This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Mathematical and Computer Modelling
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mcm
Contact stress analysis for a pair of mating gears✩
Seok-Chul Hwang a , Jin-Hwan Lee b , Dong-Hyung Lee c , Seung-Ho Han a , Kwon-Hee Lee a,∗
a b c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dong-A University, 840 Hadan2-dong, Saha-gu, Busan 604-714, Republic of Korea Design Analysis Team, R & D Center, Nexen Tire Corporation, 30 Yusan-Dong, Yangsan-Si, Republic of Korea Railway System Research Department, Korea Railroad Research Institute, Uiwang, 360-1, Republic of Korea
This paper presents a contact stress analysis for a pair of mating gears during rotation. Contact stress analyses for spur and helical gears are performed between two gear teeth at different contact positions during rotation. Two examples of spur and helical gears are presented to investigate the respective variations of the contact stress in a pair of mating gears with the contact position. The variation of the contact stress during rotation is compared with the contact stress at the lowest point of single-tooth contact (LPSTC) and the AGMA (American Gear Manufacturers Association) equation for the contact stress. In this study, we can see that the gear design that considers the contact stress in a pair of mating gears is more severe than that of the AGMA standard. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Article history: Received 22 March 2011 Received in revised form 21 June 2011 Accepted 22 June 2011 Keywords: Spur gear Helical gear Contact stress Lowest point of single-tooth contact (LPSTC) Contact ratio
1. Introduction Gears are used to change the speed, magnitude, and direction of a power source. Gears are being most widely used as the mechanical elements of power transmission. When two gears with unequal numbers of teeth are combined, a productive output is realized with both the angular speeds and the torques of the two gears differing through a simple relationship. AGMA  and ISO  standards generally are being used as the strength standard for the design of spur, helical, and worm gears. The strength determined from the AGMA and ISO standards is valid under the assumption that the load is uniformly distributed along the line of contact. However, in actuality, the load per unit length varies with the point of contact . In practice, in gear transmission, sudden load changes occur from the viewpoint of load transmission. That is, the load acting on a pair of teeth depends on the meshing stiffness of that pair. This leads to a variation in the load distribution across contact points [3,4]. In Ref. , a mathematical model of load distribution along the contact line is suggested. This research utilizes the finite element method to investigate the variation of contact stress along the line of contact. Stress analysis for gear teeth is regarded as a limiting factor for designers. Stress analysis focuses on the determination of the regions of stress concentration where failure or fracture may be initiated . At this point, the change in the load is one of the elements that is involved in surface pitting. A preexisting pit aggravates the operating condition with noise and vibration, and if this pit is left as it is, an adventitious crack can be induced. However, though surface pitting by contact fatigue has been a concern of researchers for a long time, no universal theory has been defined as yet . Therefore, in order to take the contact fatigue into consideration, it is necessary to investigate the change in the contact stress following the change in the transmitted load in gear transmission. The present work concentrates on the change in the contact stress that is generated in meshing gear teeth. The change in the contact stress at any point of the line of contact is analyzed through the finite element method . Dynamic finite element
✩ This paper was presented at the PCO’2010 conference in Kuching, Malaysia on 2–4th December 2010. This paper was recommended for publication in revised form. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 51 200 7638; fax: +82 51 200 7656. E-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org (K.-H. Lee).
