Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
in SPUR GEARS
Edoardo Conrado and Piermaria Davoli
Introduction
Management Summary In today’s gear industry, designers
It is well known from the literature that the true bending stresses at typically utilize rating methods of gear
the tooth root of spur gears are quite different from the nominal values load capacity based on standards or the
that are utilized for the calculation of load capacity, either by standards or customary design rules. In these meth-
usual design rules. ods, nominal quantities are calculated
No problems arise in using a load capacity rating when the simplified in order to characterize the stress field
values are compared with the results of bending fatigue tests whose limits in the gear. These nominal quantities
are calculated with the same schematic method.
are compared with limit values derived
But the “true” stress at the tooth root has different trends and values,
from tests using gears as specimens.
and the designer must be aware of this difference, especially for light
gears with narrow ribs and rims. In the case of tooth bending
In this paper, an accurate FEM analysis has been done of the “true” strength, a cantilever-beam model is
stress at tooth root of spur gears in the function of the gear geometry. The generally used to compute the bend-
obtained results confirm the importance of these differences. ing stress. With this approach, Lewis
in 1892 first calculated the tooth root
stress of spur gear teeth (W. Lewis,
Table 1- Synthesis of the cases analyzed
for the full-body and the thin-rimmed gear. “Investigation of the Strength of Gear
Teeth,” Proceedings of Engineers
Full-Body Gears Thin-Rimmed Gears Club, Philadelphia). This model is still
Model Single Gear Gear Pair the basis for standard calculation meth-
Load Pinion Pinion ods successfully used in gear design.
Body Gear Structure Full Rim Rim Supported by a Web However, the local stress state—the
“true” stress—in the tooth root fillet
Module m=4.5 mm Module m=4.5 mm
may be different from the nominal val-
Geometric Face width b = 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 Face width b=20 mm ues obtained by this method.
Parameters 40, 50, 70, 100 mm Backup ratio r = 0.5 - 0.65 - 0.75 In truth, the calculation of the maxi-
and Plane Strain Condition. Web ratio w = 0.2 - 0.3 - 0.4 mum tensile stress at the tooth root is a
three-dimensional problem: The plane
Gear Data For Pinion strain or plane stress model can be used
Normal Module mn without approximations only in the
case of infinite, or infinitesimal, face
Number of Teeth z
width. In Reference 1, starting from the
Normal Pressure Angle αn analytical solution of Jaramillo (Ref.
Tip Diameter da 2), Wellauer and Seireg introduced
a study of the bending stress of gear
Root Diameter dR
teeth based on a cantilever-plate model.
Profile Shift Coefficient x
This method shows clearly that a three-
Span Measurement W dimensional model must be used to
Number of Teeth Spanned k evaluate the variation of the tooth root
stress along the face width. Current
Operating Center Distance aw
numerical methods, FEM and BEM,
Tool Geometry for example, are available for the solu-
Tool Normal Tooth Thickness Sn0 tion of the elasticity problem for com-
plex domains. Thus it is possible to
Tool Addendum ha0
calculate accurately the local strain and
Tool Addendum ρa0
stress state in the tooth root, taking into
Tool Protuberance δa0 account the real geometry of both gear
52 GEARTECHNOLOGY August 2007 www.geartechnology.com
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
teeth and body (Refs. 3 and 4).
This work analyzes the stress field
b/2 Fbt/b
at the tooth root using a three-dimen-
sional, parametric, finite element solid Fixed Surface Symmetry Plane
1.00
tion, the bending stress approaches the
0.95 1.10
b = 5mm
plane strain value for face width close
Bending Stress
0.90 1.05
b = 10mm to infinity.
b = 15mm
b = 20mm Thin-Rimmed Gears
PS
�F����F
0.85 b = 30mm
1.00 b = 40mm A common design goal for gears in
0.80
b = 50mm
some power transmissions (e.g., aero-
0.95 b = 70mm
b = 100mm b = 5mm
space transmissions) is reduced weight.
Bending Stress
0.75 b = 10mm
0.90 b = 15mm To meet this goal, thin rims are often
0.70 b = 20mm
utilized. But rims that are too thin may
0.85 b = 30mm
0.65
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 b = 40mm
50 adversely affect the bending stress.
