M. J.

Richard
Assistant Professor.
Computer Implementation of an
Dept. of Mechanical Engr.,
Laval University,
Quebec, Canada G1K7P4
Optimal Conformal Mapping for
D. Pare
Gear Tooth Stress Analysis
Design Engineer. This paper describes a computerized version of the complex potential approach
General Electric of Canada, which is a comprehensive mathematical model for the stress analysis of spur gear
795 First Ave., Lachine, teeth. The entire procedure is a basic application of Hirano's conformal mapping
Quebec, Canada H8S 2S8
theory in which laws of elasticity have been combined. The main concepts of the
method have been explained in previous publications but the work described herein
A. Cardou is an appreciable extension of this relatively new approach. The algorithm is
Professor.
eminently well-suited for computer-aided-design of gear teeth; it serves as the basis
Dept. of Mechanical Engr., for an interactive computer program which can model a gear tooth and can calculate
Laval University, the stresses and displacements within the tooth when subjected to a concentrated
Quebec, Canada G1K7P4 load. Results are compared with AGMA's and other published values.

Introduction
Computer-based analysis and display techniques are playing The paper shows how the trial and error process of the CPM
a rapidly expanding role in the engineering design process may be performed numerically by computer as accurately as
throughout industry. The availability of sophisticated soft- needed and simultaneously visualized by display techniques.
ware and increasingly powerful hardware is allowing timely, The treatment of the mechanical strength theory is inter-
cost effective, detailed analysis aiding in the design of more ef- calated into the complex potential formula giving birth to an
ficient and reliable transmission components such as gear interactive program. The method is very methodical and well-
teeth. The refinement of formulation techniques for gear suited for computer implementation, thus lending itself to a
tooth stress analysis has led to the development of efficient systematic use for gear profiles found in practice. The Com-
algorithms. Several have been described in the literature ex- plex Potential formalism is an ideal algorithm for a CAD
ploiting various techniques such as photo-elasticity [1, 2, 3, 4, system because of the pictorial relationship existing between
5], finite elements [6, 7, 8, 9, 10], boundary integral equations the physical and mathematical system. In fact, an interactive
[11, 12,13,14, 15] and naturally algorithms based on the com- computer program called MPCGRAPH (for Methode des
plex potential method [16, 17, 18]. Potentiels Complexes GRAPHique which stands for the
The complex potential method (CPM) is a mathematical French version of graphical complex potential method) has
model which calculates the stress in spur gear teeth using con- been written and tested.
formal mapping as its modeling framework. The first signifi-
cant application of complex potentials in stress analysis was Complex Potential Method
developed in 1951 by Hirano [19]. He applied the CPM to
plane elasticity problems in domains consisting of a half plane Stresses and displacements for a structure when subjected to
with a symmetric protruding hump or "bell" shape (Fig. 1). a normal concentrated load on its boundary have been
The original domain is transformed into a half plane via a developed in the field of plane elasticity by Kolossov [20],
proper conformal transformation. Once the transformation If one applies a concentrated load to a half plane at Z0 in
completed, Hirano exploited Kolossov [20] formulas to com- the Z=x+ iy plane, the well-known complex potentials, <j>{Z)
plete his analysis. Later, Aida and Terauchi [21] have attemp- and \j/(Z) can be expressed as,
ted to apply Hirano's formulation to spur gears with poor
results due to an inadequate conformal transformation. This <MZ) = - - ^ l o g ( Z - Z 0 ) + </>*(Z) (1)
2TT
method was also examined by Ustinenko [22] and Rubenchik
[23]. Baronet and Tordion [16], in the early 1970, have finally We~ We'J)3
developed a conformal mapping which was applied to spur * ( Z ) = 2TT log(Z-Z 0 ) + 27T Z — Za + r(Z) (2)
gears. The method was then clearly exposed in 1981 [17] for
various profiles. where a and a' are complex constants and <j>*(Z), yp*(Z) are
holomorphic functions in the whole domain. In our case,
however, we apply the load W as shown in Fig. 1 at an ar-
Contributed by the Power Transmission and Gearing Committee for publica-
bitrary point Z0 of the boundary of a "bell" shape.
tion in the JOURNAL OF MECHANISMS, TRANSMISSIONS, AND AUTOMATION IN Now that the potential equations <j>(Z) and \j/(Z) have been
DESIGN. Manuscript received August 1987. defined for the half plane and the "bell" shape domain, we

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design JUNE 1989, Vol. 1 1 1 / 2 9 7

Copyright © 1989 by ASME

 the complete stresses and displacements in terms of half f-
plane coordinates.
The conformal mapping profile varies according to the c,
ak, bk coefficients and also in terms of the surface coordinate
/. Hence, the profile equations can be rewritten in a series of
terms along the curvilinear coordinate t [17].
It can be shown that each term has a specific geometry
which, when added together, provide a perfect fit for the con-
formal mapping of the gear tooth. Note that the CPM is an
"exact" method according to the elasticity theory for the
stress analysis of bodies. The qualifier "exact" is in quotation
marks because the accuracy of the results are directly a func-
tion of the mapping precision obtained via the conformal
transformation. For this reason, the use of computer graphics
and numerical methods are important in the process of deter-
mining quickly exact transformation coefficients.

