Advertisement

Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization

, Volume 60, Issue 4, pp 1645–1665 | Cite as

Robust design optimization of an angular contact ball bearing under manufacturing tolerance

  • Kibong Kang
  • Seung-Wook Kim
  • Kichan Yoon
  • Dong-Hoon ChoiEmail author
Industrial Application
  • 130 Downloads

Abstract

The performances of an angular contact ball bearing (ACBB) are influenced by its geometric dimensions that can have uncertainty due to manufacturing tolerances. Uncertainty of these geometric dimensions results in uncertainty of the performances. This study performed robust design optimization considering the uncertainty of the geometric dimensions which affect the performances of an ACBB, mounted on the main shaft of a grinder. Six geometric parameters and an axial preload were selected as design variables. Among these design variables, three geometric variables were regarded as random design variables that have significant uncertainty of geometric dimensions. To ensure manufacturing precision of the grinder, simultaneously maximizing means and minimizing standard deviations of both axial and radial stiffness values were defined as objective functions. Constraints were imposed to consider uncertainty of the performance functions. A quasi-static analysis was employed to evaluate the bearing performances. The means and standard deviations of the performances were evaluated by the enhanced dimensional reduction method. Robust design optimization was performed using the progressive quadratic response surface method. The robust optimum design revealed that the performance and robustness of both stiffness values were improved than the initial design of the ACBB while satisfying all constraints.