0895-7177/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2011.06.055
The lengths AC and CB are represented as AC = CB = (1) 2 2 ro 2 − (rp2 × cos(αo )) − rp2 × sin(αo ) (2) (3) 2 2 ro 1 − (rp1 × cos(αo )) − rp1 × sin(αo ).-C. Then. The first is to apply the concentrated load at the load position directly.S. Using the same method. CB′ = AB′ − AC = Pg · AC = π × m × cos(α0 ) · AC rB′ = (5) (6) 2 ′ 2 ′ ◦ rp 1 + (CB ) − 2 × rp1 × CB × cos(αo + 90 ). The results obtained from finite element analysis are compared with the stresses yielded through AGMA standards. AB = ε × Pg = AC + CB. 1. the entire load is being transmitted through only one pair of contacted teeth in A′ B′ . Thus. The lengths of AB′ and A′ B are the same as the circular pitch Pg · Therefore. the LPSTC of one pair of contact locations can be calculated as well. but the contact stress cannot be calculated. while the three-dimensional finite element analysis based on dynamics is undertaken for helical gears. the bending stress of the gear can be calculated. though the load is transmitted through two pairs of contacted teeth in AA′ and B′ B.8]. Contact stress analysis of spur gears There are two methods for analyzing the stress generated in meshing gear teeth through finite element analysis.1. and A is the LPSTC. On the other hand. In Fig. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 41 Nomenclature CR Pb Pg Pn b m r0 rp contact ratio pitch of the base circle circular pitch of the base circle normal pitch tooth width module radius of the addendum circle radius of the pitch circle approaching angle roll angle recessing angle pressure angle helix angle of the helical gear contact ratio transverse contact ratio overlap ratio ΦA ΦC ΦR α0 β ε εα εβ analysis allows the load at any point of the line of contact to be changed automatically. Hwang et al. the load is applied to a single tooth for the interval of A′ B′ . In order to perform contact analysis while meshing the gear and the pinion. B is the HPSTC. the length CB′ and the radius rB′ are determined by the following equation. In this process. 2. Highest and lowest points of single-tooth contact in spur gears If the involute gear is revolving as shown in Fig. 2. Then. the length AB can be derived as AB = 2 2 ro 2 − (rp2 × cos(αo )) + 2 2 ro 1 − (rp1 × cos(αo )) − (rp1 + rp2 ) × sin(αo ). 1. (4) ′ ′ The teeth of the gear and the pinion contact between A and B along the line AB. . The second method is used for the meshing gears by applying a torque on the gear or pinion after modeling both the gear and the pinion. the length of the action AB is calculated as follows [6. That is. two-dimensional finite element analysis based on statics is performed for spur gears. This method is being widely used owing to its simplicity. the geometrical shape of the meshing gear and pinion needs to be modeled. This study utilizes a two-dimensional finite element model to calculate the contact stress in a pair of mating spur gears. the load is distributed across the two teeth over the intervals of AA′ and BB′ .
surface contact between at least one pair of subsequent teeth should commence before the present tooth-surface contact is complete. ro . 1. the contact force that is working on two pairs of contacting teeth will be approximately half the force on one pair of contacting teeth. (ro2 )2 − (rb2 )2 . The contact ratio CR is the average number of teeth that are in contact when the gears are meshed and revolved. 2 is a diagram that shows the change in the contact force for each contact location . 1. The roll angle corresponding to the length of the contact path can be defined as follows [8. Thus. Pb = Pn = π × m × cos(α0 ). since the sum of the contact forces that are working on the teeth surfaces should be constant as well. In general. The length l is represented as l= 2 2 ro 2 − rb 2 + 2 2 ro 1 − rb1 − (rp1 + rp2 ) × sin αo . 2. (9) The applied load on the pinion changes with the contact ratio. . / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 Fig. as shown in Figs.2. Hwang et al. Φc = ΦA + ΦR . Contact ratio of spur gears In order for spur gears to transmit revolutions continuously. l is the length of the line of action AB in Fig. (7). 1. That is. A greater contact ratio can create a smoother operation. 1 and 2.42 S. CR = l Pb .9]. Suppose that gears are transmitting a constant torque. and α0 are the same as those in Fig. the contact ratio is defined as a number of teeth in contact as these teeth pass through the contact area. Then. Geometric determination of HPSTC and LPSTC. The contact ratio means the ratio that represents the average number of gear tooth pairs in contact for a pair of meshing gears. (8) and the pitch of the base circle Pb is equal to the normal pitch Pn . (7). the highest contact ratio leads to the least stress generation by distributing the load over the teeth. This means that when the spur gear is meshed with the pinion and revolves. contact between gear teeth can be distinguished as the position with one pair of contacted gear teeth and the position with two pairs of contacted gear teeth. (7) In Eq. It can be calculated from the definition of the contact ratio given in Eq. SA = −rb1 tan(α0 ) + SB = −rb2 tan(α0 ) + (ro1 )2 − (rb1 )2 (11) (12) . Fig. The symbols rb .-C. The angles ΦA and ΦR are represented as (10) ΦA = ΦR = −SA rb1 SB rb1 . The figure means that the entire load will be transferred to one tooth as only one pair of teeth are in contact in sections A′ and B.
