Accepted Manuscript

Fatigue life analysis of slewing bearings in wind turbines

Peiyu He, Rongjing Hong, Hua Wang, Cheng Lu

PII: S0142-1123(18)30072-0
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.02.024
Reference: JIJF 4589

To appear in: International Journal of Fatigue

Received Date: 22 November 2017

Revised Date: 8 February 2018
Accepted Date: 14 February 2018

Please cite this article as: He, P., Hong, R., Wang, H., Lu, C., Fatigue life analysis of slewing bearings in wind
turbines, International Journal of Fatigue (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.02.024

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Fatigue life analysis of slewing bearings in
wind turbines
Peiyu He1, Rongjing Hong1, Hua Wang1, Cheng Lu2
1-School of Mechanical and Power Engineering, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816,
China
2- School of Mechanical, Materials and Mechatronic Engineering, University of Wollongong,
NSW 2522, Australia

Abstract

Wind energy is a type of green renewable energy that has received increased attention.
Wind turbines use wind power to generate electricity. As important components of wind turbines,
slewing bearings are large and expensive, and these properties make bearing tests challenging.
The theories and methods of slewing bearing design in wind turbines are not perfect, and the
field lacks long-term engineering verification. To ensure the service life of slewing bearings, an
accurate fatigue life estimation in the design stage is essential. This paper presents a method of
testing the fatigue life using a small sample test. Experiments were conducted to determine the
actual fatigue life of a small sample, and the changes in local raceway damage, vibration
acceleration, and lubrication were monitored. A finite element model of the slewing bearing was
established in ABAQUS to obtain the contact stress between the ball and raceway. The
calculation results were imported into FE-SAFE to analyse the fatigue life. The Morrow mean
stress correction in conjunction with the Brown-Miller strain-life method were used in the
analysis. The simulation results were compared with the experimental results to validate the
effectiveness of the experiment. Three fatigue life calculation methods have distinct advantages
and can be mutually referenced to improve the accuracy of bearing life calculations.

Keywords: slewing bearing; fatigue life; finite element method; rolling contact fatigue

Nomenclature
 Slewing bearing
Serial number of acceleration
A1 L ANSI/ABMA standard-
sensor 1 nm
modified rating life
Serial number of acceleration
A2 M (N·mm) Overturning moment
sensor 2
Serial number of acceleration
A3 Mn Manganese
sensor 3
Serial number of acceleration
A4 Mo Molybdenum
sensor 4
Life modification factor for
a Ni Nickel
1
reliability (reliability 90%)
Life modification factor for bearing
a Nf Cycles
2 steel or material
Life modification factor for Cyclic strain hardening
a n'
3 lubrication exponent
Life modification factor for a Dynamic equivalent axial
a Pea
4 flexible supporting structure load rating
a (o) Contact angle n ' (mm) Groove curvature radius
b Fatigue strength S Sulfur
C Carbon Si Silicon
Ca Basic dynamic axial load rating T1 Grease measurement point 1
Cr Chromium T2 Grease measurement point 2
Cu Copper T3 Grease measurement point 3
c Ductility index T4 Grease measurement point 4
Temperature of
D (mm) Raceway centre diameter T5
surroundings
Theoretical calculation of
D0 (mm) Outer ring diameter T
1 raceway stress cycles
Raceway stress cycles from
Dw (mm) Ball diameter T
2
the test platform
 d i (mm) Inner ring diameter t The test time
E (MPa) Young’s modulus w (r/min) Test speed
Fa (N) Axial force Z Ball numbers

Fr (N) Radial force Δrmax Shear strain amplitude

Raceway groove curvature radius/
f Δε n Principal strain amplitude
D

m
g( ) Gravitational acceleration  a (MPa) Stress amplitude
s2

H (mm) Outer ring height σ 'f Fatigue strength coefficient

Fatigue extension
h (mm) Inner ring height ε'f
coefficient

i Rolling element row  a (mm) Strain amplitude

K' Cyclic strength coefficient ε e (mm) Elastic strain

P Phosphorus εp Plastic strain

(mm)

1 Introduction

In recent years, due to the increased concern regarding environmental and energy problems,
wind energy as a renewable energy source has received increased attention. Since 2005, the
average annual growth rate of the wind power capacity has reached 20%. It is projected that
wind power will account for 12% of the world’s electricity supply by 2030[1]. Wind power has
the potential to become an important part of new power supplies at the country level and achieve
large-scale applications. The economy of wind power development and utilization significantly
improved and the cost has dropped by approximately 30% in the past five years.
Slewing bearings are important components of wind turbines and composed of a yaw
bearing and a pitch bearing. They have driving teeth in the inner or outer ring that drive the
pinion gear and transmit torque to achieve the wind turbine yaw and pitch movement, as shown
in Fig. 1. The common yaw bearing is a four-point contact ball slewing bearing with a zero
cross-section gap or microsection gap (Fig. 2a),and the pitch bearing is a double-row four-point
contact ball slewing bearing with a negative cross-section gap (Fig. 2b).

