Fred B. Oswald and Erwin V. Zaretsky

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Joseph V. Poplawski

J. V. Poplawski & Associates, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

Effect of Roller Geometry on Roller Bearing

Load-Life Relation

NASA/TM—2015-218895

December 2015
NASA STI Program . . . in Profi le

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated 

to the advancement of aeronautics and space science. 

The NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) 

Program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role.

The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices 

of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, 

organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates 

NASA’s STI. The NASA STI Program provides access 

to the NASA Technical Report Server—Registered 

(NTRS Reg) and NASA Technical Report Server—

Public (NTRS) thus providing one of the largest 

collections of aeronautical and space science STI in 

the world. Results are published in both non-NASA 

channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report 

Series, which includes the following report types:

• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major signifi cant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or theoretical 

analysis. Includes compilations of signifi cant 

scientifi c and technical data and information 

deemed to be of continuing reference value. 

NASA counter-part of peer-reviewed formal 

professional papers, but has less stringent 

limitations on manuscript length and extent of 

graphic presentations.

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientifi c 

and technical fi ndings that are preliminary or of 

specialized interest, e.g., “quick-release” reports, 

working papers, and bibliographies that contain 

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive 

analysis.

• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and 

technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees.

• CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientifi c and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or co-sponsored by NASA.

• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest.

• TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientifi c and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission.

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following:

• Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

• E-mail your question to help@sti.nasa.gov

• Fax your question to the NASA STI 

Information Desk at 757-864-6500

• Telephone the NASA STI Information Desk at

 757-864-9658

• Write to:

NASA STI Program

 Mail Stop 148

 NASA Langley Research Center

 Hampton, VA 23681-2199
Fred B. Oswald and Erwin V. Zaretsky

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Joseph V. Poplawski

J. V. Poplawski & Associates, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

Effect of Roller Geometry on Roller Bearing

Load-Life Relation

NASA/TM—2015-218895

December 2015

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio 44135
Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Bob Flowers of J. V. Poplawski and Associates for developing 

programmed formulas for Lundberg-Logarithmic Crown Drop.

Available from

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identifi cation 

only. Their usage does not constitute an offi cial endorsement, 

either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration.

This work was sponsored by the Fundamental Aeronautics Program 

at the NASA Glenn Research Center.

Level of Review: This material has been technically reviewed by technical management. 

NASA STI Program

Mail Stop 148

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681-2199

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfi eld, VA 22161

703-605-6000

This report is available in electronic form at http://www.sti.nasa.gov/ and http://ntrs.nasa.gov/
NASA/TM—2015-218895 1 

Effect of Roller Geometry on Roller Bearing Load-Life Relation 

Fred B. Oswald and Erwin V. Zaretsky*

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Glenn Research Center 

Cleveland, Ohio 44135 

Joseph V. Poplawski 

J. V. Poplawski & Associates 

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18018 

Abstract 

Cylindrical roller bearings typically employ roller profile modification to equalize load distribution, 

minimize stress concentration at roller ends and allow for a small amount of misalignment. The 1947 

Lundberg-Palmgren analysis reported an inverse fourth power relation between load and life for roller 

bearings with line contact. In 1952, Lundberg and Palmgren changed their load-life exponent to 10/3 for 

roller bearings, assuming mixed line and point contact. The effect of roller-crown profile was reanalyzed 

in this paper to determine the actual load-life relation for modified roller profiles. For uncrowned rollers 

(line contact), the load-life exponent is p = 4, in agreement with the 1947 Lundberg-Palmgren value but 

crowning reduces the value of the exponent, p. The lives of modern roller bearings made from vacuumprocessed steels significantly exceed those predicted by the Lundberg-Palmgren theory. The Zaretsky 

rolling-element bearing life model of 1996 produces a load-life exponent of p = 5 for flat rollers, which is 

more consistent with test data. For the Zaretsky model with fully crowned rollers p = 4.3. For an 

aerospace profile and chamfered rollers, p = 4.6. Using the 1952 Lundberg-Palmgren value p = 10/3, the 

value incorporated in ANSI/ABMA and ISO bearing standards, can create significant life calculation 

errors for roller bearings. 

Introduction 

Classical rolling-element fatigue is the process by which repeated cycles of a concentrated 

compressive surface load creates surface or near-subsurface cracks that propagate into a crack network 

that eventually generates a spall, creating a pit in the surface of the running track. The time to failure is 

related to the normal load, Pn, and resultant maximum Hertz stress, Smax, in the contact zone and the 

critical shearing stresses, τ, near the surface of two bodies in contact (Ref. 1). 

In 1947 Lundberg and Palmgren (Ref. 2) related rolling-element bearing life to the magnitude of the 

shearing stress τ, stressed volume V, depth to the critical shear stress z, and N, the number of stress cycles 

per inner-race revolution where for each race the life at a defined probability of survival. 

  h m c m m

LP z

V N

L /

/ 1/ 1 1 1 ~ 



 



 



 







 (1) 

They chose the maximum orthogonal shear stress, τo as the critical shearing stress. Exponents c, m

and h were chosen to fit experimental data available at that time. The rationale for the term involving z, 

the depth to critical shear stress, is that a significant portion of the fatigue life represents the time required 

for a crack to propagate to the surface and produce a fatigue spall. The life of each raceway was 

 

*

Distinguished Research Associate 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 2 

m or m ir mL10 L10 L10

1 1 1   (2) 

Lundberg and Palmgren (Ref. 2) related the fatigue life at a 90-percent probability of survival, L10, of 

a radially-loaded bearing to the ratio of the load capacity of the bearing, C, and the applied load, P, to the 

power p. Based on test data, they established that the exponent p = 3 for point contact on ball bearings 

and p > 3 for line contact on roller bearings. 

p

P

C L 



 





10  (3) 

In 1952, Lundberg and Palmgren (Ref. 3) revised their load-life model for roller bearing life, based on 

additional experimental data. Lundberg and Palmgren stated that for line contact on both bearing races

p = 4, while for point contact on both races p = 3 and they suggested that for mixed point and line contact

p = 10/3. The ANSI/ABMA and ISO bearing life standards (Refs. 4 and 5) use the 1952 Lundberg and 

Palmgren relation (Ref. 3), with p = 10/3 for roller bearings. Bearing lives as computed according to the 

standards are often adjusted by means of life factors (Ref. 6) to account for longer life due to improved 

bearing materials, manufacturing methods and lubrication. 