Computer Implementation
The mathematical substitutions theorized in the preceding
section are rarely suitable for manual solution mainly due to
the omission of any simplifying assumptions and to the com-
plex nature of stress analysis problems. Nevertheless, this
iterant procedure is very appealing when executed by a tireless
digital machine. The unified methodology set forth in this
work for evaluating stresses and displacements in spur gear
teeth was implemented into a comprehensive computer pro-
gram called MPCGRAPH. This program consists of a main
program and 117 subroutines. The main program essentially
plays a coordinating role when calling the diverse subroutines.
It has two main functions; first, it sets up the geometrical en-
vironment to suit the needs of the interactive algorithm and
second, it serves as a central command center for the program.
A simplified flow-chart of the main program in terms of com-
mand subroutines and visual displays is depicted in Fig. 2.
Fig. 1 Conformal mapping The logic sequence of the program is guided by the follow-
ing steps:
(/) Type of computer display
must establish a relationship between the "bell" shape and the (2) Tooth generation
half-plane coordinate system. This relation will allow us to ex- (5) Translation axis coefficient
ploit the half-plane potentials <j> (Z) and ^(Z) in order to solve (4) Conformal mapping transformation
for the complex potentials of the "bell" shape domain. (5) Position of the concentrated force
The conformal transformations to map a tooth-like profile (6) Superficial stresses
represented in Fig. 1 in the Z-pIane (Z=x+ iy) into the half f- (7) Internal stresses
plane (f=£ + i t]) is of the form: (8) Displacement of tooth symmetry axis
With the objective of rendering the whole process
z=W(r)=cr+2\ «* (3) transparent for a gear designer, the first step is to select the
type of computer display for his session. This operation bloc
where c, ak, bk are real coefficients. Hence, by defining a cur- allows the user to choose between a numerical or a graphical
mode. One can modify his selection at all times during the
vilinear coordinate t along the half-plane (£ = t & rj = 0) equa- analysis of the tooth.
tion (3) represents the equation of the bell profile. Applying
relation (3), one may write the potentials for a gear tooth as: The second step begins the actual tooth generation process.
The user must enter the technical characteristics (pressure
angle, number of teeth, tip radius of generating rack, offset,
etc.) of the gear and also, parameters of both mating gears.
h m i>'('bk) The analyst must enter these technical parameters from a
(4)
2TT •ibk s>'(ibk) single data file or directly from the keyboard. Once the input
We-if) a(f) is complete, the user selects the number of points P that will
*<f) = 2TT log(f-fo)- define the tooth profile (60<P<100) and the actual tooth
profile can be visualized as shown in the first display of Fig. 2.
Then, the translation axis coefficient must be calculated. The
given gear tooth profile is actually defined from the addendum
Ck 4>'{-ibk) circle to the trochoid's tangency point with the dedendum cir-
(5) cle by a number of points. The coordinates of these points are
& $+ibk <a'{-ibk)
taken with respect to some initial axes, Oxy. Because of sym-
where the calculations of <j>' (ibk) = Xk — i Yk andmetry, there is no ambiguity for the .y-axis. However, the x-
<t>' (—ibk)=Xk + i Yk are performed in [17]. Substitution of axis has to be translated to be compatible with the conformal
equations (4) and (5) into Kolossov formulas [20] would yield mapping (y—0@*—oo). This portion of the program provides

298/Vol. 111, JUNE 1989 Transactions of the ASME

 TOOTH

GENERATION

_^ MAPPING

TRANSFORMATION 2.25-
" N\ TOOTH

1.75-
\
COEFFICIENTS 1.25-
\
0.75-
1
IDENTIFICATION 0.25-

'. ' 0.75i. ' 1.25i ' X:

0.25
v__
ACTIVE SURFACE ^

COMPLEX

POTENTIAL

CALCULATIONS -1 ' 1 ' 1—

0.25 0.75 1.25

y w
STRESSES 2.25-
CRITICAL
SECTION
COMPRESSION

1.75-
TENSION

DISPLACEMENTS 1.25-

0.75-

0.25- _jJ§55$T - --S

CALCULATIONS 0.25-

-1.25 -0.75 - 0 . 2 5 0.25 0.75 1.25

Fig. 2 MPCGRAPH flow-chart

the analyst with the translation coefficient via the cross-hair as
shown in Fig. 3(a).
The fourth step deals with the conformal mapping transfor-
mations. Two options are available for this operation bloc, an
interactive mode or a numerical mode. In either case, one
must submit tentative initial coefficients. A table of conformal
mapping parameters is available which can be used as starting
values for a new profile (e.g., for a 40 teeth gear, one can start
with the 30 teeth gear parameters). The search for more exact
parameters is then performed interactively or numerically. In
the first case, an experienced analyst can converge towards a
good profile rapidly (1-2-3 trials) as visualized in Fig. 3(b).
Then, from this latest profile, a numerical search can be con-
ducted. It can be stopped at any stage and the current approx-
imate profile examined and compared visually with the exact
one as shown in the second display of Fig. 2.

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design JUNE 1989, Vol. 111/299
 Y ,
CONFORMAL
TOOTH MAPPING
2.00- \
\
1.50-

1.00-

0.50-

0.00-

0.25 0.75 1.25 X 0.25 0.75 1.25

YOUNG'S MODULUS=0.3»10 f
POISSON'S RATIO = 0 . 3 * 1 0 °
(10 EXP - 7
Y\
i ?. .. . W

2.25 -
\
1.75 -
\
1.25 -
\
0.75 -
I
0.25 -
V p»
-1.25 -0.75 -0.25 0.25 0.75 1.25 X -1.25 -0.75 -0.25 0.25 0.75

Fig. 3 Graphical display from MPCGRAPH

The use of an optimization algorithm is important during (via the cross-hair) a unit force per unit width on the
this reconstruction of the tooth since it will provide the best transformed tooth. This is depicted in the third display of Fig.
coefficients minimizing the distance between the two profiles 2. It is also possible to include a friction coefficient which in-
and, hence, realize a perfect mathematical model of the tooth fluences the angle of application of the unit load. Then, super-
under scrutiny. Powell's algorithm [24] was exploited for this ficial stresses can be visualized as reproduced in the fourth
minimization process. Since the distance between the two pro- display of Fig. 2. Coggins algorithm [25] is employed to find
files must be minimized, the distance u can be represented by a the maximum stress on the tooth as well as the curvilinear
Least-Square function of the type: coordinate t associated with this maximum value which will fix
the critical section. The algorithm starts once the stresses are
1 m known at the surface of the tooth. The stress calculation is
— EWJ(XJ-XJ)2< (6) realized in the following manner: two points are selected along
the tooth profile, ?start and rend, as shown in Fig. 5 in between
where Xj is the value of the profile while Xj is the value yielded which stresses are desired. After specifying the number of
by the transformation. The constant m represents the number stress points Npt along the profile, the step At is calculated as
of points selected along the profile and Wj is a weighing term follows:
which emphasizes the importance of specific sections of the
*end *star
profile (Fig. 4). Note that since the stress is high in the concave At = (7)
(lower) section of the tooth, a special effort to fit the curve in Np,-1
this region is attempted by introducing a weighing factor Wj The searching step is then defined as At\ = At/20 with a con-
equal to 2. vergence criteria of e = l x l 0 ~ 5 . Hence, this option also
Once the tooth profile is well represented, a concentrated locates automatically the critical section of the tooth.
force can be applied on the tooth and the stresses at the sur- Finally, the stress profile in the critical cross-section (or any
face can be calculated. Note that the conformal mapping has cross-section selected with the cross-hair) and the
no effect on the force itself but for its point of application f0. displacements from the tooth symmetry axis can be deter-
The force option allows to position numerically or graphically mined and traced directly on the screen as pictured in Figs.

300/Vol.111,JUNE1989 Transactions of the ASME

 I I I I
6.0 - -
l\ B.E.M.
5.0

- ?} C.P.M. -
4.0
•max
3.0 - 2) F.E.M. //A "
2.0

I 1.0 -
•w W
</UJ>
w^-W^-^^

rfp^-
CL

m -1.0
-
\
((f

I
-2.0
CxY
"

I
-3.0
'mm.

I _
-4.0

-5.0
~
Fig. 4 Importance of specific sections of the profile
.
-6.0
.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 in.