Fig. 1 Yaw and pitch slewing bearings in a wind turbine

(a) (b)
Fig. 2 Slewing bearings in wind turbines [2]: (a) single row four-point contact slewing
bearing; (b) double row four-point contact slewing bearing
To design wind turbine bearings with high carrying capacity and reliability, the failure
mechanism must be studied. Experimental equipment and experimental methods are essential for
testing the manufacturing quality of wind turbine bearings. Researchers have closely analysed
the bearing fatigue life. Palmgren et al. [3, 4] studied slewing fatigue failure and found that
rolling contact damage originated from the maximum orthogonal shear stress in the raceway
subsurface. In their study, the bearing life was defined as the crack initiation life, and the theory
of rolling contact fatigue reliability was established. A practical method for bearing life design
was proposed and has been included in the international standard of bearing life design. However,
practical engineering studies have indicated that this method may be overconservative. Based on
studies by Lundbery and Palmgren et al. [3, 4], Ioannides and Harris [5] established a model
correlating the bearing rolling contact fatigue life and the reliability. This model introduced the
discrete volume of the bearing material into the concept of the contact fatigue stress limit.
Schlicht et al. [6] concluded that bearing rolling fatigue failure arises from surface pitting, that
the flow and residual stress determine the life expectancy and that the von Mises stress should be
considered the main stress used to determine the fatigue life during the design process. Tallian [7,
8] considered the bearing life the crack initiation life and concluded that the orthogonal stress
was the design characteristic stress and that the life model should consider the material fatigue
sensitivity, the machinery fatigue, and the internal defect distribution of the material. Zaretsky [9]
presented corrections based on the results of Palmgren et al. [3] and used the maximum shear
stress as the characteristic stress while ignoring the effect of the stress depth on the lifetime.
Kudish et al. [10] used the crack development life as the bearing life and established a bearing
design model similar to that of Tallian which included the friction coefficient, residual stress,
material hardness, and defect size, among other parameters. Shimizu [11] found that bearing
steel did not survive the contact fatigue limit, which differed from the case of general structural
steel fatigue problems.
The above studies were based on a large number of tests and statistical analyses of
engineering data. Other scholars have attempted to study the failure mechanisms of bearings
using contact mechanics and fracture mechanics. The bearing life calculation model was
established to explain the various mechanical phenomena in the process of rolling contact
fatigue failure.
Keer et al. [12] used mechanical analysis to investigate bearing rolling contact fatigue, but
their fatigue life results were underestimated compared to those associated with the engineering
application models. Zhou et al. [13, 14] established a bearing life model considering the
initiation and development cycle of crack initiation based on fracture mechanics. Bhargava et al.
[15] used plastic strain accumulation under the cyclic action of material contact to establish a
model of the bearing life. Cheng et al. [16, 17] assumed that microcracks formed on the grain
slip boundary and used dislocation stacking theory to model the bearing life. Vincent et al. [18]
established a bearing life model considering the effects of stress components and residual
stresses based on the dislocation accumulation theory. Xu et al. [19] argued that bearing rolling
fatigue failure resulted from the accumulation of plastic strain rather than the stress intensity at
the crack tip. Lormand et al. [20] developed the Vincent model and assumed that cracks were
type II crack, based on the development life of the crack. Harris et al. [21] noted that the von
Mises stress should be used as the primary characteristics of bearing life design based on their
research results. Jiang et al. [22] used elastic-plastic finite element theory to establish a bearing
life calculation model considering the fatigue failure and ratcheting effect failure. They
concluded that orthogonal shear stress caused bearing fatigue failure. Ringsberg [23] used the
elastic-plastic finite element method to study multifatigue cracks and introduced the concept of
using a critical surface to solve the problem of rolling contact fatigue based on a cumulative
method. Rok et al. studied the fatigue life of double-row ball slewing bearings and analysed the
influences of bearing ring deformation and hardened layer depth on the fatigue life [24]. Peter et
al. established a mechanical model of a slewing bearing. The fatigue parameters of the slewing
bearing were obtained through experiments. The initiation and propagation of a fatigue crack in a
raceway were simulated by the finite element method [25]. Farshid et al. summarized the widely
used rolling contact fatigue model, analysed the limitations of the model and presented a new life
model approach [26]. Glodež et al. compared the stress life method and strain life method. The
results showed that the stress life is more suitable for slewing bearing fatigue life calculations.
The theoretical life calculation method for slewing bearings is cumbersome and not suitable for
all types of slewing rings [27]. Zaretsky et al. used a Monte-Carlo method to simulate the fatigue
of a rolling bearing with rigid support and compared the service life of bearings with different
types of bearing steel [28].
Lundberg-Palmgren [3, 4] proposed the widely accepted belief that the largest orthogonal
shear stress is the main factor that influences rolling bearings. Conversely, Schlicht et al. [6]
suggested that the pitting of the raceway surface was the main factor. Zaretsky et al. [29] used
the 45° maximum shear stress of the raceway subsurface as the cause for the rolling contact
fatigue of the raceway and introduced this parameter into the bearing rolling contact fatigue life
model. Harris et al. [5] used the von Mises stress to analyse rolling bearing contact fatigue.
Cheng and Vincent et al. [30, 39] examined the dislocation accumulation of the raceway
subsurface as a cause of rolling contact fatigue.
Since slewing bearings are typically large, have diverse specifications, and are subjected to
complex loads, constructing test platforms presents technical difficulties and is costly. These
factors discourage researchers from performing experimental tests.
The slewing bearing test platform standard of Laboratoire de Genie Mecanique de Toulouse
in France is specified only for a static load test. Strain gauges are installed to assess circle bolts
and the stress distribution of the structure. During tests, the slewing bearing cannot rotate, and
the test load involves only certain proportions of the loading axial force and overturning moment;
therefore, it cannot simulate complex load conditions [31, 32]. PSL test platforms can be used to
test slewing bearings within a certain range. Compared to the Laboratoire de Genie Mecanique
de Toulouse apparatus, the PSL loading function is more accurate and can achieve a more
complex combination of loads. The control system and test project have not been described in
the literature [32]. Zupan and Prebil [33] have studied slewing bearing technology for a long
time and developed a small slewing bearing test platform that can test a single specification (φ =
644 mm) for a combination of complex loads and produce an arbitrary rotary motion.
Researchers have estimated the running state and degree of damage based on measurements of
parameters such as the vibration, frictional resistance moment and wear amount during operation.
Based on these results, some innovative ideas have been proposed for design guidance [32-35].
IMO test platforms primarily focus on testing operations under extreme conditions (such as -
40°C). However, the loading procedure and fatigue test design of their test platforms must be
optimized [2]. Rothe Erde test platforms use vertical installations and predominantly simulate the
pitch bearing in its actual working state. The collected data accurately represent the actual
working conditions of pitch bearings [36]. MTS test platforms can be used to investigate the
static load deformation, fatigue life and other performance factors. Additionally, they can
achieve different specifications. Test and control systems can record a variety of performance
data in the test process [37].
Engineering practice shows that the selection and design methods of traditional bearings
and slewing bearings design in wind turbines are different in some aspects. Slewing bearing
design involves the raceway, ring gear, and installation bolts. Some studies have shown that over
98% of slewing bearing failures arise from raceway failure [38]. In practical applications, the
local deformation and fatigue peeling of large raceways ultimately lead to slewing bearing
failure. Therefore, failure-avoidance schemes should focus on improving the raceway capacity.
Fatigue bearing capacity analysis methods have not been used in long-term engineering practice
or tests, and the correlation coefficient should be amended. In the present study, a slewing
bearing test platform is developed. Test methods for the fatigue test and overall raceway fatigue
in a small sample are presented. The FE-SAFE fatigue analysis results and theoretical life
calculation results are compared with test results to verify the test effectiveness. The test
provides a basis for determining the bearing raceway capacity and the raceway fatigue failure
mechanism. The different wind turbine bearing life calculation methods have different
advantages and can be mutually referenced. This research provides a foundation for studies of
the fatigue failure mechanisms associated with raceways.

