AGMA 925-A03 - Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress

© All Rights Reserved

235 views

AGMA 925-A03 - Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress

© All Rights Reserved

- AGMA 906 A94
- AGMA 915-3-A99
- Agma 927-a01.pdf
- AGMA 914-B04
- AGMA 915-2-A05
- AGMA 930-A05
- AGMA 912-A04
- AGMA 923-B05
- AGMA 915-1-A02 Gears Inspect
- AGMA 2002-B88
- AGMA 910-C90
- AGMA 918-A93
- AGMA 911-A94
- AGMA 929-A06 Calculation of Bevel Gear Top Land and Guidance on Cutter Edge Radius
- www
- Ansi Agma6010 f97
- AGMA 917-B97 Design Manual for Parallel Shaft Fine-pitch Gearing
- 1012-G05 Gear Nomenclature, Definition of Terms
- AGMA 925-A03 - Effect of Lubrification on Gear Surface Distress.pdf
- Norma ANSI+AGMA+6000-B96+(R2002)

You are on page 1of 58

Distress

(This Information Sheet is NOT an AGMA Standard)

American

AGMA 925--A03

Gear

Manufacturers CAUTION NOTICE: AGMA technical publications are subject to constant improvement,

revision or withdrawal as dictated by experience. Any person who refers to any AGMA

Association

technical publication should be sure that the publication is the latest available from the Association on the subject matter.

[Tables or other self--supporting sections may be quoted or extracted. Credit lines should

read: Extracted from AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress, with

the permission of the publisher, the American Gear Manufacturers Association, 500 Montgomery Street, Suite 350, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.]

Approved March 13, 2003

ABSTRACT

AGMA 925--A03 is an enhancement of annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95. Various methods of gear surface

distress are included, such as scuffing and wear, and in addition, micro and macropitting. Lubricant viscometric

information has been added, as has Dudleys regimes of lubrication theory. A flow chart is included in annex A,

Gaussian theory in annex B, a summary of lubricant test rigs in annex C, and an example calculation in annex D.

Published by

500 Montgomery Street, Suite 350, Alexandria, Virginia 22314

Copyright 2003 by American Gear Manufacturers Association

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic

retrieval system or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher.

ISBN: 1--55589--815--7

ii

AGMA 925--A03

Contents

Page

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

1

Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3

Symbols and units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

4

Gear information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

5

Lubrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

6

Scuffing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

7

Surface fatigue (micro-- and macropitting) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

8

Wear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Annexes

A

B

C

D

Flow chart for evaluating scuffing risk and oil film thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Normal or Gaussian probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Test rig gear data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Example calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

31

39

41

43

Figures

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Transverse relative radius of curvature for external gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Load sharing factor -- unmodified profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Load sharing factor -- pinion driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Load sharing factor -- gear driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Load sharing factor -- smooth meshing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for mineral oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAO--based synthetic

non--VI--improved oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAG--based synthetic oils . . . . . . 15

Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for MIL Spec. oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Pressure--viscosity coefficient versus dynamic viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Example of thermal network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Contact temperature along the line of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Plot of regimes of lubrication versus stress cycle factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Probability of wear related distress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Tables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Data for determining viscosity and pressure--viscosity coefficient . . . . . . . . . 12

Mean scuffing temperatures for oils and steels typical of the aerospace

industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Welding factors, XW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Scuffing risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Stress cycle factor equations for regimes I, II and III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Calculation results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

iii

AGMA 925--A03

Foreword

[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, in this document are provided for

informational purposes only and are not to be construed as a part of AGMA Information

Sheet 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]

The purpose of this information sheet is to provide the user with information pertinent to the

lubrication of industrial metal gears for power transmission applications. It is intended that

this document serve as a general guideline and source of information about conventional

lubricants, their properties, and their general tribological behavior in gear contacts. This

information sheet was developed to supplement ANSI/AGMA Standards 2101--C95 and

2001--C95. It has been introduced as an aid to the gear manufacturing and user community.

Accumulation of feedback data will serve to enhance future developments and improved

methods to evaluate lubricant related wear risks.

It was clear from the work initiated on the revision of AGMA Standards 2001--C95 and

2101--C95 (metric version) that supporting information regarding lubricant properties and

general tribological knowledge of contacting surfaces would aid in the understanding of

these standards. The information would also provide the user with more tools to help make

a more informed decision about the performance of a geared system. This information

sheet provides sufficient information about the key lubricant parameters to enable the user

to generate reasonable estimates about scuffing and wear based on the collective

knowledge of theory available for these modes at this time.

In 1937 Harmon Blok published his theory about the relationship between contact

temperature and scuffing. This went largely unnoticed in the U.S. until the early 1950s

when Bruce Kelley showed that Bloks method and theories correlated well with

experimental data he had generated on scuffing of gear teeth. The Blok flash temperature

theory began to receive serious consideration as a predictor of scuffing in gears. The

methodology and theories continued to evolve through the 1950s with notable

contributions from Dudley, Kelley and Benedict in the areas of application rating factors,

surface roughness effects and coefficient of friction. The 1960s saw the evolution of gear

calculations and understanding continue with computer analysis and factors addressing

load sharing and tip relief issues. The AGMA Aerospace Committee began using all the

available information to produce high quality products and help meet its long--term goal of

manned space flight. R. Errichello introduced the SCORING+ computer program in 1985,

which included all of the advancements made by Blok, Kelley, Dudley and the Aerospace

Committee to that time. It became the basis for annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and

2001--C95 which helped predict the risk of scuffing and wear. In the 1990s, this annex

formed the basis for AGMAs contribution to ISO 13989--1.

Just as many others took the original Blok theories and expanded them, the Tribology

Subcommittee of the Helical Gear Rating Committee has attempted to expand the original

annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95 and 2101--C95. Specifically, the subcommittee

targeted the effect lubrication may have on gear surface distress. As discussions evolved, it

became clear that this should be a stand alone document which will hopefully serve many

other gear types. This should be considered a work in progress as more is learned about the

theories and understanding of the various parameters and how they affect the life of the

gear. Some of these principles are also mentioned in ISO/TR 13989--1.

AGMA 925--A03 was was approved by the AGMA Technical Division Executive Committee

on March 13, 2003.

Suggestions for improvement of this document will be welcome. They should be sent to the

American Gear Manufacturers Association, 500 Montgomery Street, Suite 350, Alexandria,

Virginia 22314.

iv

AGMA 925--A03

Chairman: D. McCarthy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dorris Company

Vice Chairman: M. Antosiewicz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Falk Corporation

SubCommittee Chairman: H. Hagan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Cincinnati Gear Company

K.E. Acheson . . .

J.B. Amendola . .

T.A. Beveridge . .

M.J. Broglie . . . . .

A.B. Cardis . . . . .

M.F. Dalton . . . . .

G.A. DeLange . . .

D.W. Dudley . . . .

R.L. Errichello . . .

D.R. Gonnella . . .

M.R. Hoeprich . .

O.A. LaBath . . . .

MAAG Gear AG

Caterpillar, Inc.

Dudley Technical Group, Inc.

Exxon Mobil Research

General Electric Company

Prager, Incorporated

Consultant

GEARTECH

Equilon Lubricants

The Timken Company

The Cincinnati Gear Co.

G. Lian . . . . . . . . .

J.V. Lisiecki . . . . .

L. Lloyd . . . . . . . .

J.J. Luz . . . . . . . .

D.R. McVittie . . . .

A.G. Milburn . . . .

G.W. Nagorny . . .

M.W. Neesley . . .

B. OConnor . . . .

W.P. Pizzichil . . .

D.F. Smith . . . . . .

K. Taliaferro . . . .

The Falk Corporation

Lufkin Industries, Inc.

General Electric Company

Gear Engineers, Inc.

Milburn Engineering, Inc.

Nagorny & Associates

Philadelphia Gear Corp.

The Lubrizol Corporation

Philadelphia Gear Corp.

Solar Turbines, Inc.

Rockwell Automation/Dodge

I. Laskin . . . . . . . .

J. Maddock . . . . .

J. Escanaverino .

G.P. Mowers . . . .

R.A. Nay . . . . . . .

M. Octrue . . . . . .

T. Okamoto . . . . .

J.R. Partridge . . .

J.A. Pennell . . . . .

A.E. Phillips . . . . .

J.W. Polder . . . . .

E. Sandberg . . . .

C.D. Schultz . . . .

E.S. Scott . . . . . .

A. Seireg . . . . . . .

Y. Sharma . . . . . .

B.W. Shirley . . . .

L.J. Smith . . . . . .

L. Spiers . . . . . . .

A.A. Swiglo . . . . .

J.W. Tellman . . . .

F.A. Thoma . . . . .

D. Townsend . . . .

L. Tzioumis . . . . .

F.C. Uherek . . . . .

A. Von Graefe . . .

C.C. Wang . . . . .

B. Ward . . . . . . . .

R.F. Wasilewski .

Consultant

The Gear Works -- Seattle, Inc.

ISPJAE

Consultant

UTC Pratt & Whitney Aircraft

CETIM

Nippon Gear Company, Ltd.

Lufkin Industries, Inc.

Univ. of Newcastle--Upon--Tyne

Rockwell Automation/Dodge

Delft University of Technology

Det Nordske Veritas

Pittsburgh Gear Company

The Alliance Machine Company

University of Wisconsin

Philadelphia Gear Corporation

Emerson Power Transmission

Invincible Gear Company

Emerson Power Trans. Corp.

IIT Research Institute/INFAC

Dodge

F.A. Thoma, Inc.

NASA/Lewis Research Center

Dodge

Flender Corporation

MAAG Gear AG

3E Software & Eng. Consulting

Recovery Systems, LLC

Arrow Gear Company

M. Bartolomeo . .

A.C. Becker . . . .

E. Berndt . . . . . . .

E.J. Bodensieck .

D.L. Borden . . . .

M.R. Chaplin . . . .

R.J. Ciszak . . . . .

A.S. Cohen . . . . .

S. Copeland . . . .

R.L. Cragg . . . . .

T.J. Dansdill . . . .

F. Eberle . . . . . . .

L. Faure . . . . . . . .

C. Gay . . . . . . . . .

J. Gimper . . . . . .

T.C. Glasener . . .

G. Gonzalez Rey

M.A. Hartman . . .

J.M. Hawkins . . .

G. Henriot . . . . . .

G. Hinton . . . . . . .

M. Hirt . . . . . . . . .

R.W. Holzman . .

R.S. Hyde . . . . . .

V. Ivers . . . . . . . .

A. Jackson . . . . .

H.R. Johnson . . .

J.G. Kish . . . . . . .

R.H. Klundt . . . . .

J.S. Korossy . . . .

Nuttall Gear LLC

Besco

Bodensieck Engineering Co.

D.L. Borden, Inc.

Contour Hardening, Inc.

Euclid--Hitachi Heavy Equip. Inc.

Engranes y Maquinaria Arco SA

Gear Products, Inc.

Consultant

General Electric Company

Rockwell Automation/Dodge

C.M.D.

Charles E. Gay & Company, Ltd.

Danieli United, Inc.

Xtek, Incorporated

ISPJAE

ITW

Rolls--Royce Corporation

Consultant

Xtek, Incorporated

Renk AG

Milwaukee Gear Company, Inc.

The Timken Company

Xtek, Incorporated

Exxon Mobil

The Horsburgh & Scott Co.

Sikorsky Aircraft Division

The Timken Company

The Horsburgh & Scott Co.

AGMA 925--A03

K.E. Acheson . . .

J.B. Amendola . .

T.A. Beveridge . .

M.J. Broglie . . . . .

A.B. Cardis . . . . .

R.L. Errichello . . .

D.R. Gonnella . . .

M.R. Hoeprich . .

vi

MAAG Gear AG

Caterpillar, Inc.

Dudley Technical Group, Inc.

Exxon Mobil Research

GEARTECH

Equilon Lubricants

The Timken Company

G. Lian . . . . . . . . .

D. McCarthy . . . .

D.R. McVittie . . . .

A.G. Milburn . . . .

G.W. Nagorny . . .

B. OConnor . . . .

D.F. Smith . . . . . .

K. Taliaferro . . . .

Dorris Company

Gear Engineers, Inc.

Milburn Engineering, Inc.

Nagorny & Associates

The Lubrizol Corporation

Solar Turbines, Inc.

Rockwell Automation/Dodge

Association --

Effect of Lubrication on

Gear Surface Distress

1 Scope

This information sheet is designed to provide

currently available tribological information pertaining

to oil lubrication of industrial gears for power

transmission applications. It is intended to serve as

a general guideline and source of information about

gear oils, their properties, and their general tribological behavior in gear contacts. Manufacturers and

end--users are encouraged, however, to work with

their lubricant suppliers to address specific concerns

or special issues that may not be covered here (such

as greases).

The equations provided herein allow the user to

calculate specific oil film thickness and instantaneous contact (flash) temperature for gears in

service. These two parameters are considered

critical in defining areas of operation that may lead to

unwanted surface distress. Surface distress may be

scuffing (adhesive wear), fatigue (micropitting and

macropitting), or excessive abrasive wear (scoring).

Each of these forms of surface distress may be

influenced by the lubricant; the calculations are

offered to help assess the potential risk involved with

a given lubricant choice. Flow charts are included as

aids to using the equations.

This information sheet is a supplement to ANSI/

AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95. It

has been introduced as an aid to the gear manufacturing and user community. Accumulation of feedback data will serve to enhance future developments

and improved methods to evaluate lubricant related

surface distress.

AGMA 925--A03

ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95 (ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95,

metric version) that supporting information regarding lubricant properties and general tribological

understanding of contacting surfaces would aid in

understanding of the standard and provide the user

with more tools to make an informed decision about

the performance of a geared system. One of the key

parameters is the estimated film thickness. This is

not a trivial calculation, but one that has significant

impact on overall performance of the gear pair. It is

considered in performance issues such as scuffing,

wear, and surface fatigue. This information sheet

provides sufficient information about key lubricant

parameters to enable the user to generate reasonable estimates about surface distress based on the

collective knowledge available.

