Abstract
To improve the fatigue, wear and thermal based failures of Tapered Roller Bearings (TRBs) a multiobjective optimization technique has been proposed. Objective functions considered are: the dynamic capacity (C_{d}) that is related to fatigue life, the elastohydrodynamic minimum film thickness (h_{min}) that is associated to the wear life, and the maximum bearing temperature (T_{max}) that is related to the lubricant life. This paper presents a nonlinear constrained optimization problem of three objectives with eleven design variables and twentyeight constraints. The said objectives have been optimized individually (i.e., the singleobjective optimization) and concurrently (i.e., the multiobjective optimization) through a multiobjective evolutionary procedure, titled as the Elitist Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm. A set of standard TRBs have been selected for the optimization. Paretooptimal fronts (POFs) and Paretooptimal surfaces (POSs) are obtained for one representative standard TRB. Out of many solutions on the POFs/POSs only the kneepoint solution has been shown in a tabular form. Life comparison factors have been calculated based on both the optimized and standard TRBs, and results indicate that the optimized TRBs got enhanced lives than standard bearings. To get the graphical impression of optimized TRBs, a skeleton of radial dimensions of all seven optimized bearings based on various combinations of objectives has been shown for one of the representative standard TRB. In few cases the multiobjective optimization has better convergence as compared to single objective optimization due to its inherent diversity by the principle of dominance. The sensitivity investigation has also been conducted to observe the sensitivity of three objectives with design variables. From the sensitivity analysis data, tolerances have been provided for design variables. These tolerances could be used by the manufacturing industry while producing TRBs.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Abbreviations
 \( A_{{}} \) :

Area normal to the heat flow, m^{2}
 \( A_{f} \) :

Area of the flange, mm^{2}
 b _{ m } :

Rating factor for the contemporary material
 B :

Width of the cone, mm
 \( B_{{1_{ \hbox{min} } }} \) :

Width of the narrow front face of cone, mm
 \( B_{{2_{ \hbox{min} } }} \) :

Width of the flange, mm
 C :

Width of the cup, mm
 \( C_{d} \) :

Dynamic load capacity of the bearing, N
 \( C_{d\_new} \) :

Dynamic load capacity of the bearing obtained using NSGAII, N
 \( C_{d\_std} \) :

Dynamic load capacity of the bearing given in bearing catalogues, N
 C _{ p } :

Specific heat of a lubricant at a conSOOnt pressure, J/KgK
 \( C_{{1_{ \hbox{min} } }} \) :

Minimum width of the backface of the cup, mm
 \( C_{{2_{ \hbox{min} } }} \) :

Minimum width of the frontface of the cup, mm
 \( d \) :

Inner (or bore) diameter of the bearing, mm
 d _{ i } :

inner raceway mean diameter, mm
 d _{o} :

outer raceway mean diameter, mm
 \( D \) :

Outer diameter of the bearing, mm
 \( D_{m} \) :

Bearing pitch diameter, mm
 \( D_{r} \) :

Roller mean diameter, mm
 \( D_{{r_{LL} }} \) :

Lower limit of the roller mean diameter, mm
 \( D_{{r_{UL} }} \) :

Upper limit of the roller mean diameter, mm
 \( D_{{o_{i} }} \) :

Minimum diameter of the cup, mm
 \( e \) :

Parameter for the mobility condition
 E :

Modulus of elasticity, Pa
 \( E^{\prime} \) :

Equivalent modulus of elasticity, Pa
 \( EI \) :

Section modulus of the flange section subjected to bending, Nmm^{2}
 \( f(X) \) :

Objective vector
 Gr :

Grashof number
 \( h_{f} \) :

Position of the ribroller contact on the flange face, mm
 h _{ min } :

Elastohydrodynamic minimum film thickness, m
 h _{ r } :

Radiation heat transfer coefficient
 H _{ w } :

Housing width, mm
 i :

Number of rows of the roller
 k :

Thermal conductivity of rings and the rolling element
 \( K_{D\hbox{min} } \) :

Minimum roller diameter limiter
 \( K_{D\hbox{max} } \) :

Maximum roller diameter limiter
 k_{o} :

Thermal conductivity of the lubricant, W/m°C
 l :

Total length of the roller, mm
 \( l_{e} \) :

Effective length of the roller, mm
 \( \ell \) :

DiSOOnce between two points (i, j) of the heat transfer, m
 \( L_{10} \) :

Rating life (Bearing fatigue life cycles)
 n_{o} :

Outer raceway speed, rpm
 \( P \) :

Equivalent radial load, N
 P_{r} :

Prandtl number of the lubrication oil
 \( Q_{i} \) :

Load on the inner ring at the most heavily loaded roller, N
 Q_{max} :

Contact force on the interior raceway at the heaviest loaded roller, N
 \( Q_{o} \) :

Load on the outer ring at the most heavily loaded roller, N
 \( Q_{f} \) :