2. Test of fatigue life

Although a slewing bearing has a variety of failure forms, most of them involve raceway
failure modes, such as raceway pitting or peeling. The structure, working conditions and other
characteristics of a slewing bearing are different from those of traditional bearings. The design
model and design parameters of traditional bearings cannot be directly applied to a slewing
bearing. Therefore, developing a test method to verify the raceway fatigue capacity is essential to
facilitating the design of wind turbine yaw and pitch bearings.
The vibration signal is directly associated with machine working condition, and some
researchers have investigated the vibration signal [40-42]. The impulse repetition can be
identified when the rolling element and defect spot come into contact. The test platform can
realistically reflect the actual working conditions of a slewing bearing. Many factors (such as
lubrication, environmental factors, and the supporting structure) should be considered in these
cases.

2.1 Introduction of the test platform

Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show the structure of the slewing bearing test platform. The test load is
applied through a set of hydraulic cylinders that directly act on the loading cap and are passed to
the test slewing bearing. Two bearings of the same specifications are installed either “back to
back” or “face to face”. The movable rings of the two bearing are connected by bolts. The fixed
ring of the lower bearing connects to the lower flange, and that of the upper bearing connects to
the upper flange by bolts. Changing the upper and lower flanges enables testing for different
specifications of slewing bearings. The drive system, which consists of a hydraulic motor, torque
sensor, pinion and drive assembly bracket (shown in Fig. 3), is powered for rotary operation and
monitors the real-time friction torque. The hydraulic cylinders M1 and M2 control the output
pressure and apply the axial force Fa and the overturning moment M .
 Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of the yaw slewing bearing test stand

Fig. 4 Physical model of the yaw slewing bearing test stand

To obtain effective vibration acceleration signals, the sensors must be positioned at
appropriate measuring points. The sensor mounting positions are shown in Fig. 5, and the test
parameters are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Test parameters
Parameter Meaning Comments
Temperature Sensor T1 Temperature 1 Grease measurement point 1
Temperature Sensor T2 Temperature 2 Grease measurement point 2
Temperature Sensor T3 Temperature 3 Grease measurement point 3
Temperature Sensor T4 Temperature 4 Grease measurement point 4
Temperature Sensor T5 Temperature 5 Temperature of surroundings
Accelerometer A1 Acceleration 1 Upper ring test point 1
Accelerometer A2 Acceleration 2 Upper ring test point 2

Accelerometer A3 Acceleration 3 Upper ring test point 3

Accelerometer A4 Acceleration 4 Upper ring test point 4
 Fig. 5 Sensor installation position
The test time depends on the rolling speed of the ball (the slewing bearing test speed). The
axial force Fa is 330 kN, the overturning moment M 1.38 ×105 kN mm, and the test speed is 4

rpm.