Fig. 6 Stress distribution in the critical section due to a concentrated

load applied at 1.168 mm of tip cricle

Table 1 Types of teeth

GENERATION TYPES
PARAMETERS

1 2 3

PRESSURE
20° 20° 25 =
ANGLE

1.00 1.00 1^00

ADDENDUM
P P P

H O 1.25
DEDENDUM
P P p

FILLET 0.350 0.380 0^33

RADIUS P P P
Fig. 5 Tooth section

3(c) and 3(d). The Newton-Raphson algorithm for two

variables is exploited to convert the x—y tooth coordinates to a= 1.0/P (25.4 mm), dedendum b=1.25/P (31.75 mm), fillet6
the £ — T\ half-plane coordinates. This conversion is utilized radius r^b.lZ/P 6
(9.65 mm), Young's modulus £'=30xl0
when calculating the internal stresses on a tooth section psi (207 X 10 Kpa) and Poisson's ratio c = 0.3. Figure 6 gives
y = constant as depicted in Fig. 5. By knowing the section the stress distribution (ax, axy) obtained in the critical section
height y, each side of the tooth can be connected by a straight and results are compared to those given by the FEM and the
line on which the x,y coordinates can be located to calculate BEM. Results are very good since there is most agreement with
the stresses. Begin the stress calculations at the tooth surface all three methods as shown in Fig. 6. Thus from this
£ i = / and r;! = 0 to progressively penetrate inside the tooth un- preliminary analysis, it can be stated that the CPM is as
til all internal stresses have been compiled. Then, tooth reliable and accurate as the FEM and the BEM but requires
displacements are easily obtained by a direct application of a less computational effort for gear tooth stress analysis. Note
simple formula [17]. that the CPM has also been compared and validated by photo-
Throughout this work, an attempt has been made to show elastic experiments [26].
the potential involved in using this interactive program for
gear tooth stress analysis. In particular, note that the search Application
for the transformation coefficients, which is the numerical To illustrate some of the capabilities of MPCGRAPH and
part of the analysis, does not need much computer space, as this formulation, the results obtained from MPCGRAPH for
opposed to the finite element method for example, and can be three types of gear tooth (see Table 1) will also be compared
performed on a desk top calculator. Moreover, the only input with other related methods. For each type, a number N be-
required for this algorithm is a table of values defining the tween 18 and 150 teeth will be considered. Each tooth will be
given profile. generated with 80 profile points since best results were ob-
Let us compare the results of the complex potential method tained when the profile points varied between 60 and 100
(CPM) with respect to other conventional techniques such as points. Note that the actual number of profile points is not
the finite element method (FEM) and the boundary element critical in the application of the algorithm, because the com-
method (BEM). A two-dimensional spur gear was analyzed puting time is almost not affected by the number of profile
with the following characteristics: pressure angle <£ = 20 deg, points. However, it should be mentioned that the distribution
number of teeth N-20, diametral pitch P = l , addendum of the profile points is very important for an optimal mapping

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design JUNE 1989, Vol. 111/301
 Table 2 Maximum tensile stress for a type 2 profile .45
AGMA (graphic method)

MPCGRAPH 425- AGMA (numerical method)

Cardou-Tordion Rubenchik
MPCGRAPH
4

%ax 26663 Pa 27883 Pa 26594 Pa

.375-

.35-

of the tooth. For instance, approximately 2/3 of the points .325

should be concentrated at the root (critical section) of the .3-

tooth and 1/3 of the points should represent the remaining
section of tooth. The generation of a good profile is of para- .275-

mount importance since the numerical results depend on the .25-

accuracy of the transformation and, hence, very small devia-
.225
tions of the approximate profile, in particular in the root
region, may induce a few percent variations in the stress .2 ~1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
values. 60 80 100 120 140

First, let us compare the maximum tensile stress <rmax for a NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N )

type 2 tooth with 20 teeth as calculated by MPCGRAPH with Fig. 7(a) Load applied at tip of tooth (profile #1)
that of Rubenchik [11] using the Boundary Equations In-
tegrals (which can be considered as an exact solution [11]) and A AGMA (graphic method)
that of earlier publication by Cardou and Tordion [17] using A AGMA (numerical method)
the CPM. For the case of a unit load per unit thickness applied D MPCGRAPH
on the addendum circle of the tooth (? = 0.004, /3= —150.5 3
deg) with W= 175 N/m (1 lb/in) and P=39.4 m" 1 (1 in." 1 ), rr
.6

the maximum stress is reported in Table 2: Note that before,

Rubenchik had a 5 percent difference with Cardou-Tordion < e -
stress calculation. Now, the divergence beween both methods
is a mere !4 percent difference.
For comparison purposes, the modified Lewis formula,
which is found in handbooks to calculate the maximum tensile 5
stress is: O

WtP
(8)
where W, is the tangential load between gears, F is the face 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
width and / , is a tension geometry factor including stress con- NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N )
centration for a given load position. Since W,/F= W cos </>, Fig. 7(B) Load applied at highest point of single tooth contact (profile
equation (8) can be rewritten as: #1)

