
pre-filled in a surface crack was trapped between the crack
surfaces when the approaching contact reached the surface
opening and pinched the crack closed. As a result, the crack
tip was extended by a hydraulic pressure of the lubricant oil
sealed between the crack surfaces. The extensively quoted
Way’s hypothesis was not challenged until a half-century
later. Keer and Bryant [8] simulated Way’s experiments and
found that the dominant mechanism for surface-breaking
crack growth was mode II (shear) propagation. Their con-
clusion is not consistent with Way’s assumption of Mode I
(tension) crack propagation. However, they also suggested
that the phenomenon of crack curving, i.e. changing its di-
rection to the contact surface to form a crater or cavity, could
be due to the influence of tensile rather than shear stress.
Bower [9] performed a fracture mechanics analysis of crack
propagation in the presence of lubricating oil. His results
did not appear to support Way’s hypothesis, either. Further-
more, the experimental results obtained by Cheng et al. [10]
showed that the surface crack growth was very slow and
the depth of the slowly growing surface cracks was in the
 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317
range of 5–10 ␮m. Therefore, it is almost impossible to form
a spall cavity from surface crack growth, unless there is a
near-surface inclusion to act as a bridge to significantly ac-
celerate the propagation of the surface crack into the sub-
surface region.
2.2. Existing theories of subsurface-defect-origin
contact fatigue
Many researchers have also studied the behaviour of
subsurface cracks under contact loads for the purpose of un-
derstanding of spalling/pitting mechanisms. Among them,
Fleming and Suh [11] were the first ones who utilised
fracture mechanics as a method to analyse the propagation
of subsurface cracks parallel to the contact surface. Their
results showed that the stress intensity factors (SIFs) for
Modes I and II were very low. Kaneta et al. [12] studied
the growth mechanism of subsurface cracks by numerically
analysing the behaviour of a three-dimensional subsurface
crack parallel to the contact surface. They concluded that
the propagation of subsurface cracks is mainly by Mode II.
They also found that the direction of the Mode II propa-
gation was different for the trailing and leading tips of the
crack with respect to the direction of the surface traction.
The tip at the trailing side of the traction extends along the
crack line, and the tip at the leading side extended towards
the surface at an angle less than 6.2◦ . Sin and Suh [13] stud-
ied the mechanism of subsurface crack propagation in slid-
ing elastic–plastic solids using the finite element analysis.
They suggested that crack tip sliding displacement (CTSD)
be taken as the propagation rate of subsurface cracks. They
also suggested that the direction of the propagation be the
direction of the maximum shear stress in front of the crack
tip and along an angle between −5 and 5◦ to the crack line,
implying that the propagation was almost parallel to the
contact surface. They claimed that, based on the CTSDs
calculated using FEA, their predicted wear rates com-
pared favourably with the experimentally determined wear
rates.
More recently, Ding et al. [14] studied the behaviour of
subsurface cracks beneath the pitch line of a gear tooth with a
view to develop a fundamental understanding of the spalling
mechanism in gears. Using the finite element method, they
analysed the potential modes of crack propagation and fail-
ure, and found that the values of the stress intensity factors
of the subsurface cracks were below the critical SIF, Kc .