Zaretsky (Ref. 1) and Zaretsky et al. (Ref. 7) modified the Lundberg-Palmgren life model in 

Equation (1), to better fit post-1960 life data for bearings made from vacuum processed steel, which have 

much longer lives, particularly at light load 

c m

Z N V

L

1/ 1 1 1 ~ 



 



 



 







 (4) 

The Zaretsky life model Equation (4), which does not include the term involving the depth to the 

critical shearing stress, results in a larger value of the load-life exponent p in Equation (3). Zaretsky et al. 

(Ref. 7) suggest that p = 5 is more appropriate for contemporary roller bearings with line contact where 

crack propagation time does not dominate bearing life. In addition, Zaretsky chose the maximum shearing 

stress, τmax as the critical stress. This choice affects the stressed volume, since the volume is based on zmax, 

the depth to τmax, which occurs at a greater depth than zo, the depth to τo. A procedure for converting the 

life as computed from the Lundberg-Palmgren life model to the Zaretsky life model is described in 

Appendix B. 

Either life model above can be expressed in terms of the Hertz stress, Smax by Equation (5), where, 

with line contact, exponent n = 8 for the Lundberg-Palmgren model of Equation (1) or n = 10 for the 

Zaretsky life model of Equation (4). Derivations for Equations (1) to (4), including an explanation of how 

the exponents were determined are given in Zaretsky (Ref. 1). 

n

S

L 















max

1 ~ (5) 

Although bearing researchers have long recognized that roller edge loading can significantly reduce 

roller bearing fatigue life, the stress concentration at the roller ends is generally not included in roller 

bearing life calculation. The usual procedure is to choose a roller profile that minimizes edge loading at 

the highest expected load and allow for a small amount of misalignment and then to ignore the effect in 

the life calculation, which is based on the stress at the center of the roller. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 3 

Sugiura, et al. (Ref. 8) performed rolling contact tests using fully-crowned rollers with five different 

values of the crown radius and four loads to find an optimal crowning that produced a stress distribution 

to equalize the distribution of fatigue failures between roller center and edge. They found that the effect of 

higher edge stresses resulted in an approximate 30 percent reduction in life when compared to the effect 

of the stress at the center of the contact area. This indicates that the stress at the edge of the rollers must 

be controlled for long bearing life. 

Takata, et al. (Ref. 9) investigated both fully-crowned circular arc and optimized custom profiles on 

tapered roller bearings under six loading conditions, including radial and axial loads with and without 

misalignment to create a new design technique for optimized rollers. Fujiwara and Kawase (Ref. 10) 

developed an optimized logarithmic profile to exclude edge loading and maximize rolling fatigue life. 

Roller crowning affects the stress distribution along the roller, increasing the maximum Hertz stress; 

therefore it affects the load-life and stress-life relationships. Poplawski, et al. (Refs. 11 and 12) considered 

the effect of crowning on roller bearing life but assumed a constant Hertz stress-life exponent in 

Equation (5) that did not change with different roller profiles, with n = 8.1 for the Lundberg-Palmgren life 

model and n = 9.9 for the Zaretsky life model. 

Based on the discussion above, the objective of this work was to extend the work of Poplawski, et al. 

(Refs. 11 and 12) by using COBRA-AHS, a commercially-available bearing analysis code (Ref. 13) to 

include the effect of five roller profiles on the actual load- and stress-life relationships using both the 

Lundberg-Palmgren and Zaretsky bearing life models. Results are given for five different roller profiles 

as plots of predicted roller bearing life vs. applied radial load and vs. maximum Hertz stress. Our analysis 

assumes a cylindrical roller bearing with “zero” clearance in a rigid housing on a stiff shaft with no 

misalignment. 

Nomenclature 

b semiwidth of Hertzian contact area in direction of rolling, mm (in.) 

C dynamic load capacity, N (lb) 

Ci magnitude of crown drop relief at location i, mm (in.) 

C0 roller crown drop amplitude based on a gage point along roller, mm (in.) 

C(x) roller crown drop at a lamina location, mm (in.) 

c stress-life exponent 

d roller diameter, mm (in.) 

E Young’s modulus of elasticity, MPa (ksi) 

f ratio of ball bearing raceway groove radius to ball diameter (conformity) 

h exponent in Equation (1) 

Ki inner-race stiffness for roller lamina

k1 constant in Equations (B1), (B2), (B3) mmh/m (in.h/m) 

L life, millions of inner-race revolutions or hours 

le effective roller length, mm (in.) 

LB life of bearings in gearbox, stress cycles, millions of inner race revolutions or hours 

LG life of bearings in gearbox, stress cycles, millions of inner race revolutions or hours 

L10 10-percent life: life at which 90 percent of a population survives, millions of 

 inner-race revolutions or hours 

m Weibull modulus (slope) 

N number of stress cycles per inner-race revolution 

n Hertz stress-life exponent in Equation (5) or number of lamina in Equation (13) 

P, Pn bearing, normal or roller load, N (lb) 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 4 

p load-life exponent 

pj load acting on lamina slice i, N (lb) 

R Radius, mm (in.) 

S stress, MPa (ksi)

Smax maximum Hertz stress, MPa (ksi) 

V stressed volume, mm3 (in.3) 

w width of roller lamina, mm (in.) 

x dimension along roller length, mm (in.)

Y0 roller displacement (compression) in normal direction 

Z axial location along roller 

z distance below surface to critical shear stress due to Hertzian load, mm (in.) 

 exponent 

δ deflection between axis of a finite-length cylinder and an infinite plane, mm (in.) 

δi deflection in roller spring element i, mm (in.) 

θ roller misalignment angle, radians 

θa, θb elastic constants for two bodies in contact 

ν Poisson’s ratio 

σ stress, MPa (ksi) 

τ shear stress, MPa (psi) 

τmax maximum shear stress, MPa (psi) 

τo maximum orthogonal shearing stress, MPa (psi) 

ξ roller lamina location, measured from roller center, mm (in.) 

Subscripts: 

B bearing 

G gear 

j jth lamina on roller 

ir, or inner- or outer-race of bearing 

LP refers to Lundberg-Palmgren life model, Equation (2) 

max refers to maximum Hertz stress or maximum shear stress 

o refers to maximum orthogonal shearing stress 

r residual stress 

RE rolling element set 

S shaft and inner-ring bore 

s system 

x tangential direction 

Z refers to Zaretsky life model, Equation (3) 

z normal direction
NASA/TM—2015-218895 5 

Roller Bearing Geometry 

A representative cylindrical roller bearing is shown in Figure 1. The bearing comprises an inner and 

outer ring and plurality of rollers interspersed between the two rings and positioned by a cage or 

separator. The drawing shows a bearing with guiding flanges on the outer race only, which allows axial 

movement between the inner race and rollers. 