C O S <j>
J,= MPCGRAPH is always smaller than AGMA's estimates.
(9)
However, the spread between AGMA and MPCGRAPH fac-
This geometry factor J, will be our comparison criteria be- tors is small for a low number of teeth (N< 30) which increases
tween the AGMA methods (numerical and graphical) and the for a higher number of teeth (N> 60) to a maximum of 15 per-
Complex Potential Methods. cent. The same trend can be observed from Fig. 1(b) where in
The geometry factor J, is calculated by MPCGRAPH for a this case a 20 percent difference can be registered.
force W= 175 N/m (1 lb/in) applied to the addendum circle Let us now establish comparisons shown in Fig. 8(a) and
and for a force applied to the highest simple contact point. 8(b) for a type 2 profile between the factors Jt obtained from
These factors will be compared with the AGMA factors as well MPCGRAPH, AGMA's numerical method as well as Com-
as the factors obtained by different authors using the CPM: plex Potential Methods applied in earlier work. Again, an ex-
Cardou-Tordion [18] and Baronet-Tordion [16]. To identify cellent fit is attained by using MPCGRAPH where the
the AGMA geometry factors, the graphical sheets 226.01 [27] minimization coefficient u fluctuates between 10""6 and 10~"7.
are used. In the case where the type of tooth (type 2 and 3 in A better, faster and more consistent profile is generated by
our case) do not appear in these sheets, the AGMA numerical MPCGRAPH compared with all the previous complex poten-
method will be exploited [28]. tial algorithms. The variation between the methods increases
Let us examine the type 1 tooth where the geometry factors as the number of teeth becomes larger and the complex poten-
J, provided by MPCGRAPH are compared with the factors tial results are still lower than those suggested by AGMA.
obtained from the AGMA graphical and numerical methods. Finally, one can repeat the process for a type 3 tooth and
These results are plotted in Figs. 7(a) and 1(b). Note that for observe the same trends as before in Figs. 9(a) and 9(b).
both types of load the AGMA numerical method Note that in previous works, a perfect fit was difficult to
overestimates the / , factors by approximately 3 percent over achieve for this type of tooth. Nevertheless, MPCGRAPH
the AGMA graphical method. Hence, this spread should be modeled precisely the tooth with a u coefficient of 10 ~5. Even-
kept in mind when examining the other types of tooth though MPCGRAPH provided a better profile, a small
analysis. The modeling of the type 1 teeth provided an ac- variance of 3 percent was obtained between MPCGRAPH and
curate representation with a u value varying between 10 ~5 and Cardou-Tordion results.
10~6. Also, note that the tooth generated with N= 18 had a The increase in precision of the u function and the visualiza-
curved flank profile while that ofN= 150 had a quasi-straight tion process of the algorithm allow us to confirm the efficien-
flank profile. cy of the Least-Square formula (6) as our objective function.
Regarding the variation between the results obtained from Now, the top or bottom (fillet) portion of the tooth profile is
MPCGRAPH and AGMA for a load applied on the adden- just as well represented with this new computerized algorithm.
dum circle, it can be observed that the factor J, calculated by However, it appears that the conformal mapping has more

302/Vol. 111, JUNE 1989 Transactions of the ASME

 .45 .45-
A AGMA (numerical method) D MPCGRAPH
.425 A AGMA (numerical method)
.425-
• CARDOU-TORDION S BARONET-TORDION
D MPCGRAPH
.4 • CARDOU-TORDION .4-
—> ® BARONET-TORDION
' " ' .375- .375-
a.
° .35- O .35-
o <
LL
< .325- .325-
-J
< 3-
<
O 2 .3-
or
i-
H .275H W.275-
LU

§ .«•
LU
° .225

.2 —I— ~~I
0 60 80 100 120 40 60 80
80 100 120
NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N ) NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N )

Fig. 8(a) Load applied at tip of tooth (profile #2) Fig. 9(a) Load applied at tip of tooth (profile #3)

A AGMA (numerical method)

.65- D MPCGRAPH A AGMA (numerical method)
m CARDOU-TORDION • MPCGRAPH
.6 B CARDOU-TORDION