Consequently, ligament collapse at crack tips as the cause
of spalling from subsurface cracks was hypothesised. Ding
et al. [1] also performed an elastic–plastic finite element
analysis that further evaluated the hypothesis as the failure
mechanism of spalling in gears.
2.3. Discussion on crack propagation theories
The literature presented above inspired the discussion on
the following observations.
1309
2.3.1. Surface crack propagation is most likely
to result in pitting or delamination only
Despite the controversy over whether Mode I or II is the
dominant mode for surface crack propagation, it can be ar-
gued that, if Mode I growth of a surface crack is the domi-
nant mode, the crack would extend along the direction of the
maximum shear stress at the crack tip. This direction could
be determined according to the initial inclined angle of the
surface crack. When the initial angle of the crack is equal
to or less than 45◦ , the surface crack would propagate either
parallel to the surface or at an angle towards the contact sur-
face. As a result, a very shallow pit would form. When the
initial inclined angle of the surface crack is greater than 45◦ ,
the direction of the surface crack would be downwards into
the bulk of the material. On the other hand, if the Mode II
growth were the dominant mode, a surface crack would ex-
tend along the direction of the surface crack line itself. Both
analytical and experimental work discussed in Section 2.1
have demonstrated that a surface crack alone is unable to
penetrate into the bulk of material by propagation [10,15,16],
regardless which mode dominates the growth. Furthermore,
when surface roughness is considered, surface crack growth
may end up by cutting off asperities, resulting in delamina-
tion. Thus, it can be concluded that surface crack growth in
both Modes I and II only results in pitting or delamination.
2.3.2. Though subsurface cracks propagate in Mode II,
they do not appear to fail by crack propagation
As the general perception shown in the literature, spalling
and pitting are assumed to be the result of propagation of
a crack until it reaches a critical size. O’regan et al. [17]
defined the critical size as a/d = 1, where a is the half
crack length and d the depth of the crack from the con-
tact surface. However, the literature discussed previously has
demonstrated that subsurface crack growth is very slow. Ac-
cording to the concept of brittle fracture, the SIFs for Modes
I and II, obtained by Fleming and Suh [11], were too small
to be the driving force for subsurface crack growth. The re-
sults of Kaneta et al. [12] showed that, for the case of low
coefficients of friction between contact surfaces, i.e. 0 <
f < 0.1, the values of SIFs in Mode II, KII , were just in the
threshold stress intensity range: KII,th ∼ = 1.5 MPa m1/2 .
These results indicated that the growth of a subsurface crack
would be very slow, particularly for the case of low fric-
tion contact, such as gears. The results of CTSD obtained
Sin and Suh [13] also implied a very slow growth of sub-
surface crack propagation. Besides, the CTSD criterion for
crack propagation in elastic–plastic solids proposed by Sin
and Suh [13] and Bastias et al [18] lacks support accord-
ing to available data for such complex loading conditions.
Moreover, their work only suites the cases of high surface
traction (f ≥ 0.25), such as in abrasive or adhesive sliding
wear, but not for the case of gear tooth contact in which
f ∼= 0.06, since the influence of surface traction on subsur-
face crack propagation is detrimental [19]. Furthermore, the
direction of the crack propagation reported in the literature
1310 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317

