[JukeBox]

Trying to find or calculate axial load ratings of the particular double row angular contact ball bearing (static, dynamic, fatigue). There are only radial load ratings listed.

The bearing: http://medias.schaeffler.de/medias/e...3201-B-2RS-TVH

[mactec54]

Trying to find or calculate axial load ratings of the particular double row angular contact ball bearing (static, dynamic, fatigue). There are only radial load ratings listed.

The bearing: http://medias.schaeffler.de/medias/e...3201-B-2RS-TVH

Just think of it as a single AC bearing and you will find a calculation for it, even though you have a double row, the bearing configuration is able to have equal thrust each side of the bearing, so the thrust is only on one row, which ever side of the bearing the thrust is coming from

[JukeBox]

That makes sense but there is no axial load listed for single row angular contact ball bearings either. I would like to know static, dynamic and fatigue axial loads.

[mactec54]

That makes sense but there is no axial load listed for single row angular contact ball bearings either. I would like to know static, dynamic and fatigue axial loads.

You will find the spec's at company's like SKF, Dynamic bearing loads and life

[Eldon_Joh]

the fundamental relationship for axial vs radial thrust of a set of ball bearings is primarily dependent on the contact angle.

for a typical DGRBB the reason the axial thrust load is rated as half of the radial load is because the contact angle of a dgrbb in axial thrust is approximately 12-15 degrees. without being paid to do the math, i would speculate that this angle is fundamentally set by the number of balls you can fit in the bearing. if you remove the spacer that holds the balls apart, you'll find they fit half way around the race, and then you can remove the inner race.

the tangent of 15 degrees is about 0.25. All of the balls under axial load are approximately equivalent to half of the balls under radial thrust load when you account for the distribution of force under radial load.

but the tangent of 25 degrees is 0.46. if the radial load is given at a contact angle of 0 degrees, meaning no multiplication of force due to the geometry, then you should expect an angular contact bearing of 25 degrees to have an axial load approximately equal to its radial load capacity--assuming there is enough slop in the bearing for the angle to change.

at a contact angle of 30 degrees axially and 0 degrees radially you've got nearly equal stress in the bearing balls for both axial and radial thrust of equal loads so you should see similar fatigue life.



your fundamental problem will be determining if the bearings are actually being used properly.

standard 15 degree deep groove radial ball bearings are considerably affected by clearance. a C3 bearing in a slip fit is going to fail sooner than a P5 bearing in a press fit bore because the contact angles will be higher for the lower clearance bearing. the sloppy bearing will have the balls riding on the edge of the groove, and that concentrates stress leading to increased fatigue.

Toyota used a standard 6308 bearing to handle the entire thrust load of the input shaft in a number of their 4wd transmissions on ~120hp engines, and a 6307 bearing to handle the thrust load of the secondary shaft iirc

[RCaffin]

Contact Schaeffler and ask.

Cheers
Roger