Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796 – 5803

www.elsevier.com/locate/surfcoat

An initial approach to the link of multi-layer coatings contact stresses

and the surface engineered gears
K. Mao a,⁎, Y. Sun b , T. Bell c
a
Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK
b
School of Engineering and Technology, De Montfort University, Leicester, LE1 9BH, UK
c
School of Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
Received 17 February 2006; accepted in revised form 16 October 2006
Available online 4 December 2006

Abstract

The tribological properties in surface contact can be markedly improved by coating the surface with soft or hard layers according to practical
applications. Rapid developments in surface engineering technologies have made available many surface engineering systems to combat diverse
component degradation problems and to meet the ever increasing demands for combined properties in modern machinery operating under ever
more severe conditions. Designers thus have many surface engineering technologies to select from in the design of components. Therefore,
numerical modelling is urgently required for surface engineering to assist engineers in their design of components with the surface and substrate as
a system. The present paper attempts to introduce a numerical approach for the contact behaviour of multi-layer systems and establish an initial
link between the contact stresses and performance of the surface engineered gears. Experimental tests have been carried out on untreated, TiN
coated, plasma nitrided and duplex treated steel gears. Here duplex treatment indicates plasma nitrided steel gear with TiN coating. The model has
also been applied in powertrain transmission titanium gears as well as polymer composite gear failure mechanisms.
© 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Multi-layers; Coatings; Surface roughness; Gears

