You are on page 1of 17

Gear Box Design

MAE 4342
December 7, 2016
Team Members:
Nicolas Long
Raza Shah
Michelle Tadlock

Introduction
Gears are mechanical components that essentially increase or decrease the output
rotational speed with respect to input speed. However, when the reduced speed become much
less than the input speed, it is not reasonable to have a simple combination of a pair of pinion and
gear because that would make the gear very large in size which is not realistic. In such situations,
we use different stages of gear reduction such that the gear sizes are kept within reasonable
dimensions. In this project and input speed of 1800 rpm at 15 HP is to be reduced to an output
linear velocity of the 30 ft. /min such that it can carry loads up to 7.5 tons at that constant speed.
Thus, a 3 stage gear box is to be designed to accomplish this task. All the gears and pinions, the
shaft carrying stage 1 reduction gear as well as the stage 2 reduction pinion, and they keys for
that shaft as well as for the output shaft is designed in this project that would successfully
accomplish the required task with no part failure for the expected life cycle.

Engineering Requirements
Performance Requirements
Load: 7.5 tons
Maximum Speed: 30 ft/min
Drive a drum with D=10.625
Motor Specifications
15 HP at 1800 rpm
Gears
3-stage gear reduction
Minimum ratio: 3:1; Maximum ratio: 10:1
Pressure Angle: =25
Shafts
Shaft 1: OD=1.875 in
Shaft 3: OD=3.00 in
Shaft 4: OD= 4.00 in
Additional Requirements
Life: 10 years at an average use of 5 hour/day, 200 day/year
Reliability: 90%
Safety Factors: 1.2-surface; 1.5-bending
Key fails before shaft
Materials
1st stage pinion: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 325-365 BHN
1st stage gear: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 325-365 BHN
2nd stage pinion: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 370-410 BHN
2nd stage gear: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 325-365 BHN
3rd stage pinion: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 370-410 BHN
3rd stage gear: AISI 4140 Heat Treated to 325-365 BHN
Material Properties of Heat Treated AISI 4140
2

Design Approach
Output Requirements
The requirements of the output shaft were found using the load requirements, speed, and size of
the drum.

Output Torque:
Output Speed:
Motor Input
Motor Torque:
Gear Design
Excel spreadsheets were created to solve for the values needed for the gears to meet the
design requirements.
General Parameters:
Diametral Pitch:
Number of Gear Teeth:
Gear Diameter:
Number of Pinion Teeth:
Diameter of Pinion
Gear ratio:
Output Torque:
Output Speed:
Gear Quality: Qv
Face width:

(Table 12-7)

Transmitted Load:
Pitch Line Velocity:
Assumptions:
Application factor (assuming uniform load):
Surface factor:
Surface Hardness Factor:
Temperature Factors:
Bending Stress Parameters:
Geometry factor for Pinion:
(Table 12-9)
Geometry factor for Gear:
(Table 12-9)
3

Load distribution factor:

(Table 12-16)

Velocity Factor:
Bending Stress:
Uncorrected Bending Fatigue Strength:
Number of Cycles
Bending Strength Life Factor
Reliability Factor:
(Table 12-19)
Bending Fatigue Strength:
Bending Safety Factor:
Surface Fatigue Parameters:
Elastic Coefficient

Curvature of Radii of pinion:


Curvature of radii for gear:
Surface geometry factor:
Surface Stress:
Uncorrected Surface Fatigue Strength:
Surface Life Factor:
Surface Fatigue Strength:
Surface Safety Factor:
Shaft #2
The loads on shaft #2 was found using the transmitted load and pressure angle from the
above analysis. Reaction forces were found on the supports and singularity equations were used
to find the maximum bending moment applied to the shaft. That moment was used to design the
shaft to withstand failure due to bending.
Assumptions:
(Figure 10-16)
Notch radius:
Shaft Design Parameters
Load from gear:
4

Load from pinion:


Moment Singularity Equation:
Uncorrected Endurance Fatigue Strength:
Size Correction Factor:
Load Factor:
Reliability Factor:
Fatigue Endurance Strength:
Fatigue Factors:

ASME Shaft Diameter Equation:

Shaft Keys

Key Design for Shaft 2


Given/Known:
Shaft diameter, d = 2 inch
An assumption made is the key share the same material as shaft,
Sut = 181000 psi and Sy = 165000 psi
Assume a safety factor, Nf = 15 (less than that of the shaft to make the key as a weak link)
From Table 10-2, for 1.75 inch < d <= 2.25 inch,
Key width (W) = 0.5 inch
Key height (H) = 0.5 inch
For shaft 2, Tmax = 5062 lb-in and Tmin = 0 lb-in

Ashear = W L
Alternating shear stress,

Mean shear stress,

Von Mises stress:

Similarly,

Using Modified Goodman Criteria,

Solving for L,

Also,

Cload = 1
A_95 = WL
Also,

For 0.3 inch < d <= 10 inch

Where,

Then,

Also,

Assume machined surface, so from Table 6-3


A = 2.7 and b = -0.265
Substituting, Csurf = 0.78
Ctemp = 1 (assume room temperature)
Creliab = 0.897 (90% reliability)
Now,

From equation (i)

Assume L = 1.9in based on hand calculations then iterate.


