European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

Volume year - issue

Dynamic Contact Loads of Spur Gear Pairs

with Addendum Modifications
V. Atanasiu, I. Doroftei
Theory of Mechanisms and Robotics Department, Gh. Asachi Technical University of Iasi
B-dul D. Mangeron, 61-63, Iasi - 700050, Romania
Email: vatanasi@mail.tuiasi.ro, idorofte@mail.tuiasi.ro

Abstract
The paper presents a dynamic tooth load analysis of spur gears with addendum modifications. The
analytical model is developed to simulate the load sharing characteristics through a mesh cycle.
The model takes into account the main internal factors of dynamic load as time-varying mesh
stiffness and composite tooth profile errors. The specific phenomenon of contact tooth pairs
alternation during mesh cycle is integrated in this dynamic load modeling. A comparative study is
included, which shows the effects of the factors with an important role in the way of the dynamic
load variation.

Keywords: spur gears, dynamic loads, mesh stiffness, profile error, addendum modification.

1. Introduction
The dynamic characteristics of spur gear pairs
are significant for the design and motion control
of these mechanisms [1], [2]. The position
accuracy in a motion control system is affected
by vibration due to nonlinear effects such mesh
stiffness or tooth profile errors [2], [3], [4]. A
complete analytical methodology that covers all
influence factors with high accuracy is not current
available.
The time-varying mesh stiffness represents the
main cause of undesired vibrations in the case of
gear transmissions with high manufacturing
precision. Because the tooth pair stiffness varies
during the mesh cycle, different evaluation
models for gear mesh stiffness have been
developed [3-6]. The fluctuation of the dynamic
loads of meshing gears represents a relevant
parameter in dynamic analysis.
In this work, the dynamic model accounts the
non-linear time varying mesh stiffness, variable
tooth profile errors, and tooth profile
modifications in order to obtain reliable data for
the prediction of gear dynamic loads. An
investigation of the two group of the evaluation
methods of the mesh stiffness used in the
dynamic analysis of spur gear pairs is included in

the paper. The effects of the operation frequency

and load condition od spur gears are considered
in the numerical analysis of the dynamic shared
loads.

2. Dynamic Model
During the engagement cycle, the contact load
does not remain constant. The load variation is
mainly caused by the following factors: (i) the
alternating engagement of single and double
pairs of teeth; (ii) the variation of the mesh
stiffness along the line of action; (iii) the deviation
of the tooth profile from the theoretical involute
profile. In order to build an accurate analytical
model of the dynamic tooth load sharing, the
parameters used in the model need to be
estimated correctly.
The mechanical model for a gear pair in mesh is
shown in Figure 1, where the teeth are
considered as springs and the gear blanks as
inertia masses [4], [6]. In developing this model,
the dynamic process is studied in the rotating
plane of the gears and the differential equations
of motion are developed by using the theoretical
line of action. In Figure 1, for a pair of contacting
teeth i, the time-varying mesh stiffness ki(t) and
the composite tooth profile error ei(t) act as
parameter excitations.

European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

Volume year - issue

with xd being the dynamic displacement and e i ( t )

the equivalent error of teeth profile.

Fn
J1 rb1
T1

J2

The damping coefficient is calculated by

Fdi(t)
c = 2 me k m ,

T2

k i (t)
e i(t)
Fn

r b2

where represents the damping ratio factor and

km is the average mesh stiffness of the gear
pair. The meshing resonance frequency of the
gear pair is determined as follows:

Figure 1: Dynamic model of meshing gears

The differential equations of motion can be
expressed as

J 1&&1 + Fd rb1 = T1 ,

(1)

J 2 &&2 + Fd rb 2 = T2 ,

(2)

where: 1 , 2 are the rotation angle of the pinion

and the driven gear, respectively; J 1 and J 2 are
the mass moments of inertia of the gears; T1 and
T2 denote the external torques applied on the
gear system; and rb1 , rb 2 are the base circle
radii of the gears.
The dynamic load is expressed as

fn =

km
,
m

1
2

(8)

where km is the average mesh stiffness of the

gear pair.