2.2 Test results and analysis

The QNA-730-20 four-point contact slewing bearing was operated for 16 days and a total of
92,160 revolutions. The test platform began to produce an abnormal sound on the 8th day, and
the test was stopped after ten hours of intense vibration on the 16th day. This test process reflects
the slewing bearing from the run-in phase through the normal operation stage and up to the
degradation failure stage. The inner and outer ring raceways of the slewing bearing exhibited
multiple prominent peeling points, as shown in Figs. 6 and 7. The inner and outer rings were
uniformly punched and indented. The soft part of the raceway in the vicinity of the drive head
experienced severe damage under a small load, although the area opposite the drive head
displayed little damage. The damage to the raceway and edge of the outer ring was more severe
than that to the inner ring. Furthermore, peeling and damage were severe in the M1 cylinder and
M2 cylinder at a relatively fixed load. The plugging area was not exposed to the load, and the
severe damage there was due to quenching.
 Fig. 6 Inner-ring wear situation

Fig. 7 Outer ring wear situation

In scenarios that require high-speed or high-precision bearing, the fatigue damage areas on
the raceway surface typically affect performance. Thus, the bearing performance determines the
degree of failure. However, slewing bearings typically run at low speeds and heavy loads; thus,
the requirements are not the same, and a small number of fatigue damage spots will not
immediately affect normal bearing operation. Nagaraj et al. [43, 44] analysed the effect of
fatigue damage on the subsequent bearing damage. Their results showed that the stress
concentration at the edge of a damaged area is localized when the ball is over the area of fatigue
damage, as shown in Fig. 8-a. Due to the influence of the stress concentration, the edge of
fatigue damage occurs under the rolling ball, so that the peeling area expands in the direction of
rolling. However, the edge shape (slope) and the peeling depth are the same as those observed
for the original stripping spots, as shown in Fig. 8-b.
 (a)

(b)
Fig. 8 (a) Stress distribution on the spall edge; (b) development of the spalled region
The test sampling frequency is 2048 Hz. Figs. 9-12 show the acceleration signals collected
by the four sensors (A1 to A4) during the test. The signals are relatively stable until the 6th day.
The small increase that lasts until the 8th day is caused by slewing bearing jitter and a slight
amount of noise. On the 14th day, the acceleration signal increases because of the violent
jittering of the slewing bearing. The test was stopped after ten hours of intense vibration on the
16th day.
-3
x 10
6

0
A1 (g)

-2

-4

-6

-8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (day)

Fig. 9 Accelerometer A1 acceleration trend

 -3
x 10
10

4
A2 (g)

-2

-4

-6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (day)

Fig. 10 Accelerometer A2 acceleration trend

-3
x 10
6

0
A3 (g)

-2

-4

-6

-8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Time (day)

Fig. 11 Accelerometer A3 acceleration trend

-3
x 10
6

0
A4 (g)

-2

-4

-6

-8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Time (day)
 Fig. 12 Accelerometer A4 acceleration trend
The detected parameters indicate that the acceleration changes over the first six days are
small. Slight failure begins on the eighth day, and the signal increases on the fourteenth day. The
acceleration sensors A1, A2 and A3 exhibit general increasing trends; acceleration sensor A2
displays a slight increase after 13 days; and the acceleration sensors A3 and A4 exhibit variable
changes in the vibration signals. The slewing bearing speed is not high, the bearing vibration is
very weak and relative changes are obvious. Fig. 13 shows the temperatures at the five
monitoring points. The grease temperatures exhibit the same trend and are higher than the
environmental temperature.
T1、T2、T3、T4、T5
80
T1
T2
70
T3
T4
T5
60
T (℃)

50

40

30

20

10 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (day)
Fig. 13 Temperature histories at five monitoring points

3 Fatigue life simulation

3.1 Finite element model

A three-dimensional solid model of the bearing described in Fig. 13 and Table 2 was
created in ABAQUS; the model omits the bolt mounting holes and driving ring gear to improve
the computation efficiency without affecting the calculation results. The test bearing is a QNA-
730-20 four-point contact slewing bearing, the structure and parameters are shown in Fig. 14 and
Table 2, respectively. The ring material is 42CrMo, and the chemical components are shown in
Table 3. The ball material is GCr15, and the associated chemical components are shown in
Table 4. Detailed parameters are shown in Table 5 and were obtained based on available
experimental data [27, 45, 46]. The Ramberg-Osgood relationship shown in equation (1) is used
to obtain the relationship between the stress and strain [47]. Because the geometric dimensions
of the slewing bearing are large, the degree of density and the number of cells should be
carefully controlled to improve the calculation accuracy. The mesh is refined around the ball and
raceway contact area, as shown in Fig. 15. The sweep mesh method is used, and the element type
is C3D8I, which is suitable for contact calculations involving two objects [45]. The grid
algorithm is a neutral axis algorithm, which can be assigned a regular cell shape.