Properties for the 210-size cylindrical roller bearings analyzed in this paper are shown in Table 1. 

Rollers are assumed to have a “square” cross-section, with the roller length equal to the roller diameter. 

Roller crowning is represented by six profiles, with profiles summarized in Table 2. The amount of 

crowning is expressed in terms of the maximum profile relief or “crown drop” at a “gauge point” near the 

ends of the rollers. The roller profiles (roller drops) for five of the profiles are plotted in Figure 2. For 

clarity, the scale in the vertical (crowning) direction is exaggerated by approximately 400 times compared 

to the horizontal direction. 

The stress (or pressure) distribution across the rollers is shown for six different profiles and at three 

different radial loads by 18 small “thumbnail” plots in Figure 3. These plots are provided by the analysis 

code (Ref. 13) to help the analyst avoid excessive edge loading. The loads shown include the “reference” 

load of 29,190 N (6562 lb) plus a light load of 24 percent of the reference load and a heavy load of 

280 percent of the reference load. 

Flat (Uncrowned) Rollers 

Flat rollers have a cylindrical profile of constant diameter. Flat rollers would provide pure line contact 

and thus the lowest contact stress. However, as shown in the top row of plots in Figure 3, flat rollers do 

not compensate for edge loading, which produces significant stress concentration at the ends, particularly 

at high loads. 

Aerospace Profile 

The aerospace (partially crowned) profile modeled for this paper has a flat central portion (flat length 

of 8.0 mm) comprising 61.5 percent of the roller length) and circular arc relief at the roller ends with a 

radius of curvature (1300 mm) that is 100 times the roller diameter. The stress distribution is shown in the 

second row of plots in Figure 3. The modification parameters were interactively chosen to control stress 

concentration in the middle plot. At the light load, there is no contact at the roller ends, which increases 

the stress at the center. Although stress concentrations appear at the roller ends at the heavy load, this 

stress is reduced by about 28 percent from the flat roller case. 

Chamfered Profile 

The chamfered (partially crowned) profile is similar to the aerospace profile. The modeled profile has a 

flat central portion (8.0 mm) and linear relief at the roller ends equal to the roller diameter divided by 1500. 

The stress distribution along the rollers (row 3 of Fig. 3) is very similar to that of the aerospace profile. 

In theory, the aerospace and chamfered profiles have discontinuities in their shape: the chamfered in 

the slope and the aerospace in the curvature. However, in actual manufacturing practice any such 

discontinuities will be blended in to the flat part of the roller. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 6 

Logarithmic Profile 

The logarithmic profile has a very gentle curve at the center of the roller that gradually increases, 

becoming theoretically infinite (tangent) at the ends. The crown drop is defined by Equation (6), where 

we have chosen the gauge point as 0.999 times the distance from the center to the end of a roller, this is 

0.0065 mm from the ends of a 13 mm roller. 

 

2

0 1 (2 / )

1 ( ) ln 















   Lt

C x C (6) 

The stress distribution for the logarithmic profile modeled for this paper is shown in row 4 of 

Figure 3. At both the reference load and at the light load, this profile provides a more uniform stress near 

the roller center than any of the other profiles considered here. 

Full Crowning 

Fully-crowned rollers have a constant radius of curvature across the roller length, which concentrates 

the load and thus the contact stress towards the roller center in order to avoid loading at the roller ends. 

For the reference level of loading considered in this paper of 29,190 N (6562 lb), a crown radius, R equal 

to 150 times the roller diameter, d avoids creating stress concentration at the roller ends without excessive 

stress at the center of the roller. The stress distribution for this profile is shown in row 5 of Figure 3. At 

the heavy load, the stress distribution is similar to the preceding three profiles. 

We also included more severe crowning, with R = 100d to show the increased Hertz stress at the 

center of the rollers, particularly at lighter loads. See row 6 of Figure 3. 

Laminated Roller Model 

The Laminated Roller model approach to quantify the load distribution and stress pattern developed 

along cylinders in misaligned contact was first introduced by Daring and Radzimovsky (Ref. 14) in 1962. 

The method was applied to cylindrical roller bearings having crowned rollers by A.B. Jones in his early 

computer software (Ref. 15). The application of the laminated roller model to roller bearings is further 

documented by Harris (Ref. 16) in 1969. This method has been incorporated into ISO/TS 16281 

(Ref. 17). The treatment of the elastic contact between the crowned roller and raceway incorporated 

within the software used in this study and presented in ISO/TS 16281 are both consistent with the 

historical publications (Refs. 14 to 16). 

Anderson (Ref. 18), based on Palmgren (Ref. 19), shows that the approach (deflection) between the 

axis of a finite-length cylinder and an infinite plane can be expressed as: 

 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.39 ( ) / a b e       P l (7) 

where P is the load, le is the effective cylinder (roller) length, and θ is defined in terms of the elastic 

constants E and ν as θ = 4(1 – ν2

)/E. The constants need not be the same for bodies a and b. 

 















  

      

b

b

a

a a b E E

(1 ) (1 ) ( ) 4

2 2

 (8) 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 7 

Solving for the force P and substituting for (θa + θb) gives 

 















  

  

  















  

   

  

b

b

a

a

e

b

b

a

a

e

E E

l

E E

l P

2 2

8/9 10/9

2 2

10/9

8/9 10/9

1 1

0.7117

1 1 4 (0.39)

 (9) 

Defining the stiffness K = P/δα

 (recall that for line contact, α = 10/9 ≈ 1.11), gives 

 















  

  

 

b

b

a

a

E E

l K

2 2

8/9

1 1

0.7117 (10) 

If bodies a and b are the same material, the denominator of Equation (10) simplifies to 2(1 – ν2

)/E. 

Dareing and Radzimovsky (Ref. 14) introduced a method to estimate the load distribution across a 

misaligned roller (cylinder). In their model, the roller was approximated as a series of n thin disks or 

lamina where each lamina is of width w (Fig. 4). The shear stress between adjacent lamina disks due to 

the variation of load along the roller was neglected. Since this method is an approximation, the laminated 

roller model cannot predict stress concentration such as at the edge of a roller contact. 

The rolling-element bearing analysis code (Ref. 13) used for the analysis in this paper embodies both 

the laminated roller model (Ref. 14) and a method based on the numerical approach of Hartnett (Ref. 20) 

to calculate the contact stresses between a profiled roller and raceway. The more rigorous approach of 

Hartnett (Ref. 20) yields stress concentration estimates not available from the laminated roller approach. 

Experimental validation of the Hartnett methodology was presented by Hartnett and Kannel in 

Reference 21. 