3. Parameters for Dynamic Model

3.1 Mesh Stiffness
The gear tooth is modeled to be a nonuniform
cantilever beam supported by a flexible fillet
region and foundation [7] as shown in Figure 2.
y

Fy

Fd = Fdi ( t ) ,

(7)

sp

(3)

'y

Fn

Fz

i =1

yp

where

Fd i = k i (t ) r b 1 1 r b 2 2 + c (r b1& 1 r b 2& 2 ) (4)

with k i representing the mesh stiffness of the
gear pair and c the damping coefficient. By
introducing the composite coordinate
xd = r b11 r b 22

(4)

Eqs. (1) and (2) yield an equation of motion in

the following form

sf
20

2 0

Fig. 2: Gear tooth deflection model

The individual tooth mesh stiffness is defined in
the normal direction to the contact surface as

kj =

Fn
fj

(9)

mx&&d + cx& d + Fdi ( t ) = Fn

(5)

i =1

where Fn is the static load and N represents the

number of simultaneous tooth pairs in mesh, and

Fdi ( t ) = k i ( t ) xd + ei ( t )

(6)

where Fn is the normal tooth load per unit length.

The approach methodologies of the tooth mesh
stiffness are based on analytical or with finite
element methods [1], [3], [5]. Two groups of the
evaluation methods of the mesh stiffness of spur
gear pairs is presented in the paper.
The finite element contact modelling is
computationally very difficult to model for

European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

dynamic analysis. Kuang and Yang [5]
developed an alternative method and introduced
a semi-empirical equation for the single tooth
stiffness with and without modification. In this
approach, the analytical expression is proposed
by using the curve fitting technique on the data
drown from a quadratic isoparametric finite
element method

( )

k j ry = ( A0 + A1x ) + ( A2 + A3 x )

ry rw

(1 + x ) m

Volume year - issue

great complexity [7]. The equations of the tooth

profile coordinates are established from the
geometrical conditions by using the property of
the involute profile and trochoidal curve
corresponding to the fillet profile.

rb2

where ry , rw , x and z are radius at loading

The effect of bending, shear and Hertzian

contact deformation is taking into account in the
analytical method to calculate the tooth
deformation. In this calculus procedure, the total
deflection f j of a pair of meshing teeth is
expressed as
2

T2

T1
h1

h2

O2

Fig. 3: Contact of spur gear teeth

For a pair of meshing teeth, the contact teeth
deflection is given by

fH =

4 (1 ) Fn
E

hh

ln 2 1 2

lc
bH
2 (1 )

(15)

j =1

j =1

and h 1 , h 2 represent the distance between

(11)

where: fb is the deflection due to bending, shear

and axial deformation of the tooth corresponding
to the involutes profile; ff is the deflection due to
the flexibility of the tooth foundation and fillet; f H
represents the local compliance of the Hertzian
contact.
The tooth deflection fb is analytically derived by
using the method of the potential energy of
deformation [4], [7], and can be expressed in the
integral form as follows
y
yp

Fn cos 2 'y p Mi'

2.4 (1 + ) + tan 2 'y

+
dy
dy (12)

0 Iy

E
Ay
0

where:

fz = fb + ff

(13)

Mi' = y p y cos 'y s f sin 'y

(14)

where b H is the half-width of surface of contact

f j = fbj + ffj + fH ,

fz =

rb1

(10)

point, pitch radius, addendum modification

coefficient and number of teeth and the
coefficients A1 , A2 , A3 are computed as
functions of the number of teeth z .
The Eq.(10) is applicable for the following
0.6 < x < 0.6 and 12 < z < 100 for solid steel
gears.

O1

The tooth parameter sf = f ( y ) and integrands, Iy

and Ay, are formulated in terms of variable with

contact point and tooth centreline in the normal

direction on tooth profile of the pinion and gear,
respectively, and is the Poissons coefficient.
(Fig. 3).
The teeth pairs in contact act like parallel
springs. Therefore, the total mesh stiffness kt
during each engagement cycle can be written as
a function of the position of contact point on the
action line
kt = ksI + ksII , for double-tooth contact

(16)

kt =

ksI

, for simple - tooth contact

where I and II are the mating points of the teeth

pairs.
The numerical results obtained from analytical
calculus method of mesh stiffness are plotted
and compared with the values computed by the
equation introduced by Kuang and Yang [5].
Figures 4 and 5 show the variation of the total
mesh stiffness from the starting to ending of the
contact cycle in relation to the geomatrical
specificatuion pf the gears. The numerical values

European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

obtained from Eq.(11) by using the analytical

calculus procedure are represetated with the thin
line of the curve 2. These examples illustrate the
effect of the change of the number of teeth and
addendum modification coefficients on the
amount and variation of the total mesh stiffness.
30

kt

The time-varying mesh stiffness is mainly caused

by the following factors: (i) the variation of the
single mesh stiffness along the equivalent line of
action; (ii) the fluctuation of the total number of
total pairs in contact during the engagement
cycle.