.55-

O 45-

i
O 2
LU O
a

~i i i i i i i i i i — i — i — i — i — r
0 ^o 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
~~1—
NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N ) 20 40 60 80 100 120
Fig. 8(b) Load applied at highest point of single tooth contact (profile NUMBER OF T E E T H ( N )
#2) Fig. 9(b) Load applied at highest point of single tooth contact (profile
#3)

difficulty to reconstruct the fillet section of the tooth profile

for a wide root thickness (for example type 3). Hence, the u
function is in the range of 10 ~5 for type 3 tooth as compared
to 10"6 for types 1 and 2. This is normal since the critical sec-
tion of the tooth is located near the fillet due to stress
concentrations.
Following our study of the geometry factor / , for all three
types of tooth, it is clear that AGMA overestimates the J, fac-
tors as compared with the CPM. These high values actually
imply lower estimates for the maximum stresses. The dif-
ference between these methods can be explained as follows:
AGMA considers a gear tooth as a beam and uses a stress con-
centration factor obtained from the theory of photo-elasticity
as a correction coefficient while the complex potential method
exploits the plane elasticity theory. Moreover, Figs. 7,8, and 9
show clearly that the difference between the factors / ,
calculated by AGMA and MPCGRAPH increases with the
number of teeth. This can somewhat be explained by Allison
and Hearn hypothesis [29] concerning the increase of the in-
fluence of shear stresses with respect to other type of stresses
for gears having a high number of teeth. Effectively, AGMA
does not take into account the effect of the shearing force at
the critical section when calculating stresses, only the effect of
the bending moment and the radial force component is con-
sidered in their calculations. Thus, unlike the Complex Poten-
tial Method, the maximum stress calculated by this formula
does not correspond to the real maximum stress at the tooth's
surface, but rather to the maximum stress in the jc-direction.
In order to obtain the maximum stress at the surface with
AGMA's formula, Mohr's circle with a shearing stress rxy not
equal to zero should be used.
This brief explanation might provide some reasons why the
gap between the geometry factors are higher for tooth solicited
at the highest single contact point. Indeed, when the force is
positioned at this location, it is much closer to the critical sec-
tion and the shearing force produced by it is more important
compared with the other internal forces.
It might be of interest at this point to discuss the influence
of friction (ji) on the geometry factor /, (tension) and Jc (com-
pression). A type 2 tooth was examined with N=20 teeth. This
study was realized with MPCGRAPH with the concentrated
force applied on the addendum circle with a coefficient of fric-
tion varying between - 0 , 3 , and 0,3 (-0,3</*<0,3). Note
that a positive coefficient of friction /t>0 implies that the
tangential force is applied towards the tip of the tooth. The
results are plotted in Fig. 10. In this case, a new factor Jr was
calculated which implicitly includes the friction factor KJr:
P COS <j)
J,= (10)
K,•fr
In this case where there is no friction between the gears the
Kfr = 1 and both factors are equal. A new factor Jr was
calculated in order to compare with an equivalent factor de-
rived by Cardou-Tordion using the CPM [18]:
1
Jr = (11)

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design JUNE1989, Vol.111/303