The load distribution along a loaded and misaligned roller to raceway contact can be determined by 

representing the lamina to raceway contact with an equivalent spring (Fig. 5). The stiffness of the ith

equivalent lamina spring can be determined from applying the line-contact load/deflection relationship of 

Equation (10), replacing the roller width, l, with the lamina width, w: 

 















  

  

 

b

b

a

a

E E

w K

2 2

8/9

1 1

0.7117 (11) 

The force pj in a roller lamina becomes: 

8 / 9 10 / 9 p j K jw j   (12) 

From Figure 5, the compression, δi within each of the n lamina springs can be calculated for small angles 

of misalignment, θ as: 

j  Y0  Z  2C j  (13) 

Misalignment is not considered in this paper, therefore, θ = 0 in Figure 5. The compression force in the 

lamina spring element, pj is found from the displacement, δj using Equation (13). The total roller load Pir

at a particular location is found by summing the individual lamina forces, pj as shown in Equation (14). 

For equilibrium, the roller loads must equal the applied loads on the bearing. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 8 







n

j

P p j

1

 (14) 

The equations above apply to both the inner and outer race contacts. 

The fatigue life estimates presented by the authors use the classical Lundberg-Palmgren (L-P) life 

models since the authors do not accept the fatigue limit stress life method contained in ISO/TS 16281 

(Ref. 17). Furthermore, that method has not been accepted in the United States per the American Bearing 

Manufacturers Association ANSI/ABMA-11:1990 (Ref. 4). Therefore, the load-life exponent using the 

L-P life model will not be a variable as implied by the fatigue limit stress life approach. 

Finally, the software incorporates the method for calculating the life of the inner and outer raceways 

and combining those into a bearing life as is consistent with the original L-P approach and used within 

ISO/TS 16281 (Ref. 17). 

Results and Discussion 

Analysis 

A commercial rolling-element bearing analysis code (Ref. 13) was used to calculate the fatigue lives, 

maximum Hertz stresses at the inner- and outer-race and the depth to the maximum shearing stress for 

radially-loaded cylindrical roller bearings with 50-mm bore in 1910-, 110-, 210-, and 310-size and for 

30-mm bore, 1906-size and 100 mm bore, 220-size bearings. This paper shows the results for only the 

210-size bearings. The calculations were performed for six loads for each of the five roller profiles. The 

analysis assumed a cylindrical roller bearing with “zero” clearance in a ridged housing on a stiff shaft 

with no misalignment. 

The code can analyze the effect of typical roller profiles on bearing stress and life. Lives predicted by 

the code, which is based on Lundberg and Palmgren theory (Refs. 2 and 3), were adjusted for the 

Zaretsky (Refs. 1 and 7) life model for comparison with the Lundberg-Palmgren results. The Weibull 

slope for roller bearings was taken to be m = 1.125. 

The reference roller profile for this paper has an aerospace profile with flat length (8.0 mm) 

comprising 61.5 percent of the roller length and with a radius of curvature (1300 mm) that is 100 times 

the roller diameter. These parameters were chosen interactively in the analysis software to avoid stress 

concentration at the ends of the rollers for the reference load of 29,190 N (6562 lb). The reference load 

produces an inner-ring maximum Hertz stress of 2240 MPa (325 ksi) with the aerospace profile. The 

computed stress distribution across the roller width at the reference load for each of the six roller profiles 

is shown in Figure 3. 

Six load cases ranging from 6,940 to 81,994 N (1,560 to 18,443 lb) were chosen for the analysis.

These loads produced inner-ring maximum Hertz stress ranging from 1200 to 3620 MPa (174 to 525 ksi) 

for the aerospace profile. The loads and resulting maximum Hertz stresses are given in Table 3 for each of 

the 36 cases analyzed. 

Effect of Roller Profile 

The effect of roller profile on life for the six load cases for six profiles is shown in Figure 6. For each 

profile, the computed life is plotted vs. the applied load to produce a load-life plot. The longest computed 

life at any load would be produced by flat rollers (where stress concentration at roller ends was 

neglected). For flat rollers, the load life exponent p = 4 from Equation (3), which is in agreement with the 

Lundberg-Palmgren life model. Crowning decreases the effective roller length and increases the 

maximum stress at the center of the roller, which decreases the life, particularly at light loads. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 9 

At the highest load in Figure 6, for the most severe crowning, where R = 100d, the life is 17 percent 

less than the calculated life for flat rollers. At the lightest load, the life is reduced much more, by 

86 percent compared to flat rollers. The greater effect at light loads is reflected in the load-life exponent p, 

which is reduced from p = 4 for flat rollers to p = 3.1 with severe crowning. This case was included to 

show the effect of excessive crowning. For the more moderate full crown, where R = 150d, the load-life 

exponent p = 3.2. The analysis shows that the 1952 assumption by Lundberg and Palmgren (Ref. 3) of a 

load life exponent of p = 10/3 (or 3.33) applies only to crowned rollers. 

The chamfered profile and the similar aerospace profile have a very similar stress distribution (Fig. 2) 

and produce almost identical load-life curves (Fig. 6). A full crown with crown radius 150 times roller 

diameter also avoids stress concentration at the ends but at the expense of higher stress at the roller center 

and thus lower life because of the greater crown drop. 

The life data of Figure 6 were replotted in Figure 7 to show the relationship between maximum Hertz 

stress and life. For flat rollers, the load life exponent c = 8 in Equation (1), which agrees with the 

Lundberg-Palmgren life model. Because crowning increases the Hertz stress at the center of the rollers, 

the stress at each condition differs for the various profiles. As shown in Figure 6, increased crowning will 

decrease life. However, because crowning increases stress at the center of the rollers, the Hertz stress-life 

exponent n increases with crowning instead of decreasing. Note that the two fully crowned profiles 

(crown radius, R = 150d and R = 100d) produce approximately the same value of exponent n = 8.8 even 

though these profiles have different values of the load-life exponent p (see Fig. 6). 

The load-life relation for both the Lundberg-Palmgren (Refs. 2 and 3) and Zaretsky (Refs. 1 and 7) 

life models is compared in Figure 8 for three roller profiles. With the Zaretsky model, the load-life 

exponent p = 5.0 for a flat profile. An aerospace profile reduces the load-life exponent to p = 4.6. The full 

crown reduces the exponent further, to p = 4.3. With an aerospace crown, the Zaretsky model (where 

p = 4.6) yields lives ranging from 5 to 45 times the lives predicted by the Lundberg-Palmgren model 

(where p = 3.5) for the range of loads shown. 