Fig. 14 Structure of the single-row four-contact ball slewing bearing

Table 2 Parameters of the single-row four-contact ball slewing bearing
Parameter Value Parameter Value
Outer ring diameter D0 (mm) 811 Ball diameter Dw (mm) 22

Inner ring diameter d i (mm) 659 Groove curvature radius r (mm) 11.668

Raceway centre diameter D (mm) 730 Contact angle a (o) 45

Outer ring height H (mm) 65 Ball number Z 91

Inner ring height h (mm) 65
Table 3 Chemical components of 42CrMo
C Si Mn S P Cr Ni Cu Mo
0.38~0.45 0.17~0.37 0.50~0.8 ≤0.035 ≤0.035 0.90~1.2 ≤0.03 ≤0.03 0.15~0.25
Table 4 Chemical components of GCr15
C Si Mn Cr Mo Ni Cu P
0.95~1.05 0.15~0.35 0.25~0.45 1.04~1.65 ≤0.10 ≤0.30 ≤0.25 ≤0.025
Table. 5 Material properties of the contact pair

Material E(GPa) v K ' (MPa) n'  f ' (MPa) f'

 Ball GCr15 207 0.3 1173 0.0932 1511 1.3943
Raceway 42CrMo 212 0.3 5808 0.1550 2425 0.1167
1
σ σ  n'
εa  εe  ε p  a   a'  (1)
E K 

where  a is the strain amplitude (mm), ε e is the elastic strain (mm), ε p is the plastic strain (mm),

 a is the stress amplitude (MPa), E is the modulus of elasticity (MPa), K ' is the cyclic strength

coefficient, and n ' is the cyclic strain hardening exponent.

Fig. 15 The slewing bearing grid

Fig. 16 The slewing bearing load

To facilitate the inner and outer ring boundary conditions and the applied load, reference
point RP-1 is set at the slewing bearing geometric centre, and coupling constraints with the outer
ring-mounting surface are established. A fully fixed restraint is applied to the inner ring, and an
asymmetrical constraint is set at the inner and outer ring sections. The reference point RP-1 uses
the three degrees of freedom in the displacement constraint that restricts the degree of freedom of
rotation in the X-axis and Y-axis directions but releases the degree of freedom of rotation in the
Z-axis direction. The Z-axis translational degree of freedom is constrained. The X-axis and the
Y-axis translational degrees of freedom are released. Fa is 330 kN, and M is 1.38 ×105 kN·mm.
The load applied to RP-1 is halved because the finite element model is established for half of the
structure, as shown in Fig. 16.

Fig. 17 Slewing bearing stress gradient

Fig. 17 shows that the maximum equivalent stress of the ball and raceway contact area is
607 MPa and that the axial force and the overturning moment are coupled with the maximum
position. The output (stress field) generated from the static simulation in ABAQUS is later used
as input in FE-SAFE, with a pulsating amplitude, to calculate the fatigue life.

3.2 FE-SAFE fatigue life model

FE-SAFE is a specialized software for structural fatigue durability analysis that can be used
for fatigue life analysis and optimum design. Because the FE-SAFE material library does not
include the material 42CrMo, the Seeger algorithm [49] is used to estimate the 42CrMo fatigue
properties. The Seeger algorithm generates fatigue data based on the ultimate tensile strength and
elastic modulus of the material. The algorithm is suitable for ordinary carbon steel, aluminium
alloy, and medium- and low-alloy steel and can produce accurate results. A tensile strength of
1080 MPa and elastic modulus of 207 GPa were used for 42CrMo steel based on the Seeger
method to obtain the fatigue performance parameters [50]. Fig. 18 shows the S-N curve and ɛ-N
curve of 42CrMo. In this model, the bearing surface roughness is defined as between 0.25 µm
and 0.6 µm [51].
 (a)

(b)
Fig. 18 42CrMo (a) S-N curve and (b) ɛ-N curve
During bearing operation, the alternating stress is the main factor that leads to the
occurrence of fatigue damage. At a certain position on the raceway, each rolling ball produces an
alternating stress that is described as the fatigue life load information in the bearing load
spectrum [10]. The maximum load is defined as 1, and the minimum load is defined as 0, as
shown in Fig. 19.
 Fig. 19 Load information
FE-SAFE software provides a variety of fatigue life algorithms. The selection of a
reasonable fatigue life correction method is a key step in accurately predicting the material
fatigue life in the process of fatigue life assessment.
The material 42CrMo is ductile. Thus, the Brown-Miller algorithm [49], which is the
preferred method recommended by the American Automobile Manufacturers Association, is
used in the fatigue analysis. The Brown-Miller algorithm uses standard material data and critical
plane techniques to obtain accurate stress-strain spectra for non-uniform loading conditions and
calculates the probability of fatigue. This algorithm assumes that the greatest fatigue damage
occurs in the plane subjected to the maximum shear stress amplitude and that fatigue damage is
the result of the maximum shear strain and the co-action of the principal strain in this plane.
Considering the effect of the average stress and strain, it is necessary to modify the algorithm.
The Morrow mean stress criterion is often used in engineering practice.
The Morrow approach [52] subtracts the average stress per cycle to correct the elastic stress
and make the predicted fatigue life closer to the actual fatigue life. The Brown-Miller strain-life
equation with Morrow’s mean stress correction is expressed as follows:

Δr Δε σ'
max  n  c f ( 2 N )b  c ε' ( 2 N )c (2)
2 2 1 E f 2 f f
where Δrmax is the shear strain amplitude, Δε n is the principal strain amplitude, N f is the

number of cycles, b is the fatigue strength index, σ 'f is the fatigue strength coefficient, c is the

ductility index, ε'f is the fatigue extension coefficient, and E is Young’s modulus.
 Fig. 20 Ball rolling over a contact point 107 times
The slewing bearing fatigue life is calculated using the Brown-Miller algorithm and the
Morrow mean stress criterion. The bearing design life is 10 7 , as shown in Fig. 20. The stress
concentration factor based on the surface roughness is 1.05 [51]. The FE-SAFE results are
illustrated in ABAQUS for intuitive display.
Fig. 21 shows the log-10 lifetime gradient diagram obtained from the simulations. The low
fatigue life region is the same as the area of the stress concentration in the static analysis. The
minimum fatigue logarithmic life value is 6.877, and the cycle number is 10 6.877 = 7533600
cycles. The area is the raceway subsurface, where the coupled axial force and overturning
moment reach a maximum. The region where the logarithmic life is less than 10 7 is concentrated
and includes another area in which the logarithmic life is 10 7 . This area is unlikely to be
damaged in normal use. The above results illustrate that slewing bearing failure mainly occurs
due to fatigue failure in the raceway in the stress concentration area and that fatigue cracks are
first generated in this area. Then, cracks propagate and cause surface spall, which aggravates the
bearing wear and expands the scope of damage. This process is the main cause of slewing
bearing fatigue failure.

Fig. 21 Logarithmic plot of the lifetime cycles of the studied slewing bearing
 Fig. 22 Slewing bearing SF@Life = 10 7 cycles
As shown in Fig. 22, the safety factor (SF) distribution is consistent with the logarithmic
lifetime gradient. The minimum lifetime safety factor associated with a design life of 10 7 cycles
in the stress concentration area is 1.031. This value indicates that the bearing is reliable for future
product design.

4. Discussion

According to the yaw and pitch rolling bearing design guideline published by the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory in the United States [53], the basic dynamic axial load rating is as
follows:
2
0.7
C = f ( i cos a ) Z 3 D 1.8 tan a
a w
(3)
where f is the raceway groove curvature radius/ D , Z is the ball number, i is the rolling

element row, Dw is the roller diameter, and a is the contact angle.

The dynamic equivalent axial load rating of the slewing bearing is as follows:

P  0.75F  F  2M
ea r a D
(4)
The basic rating L10 formula (for 10 6 revolutions) of the slewing bearing is as follows:
3
C 
L10   a  (5)
 Pea 
 The ANSI/ABMA standard modified rating life Lnm formula (for 10e6 revolutions) of the
slewing bearing is as follows:
L a a a a L
nm 1 2 3 4 10
(6)

where a1 is the life modification factor for reliability (reliability 90%); a 2 is the life

modification factor for bearing steel or another material; a3 is the life modification factor for

lubrication; and a 4 is the life modification factor for a flexible supporting structure.

The final wind turbine slewing bearing fatigue life theory estimate is 9.65 ×105 revolutions.

T  Lnm * Z  8821000 (7)

1

where T is the theoretical calculation of the number of raceway stress cycles.

1
The slewing bearing test platform was used to conduct the test at a test speed of 4 rpm. The
test was stopped on the 16th day after 10 hours of intense vibration, and the raceway exhibited
prominent peeling. The total lifetime was 92,160 revolutions.

T  Z * t * w  8386560 (8)
2

where T is the number of raceway stress cycles for the test platform, t is the test time, and w
2
is the test speed.
The cycle number obtained from FE-SAFE is 10 6.877 = 7533600 , which uses the Brown-

Miller algorithm and the Morrow mean stress criterion to calculate the fatigue life. The fatigue
life is calculated using the theoretical fatigue test and FE-SAFE simulation results, which are
within the acceptable range, as shown in Table 6. Thus, the fatigue test is verified. The slewing
bearing stress state characterizes the elastic stress and a multiaxial stress field under service
conditions. Thus, Morrow’s mean stress-modified Brown-Miller strain-life equation is applied to
the fatigue life prediction for the slewing bearing.
Table 6 Comparison of the fatigue life
Theoretical calculation Fatigue test FE-SAFE simulation
Cycles 8,821,000 8,386,560 7,533,600
Error 5.18% 0% 10.17%
5. Conclusion

In this study, an fatigue test of a wind turbine slewing bearing is conducted to characterize
the fatigue life in a relatively short time. This analysis provides an experimental reference for
bearing design. The fatigue life of a specific type of slewing bearing must be determined via
similar tests. The test requirements are extensive, time consuming and costly. Wind turbine
bearing life theory calculations can fully consider various factors to best represent the actual
situation. Life modification factors associated with reliability a1 are determined based on the
different conditions and requirements. Different heat treatment processes result in different
hardness levels for the same material. Different hardness levels can be incorporated into the life
modification factors for bearing steel or other materials. Wind turbine bearing life theory
calculations also consider both the effects of lubrication conditions and the influence of the
supporting structure. However, the surface roughness cannot be considered in wind turbine
bearing life theory calculations. The simulation results obtained from FE-SAFE using the
Brown-Miller strain-life method, Morrow’s mean stress correction, and the theoretical
calculation results are compared to verify the results. The shortest fatigue life of the slewing
bearing coincides with the maximum stress point calculated by the finite element method, which
is below the contact surface of the ball and the raceway. However, the fatigue life analysis in FE-
SAFE software did not consider the influence of lubrication. The complex load on wind turbine
bearing life often results in an irregular load spectrum. The simulation results provide numerous
advantages; for example, the load spectrum can be set, and dangerous areas can be identified
from the fatigue gradient. The three different wind turbine bearing life calculation methods have
different advantages and can be mutually referenced. This research provides the foundation for
studies of the fatigue failure mechanisms of raceways.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support provided by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (51105191, 51375222), the project of Jiangsu provincial Six Talent Peaks
(GDZB033), the Shanghai Sailing Program (16YF1408500).
References