Blok [1] published his contact temperature equation

in 1937. It went relatively unnoticed in the U.S. until

Kelley [2] showed that Bloks method gave good

correlation with Kelleys experimental data. Bloks

equation requires an accurate coefficient of friction.

Kelley found it necessary to couple the coefficient of

friction to surface roughness of the gear teeth.

Kelley recognized the importance of load sharing by

multiple pairs of teeth and gear tooth tip relief, but he

did not offer equations to account for those variables.

Dudley [3] modified Kelleys equation by adding

derating factors for application, misalignment and

dynamics. He emphasized the need for research on

effects of tip relief, and recommended applying

Bloks method to helical gears.

In 1958, Kelley [4] changed his surface roughness

term slightly.

Benedict and Kelley [5] published their equation for

variable coefficient of friction derived from disc tests.

The AGMA Aerospace Committee began investigating scuffing in 1960, and Lemanski [6] published

results of a computer analysis that contains data for

90 spur and helical gearsets, and formed the terms

for AGMA 217.01 [7], which was published in 1965.

It used Dudleys modified Blok/Kelley equation and

included factors accounting for load sharing and tip

relief.

AGMA 925--A03

in 1985. It incorporated all advancements made by

Blok, Kelley, Dudley and AGMA 217.01. In addition,

it added several improvements including:

-- Helical gears were analyzed by resolving the

load in the normal plane and distributing the

normal load over the minimum length of the

contact lines. The semi--width of the Hertzian

contact band was calculated based on the normal

relative radius of curvature;

-- Derating factors for application, misalignment

and dynamics were explicit input data;

-- Options for coefficient of friction were part of

input data, including a constant 0.06 (as prescribed by Kelley and AGMA 217.01), a constant

under user control, and a variable coefficient

based on the Benedict and Kelley equation.

SCORING+ and AGMA 217.01 both use the same

value for the thermal contact coefficient of

BM = 16.5 N/[mms0.5K], and they calculate the

same contact temperature for spur gears if all

derating factors are set to unity.

Annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/

AGMA 2001--C95 was based on SCORING+ and

included methods for predicting risk of scuffing

based on contact temperature and risk of wear

based on specific film thickness.

This information sheet expands the information in

annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/AGMA

2001--C95 to include many aspects of gear tribology.

2 References

The following standards contain provisions which

are referenced in the text of this information sheet.

At the time of publication, the editions indicated were

valid. All standards are subject to revision, and

parties to agreements based on this document are

encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying

the most recent editions of the standards indicated.

ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95, Fundamental Rating Factors and Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and

Helical Gear Teeth

ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95, Fundamental Rating Factors and Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and

Helical Gear Teeth (Metric Edition)

ANSI/AGMA 1010--E95, Appearance of Gear Teeth

-- Terminology of Wear and Failure

ISO 10825:1995, Gears -- Wear and Damage to

Gear Teeth -- Terminology

The symbols used in this document are shown in

table 1.

NOTE: The symbols and definitions used in this document may differ from other AGMA standards.

Symbol

Description

A

aw

B

BM

BM1, BM2

b

bH

Dimensionless constant

Operating center distance

Dimensionless constant

Thermal contact coefficient

Thermal contact coefficient (pinion, gear)

Face width

Semi--width of Hertzian contact band

CA ... CF

CR

Surface roughness constant

c

cM1, cM2

Di

d

Specific heat per unit mass (pinion, gear)

Internal gear inside diameter

Parameter for calculating o

avgx

Units

-- -mm

-- -N/[mm s0.5K]

N/[mm s0.5K]

mm

mm

mm

-- --- -J/[kg K]

mm

-- --

Where first

used

Eq 61

Eq 4

Eq 61

6.2.3

Eq 84

Eq 23

Eq 57

4.1.2

Eq 85

Eq 69

Eq 89, 90

4.1.2

Eq 69

(continued)

AGMA 925--A03

Table 1 (continued)

Symbol

Description

E1, E2

Er

Ft

(Ft)nom

Fwn

G

g

Hc

Reduced modulus of elasticity

Actual tangential load

Nominal tangential load

Normal operating load

Materials parameter

Parameter for calculating o

Dimensionless central film thickness

h

hc

Central film thickness

hmin

K

KD

Km

Ko

Kv

k

ksump

Lx

Lmin

mn

n1

N

na

nr

P

P(x)

p

pbn

pbt

px

Q

Q(x)

R avgx

Ra1x, Ra2x

Rqx

Rqx avg

Rq1x, Rq2x

r1, r2

ra1, ra2

rb1, rb2

rw1

Sf

s

Flash temperature constant

Combined derating factor

Load distribution factor

Overload factor

Dynamic factor

Parameter for calculating

Parameter for calculating M

Filter cutoff of wavelength x

Minimum contact length

Normal module

Pinion speed

Number of load cycles

Fractional (non--integer) part of

Fractional (non--integer) part of

Transmitted power

Probability of survival

Pressure

Normal base pitch

Transverse base pitch

Axial pitch

Tail area of the normal probability function

Probability of failure

Average of the average values of pinion and gear roughness

Average surface roughness (pinion, gear) at Lx

Root mean square roughness at Lx

Arithmetic average of Rq1x and Rq2x at Lx

Root mean square roughness at Lx (pinion, gear)

Standard pitch radius (pinion, gear)

Outside radius (pinion, gear)

Base radius (pinion, gear)

Operating pitch radius of pinion

Contact time

Parameter for calculating

Units

N/mm2

N/mm2

N

N

N

-- --- --- --

Where first

used

Eq 58

Eq 57

Eq 42

Eq 40

Eq 43

Eq 65

Eq 69

Eq 65

m

mm

Eq 59

Eq 75

mm

-- --- --- --- --- --- --- -mm

mm

mm

rpm

cycles

-- --- -kW

-- -N/mm2

mm

mm

mm

-- --- -mm

Eq 102

Eq 84

Eq 41

Eq 41

Eq 41

Eq 41

Eq 74

Eq 91

Eq 77

Eq 25

Eq 2

Eq 33

Fig 14

Eq 25

Eq 25

Eq 40

8.2.2

Eq 64

Eq 10

Eq 9

Eq 11

Eq B.2

8.2.2

Eq 87

Eq 78

Eq 79

Eq 99

Eq 99

Eq 2, 3

Eq 19, 16

Eq 6, 7

Eq 4

ms (sec 10--3) Eq 97

-- -Eq 74

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

(continued)

AGMA 925--A03

Table 1 (continued)

Symbol

T

U(i)

u

v

ve

Description

Absolute temperature

Speed parameter

Gear ratio (always 1.0)

Velocity

Entraining velocity

i

i

vs

Sliding velocity

i

Units

K

-- --- -m/s

m/s

Where first

used

Eq 61

Eq 65

Eq 1

Eq 59

Eq 39

m/s

Eq 36, 37

m/s

Eq 38

m/s

-- -N/mm

-- --- --

Eq 35

Eq 65

Eq 44

Eq 96

4.3

mm

-- --- --- --- -mm2/N

degrees

degrees

degrees

degrees

degrees

degrees

degrees

radians

radians

-- --- -mPas

mPas

mPas

mPas

mPas

mPas

C

Eq 21

7.5

Eq B.3

Eq 1

Eq 1

Eq 64

Eq 5

Eq 5

Eq 14

Eq 8

Eq 2

Eq 12

Eq 13

Eq 29

Eq 28

Eq 22

Eq 23

Eq 59

Eq 64

Eq 64

Eq 67

Eq 70

Eq 71

Eq 92

vt

W(i)

wn

XW

X

Load parameter

Normal unit load

Welding factor

Load sharing factor

Z

ZN

ZQ

z1

z2

n

t

wn

wt

b

w

(i)

A ... E

atm

P

M

1, 2

40, 100

B

Stress cycle factor

Normal probability density function

Number teeth in pinion

Number teeth in gear (positive)

Pressure--viscosity coefficient

Normal generating pressure angle

Transverse generating pressure angle

Normal operating pressure angle

Transverse operating pressure angle

Helix angle

Base helix angle

Operating helix angle

Pinion roll angle at point i along the line of action

Pinion roll angle at points A ... E

Transverse contact ratio

Axial contact ratio

Dynamic viscosity

Viscosity at atmospheric pressure

Viscosity at pressure P

Dynamic viscosity at gear tooth temperature M

Dynamic viscosity at temperature 1, 2

Dynamic viscosity at 40C, 100C

Contact temperature

B max

fl

Flash temperature

C

C

Eq 93

Eq 84

fl max

fl max, test

M

M, test

Maximum flash temperature of test gears

Tooth temperature

Tooth temperature of test gears

C

C

C

C

Eq 91

Eq 96

Eq 69

Eq 96

(i)

(continued)

4

AGMA 925--A03

Table 1 (concluded)

Symbol

oil

S

S

Mean scuffing temperature

Method of calculating scuffing temperature, S

C

C

-- --

Where first

used

Eq 91

Eq 94

Annex A

1, 2

min

2b

Specific film thickness

Specific film thickness at point i with a filter cutoff wavelength

of 2bH

C

-- --- --

Eq 70

Eq 104

Eq 76

M1, M2

W&H

my

mm

Wellauer and Holloway specific film thickness

Mean value of random variable y

Mean coefficient of friction

N/[s K]

-- --- --- --

Eq 89, 90

Eq 102

6.5.5

Eq 84

mmet

mm const

m min

1, 2

40, 100

M1, M2

1 , 2

Mean coefficient of friction, constant

Mean minimum specific film thickness

Kinematic viscosity

Poissons ratio (pinion, gear)

Kinematic viscosity at 40C, 100C

Density

Density (pinion, gear)

Transverse radius of curvature (pinion, gear)

-- --- -mm

mm2/s

-- -mm2/s

kg/m3

kg/m3

mm

Annex A

Eq 85

Eq 109

Eq 60

Eq 58

Eq 62

Eq 60

Eq 89, 90

4.1.5

mm

Eq 32

mm

Eq 31

Standard deviation of the minimum specific film thickness

Composite surface roughness adjusted for a cutoff

wavelength equal to the Hertzian contact width

Shear stress

Angular velocity (pinion, gear)

mm

mm

mm

Eq 77

Eq 109

Eq 76

met

H

i

x

min

2b

H

i

1, 2

Description

4 Gear information

N/mm2

rad/s

Eq 59

Eq 33, 34

z1 mn

2 cos

r2 = r 1 u

r1 =

This clause gives equations for gear geometry used

to determine flash temperature and elastohydrodynamic (EHL) film thickness. The following equations

apply to both spur and helical gears; spur gearing is a

particular case with zero helix angle. Where double

signs are used (e.g., ), the upper sign applies to

external gears and the lower sign to internal gears.

4.1.1 Basic gear geometry

(2)

(3)

r w1 =

aw

u1

(4)

t = arctan

tancos

n

(5)

Base radii

Gear ratio

z

u = z2

1

Units

(1)

r b1 = r 1 cos t

r b2 = r b1 u

(6)

(7)

AGMA 925--A03

r

wt = arccos r b1

w1

(8)

p bt =

2 r b1

z1

wt

(9)

ra2

rb2

aw

p bn = m n cos n

HPSTC

(10)

Axial pitch

px =

mn

sin

(11)

p

b = arccos pbn

bt

A

CA

(12)

EAP

pbt

LPSTC

SAP

pbt

CB

CC

ra1

CD

rb1

tan

w = arctan cos b

wt

CE

CF

(13)

wn = arcsincos b sin wt

(14)

Figure 1 is the line of action shown in a transverse

plane. Distances Cj are measured from the interference point of the pinion along the line of action.

Distance CA locates the pinion start of active profile

(SAP) and distance CE locates the pinion end of

active profile (EAP). The lowest and highest point of

single--tooth--pair contact (LPSTC and HPSTC) are

located by distances CB and CD, respectively.

Distance CC locates the operating pitch point. CF is

the distance between base circles along the line of

action.

(15)

C F = a w sin wt

C A = C F r 2a2 r 2b2

(16)

Transverse contact ratio

= pZ

bt

nr

--

= pb

na

--

= 0.0

(24)

CF

CC =

u1

C D = C A + p bt

L min =

b n a n r p x

cos b

(25)

(18)

--

(19)

L min =

C B = C E p bt

(20)

--

Z = CE CA

(21)

L min = b

0.5

(23)

-(17)

(22)

D

NOTE: For internal gears r a2 = i .

2

C E = r 2a1 r 2b1

0.5

external gears

b 1 n a1 n r p x

cos b

(26)

(27)

AGMA 925--A03

1 2

i i

r =

i

2 1

points along the line of action shown in figure 1 are

given by:

Cj

j = r

(31)

i

(28)

b1

r

n =

where

(32)

cos b

j = A, B, C, D, E

i

riding on a flat plate that represent the gear pair

curvatures in contact along the line of action.

r

Transverse radii of curvature

Figure 2 shows the transverse radii of curvature, 1

i

i

any point on the line of action from A to E (see figure

1).

n 1

30

1

2 = u

Operating pitch line velocity

1 =

1 r w1

1000

Rolling (tangential) velocities

vt =

1 1

1 2

i i

r =

2 1

i

i

v r1 =

2 2

v r2 =

(35)

(37)

1000

(34)

(36)

1000

(33)

1

r b1

v s = v r1 v r2

i

i

i

(38)

(i)

v e = v r1 + v r2

i

i

i

CF

(39)

F t

Figure 2 -- Transverse relative radius of

curvature for external gears

(29)

where

A (i) E

i

P

= 1000

v

t

(40)

K D = K o Km Kv

(41)

where

1 = r b1 i

i

2 = CF 1

nom

(30)

i

Ko

is overload factor;

Km

Kv

is dynamic factor.

determining Ko, Km and Kv factors.

AGMA 925--A03

F t = F t nom K D

(42)

F wn =

Ft

(43)

cos wn cos w

wn =

F wn

L min

(44)

The load sharing factor accounts for load sharing

between succeeding pairs of teeth as influenced by

profile modification, and whether the pinion or gear is

the driving member. By convention, the load sharing

factor is represented by a polygonal function on the

line of action with magnitude equal to 1.0 between

points B and D (see figure 3).