Figure 9 shows the same life data from the Zaretsky model as Figure 8 except the vertical axis shows 

the maximum Hertz stress, rather than the applied radial load. As in Figure 7, roller crowning increases 

the stress-life exponent, c, from 10.1 for flat rollers to 10.8 for fully crowned rollers according to the 

Zaretsky life model. 

The calculated load-life exponent, p and the Hertz stress-life exponent, n for radially-loaded 210-size 

roller bearings are summarized in Table 4 for each of the five roller profiles analyzed in this paper. For 

flat rollers, n = 8.0 for the Lundberg-Palmgren model and n = 10.1 for the Zaretsky model, which nearly 

agree with the values 8.1 and 9.9 assumed in Poplawski, et al. (Refs. 11 and 12). However, as the crown 

drop increases, the exponent n becomes greater than the constant values assumed in Reference 12. 

In addition to the results for 210-size bearings described herein, a similar life analysis was conducted 

for 50-mm bore bearings in 1910-, 110- and 310-size and for 30-mm bore, 1906-size and 100-mm bore, 

220-size cylindrical roller bearings. Computed results (not shown in this paper) for the load-life exponent, 

p and the stress-life exponent, n were identical to results given in Table 4 for 210-size bearings. 

Roller Bearing Field Data 

The application of both the Lundberg-Palmgren model and the Zaretsky model to predict roller life 

and reliability need to be benchmarked and verified under a varied load and operating profile. The cost 

and time to laboratory test a statistically significant number of roller bearings of different roller 

geometries to determine their life and reliability is prohibitive. A practical solution to this problem is to 

benchmark the analysis to field data. Fortunately, these data were available for a commercial turboprop 

gearbox (Ref. 22). 

Field data were collected for 64 new commercial turboprop gearboxes. From these field data, the 

resultant time to removal of each gearbox is presented in the Weibull plot of Figure 10. The failure index 

was 59 out of 64. That is, 59 out of the 64 gearboxes removed from service were considered failed. For 

these data, there was no breakdown of the cause for removal or the percent of each component that had 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 10 

failed. The resultant L10 life from the field data was 5627 hr and the Weibull slope m was 2.189. The 

lowest lived components in the gearbox are the roller bearings. As a result, the Weibull slope assumed for 

the planetary gear spherical roller bearings is assumed to be the Weibull slope m of the entire gearbox 

system. Using the Lundberg-Palmgren model the predicted L10 life was 774 hr and the Weibull slope m

was 1.125. The field data suggest that the L10 life of the gearbox was under predicted by a factor of 7.56 

(Ref. 22). 

Although errors in the assumed operating profile of the gearbox may account for the difference 

between actual and predicted life, it is suggested that using the Lundberg-Palmgren equations results in a 

life prediction that is too low for the bearings. 

With reference to Equation (3), in their 1952 publication (Ref. 3), Lundberg and Palmgren proposed a 

load-life exponent p = 10/3 for roller bearings, where one raceway has point contact and the other 

raceway has line contact. The 10/3 load-life exponent has been incorporated in the ANSI/ABMA (Ref. 4)

and ISO (Ref. 5) standards first published in 1953. Their assumption of point and line contact may have 

been correct for many types of roller bearings in use at that time. However, it is no longer the case for 

most roller bearings manufactured today, and most certainly not for cylindrical roller bearings. The 

analysis employed for the bearing life calculations used a value of p = 3 for ball bearings and p = 4 for 

roller bearings. Poplawski, Peters, and Zaretsky (Refs. 11 and 12) suggest the use of p = 4 for ball 

bearings and p = 5 for roller bearings (Ref. 22). 

From (Ref. 22), the Weibull plot of Figure 10 showing the predicted life of the gearbox, has a Weibull 

slope or modulus, msys = 1.125. It was based on Weibull slopes for roller bearings of mB = 1.125 

(Lundberg and Palmgren (Ref. 3)). And, from experimental data (Ref. 23), the Weibull modulus (slope) 

mG of gears equals 2.5. 

The Weibull plot of the field data in Figure 10 for the lives of the turboprop gearboxes contained 

59 failures out of 64 gearboxes. These failures were ~90 percent the result of planetary bearing failures, 

less than 2 percent from gear failures and the balance from other bearing failures (Ref. 22). The resulting 

Weibull slope or modulus of the gearbox failures ms was 2.189. It is assumed that the Weibull modulus 

(slope) of the gearbox system is the same as that of the shortest-lived components in the system, which 

are the planetary bearings. Hence, the Weibull modulus (slope) of the bearings mB was assumed also to be 

2.189. From Reference 23, the Weibull slope mG of the gears, from experimental data, was assumed to be 

2.5. From Strict Series Reliability (Appendix A), 

s B mG

G

m

B

mLsys L L

1 1 1   (15a) 

and substituting in the known values 

    2.189 2.189 2.5 16, 680

1 1

5627

1  

LB

 (15b) 

and solving for the bearing system life, results in a value of 

 5627 hr LB (15c) 

From Lundberg-Palmgren (Ref. 2), the predicted bearing system life is 

~ ~ 774 hr

4

















eq

D

B P

C L (16a) 

then, 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 11 

~ 5.27 















eq

D

P

C (16b) 

Calculating a revised value for the load-life exponent p for the gearbox bearings based on the actual 

bearing system life of 5627 hr, 

~   5.27 ~ 5627 hr p

p

eq

D

P

C

















 (17a) 

Solving for load-life exponent p, 

 2 p  5. (17b) 

For line contact (roller bearing) the Hertz stress-life exponent n = 2p. From Equation (17b), n = 10.4 for 

line contact for the turboprop gearbox data. Referring to the Zaretsky model, Equation (4), for line contact 

the shear stress-life exponent is 

m

c n

1   (18a) 

and where n = 10.4 and m = 2.189, 

9.943

2.189

1

c  10.4   (18b) 

Using the value of c from Equation (18b) to solve for the Hertz stress-life exponent n for point contact 

where m is assumed to equal 1.11, then 

11.74

1.11

2 9.943 2



   

m

n c

 (19a) 

and for point contact, 

3.91

3

11.74

3    n

p (19b)

The apparent load-life exponent p for the roller bearings is equal to 5.2 and correlates with the Zaretsky 

model. Were the roller bearing lives to be recalculated using a load-life exponent p = 5.2, the predicted 

L10 life of the gearbox would be equal to the actual life obtained in the field, 5627 hr. It should be noted 

that if an exponent p = 5 were used; the predicted L10 life of the gearbox would be 4065 hr. This result 

suggests a strong reliance of the predicted bearing life upon the load-life exponent p and correlates with 

reasonable engineering certainty with the analysis of the load-life relation for the Zaretsky life model 

shown in Figure 8. The values of the load-life exponent p for roller bearings equal to 10/3 from the 

ANSI/ABMA and ISO standards (Refs. 4 and 5) and 4 from computer codes may provide predicted roller 

bearing lives that are too conservative for design purposes. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 12 

Summary of Results 

A commercial bearing analysis code (Ref. 13) was used to calculate the fatigue lives for radiallyloaded cylindrical roller bearings with five different roller profiles. Lives predicted by the code, which is 

based on the Lundberg-Palmgren life model (Refs. 2 and 3), were adjusted to also predict roller bearing 

life based on the Zaretsky (Refs. 1 and 7) life model. The following results were obtained. 