Table 1
The maximum values of SIF ( KII ) at subsurface crack tips [1]
d/c a/c = 0.11 a/c = 0.33 a/c = 0.5 a/c = 0.67 a/c = 0.89

Trailing tip Lead tip Trailing tip Lead tip Trailing tip Lead tip Trailing tip Lead tip Trailing tip Lead tip

0.177 3.9677 3.925 6.950 7.199 13.402 18.050 8.863 5.818 13.922 10.789
0.237 3.790 3.624 10.657 7.670 11.198 10.763 8.608 7.042 12.009 15.711
0.296 3.823 4.469 6.810 4.314 15.124 8.516 16.174 12.602 11.345 12.880
0.355 4.571 4.236 6.494 1.853 19.926 11.309 7.549 5.141 8.796 7.372
0.414 1.427 1.595 5.840 1.643 15.669 9.793 11.707 7.284 9.602 6.526
0.532 1.239 1.177 4.085 2.504 13.541 9.954 – – 9.727 6.992
0.887 1.393 0.996 – – – – – – – –

was almost parallel to the contact surface. This does not ex-
plain the orientations of the walls of a spall cavity. Although
Miller [20] recognized the incapability of Mode II propaga-
tion resulting in spalling and attempted to explain such fail-
ure as subsurface crack branching in Mode I, the tendency
of crack branching shown in Miller’s results did not appear
to confirm this theory. Using a realistic asymmetrical gear
tooth FE model, Ding et al. [1,14] investigated the behaviour
of subsurface cracks under a gear tooth in contact with a
heavy contact load and low surface traction. They calculated
the stress intensity factors for both Modes I and II of the sub-
surface cracks beneath a gear tooth surface with normalised
size: a/c = 0.89, 0.67, 0.50, 0.11, at normalised depth:
d/c = 0.118, 0.177, 0.237, 0.296, 0.355, 0.414, 0.532, 0.887
(where a is the half crack length, c the half contact width, and
d the depth of the crack from the contact surface). The high-
est value of KI obtained was 4.54 MPa m1/2 , which did
not exceed the threshold value. On the other hand, the stress
intensity factor range in Mode II, KII , was more appeal-
ing. As shown in Table 1, the values of KII are generally
greater than the threshold value KII,th . However, the high-
est value of KII is 19.9 MPa m1/2 , less than the suggested
critical stress intensity of crack failure Kc ∼ = 20 MP m1/2
by Blake and Cheng [21]. It should be noted here that this
value of Kc is conservative. For gear material, the value of
Kc should be significantly greater.
In summarising the findings from literature, it can be con-
cluded that (1) surface crack propagation only results in
pitting or delamination; (2) spalls are developed from subsur-
face cracks; (3) the growth of a subsurface crack is in Mode
II; and (4) a subsurface crack beneath a gear tooth contact
surface does not fail by crack propagation. In another word,
spalling is not caused by the failure of subsurface cracks.
3. Ligament collapse spalling mechanism
3.1. The hypothesis
In searching for the possible cause of spalling, Ding et al.
[1] used a general fracture mechanics based approach to
investigate the subsurface crack failure by checking if the
remaining ligament between the crack tip and the contact
surface had failed. This was done using the following equa-
tion:

ysurface
ytip σe dy
σm = (1)
ysurface − ytip
where σ m is the mean stress in a ligament region, σ e the
von Mises stress caused by the contact load, the ligament
length: (ysurface −ytip ) is the shortest distance from the crack
tip to the contact surface. Comparing σ m to the material
ultimate strength, σult = 1207 MPa, it was found that the
material in the ligament (ysurface − ytip ) failed during a load
cycle for most of the crack cases investigated, and that the
crack with size of a/c = 0.5 at the depth of d/c = 0.355
was the most severe case. Based on these results, ligament
collapse spalling mechanism for gears was hypothesised as
the failure mode of subsurface cracks resulting in spalling.
3.2. Experimental apparatus
In order to verify Ding’s hypothesis, an experimental in-
vestigation was conducted in the Department of Mechan-
ical Engineering, Monash University, Australia. The aims
of the experimental work were to investigate the important
phenomenon and interdependencies, as well as to examine
experimental evidence to test the proposed gear ligament
collapse spalling mechanism. Fig. 2 shows the schematic di-
agram of the experimental apparatus of the single stage spur
gear test rig.
As indicated in Fig. 2, the hydraulic gear pump provided
input load for the gear set. The load control system included
a pressure control valve, a pressure relief valve, two pressure
transducers, and amplifiers. The input load was controlled
by adjusting the pressure control valve, and monitored con-
stantly by the two pressure transducers. The pressure re-
lief valve installed between the pressure transducers and the
control valve for safety.
The calibration for the reading of the amplifier meter Re ,
in terms of the input hydraulic pressure pinput of the pump,
was carefully conducted, and the relation between pinput and
Re was obtained using the straight line of best fit:
pinput (psi) = 2.43 + 420.29Re (2)
Consequently, the relation between the input hydraulic pres-
sure pinput of the pump and the contact load F on gear tooth
 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317 1311

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the gear test rig.