The load sharing factor is strongly influenced by

profile modification of the tooth flanks of both gears.

On the other hand, profile modifications are chosen

such that load sharing follows a desired function.

The following equations give the load sharing factor

for unmodified tooth profiles, and for three typical

cases of profile modifications.

load capacity, and if the pinion drives the gear (see

figure 4):

X = 6

7

i

i A

B A

X = 1 for B i D

i

X = 1 + 6

7 7

i

E i

E D

(49)

for D < i E

(50)

1

6

7

1

7

A

If there is no tip or root relief (see figure 3):

X = 1 + 1

3 3

i

i A

B A

for A i < B

(45)

X = 1 for B i D

i

X = 1 + 1

3 3

i

E i

E D

(46)

for D < i E

(47)

load capacity, and if the pinion is driven by the gear

(see figure 5):

X = 1 + 6

7 7

i

i A

B A

for A i < B

(51)

X = 1 for B i D

i

X = 6

7

i

E i

E D

(52)

1

1

2

3

6

7

1

3

profiles

8

1

7

A

AGMA 925--A03

5 Lubrication

meshing (see figure 6):

X =

i

i A

B A

(54)

for A i < B

X = 1 for B i D

i

X =

i

E i

E D

(55)

(56)

for D < i E

type, for example mineral or synthetic, and their

viscosity, usually in relation to a defined viscosity

grade. Viscosity is one of the basic and very

important properties of a lubricant and is used

extensively in tribological calculations. Viscosity is a

bulk property of a fluid, semi--fluid or semi--solid

substance that causes it to resist flow. In addition to

the basic composition and structure of the material,

viscosity decreases with increasing temperature

and increases with increasing pressure.

For a liquid under shear, the rate of deformation or

shear rate is proportional to the shearing stress. This

relationship is Newtons law, which essentially states

that the ratio of the stress to the shear rate is a

constant. That constant is viscosity. Dynamic

viscosity, , sometimes referred to as absolute

viscosity, is defined by equation 59.

meshing

= 10 9

dv

dh

(59)

where:

4.4 Hertzian contact band

The semi--width of the rectangular contact band is

given by:

0.5

8 Xi wn ni

b H =

i

Er

i

Er

is velocity, m/s;

dv is

dh

sometimes listed as .

is normal unit load, N/mm (see equation 44);

wn

(57)

where

X

(see equation 32);

is reduced modulus of elasticity given by:

Er = 2

1 21

E1

1 22

E2

(58)

where

1, 2 is Poissons ratio (pinion, gear);

E1, E2 is modulus of elasticity,

gear).

N/mm2

(pinion,

their viscosity measured by capillary viscometers

which provide a kinematic viscosity. Kinematic

viscosity, , is the ratio of dynamic viscosity, , to the

density, , at a specified temperature and pressure

(see equation 60).

= 10 3

(60)

where:

is density, kg/m3.

measuring the kinematic viscosity of lubricants for

many different applications. The most commonly

AGMA 925--A03

measurements are generally made at atmospheric

pressure.

then

shear rate. Fluids such as these are referred to as

Newtonian fluids. Most conventional, single grade

lubricants made with a relatively low molecular

weight base stock (non--polymeric) are considered

Newtonian fluids. However, there are fluids that do

not exhibit this ideal behavior because their viscosity

is not independent of shear rate. These are usually

finished blends containing higher molecular weight

polymers (viscosity modifiers or viscosity index

improvers, as well as pour point depressants) that

are sensitive to shear rate. Some exhibit shear

thinning, whereas others result in shear thickening.

It is more common in gear lubricant applications to

find shear thinning relationships due to the nature of

the polymers typically used in these formulations.

This shear thinning translates into lower effective

viscosities in the contact region under operation than

might be expected from a non--polymer blend of

similar viscosity.

information about the viscosity--temperature relationship of a fluid is the viscosity index or VI. The

viscosity index of a fluid can be calculated by ASTM

method D2270 [11]. This arbitrary measure gives a

relative viscosity--temperature sensitivity for a given

oil. The higher the value the less change in viscosity

with temperature.

Lubricant viscosity varies inversely with temperature. A truly ideal fluid would have a viscosity that is

constant over all temperature. ASTM method D341

[10] can be used to obtain the viscosity--temperature

relationship. A simplified form can be used to

estimate the kinematic viscosity of a fluid at a given

temperature if there is some viscometric information

available for the fluid at two other temperatures (see

equation 61).

(61)

where:

T

is absolute temperature, K;

10

log 10(373.15) log10(313.15)

Equally important to temperature on the fluid

viscosity is the pressure acting on it. This is

especially important in highly loaded contacts such

as gears and rolling element bearings where pressures can easily exceed 1 GPa. The viscosity of

lubricant trapped in a concentrated contact increases exponentially with pressure. In 1893, C.

Barus established an empirical equation to describe

the isothermal viscosity--pressure relationship for a

given liquid as shown in equation 64.

(64)

where

P

atm is viscosity

mPas;

at

atmospheric

pressure,

Klaus [12] provided a comparison of the many

models developed since the Barus equation was first

introduced. The continued research aided by the

development of high pressure rheology techniques

to generate empirical information have shown that

the viscosity--pressure response of a fluid is also

related to its chemical structure [13, 14, 15]. This can

have a profound effect on the film forming capabilities of the fluid in question and the overall life of the

component involved.

5.2 Film thickness equation

simultaneously with equations 62 and 63, using the

kinematic viscosity of the fluid measured at standard

temperatures of 40C and 100C.

B=

(63)

P = atm e p

(62)

various papers on EHL film thickness [16, 17, 18,

19]. The film thickness equations given in these

papers account for the exponential increase of

lubricant viscosity with pressure, tooth geometry,

velocity of the gear teeth, material elastic properties

and the transmitted load. The film thickness

determines the operating regime of the gearset and

AGMA 925--A03

distress probability. Wellauer and Holloway [20] also

found that specific film thickness could be correlated

with the probability of tooth surface distress. The

Dowson and Toyoda [19] equation for line contact

central EHL film thickness will be used as shown

below.

mPas;

mPas;

C;

C.

H c = 3.06

G 0.56U 0.69

W i

i

0.10

(65)

where

(i)

d=

(as a subscript) defines a point on the line of

action,

are defined below:

M ve

2E r n

10 6

log 10 40 + 0.9

d log 10 1 + 273.15)

(71)

(72)

(68)

temperature, mPas.

M = 10 g 0.9

(69)

where

d

can either be taken from table 2 or calculated with

equations 70 and 72, respectively. Equations 70 and

72, derived from a modification of the Walther

equation [10], will yield the parameters c and d if two

dynamic viscosities, 1 and 2, are known at two

corresponding temperatures, 1 and 2.

Since dynamic viscosity is generally available at

40C and 100C, equations 70 and 72 are modified

in equations 71 and 73 to incorporate terms

corresponding to those temperatures.

(73)

Values range from 0.725 10 --2 mm2/N to

2.9 10 --2 mm2/N for typical gear lubricants.

Values for pressure--viscosity

coefficients vs. dynamic viscosity can be

obtained from equation 74.

where

g = 10 c M + 273.15

Er n

(70)

(67)

X wn

+273.15

log 10 2

1+273.15

log 10 1+0.9

(66)

G = Er

W i =

log 10 2+0.9

d = 13.13525 log 10

materials parameter, G

U i =

log 10

= k sM

(74)

oils, MIL--L spec. oils, polyalphaolefin (PAO) based

synthetic oils (which contain ester) and polyalkylene

glycol (PAG) based synthetic oils, as well as

constants c, d, k and s for use in the equations 69

through 74. These values were obtained from the

data shown in figures 7 through 11 [22]. It is

important that the film thickness is calculated with

values of viscosity and pressure--viscosity coefficient for the gear tooth temperature, M, (see 6.3).

The central film thickness at a given point is:

h c = H c n 10 3

i

(75)

i

11

AGMA 925--A03

Lubricant

Mineral oil

PAO -- based

synthetic non-VI improved oil

PAG -- based

synthetic2)

MIL--L--7808K

Grade 3

MIL--L--7808K

Grade 4

MIL--L--23699E

ISO VG1)

32

46

68

100

150

220

320

460

680

1000

1500

2200

3200

150

220

320

460

680

1000

1500

2200

3200

6800

100

150

220

320

460

680

1000

40

27.17816

39.35879

58.64514

86.91484

131.4335

194.2414

284.6312

412.0824

613.8288

909.4836

1374.931

2031.417

2975.954

128.5772

189.9828

278.3370

402.8943

600.0179

868.1710

1310.350

1933.070

2827.726

6077.362

102.630

153.950

225.790

328.430

472.130

697.920

1026.37

100

4.294182

5.440514

7.059163

9.251199

12.27588

15.98296

20.60709

26.34104

34.24003

38.56783

49.58728

62.69805

78.56109

16.17971

21.60933

28.66405

37.54020

53.20423

68.60767

91.03300

118.0509

151.2132

244.5559

19.560

27.380

40.090

56.710

77.250

113.43

163.30

c

10.20076

10.07933

9.90355

9.65708

9.42526

9.24059

9.09300

8.96420

8.84572

9.25943

9.19946

9.15646

9.13012

7.99428

7.79927

7.63035

7.49799

7.16434

7.12008

7.07678

7.06113

7.06594

7.11907

6.42534

6.19586

5.76552

5.49394

5.35027

5.06011

4.85075

d

--4.02279

--3.95628

--3.86833

--3.75377

--3.64563

--3.55832

--3.48706

--3.42445

--3.36585

--3.52128

--3.48702

--3.46064

--3.44157

--3.07304

--2.98154

--2.90169

--2.83762

--2.69277

--2.66528

--2.63766

--2.62221

--2.61561

--2.62091

--2.45259

--2.34616

--2.16105

--2.04065

--1.97254

--1.84558

--1.75175

k

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010471

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.010326

0.0047

0.0047

0.0047

0.0047

0.0047

0.0047

0.0047

s

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.1348

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.0507

0.1572

0.1572

0.1572

0.1572

0.1572

0.1572

0.1572

12

11.35364

2.701402

9.58596

--3.82619

0.005492

0.25472

17

16.09154

3.609883

9.08217

--3.60300

0.005492

0.25472

23

22.56448

4.591235

8.91638

--3.51779

0.006515

0.16530

NOTES:

1) (mm2/s)

40

2) Copolymer of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide in 50% weight ratio.

thickness divided by the composite roughness of the

contacting gear teeth and can be used to assess

performance.

To determine this ratio, the cutoff wavelength for the

composite surface roughness measurement (x)

should be comparable to the width of the Hertzian

contact, 2b H . This results in x becoming 2b as

i

12

H

i

hc

2b

H

i

2b

(76)

H

i

measuring instruments have a fixed cutoff wavelength (usually 0.8 mm).

AGMA 925--A03

1 000 000

ISO VG

3200

2200

100 000

1500

1000

680

460

10 000

320

220

150

100

1000

68

46

32

100

10

1

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Temperature (K)

approximated by:

2b

H

i

0.5

Lx

x 2b

Hi

hc

x = Ra 21x + Ra 22x

0.5

(77)

(78)

where

2b

H

i

filter cutoff wavelength of 2bH;

Lx

surface roughness, mm. Any cutoff length,

Lx, can be used (for example, L0.8 = 0.8 mm

cutoff);

13

AGMA 925--A03

cutoff wavelength Lx, mm;

mm;

Rq 2x L x

where

square roughness, mm.

mm.

also [25]:

adjustment is developed below.

Ra x =

(79)

2 Rqx

(80)

Ra x L 0.5

x

(81)

1 000 000

ISO VG

6800

100 000

3200

2200

1500

1000

680

10 000

460

320

220

150

1000

100

10

1

200

300

350

400

450

500

Temperature (K)

Figure 8 -- Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAO--based synthetic non--VI--improved oils

14

250

AGMA 925--A03

Ra 2b

H

i

= Ra 0.8

0.8

0.5

i

L0.8

2b H

= Ra

0.5

2

2

10.8 + Ra 2 0.8

yields equation 83

length.

(82)

each for Ra1x and for Ra2x to obtain 2b .

H

i

Using this in equation 76, noting that

0.5

i L

2b

= 0.8

0.8 2b H

H

i

i

hc

(83)

1010000000

000 000

1000000

1 000

000

100

000

100000

1010000

000

1000

1000

100

100

ISO VG

1000

680

460

320

220

150

100

10

10

11

200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500

Temperature (K)

Figure 9 -- Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAG--based synthetic oils

15

AGMA 925--A03

1000

MIL--L--23699E

MIL--L--7808K Grade 4

100

Dynamic viscosity (mPas)

MIL--L--7808K Grade 3

10

0.1

200

250

300

350

Temperature (K)

400

450

500

Mineral oil

MIL--L--7808K

MIL--L--23699E

Synthetic oil (PAO)

Synthetic oil (PAG)

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.1

10

100

1000

Dynamic viscosity (mPas)

10 000

16

6 Scuffing

6.1 General

The term scuffing as used in this information sheet is

defined as localized damage caused by solid--phase

welding between surfaces in relative motion. It is

accompanied by transfer of metal from one surface

to another due to welding and subsequent tearing,

and may occur in any highly loaded contact where

the oil film is too thin to adequately separate the

surfaces. Scuffing appears as a matte, rough finish

due to the microscopic tearing at the surface. It

occurs most commonly at extreme end regions of the

contact path or near points of single tooth contact.

Scuffing is also known generically as severe

adhesive wear.

Scoring was a term commonly used in the U.S. to

describe the same phenomenon now defined as

scuffing (welding and tearing of mating surfaces).

See ANSI/AGMA 1010--E95 or ISO 10825:1995.

6.1.1 Mechanism of scuffing

The basic mechanism of scuffing is caused by

intense frictional heat generated by a combination of

high sliding velocity and high contact stress.

Scuffing occurs under thin film, boundary lubrication

conditions and can be affected by physical and

chemical properties of the lubricant, nature of the

oxide films, and gear material.