(13) are shown in Table 1.0 1. 2. the meshing gears are regarded as the plane stress problem that has a unit tooth thickness . (13) for spur gears. In this research. the involute gear tooth profile can be embodied using the gear specification and involute function .0 8. The material is isotropically homogeneous with an elastic ratio of 200 GPa and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.0 1. the number of teeth in the pinion is 22. . (13) The meanings and the values of the factors that are used in Eq.0 Table 2 Data for the contact analysis of mating spur gears. and the pressure angle is 20°.0 0. Hwang et al.0 1. First of all.115 88. number of teeth and shift coefficient are given. Table 2 shows the specifications of the gear and the pinion and the material properties.46 2. Parameter Number of teeth Pitch diameter (mm) Base diameter (mm) Torque (N mm) Modulus of elasticity (GPa) Module. Table 1 Meaning of the symbols used in Eq. 2.3. Abaqus 6. If the basic specifications such as the pressure angle. further. module.0 Gear 55 440. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 43 Fig. Finite element analysis of spur gears The gear tooth profile can be distinguished as involute and trochoid fillet curves. the module is 8. The AGMA standard In this study.0 165. Variation of the tooth load with the position of the contact point.0 413. σH = ZE Ft Ko Kv Ks KH 2r1 WZI . it is necessary to embody the gear tooth that has the involute gear tooth profile. the number of gear teeth is 55.0 1.39 1987 × 103 200. Meaning Transmitted tangential load (N) Elastic coefficient (MPa) Overload factor Dynamic factor Size factor Load distribution factor Face width (mm) Geometry factor for pitting resistance Pitch radius of the pinion (mm) Symbol Ft ZE Ko Kv Ks KH W ZI r1 Value 9032.0 187.-C.0 120. the contact stress of an involute spur gear pair is studied through the finite element method and AGMA stress formulas.0 20. The contact stress σH based on the AGMA 2101-C95 standard is represented as follows .S. m Pressure angle (°) Pinion 22 126.96.36.199  is used to perform stress analysis considering the LPSTC.
.11]. (7) as 1. respectively. a torque of 993. The finite element model is constructed as shown in Fig. The finite element model was determined as Fig.09 (a) Boundary condition.96 Gear 221. The load of a torque is applied to the center of gear. 3 through the mesh convergence tests. Therefore.43 88. is applied on the gear when two pairs of teeth are in contact. which is half of 1 987 × 103 N mm.4°. The contact stress on the pinion at the contact location is observed by increasing the roll angle from 2.7°. 10 finite element models for each roll angle and the finite element model at the LPSTC for one pair of contact locations are generated. and one pair of teeth are contacting for the rest 32%. and a torque is applied on the gear. That is. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 Table 3 Positions of the LPSTC and the HPSTC.4°. The contact ratio is determined from Eq. a contact ratio of 1. (10) is calculated as 27. Fig. A torque of 1 987 × 103 N mm is applied on the gear when a pair of teeth are in contact with each other. in the case when two pairs of teeth are contacting. The finite element models of Case 1.-C. 3 are 2800 and 2240.4° are shown in Fig.4° in 10 equal increments.74 219.0 indicates that two pairs always are in contact. The LPSTC for one pair of contact locations is calculated as shown in Table 3.5 × 103 N mm. the load is the same as half the transferred torque. Three teeth of pinion and one tooth of gear are included in the finite element model. (b) FE model of Case 1. which is derived from Eq. (6). 3(b) and (c). (c) FE model of Case 10. 3. and of Case 10 that represents the end of contact under a roll angle of 27. A contact ratio of 2. which is just after the start of gear contact with a roll angle of 2. Position (mm) Radius to LPSTC Radius to HPSTC Pinion 86.7° to 27. The pinion rim is fixed. The roll angle Φc represented in Eq. Shell elements with four nodes are used. a new pair comes into contact [10. Two-dimensional finite element model of mating spur gears. A number of nodes and elements in Fig. and the contact surface is densely meshed. A torque is applied directly to the ends of the rigid bars that are connected with the teeth of the gear. which means that as soon as one pair goes out of contact. On the contrary. respectively. From this point of view. the contact starts from 0° and ends at 27.44 S. Thus. 3.68 means that two pairs of teeth are contacting for 68% of a revolution.68. 3(a). Hwang et al. The gear is considered as the master surface and the pinion as the slave. The boundary condition is represented as Fig.