surfaces was derived:
F (N) = 43.1 + 0.76pinput
The lubricating system consisted of an oil pump, an oil filter
(3 ␮m pore size), an oil relief valve, an oil jet feeder, and a
large oil tank. The oil circulated by the oil pump was first
pumped through the oil filter, then injected directly onto the
meshing area of the gear teeth through the oil feeder situated
on the top of the gear box as shown in Fig. 3. The oil, then,
flowed back to the large oil tank where it was cooled down
and then re-circulated. In order to keep the oil temperature
within the room temperature range, the ratio of the oil vol-
ume in the gearbox to that in the tank was 1:20. The brand of
the lubricating oil was Spirax hd80w/90, which was additive
free. It should be noted that gear lubricants often contain sev-
eral additives to improve gear life. For example, in the cases
of heavily loaded contacts, as occur in hypoid gear drives,
EP (extreme pressure) additives are adopted. However, for
(3)
this study the lubricant was chosen to be adequate in that it
would provide a lubrication film in the elasto-hydrodynamic
regime, but in view of the need in minimising the test time,
it was not chosen to provide significant increase in life of the
gears. The test conditions were deemed to be fair as far as the
tooth spalling phenomenon was concerned and subsequent
observation proved that the spalling of the test gear teeth was
typical of that found in heavily loaded in-service gear drives.
3.3. Gear sets
Three pairs of spur gear sets, identical in dimensions,
manufacturing process and material, were used in this in-
vestigation. Fig. 4 shows one pair of them. The dimension

Fig. 3. The gear transmission and lubrication system with the oil jet feeder.
1312 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317

Fig. 4. A pair of the tested gear sets.

Table 2
Dimension parameters of the tested gear sets
Gears Pitch diameter (mm) Teeth num. (z) Diametral pitch (z/D) Base Diameter (mm) Outer diameter (mm)

Pinion 38.1 24 16 35.8 40.6

Gear 50.8 32 16 47.7 53.3

parameters of the gears are given in Table 2. They were
generated from AISI 4340, a typical through-hardening, an-
nealed steel for gears, of which the material property is
given in Table 3. The surface finish of the gear teeth was be-
low 1.6 ␮m roughness, which is the typical smoothness of
tooth surface for in-service applications. In order to avoid
the phenomenon of case crushing, no case-hardened gears
were used.
3.4. Experimental procedure
Three sets of the gear pairs were tested with different
loading conditions and different operating periods. Before
the test, the lubricating oil was filtered through a 3 ␮m fil-
ter, then, circulated in the lubricating system of the rig until
a filtergram analysis indicated that there were no particles
larger than 3 ␮m in the lubricant. In order to examine the
spalling progress on the same teeth at the end of each op-
eration step, three teeth of each gear were chosen randomly
and labelled A, B, and C, respectively, as shown in Fig. 4.
The test procedure of the first gear set was as follows:
(1) Initially, the gears were run for 1 h at a pinion rotation
speed of 300 rpm and a low contact load (10 N), in order
to smooth the original machine-finished teeth surfaces.
(2) Then, the gears were run for 8 h with the operation con-
ditions as the loading stage 1 shown in Table 4, and then
stopped.
(3) After being removed from the rig, the gears were washed
in acetone first, then soaked in Shell X55 solvent in an

Table 3
Material properties of the gears
Material Approximate Hardness BHN Modulus of Yield strength Tensile strength
carbon (%) elasticity (GPa) (MPa) (MPa)
AISI 4340 0.4 350 197 1145 1207