1. The Zaretsky life model for rollers with an aerospace or chamfered crown predicts roller bearing life 

between 5 and 45 times the life predicted by the 1952 Lundberg and Palmgren model depending on 

load. The Zaretsky model better fits post-1960 bearing life data for vacuum processed steel bearings. 

2. The Zaretsky life model produces a load-life exponent p = 5, for flat (uncrowned) rollers if stress 

concentration effects at the ends of the rollers is neglected. This compares with p = 4 for the 

Lundberg-Palmgren theory with flat rollers. 

3. Using the Zaretsky life model, the load-life exponent p is reduced from 5.0 for flat rollers to 4.6 for 

either aerospace or chamfered rollers and to 4.3 for fully-crowned rollers. 

4. The analysis shows that the 1952 assumption of Lundberg and Palmgren of a load life exponent of 

p = 10/3 applies only to crowned rollers. Using the Lundberg-Palmgren life theory, the load-life 

exponent is reduced from a value of 4 for flat rollers to approximately 10/3 for fully-crowned rollers. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 13 

Appendix A.—Derivation of Strict Series Reliability 

As discussed and presented in Reference 11 and 23, G. Lundberg and A. Palmgren (Ref. 2) in 1947, 

using the two parameter Weibull equation for rolling-element bearing life analysis, first derived the 

relationship between individual component lives and system life. The following derivation is based on but 

is not identical to the Lundberg-Palmgren analysis (Ref. 1). 

The two parameter Weibull equation which is a cumulative distribution function can be written as 















 

















L

L

m

S

ln 1 ln ln

sys

 (A1) 

where L is the number of cycles to failure, Ssys is the system probability of survival; m is the Weibull 

modulus or slope designating the type of distribution, e.g., where m = 1, exponential distribution, 2, 

Raleigh distribution, and 3.57, Gaussian or normal distribution; and Lβ is the characteristic life or the life 

at a 63.2 percent probability of failure (Ref. 1). 

Figure 11 is a sketch of multiple Weibull plots where each Weibull plot represents a cumulative 

distribution of each component in the system. The system Weibull plot represents the combined Weibull 

plots 1, 2, 3, and so forth. All plots are assumed to have the same Weibull slope m. 

The slope m can be defined as follows: 

ref

sys ref

ln ln

1 ln ln 1 ln ln

L L

S S

m 





 



 

















 (A2a) 

or 

m

L

L

S

S





 



 





 





















ref

ref

sys

1 ln

1 ln

 (A2b) 

From Equations (A1) and (A2b), 

m m

L

L

L

L

S S 















 



 









 



 

















sys ref ref 

1 ln 1 ln (A3) 

and 

m

L

L S















  



exp sys (A4) 

where Ssys = S in Equation (A1). For a given time or life L, each component or stressed volume in a 

system will have a different reliability S. For a series reliability system 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 14 

 ... sys 1 2 3 S  S  S  S  (A5) 

Combining Equations (A4) and (A5) gives 

exp exp exp ...

1 3



















 















  



















  

m m m

L

L

L

L

L

L (A6a) 









































































  



















   

exp exp ...

1 2 3

m m m m

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L (A6b) 

It is assumed that the Weibull slope m is the same for all components. From Equation (A6b) 









































































  

















 ... L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L m m m m

β β1 β2 β3

 (A7a) 

Factoring out L from Equation (B7a) gives 

... 1 1 1 1

1 2 3









































































   

m m m m

L L L L (A7b) 

From Equation (A3) the characteristic lives L1, L2, L3, etc., can be replaced with the respective lives L1, 

L2, L3, etc., at Sref (or the lives of each component that have the same probability of survival Sref) as 

follows: 

... 1 1 ln 1 1 ln 1 1 ln 1 1 ln

ref ref ref 1 ref 2 ref 3

 



 









 



  



 









 



  



 









 



  



 









 



 m m m m

S L S L S L S L (A8) 

where, in general, from Equation (A3) 

m m

L S L 



 









 



 

















 ref ref

1 1 ln 1 (A9a) 

and 

,etc.

1 1 ln 1

1 ref 1

m m

L S L 



 









 



 



















 (A9b) 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 15 

Factoring out ln (1/Sref) from Equation (A8) gives 

m m m m

L L L L

1/

ref 1 2 3

... 1 1 1 1

















 



 



  



 



  



 



  



 



 (A10) 

or rewriting Equation (A10) results in 









 



  



 



 n

i

m

i

m

L L 1

1 1 (A11) 

Equation (A11) is identical to Equations (2) and (15a) of the text. 

NASA/TM—2015-218895 17 

Appendix B.—On Converting Calculated Life From the Lundberg-Palmgren 

Life Model to the Zaretsky Life Model 

Zaretsky et al. (Ref. 7) modified the equation for the Lundberg-Palmgren bearing life model (Refs. 2 

and 3), by making three changes: (1) replacing the orthogonal shear stress with the maximum shear 

stress; (2) eliminating the dependence on the Weibull modulus (slope), m in the first term (which involves 

the shear stress, τ) and (3) removing the term involving the depth to critical shear stress. 

If we solve for the life for the life LZ from the Zaretsky model Equation (3) in terms of the LundbergPalmgren life, LLP, Equation (2), we have: 

 

h m

o

m

Z

LP

c

o Z LP V z

V L k L

1/ /

max

1

1



















































  (B1) 

Constant k1 incorporates the dimension of z

h//m, where z is the depth to the critical shear stress. The 

value of k1 is unknown. The value of k1 will vary with different units of z. In this paper, we assume that k1

is unity when z is expressed in mm. For z in inches and with line contact, where exponent h/m = 2.071, 

the value converts to k1 = (1 / 25.4)2.071 = 0.001232. It will take a series of life tests to establish the actual 

value of this constant. 