The contact stress for the helical gear can be calculated using Eq.0 0. (14). The change in the contact force that is applied to a pair of gear teeth is the same as that for spur gears. allowing them to be used at faster speeds than a standard spur gear .5 Gear 134 12. (13) for helical gears. εβ = π ×m (14) (15) (16) The transverse contract ratio of a helical gear is computed in the same manner as for the spur gear contact ratio. helical gears do not satisfy these assumptions.0 118. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 Table 4 Data for the contact analysis of mating helical gears. This is valid under the assumptions that changes in shape do not occur in the width-direction of the tooth and the stress variation generated in the width-direction of the tooth is negligible. they are employed for reducing vibration and noise. The following is the procedure for analyzing the strength of helical gears. However. a helical gear tends to meet and move with other gears more smoothly.0 3. for helical gears. Spur gear strength analysis that is based on the static finite element analysis generally is conducted by using a two-dimensional model.06 110. Since the calculated contact ratio is 1. The specifications of the helical gears are shown in Table 4. Because of the angle of the teeth.0 3. . the strength analysis of helical gears uses threedimensional dynamic finite element analysis. 3.0 45 Table 5 Position of the LPSTC.0 187. contact ratio. Parameter Number of teeth Helix angle (°) Profile shift coefficient Addendum (mm) Tooth width (mm) Center distance (mm) Normal module.0 1.0456 487.5 (left) 0.5 (left) −0. Thus. m Pinion 51 12. The description of each coefficient and the values used for analysis are presented in Table 6.0 1.93 118. ε = εα + εβ 2 2 2 + 2 ro − ( r ) ro b2 2 1 − (rb1 ) − (rp1 + rp2 ) × sin(α0 ) εα = π × m × cos(α0 ) b sin β . LPSTC. Contact stress analysis of helical gears Helical gears are used in machines that have fast rotating parts.S. The contact ratio of helical gears is calculated through Eqs.1573 190. and the AGMA standard for helical gears The position of LPSTC in the helical gear and pinion is listed in Table 5.97. However. and the sum of the transverse contact ratio and the overlap ratio becomes the contact ratio of the helical gear.115 92. The model allows for changes in shape due to the helix angle in the width-direction of the tooth. Meaning Transmitted tangential load (N) Elastic coefficient (MPa) Overload factor Dynamic factor Size factor Load distribution factor Face width (mm) Geometry factor for pitting resistance Pitch radius of the pinion (mm) Symbol Ft ZE Ko Kv Ks KH W ZI r1 Value 13254. when a helical gear tooth is in complete contact. Position Radius to LPSTC (mm) Pinion 93.1. (14)–(16).0 1.28 Gear 241. the next tooth will be in contact for approximately 97% of the time. Hwang et al.25 Table 6 Meanings of the symbol used in Eq.0 330. the overlap ratio owing to the helix angle is calculated.0 1.-C.
The results for the LPSTC corresponding to one pair of contacting teeth and the contact stress from the AGMA standard are listed in Table 7. Furthermore. and its tooth form takes the shape of an involute curve. is used for modeling. and between the stress at LPSTC and the AGMA stress are represented in Table 8. From Fig. excluding the z -directional rotation. the number of nodes and elements in Fig. 5. First. Also. a torque of 3 227. tip relief is not considered in the analysis. A commercial program. 4. If the AGMA stress is assumed to be the true value. the geometric shape of a pair of helical gears that mesh with each other is modeled by using CATIA V5. and the inner side of the rim of the gear is connected to the center of the gear by using beam elements. HyperMesh. The stresses in Cases 0 and 10 should be excluded from the analysis since they are generated from the application of a drastic load. 6 represents the change in the maximum contact stress according to the case. and the stress distribution in Case 7 is as shown in Fig.-C. Hwang et al. Through the mesh convergence tests. it can be seen that the maximum stress is generated at the contact point and the stress is propagated along diagonally. we can see that the stress becomes the maximum around the LPSTC point corresponding to one pair of contacting teeth and then reduces. the inner rim of the pinion and all the degrees of freedom in the vertical section of the pinion are constrained. While three or more teeth generally are included in the finite element modeling of a gear. the degrees of freedom in the center of the gear are constrained. While the gears are meshed and revolved. the errors between the stress in Case 7 and the AGMA stress. FE model of helical gears. the finite element model in this study includes six teeth for the gear and four for the pinion. Boundary and loading conditions for contact analysis for helical gears. the maximum stress at the contact location in Table 7 is 415.46 S. The finite element modeling process is as follows. 5. The gear is considered as the master surface and the pinion as the slave. The elements used here are 8-node hexahedrons. Then.9 N m is applied to the center of the gear.2 MPa in Case 7. . (13). / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 Fig. 3. The diagram of Fig. The finite element model of a pair of helical gears is displayed in Fig. Results The results of finite element analysis for each contact location of spur gears are summarized in Table 7. Then. 4.2. Compared with the AGMA contact stresses. 7. This is shown in Fig. 4 were determined as 10 380 and 7680. 4. The AGMA contact stress is calculated as 361 MPa from Eq. For the boundary condition. Finite element analysis of helical gears The gear used in this section is a helical gear. respectively. 7. the computed stresses are slightly higher. Fig.