1. Introduction no longer be directly applied to find the solution for layered

Contact mechanics is concerned with the stresses and
deformations [1] which arise when the surfaces of two solid
bodies are brought into contact. Contact parameters such as
pressures, stresses and deformations are of great importance to
the study of the mechanisms of friction, wear, mixed lubrication,
load bearing capacity and fatigue. One of the most effective
ways to improve the tribological performances of engineering
components is to modify the surfaces by means of surface
engineering [2], which by changing the properties of contacting
surfaces, affects their contact behaviour. In view of the dif-
ference in the elastic and plastic properties between the surface
layers and the substrate materials beneath, conventional contact
mechanics approaches based on homogeneous materials can
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ken.mao@brunel.ac.uk (K. Mao).
0257-8972/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.surfcoat.2006.10.028
surfaces.
The first significant elastic contact analysis of surfaces was
produced by Heinrich Hertz [3] in 1881 when he presented a
paper “on the contact of elastic pressure and subsurface stress
distributions” which arise in a non-conforming contact. This
classic work has formed the basis of our present theoretical
knowledge of static and rolling contact mechanics. Hertzian
theory shows that the highest maximum shear does not occur at
the surface, but at certain distance below the surface, indicating
that under Hertzian contact conditions, failure of materials is
initiated below the surface where the highest maximum shear
stress occurs. The Hertzian theory is restricted to frictionless
surfaces and perfectly elastic solids. Progress in the field of
contact mechanics over the last few decades has been associated
largely with the removal of these restrictions.
Smith and Liu's model [4] concerned friction effects on
subsurface stress distributions. For the subsurface stress distri-
butions, if sliding is present and the coefficient of friction is not
 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803
zero, then a tangential traction is also present on the surface, in
addition to the normal loading. This tangential traction induces
subsurface stresses in addition to those due to the normal load.
From their theory, it can be shown that the maximum shear
stress is moved towards the surface with the introduction of
friction (compared to Hertzians). This movement will be in-
creased as the coefficient of friction is increased and when the
coefficient of friction reaches some value the maximum shear
stress will reach the surface.
The problem of indentation of a layered half-space consist-
ing of an elastic substrate with a thin elastic layer was first
solved by Gupta and Walowit's model [5]. They derived the
mathematical formulation to the problem of a layered elastic
surface indented by an elastic indenter and a rigid indenter, and
by using the Sneddon's integral transform techniques, numer-
ical solutions of the actual pressure distribution and the contact
zone were obtained. When the layer has a lower elastic modulus
than the substrate it is found that the actual contact pressure
distribution is very closely determined by a weighted sum of
elliptic and parabolic functions. For a layer stiffer than the
substrate the pressure distribution substantially deviates from an
elliptical or a parabolic behaviour when the layer thickness is
smaller than the half-contact width. However, when the stiffer
layer is thicker than the half-contact width, the pressure
distribution closely follows the elliptic and parabolic functions.
With the advent of numerical techniques, the solution of
contacts no longer requires the geometric description of the
body surfaces to be analytically convenient. In a more recent
paper, Webster and Sayles [6] have provided a numerical model
for the elastic contact of two-dimensional real rough surfaces.
The model used data directly recorded from a stylus measuring
instrument. The significant effect of surface topography on the
pressure distribution can be seen. Depending on the topographic
parameters, the maximum pressure in rough contact can be
many times higher than that in smooth contact, and the pressure
peaks arise from the highest asperities. Cole and Sayles [7] have
studied one layer coated real rough surfaces. In their work, a
numerical model which allows simulation of the two-dimen-
sional dry, frictionless, elastic contact of real rough layered
surfaces, without recourse to asperity models or topographical
statistics of the surface, is described. The model is shown to
reproduce smooth case behaviour to a high degree of accuracy.
Further work has been done by Bell, Sun and Cole [8] for multi-
layered rough surface contact in real engineering surface con-
tacts. The computation of stresses in layered surfaces is of great
analytical and practical importance in many engineering appli-
cations where the friction and wear characteristics can be
significantly improved by depositing thin layers of hard wear
resistant materials, such as nitrides and carbides, on to the
surfaces.
In the past decade, significant progress has been made in the
study of contact behaviour of layered surfaces. The underlying
aims of the current research have been to understand the basic
mechanisms involved in various tribological processes of
coated surfaces, to help in the selection of the optimum
coating/substrate combination system for a specific application
and in the design of engineering components with coatings.
5797
2. Contact modelling
This model is at present based on the following major as-
sumptions, some of which may be relaxed as the work proceeds:
1) The structure of the contact bodies is considered to be
composed of one or more elastically homogeneous surface
layers rigidly bonded to each other and, in turn, to the
substrate. Each component of the system, i.e. each layer and
substrate, is taken as having its own distinct mechanical
properties.
2) The system is taken as being in contact with another elastic
body, which may be an elastic half-space or another multi-
layered body.
3) The contact is assumed to give rise to a state of plane strain
so that the system is considered in two dimensions only. This
assumption holds well for line contacts, such as those which
arise in gears and roller bearings.
4) Strains are assumed small, leading to the usual linear elastic
theory assumptions.
5) The contact is considered to be dry, i.e., the presence of a
lubricant is neglected.
Fig. 1 shows an elastic half-space coated with n elastic
layers. Green's function for a unit normal load and a unit
tangential load for the generalised plane strain problem are
derived. The layers are completely bonded to each other and to
the elastic half-space they cover. A common method used in the
numerical solution of contact problems is to divide the contact
boundary into elements, over which it is assumed that the
pressure is uniform [6]. Since the authors are using linear elastic
theory, each term of normal or horizontal movement is
proportional to the element load, hence the authors can express
the displacement as the displacement due to unit uniform
elemental pressure times the real elemental pressure, resulting in
the following expressions:
½U  ¼ ½C½Pu  ð1Þ
½V  ¼ ½D½Pv  ð2Þ
where
[U] is normal displacement matrix
[C] is influence coefficient for normal displacement
[Pu] is normal load matrix
[V] is tangential displacement matrix
[D] is influence coefficient for tangential displacement
[Pv] is tangential load matrix.
For a detailed description of the solution procedure of the
contact model, one may refer to the work of Mao, Sun and Bell
[9]. In summary, the surfaces are represented as arrays of points
with a fixed distance, i.e., the sampling interval, a, apart, where
each point has associated with it a height value relative to some
datum. A master strain influence coefficient array is formed,
which holds the set of all profile point deflections that can occur
5798 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803

Z l    
1−m2i d 3 Gi 2−mi 2 dGi −jxyi dx
ux i ¼ x 3 − x e ð5dÞ
2kEi −l dxi 1−mi dxi x2
Z l    
1−m2i d 2 Gi mi dx
uy i ¼ x 2 þ x Gi je−jxyi
2
ð5eÞ
2kEi −l dxi 1−mi x

where

i is the number of layers

E is elastic modulus
v is Poisson's
pffiffiffiffiffi
ffi ratio
j −1
ω is Fourier transform integrating variable.

Gi is the Fourier transform of the Airy stress function, and it

Fig. 1. Multi-layered elastic solid model. is given by:

Gi ¼ ðAi þ Bi xi Þe−jxjxi þ ðCi þ Di xi Þejxjxi ð5f Þ

due to constant unit elemental pressure and friction on any
profile point. The stress function coefficients Ai, Bi, Ci, Di are general
The solution proceeds by giving the upper body a series of functions of ω and need to be identified first. Once the stress
vertical displacements until contact is detected. The surface function coefficients are known, G i is known and, by
points in contact are noted and a matrix [U] is formed con- performing integrals on Gi and its derivatives, the stress and
taining their vertical displacements, as assumed from the over- deflection at any point in the structure may be found. To find the
lap. A matrix [C] is filled with the influence coefficients for the stress function coefficients it is necessary to examine the
points in contact from the master array. The matrix Eq. (1) is boundary conditions that apply. For the n layered structure
then solved iteratively for the pressures [Pu] at the points in shown in Fig. 1, the boundary conditions are as follows:
contact until agreement between the pressure distribution and
the applied load is obtained. The matrix Eq. (2) is also solved 1) At the surface (xi = 0) the normal and shear stresses must
iteratively by following the same approach. equal to the applied pressures.
An arbitrary normal pressure p(y) and shear stress q(y) are
applied on the surface. For a two-dimensional elastic solid, if a rx1 ¼ −pðyÞ; sx1 y1 ¼ −qðyÞ
stress function ϕ(x,y) is defined by:
2) At every interface (xi = hi, xi+1 = 0) in the system, the normal
A /2
A / A /2 2 and shear stresses and the normal and transverse deflections
rx ¼ ; ry ¼ 2 ; sxy ¼ ð3Þ on each side of the interface must be equal.
Ay2 Ax AxAy
then the equations of equilibrium, compatibility and Hooke's rxi ¼ rxiþ1 ; sxi yi ¼ sxiþ1 yiþ1
law are satisfied, provided that ϕ(x,y) satisfies the biharmonic uxi ¼ uxiþ1 ; uyi ¼ uyiþ1
equation:
3) The stresses fall to zero at a large distance (xn+1 is infinite)
A/
4
A/ A/ 4 2 from the load.
j4 / ¼ þ2 2 2þ 4 : ð4Þ
Ax4 Ax Ay Ay
rxnþ1 ¼ 0:
Using the co-ordinate system and notation for the n + 1
component system, the stresses σx, σy and τxy and displacements Through examination of these boundary conditions, expres-
ux and uy, in the x and y directions respectively, in any com- sions for the stress function coefficients can be obtained as
ponent i are given by: follows:
Z l
1 x2 ðA1 þ C1 Þ ¼ pðxÞ ð6Þ
rx i ¼ − x2 Gi e−jxyi dx ð5aÞ
2k −l
B1 þ D1 −jxjðA1 −C1 Þ ¼ qðxÞ ð7Þ
Z l 2
1 d Gi −jxyi
ryi ¼ 2
e dx ð5bÞ ðAi þ Bi hi Þe−jxjhi þ ðCi þ Di hi Þejxjhi −Aiþ1 −Ciþ1 ¼ 0 ð8Þ
2k −l dxi

Z l ðBi ð1−jxjhi Þ−Ai jxjÞe−jxjhi þ ðCi jxj þ Di ð1 þ jxjhi ÞÞejxjhi

1 dGi −jxyi
sxi yi ¼ jx e dx ð5cÞ
2k −l dxi þ jxjðAiþ1 −Ciþ1 Þ−Biþ1 −Diþ1 ¼ 0 ð9Þ
 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803
½Ai jxjðmi V−1Þ þ Bi ð3−jxjhi −mi Vð1−jxjhi ÞÞe−jxjhi
þ ½Ci jxjð1−mi VÞ þ Di ð3 þ jxjhi −mi Vð1 þ jxjhi ÞÞejxjhi
þ gi ½jxjðAiþ1 −Ciþ1 Þð1−miþ1
V Þ
þ ðBiþ1 þ Diþ1 Þðmiþ1
V −3Þ ¼ 0 ð10Þ
½Ai jxjð1 þ mi WÞ þ Bi ðjxjhi ð1 þ mi WÞ−2Þe−jxjhi
þ ½Ci jxjð1 þ mi WÞ þ Di ðjxjhi ð1 þ mi WÞ þ 2Þejxjhi
−gi ½jxjðAiþ1 þ Ciþ1 Þð1−miþ1
W Þ−2ðBiþ1 −Diþ1 Þ ¼ 0 ð11Þ
where
ð1−m2iþ1 ÞEi 2−mi mi
gi ¼ ; mi V¼ ; mi W ¼
ð1−mi ÞEiþ1
2 1−mi Z1−mi
Rl 1 l
pðxÞ ¼ −l pðyÞe dy; qðxÞ ¼
jxy1
qðyÞejxy1 dy
x −l
In summary, every component in the system has its own Gi,
and each Gi is described by four variables, the stress function
coefficients Ai, Bi, Ci, Di. Thus, for the n-layer system there are
4 (n + 1) variables. The condition of zero stress at an infinite
depth in the substrate ensures that Cn+1 = Dn+1 = 0, and this
reduces the number of variables to 4n + 2. The consideration of
the two types of loading at the surface yields two equations and
the four stress and deflection equivalence considerations at
every interface in the system give a further set of 4n equations,
thus a set of 4n + 2 simultaneous equations is obtained. The
equations are in terms of the elastic properties of every
component in the system, the thickness of every layer in the
system, the Fourier transforms of the applied loads and the
Fourier transform integrating variables.
3. Surface coatings evaluations
A computer code written in Fortran has been developed to
simulate the specific contact problem based on the developed
model. The digitised surface profile shown in Fig. 2 was
obtained and taken as the surface of a layer. The technique
developed by Webster and Sayles [6] was employed to deal with
real rough surfaces. Computation results demonstrated that the
surface pressure distribution for the real surface profile is
significantly different from the traditional Hertzian smooth
contact theory, sometimes the pressure values in the case of real
surface profile are even twice as high as those of the smooth
situation.
Having found the surface deflections and pressures, the main
area of interest in analysing the contact is usually the calculation
of the stress states in the bodies induced by the contact. Detailed
derivation of various stress functions is given in Refs. [10,11].
In summary, a mesh is created in the body of interest (the layers
and the substrate) and the stress at each point is calculated as the
sum of the stresses due to each pressure element on the surface.
The input to the subsurface stress calculation programmes is
simply the output file from the contact simulation programme.
The required information is layer thickness, material properties
and surface pressure distribution. The output is a file containing
5799
Fig. 2. A typical as-measured surface profile.
the spatial coordinates and values of the direct stresses at every
point in the mesh.
3.1. TiN/steel and duplex systems
To demonstrate the capacity of the model to deal with multi-
layer systems under real rough and friction contacts, the model
has been used to simulate the contact of (a) a half-space (i.e.
steel) coated with a 3 μm TiN coating and (b) a half-space (i.e.
steel) with duplex treatment (3 μm TiN and 8 μm Fe4N
coatings). Material properties used in the calculation were the
following, elastic modulus: TiN, 640 GPa; Fe4N, 140 GPa;
substrate, 210 GPa, Poisson's ratio: TiN, 0.2; Fe4N, 0.25;
substrate, 0.3 [12]. Fig. 3 shows the rough surface contact
pressure and the resultant subsurface stress (Von Mises stress)
distribution in the investigated TiN coating system. It has been
found that the effect of friction on the pressure distribution for
layered surfaces is very small [9] and thus Fig. 3(a) is applied to
all cases with different friction coefficients. However, the effect
of friction on the subsurface stress distribution is significant,
particularly for rough surface contact (Fig. 3(b)). For smooth
and frictionless contact, the maximum stress position is at
certain distance below the surface. When a real rough surface is
considered, the subsurface stress distribution changes signifi-
cantly: the maximum stress position is moved to the substrate
surface even without friction. This is true for most of
engineering surface finish. When friction is introduced, the
stress distributions change considerably: the maximum stress
and the stress values in the near surface region increase with
increasing friction coefficient. Clearly, in the case of hard
coating systems, the combination of a rough surface and friction
force will greatly increase the level of subsurface stress and
move the maximum value to the surface, thus increasing the
scope for failure.
The severe stressing conditions due to a single hard coating
of high elastic modulus can be improved by the duplex
technique, involving plasma nitriding and PVD TiN coating.
The iron nitride layer (Fe4N) formed during nitriding has a low
elastic modulus and helps to reduce the stress level in the duplex
system. Fig. 4 shows the rough surface contact pressure
distribution and the resultant subsurface stress distribution for
the duplex system. It can be seen that the distribution of pressure
5800 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803

influence of coating and substrate plastic properties (e.g. hard-

ness) on the test results as encountered in the well known scratch
and indentation tests, but also allows for the theory of elasticity
to be employed. Using the numerical model described above, the
distribution of various stress components in the test specimen
can be easily calculated. Fig. 5 shows the variation of the
maximum shear stress (τmax) and shear stress range, Δτ (τmax–
τmin) at the coating–substrate interface for a 4 μm thick TiN
coating–steel system. It can be seen that the maximum shear
stress at the interface increases with increasing friction coeffi-
cient, whilst the shear stress range is nearly independent of the
friction coefficient when its value is below 0.15. A comparison
with experimental observations shows that the measured
interfacial fatigue limit is independent of the variation of friction
coefficient during the test, which suggests that it is the shear
stress range Δτ that is the dominant stress component respon-
sible for interfacial fatigue failure. Using Δτ as an index param-
eter, the interfacial fatigue behaviour and cyclic bonding
strength of various coating–substrate systems can be quantita-
tively evaluated and compared [13].

4. High performance engineered gears

Tests were carried out using a speed ratio of 1:1 and the
tested gears run under dry condition as shown in Fig. 6. The
gears were run using a dedicated rig modified from a unit built

Fig. 3. TiN/steel system contact pressure (a) and resultant subsurface stress (b).

in the duplex system (Fig. 4(a)) is similar to that in the single

coating system (Fig. 3(a)). However, the subsurface stress
distribution is different. During real rough surface contact, the
subsurface stress is reduced considerably in the duplex system
(Fig. 4(b)) as compared with the single coating system (Fig. 3
(b)). This is true for both frictionless and frictional contacts with
various friction coefficients. Clearly, in the duplex system, the
subsurface iron nitride layer behaves as a ‘stress barrier’.

3.2. Coating interfacial bonding evaluations

The model described above has been used to predict the

interfacial fatigue behaviour of various coating systems. Recent-
ly experimental work [13] involving lubricated rolling-sliding
contact tests of various PVD, PCVD and IBED TiN, TiCN-steel
systems under elastic loading conditions has demonstrated that
under such cyclic loading conditions, fatigue failure is initiated
at the coating-substrate interface (interfacial fatigue). The mea-
sured interfacial fatigue limit is closely related to the coating–
substrate bonding strength evaluated using other techniques like
the scratch and indentation methods. More importantly, it has
been found that the interfacial fatigue test results are not
influenced by the variation of the friction coefficient during the
test, which usually varies between 0.01 and 0.07. Furthermore,
the elastic loading nature of the test not only eliminates the Fig. 4. Duplex system contact pressure (a) and resultant subsurface stress (b).
 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803
Fig. 5. Effects of friction on interfacial shear stress of 4 μm TiN coated steel.
originally for testing polymer gears, described in details in Refs.
[14–16]. The rig employs the standard back-to-back configu-
ration of running test gears externally against a set of master
gears in this case gears made from hardened steel running in oil
in a conventional gearbox for normal, prolonged life. During
conventional gear testing where little or no wear is expected
gears are loaded by simply winding-in the torque. For dry
running gears, however, which may experience gross wear, the
load would progressively unwind and consequently tooth loads
would change with time. To counteract this, the test gears were
mounted in a bearing block and driven by shafts with universal
joints at each end, thus allowing the bearing block to pivot from
a loaded torque arm, as shown in Fig. 6. In this way the gears
were continuously loaded with a constant torque irrespective of
Fig. 6. Gear test rig.
5801
Table 1
Test results for gears with different treatments
Treatments Roughness change (Ra, μm) Weight loss (mg)
Untreated 7.026 550
TiN coated 5.539 250
Plasma nitrided 0.359 50
Duplex treated 0.035 10
tooth wear. Gears were mounted on the rig in random pairs, as
would be expected for off-the-shelf gears used in practice. The
method of assembling the gears to the test rig was such that each
pair could only be re-assembled with the same teeth in mesh.
The gears were driven by a constant speed, 1.5 kW electric
motor. Changes in speed were effected by changing the drive
pulleys and belts. In an attempt to shorten testing time, an
accelerated programme was envisaged using a real-time PC
controlled data logging system. This system however, indicated
wear related to only a single point on the gear faces the pitch
point and as wear is not uniform along the tooth face and wear at
the root and tip is considerably more than at the pitch point,
nominal measurements were misleading.
This work was carried out to investigate the potential of
VERY high hardness coatings with good tribological properties,
allied to gears of superior base metal. Tests were carried out to
examine surface and subsurface crack initiation of high perfor-
mance engineered steels in gear applications. En 40B (BS 970
722M24, DIN 17211, 14Cr Mo V6.9) was used due to its
suitability to resist plastic flow deformation under high load.
The gears are module 4 mm, 15 teeth with a face width of only
10 mm in order to try and promote rapid wear and create
subsurface cracks. Three sets of gears were coated by different
processes, namely Titanium nitride TiN, plasma nitriding and a
Duplex coating-TiN on plasma nitriding. The gears were run at
500 rpm at a load of 40 Nm for periods of 3000 cycles. The TiN
coated gear wear was one half of that of a pair of untreated
gears, but five times more than the plasma nitriding, which in
turn wore five times more than the Duplex coated gears. The
overall reduction in wear of the Duplex gears was some fifty
five times better than that of the untreated gears. The surface
finish of both the driver and driven gears had improved with
running, signifying running-in had been accelerated, which
would give cause to consider that Duplex coatings would
probably give long term low wear. Changes in surface rough-
ness over the test duration and weight loss for these tests are
Fig. 7. Schematic view of hardness/stress variations for different systems.
5802 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803
Fig. 8. Possible failure mechanism for TiN coated untreated steel gears.
given in Table 1. Whilst such high performing gear base
materials and coatings are inevitably relatively expensive they
give rise to confidence that the performance, for dry-running
gears, would be significantly enhanced. Duplex coatings
applied to gears made to precision standards would result in
even better performance.
The possible reasons why TiN coated untreated steel gear
performance is poor may be linked to its surface and subsurface
hardness variation. For plasma nitrided steel (PNS), its hardness