Table 4
Operating and loading conditions of the first gear set
Load stage Pinion speed Contact Input pressure of Contact Maximum Hertzian Operating Total test
(RPM) ratio the pump (psi) load (N) pressure (MPa) hours hours
1 1200 1.6 250 233.1 656 8 8
2 1200 1.6 500 437.7 898 8 16
3 1200 1.6 500 437.7 898 16 32
4 1200 1.6 500 437.7 898 32 64
 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317 1313

ultrasonic bath for 1 h to remove all of the wear particles,

and then dried in a desiccator.
(4) The three teeth labelled A, B, and C, on both the pinion
and gear were examined using the scanning electron
microscope (SEM).
(5) The gears were re-assembled into the rig, then set to run
for another 8 h. The operating condition was the loading
stage 2 as shown in Table 4.
(6) Steps 3 and 4 were repeated. Then, the gears were as-
sembled again to the rig and set to run for a further 16 h
with the same load (see loading stage 3 in Table 4).
(7) Step 6 was repeated with the exception of the running
time, which was extended to 32 h for the final operating
stage (see loading stage 4 in Table 4).
(8) Steps 3 and 4 were repeated to obtain the final surface
damage of the gear teeth.
(9) After the final SEM examination on the worn surfaces,
each selected tooth (labelled A, B, and C) was sawed Fig. 5. Some cross-sectioned samples.
off from the gear together with the two adjoining teeth,
and then cross-sectioned for the preparation of metallo-
graphic samples. A spark erosion wire-cutting machine, investigation that focused on the process between the phe-
Hansvedt EDM model serial SM-150B, was used to nomenon and its causes. The first objective of this exper-
carry out the cross-section procedure. In order to avoid imental study was to investigate the variation of spalling
artefacts, special care was taken to ensure the direc- features due to the variation of loading conditions. The sec-
tion of the cutting, which must be from a worn surface ond objective was to examine the development of spalling
into the bulk of the tooth. The sectioned samples were from the initiation to the completion. The intent was to en-
then carefully mounted, grinded, and polished, follow- capsulate different stages of the spalling process by observ-
ing procedures described in ASM Metals Handbook by ing ‘snapshots’ of random spalling events. It is not possible
Knechtel et al. [22]. Fig. 5 shows some of the completed to ‘snap’ various stages of the progression of a single spall
samples. These samples were finally examined in SEM because that the process requires intrusive metallographic
to observe the characteristics of spalls. sectioning and, anyway, the final creation of a spall (after
The test procedures of the second and third sets of gears the period of crack initiation) is thought to take place in a
followed the same steps as described above but with different very short interval of time.
operating and loading conditions as shown in Table 5. As outlined in Tables 4 and 5, the maximum Hertzian pres-
sure on the three gear sets were 898, 1503, and 1885 Mpa,
3.5. Experimental results respectively. From all the SEM examined contact surfaces,
spalls were found to concentrate in a band right across a
tooth flank in the region from the pitch line spreading to-
According to the different stages of the test, the experi-
wards the dedendum. Figs. 6–8 reveal the spalling band and
mental results are presented in the following two groups:
some typical spalls on a tooth surface from each set of gears.
• Spalling features on gear tooth surfaces due to different It is evident that the features of the majority of spall cavities,
loading conditions. although randomly different in individual details, are very
• Profiles of spall cavities due to different loading condi- similar in overall form that seems falling into a pattern, i.e.
tions. the cavity of the spalling is formed by a shallow wall and
a steep wall along the load rolling direction. The shallow
3.5.1. Spalling features on contact surfaces of gear teeth wall lies at the tail of the spall cavity in relation to the load
Although a number of studies of the spalling phenomenon rolling direction and the steep wall lies at the head of the
were conducted (e.g. [6,23,24]), there has been no thorough spall cavity. Another common feature of spalling is that all

Table 5
Operation and loading conditions of the second and third gear sets
Gear set Pinion speed Contact Input pressure of Contact Maximum Hertzian Operating Total test
no. (RPM) ratio the pump (psi) load (N) pressure (MPa) hours hours
2 1200 1.6 1500 1226.8 1503 4 4
3 1200 1.6 2500 1929.7 1885 2 2
1314 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317

Fig. 6. Scanning electron micrographs of the wheel in gear set 1 showing the spalling phenomenon after 4.32 × 105 contact cycles under the maximum
Hertzian pressure of 898 MPa.