When gear teeth are separated by a thick lubricant

film, contact between surface asperities is minimized and there is usually no scuffing. As lubricant

film thickness decreases, asperity contact increases

and scuffing becomes more probable. A very thin

film, such as in boundary lubrication, together with a

high contact temperature suggests a high probability

of scuffing is possible in the absence of antiscuff

additives in the lubricant.

6.1.2 Probability of scuffing

Bloks [1] contact temperature theory states that

scuffing will occur in gear teeth that are sliding under

boundary--lubricated conditions, when the maximum contact temperature reaches a critical

magnitude. The contact temperature is the sum of

two components: the flash temperature and the

tooth temperature. See 6.4.

Scuffing most commonly occurs at one of the two

extreme end regions of the contact path or near the

points of single tooth contact.

AGMA 925--A03

comparing the calculated contact temperature with

limiting scuffing temperature. The limiting scuffing

temperature can be calculated from an appropriate

gear scuffing test, or can be provided by field

investigations.

For non--additive mineral oils, each combination of

oil and gear materials has a limiting scuffing

temperature that is constant regardless of the

operating conditions. It is believed that the limiting

scuffing temperature is not constant for synthetic

and high--additive EP lubricants, and it must be

determined from tests that closely simulate the

operating condition of the gearset.

6.2 Flash temperature

The flash temperature is the calculated increase in

gear tooth surface temperature at a given point along

the line of action resulting from the combined effects

of gear tooth geometry, load, friction, velocity and

material properties during operation.

6.2.1

Fundamental

temperature, fl

formula

for

flash

equation.

X wn

fl = 31.62 K m m

i

bH

0.5

v r1 v r2

i

i

B M1 v r1

i

0.5

0.5

(84)

+ B M2 v r2

i

where

is 0.80, numerical factor valid for a semi-elliptic (Hertzian) distribution of frictional

heat over the instantaneous width, 2 bH, of

the rectangular contact band;

mm

X

is normal unit load, N/mm (see equation 44);

wn

v r1

(see equation 36);

17

AGMA 925--A03

v r2

(see equation 37);

material, N/[mm s0.5K] (see 6.2.3);

BM2 is thermal contact coefficient of the gear

material, N/[mm s0.5K] (see 6.2.3);

bH

average values:

Ra + Ra 2x

(87)

R avgx = 1x

2

where

cutoff length, Lx, mm;

action.

cutoff length, Lx, mm.

approximated by different expressions, for instance

as proposed by Kelley [2, 4] and AGMA 217.01 [7].

The influence of surface roughness is incorporated

in the approximation of the coefficient of friction.

6.2.2 Mean coefficient of friction, m m

of the actual coefficient of friction on the tooth flank,

which is an instantaneous and local value depending

on several properties of the oil, surface roughness,

lay of the surface irregularities like grinding marks,

material properties, tangential velocities, forces and

dimensions.

Three methods may be used to determine the value

of m m to be used in equation 84.

i

is a constant;

-- input a value from equation 85, which is also

a constant;

-- input a value from equation 88, which varies

along the line of action.

6.2.2.1 Approximation by a constant

A constant coefficient of friction along the line of

action has been assumed by AGMA 217.01 [7] and

Kelley [2]:

m m = m m const = 0.06 C R

i

avg

(85)

, is limited

avgx

to a maximum value of 3.0:

1.0 C R

avgx

1.13

3.0

1.13 R avgx

(86)

in the partial EHL regime. It may be too low for

18

than 0.2, or too high for gears operating in the

full--film regime where mm may be less than 0.01.

An empirical equation for a variable coefficient of

friction is the Benedict and Kelley [5] equation,

supplemented with the influence of roughness:

29 700 Xiwn

log 10

m m = 0.0127 C R

2

i

avgx

Mvsivei

(88)

accordance with equations 86 and 87. Equation 88

is not valid at or near the operating pitch point, as vs

goes to zero.

where

M

temperature, M, mPas;

vs

ve

The thermal contact coefficient accounts for the

influence of the material properties of pinion and

gear:

B M1 = M1 M1 c M1

0.5

B M2 = M2 M2 c M2

0.5

(89)

(90)

M , is 41 to 52 N/[s K] and the product of density

times the specific heat per unit mass, M cM is

about 3.8 N/[mm2K], so that the use of the average

value BM = 13.6 N/[mm s0.5 K] for such steels will not

introduce a large error when the thermal contact

coefficient is unknown.

6.2.4 Maximum flash temperature

To locate and determine the maximum flash temperature, the flash temperature should be calculated

AGMA 925--A03

50) on the line of action. Calculate flash temperatures at points between SAP and LPSTC during

double tooth contact, at LPSTC and HPSTC for

single tooth contact, and between HPSTC and EAP

during double tooth contact.

be used for the analysis.

the mean scuffing temperature (see 6.5) for the

lubricant being used, there is a potential risk for

scuffing (see 6.5.5).

The tooth temperature, M, is the equilibrium temperature of the surface of the gear teeth before they

enter the contact zone. In some cases [26], the tooth

temperature may be significantly higher than the

temperature of the oil supplied to the gear mesh.

6.3.1 Rough approximation

For a very rough approximation, the tooth temperature may be estimated by the sum of the oil

temperature, taking into account some impediment

in heat transfer for spray lubrication if applicable, and

a portion that depends mainly on the flash temperature, for which the maximum value is taken:

M = k sump oil + 0.56 fl max

where

(91)

or determined according to experience.

thermal network analysis [43] (see figure 12).

The tooth temperature is determined by the heat flow

balance in the gearbox. There are several sources

of frictional heat, of which the most important ones

are the tooth friction and the bearing friction. Other

heat sources, like seals and oil flow, may also

contribute. For gear pitchline velocities above 80

m/s, churning loss, expulsion of oil between meshing

teeth, and windage loss become important heat

sources that should be considered. Heat is conducted and transferred to the environment by

conduction, convection and radiation.

6.4 Contact temperature

6.4.1 Contact temperature at any point

At any point on the line of action (see figure 13) the

contact temperature is:

(92)

B = M + fl

i

i

oil

where

6.2.

However, for a reliable evaluation of the scuffing risk,

it is important that instead of the rough approxima-

fl

action.

Oil

Pinion

Case

Friction power

Gear

Air

Shafts

Bearings

Friction

power

Figure 12 -- Example of thermal network

19

AGMA 925--A03

derived from data published by Blok [27].

B max

i

fl

non--antiscuff mineral oils (R&O in accordance with

ANSI/AGMA 9005--E02 [28]).

fl max

i

S = 63 + 33 ln 40

where

40

(94)

2).

antiscuff mineral oils (EP gear oil in accordance with

ANSI/AGMA 9005--E02).

A

of action

(93)

where

fl max is maximum flash temperature, C (see

6.2).

6.5 Scuffing temperature

The scuffing temperature is the temperature in the

tooth contact zone at which scuffing is likely to occur

with the chosen combination of lubricant and gear

materials. The scuffing temperature is assumed to

be a characteristic value for the material--lubricant

system of a gear pair, to be determined by gear tests

with the same material--lubricant system.

When B max (see figure 13) reaches the scuffing

temperature of the system, scuffing is likely. The

mean scuffing temperature is the temperature at

which there is a 50% chance of scuffing.

6.5.1 Mean scuffing temperature for mineral oils

Scuffing temperatures for mineral oils with low

concentrations of antiscuff additives are independent of operating conditions. Viscosity grade is a

convenient index of oil composition, and thus of

scuffing temperature.

Equations 94 and 95 are approximate guides for

mineral oils and steels typical of IAE and FZG test

20

with steels typical of the aerospace industry.

Table 3 -- Mean scuffing temperatures for oils

and steels typical of the aerospace industry

B max = M + fl max

(95)

S = 118 + 33 ln 40

6.5.2 Mean scuffing temperature for oils and

steels typical of aerospace industry

Lubricant

MIL--L--7808

MIL--L--23699

DERD2487

DERD2497

DOD--L--85734

ISO VG 32 PAO

DexronR II1)

Mean scuffing

temperature, C

205

220

225

240

260

280

290

NOTE:

1) DexronR is a registered trademark of General

Motors Corporation.

for one steel to other steels

The scuffing temperature determined from test

gears with low--additive mineral oils may be extended to different gear steels, heat treatments or

surface treatments by introducing an empirical

welding factor.

S = X W fl max, test + M, test

(96)

where

XW

gears, C;

M, test

hypoid gear application

Scuffing temperature for high--additive oils (hypoid

gear oil) may be dependent on operating conditions.

Therefore, the scuffing temperature should be

obtained from tests that closely simulate operating

conditions of the gears.

Table 4 -- Welding factors, XW

Material

Through hardened steel

Phosphated steel

Copper--plated steel

Bath or gas nitrided steel

Hardened carburized steel

-- Less than 20% retained austenite

-- 20 to 30% retained austenite

-- Greater than 30% retained austenite

Austenite steel (stainless steel)

XW

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.50

1.15

1.00

0.85

0.45

Scuffing risk can be calculated from a Gaussian

distribution of scuffing temperature about the mean

value. Typically, the coefficient of variation is at least

15%. Therefore, use the procedure of annex B to

calculate the probability of scuffing:

where

rotor dimensions most suitable to the gear application. Gear drives cover a wide field of operating

conditions from relatively low pitch line velocities

with high specific tooth loads, to very high pitch line

velocities and moderate specific tooth loads.

Lubricants vary, as well, between mineral oils with

little or no additives to antiscuff lubricants with

substantial additives.

The flash temperature method described in 6.2

through 6.5 is based on Bloks contact temperature

theory. The flash temperature, fl, must be added to

the steady gear tooth temperature, M, to give the

total contact temperature, B. The value of the

contact temperature for every point in the contact

zone must be less than the mean scuffing temperature of the material--lubricant system or scuffing may

occur.

6.6.1 Integral temperature method

The integral temperature method [29] has been

proposed as an alternative to the flash temperature

method by which the influence of the gear geometry

imposes a critical energy level based on the

integrated temperature distribution (for example,

numerically integrating using Simpsons rule) along

a path of contact and adopting a steady gear tooth

temperature. This method involves the calculation of

a scuffing load basically independent of speed, but

controlled by gear geometry. Application requires

comparison of the proposed gearset based on a test

rig result to a known test rig gearset and tested oil.

A comparison of the flash temperature method and

integral temperature method has shown the

following:

y = B max

my = s

y = 0.15 s

Table 5 gives the evaluation of scuffing risk based on

the probability of scuffing [7].

Table 5 -- Scuffing risk

Probability of scuffing

<10%

10 to 30%

>30%

AGMA 925--A03

Scuffing risk

Low

Moderate

High

The calculation of the scuffing load capacity is a very

complex problem. Several alternative methods are

method give essentially the same assessment of

scuffing risk for most gearsets;

-- Bloks method and the integral temperature

method give different assessments of scuffing

risk for those cases where there are local

temperature peaks. These cases usually occur in

gearsets that have low contact ratio, contact near

the base circle, or other sensitive geometries;

-- Bloks method is sensitive to local temperature peaks because it is concerned with the

maximum instantaneous temperature, whereas

the integral temperature method is insensitive to

these peaks because it averages the temperature

distribution.

21

AGMA 925--A03

6.6.2.1 PVT Method

predicting scuffing where:

P

is Hertzian pressure;

is sliding velocity;

automotive and aircraft industries. It worked well for

a narrow range of gear designs, but was unreliable

when extrapolated to other gear applications.

6.6.2.2 Borsoff scoring factor method

Borsoff [31, 32, 33, 34] conducted many scuffing

tests during the 1950s and found scuffing resistance

increased when test gears were run at high speeds.

Borsoff introduced a scoring factor, Sf:

2b

Sf = v H

s

(97)

where

Sf

bH

vs

traverse the Hertzian band of the mating tooth.

Borsoffs test data showed a linear relationship

between scuffing load and scoring factor, Sf. Borsoff

recommended that a number of considerations

should be made before using his method for specific

applications.

6.6.2.3 Simplified scuffing criteria for high speed

gears

Annex B of ANSI/AGMA 6011--H98 [35] has been

used to evaluate scuffing risk of high speed gear

applications.

There are other methods for evaluating scuffing of

gear teeth not mentioned here. Other methods may

also have application merit. Most importantly, the

gear designer should recognize scuffing as a gear

design criteria.

22

spalling, is a wear mode that results in loss of

material as a result of repeated stress cycles acting

on the surface. There are two major sub--groups

under surface fatigue known as micro-- and macropitting. As their names imply, the type of pitting is

related to the size of the pit. Macropits usually can be

seen with the naked eye as irregular shaped cavities

in the surface of the tooth. Damage beginning on the

order of 0.5 to 1.0 mm in diameter is considered to be

a macropit.

The number of stress cycles occurring before failure

is referred to as the fatigue life of the component.

The surface fatigue life of a gear is inversely

proportional to the contact stress applied. Although

contact stress is probably the major factor governing

life, there are many others that influence life. These

include design factors such as tip relief and crowning, surface roughness, physical and chemical

properties of the lubricant and its additive system,

and external contaminants such as water and hard

particulate matter.

7.2 Micropitting

Micropitting is a fatigue phenomenon that occurs in

Hertzian contacts that operate in elastohydrodynamic or boundary lubrication regimes and have

combined rolling and sliding. Besides operating

conditions such as load, speed, sliding, temperature

and specific film thickness, the chemical composition of a lubricant strongly influences micropitting.

Damage can start during the first 105 to 106 stress

cycles with generation of numerous surface cracks.

The cracks grow at a shallow angle to the surface

forming micropits that are about 10 20 mm deep by

about 25 -- 100 mm long and 10 20 mm wide. The

micropits coalesce to produce a continuous fractured surface which appears as a dull, matte surface

to the observer.

Micropitting is the preferred name for this mode of

damage, but it has also been referred to as grey

staining, grey flecking, frosting, and peeling. Although micropitting generally occurs with heavily

loaded, carburized gears, it also occurs with nitrided,

induction hardened and through--hardened gears.