 .45-i
A J r l (MPCGRAPH) A Jrc (MPCGRAPH)
D Jt (CARDOU-TORDION) B Jc (CARDOU-TORD10N)
.4-
-3
cc \ MPCGRAPH where a wide spectrum of design alternatives
I- •Jb \ V
LU . 2 5 - ^ ^ ^ K ;
. 1 5 - ] — r — | — | — | — | — , — | — r — | — | — | — , — | — | — | —
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
FRICTION COEFFICIENT ( |i X Mf2)
Fig. 10 Influence of friction coefficients on geometric factors
where /„ is a geometry factor calculated from the normal
force on the profile and Jf is a factor associated with the
tangent force on the profile. It should be noted that the fric-
tion force applied on the gear tooth has a greater effect on ten-
sion stresses than compression. Hence it is important to
eliminate as much friction as possible.
For the tooth under study, the factors Jrl and Jrc calculated
by both methods are in accordance with each other. The max-
imum difference for a high coefficient of friction (ji= ±0,3) is
of 4 percent. These results corroborate the validity of equation
(11) for this specific example. Many more tests should be con-
ducted before exploiting this newly derived geometry factor.
Conclusion
A comprehensive method of stress analysis for spur gear
teeth has been derived using a systematic approach based on
conformal mapping concepts. This algorithm was im-
plemented into an efficient computer program which exploits
some of the latest techniques in computer display. By using
this program it has become possible to easily and quickly per-
form a gear tooth stress analysis. This approach is particularly
well-suited for parametric studies, since the only numerical ef-
fort relies in the obtainment of the mapping coefficients. Once
they are known, the load can be displaced at will along the
profile. Although the method is efficient, it has limitations.
For instance, it can only analyze symmetrical profiles having a
convex upper section with a concave lower section which is a
basic tooth profile.
Stresses calculated by MPCGRAPH for three types of teeth
have been compared with different authors. A comparison of
the geometry factor / as calculated by the CPM and AGMA,
versus the number of teeth, for standard, 20 deg pressure
angle, AGMA profiles was examined. It was shown that the
AGMA calculation procedure tends to underestimate slightly
the bending stresses. Hence, some variations could be ob-
served between the complex potential method and AGMA's
method which were attributed to the formula used by AGMA.
However, the CPM is function of the tooth profile fit and
relies heavily on the performance of a good numerical op-
timization algorithm.
Referring to the computer program, a variety of investiga-
tions may be initiated to enlarge its capabilities. In addition to
the theoretical concepts suggested in this work, a major area
within MPCGRAPH which may require some improvement is
the optimization scheme. Although more refinement may be
introduced, the program has demonstrated its practical ap-
plication in the stress analysis of gear systems and, by doing
so, has promoted the validity of the analytical model.
The method and computer program described in this work
304/Vol. 111, JUNE 1989
can be applied to the creation of prototypes of gear equipment
which are usually expensive and time consuming to fabricate.
Transmission systems can now be modelled quickly and easily
by using a computerized interactive algorithm such as
can be evaluated in a short period of time, optimizing the
operator's performance and the design itself. It is expected
that these techniques will provide new tools to launch pilot
studies and stimulate further research in the field of conformal
mapping as it interrelates with the domain of computer-aided
design.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution of G. V.
40
Tordion for his initial guidance, A. Gakwaya for his expertise
in the field of FEM and BEM, and the assistance of the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada which supported this work.
References
1 Cornell, R. W., "Compliance and Stress Sensitivity of Spur Gear to Gear
Teeth," Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 20, No. 7, July 1980, pp. 217-225.
2 Erichello, R., "An Efficient Algorithm for Obtaining the Gear Strength
Geometry Factor on a Programmable Calculator," AGMA Technical Paper
P139.03, Oct. 1981.
3 Mitchiner, R. G., and Mabie, H. H., "The Determination of the Lewis
Form Factor and the AGMA Geometry Factor J for External Spur Gear
Teeth," ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 104, No. 1, Jan. 1982, pp.
148-158.
4 Erichello, R., "An Efficient Algorithm for Obtaining the Gear Strength
Geometry Factor for Shaper Cut Gears," AGMA Technical Paper P139.05,
Oct. 1983.
5 Lopez, M. A., and Wheway, R. T., " A Method for Determining the
AGMA Tooth Form Factor from Equations for the Genered Tooth Root
Fillet," ASME Paper 85-DET-9, June 6, 1985.
6 Oda, S., Nagamura, K., and Aoki.K., "Stress Analysis of Thin Rim Spur
Gears by Finite Element Method," Bulletin of the Japanese Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 24, No. 193, July 1981, pp. 1273-1280.
7 Guillot, M., "Etude des contraintes dans les couronnes et jantes minces
d'engrenages aux axes paralleles," Rapport no. SM-85-04, Departement de
g£nie mecanique, Universite Laval, Quebec, Canada, Dec. 1985.
8 Arai, N., Arado, S., and Aida, T., "Research on Bending Strength
Properties of Spur Gears with Thin Rim," Bulletin of the Japanese Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 24, No. 195, 1981, pp. 1642-1650.
9 Chang, S. H., Huston, R. L., and Coy, J. J., " A Finite Element Stress
Analysis of Spur Gear Including Fillet Radii and Rim Thickness Effects,"
ASME JOURNAL OF MECHANISMS, TRANSMISSIONS, AND AUTOMATION IN DESIGN,
Vol. 105, Sept. 1983, pp. 327-330.
10 Chong, T. H., Katayama, N., Kubo, A., and Yabe, H., "Tooth Fillet
Stresses of Gear with Thin Rim (5th Report, Tooth Fillet and Root Stresses of
Internal Spur Gear Supported by Pinned Coupling)," Bulletin of the Japanese
Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 27, No. 226, 1984, pp. 815-822.
11 Rubenchik, V., "Boundary-Integral Equation Method Applied to Gear
Strength Rating," ASME JOURNAL or MECHANISMS, TRANSMISSIONS, AND
AUTOMATION IN DESIGN, Vol. 105, March 1983, pp. 129-131.
12 Gakwaya, A., Cardou, A., and Dhatt, G., "Evaluation of Stresses and
Deflection of Spur and Helical Gears by the Boundary Element Method,"
ASME Paper 84-DET-169, 1984.
13 Yakovlev, A. S., "Determination of the Bending Stresses in the Teeth of
Involute Spur Gears," Soviet Engineering Research, Vol. 4, No. 4, April 1984,
pp. 6-7.
14 Oda, S., Miyachika, K., Koide, T., and Mizume, M., "Stress Analysis of
Thin-rimmed Spur Gears by Boundary Element Method," Bulletin of the
Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 51, No. 466, 1985, pp.
1312-1319.
15 Tanaka, M., "Application of the Boundary Element Method to Spur
Gears (on a Practical and Convenient Method for Gear Analysis," Bulletin of
the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 50, No. 455, 1984, pp.
1314-1317.
16 Baronet, C. N., and Tordion, G. V., "Exact Stress Distribution in
Standard Gear Teeth and Geometry Factor," ASME Journal of Engineering for
Industry, Vol. 95, Nov. 1973, pp. 1159-1163.
17 Cardou, A., and Tordion, G. V., "Numerical Implementaion of Complex
Potentials for Gear Tooth Stress Analysis," ASME Journal of Mechanical
Design, Vol. 103, No. 2, April 1981, pp. 460-465.
18 Cardou, A., and Tordion, G. V., "Etude du facteur geomeirique dans les
engrenages droits," Rapport no. SM-85-02, Departement de genie mecanique,
Universite Laval, Quebec, Canada, 1985.
Transactions of the ASME
 19 Hirano, F., "Research on Stress Concentration Factors for Two- Function of Several Variables without calculating Derivatives," Computer
Dimensional Elastic Bodies," Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical Journal, No. 7, 1964, pp. 165-172.
Engineers, Vol. 17, No. 61, 1951, pp. 12-16. 25 Coggins, G. F., "Univariate Search Methods," Research Note 64/11, ICI
20 Muskhelishvili, N. I., "Some Basic Problems of the Mathematical Theory Central Instrument Res. Lab., 1964.
of Elasticity," Noordhoff Ldt., Groningen, Holland, 1953. 26 Hirt, M. C. O., "Stresses in Spur Gear Teeth and Their Strength as In-
21 Aida, T., and Terauchi, Y., "On the Bending Stress of Spur Gear," fluenced by Fillet Radius," Doctorate dissertation, 1976, Published by
Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 5, No. 17, 1962, American Gear Manufacturers Association.
pp. 161-170. 27 American Gear Manufacturers Association, AGMA 226.01, Information
22 Ustinenko, V. L., "Influence of Some Parameters on the Bending Stress Sheet-Geometry Factors for Determining the Strength of Spur, Helical, Herr-
in Spur Gear Teeth," Vestnik mashinostroenja (Transactions for Machine inglone and Bevel Gear Teeth, Arlington, 1970.
Design), No. 11, 1962, p. 33. 28 American Gear Manufacturers Association, AGMA 218-01, AGMA
23 Rubenchik, V. Y., "On the Conformal Mapping Construction for Standard for Rating the Pitting Resistance and the Bending Strength of Spur
Calculating the Stresses in Gear Teeth," Materialy sektsii teoreticheskoy i and Helical Involute Gear Tooth, Arlington, 1982.
prikladnoy mekhaniki, Minsk, Byel, Politekh. Institut, 1970, pp. 88-97. 29 Allison, I. H., and Hearn, E. J., "A New Look at the Bending Strength of
24 Powell, M. J. D., "An Efficient Method for Finding the Minimum of a Gear Teeth," Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 20, No. 7, July 1980, pp. 217-225.