Keywords

Robust design optimization Angular contact ball bearing Quasi-static analysis Enhanced dimensional reduction method Progressive quadratic response surface method 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (no. 20184010201710). The authors extend their gratitude to PIDOTECH Inc. for providing PIAnO, a commercial software for process integration and design optimization software for this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abbas M, Youssef A, Metwalli S (2010) Ball bearing fatigue and wear life optimization using elastohydrodynamic and genetic algorithm. In: Proc. ASME 2010 Int Des Eng Tech Conf Comput Inf Eng Conf (IDETC/CIE 2010), Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 15–18 August:849–856Google Scholar
  2. Budynas R, Nisbett K (2015) Shigley’s mechanical engineering design tenth edition. McGraw-Hill Education, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Changsen W (1991) Analysis of rolling element bearings. Mechanical Engineering Publications Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Choi DH, Yoon K (2001) A design method of an automotive wheel bearing unit with discrete design variables using genetic algorithms. Trans ASME J Tribol 123(1):181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dragoni E (2013) Optimal design of radial cylindrical roller bearings for maximum load-carrying capacity. Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci 227(11):2393–2401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dragoni E (2015) Optimal design of paired tapered roller bearings under centred radial and axial static loads. Mech Ind 16(6):604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feng J, Sun Z, Sun H (2016) Optimization of structure parameters for angular contact ball bearings based on Kriging model and particle swarm optimization algorithm. Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci 231(23):4298–4308Google Scholar
  8. Gu X, Sun G, Li G, Mao L, Li Q (2013) A comparative study on multiobjective reliable and robust optimization for crashworthiness design of vehicle structure. Struct Multidiscip Optim 48(3):669–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hamrock BJ, Dowson D (1981) Ball bearing lubrication: the elastohydrodynamics of elliptical contacts. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Hao P, Wang B, Li G, Meng Z, Wang L (2015) Hybrid framework for reliability-based design optimization of imperfect stiffened shells. AIAA J 53(10):2878–2889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hao P, Wang Y, Liu C, Wang B, Wu H (2017) A novel non-probabilistic reliability-based design optimization algorithm using enhanced chaos control method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 318(1):572–593MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hao P, Ma R, Wang Y, Feng S, Wang B, Li G, Xing H, Yang F (2019) An augmented step size adjustment method for the performance measure approach: Toward general structural reliability-based design optimization. Struct Saf 80:32–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris TA, Kotzalas MN (2007) Rolling bearing analysis, fifth edition. Taylor and Francis group, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  14. Hashimoto H, Ochiai M, Sunami Y (2012) Robust optimum design of fluid dynamic bearing for hard disk drive spindle motors. J Tribol 134(4):041102–041-11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hong KJ, Kim MS, Choi DH (2001) Efficient approximation method for constructing quadratic response surface model. KSME Int J 15(7):876–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ioannides E, Harris TA (1985) A new fatigue life model for rolling bearings. Trans ASME J Tribol 107(3):367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ioannides E, Harris TA, Ragen M (1990) Endurance of aircraft gas turbine main shaft ball bearings-analysis using improved fatigue life theory: part 1-application to a long-life bearing. Trans ASME J Tribol 112(2):304–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones AB (1960) A general theory for elastically constrained ball and radial roller bearings under arbitrary load and speed conditions. J Basic Eng 82(2):309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kalyan M, Tiwari R (2016) Multi-objective optimization of needle roller bearings based on fatigue and wear using evolutionary algorithm. Proc Inst Mech Eng J J Eng Tribol 230(2):170–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim SW, Kang K, Yoon K, Choi DH (2016) Design optimization of an angular contact ball bearing for the main shaft of a grinder. Mech Mach Theory 104:287–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim J, Lee TH, Song Y, Sung TH (2017) Robust design optimization of fixed-fixed beam piezoelectric energy harvester considering manufacturing uncertainties. Sensors Actuators A Phys 260:236–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kumar K, Tiwari R, Reddy RS (2008) Development of an optimum design methodology of cylindrical roller bearings using genetic algorithms. Int J Comput Methods Eng Sci Mech 9(6):321–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li F, Sun G, Huang X, Rong J, Li Q (2015) Multiobjective robust optimization for crashworthiness design of foam filled thin-walled structures with random and interval uncertainties. Eng Struct 88:111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lim J, Jang YS, Chang HS, Park JC, Lee J (2018) Role of multi-response principal component analysis in reliability-based robust design optimization: an application to commercial vehicle design. Struct Multidiscip Optim 58(2):785–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mahadevan S (1997) In: Cruse TA (ed) Monte Carlo simulation. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 123–146Google Scholar
  26. McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (1979) Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2):239–245MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. NSK (2006) Super precision bearings, Cat. no. 1254 KGoogle Scholar
  28. Ochiai M, Kato N, Hashimoto H (2018) Groove shape optimization of thrust air bearing for small size spindle considering the processing errors. In: Proc. ASME-JSME 2018 Jt Int Conf Inf Storage Process Syst Micromechatron Inf Precis Equip (ISPS-MIPE 2018), San Francisco, California, USA, 29–30 AugustGoogle Scholar
  29. Panda S, Panda SN, Nanda P, Mishra D (2015) Comparative study on optimum design of rolling element bearing. Tribol Int 92:595–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rahman S, Xu H (2004) A univariate dimension-reduction method for multi-dimensional integration in stochastic mechanics. Probab Eng Mech 19:393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Savsani V (2013) Multi-objective design optimization of rolling element bearings using ABC, AIA and PSO technique. Int J Energy Optim Eng 2:102–125Google Scholar
  32. Shinde AB, Pawar PM (2017) Multi-objective optimization of surface textured journal bearing by Taguchi based Grey relational analysis. Tribol Int 114:349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sun G, Li G, Zhou S, Li H, Hou S, Li Q (2011) Crashworthiness design of vehicle by using multiobjective robust optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44(1):99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tiwari R, Chandran R (2015) Multitude of objectives based optimum designs of cylindrical roller bearings with evolutionary methods. J Tribol 137(4):041504 1–041504 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tiwari R, Waghole V (2015) Optimization of spherical roller bearing design using artificial bee colony algorithm and grid search method. Int J Comput Methods Eng Sci Mech 16(4):221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tiwari R, Kumar K, Reddy RS (2012) An optimal design methodology of tapered roller bearings using genetic algorithms. Int J Comput Methods Eng Sci Mech 13(2):108–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tudose L, Kulcsar G, Stănescu C (2013) Pareto approach in multi-objective optimal design of single-row cylindrical rolling bearings. In: Dobre G (ed) Power transmissions. Mechanisms and machine science, vol 13. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  38. Tudose L, Rusu F, Tudose C (2016) Optimal design under uncertainty of bearing arrangements. Mech Mach Theory 98:164–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Waghole V, Tiwari R (2014) Optimization of needle roller bearing design using novel hybrid methods. Mech Mach Theory 72:71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Youn B, Choi KK (2004) A new response surface methodology for reliability based design optimization. Comput Struct 82:241–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Youn B, Xi Z, Wells L, Wang P (2006) Enhanced dimension-reduction (eDR) method for sensitivity-free uncertainty quantification. 11th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, Multidisciplinary Analysis Optimization Conferences, September 6–8, USAGoogle Scholar
  42. Yu W, Ren C (2010) Optimal design of high speed angular cntact ball bearing using a multiobjective evolution algorithm. In: Proc IEEE Int Conf Comput Control Ind Eng (CCIE 2010), Wuhan, China, 5–6 June:320–324.Google Scholar
  43. Zhang J, Fang B, Zhu Y, Hong J (2007) A comparative study and stiffness analysis of angular contact ball bearings under different preload mechanisms. Mech Mach Theory 115:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Mechanical EngineeringHanyang UniversitySeongdong-guRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.LG InnotekPyeongtaek-siRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Hanyang UniversitySeongdong-guRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations