Abstract
Although the ultimate assessment of materials for rolling elements is performance in service, full-scale testing is both expensive and time-absorbing, and an accepted accelerated service-simulation laboratory test to screen potentially suitable materials would be desirable.
Using reference materials of known service performance, results obtained from the National Engineering Laboratory rolling four-ball test, a high-speed rolling four-ball test, and the washer-type Unisteel fatigue machine have been compared. Variables in the different test methods which may influence the results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