Micropitting may arrest after running--in. If micropitting continues to progress, however, it may result in

loads and noise. Eventually, it can progress to

macropitting and gear failure.

7.2.1 Micropitting risk evaluation

Factors that influence micropitting are gear tooth

geometry, surface roughness, lubricant viscosity,

coefficient of friction, load, tangential speed, oil

temperature and lubricant additives. Common

methods suggested for reducing the probability of

micropitting include:

AGMA 925--A03

material will dislodge from the surface forming a pit,

an irregular shaped cavity in the surface of the

material. With gears the origin of the crack is more

likely surface initiated because lubricant film thickness is low resulting in a high amount of asperity or

metal--to--metal contact. For high--speed gears with

smooth surface finishes, film thickness is larger and

sub--surface initiated crack formation may dominate.

In these cases an inclusion or small void in the

material is a source for stress concentration.

--

--

--

--

--

tooth surface area damage as a criteria to stop a test.

However, for field service applications one should

always abide by the equipment manufacturers

recommendations or guidelines for acceptable limits

of damage to any gear or supporting component.

--

resistance;

-- protect gear teeth during run--in with suitable

coatings, such as manganese phosphate, copper

or silver plating.

CAUTION: Silver or copper plating of carburized gear

elements will cause hydrogen embrittlement, which

could result in a reduction in bending strength and fatigue life. Thermal treatment shortly after plating may

reduce this effect.

to micropit. Gears finished to a mirrorlike finish have

been reported to eliminate micropitting [36, 37, 38].

Gear teeth have maximum micropitting resistance

when the teeth of the high speed member are harder

than the mating teeth and are as smooth as possible

[39].

Currently there is no standard test for determining

micropitting resistance of lubricants. However, FVA

Information Sheet 54/IV describes a test that uses

the FZG C--GF type gears to rank micropitting

performance of oils [40]. At present, the influence of

lubricant additives is unresolved. Therefore, the

micropitting resistance of a lubricant should be

determined by field testing on actual gears or by

laboratory tests.

7.3 Macropitting

Macropitting is also a fatigue phenomenon. Cracks

can initiate either at or near the surface of a gear

tooth. The crack usually propagates for a short

distance at a shallow angle to the surface before

Gear rating standards have progressed and been

refined to take into account many of the major

variables that affect gear life. With respect to

calculated stress numbers, variables such as load

distribution, internally induced dynamic loading and

externally induced dynamic loading are accounted

for by derating factors. Variables such as material

quality, cycle life and reliability are accounted for by

allowable stress numbers, stress cycle factors and

reliability factors.

Along with these influences, it has been recognized

that adequate lubrication is necessary for gears to

realize their calculated capacity. Indeed, AGMA

gearing standards have acknowledged this fact by

stating this need as a requirement in order to apply

the various rating methods.

Much of the groundwork for lubrication theory came

about in the 1960s and 1970s. This period saw the

advent and proliferation of jet travel, space travel,

advanced manufacturing processes and advanced

power needs. These technological and industrial

developments led to the need for better gear rating

methods which, in turn, resulted in rapid progress in

industrial, vehicle and aerospace gearing standards.

High speed gearing was coming into greater use, but

it was not as well understood as the industry would

have liked. To compensate, designs tended to focus

on making higher speed stages of gearing more

successful, sometimes to the detriment of slower

speed stages. This is how the gearing industry

23

AGMA 925--A03

lubrication on the life of gearing.

operating pitch diameter as follows:

industrial gear drive with problems as follows: a high

speed set of gears that looked relatively undamaged, an intermediate speed set of gears that was

experiencing initial pitting, and a slow speed set of

gears that was experiencing advanced pitting and

tooth breakage. In the event that all three stages

were designed to have similar load intensity factors

(K--factors and unit loads) the problem could be

particularly puzzling. Rating theory at the time

indicated that with all other things equal, the higher

speed stages of gearing should have been failing

sooner than the lower speed stages, due to greater

stress cycles.

separates the asperities of gear flanks in motion

relative to one another;

surfaces of two mating teeth. Elastohydrodynamic

lubrication (EHL) theory showed that factors like

relative surface velocity and local oil viscosity at the

contact area directly affected thickness of the EHL oil

film that separated asperities on surfaces of two

mating gear teeth. For a multiple stage gear reducer,

higher speed stages of gearing, with higher surface

velocities, tended to produce thicker EHL oil films,

better capable of separating asperities on mating

teeth. Lower speed stages, with lower surface

velocities, tended to produce thinner EHL oil films,

less capable of separating asperities on mating

teeth.

Through the years, a great many researchers and

companies inside and outside of the gear industry

have sought to quantify the effects of EHL oil film

theory on the life of gearing. There are many ways in

which one could hypothesize the effects of inadequate oil films on degradation of gear tooth surfaces

and its results on the life of gearing. Indeed, a

comprehensive treatment of this subject could fill

many volumes. Added to this is the fact that this is

still a very active area of gear research. With this in

mind, it is still useful to put forth a simplified

description of how inadequate oil films can lead to

decreased life of gears. So, very simply put, thinner

oil films lead to a greater chance of more frequent

and more detrimental degree of contact between

asperities on mating gear teeth. The more severe

this is, the more likely it will lead to pitting, a

recognized form of surface fatigue in gearing.

The effects of this phenomenon on the fatigue life of

gearing were introduced by Bowen [41]. Dudley [42]

24

and there is occasional contact of the asperities of

gear flanks in motion relative to one another;

-- Regime I: Only boundary lubrication exists

with essentially no EHL film and contact of the

asperities of gear flanks in motion relative to one

another is pronounced.

The implementation of this theory involves what is

currently referred to as the stress cycle factor for the

surface durability of gears, ZN, (this used to be called

the life factor for surface durability). Keeping in mind

that regime of lubrication depends ultimately on the

degree of separation between asperities, Dudley

proposed that the effect could be quantified by

making proper adjustments to the curves that

determine the stress cycle factor. Thus, we have as

follows:

7.4.2 Regime III

This regime of lubrication, characterized by full EHL

oil film development, occurs mainly when gears have

relatively high pitch line velocity, good care is taken

to ensure that an adequate supply of clean, cool oil is

available (of adequate viscosity and formulation),

and good surface finishes are achieved on the

gearing. As such, aerospace gearing, high speed

marine gearing, and good quality industrial gear

drives tend to have gears that operate within regime

III. Thus, stress cycle factor curves that appear in

standards for these gears are the basis for rating

gears that operate within regime III.

7.4.3 Regime II

This regime of lubrication, characterized by partial

EHL oil film development, occurs mainly when gears

have moderate pitch line velocities, moderate care is

taken to ensure that an adequate supply of clean,

cool oil is available (of adequate viscosity and

formulation), and moderately good surface finishes

are achieved on the gearing. As such, vehicle

gearing is very characteristic of gears that operate

within regime II. Dudley uses information from the

stress cycle factor curves in vehicle standards to

create a branch from the regime III curve for cycles

greater than 100 000. It is felt that effects of

operation within regime II on fatigue life will not begin

to be realized until this point in the life of a gear.

7.4.4 Regime I

This regime of lubrication, characterized by boundary lubrication, occurs mainly when gears have low

pitch line velocities, little care is taken to ensure that

an adequate supply of clean, cool oil is available (of

adequate viscosity and formulation), and relatively

rough surface finishes are achieved on the gearing.

Many types of gearing can fall into this range of

operation, including all types mentioned above.

Dudley used fatigue curves generated for ball and

roller bearings as a basis for regime I stress cycle

factor curves. These curves, first developed in the

1940s, indicated that with a ten--fold increase in

AGMA 925--A03

factor of 2.0. Thus, a stress curve for Hertzian

contact would drop off by about a factor of 1.41

(square root of 2.0). Bearings back in the 1940s

commonly had surface finishes and oil films very

analogous to gears operating in regime I. This

information is used to create a branch from the

regime III curve at cycles greater than 100 000.

Figure 14 shows the curves that result from Dudleys

method of regimes of lubrication. Below, the method

is described in fuller detail and calculations are given

to show how one assesses which regime of lubrication should be applied to a given set of gears.

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70

0.60

0.50

Regime III

Regime II

0.40

0.30

Regime I

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.09

0.08

0.07

0.06

0.05

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

1010

1011

1012

Regime of lubrication

Regime III

Regime II

Regime I

Z N = 1.47

for N < 10 000 cycles

Z N = 2.46604 N 0.056

ZN =

3.83441 N 0.094

ZN =

7.82078 N 0.156

25

AGMA 925--A03

durability

After calculating the minimum EHL film thickness

based on 5.2, one must calculate the specific film

thickness. In figure 14, specific film thicknesses

greater than or equal to 1.0 indicate the beginning of

regime III and the end of regime II lubrication.

Specific film thicknesses between 0.4 and 1.0

indicate operation within regime II and specific film

thicknesses less than or equal to 0.4 indicate

regime I.

Once the regime of lubrication is determined, one

can calculate the stress cycle factor, ZN, shown in

figure 14. ZN is used to calculate gear rating in

ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95.

8 Wear

Wear is a term describing change to a gear tooth

surface involving removal or displacement of material, due to mechanical, chemical or electrical action.

In the boundary lubrication regime, some wear is

inevitable. Many gears, because of practical limits on

lubricant viscosity, speed and temperature, must

operate under boundary lubricated conditions.

Mild wear occurs during running--in and usually

subsides with time, resulting in a tolerable wear rate

and a satisfactory lifetime for the gearset. Wear that

occurs during running--in may be beneficial if it

smoothes tooth surfaces (increasing specific film

thickness) and increases the area of contact by

removing minor imperfections through local wear.

The amount of wear that is tolerable depends on the

expected lifetime for the gearset, and on requirements for noise and vibration. Wear rate may

become excessive if tooth profiles are worn to the

extent that high dynamic loads are encountered.

Excessive wear may also be caused by contamination of the lubricant by abrasive particles. When wear

becomes aggressive and is not preempted by

scuffing or bending fatigue, wear and pitting will likely

compete for the predominate failure mode.

8.1 Abrasive wear

Abrasive wear is removal or displacement of material due to the presence of hard particles suspended in

26

The choice of lubricant usually does not have any

direct effect on abrasive wear. Abrasive particles can

be present, however, as debris from other forms of

wear such as fatigue pitting and adhesion. The

lubricant should not react with any systemic materials or with any contaminants. Products of these

reactions can be abrasive. In large open gears, the

film thickness of highly viscous lubricants may

prevent three--body abrasion from small particles.

8.2 Wear risk evaluation

The boundary lubrication regime consists of exceedingly complex interactions between additives in the

lubricant, metal, and atmosphere making it impossible to assess accurately the chance of wear or

scuffing from a single parameter such as specific film

thickness. However, empirical data of figure 15 have

been used as an approximate guide to the probability

of wear related distress. Figure 15 is based on data

published by Wellauer and Holloway [20] that were

obtained from several hundred laboratory tests and

field applications. The curves of figure 15 apply to

through--hardened steel gears ranging in size from

25 mm to 4600 mm in diameter that were lubricated

with mineral--based, non--EP gear lubricants. The

authors [20] defined tooth flank surface distress as

surface pitting or wear that might be destructive or

could shorten the gear life. Most of the data of figure

15 pertain to gears that experienced lives in excess

of 10 million cycles.

8.2.1 Adjustments to the surface distress and

specific film thickness curves

The surface distress and specific film thickness

curves (figure 15) were derived from the Wellauer

and Holloway curves. The curves are adjusted to

account for different definitions of composite surface

roughness and specific film thickness.

8.2.1.1 Average surface roughness adjustment

Reference [20] used root mean square surface

roughness. This information sheet uses average

surface roughness. The relationship between root

mean square and average surface roughness varies

with the machining process. Typically,

Rq x 1.11 Ra x

(98)

AGMA 925--A03

10

5%

40%

80%

0.1

0.01

0.1

10

Pitch line velocity (m/s)

100

1000

8.2.1.2

Composite

adjustment

roughness

composite surface roughness:

1.316 times the Dowson and Higginson [17] minimum film thickness, hmin, used by the Wellauer and

Holloway paper [20].

Rq x avg =

Rq1x + Rq 2x

2

surface

(99)

as follows:

Wellauer and Holloway [20] defined as:

where

Rq1x, Rq2x is root mean square surface roughness, pinion and gear respectively, for

filter cutoff length, Lx, mm.

Composite surface roughness used in this information sheet is root mean square average of average

surface roughness, see equation 78.

If Rq1x = Rq2x and Ra1x = Ra2x (similar surface

roughnesses),

x = 2 Ra1x = 2 Ra 2x

(100)

Rq x avg = Rq 1x = Rq 2x

(101)

The curves of figure 15 were also adjusted for

different definitions of film thickness. The Dowson

and Toyoda equation for central film thickness [19],

W&H =

h min

Rqx avg

(102)

i

equations 75 and 100:

hc

i

(103)

i =

x

Substituting adjustment factors into the equation for

gives:

min =

2 Rq

(104)

x avg

(105)

min = 1.033 W&H

and is used to adjust the specific film thickness

provided by Wellauer and Holloway. This vertical

axis adjustment is now reflected in figure 15.

27

AGMA 925--A03

adjusted from feet per minute to meters per second.

Note that specific film thickness is dimensionless.

8.2.2 Wear risk probability

The curves of figure 15 can be fitted with the

following equations:

+ 0.47767

5% = 2.68863

vt

+ 0.64585

40% = 4.90179

vt

80% = 9.29210

+ 0.95507

vt

(106)

(107)

(108)

specific film thickness, m min, and the standard

deviation, min, can be calculated by simultaneous

solution (two equations in two unknowns) using any

two of the adjusted Wellauer and Holloway curves

(5% and 40%, 40% and 80%, or 5% and 80%):

x=

min m min

min

(ref [24])

(109)

where

x

determined by probability;

min

min is standard deviation of the minimum

specific film thickness.