For roller bearings with line contact, the maximum orthogonal shear stress τo = 0.25Smax, while the 

maximum shear stress, τmax = 0.300Smax and Smax is the maximum Hertz stress. Therefore the ratio τo/τmax = 

0.25/0.300 = 0.833. 

The Lundberg-Palmgren life model is semi-empirical. The exponents for the various terms were 

chosen to fit the experimental data available at the time. In their 1952 paper (Ref. 3), they show the 

Weibull slope for ten roller bearing tests, with thirty bearings in each test. The test bearings included 

tapered, cylindrical and spherical roller bearings. The exponents varied from 0.7 to 1.4. Thus, they stated 

“The value e = 10/9 can be taken as a mean value as with ball bearings.” 

Lundberg and Palmgren (3) adjusted their exponents in order to have an integer value for p, the 

load/life exponent, where p = (c-h+1)/(2m). For roller bearings with line contact, they chose m = 9/8 

which makes p = 4. 

Lundberg and Palmgren (Refs. 2 and 3) chose for their exponent involving the critical shearing stress 

in Equation (1) c = 10.33 for either ball bearings or roller bearings Therefore, for roller bearings with line 

contact, where L~1/τ

c/m, c/m = 10.33/1.125 = 9.182. 

When he modified the life relation, removing the dependence on the Weibull slope, Zaretsky adjusted 

the exponent c so that it is equal to the published values of the Lundberg-Palmgren quotient c/m. This 

exponent will not vary if the Weibull exponent is changed from the nominal value. Therefore, for roller 

bearings, the term (τo/τm)

c

 = (0.833)9.182 = 0.1875. 

The stressed volume in either life model is the product of the circumference of the rolling-element 

running track, times the width of the contact times the depth to the critical shear stress. In changing from 

the orthogonal to maximum shear stress, the only parameter for the stressed volume that changes is the 

depth to the critical shear stress. 

The maximum shear stress occurs at greater depth than the maximum orthogonal shear stress; 

therefore, zm is greater than zo. For cylindrical roller bearings, zo = 0.5b, while zm = 0.786b, where b = the 

half-width of the Hertzian contact stress zone and the Weibull slope m = 1.125. Therefore, the term 

(VLP/VZ)

1/m = (zo/zm)1/m = (0.50/0.786)1/1.125 = 0.6689. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 18 

To remove the dependence on the depth to the critical shear stress for the Zaretsky (Z) life model, the 

LP life is divided by zo

h/m, where for line contact, the exponent h/m = 2.33/1.125 = 2.071. 

For roller bearings with line contact, Equation (B1) simplifies to Equation (B2) 

       

2.071

1

2.071

1 0.5

1 0.1254

0.5

1 0.1875 0.6689 













  













  b

k L

b

LZ k LLP LP (B2) 

For ball bearings, with m = 1.11, c/m = 10.33/1.11 = 9.306. The term (τo/τm)

c = (0.785)9.306 = 0.1056. 

For ball bearings with typical conformity, f = 0.52, zo = 0.49b while zm = 0.767b. Thus, (VLP/VZ)

1/m = 

(0.49/0.767)1/1.11 = 0.6679. 

As above, to remove the dependence on the depth to the critical shear stress for the Zaretsky (Z) life 

equation, the LP life is divided by zo

h/m, where for point contact, h/m = 2.33/1.11 = 2.099. 

Thus, for ball bearings with point contact, Equation (B1) simplifies to Equation (B3) 

       

2.0991

1

2.0991

1 0.49

1 0.07054

0.49

1 0.1056 0.6689 













  













  b

k L

b

LZ k LLP LP (B3) 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 19 

References 

1. Zaretsky, E.V. (2010), “Rolling Bearing Life Prediction, Theory, and Application,” Recent 

Developments in Wear Prevention, Friction and Lubrication, 2010: ISBN: 978-81-308-0377-7, 

George K. Nikas, ed. Research Signpost, Kerala, India, 2010, pp. 45–136 (also NASA/TP—2013-

215305). 

2. Lundberg, G., and Palmgren, A., (1947), “Dynamic Capacity of Rolling Bearings,” Acta 

Polytechica, Mechanical Engineering Series, 1, 3, Stockholm, Sweden. 

3. Lundberg, G.; and Palmgren, A., (1952), “Dynamic Capacity of Roller Bearings,” Handlingar 

Proceedings, No. 210, The Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences, Stockholm Sweden.

4. ANSI/ABMA–11:1990. R2008 (2008), Load Ratings and Fatigue Life for Roller Bearings, 

American Bearing Manufacturers Association, Washington, DC. 

5. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), (2007), Rolling Bearings—Dynamic Load 

Ratings and Rating Life, ISO 281:2007, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 

Switzerland. 

6. Zaretsky, E.V., ed. (1999), STLE Life Factors for Rolling Bearings, STLE SP-34, 2nd edition, 

Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers, Park Ridge, IL. ISBN 9993313599, 

ISBN 13: 9789993313595. 

7. Zaretsky, E.V., Poplawski, J.V. and Peters, S.M. (1996), “Comparison of Life Theories for 

Rolling-Element Bearings,” Tribology Transactions, 39, 2, pp. 237–247. 

8. Sugiura I., Ito S., Tsushima N., and Muro H., (1982), “Investigation of Optimum Crowning in a 

Line Contact Cylinder-to-Cylinder Rolling Contact Fatigue Test Rig,” ASTM STP 771, 

pp. 136–149, J.J.C. Hoo, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. 

9. Takata, H., Suzuki, S. and Maeda, E., (1992), “Experimental Study of Fatigue Life of Profiled Roller 

Bearings,” NSK Technical Journal, 653, pp. 1–7. 

10. Fujiwara, H. and Kawase, T., (2006), “Logarithmic Profiles of Rollers in Roller Bearings and 

Optimization of the Profiles,” NTN TECHNICAL REVIEW No. 75 (2007), reprinted from the 

original paper (in Japanese) Proceedings of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers Part C, 

72 (2006), pp. 3022–3029. 

11. Poplawski, J.V., Peters, S.M., and Zaretsky, E.V., (2001), “Effect of Roller Profile on Cylindrical 

Roller Bearing Life Prediction—Part I: Comparison of Bearing Life Theories, STLE Tribology 

Trans., 44, 3, pp. 339–350. 

12. Poplawski, J.V., Peters, S.M., and Zaretsky, E.V., (2001), “Effect of Roller Profile on Cylindrical 

Roller Bearing Life Prediction—Part II: Comparison of Roller Profiles, 44, 3, pp. 417–427. 

