Additive Roller Bearing Cage Design
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Traditional production methods for roller bearing cages result in excessive material usage and increased costs due to the inability to efficiently remove unnecessary material, particularly in weight-sensitive applications where high strength and low weight are required.
Innovation Solution
The cage is manufactured using an additive process with two side rings and pocket elements connected by beams, allowing for optimized material distribution and reduced volume through 3-D printing or metal laser sintering, enabling a lightweight yet strong design.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If traditional stamping or injection moulding is used for cage production, then manufacturing efficiency is improved for medium and high production volumes, but material waste increases and weight reduction becomes impossible
Solution Approach 1:
The invention changes the manufacturing process parameter from traditional subtractive methods (stamping, injection moulding, turning, milling) to additive manufacturing (3D printing). This fundamental parameter change enables precise material placement only where needed for structural strength, eliminating unnecessary material and achieving weight reduction while maintaining manufacturing efficiency for the target production volume range.
Solution Approach 2:
The additive manufacturing process enables local quality optimization by depositing material only in regions where structural strength is required. The cage structure achieves varying material densities and distributions tailored to specific load-bearing areas, rather than using uniform material distribution throughout the entire component, thus reducing overall weight while maintaining necessary strength characteristics.
2Strength
If turning and milling are used for low volume production or high strength requirements, then manufacturing flexibility and strength are improved, but production time and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The additive manufacturing process performs preliminary action by directly creating the final cage structure in a single manufacturing step, eliminating the sequential operations of turning, milling, and pocket machining required in traditional methods. This preliminary formation of the complete structure significantly reduces production time while maintaining the ability to achieve high strength requirements through optimized material distribution and controlled deposition parameters.
3Weight of moving object
If material is removed to reduce weight, then cage weight is reduced, but production complexity and cost increase due to additional machining operations
Solution Approach 1:
Instead of the traditional approach of creating a complete cage structure and then removing material to reduce weight, the invention inverts the process by directly building only the necessary material structure through additive manufacturing. This inversion eliminates the need for subsequent material removal operations and associated machining complexity, achieving weight reduction as a direct result of the manufacturing method rather than through additional processing steps.
4Strength
If traditional manufacturing methods are used, then structural strength is maintained, but material cost increases due to excessive material usage
Solution Approach 1:
The invention changes the material deposition parameter from bulk material formation to precise localized material placement. Additive manufacturing controls material deposition at the layer level, placing material only where structural strength is required rather than forming complete solid structures that are later machined. This parameter change directly reduces raw material quantity consumed while maintaining the necessary strength characteristics of the cage.
Solution Approach 2:
The additive manufacturing process implements local quality by varying material density and distribution according to specific structural requirements at different locations within the cage. Material is concentrated in high-stress regions and minimized or eliminated in low-stress areas, achieving optimal strength-to-material-quantity ratio that traditional uniform manufacturing methods cannot accomplish.
Applied Scientific Principles
This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.
Function Achieved in This Case
This approach results in a cage that is 30-70% lighter than traditional designs while maintaining strength and functionality, reducing raw material costs and inertia, making it suitable for applications like aerospace and racing.
Implementation Method 1
The cage is manufactured using an additive process with two side rings and pocket elements connected by beams, allowing for optimized material distribution and reduced volume through 3-D printing or metal laser sintering
Implementation Method 2
The cage is manufactured using an additive process with two side rings and pocket elements connected by beams, allowing for optimized material distribution and reduced volume through 3-D printing or metal laser sintering
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
The invention relates to a cage (1) of a roller bearing, wherein the cage has a basically ring-shaped base body with a plurality of pockets (2) for receiving of rolling elements. To obtain a light but sufficient stiff cage, the invention proposes that the base body is formed by two side rings (3, 4) which are arranged in a defined axial distance and by a plurality of pocket elements (5), which are located between the side rings, wherein each pocket element has two face sides (6, 7) which are designed for contacting a rolling element, wherein the connection between the pocket element and each of the side rings is established only by at least one beam (8), which beam is positive substance joined with one of the side rings and the pocket element and has a ring-shaped or elliptical cross section in a section perpendicular to the longitudinal extension of the beam.