Figure 15 and equations 106 through 108 are listed

in the percent failure mode, Q(x). This must first be

converted to a percent survival mode, P(x), by the

equation P (x) = 1 Q (x). With P(x) known, the value

x may be determined from the table Normal

Probability Function and Derivatives of reference

[24].

5%:

P (x) = 20%

x 80% = 0.84163389

Use several film thickness values from figure 15 to

find how mean minimum specific film thickness,

m min, and standard deviation of the minimum

specific film thickness, min, vary with pitch line

velocity. An example is shown below:

v t = 5 ms

5% = 0.9849

40% = 0.6149

This gives the following equations that are solved for

min:

1.6449 =

0.2534 =

0.9849 m min

min

0.6149 m min

min

0.2534 min = 0.6149 m min

Subtracting the bottom equation from the upper

equation yields:

1.3915 min = 0.3700

min = 0.3700 = 0.2659

1.3915

Using min in the first equation, m min is found:

1.6449 =

0.9849 m min

0.2659

m min = 0.9849 1.6449 (0.2659)

m min = 0.5475

This process was repeated for all data points along

the curves in the following combinations: 5%--40%,

40%--80% and 5%--80%. Results of these calculations were averaged and the values are shown in

table 7.

Q (x) = 5%

P (x) = 95%

min

1

inverse of the pitch line velocity, v , results in the

t

following:

x 5% = 1.64491438

40%:

Q (x) = 40%

P (x) = 60%

x 40% = 0.25335825

80%:

28

Q (x) = 80%

min

, and the

for vt 5 m/s

m min = 5.43389

+ 0.71012

vt

(110)

min =

vt

v 2t

(111)

m min = 5.47432

+ 0.70153

vt

min =

(112)

vt

v 2t

(113)

Association of a mean and standard deviation with

each pitch line velocity allows the probability of wear

distress to be assigned given specific EHL operating

conditions using the procedure of annex B and

using:

y = min

m y = m min

y = min

AGMA 925--A03

vt (m/s)

0.25

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

m min

0.04455408

0.08636353

0.16271966

0.23073618

0.29172511

0.34673387

0.39660952

0.44204486

0.48361240

0.52178951

0.55697759

0.80016431

0.93691698

1.02464932

1.08573704

1.13072662

1.16524421

1.19256659

1.21473204

1.23307514

1.32309469

1.35614631

1.37331023

1.38382249

min

0.02496302

0.04757665

0.08689583

0.11982298

0.14771523

0.17158123

0.19218459

0.21011292

0.22582491

0.23968331

0.25197825

0.32484801

0.35693985

0.37431229

0.38496185

0.39205782

0.39707727

0.40079104

0.40363655

0.40587858

0.41541491

0.41831071

0.41968741

0.42048785

29

AGMA 925--A03

30

AGMA 925--A03

Annex A

(informative)

Flow chart for evaluating scuffing risk and oil film thickness

[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be

construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]

START

P, Ko, Km, Kv, E1, E2, 1, 2, Ra1x,

Ra2x, nop, Tip, Driver, mmet, M,

BM1, BM2, oil, ksump, M, , Lx,

M,test, XW, 40, fl max, test,

S met

P1

Tip

profile modification

0 = none

1 = modified for high load capacity

2 = modified for smooth meshing

mmet

method

for

approximating

mean

coefficient of friction

1 = Kelley and AGMA 217.01 method

(constant)

2 = Benedict and Kelley method (variable)

Other = enter own value for mm (constant)

0 = program calculates with equation 91

0 ! input own value

1 = pinion

2 = gear

nop

of action (25 recommended)

temperature, M

0 = calculate using table 2 and equation 69

0 ! input own value (must also input )

0 = calculate using table 2 and equation 74

0 ! input own value (must also input M)

= 1.2 if spray lube

of

calculating

scuffing

S met method

temperature, s

0 = from test gears (need to also input

fl max, test, M, test and XW from table 4

1 = R&O mineral oil

2 = EP mineral oil

Other = enter own value of s (C), (see

table 3)

31

AGMA 925--A03

P1

u

r1

r2

rw1

t

rb1

rb2

wt

pbt

pbn

px

b

w

wn

(Eq 1)

(Eq 2)

(Eq 3)

(Eq 4)

(Eq 5)

(Eq 6)

(Eq 7)

(Eq 8)

(Eq 9)

(Eq 10)

(Eq 11)

(Eq 12)

(Eq 13)

(Eq 14)

CF

CA

CC

CD

CE

CB

Z

(Eq 15)

(Eq 16)

(Eq 17)

(Eq 18)

(Eq 19)

(Eq 20)

(Eq 21)

(Eq 23)

na = fractional part of

(1 n r) n a

yes

(Eq 22)

nr = fractional part of

Lmin

(Eq 25)

1

2

vt

(Ft)nom

KD

Ft

Fwn

wn

Er

(Eq 33)

(Eq 34)

(Eq 35)

(Eq 40)

(Eq 41)

(Eq 42)

(Eq 43)

(Eq 44)

(Eq 58)

R avg

(Eq 87)

CR

no

helical gear

yes

spur gear

32

(Eq 24)

Lmin

(Eq 27)

avgx

m m const

=0

no

(Eq 86)

(Eq 85)

(Eq 78)

P2

Lmin

(Eq 26)

AGMA 925--A03

P2

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

(Eq 28)

A, B, C, D, E = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

i=1

i>5

Xi

Xi

Xi

(Eq 45)

(Eq 46)

(Eq 47)

Xi

Xi

Xi

(Eq 54)

(Eq 55)

(Eq 56)

Xi

Xi

Xi

(Eq 48)

(Eq 49)

(Eq 50)

Xi

Xi

Xi

(Eq 51)

(Eq 52)

(Eq 53)

yes

no

i = A + (i 6 )

E A

(nop 1)

(Eq 29)

(Eq 30)

(Eq 31)

(Eq 32)

(Eq 36)

(Eq 37)

(Eq 38)

(Eq 39)

1i

2i

ri

ni

vr1i

vr2i

vsi

vei

yes

yes

no

(eq 57)

bH1

yes

Tip = 0

i = i+ 1

no

Tip = 2

no

i = nop + 6

yes

Driver = 1

no

P3

33

AGMA 925--A03

P3

K = 0.8

yes

M = 0

yes

no

(M input)

mmet = 2

no

yes

(Eq 85)

mm const

mm const = mmet

M = 0

M = 0

mmet = 1

no

no

(M & input)

yes

yes

no

(M &

input)

mm const

M*

(Eq 69)

(Eq 74)

(Eq 85)

Call subroutine

Max_Flash_Temp

fl max

Call subroutine

Max_Flash_Temp

fl max

Call subroutine

Max_Flash_Temp

fl max

(Eq 91)

P3A

yes

M = 0

(Eq 91)

no

(M input)

yes

M1 = M

Call subroutine

Max_Flash_Temp

fl max

M*

(Eq 69)

(Eq 74)

mm const = 0

M = 0

P3A

(Eq 69)

(Eq 74)

no

(o & input)

same

page

Call subroutine

Max_Flash_Temp

fl max

P4

yes

* See table 2 for constants in these equations calculated per 71 and 73.

34

(Eq 91)

no

AGMA 925--A03

P4

(Eq 66)

hmin = 100

min = 100

yes

no

i=1

U(i)

(Eq 67)

W(i)

(Eq 68)

min = 2bH(i)

i=i+1

no

i = nop + 6

yes

Hc(i)

(Eq 65)

hc(i)

(Eq 75)

(eq 93)

B max

P5

yes

no

hmin = hc(i)

2bH(i)

(Eq 77)

35

AGMA 925--A03

P5

yes

S met = 0

Srisk = low

no

yes

S (eq 96)

no

S met = 2

yes

S (Eq 95)

no

s = S met

S risk = high

yes

S (eq 94)

no

Srisk = moderate

no

test gears

(need fl max, test,

M test & XW input)

S met = 1

yes

P scuff 0.30

Rq1x

(Eq 98)

Rq2x

(Eq 98)

Rqx avg

(Eq 99)

min

(Eq 105)

no

v t 5 ms

EP Mineral Oil

yes

m min

(Eq 110)

min

(Eq 111)

y = B max

m min

(Eq 112)

my = s

min

(Eq 113)

y = 0.15 s

Call subroutine

Probability

y = min

m y = m min

y = min

Return POF

Return POF

Pscuff = POF

36

AGMA 925--A03

Subroutine Probability

y, m y, y input

x (eq B.1)

yes

Q = 0.05

no

t (eq B.4)

ZQ (eq B.3)

Q (eq B.2)

x>0

no

yes

POF = 1.0 -- Q

POF = Q

Return POF

37

AGMA 925--A03

Subroutine Max_Flash_Temp

i=1

fl max = 0

mm const = 0

no

yes

mm is a (given) constant

or calculated by equation

85 (AGMA 217.01 and

Kelley)

s(i) or X(i)

< mach**

yes

no

mm(i)

(Eq 88)

(Benedict and Kelley)

mm(i) = mm const

mm(i) = 0

yes

mm(i) or bH(i)

< mach**

yes

no

mm(i) = 0

no

yes

fl max = fl(i)

(Eq 84)

fl(i)

fl(i) = 0

no

i=i+ 1

i = nop + 6

yes

Return

**Eq 88 is not valid at vs(i) = 0 or X(i) = 0 or near zero, and Eq 84 is not valid at bH(i) = 0 or near zero.

mach is a small finite number (e.g., 10 --10). In case the calculated mm(i) < 0, set mm(i) = 0.

38

no

AGMA 925--A03

Annex B

(informative)

Normal or Gaussian probability

[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be

construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]

where

For random variables that follow normal (Gaussian)

distributions, the following procedure [24] can be

used to calculate probabilities of failure in the range

of 5% to 95%:

x=

y m y

y

(B.1)

function;

ZQ

Probability of failure:

if x > 0, then:

probability of failure = 1 -- Q;

where

else

probability of failure = Q

my

y.

where

Evaluation of Q:

ZQ

0.5(x )

= 0.3989422804 e

(B.3)

b 1 = 0.319381530

b 2 = 0.356563782

b 3 = 1.781477937

b 4 = 1.821255978

Q = 0.05;

b 5 = 1.330274429

else

Q = Z Q b 1t + b 2t 2 + b 3t 3 + b 4t 4 + b 5t 5

(B.2)

p = 0.2316419

1

t=

1 + p|x|

(B.4)

39

AGMA 925--A03

40

AGMA 925--A03

Annex C

(informative)

Test rig gear data

[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be

construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]

Table C.1 provides a summary of gear data for

several back to back test rigs that have been used for

gear lubrication rating and research.

41

42

Pinion torque

range

Primary wear

assessment

a

mn

n

wt

z1

z2

b

ra1

ra2

x1

x2

Quality number

Quality standard

Ra1

Ra2

n1

oil

Ref document

Symbol

AGMA 925--A03

Nm

mm

mm

rpm

deg C

-- --

mm

mm

deg

deg

deg

-- --- -mm

mm

mm

-- --- --- --

Units

91.5

4.5

20

0

22.44

16

24

20

44.385

56.25

0.8635

-- 0.5103

5

ISO 1328

0.3 -- 0.7

0.3 -- 0.7

2170

90--140

ISO 14635--1

ASTM

D5182--97

CEC

L--07--A--95

3.3 -- 534.5

Scuffing

FZG A

3.3--534.5

91.5

4.5

20

0

22.44

16

24

10

44.385

56.25

0.8635

--0.5103

5

ISO 1328

0.3 -- 0.7

0.3 -- 0.7

2170

90--120

ISO/WD

14635--2

Scuffing

FZG A10

135 -- 376

Pitting (micro

& macro)

91.5

4.5

20

0

22.44

16

24

14

41.23

59.18

0.1817

0.1715

5

DIN 3962

0.3 -- 0.5

0.3 -- 0.5

2250

90--120

FVA Info

Sheet

54/7

FZG C

28 -- 265

91.5

4.5

20

0

22.44

16

24

14

41.23

59.18

0.1817

0.1715

5

DIN 3962

0.4 -- 0.6

0.4 -- 0.6

2250

90

FVA Info

Sheet

54/I--IV

FZG

C -- GF

Micropitting

0 -- 100

88.9

3.175

20

0

20

28

28

6.35/2.8

47.625

47.625

0

0

13

AGMA 2000

0.3 -- 0.4

0.3 -- 0.4

10000

49 -- 77

NASA

TP -- 2047

(1982)

Pitting

NASA

0 -- 270

88.9

3.175

22.5

0

22.5

28

28

6.35

47.22

47.22

0

0

13

AGMA 2000

0.46 -- 0.64

0.46 -- 0.64

10000

74

ASTM

D1947--83

(1984)

Scuffing

Ryder

250 -- 400

Pitting (micro

& macro)

91.5

3.629

20

0

21.31

20

30

14

40.82

58.18

0.2231

0.0006

12--13

AGMA 2000

0.5 -- 0.8

0.5 -- 0.8

2250

80

-- --

AGMA

20 -- 407

82.55

5.08

20

0

26.25

15

16

4.76

45.02

47.69

0.3625

0.3875

5

ISO 1328

0.3 -- 0.8

0.3 -- 0.8

4K -- 6K

70 -- 110

IP166/77

(1992)

Scuffing

IAE

AGMA 925--A03

Annex D

(informative)

Example calculations

[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be

construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]

******************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

******************************************************************************

***** GENERAL AND GEOMETRY INPUT DATA *****

SCORING+ EX.#1

Input unit (=1 SI, =2 Inch)

(iInputUnit)

1.000000

Output unit (=1 SI, =2 Inch)

(iOutputUnit)

1.000000

Gear type (=1 external, =2 internal)

(iType)

1.000000

Driving member (=1 pinion, =2 gear)

(iDriver)

2.000000

Number of pinion teeth

(z1)

21.000000

Number of gear teeth

(z2)

26.000000

Normal module

(mn)

4.000000 mm

Helix angle

(Beta)

0.000000 deg

Operating center distance

(aw)

96.000000 mm

Normal generating pressure angle

(Alphan)

20.000000 deg

Standard outside radius, pinion

(ra1)