13. Poplawski, J.V., Rumbarger, J.H., Peters, S.M., Flower, R., and Galaitis, H. (2002) “Advanced 

Analysis Package for High Speed Multibearing Shaft Systems: COBRA-AHS,” Final report, 

NASA Contract NAS3–00018. 

14. Dareing, D.W. and Radzimovsky, E.I., (1962), “Influence of Misalignment on Roller Bearing Loads 

and Bearing Life Expectancy,” Jersey Production Research Company, Tulsa, OK. 

15. Jones, A.B., (1964), Personal Communication between A.B. Jones and J.V. Poplawski, Pratt & 

Whitney Aircraft, East Hartford, CT, November, 1964. 

16. Harris, T.A., (1969) “The Effect of Misalignment on the Fatigue Life of Cylindrical Roller Bearings 

Having Crowned Rolling Members,” Trans. ASME, JOLT, 91, No. 2, 1969, pp. 294–300. 

17. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), (2008), ISO/TS 16281:2008, “Rolling 

Bearings—Methods for Calculating the Modified Reference Rating Life for Universally Loaded 

Bearings,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 

18. Anderson, W.J. (1964), “Rolling-Element Bearings,” Advanced Bearing Technology, E.E. Bisson 

and W.J. Anderson, eds., NASA SP–38, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 

Washington, DC, pp. 164–168. 

19. Palmgren, A. (1959), Ball and Roller Bearing Engineering, Third ed., SKF Industries, Philadelphia, 

PA. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 20 

20. Hartnett, M.J., (1979), “The Analysis of Contact Stresses in Rolling Element Bearings,” ASME 

Journal of Lubrication Technology, 101, 1 Jan. 1979, pp. 105–109. 

21. Hartnett, M.J. and Kannel, J.W., (1981), “Contact Stresses Between Elastic Cylinders-A 

Comprehensive Theoretical and Experimental Approach,” Journal of Lubrication Technology, 103, 

No. 1, pp. 40–45. 

22. Zaretsky, E.V., Lewicki, D.G., Savage, M., and Vlcek, B.L., (2007), “Determination of Turboprop 

Reduction Gearbox System Fatigue Life and Reliability,” Tribology Trans., 50, 4, pp. 507–516. 

23. Melis, M.E., Zaretsky, E.V., and August, R., (1999), “Probabilistic Analysis of Aircraft Gas Turbine 

Disk Life and Reliability,” J. Propulsion and Power, Trans. AIAA, 15, pp. 658–666. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 21 

Table 1.—Bearing properties 

Bearing description Bore, 

mm 

Outside 

diameter, 

mm 

Number 

of 

elements 

Roller diameter, 

d 

Roller length 

mm in. mm in. 

210-size cylindrical roller bearing 50 90 10 13 0.5118 13 0.5118 

TABLE 2.—ROLLER PROFILE PARAMETERS 

Profile Flat length Radius of 

curvature 

Drop at gauge 

point, 

mm 

Max. deflection at 

ref load, 

mm 

Flat (no crown) 13 mm (100%) n/a n/a 0.0355 

Full crown, R = 150d 0.0 (0%) 1950 mm 0.010812 0.0443 

Full crown, R = 100d 0.0 (0%) 1300 mm 0.016218 0.0484 

Chamfered 8.0 mm (61.5%) n/a 0.008677 0.0395 

Aerospace 8.0 mm (61.5%) 1300 mm 0.010064 0.0398 

Logarithmic 0.0 (0%) n/a 0.020000 0.0401 

TABLE 3.—LOAD LEVELS AND CORRESPONDING INNER-RACE MAXIMUM HERTZ STRESS, MPa (ksi) 

FOR CYLINDRICAL ROLLER BEARINGS WITH FIVE ROLLER PROFILES AT SIX LOAD LEVELS 

Profile 

Radial load, N (lbf) 

6,940 

(1,560) 

15,980 

(3,592) 

20,100 

(4,519) 

29,190 

(6,562) 

58,780 

(13,214) 

81,994 

(18,433) 

Flat (no crown) 1025 (149) 1556 (226) 1745 (253) 2102 (305) 2984 (433) 3534 (513) 

Full crown, R = 150d 1406 (204) 1883 (273) 2052 (298) 2376 (345) 3200 (464) 3716 (539) 

Full crown, R = 100d 1507 (219) 2011 (292) 2178 (316) 2496 (362) 3300 (479) 3806 (552) 

Chamfered 1200 (174) 1713 (248) 1891 (274) 2232 (324) 3086 (448) 3614 (524) 

Aerospace 1200 (174) 1720 (249) 1900 (276) 2240 (325) 3092 (448) 3620 (525) 

Logarithmic 1240 (180) 1730 (251) 1910 (277) 2250 (326) 3110 (451) 3620 (525) 

TABLE 4.—LOAD-LIFE AND HERTZ STRESS-LIFE EXPONENTS FOR A 

CYLINDRICAL ROLLER BEARING WITH RADIAL LOAD 

Profile Lundberg-Palmgren Life Model Zaretsky Life Model 

Load-life exp., 

p

Stress-life exp., 

n

Load-life exp., 

p

Stress-life exp., 

n

Flat (no crown) 4.0 8.0 5.0 10.1 

Full crown, R = 150d 3.2 8.8 4.3 10.8 

Full crown, R = 100d 3.1 8.8 4.1 10.8 

Chamfered 3.5 8.2 4.6 10.3 

Aerospace 3.5 8.2 4.6 10.3 

Logarithmic 3.7 8.2 4.6 10.5 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 22 

Figure 1.—Schematic of cylindrical roller bearing. 

Figure 2.—Crown drop (vertical dimension exaggerated) for various roller profiles. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 23 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 24 

Figure 4.—Lamina representation of a roller. 

Figure 5.—Lamina to raceway equivalent spring. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 25 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 26 

Figure 8.—Comparison of Lundberg-Palmgren and Zaretsky life models for roller bearing life and load-life 

relationship for a 50-mm bore, cylindrical roller bearing with three roller profiles. 

Figure 9.—Comparison of Lundberg-Palmgren and Zaretsky life models for roller bearing life and Hertz stress-life 

relationship for a 50-mm bore, cylindrical roller bearing with three roller profiles. 
NASA/TM—2015-218895 27 

Figure 10.—Weibull plot of field data for lives of turboprop 

gearboxes compared with predicted lives using LundbergPalmgren life model. Failure index, 59 out of 64 (Ref. 22). 

Figure 11.—Sketch of multiple Weibull plots where each numbered plot 

represents cumulative distribution of each component in system and 

system Weibull plot represents combined distribution of plots 1, 2, 3, 

etc. (all plots are assumed to have same Weibull slope m) (Ref. 11).