3.2 Tooth Profile Error

25

Volume year - issue

GA 1

N
20
mm m
15
10
5

The tooth profile error is defined as the distance

between the theoretical involutes profile and the
real tooth profile in the normal direction. The
profile error function ei ( t ) due to manufacturing
can be defined as
ei ( t ) = Ei sin ( z t + )

Figure 4: Numerical results of mesh stiffness for

the gear pair with following specifications
z1 = 30 ; z2 = 30 ; x1 = 0 ; x2 = 0

27
k t 24
21
N
18
mm m 15
12
9
6
3
0

GA 2

where z is the mesh frequency and is the

phase angle. The composite error es is the sum
of tooth errors of the pinion and gears. Tooth
profile errors are added to the theoretical profile
in normal directions.

4. Static Load Sharing

The total displacement must be the same for
each pair of teeth in the region of double tooth
contact to maintain tooth contact. From this
condition, the static load factor c sI can be
expressed [7] as

(17)

Figure 5: Numerical results of mesh stiffness for

the gear pair with following specifications
z1 = 18 , z2 = 42 , x1 = +0.8 , x2 = 0.8

Numerical results presented in Figs. 4 and 5

show that the variation of the mesh stiffness is
sensitive to the calculus method used especially
for the case of spur gear with addendum
modification coefficients.
Referring to Figures 4 and 5, the following mesh
points were used to represent the successive
positions of contact point of a tooth as it passes
through the zone of loading: the initial point of
engagement, A; the lowest point of single-tooth
contact, B; the highest point of single-tooth
contact, D; and the final point of engagement, E.
Section AB and DE are double - tooth contact
zone and section BD is the single tooth - contact
zone.

kI
k II
csI = 1 esI esII s I s II
Fn ks + ks

(18)

where: esI , esII represent the composite profile

deviations at the mating point points of the teeth
pairs and ksI , ksII are the single-tooth-pairstiffness [ N / m ] . The static factor csI of the
single tooth pair I is defined the ratio of the
single static load FI to the static load Fn .
If the effect of tooth errors is neglected in Eq.
(18) , the tooth load sharing ratio csI depends on
the mesh stiffness only. In such a case, the
sharing loads do not depend on the magnitude of
the transmitting load.

5. Dynamic Load Simulation

The design parameters of the analyzed gear
pairs are chosen as: material - steel/steel;
number of teeth of the pinion and gear, z1 =18;
z2 = 42; tooth module, m = 3 [mm]; tooth facewidth, b = 25 [mm], center distance, a = 90 [mm].

European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

Specific characteristics of these gear pairs are
shown in Table 1, where x1 and x2 are the
addendum modification coefficients of the pinion
and gear, and represents the contact ratio.
Gear
x1
x2
km
fn

pair
[Hz]
[N/m]
GA1
0
0
1.63
546.5
3889
GA2 +0.8 -0.8 1.40
418.2
3398
Table 1. Characteristics of the analyzed gears
In the analysis of dynamic loads, the transmitting
load is defined as W = q( Fn / b ) , where q
represents the load factor.