Substitute L = 1.9in, we get Lactual = 1.908in
This result is close enough to the previous value of s so no more iterations required.

Now checking for bearing failure,

The safety factor obtained is greater than our chosen criteria of Nf = 15, so it is safe against
bearing failure.
Design summary for key on shaft 2:
Width (W) = 0.5 inch
Height (H) = 0.5 inch
Length (L) = 1.9 inch

Results
Gears
Stage 1 Pinion
Number of Teeth Np 14
Diametral Pitch
Pd 10
Outer Diameter
Face Width
Bending
Geometry Factor
Bending Safety
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Factor
Stage 1 Output
Torque
Rotational Speed

dp
F
J

1.4
1.75
0.35

in
in

Nb 1.85013
Nc 1.438712

Outer Diameter
Face Width
Bending Geometry
Factor
Bending Safety
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Factor

dg
F
J

13.5
1.75
0.51

Nb

2.806876

Nc

15.3976

in-1
in
in

T2 5062.5
lb-in
2 186.6667 rpm

Stage 2 Pinion
Number of Teeth Np 17
Diametral Pitch
Pd 5
Outer Diameter
dp 3.4
Face Width
F
3
Bending Safety
Nb 1.923431
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Nc 1.862033
Factor
Stage 2 Ouput
Torque
T3 28588.24
Rotational Speed 3 33.05556
Stage 3 Pinion
Number of Teeth Np 17
Diametral Pitch
Pd 3
Outer Diameter
Face Width
Bending Safety
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Factor

in-1

Stage 1 Gear
Number of Teeth
Ng 135
Diametral Pitch
Pd 10

in-1
in
in

Outer Diameter
Face Width
Bending Safety
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Factor

dg
F
Nb

19.2
3
2.747462

Nc

13.00132

in-1
in
in

lb-in
rpm

in-1

dp 5.666667 in
F
5
in
Nb 1.722317
Nc 1.60231

Stage 2 Gear
Number of Teeth
Ng 96
Diametral Pitch
Pd 5

Stage 3 Gear
Number of Teeth
Ng 51
Diametral Pitch
Pd 3
Outer Diameter
Face Width
Bending Safety
Fatctor
Surface Safety
Factor

dg
F
Nb

17
5
2.172302

Nc

5.056097

in-1
in
in

Stage 3 Output
Torque
T4 85764.71 lb-in
Rotational Speed 4 10.80124 rpm
Maximum Lifting Load
Lifting Speed

8.072 tons
30.0 ft/min

Shaft #2
Excel was used to iterate calculations to find an appropriate diameter size for shaft #2.
The shaft was over designed for with a safety factor of 15.
d
Nf

Shaft #2
2 inches
15.5

Shaft Keys

Key Design for Shaft 4


Given/Known:
Shaft diameter, d = 5in
Assuming the key to be same material as shaft,
Sut = 181000 psi and Sy = 165000 psi
Assume a safety factor, Nf = 9 (less than that of shaft to make the key as weak link)
From Table 10-2, for 3.75 inch < d <= 4.5 inch,
Key width (W) = 0.875 inch
Key height (H) = 0.875 inch
For shaft 4, Tmax = 85764 lb-in and Tmin = 0 lb-in

Ashear = W L
Alternating shear stress,

Mean shear stress,

Von Mises stress:

Similarly,

Using Modified Goodman Criteria,

Solving for L,

Also,

Cload = 1
A95 = WL
Also,

For 0.3 inch < d <= 10 inch

Where,

10

Then,

Also,

Assume machined surface, so from Table 6-3


A = 2.7 and b = -0.265
Substituting, Csurf = 0.78
Ctemp = 1 (assume room temperature)
Creliab = 0.897 (90% reliability)
Now,

From equation (i)

Let's assume L = 5 in then iterate.


After much iterations L=5.96in.
This result is close enough to the previous value so no more iterations required.
Now checking for bearing failure,

The safety factor obtained is greater than our chosen criteria of Nf = 2, so it is safe against
bearing failure.

11

Design summary for key on shaft 4:


Width (W) = 1.0 inch
Height (H) = 0.75 inch
Length (L) = 5.96 inch

12

Drawings

Figure 1. Gearbox Housing Overall Dimensions

Figure 2. Section A-A

13

Figure 3. Section C-C

Figure 4. Isometric View (Cover Removed)

14

Figure 5. Gear Assembly Side View (Hidden Lines Shown)

15

Conclusion
The proposed gear box was successfully designed with respect to the desired factor of
safety, and thus the gear box assembly to be manufactured should not fail under the circumstance
of the given load and speed requirements. One thing to notice however, is that some of the gears
came out to be a little larger than the given dimensions of the gear box housing. Obviously, the
gears would not fit in the housing such that either the housing size has to be increased a little bit
or the gears size will have to be reduced. We assume that if the gear ratio had been chosen more
wisely at the beginning of the design, the size of the gears would have been within the required
limit. The 3rd stage reduction gear ratio was quite large. So, if the gear ratio chosen had been
distributed more evenly, the sizes of the gears would have been more within the limits. A design
iteration would thus had to be performed as with most design cases, however due to time
limitations it was not performed but the procedure to follow would have been the same as what
has been done in the analysis of this project.

16

Appendix

17