[1] Arthouros Z, Christian K. Wind energy scenarios up to 2030. European Wind Energy
Association (EWEA) 2008; 1-60.
[2] IMO. DV 105E Slewing Ring Product Catalogue. www.goimo.com, 2009.
[3] Lundbery G, Palmgren A. Dynamic capacity of rolling bearings. Acta Polytech Scand, Mech
Eng Ser 1947; 1~52.
[4] Lundbery G, Palmgren A. Dynamic capacity of rolling bearings. Acta Polytech Scand, Mech
Eng Ser 1952; 96~127.
[5] Ioannides E, Harris T A. A new fatigue life model for rolling bearings. J Tribol 1985; 107(3):
367~377. Doi:10.1115/1.3261081.
[6] Schlicht H, Schreiber E, Zwirlein O. Fatigue and failure mechanism of bearings. I Mech E
Conf 1986; 85~91.
[7] Tallian T E. Simplified contact fatigue life prediction model-Part I: review of published
models. J Tribol 1992; 114(2):207~213.Doi: 10.1115/1.2920875.
[8] Tallian T E. Simplified contact fatigue life prediction model-Part II: new model. J Tribol
1992; 114(2): 214~220. Doi:10.1115/1.2920876.
[9] Zaretsky E V, Poplawski J V, Miller C R. Rolling bearing life prediction—past, present,
and future. International Tribology Conference 2000; 2000~210529.
[10] Kudish I, Burris K W. Modern state of experimentation and modelling in contact fatigue
phenomenon: Part II- analysis of the existing statistical mathematical models of bearing and
gear fatigue life. New statistical model of contact fatigue. Tribol T 2000; 43(2): 293~301.
Doi: 10.1080/10402000008982343.
[11] Shigeo S. Fatigue limit concept and life prediction model for rolling contact machine
elements. Tribol T 2002; 45(1):39~46. Doi: 10.1080/10402000208982519.
[12] Keer L M, Bryant M D. A pitting model for rolling contact fatigue. J Lubrication Tech 1983;
105(2):198~205. Doi:10.1115/1.3254565.
[13] Zhou R S, Cheng H S, Mura T. Micropitting in rolling and sliding contact under mixed
lubrication. J Tribol 1989; 111(4):605~613. Doi:10.1115/1.3261984.
[14] Zhou R S. Surface topography and fatigue life of rolling contact bearing. Tribol T 1993;
36(3):329~340. Doi: 10.1080/10402009308983167.
[15] Bhargava V, Hahn G T, Rubin C A. Rolling contact deformation, etching effects, and failure
of high-strength bearing steel. Metallurgical Transactions A 1990; 21(7):1921~1931. Doi:
10.1007/BF02647240.
[16] Cheng W, Cheng H S, Mura T, et al. Micromechanics modeling of crack initiation under
contact fatigue. J Tribol 1994; 116(1):2~8. Doi:10.1115/1.2927042.
[17] Cheng H S. Semi-analytical modeling of crack initiation dominant contact fatigue life for
roller bearings. J Tribol 1997; 119(2):233~240. Doi:10.1115/1.2833163.
[18] Vincent A, Lormand G, Lamagnère P, et al. From white etching areas formed around
inclusions to crack nucleation in bearing steels under rolling contact fatigue. ASTM Special
Technical Publication 1998; 1327:109-123.
[19] Xu G, Sadeghi F. Spall initiation and propagation due to debris denting. Wear 1996; 201 (1–
2):106~116. Doi: 10.1016/S0043-1648 (96)07225-0.
[20] Lormand G, Meynaud P, Vincent A, et al. From cleanliness to rolling fatigue life of
bearings - A new approach. ASTM Special Technical Publication 1998; 1327:55-69.
Doi: 10.1520/ STP12120S.
[21] Harris T A, Yu W K. Lundberg-Palmgren Fatigue Theory: Considerations of Failure Stress
and Stressed Volume. J Tribol 1999; 121(1):85~89. Doi:10.1115/1.2833815.
[22] Jiang Y, Sehitoglu H. A model for rolling contact failure. Wear 1999; 224(1):38~49. Doi:
10.1016/S0043-1648(98)00311-1.
[23] Ringsberg J W. Life prediction of rolling contact fatigue crack initiation. Int J Fatigue 2001;
23(7):575~586. Doi：10.1016/S0142-1123 (01)00024-X.
[24] Rok P, Peter G, Jože F et al. Fatigue life of double row slewing ball bearing with irregular
geometry. Procedia Engineering 2010; 2(1): 1877-1886. Doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2010.03.202.
[25] Peter G, Rok P, Srečko G. Fatigue behaviour of 42CrMo4 steel under contact loading.
Procedia engineering 2010; 2(1): 1877-1886. Doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2010.03.214.
[26] Farshid S, Behrooz J, Trevor S et al. A review of rolling contact fatigue. J Tribology 2009;
131(4):220.
[27] Glodež S, Potočnik R, Flašker J. Computational model for calculation of static capacity and
lifetime of large slewing bearing’s raceway. Mech Mach Theory 2012; 47: 16-30．
[28] Zaretsky E V, Poplawski J V, Peters S M. Comparison of life theories for rolling-element