46.570900 mm

Standard outside radius, gear

(ra2)

57.277000 mm

Face width

(b)

66.040000 mm

Profile mod (=0 none, =1 hi load, =2 smooth)

(iTip)

1.000000

***** Material input data *****

Modulus of elasticity, pinion

(E1) 206842.718795 N/mm^2

Modulus of elasticity, gear

(E2) 206842.718795 N/mm^2

Poissons ratio, pinion

(Nu1)

0.300000

Poissons ratio, gear

(Nu2)

0.300000

Average surface roughness at Lx, pinion

(Ra1x)

0.508000 mu m

Average surface roughness at Lx, gear

(Ra2x)

0.508000 mu m

Filter cutoff of wavelength x

(Lx)

0.800000 mm

Method for approximate mean coef. friction

(Mumet)

1.000000

Welding factor

(Xw)

1.000000

***** Load data *****

Pinion speed

(n1)

308.570000 rpm

Transmitted power

(P)

20.619440 kW

Overload factor

(Ko)

1.000000

Load distribution factor

(Km)

1.400000

Dynamic factor

(Kv)

1.063830

***** Lubrication data *****

Lubricant type (=1 Mineral, =2 Synthetic,

=3 MIL--L--7808K, =4 MIL--L--23699E)

(iLubeType)

1.000000

ISO viscosity grade number

(nIsoVG)

460.000000

Kinematic viscosity at 40 deg C

(Nu40)

407.000000 mm^2/s

***** Input temperature data *****

Tooth temperature

(ThetaM)

82.222222 deg C

Thermal contact coefficient, pinion

(BM1)

16.533725 N/[mm s^.5K]

Thermal contact coefficient, gear

(BM2)

16.533725 N/[mm s^.5K]

Oil inlet or sump temperature

(Thetaoil)

71.111111 deg C

Parameter for calculating tooth temperature

(ksump)

1.000000

Dynamic viscosity at gear tooth temperature

(EtaM)

43.000000 mPas

Pressure--viscosity coefficient

(Alpha)

0.022045 mm^2/N

Method of calculating scuffing temperature

(Thetasmet)

2.000000

Maximum flash temperatrue of test gears

(Thetaflmaxtest)

0.000000

Tooth temperature of test gear

(ThetaMtest)

0.000000

Number of calculation points

(nNop)

25.000000

43

AGMA 925--A03

******************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

******************************************************************************

***** GEOMETRY CALCULATION *****

Gear ratio

(u)

1.238095

Standard pitch radius, pinion

(r1)

42.000000 mm

Standard pitch radius, gear

(r2)

52.000000 mm

Pinion operating pitch radius

(rw1)

42.893617 mm

Transverse generating pressure angle

(Alphat)

20.000000 deg

Base radius, pinion

(rb1)

39.467090 mm

Base radius, gear

(rb2)

48.864016 mm

Transverse operating pressure angle

(Alphawt)

23.056999 deg

Transverse base pitch

(pbt)

11.808526 mm

Normal base pitch

(pbn)

11.808526 mm

Axial pitch

(px)

---------------Base helix angle

(Betab)

0.000000 deg

Operating helix angle

(Betaw)

0.000000 deg

Normal operating pressure angle

(Alphawn)

23.056999 deg

Distance along line of action -- Point A

(CA)

7.715600 mm

Distance along line of action -- Point B

(CB)

12.913884 mm

Distance along line of action -- Point C

(CC)

16.799142 mm

Distance along line of action -- Point D

(CD)

19.524126 mm

Distance along line of action -- Point E

(CE)

24.722409 mm

Distance along line of action -- Point F

(CF)

37.598080 mm

Active length of line of action

(Z)

17.006810 mm

Transverse contact ratio

(EpsAlpha)

1.440214

Fractional part of EpsAlpha

(nr)

0.440214

Axial contact ratio

(EpsBeta)

0.000000

Fractional part of EpsBeta

(na)

0.000000

Minimum contact length

(Lmin)

66.040000 mm

***** GEAR TOOTH VELOCITY AND LOADS *****

Rotational (angular) velocity, pinion

(Omega1)

32.313375

Rotational (angular) velocity, gear

(Omega2)

26.099264

Operating pitch line velocity

(vt)

1.386038

Nominal tangential load

(Ftnom)

14876.538066

Combined derating factor

(KD)

1.489362

Actual tangential load

(Ft)

22156.550486

Normal operating load

(Fwn)

24080.178937

Normal unit load

(wn)

364.630208

rad/s

rad/s

m/s

N

N

N

N/mm

Reduced modulus of elasticity

(Er) 227299.690984 N/mm^2

Average of pinion and gear average roughness

(Ravgx)

0.508000 mu m

Surface roughness constant

(CRavgx)

1.816720

Composite surface roughness at filter cuttoff

(Sigmax)

0.718420 mu m

44

AGMA 925--A03

**********************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

**********************************************************************************

***** LOAD SHARING RATIO AND bH *****

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Roll

Ang(rad)

0.19549

0.32721

0.42565

0.49469

0.62641

XGamma

0.14286

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

0.00000

Rhon(mm)

6.13226

8.47833

9.29314

9.38554

8.46633

bH

0.05982

0.18610

0.19484

0.19581

0.00000

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(

(

(

(

(

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

0.19549

0.21345

0.23140

0.24936

0.26731

0.14286

0.25970

0.37654

0.49339

0.61023

6.13226

6.53669

6.91441

7.26541

7.58971

0.05982

0.08327

0.10313

0.12101

0.13755

(

(

(

(

(

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

0.28527

0.30322

0.32118

0.33913

0.35709

0.37504

0.39300

0.41095

0.42890

0.44686

0.72708

0.84392

0.96076

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

1.00000

7.88729

8.15816

8.40233

8.61978

8.81052

8.97455

9.11187

9.22247

9.30637

9.36356

0.15306

0.16770

0.18160

0.18765

0.18971

0.19147

0.19293

0.19410

0.19498

0.19558

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

0.46481

0.48277

0.50072

0.51868

0.53663

1.00000

1.00000

0.81791

0.70106

0.58422

9.39403

9.39780

9.37485

9.32520

9.24883

0.19589

0.19593

0.17698

0.16342

0.14857

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

( 21)

( 22)

( 23)

( 24)

( 25)

0.55459

0.57254

0.59050

0.60845

0.62641

0.46737

0.35053

0.23369

0.11684

0.00000

9.14575

9.01596

8.85946

8.67625

8.46633

0.13214

0.11362

0.09196

0.06435

0.00000

( 21)

( 22)

( 23)

( 24)

( 25)

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

Dynamic viscosity at 40 deg C

Dynamic viscosity at 100 deg C

Factor c

Factor d

Factor k

Factor s

Mumet -- use Kelley and AGMA 217.01

Surface roughness constant

Mean coef. of friction, const. (Eq 85)

(Eta40C)

(Eta100C)

(c_coef)

(d_coef)

(k_coef)

(s_coef)

(Mumet)

(CRavgx)

(Mumconst)

412.082400

26.341040

8.964201

--3.424449

0.010471

0.134800

1.000000

1.816720

0.109003

mPas

mPas

45

AGMA 925--A03

**********************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

**********************************************************************************

**** Calculate flash temperature ****

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

K

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

Mum

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.0000

XGamma

0.1429

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.0000

bH (mm)

0.059822

0.186102

0.194840

0.195806

0.000000

vs (m/s)

0.5306

0.2269

0.0000

0.1592

0.4628

vr1 (m/s)

0.2493

0.4173

0.5428

0.6309

0.7989

vr2 (m/s)

0.7799

0.6442

0.5428

0.4717

0.3360

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1429

0.2597

0.3765

0.4934

0.6102

0.059822

0.083275

0.103129

0.121010

0.137549

0.5306

0.4892

0.4478

0.4064

0.3650

0.2493

0.2722

0.2951

0.3180

0.3409

0.7799

0.7614

0.7429

0.7244

0.7059

13.6320

19.2004

22.7228

24.7713

25.6466

(

(

(

(

(

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.7271

0.8439

0.9608

1.0000

1.0000

0.153056

0.167704

0.181595

0.187648

0.189713

0.3236

0.2822

0.2408

0.1995

0.1581

0.3638

0.3867

0.4096

0.4325

0.4554

0.6874

0.6689

0.6505

0.6320

0.6135

25.5359

24.5661

22.8276

19.2753

15.1349

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.191471

0.192930

0.194098

0.194979

0.195577

0.1167

0.0753

0.0339

0.0075

0.0489

0.4783

0.5012

0.5241

0.5470

0.5699

0.5950

0.5765

0.5580

0.5395

0.5210

11.0832

7.1033

3.1799

0.7011

4.5531

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

1.0000

1.0000

0.8179

0.7011

0.5842

0.195895

0.195934

0.176983

0.163420

0.148569

0.0903

0.1317

0.1731

0.2145

0.2559

0.5928

0.6157

0.6386

0.6615

0.6844

0.5025

0.4840

0.4655

0.4470

0.4285

8.3886

12.2201

13.8125

15.2621

15.9136

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

( 21)

( 22)

( 23)

( 24)

( 25)

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.80

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.1090

0.0000

0.4674

0.3505

0.2337

0.1168

0.0000

0.132141

0.113623

0.091964

0.064352

0.000000

0.2973

0.3386

0.3800

0.4214

0.4628

0.7073

0.7302

0.7531

0.7760

0.7989

0.4100

0.3915

0.3730

0.3545

0.3360

15.6888

14.4671

12.0443

7.9953

0.0000

( 21)

( 22)

( 23)

( 24)

( 25)

(

(

(

(

(

Thetafl (C)

13.6320

22.0835

0.0000

14.7688

0.0000

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(Thetaflmax)

25.646608 deg C

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dynamic viscosity at the gear tooth temperature

Pressure--viscosity coefficient

46

(EtaM)

(Alpha)

43.000000

0.022045

mPas

mm^2/N

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

AGMA 925--A03

**********************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

**********************************************************************************

********** P4 -- Specific film thickness **********

Material parameter (eq 66)

(G)

5010.821688

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

U

1.587561e--11

1.184300e--11

1.105036e--11

1.111223e--11

1.267961e--11

W

0.000037

0.000189

0.000173

0.000171

0.000000

Hc

3.539329e--05

2.458469e--05

2.365326e--05

2.376807e--05

0.000000e+00

hc (mu m)

0.217041

0.208437

0.219813

0.223076

0.000000

Lambda2bH

0.781203

0.425354

0.438395

0.443804

0.000000

Index

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(

(

(

(

(

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

1.587561e--11

1.495710e--11

1.420027e--11

1.357156e--11

1.304655e--11

0.000037

0.000064

0.000087

0.000109

0.000129

3.539329e--05

3.220166e--05

3.010396e--05

2.854084e--05

2.730927e--05

0.217041

0.210492

0.208151

0.207361

0.207269

0.781203

0.642142

0.570609

0.524768

0.491992

(

(

(

(

(

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

1.260712e--11

1.223958e--11

1.193348e--11

1.168076e--11

1.147515e--11

0.000148

0.000166

0.000183

0.000186

0.000182

2.630903e--05

2.548198e--05

2.479093e--05

2.439213e--05

2.414785e--05

0.207507

0.207886

0.208301

0.210255

0.212755

0.466937

0.446895

0.430320

0.427292

0.430014

( 6)

( 7)

( 8)

( 9)

( 10)

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

1.131183e--11

1.118707e--11

1.109806e--11

1.104277e--11

1.101981e--11

0.000179

0.000176

0.000174

0.000172

0.000171

2.395433e--05

2.380784e--05

2.370556e--05

2.364541e--05

2.362595e--05

0.214979

0.216934

0.218624

0.220053

0.221223

0.432510

0.434789

0.436856

0.438717

0.440375

( 11)

( 12)

( 13)

( 14)

( 15)

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

1.102840e--11

1.106830e--11

1.113982e--11

1.124380e--11

1.138168e--11

0.000171

0.000171

0.000140

0.000121

0.000101

2.364633e--05

2.370628e--05

2.428942e--05

2.481221e--05

2.546118e--05

0.222134

0.222787

0.227710

0.231379

0.235486

0.441830

0.443084

0.476505

0.503875

0.537840

( 16)

( 17)

( 18)

( 19)

( 20)

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

( 21)

1.155550e--11

0.000082

2.627996e--05

0.240350

0.582071

( 21)

( 22)

1.176804e--11

0.000062

2.735014e--05

0.246588

0.644006

( 22)

( 23)

1.202294e--11

0.000042

2.885557e--05

0.255645

0.742128

( 23)

( 24)

1.232482e--11

0.000022

3.139471e--05

0.272388

0.945273

( 24)

( 25)

1.267961e--11

0.000000

0.000000e+00

0.000000

0.000000

( 25)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Minimum film thickness found at point(5)

(hmin)

0.207269 mu m

Min. specific film thk. found at point (B)

(LambdaMin)

0.425354

Tooth temperature

(ThetaM)

82.222222 deg C

Max. flash temperature

(Thetaflmax)

25.646608 deg C

Minimum film thickness

(hmin)

0.207269 mu m

Maximum contact temperature

(ThetaBmax)

107.868830 deg C

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

47

AGMA 925--A03

**********************************************************************************

SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03

SCORING+ EX.#1

DATE:2002/04/18

TIME:08:08:23

**********************************************************************************

**** P5 -- Calculate risk of scuffing and wear ****

***** Risk of scuffing *****

Method of calculating scuffing temperature

Mean scuffing temperature

(Thetasmet)

(Thetas)

2.000000

316.290835

deg C

Maximum contact temperature

(y)

107.868830 deg C

Mean scuffing temperature

(Muy)

316.290835 deg C

Approx. standard deviation of scuffing temp.