Fig. 7. Scanning electron micrographs of the pinion in gear set 2 showing the spalling phenomenon after 2.88 × 105 contact cycles (4 h engagement)
under the maximum Hertzian pressure of 1503 MPa.

the spall cavities have zigzag surfaces. The only difference
in spalling phenomenon is that the depth of spalls appeared
to become deeper and the size of them be larger as the load
increased.
3.5.2. Spalling features observed from sections of
gear teeth
Though spalling features have been clearly revealed from
the worn surfaces, certain aspects of them still need to be
further established, such as the depth of a cavity and the
slopes of the cavity walls. Furthermore, the formation pro-
cess of a spall cavity, in terms of whether a spall starts to
develop from the surface or subsurface, also needs further
study. In order to observe these phenomena, some samples
of gear tooth cross-sections prepared and examined in SEM.
Figs. 9–11 present some of the SEM results.
From the SEM results, the features of spalling can be
summarised as: (1) spalls are concentrated in the dedendum
vicinity of the pitch line (DVP); (2) a spalling cavity consists
of a shallow wall and a steep wall; (3) the slope of the
shallow wall is about 20–30◦ from the bottom crack line at
the trailing tip towards the contact surface, and the slope

Fig. 8. Scanning electron micrographs of the pinion in gear set 3 showing the spalling phenomenon after 1.44 × 105 contact cycles (2 h engagement)
under the maximum Hertzian pressure of 1885 MPa.
 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317 1315

Fig. 9. Scanning electron micrographs taken from the gear teeth sections of gear set 1 showing profiles of spall cavities and different stages of spall
formation process. The maximum Hertzian pressure for the gear set 1 was 898 MPa.

Fig. 10. Scanning electron micrographs taken from the gear teeth sections of gear set 2 showing profiles of spall cavities and different stages of spall
formation process. The maximum Hertzian pressure for the gear set 2 was 1503 MPa.

Fig. 11. Scanning electron micrographs taken from the gear teeth sections of gear set 3 showing profiles of spall cavities and different stages of spall
formation process. The maximum Hertzian pressure for the gear set 3 was 1885 MPa.