CALL FOR PAPERS

SECOND INTERNATIONAL ASME CONFERENCE ON

DESIGN THEORY AND METHODOLOGY
(DTM '90)

September 16-19, 1990

Palmer House
Chicago, HI.

Papers in all areas of Mechanical Design Theory and Methodology are invited. Suggested topic areas are:
• Design Representations • Cognitive Design Theories
and Languages • Design for Manufacturing
8
Design Management • Constraint Understanding and
8
Design Work Spaces Management
9 8
Design Histories Analytical Decision Making for Design
8 8
Concurrent Design Design Tool Development
8 8
Life-Cycle Design Design Education
8 8
Design for Quality Computational Methods of Design
8
• Prescriptive Theories Integration of Design Education with
and Models of Design Research and Practice
Contributions in the form of full-length papers should be submitted directly to the Program Chairman. Accepted papers will
be published in bound conference proceedings by the ASME. Papers of special note will be further reviewed after the con-
ference for publication in ASME transactions.
Conference Chairman Program Chairman
Dr. David G. Ullman Dr. James R. Rinderle
Department of Mechanical Mechanical Engineering
Engineering Department
Oregon State University Carnegie Mellon University
Corvallis, OR 97331 Pittsburgh, PA 15213
ullman @cs.orst.edu rinderle@edrc.cmu.edu
(503) 754-2336 (412) 268-3677
Deadline Dates for Technical Papers
Contributions (full-length papers) 4 copies to be submitted
to Program Chairman no later than March 1, 1990
(Non-North American submissions Feb. 1, 1990)
Review process completed, notification and materials mailed May 1, 1990
Final paper(s) on author-prepared materials due to ASME June 1, 1990

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design JUNE 1989, Vol. 111/305