bearing. Tri Trans 1996; 39(2)：237-248. Doi:10.1080/10402009608983525.
[29] Zaretsky E V. Design for Life, Plan for Death. Machine Design 1994; 66(15): 55–59.
[30] Zouhair C, Alain D, Jean G, et al. Study of a bolted and screwed joint of a slewing bearing ---
Numerical Study. CPI 2005. 2005 of Conference.
[31] PSL. Quality for Heavy Duty. www.pslas.com, 2009.
[32] Zupan S, Kunc R, Prebil I. Experimental determination of damage to bearing raceways in
rolling rotational connections. Exp Techniques 2006; 30(2):31–36.
[33] Zupan S, Prebil I. Carrying angle and carrying capacity of a large single row ball bearing as a
function of geometry parameters of the rolling contact and supporting structure stiffness. Mech
Mach Theory 2001; 36(10): 1087~1103. Doi: 10.1016/S0094-114X(01)00044-1.
[34] Robert K, Ivan P. Numerical determination of carrying capacity of larger rolling bearings. J
Mater Process Tech 2004; 155~156: 1696~1703. Doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.125.
[35] Robert K, Andrej Z, Ivan P. Verification of numerical determination of carrying capacity of
large rolling bearings with hardened raceway. Int J Fatigue 2007; 29(9~11): 1913~1919. Doi：
10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2007.02.003.
[36] Rothe Erde. Slewing Bearings. Application: Wind Energy Turbines. www.rotheerde.com,
2010.
[37] MTS. MTS Wind Power Solutions. www.mts.com, 2011.
[38] Xuehai Gao. Research on carrying capability of slewing bearings in wind turbines. Nanjing
technology university, 2012.
[39] A. Vincent, G. Lormand, P. Lamagnere, et al. From White Etching Areas Formed Around
Inclusions to Crack Nucleation in Bearing Steels Under Rolling Contact. ASTM Special
Technical Publication, 1327:109-123.
[40] Caesarendra W, Kosasih P, Tieu A, et al. Condition monitoring of naturally damaged slow
speed slewing bearing based on ensemble empirical mode decomposition. J Mech Sci
Technol 2013; 27(8): 2253-2262.
[41] Kiral Z, Kiral Z K, Karagulle H R. Vibration analysis of rolling element bearings with
various defects under the action of an unbalanced force. Mech syst signal process 2006; 20:
1967-1991.
[42] Caesarendra W, Kosasih B, Tieu A K, et al. Circular domain feature based condition
monitoring for low speed slewing bearing. Mech syst signal process 2014; 45(1)：114-138.
[43] Nathan A B, Nagaraj K A, Vaughn S, et al. Stress Field Evolution in a Ball Bearing
Raceway Fatigue Spall. Journal of ASTM International 2010; 7: 1~18.
[44] Nagaraj K A, Nathan B, George L, et al. Rolling contact fatigue life and spall propagation of
AISI M50, M50NiL, and AISI 52100, Part II: Stress Modeling. Tribol T 2009; 53(1): 42~51.
Doi：10.1080/10402000903226325.
[45] M. Bauccio. ASM Metals Reference Book. ASM International 1993.
[46] Fatigue calculator-Official Website, 2017 December 20. Available from:
(http://www.fatiguecalculator.com data retrieved from SAE J1099 report).
[47] Ralph I, Stephens, Ali Fatemi, et al. Metal Fatigue in Engineering. John Wiley&Sons 2000.
[48] F L Litvin, I G Peter and A Fuentes et al. Topology of modified surfaces of involute helical
gears with line contact developed for improvement of bearing contact, reduction of
transmission errors, and stress analysis. Math Comput Model 2005; 42: 1063-1078.
[49] FE-SAFE In. FE-SAFE User’s Manual .2011, Dassault Systemes; France.
[50] GB/T3077-2015.Alloy structure steels. In: National standards of People’s Republic of China,
China, 2015.
[51] Chong He. Contact stress analysis and fatigue life studies of wind power yaw bearing.
Yanshan University, 2014.
[52] Morrow J, Fatigue properties in metal, Fatigue Design Handbook, Advances in Engineering,
Vol. 4, 1968, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, USA, 21-29. .
[53] Harris T, J H Rumbarger, C P Butterfield. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Technical
Report with number NREL/TP-500-42362, December 2009.
 Highlights:

 A method to test the accelerated fatigue life using a small sample test is proposed.
 Using experiments determines the actual fatigue life of a small sample and observes the
changes in local raceway damage, vibration acceleration, and grease.
 A small sample test of ABAQUS and FE-SAFE Fatigue life theory
slewing bearing fatigue life simulation calculation

Wind turbine
design guideline
DG03

Raceway damage Vibration acceleration Grease temperature