of the steep wall is about 50 ◦ from bottom crack line at 4. Discussions

the lead tip towards the contact surface; (4) the orientation
of spalling is sensitive to the direction of the contact load
movement, i.e. the shallow wall always lies at the tail of
the spall cavity and the steep wall lies at the head of the
spall cavity in relation to the load rolling direction; (5) both
the shallow and steep walls have jagged surfaces; (6) the
depth of a spall cavity increases as the normal contact load
increases. Furthermore, Figs. 10a and 11b also indicate that
spalling is initiated from subsurface cracks. It should be
noted that overwhelming SEM micrographs obtained have
substantiated this argument. Unfortunately, they are unable
to be presented here due to the restriction of the paper length.
Based on the experimental results presented in Sections
3.5.1 and 3.5.2, it is clear that the features of spall cavities,
regarding the pattern, orientation, and morphology, are very
similar in overall form. These findings are consistent with the
prediction of spall formation process, which was proposed
by the authors on the basis of the hypothesis of ligament
collapse spalling mechanism.
It is also observed that the surface morphology of spall
cavities is very rough. Figs. 6–8 clearly revealed the jagged
wall surfaces. This feature implies that spalling was not
caused by brittle fracture. According to the ligament collapse
1316 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317
hypothesis of the spalling mechanism, a separation plane
that forms a wall of a spall cavity should have the fea-
ture of jagged surfaces because the actual formation of the
separation plane is processed by highly concentrated mi-
crocracks joining with each other. These microcracks have
formed along the direction of the maximum shear stress
in the ligament-collapsed region during the early stage of
the contact. All spall images observed from the worn sur-
faces clearly showed jagged surfaces as one of the features
of spalling. Moreover, since that the normal contact load
acting in the vicinity of tooth pitch line reaches the maxi-
mum, spalling would occur in this region that includes de-
dendum vicinity of pitch line and addendum vicinity of
pitch line (AVP), if the contact load were the only influen-
tial factor for the initiation of the microcracks. However, a
spalling band was found only in DVP, not AVP. This phe-
nomenon can be explained by dislocation theory (e.g. [25]).
According to the theory, two major factors mutually con-
tribute to the initiation of subsurface cracks. One is the
magnitude of the loading, which increases the density of
dislocations. The other one is whether these dislocations
are mobile or non-mobile. Mobile dislocations generally
result in plastic deformation, whereas non-mobile disloca-
tions result in crack initiation. Due to the kinematics of
gear tooth contact, highly concentrated non-mobile dislo-
cations in DVP are inevitable. The fact that spalls were
observed only concentrated in the DVP of a tooth further
substantiates the validity of the ligament collapse spalling
mechanism.
Furthermore, it was also found that the shallow wall of
a spall cavity had formed before the formation of the steep
wall, as shown in Figs. 6–8. The formation process of a
cavity appeared to be caused by the material between sub-
surface crack(s) and contact surface-breaking out from the
cavity. This process seemed to initiate from the trailing sec-
tion of a cavity, then gradually extend to the head section
of the cavity until the completion of the spall formation.
Fig. 7c showed the final phase of the formation process and
revealed the last piece of the material in a nearly devel-
oped spall cavity. When a heavy contact load was applied,
the formation of the head part of the spall cavity appeared
to be rather catastrophic as shown in Fig. 8c, in which the
piece of the surface material in the head part of the cav-
ity collapsed into the cavity. The micrographs in Figs. 9a,
10b and 11a showed that the shallow wall of a cavity is
formed at the beginning of the cavity developing stage and
before the formation of the steep wall. Fig. 11b showed that
the material, between the contact surface and the main crack
plane had been ruptured into several chunky-shaped parti-
cles. All the spall profiles presented in Figs. 9–11 showed
that the angles of the shallow-wall were found in the range
of 18–33◦ and the majority is about 30◦ . This agreed well
with the slope of the predicted angle of the shallow wall: 33◦
[1]. These are again consistent with the prediction of spall