-C. 7. Load type Case 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LPSTC AGMA Roll angle (°) 0.0 255.0 376.2 250.5 . Contact regions of a pair of mating. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 47 Table 7 Maximum stress obtained through contact stress analysis.2 321.22 10.8 360.18 21. Table 8 Error in contact stress analysis.6 9.8 788.96 13.00 2. Case Case 7 LPSTC Error (%) 14.70 16. Hwang et al.7 415.44 19.S.66 27.92 24.4 396.8 395.1 358. 6.9 273.48 8.74 5. Fig.35 Maximum stress (MPa) 802. Maximum stress for spur gears (10 cases).3 361.40 16.0 Half load Full load Half load Full load Full load Fig.
0 MPa Fig. On the contrary. the maximum stress is generated at the contact point and the stress is propagated along with the line of action.2 MPa. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 Table 9 Maximum stress generated from the contact stress analysis of helical gears. Fig.2 MPa AGMA standard 537. 9.48 S. 9 shows the change in stress along the line of contact in the helical gear. Then. It is obvious that the highest contact stress appears on the surface. . The material of the spur and helical gears used in this study shows a surface fatigue strength of approximately 700 MPa or higher when the smallest surface hardness is 240 HB. On the other hand. Stress Maximum stress FE analysis 683.0 MPa. This implies that the spur and helical gears analyzed in this study are safe in terms of the contact fatigue strength. tooth modification considering misalignment must be investigated to prevent surface pitting due to repeated use. 8. the result of finite element analysis would have an error of approximately 27%.-C. Similarly to the spur gear case. The contact stress based on the AGMA standard is 537. 8. The strength based on the standard is the largest value among the stress values on the line of contact. strength evaluation based on finite element analysis has the advantage of calculating the stress at each position on the line of contact. Fig. Stress generated in the line of contact. and it yields the largest stress value among the calculated values. Table 9 shows the contact stresses obtained from dynamic finite element analysis at the LPSTC and calculated from the AGMA standard for mating helical gears. and the stress value is 683. the stress contour via finite element analysis is shown in Fig. Hwang et al. Contact stress in mating helical gears. If the strength based on the standard is assumed as the true value. The error could have resulted from the difficulty in coping with the variety of coefficients that are considered in the standard.
9 2009. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 38 (2002) 707–723. American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 3 (2010) 222–231. Li. 2004.G. Hassan. McGraw-hill Companies.  F. 287–303.  J. Fuentes. Litvin. bending strength and basic performance parameters of a pair of spur gears. M. Finite element model for stress analysis and nonlinear contact analysis of helical gears. Scientific Technical Review (Serbia J.ehow. Dimitrijević. A. A. Acknowledgment This study was supported by research funds from Dong-A University.S. D. Contact stress analysis of spur gear teeth pair. Hwang et al.T.  I. 2001. Nikolić-Stanojlović.C. the design that considers the contact stress is stricter than the AGMA standard. According to the analysis. Costopoulos. V. Regarding changes in the contact stress. Conclusions This study presents the change in the contact stress of spur and helical gears in relation to the contact position. Chen. Cambridge University Press. Abaqus analysis user’s manual ver.L.-C. World Academy of Science. N. .agma.html. Raptis.  ISO gear standards. / Mathematical and Computer Modelling 57 (2013) 40–49 49 5. they yield the appropriate strength and safety. D. http://www.org/. C.  Dassault Systemes. Norton. Effect of addendum on contact strength.A.org/.B. Pleguezuelos.K.  http://www. Critical stress and load conditions for pitting calculations of involute spur and helical gear teeth. Engineering and Technology 58 (2009) 611–616. pp.I. Munoz. Mechanism and Machine Theory 43 (2008) 1557–1584.com/how_6245632_draw-helical-gear. References  AGMA standards. Papadopulos. hence. 2011.  Y. Mom¨ cilović.A. D. the maximum value measured at the lowest point single-tooth contact is compared with the contact stress calculated based on the AGMA standard.) LVIX (2009) 61–68.iso. Atanasovska. Mechanism and Machine Theory 46 (2011) 425–437. Gear Geometry and Applied Theory. Rating of spur gear strength using photoelasticity and the finite element method. Tsay.  S.L. 6. Design of Machinery. Tsolakis. The values calculated by using finite element analysis are below the contact fatigue strength of the material. Pedrero.  G. M. http://www.  R. Stress analysis of a helical gear set with localized bearing contact.  R.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.