(Sigmay)

47.443625 deg C

Standard normal variable, x =

((y--muy)/Sigmay)

--4.393046

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Probability of scuffing

Pscuff = 5% or lower

Based on AGMA925--A03 Table 5, scuffing risk is low

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Average surface roughness, pinion

Average surface roughness, gear

Average surface roughness (rms), pinion

Average surface roughness (rms), gear

Arithmetic average of rms roughness

Minimum specific film thickness

Pitchline velocity is less than 5 m/s

Mean min. specific film thk. (eq. 110)

Std. dev. of min. spec. film thk. (eq. 111)

(Ra1x)

(Ra2x)

(Rq1x)

(Rq2x)

(Rqxavg)

(Lambdamin)

(vt)

(MuLambdaMin)

(SigmaLambdaMin)

0.508000

0.508000

0.563880

0.563880

0.563880

0.425354

1.386038

0.215956

0.112623

mu m

mu m

mu m

mu m

mu m

m/s

Minimum specific film thickness

(y)

0.425354

Mean minimum specific film thickness

(muy)

0.215956

Standard deviation of the min. specific film

(Sigmay)

0.112623

Standard normal variable, x =

((y--muy)/Sigmay)

1.859273

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Probability of wear

Pwear = 5% or lower

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

48

AGMA 925--A03

Bibliography

The following documents are either referenced in the text of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear

Surface Distress, or indicated for additional information.

1.

Blok, H., Les Tempratures de Surface dans les Conditions de Graissage sans Pression Extrme,

Second World Petroleum Congress, Paris, June, 1937.

2.

Kelley, B.W., A New Look at the Scoring Phenomena of Gears, SAE transactions, Vol. 61, 1953,

pp. 175--188.

3.

4.

Kelley, B.W., The Importance of Surface Temperature to Surface Damage, Chapter in Engineering

Approach to Surface Damage, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1958.

5.

Benedict, G. H. and Kelley, B. W., Instantaneous Coefficients of Gear Tooth Friction, ASLE transactions,

Vol. 4, 1961, pp. 59--70.

6.

Lemanski, A.J., AGMA Aerospace Gear Committee Gear Scoring Project, March 1962.

7.

AGMA 217.01, AGMA Information Sheet -- Gear Scoring Design for Aerospace Spur and Helical Power

Gears, October, 1965.

8.

9.

ASTM D445--97, Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (the

Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity).

10.

ASTM D341--93(1998), Standard Viscosity -- Temperature Charts for Liquid Petroleum Products.

11. ASTM D2270--93(1998), Standard Practice for Calculating Viscosity Index From Kinematic Viscosity at

40 and 100C.

12. So, B. Y. C. and Klaus, E. E., Viscosity--Pressure Correlation of Liquids, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 23, 4,

409--421, 1979.

13. Novak, J. D. and Winer, W. O., Some Measurements of High Pressure Lubricant Rheology, Journal of

Lubricant Technology, Transactions of the ASME, Series F, Vol. 90, No. 3, July 1968, pp. 580 591.

14. Jones, W. R., Johnson, R. L., Winer, W. O. and Sanborn, D. M., Pressure--Viscosity Measurements for

Several Lubricants to 5.5x10 8 N/m 2 (8x10 4 psi) and 149C (300F), ASLE Transactions, 18, pp. 249 262,

1975.

15. Brooks, F. C. and Hopkins, V., Viscosity and Density Characteristics of Five Lubricant Base Stocks at

Elevated Pressures and Temperatures, Preprint number 75--LC--3D--1, presented at the ASLE/ASME

Lubrication Conference, Miami Beach, FL, October 21 23, 1975.

16. Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R., New Roller -- Bearing Lubrication Formula, Engineering, (London),

Vol. 192, 1961, pp. 158--159.

17. Dowson, D. and Higginson, G.R., Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication -- The Fundamentals of Roller and

Gear Lubrication, Pergamon Press (London), 1966.

18. Dowson, D., Elastohydrodynamics, Paper No. 10, Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs., Vol. 182, Pt. 3A, 1967,

pp. 151--167.

19. Dowson, D. and Toyoda, S., A Central Film Thickness Formula for Elastohydrodynamic Line Contacts,

5th Leeds--Lyon Symposium Proceedings, Paper 11 (VII), 1978, pp. 60--65.

49

AGMA 925--A03

20. Wellauer, E. J. and Holloway, G.A., Application of EHD Oil Film Theory to Industrial Gear Drives,

Transactions of ASME, J. Eng., Ind., Vol. 98., series B, No 2, May 1976, pp. 626--634.

21. Moyer, C. A. and Bahney, L.L., Modifying the Lambda Ratio to Functional Line Contacts, STLE Trib.

Trans. Vol. 33 (No. 4), 1990, pp. 535--542.

22.

Viscosity and pressure -- viscosity data supplied by Mobil Technology Company and Kluber Lubrication.

23. Sayles, R.S. and Thomas, T.R., Surface Topography as a Nonstationary Random Process, Nature, 271,

pp. 431--434, February 1978.

24. Handbook of Mathematical Functions, National Bureau of Standards (NIST), U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D.C., 1964.

25.

Rough Surfaces, edited by Thomas, T.R., Longman, Inc., New York, 1982, p. 92.

26.

Errichello, R., Friction, Lubrication and Wear of Gears, ASM Handbook, Vol. 18, Oct. 1992, pp. 535--545.

27. Blok, H., The Postulate About the Constancy of Scoring Temperature, Interdisciplinary Approach to the

Lubrication of Concentrated Contacts, NASA SP--237, 1970, pp. 153--248.

28.

29. Winter, H. and Michaelis, K., Scoring Load Capacity of Gears Lubricated with EP--Oils, AGMA Paper No.

P219.17, October, 1983.

30.

Almen, J.O., Dimensional Value of Lubricants in Gear Design, SAE Journal, Sept. 1942, pp. 373--380.

31. Borsoff, V.N., Fundamentals of Gear Lubrication, Summary Report for Period March 1953 to May 1954,

Bureau of Aeronautics, Shell Development Company, Contract No. 53--356c, p. 12.

32. Borsoff, V.N., On the Mechanism of Gear Lubrication, ASME Journal of Basic Engineering, Vol. 81,

pp. 79--93, 1959.

33. Borsoff, V.N. and Godet, M.R., A Scoring Factor for Gears, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1963,

pp. 147--153.

34.

Borsoff, V.N., Predicting the Scoring of Gears, Machine Design, January 7, 1965, pp. 132--136.

35.

36. Nakanishi, T. and Ariura, Y., Effect of Surface--Finishing on Surface Durability of Surface--Hardened

Gears, MPT 91, JSME International Conference on Motion and Power Transmissions, 1991, pp. 828--833.

37. Tanaka, S., et al, Appreciable Increases in Surface Durability of Gear Pairs with Mirror--Like Finish,

ASME Paper No. 84--DET--223, 1984, pp. 1--8.

38. Ueno, T., et al, Surface Durability of Case--Carburized Gears on a Phenomenon of Gray Staining of

Tooth Surface, ASME Paper No. 80--C2/DET--27, 1980, pp. 1--8.

39. Olver, A.V., Micropitting of Gear Teeth -- Design Solutions, presented at Aerotech 1995, NEC

Birmingham, October 1995, published by I. Mech. E., 1995.

40. FVA Information Sheet Micropitting, No. 54/7 (July, 1993) Forschungsvereinigung Antriebstechnik e.V.,

Lyoner Strasse 18, D--60528, Frankfurt/Main.

41. Bowen, C. W., The Practical Significance of Designing to Gear Pitting Fatigue Life Criteria, ASME Paper

77--DET--122, September 1977.

42. Dudley, D.W., Characteristics of Regimes of Gear Lubrication, International Symposium on Gearing and

Power Transmissions, Tokyo, Japan, 1981.

43. Blok, H., The Thermal--Network Method for Predicting Bulk Temperatures in Gear Transmissions, Proc.

7th Round Table Discussion on Marine Reduction Gears held in Finspong, Sweden, 9--10 September 1969.

44. Blok, H., Thermo--Tribology -- Fifty Years On, keynote address to the Int. Conf. Tribology; Friction,

Lubrication and Wear -- 50 Years On, Inst. Mech. Engrs., London, 1--3 July 1987, Paper No. C 248/87.

50

AGMA 925--A03

45. Ku, P.M. and Baber, B.B., The Effect of Lubricants on Gear Tooth Scuffing, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 2,

No. 2, 1960, pp. 184--194.

46. Winter, H., Michaelis, K. and Collenberg, H.F., Investigations on the Scuffing Resistance of High--Speed

Gears, AGMA Fall Technical Meeting Paper 90FTM8, 1990.

47.

ANSI/AGMA 6002--B93, Design Guide for Vehicle Spur and Helical Gears.

48.

Barish, T., How Sliding Affects Life of Rolling Surfaces, Machine Design, 1960.

49. Massey, C., Reeves, C. and Shipley, E.E., The Influence of Lubrication on the Onset of Surface Pitting in

Machinable Hardness Gear Teeth, AGMA Technical Paper 91FTM17, 1991.

51

PUBLISHED BY

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

1500 KING STREET, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22314

- AGMA 906 A94Uploaded byAnonymous Z5wCELp
- AGMA 915-3-A99Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- Agma 927-a01.pdfUploaded byRoro
- AGMA 914-B04Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 915-2-A05Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 930-A05Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 912-A04Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 923-B05Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 915-1-A02 Gears InspectUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 2002-B88Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 910-C90Uploaded bypablo_stz
- AGMA 918-A93Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 911-A94Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 929-A06 Calculation of Bevel Gear Top Land and Guidance on Cutter Edge RadiusUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- wwwUploaded byChaiwat Phollookin
- Ansi Agma6010 f97Uploaded byvyhtran4731
- AGMA 917-B97 Design Manual for Parallel Shaft Fine-pitch GearingUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- 1012-G05 Gear Nomenclature, Definition of TermsUploaded byPablo Andrés Duque Ramírez
- AGMA 925-A03 - Effect of Lubrification on Gear Surface Distress.pdfUploaded byAnonymous uL3JlWfh
- Norma ANSI+AGMA+6000-B96+(R2002)Uploaded byAlex Ripoll
- AGMA 1103-H07 Tooth Proportions for Fine- Pitch Spur and Helical Gearing (Metric Edition)Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 922-A96 - Load Classification and Service Factors for Flexible Coupling-2Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- Gear Lubrication ManualUploaded byegarredondo
- ANSI AGMA 2015 2A 06Uploaded byhanrotools
- ANSI - AGMA 9005 - D 94Uploaded byAnibal Rios
- Agma 6000 Spec Vibration for GearUploaded byromdhan88
- ANSI-AGMA-2001-D04Uploaded byUdit Agrawal
- Agma Ansi 1006-A97Uploaded byermaksan
- Gear Metrology ReportUploaded bysanjay261289

- Fazil Say Jazz Turkish MarchUploaded byKen Sutherland
- AGMA 2002-B88Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 1103-H07 Tooth Proportions for Fine- Pitch Spur and Helical Gearing (Metric Edition)Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 930-A05Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 1102-A03Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- 1012-G05 Gear Nomenclature, Definition of TermsUploaded byPablo Andrés Duque Ramírez
- AGMA 915-1-A02 Gears InspectUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 938-A05.pdfUploaded byRoro
- AGMA 929-A06 Calculation of Bevel Gear Top Land and Guidance on Cutter Edge RadiusUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 923-B05Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 906-A94Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 922-A96 - Load Classification and Service Factors for Flexible Coupling-2Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 02FTM7 Technical Paper_Crack Lenght and Depth DeterminationUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 911-A94Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 920-A01 - Materials for Plastic GearsUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 918-A93Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 917-B97 Design Manual for Parallel Shaft Fine-pitch GearingUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 912-A04Uploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 910-C90Uploaded bypablo_stz
- 04-04-2007Uploaded byraobabar21
- AGMA 211 - Design PraticeUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 207 06 Tooth ProportionsUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- AGMA 152.02 - Application InformationUploaded bysimone.castagnetti
- Tiwari - Non Linear Stiffness Bearing ParametersUploaded bysimone.castagnetti

- Tips in using Wrc 107Uploaded byjomolt
- Lecture 22 -27 Paste Prepration.pdfUploaded byMujahid Mehdi
- Modern Fracturing CDUploaded bymirzasd
- nr322102-aerospace-structures-iiUploaded bySRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- Heat and Mass Transfer by Rk RajputUploaded byramkumar_me
- Self drainage of viscous fluids through pipes.pdfUploaded byRavi Tripathi
- Viscometer Technical Appendices AssessmentUploaded byMartha Argerich
- Shake User ManualUploaded byanita_ygy
- HACON - A Program for Temperature and Stress SimulationUploaded byvalentinluc
- Rock Berm Design for Pipeline StabilityUploaded byTeck Tiong Huan
- Fluid Mechanics StreeterUploaded bypiticmic
- Layered ShellUploaded byhernyvargas
- Abaqus.me.Chalmers.se v6.12 Books Usb Pt09ch36s01alm62Uploaded byarkan1976
- Edt ManualUploaded byAndrés García Moreno
- Lab 4-TORSION TEST.pdfUploaded byJesse Lee
- Flux Enhancement by Shear Free Surfaces in a Turbulent ConvectionUploaded byIJSTR Research Publication
- Exam Set 09Uploaded byallovid
- Blood Circulation-Chemical EngineeringUploaded byPavithiran
- CHAPTER 1 CMT 255 Fluid MechanicsUploaded byBadrudin Jundaili
- 3 - Rheology and Hydraulics_PTM_HandoutUploaded byFauzan Rahman Haq
- Why Midas GenUploaded bykdb92uce
- Fundamental Principles of EmulsionUploaded byClitor Fernandes de Souza
- Seismic Analysis of Coupled RC Shear WallsUploaded byShrishail Sambanni
- A Web-Based Electronic Book (eBook) for Solid MechanicsUploaded byAntonis Hatzikonstantinou
- Catalogo viscosimetrosUploaded byDParente93
- 252093281-Pisspanen-s-Card-Model.pdfUploaded byPedro Estrada Rengifo
- HAAKE Practical Approach to Rheology and Rheometry - SchrammUploaded bypitblau
- Hardening Soil ModelUploaded byClaudio
- Hibbeler, Mechanics of Materials-Transverse Shear 1Uploaded bypoom2007
- Steel Concrete Composite High Rise BuildingsUploaded byscchung