0.80 Position along facewidth z [mm] b = 50mm
Several researchers have employed
b = 70mm
Z X
Y
(Fig. 9). Nine different case studies are
Z
analyzed with all geometry parameters
X
fixed, excepting the back-up ratio and
the web thickness ratio (Table 1). The
Figure 9—Thin-rimmed gear geometry. Figure 10—Geometric model and boundary
conditions: Thin-rimmed gear. first, here referred to as r, is the ratio
1.4
Symmetry Plane
1.2 tooth height. The second, referred to as
z00 full
z00 r0.75
z00 r0.55
1.1
w, is the ratio between the web thick-
z00 r0.50
z10 full
ct Pressure p(z)/pH
1 z10 r0.75
z10 r0.55
0.9 ness b
z10 r0.55
S
and the face width b.
0.8
54 GEARTECHNOLOGY August 2007 www.geartechnology.com
0.7
0.6
�����������������
�������������������
���������
���������
���������
���������
���������
As opposed to the full-body gear ���������
���������
1.4 ���������
case, the gear pair is modeled and the ���������
���������
1.3 ���������
dry contact of the mating tooth surfaces Middle Cross-Section
Hertz
z00 full
���������
���������
1.2 z00 r0.75 ���������
is simulated by a numerical algorithm. 1.1
z00 r0.55
z00 r0.50
���������
1.1
1.05
calculation where the rim thickness is
1.05
Bending Stress
1
Backup Ratio r = SR/h not sufficient to provide full support
Bending Stress
1
Backup Ratio Web
r = SRRatio w = bs/b
0.95 Web Ratio
/h
w = bs/b
of the tooth root. The AGMA and ISO
0.95
piena
piena rim thickness factors KB and YB have
0.9 r = 0.75 w = 0.4
0.9 r = 0.75 w = 0.4
r = 0.75 w = 0.3
r = 0.75 w = 0.3
the same meaning and same values as a
0.85 0.85 r = 0.75 w = 0.2
r = 0.75 w = 0.2
r = 0.65 w = 0.4
r = 0.65 w = 0.4
function of the back-up ratio.
0.8 0.8
r = 0.65 w = 0.3
r = 0.65 w = 0.3 According to the ISO standard, the
r = 0.65 w = 0.2
r = 0.65 w = 0.2
0.75
r = 0.50 w = 0.4
r = 0.50 w = 0.4
rim thickness factor should be defined
r = 0.50 w = 0.3
0.75 r = 0.50 w = 0.3
r = 0.50 w = 0.2 as the ratio of the nominal tooth root
0.7 r = 0.50 w = 0.2
0.7 stress for a thin-rimmed gear and for
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a full-body gear with the same geom-
0 1 Position
2 Along
3 Facewidth
4 z [mm]
5 6 7 8 9
etry 10
but without the back-up ratio. The
Position Along Facewidth z [mm] magnitude of the rim thickness factor
Figure 16—Bending stress distributions along the face width for different r and ww: Thin-rimmed gear
with b = 20 mm ( σF is the bending stress and σFPS is the bending stress in plane strain condition). can be derived from diagrams (Fig. 17)
1.25
or calculated according to the ISO stan-
dard with this formula for an assigned
PS
1.24
�F����F
1.25
Web ratio w = bs/b
1.22
w = 0.2 backup ratio: YB = 1.6 ln (2.242 · ht
w = 0.3
PS
1.24
/SR) per 0.5<SR/ht < 1.2
�F����F
w = 0.4
Web ratio w = bs/b
Bending Stress
1.2
1.22
w = 0.2 The values of the YB factor calcu-
w = 0.3
1.18
w = 0.4
lated for r = 0.5, 0.65 and 0.75 are list-
Bending Stress
1.16
1.2 ed in Table 2, while the ratio between
bending stress for the full-body gear
1.18
1.14
and the thin-rimmed gears investigated
1.12 1.16 in this study are reported in Table 3.
The differences between the values for
1.1
1.14 a given r are large, but the effect of
1.08
0.5 1.12 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75
web is not taken into account in the
Backup Ratio r = SR/ht YB factor. The values obtained have
1.1 instead a good correlation with the
results of numerical and experimental
1.08
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75
investigations described in Reference
Backup Ratio r = SR/ht 5, where the effect of both the thin rim
and the web thickness are considered.
Figure 17—Ratio between the maximum bending stress and the bending stress in plane strain con- Conclusions
dition as function of the backup ratio for diffrent web thickness ratios.