Cd I

1.4

fz / fn = 1/ 4
eI = 0

GA 2

1.2

q =1

includes gear pairs with different combination of

the addendum modification coefficients. A
nominal
value
=
100
[N/mm]
Fn / b
corresponding to a medium transmitting load is
considered in the numerical analysis.
The dynamic factor cdI of the single tooth pair is
defined the ratio of the single dynamic load FdI
to the static load Fn . Static load is the steady
state force resulting from driving torque.
The effects of damping coefficient and
operational speed on the dynamic factor CdI are
presented in Figures 6 and 7, where the thin line
represents the csI factor. The effect of both, the
mesh stiffness and the composite profile error on
the dynamic load variation is shown in Figure 8.
Cd I 1.4
1.2

eI = 0

0.6

0.4
0.2

0.4

= 0.06

0.2

Figure 6: Variation of static and dynamic factor

of single tooth pair

1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

q =1

0.8

= 0.17

0.6

fz / fn = 1/ 2
eI = 0

GA 2

q =1

= 0.17
= 0.06
A

fz / fn = 1/ 4

GA 2

0.8

Cd I

Volume year - issue

Figure 7: Variation of static and dynamic factor

of single tooth pair

Figure 8: Variation of static and dynamic factor

of single tooth pair

Cd I

1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

fz / fn = 1/ 4

GA 2

eI 0

q = 1.5

q = 0 .5
A

Figure 9: Variation of static and dynamic factor

of single tooth pair

A computer program was developed for

simulating the dynamic characteristics of spur
gear pairs. The equations of motion are solved
by the fourth-order Runge-Kutta method.
Computer analysis of dynamic characteristics

European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering

Cd

1.8

GA 1

1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4

10

15
20
y [mm]

Figure 10: Variation of the total dynamic factor

Cd

1.8

by using an exact analytical model and a semiempirical equation. The numerical results
obtained by using these two different calculus
methodologies showed the sensitiveness of the
mesh stiffness in relation to the gear ratio and
addendum modification coefficients.
The dynamic loads are mainly affected by the
time varying mesh stiffness, operating frequency,
and composite tooth profile errors. Under a
medium or heavy load condition, the effect of
mesh stiffness on the load sharing ratio was
considerabily larger than the composite profile
error due to manufacture.

Acknowledgements
This paper is based on the financial support of
the National University Research Council of
Romania, grant ID_296.

GA 2

1.6

Volume year - issue

1.4
1.2

References

1
0.8
0.6
0.4

10

15

20
y [mm]

Figure 11: Variation of the total dynamic factor

The dynamic load fluctuation under different

transmitting loads is shown in Figure 9.
The variation of the dynamic factor Cd on the
path of contact as a function of the addendum
modification coefficients are presented in Figures
10 and 11. In these figures, the line of contact is
represented as abscissas and the position of the
path of contact on the abscissas is presented
according to the distribution of the addendum
modification coefficients.
The effect of the variation in mesh stiffness on
the change on tooth dynamic load is more
effective at lower speeds than at higher speeds.
The number of load oscillation results as a ratio
of the meshing resonance frequency fn and the
meshing frequency fz of the gear pair.

6. Conclusion
An investigation of the dynamic tooth load
sharing among meshing teeth of spur gears with
addendum modifications is presented in the
paper. The values of the time-varying mesh
stiffness along the path of contact are compared

[1] J. Wang, I. Howard, The Torsional Stiffness of

Involute Spur Gears. Proceedind of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineering, C:
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science,
Vol.218, No.1, 131-142, 2004.
[2]. M. Vaishya, M., Singh , R. Strategies for
Modeling Friction in Gear Dynamics. Journal
of Mechanical Design,Transaction of the
ASME, Vol.125, 383-393, 2003.
[3] J. Lin, J., G.P. Parker, Mesh Stiffness
Variation Instabilities in Two-Stage Gear
Systems. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics,
Transactions of the ASME, Vol.24, 68-76,
2002.
[4] D. Yang, Z.S. Sun, A Rotary Model for Spur
Gear Dynamics. Journal of Mechanisms,
Transmissions, and Automation in Design.
Vol. 107, 529-311, 1985.
[5] J.H. Kuang, Y.T. Yang, An Estimate of Mesh
Stiffness and Load Sharing Ratio of a Spur
Gear Pair. DE-Vol.43-1, International Power
Transmission and Gearing Conference,
Volume 1, ASME, 1-9, 1992.
[6] O. Sato, H. Shimojimo, T. Kaneko, Positioning
Control of a Gear Train System Including
Flexible Shafts. JSME International Journal,
Vol.30, No. 267, 1465-1472, 1987.
[7] Atanasiu, V., Analysis of Teeth Forces in Spur
Gear Pairs. Proceedings of the Eight IFToMM
International Symposium on Theory of
Machines and Mechanisms, Bucharest, 3742, 2001.