formation process based on the ligament collapse spalling
mechanism.
5. Conclusions
The following conclusions were drawn based on the pre-
dictions of the spalling phenomenon from the application of
finite element analysis and the experimental verifications:
(1) The position of the spalls could be predicted, as could
the initiation of spalls from subsurface cracks, the depth
of spalling, and the geometry of the spalling cavity.
(2) Results provided plausible support for the hypothesis
that ligament collapse associated with subsurface cracks
is a primary mechanism of spalling.
(3) The current analysis and results clarify much of the
past confusion as regards the spalling phenomenon,
and they establish a basis for future spalling prediction
based on the cyclic-loading induced initiation, col-
lapse, and the interaction of subsurface cracks in the
plastically-collapsed region.
References
[1] Y. Ding, R. Jones, B.T. Kuhnell, Elastic–plastic finite element analysis
of spall formation in gears, Wear 197 (1996) 197–205.
[2] M. Heems, F. Lagarde, R. Courtel, P. Sorin, C. R. Acad. Sci. 257 (3)
(1963) 3293.
[3] A.M. Kumar, G.T. Hahn, V. Rubin, Elasto-plastic finite element
analyses of two-dimensional rolling and sliding contact deformation
of bearing steel, J. Tribol. Trans. ASME 111 (1989) 309–314.
[4] L.E. Alban, Systematic Analysis of Gear Failures, ASM International,
Metals Park, OH, 1985.
[5] R. I. Widner, Rolling Bearing Failures, ASM Metals Handbook, ninth
ed., vol. 11, Failure Analysis and Prevention, ASM International,
Metals Park, OH, 1986, pp. 490–511.
[6] T.E. Tallian, Failure Atlas for Hertz Contact Machine Elements, New
York, 1992.
[7] S. Way, Pitting due to rolling contact, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME
2 (1935) A49.
[8] L.M. Keer, M.D. Bryant, A pitting model for rolling contact fatigue,
J. Lubr. Technol. Trans. ASME 105 (1983) 198–205.
[9] A.F. Bower, The influence of crack face friction and trapped fluid on
surface initiated rolling contact fatigue cracks, Trans. ASME, JOT
110 (1988) 704–711.
[10] H.S. Cheng, L.M. Keer, T. Mura, Analytical modelling of surface
pitting in simulated gear-teeth contacts, SAE Technical Paper, No.
841086, 1984, pp. 4.987–4.995.
[11] J.F. Fleming, N.P. Suh, Mechanics of crack propagation in dela-
mination wear, Wear 44 (1977) 39–56.
[12] K. Kaneta, Y. Murakami, T. Okazaki, Growth mechanism of sub-
surface crack due to Hertzian contact, J. Tribol. Trans. ASME 108
(1986) 134–139.
[13] H.-C. Sin, N.P. Suh, Subsurface crack propagation due to surface
traction in sliding wear, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME 51 (1984)
317–323.
[14] Y. Ding, R. Jones, B.T. Kuhnell, Numerical analysis of subsurface
crack failure beneath the pitch line of a gear tooth during engagement,
Wear 185 (1995) 141–149.
[15] M. Kaneta, H. Yatsuzuka, Y. Murakami, Mechanism of crack growth
in lubricated rolling/sliding contact, ASLE Trans. 28 (1985) 407–414.
[16] T.M. Clarke, G.R. Miller, L.M.. Keer, H.C. Cheng, The role of
near-surface inclusions in the pitting of gears, ASLE Trans. 28 (1)
(1985) 111–116.
[17] B.D. O’regan, G.T. Hahn, C.A. Rubin, The driving force for Mode
II crack growth under rolling contact, Wear 101 (1985) 333–346.
 Y. Ding, N.F. Rieger / Wear 254 (2003) 1307–1317
[18] P.C. Bastias, G.T. Hahn, C.A. Rubin, Finite element modelling of
subsurface Mode II cracks under contact loads, Eng. Fracture Mech.
33 (1) (1989) 143–152.
[19] L.M. Keer, M.D. Bryant, G.K. Haritos, Subsurface and surface
cracking due to Hertzian contact, J. Lubr. Technol. Trans. ASME
104 (1982) 347–351.
[20] G.R. Miller, A preliminary analysis of subsurface crack branching
under a surface compressive load, J. Tribol. Trans. ASME 110 (1988)
292–296.
[21] J.W. Blake, H.S. Cheng, A surface pitting life model for spur gears.
Part I. Life prediction, J. Tribol. Trans. ASME 113 (1991) 712–
718.
View publication stats
1317
[22] H.E. Knechtel, W.F. Kindle, J.L. McCall, R.D. Buchheit, Metal-
lographic Methods, ASM Metal Handbook, eighth ed., vol. 8,
American Society of Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1973, pp. 1–14.
[23] M.L. Atkin, R.A. Cummins, G.P. Sharp, A Study of Gear Wear in a
Model Gearbox, Mechanical Engineering Transactions, The Institute
of Engineers, Australia, 1979, pp. 40–52.
[24] X.Z. Jin, N.Z. Kang, A study on rolling bearing contact fatigue
failure by macro-observation and micro-analysis, in: Proceedings of
the International Conference on Wear of Materials, Denver, CO,
USA, 1989, pp. 205–213.
[25] D.C. Stouffer, L.T. Dame, Inelastic Deformation of Metals: Models,
Mechanical Properties, and Metallurgy, Wiley, New York, 1996.