This paper presents the results of
In Figure 16, the bending stress is an investigation on the variation of the
plotted as a function of the distance of tooth root stress field along the face
the section from the middle plane for width for full-body and thin-rimmed
the nine case studies and for a full-body gears. The results of parametric, 3-
gear case. For back-up ratio equal to D finite element analyses are used to
0.75, the thin rim has a small influence characterize the influence of some sig-
on the bending stress, and the stress nificant geometric parameters on the
distribution is unaffected by web thick- bending stress distribution.
ness ratio. If the back-up ratio decreas- For full-body gears, the influence of
es, the magnitude of the bending stress the face width was investigated, show-
in the middle plane increases and the ing areas with different stress levels
effect of the web thickness becomes along the tooth width. The results show
clear—the increment of the bending that, for face width ratio close to practi-
stress becomes larger when the web cal gear design, most of the bending
thickness decreases (Fig. 16). stress occurs in the center cross-section
56 GEARTECHNOLOGY August 2007 www.geartechnology.com
and the magnitude is higher than in the
Table 2–YB values as a function of the backup ratios analyzed in this study.
plane strain condition. The location in
the tooth root fillet of the highest value SR/ht r = 0.5 r = 0.65 r = 0.75
of the maximum principal stress chang- YB 2.40 1.98 1.75
es along the face width, but the values
of the angle ψ are close to 30°.
For thin-rimmed gears, the influ- Table 3–Ratio between the bending stresses calculated for the thin-rimmed gear
ence of both rim and web thickness and in plane strain condition as a function of the backup ratio r = SR/ht and the
was investigated. The results show that web thickness ratio w = bS/b.
for backup ratio values larger than 0.75, σF/σFPS r = 0.5 r = 0.65 r = 0.75
there is a very small influence on the
w = 0.2 1.24 1.12 1.09
tooth root stress, while the maximum
fillet stress increases sharply as the w = 0.3 1.21 1.21 1.09
backup ratio value is smaller than 0.75. w = 0.4 1.20 1.11 1.09
Moreover, the more the web thickness
is increased, the more the stress con- and Helical Gear Teeth.”
centration factor decreases. 9. Hibbit, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.
ABAQUS User’s Manual, version 6.5.
References
1. Wellauer, E. J. and A. Seireg, Appendix
“Bending Strength of Gear Teeth by The numerical simulations were
Cantilever-Plate Theory,” Journal of performed using ABAQUS version 6.5-
Engineering for Industry, 1960. 1 in the pre/post processing (ABAQUS/
2. Jaramillo, T. J., “Deflection and CAE) and in the numerical analysis
Moments Due to a Concentrated (ABAQUS/Standard).
Load on a Cantilever Plate of Infinite The material was considered homo-
Length,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, geneous and isotropic with a linear
vol. 17, Trans. ASME, vol. 72, 1950, elastic behavior. Small displacement
pp. 67–72. hypothesis was assumed for the anal-
3. Shijun Ma and Chien-ann Hou, yses. In the full body gear analyses,
“The Crack Initiation of Spur Gear hexahedral quadratic elements (3D)
Tooth: Experiments and Analysis,” and bilinear quadrilateral (2D) ele-
International Gearing Conference, ments fully integrated (ABAQUS codes
1988. C3D20 and CPE8 according to Ref. 9)
4 . Ts a i S . J . , a n d S . H . W u , were used for the domain discretization
“Experimental and Numerical Root in the three- and two-dimensional mod-
Stress Analysis of Conical Gears,” els. In the thin-rimmed gears analyses,
International Conference on Gears, hexahedral linear elements (ABAQUS
München, VDI Berichte, 2005. code C3D8I according to Ref. 9) were
5. Blazakis, C. A. and D. R. Houser, used for the mesh. These types of ele-
“Finite Element and Experimental ments are suggested for the conver-
Analysis of the Effects of Thin- gence of the contact algorithm and the
Rimmed Gear Geometry on Spur Gear elements are enhanced by incompatible
Fillet Stresses,” International Gearing modes to improve their bending behav-
Piermaria Davoli is a full professor of
Conference, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, ior. The number of elements used was machine design at the Department
1994. varied depending upon the particular of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico
6. Johnson, K. L., Contact Mechanics, gear width being considered. di Milano, Italy. His research areas
Cambridge University Press, 1985. In the analyses where the gear pair include gear transmissions, surface
and bending fatigue of gears, and
7. ISO 6336:2006 (E), “Calculation was simulated, the contact between
noise emission.
of Load Capacity of Spur and Helical the tooth surfaces was considered as a Edoardo Conrado holds a master of
Gears,” ISO International Standard, dry frictionless contact assuming small science degree in mechanical engi-
2006. sliding between the surfaces. The con- neering and is pursuing his Ph .D. in
8. ANSI/AGMA 2001-C95, tact constraint was simulated by the mechanical engineering at Politecnico
“Fundamental Rating Factors and LaGrange Multiplier Method (i.e. using di Milano, Italy.
Calculation Methods for Involute Spur the ABAQUS option “Hard contact”).
www.geartechnology.com August 2007 GEARTECHNOLOGY 57