Load on the flange at the most heavily loaded roller, N
 r:

Corner radius of the roller, mm
 \( r_{1} \) :

Cone backface chamfer height, mm
 \( r_{2} \) :

Cone backface chamfer width, mm
 \( r_{3} \) :

Cup backface chamfer height, mm
 \( r_{4} \) :

Cup backface chamfer width, mm
 \( r_{5} \) :

Chamfer height and width of the frontface the cone and the cup, mm
 Re:

Reynolds number
 \( R_{{e_{i,o} }} \) :

Equivalent radius (m)
 \( S_{{1_{ \hbox{min} } }}^{i} \) :

Minimum thickness of the frontface of the cone, mm
 \( S_{{2_{ \hbox{min} } }}^{i} \) :

Minimum thickness of the back face of the cone, mm
 \( S_{{1_{ \hbox{min} } }}^{o} \) :

Minimum thickness of the backface of the cup, mm
 \( S_{{2_{ \hbox{min} } }}^{o} \) :

Minimum thickness of the frontface of the cup, mm
 th:

Seal thickness, mm
 \( T \) :

Total width of the bearing, mm
 T _{i} and T _{j} :

Temperatures of the two points (i, j) between which the heat transfer is taking place
 T _{ l } :

Lubricant temperature, °C
 T _{ max } :

Maximum bearing temperature, °C
 u _{ i,o } :

Entrainment velocity, m/s
 u _{ s } :

1/3^{rd} of the surface velocity of the housing, m/s
 X :

Design variable vector
 \( Z \) :

Number of rollers
 \( \alpha_{f} \) :

Flange angle
 \( \alpha_{i} \) :

Contact angle of the inner raceway (i.e., cone)
 \( \alpha_{o} \) :

Outer raceway contact angle
 α_{p} :

Pressure viscosity coefficient of lubricant, m^{2}/N
 \( \beta \) :

Parameter for the effective length of the roller
 \( \beta^{o} \) :

Semi taper angle of the roller
 \( \gamma \) :

Ratio, \( D_{{r_{mean} }} \cos \alpha_{o} /D_{m} \)
 \( \varepsilon \) :

Parameter for outer ring strength consideration
 \( \varepsilon_{h} \) :

Thermal emissivity of the housing
 η_{o} :

Dynamic viscosity of lubricant, Ns/m^{2}
 \( \lambda \) :

Reduction factor to account for the edge loading and the nonuniform stress
 \( \lambda_{l} \) :

Life comparison factor
 \( \nu \) :

Factor to account for the edge loading
 ν_{o} :

Kinematic viscosity of lubricant, \( {\text{m}}^{ 2} / {\text{s}} \)
 \( \sigma_{{b_{f} }} \) :

Bending stress in the flange, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \sigma_{{f_{ \hbox{max} } }} \) :

Maximum stress in the flange, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \sigma_{ \hbox{max} }^{l} \) :

Maximum contact stress, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \sigma_{safe} \) :

Safe contact stress, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \sigma_{tf} \) :

Direct tensile stress in the flange, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \tau_{f} \) :

Shear stress in the flange, \( {\text{N/mm}}^{ 2} \)
 \( \upsilon \) :

Poisson’s ratio
 ω_{m} :

Angular velocity of the cage, rad/s
 ω_{r} :

Angular velocity of the roller, rad/s
 ω_{o} :

Angular velocity of the outer raceway, rad/s
 \( \varpi \) :

Width of the structure, m
 f:

Flange
 \( i \) :

Represents the inner raceway or cone
 \( o \) :

Represents the outer raceway or cup
 DOO:

Dual Objective Optimization
 MOO:

Multi Objective Optimization
 POF:

Pareto Optimal Front
 POS:

Pareto Optimal Surface
 SOO:

Single Objective Optimization
 TOO:

Triple Objective Optimization
 TRB:

Tapered Roller Bearing
References
 1
Andreason S 1973 Load distribution in a tapered roller bearing arrangement considering misalignment. ASME J. Tribol. 2: 84–92
 2
Karna C L 1974 Performance characteristics at the rib roller end contact in tapered roller bearings. ASLE Trans. 17(1): 14–21
 3
Liu J Y 1976 Analysis of tapered roller bearings considering high speed and combined loading. Trans. ASME Lubr. Symp. 98(4): 564–572
 4
Bercea I, Cretu S and Nélias D 2003 Analysis of doublerow tapered roller bearings, partI. Tribol. Trans. 46: 228–239
 5
Blake J J and Truman, C E 2004 Measurement of running torque of tapered roller bearings. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J J. Eng. Tribol. 218(4): 239–250
 6
Chakraborty I, KumarV, Nair SB and Tiwari R 2003 Rolling element bearing design through genetic algorithm. Eng. Optim. 35(6): 649–659
 7
Gupta S, Tiwari R and Nair SB 2007 Multiobjective design optimization of rolling bearings using genetic algorithms. Mech. Mach. Theory. 42: 1418–1443
 8
Rao R B and Tiwari R 2007 Optimum design of rolling element bearings using genetic algorithms. Mech. Mach. Theory 42: 233–250
 9
Kumar S K, Tiwari R and Reddy R S 2008 Development of an optimum design methodology of cylindrical roller bearing using genetic algorithms. Int. J. Comput. Methods Eng. Sci. Mech. 9(6): 321–341
 10
Kumar S K, Tiwari R and Prasad P V V N 2009 An optimum design of crowned cylindrical roller bearings using genetic algorithms. Trans. ASME J. Mech. Des. 131(5): 051011 (14 pages)
 11
Lin W Y 2010 Optimum design of rolling element bearings using a genetic algorithm–differential evolution (GA–DE) hybrid algorithm. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 225: 1–8
 12
Wang Z, Meng L and Hao W 2011 Optimal design of parameters for four column tapered roller bearing. Appl. Mech. Mater. 63–64: 201–204
 13
Tiwari R, Sunil K K and Prasad P V V N. 2012 An optimum design methodology of tapered roller bearings using genetic algorithms. Int. J. Comput. Methods Eng. Sci. Mech. 13(2): 108–127
 14
Waghole V and Tiwari R 2013 Optimization of needle roller bearing design using novel hybrid methods. Mech. Mach. Theory. 72: 71–85
 15
Tiwari R and Rahul C 2013 Thermal based optimum design of tapered roller bearing through evolutionary algorithm. In: ASME 2013 Gar Turbine, NAL Bangalore, India. Paper no. GT India 20133792
 16
Tiwari R and Chandran R M P 2015 Multitude of objectives based optimum designs of cylindrical roller bearings using evolutionary algorithms. ASME J. Tribol. 137(4): 04150404150412
 17
Najjari M and Guilbault R 2015 Formula derived from particle swarm optimization (PSO) for optimum design of cylindrical roller profile under EHL regime. Mech. Mach. Theory 90: 162–174
 18
Tiwari R and Chandran R M P 2017 Optimal design of deepgroove ball bearings based on multitude of objectives using evolutionary algorithms. Multidiscip. Model. Mater. Struct. 14(3): 567–588. https://doi.org/10.1108/MMMS0620170058
 19
Changsen W 1991 Analysis of Rolling Element Bearings. Mechanical Engineering Publications Ltd., London
 20
IS 7461 (part1) :1993 Bureau of Indian Standards. General plan of boundary dimensions for tapered roller bearings
 21
Harris T A 2001 Rolling Bearing Analysis. John Wiley, New York
 22
Harris T A and Barnsby R M 1998 Tribology performance prediction of aircraft gas turbine main shaft ball bearings. Tribol. Trans. 41(1): 60–68
 23
Jamison W E, Kauzlarich J J and Mochel E V 1975 Geometric effects on ribroller contact in tapered roller bearing. ASLE Trans. 20: 79–88
 24
Cohon J L 1985 Multicriteria programming: brief review and applications. In: J. S. Gero (Ed.), Design optimization, pp. 163–191. Academic Press, New York
 25
Deb K 2013 MultiObjective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. John Wiley and Sons Publisher, London
 26
Aihara S 1987 A new running torque formula for tapered roller bearings under axial load. ASME J. Tribol. 109: 471–478
 27
IS 3824: 2002 Bureau of Indian Standard, Rolling bearings Dynamic load ratings and rating lives
 28
Hamrock B J 1994 Fundamentals of Fluid Film Lubrication. McGrawHill, New York
 29
SKF, General Catalogue 2005 Media print, Germany
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix A: Geometrical Parameters and Their Relationships for TRBs
Appendix A: Geometrical Parameters and Their Relationships for TRBs
Following equations are used in the present study on the MOO of TRBs [13]
The minimum thickness of the front face of the cup, (refer figure 2)
The minimum thickness of the front face of the cone, (refer figure 2)
The minimum width of the front face of the cup, (refer figure 2)
The minimum thickness of the back face of the cup, (refer figure 2)
The minimum width of the back face of the cup, (refer figure 2)
The minimum width of the front face of the cone, (refer figure 2)
The minimum thickness of the back face of the cup, (refer figure 2)
The minimum thickness of the back face of the cone, (refer figure 2)
Force on the spherical face of the roller
Normal force on the cup
Tensile stress in the flange
Area of the flange
Maximum shear stress in the flange
Bending stress in the flange
Position of the ribroller contact on the flange face
Maximum principal stress in the flange
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kalyan, M., Tiwari, R. & Ahmad, M.S. Multiobjective optimization in geometric design of tapered roller bearings based on fatigue, wear and thermal considerations through genetic algorithms. Sādhanā 45, 142 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046020013853
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Keywords
 Tapered roller bearings
 dynamic capacity
 elastohydrodynamic lubrication
 maximum temperature
 multiple objectives
 NSGAII
 sensitivity analysis