is gradually reduced from the surface to the substrate (Fig. 7).
However, for untreated steel with TiN coating, there is a sharp
hardness transition from surface to the substrate. The untreated
steel can't support the very hard thin TiN coating. Cracks will
start under TiN layer and the hard TiN will then break (Fig. 8).
The developed FEM elastic-plastic contact model can be
used to predict the plastic deformation behaviour of coatings
Fig. 9. Strength/stress profiles for (a) TiN/Ti6Al4V and (b) TO/Ti6Al4V.
systems. The finite element method (FEM) has been employed
to analyse the deformation behaviour of several coating systems
[19,20] to overcome the difficulties associated with the labori-
ous numerical technique and the complex form of analytical
equations.
The FEM model developed by the authors [17] has been paid
to the initiation and development of the plastic zone in the
coating system, and the influence of coating thickness and
substrate properties on the deformation behaviour. In most
systems, plastic deformation is initiated first in the substrate at
the coating–substrate interface and plastic deformation does not
initiate in the TiN coating until a large plastic zone has been
developed in the substrate.
Another application is using Titanium alloy gear to replace
steel gear in powertrain timing gears and details can be found
from Ref. [18]. Fig. 9 shows the clear benefit of using thermal
oxidation treated (TO/Ti6Al4V) titanium gears instead of TiN
coated on untreated ones. Fig. 10 shows cam rig tested gear for
untreated and thermal oxidation treated (TO/ Ti6Al4V). The
gears are module 1.81 mm, 32 teeth for the driver and 28 for the
driven with a face width of 10 mm and are loaded at 0.29 Nm
with a running speed of 6000 rpm. The untreated gear surfaces
had worn significantly (Fig. 10 (a)) due to titanium poor adhe-
sive wear resistance [18]. However, under the same loading
conditions, the thermal oxidation treated (TO/Ti6Al4V) gear
surface only had worn slightly and the gears had achieved the
required life.
Many experiments have shown that there are some initial
successes using coatings technology in gear applications [21,22].
However much more research works, e.g. rolling/sliding contact
behaviour modelling and testing, still need to be carried out to
understand the coating wear mechanism in gear application and
achieve optimised surface engineering system design.
Fig. 10. Tested titanium alloy gears.
 K. Mao et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 201 (2007) 5796–5803
5. Summary
The elastic contact model for real rough and multi-layer
surfaces described in this paper considers the realistic situations
of layered surfaces, friction forces and roughness parameters
directly using measured surface profile as the input. Efforts have
been made to link the contact stresses predicted by the model
with the surface engineered gear performance. Applications of
the model in several situations have demonstrated its potential
to provide useful information for design of such components as
gears and bearings with the surface and substrate as a system.
Although there are some initial success using coatings
technology in gear applications, much more research works still
need to be carried out to understand the coatings, interfaces and
substrate failure mechanism in gear application for surface
engineering system design.
References
[1] K.L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, 1987.
[2] T. Bell, Surf. Eng. 6 (1) (1990) 31.
[3] H. Hertz, Zeitschrift fur Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, vol. 92,
1882, p. 156.
[4] J. Smith, C. Liu, J. Appl. Mech., ASME 20 (1953) 157.
[5] P. Gupta, J. Walowit, J. Lubr. Technol. 96 (1974) 250.
5803
[6] M. Webster, R. Sayles, J. Tribol., ASME 108 (1986) 314.
[7] S. Cole, R. Sayles, ASME J. Tribol. 114 (1992) 334.
[8] T. Bell, Y. Sun, S. Cole, “Duplex Surface Engineering”, Proceedings of 8th
International Congress on Heat Treatment of Materials, Kyoto, Japan,
1992, p. 1.
[9] K. Mao, Y. Sun, T. Bell, Tribology Transactions of STLE, vol. 39 (2),
1996, p. 416.
[10] K. Mao, T. Bell, Y. Sun, J. Tribol., ASME 119 (3) (1997) 476.
[11] T. Bell, K. Mao, Y. Sun, Surf. Coat. Technol. 108–109 (1998) , 360.
[12] Y. Sun, K. Mao, P. Buchhagen, Finite Element Modeling of the Plasma Nit
riding Process and the Resultant Load Bearing Capacity of Low Alloy
Steels, European Community, 1996.
[13] J. He, B.C. Hendrix, N. Hu, K.W. Xu, T. Bell, Y. Sun, K. Mao, Surf. Eng.
12 (1) (1996) 49.
[14] C. Hooke, K. Mao, D. Walton, J. Tribol. 115 (1) (1993) 119.
[15] A. Breeds, S. Kukureka, K. Mao, D. Walton, C. Hooke, Wear 166 (1993)
85.
[16] K. Mao, The Performance of Dry Running Non-metallic Gears, The
University of Birmingham, 1993.
[17] Y. Sun, A. Bloyce, T. Bell, Thin Solid Films 271 (1995) 122.
[18] K. Mao, A. Bloyce, H. Dong, Surface Engineering of Titanium Alloys for
Low Wear Load Bearing Surfaces, 1st World Tribology Congress, London,
1997.
[19] K. Komvopoulos, J. Tribol., ASME 111 (1989) 430.
[20] A. Bhattacharya, W. Nix, Int. J. Solids Struct. 24 (1988) 1287.
[21] A. Bloyce, T. Michler, Heat Treat. Met. 29 (2) (2002) 33.
[22] F. Joachim, N. Kurz, B. Glatthaar, Gear Technol. (July 2004) 50.