Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt

Design and kinematics evaluation of a gear pair with

asymmetric parabolic teeth
Ying-Jen Chen a, Hsueh-Cheng Yang a,⁎, P. Frank Pai b
a
Graduate Institute of Vehicle Engineering, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua 500, Taiwan, ROC
b
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents design of imaginary spur and skew rack cutters having teeth of asymmetric
Received 8 June 2015 parabolic profiles to generate spur and helical gear pairs, respectively. First, a mathematical
Received in revised form 24 February 2016 model of the imaginary rack cutter having teeth of an asymmetric parabolic profile is derived
Accepted 9 March 2016
using geometric relations and coordinate transformation. After the relationship between the
Available online 2 April 2016
coordinate system of the imaginary rack cutter and that of the gear pair is set up, a family of
imaginary rack cutter surfaces is obtained using the homogeneous coordinate transformation
Keywords: matrix to transfer the coordinate system of the rack cutter to that of the gear pair. Substituting
Asymmetric parabolic tooth profile
the equations of meshing into the family of imaginary rack cutter surfaces, a pinion and a gear
Imaginary rack cutter
are generated and their geometries are plotted using an in-house software package. Based on
Tooth contact analysis
the derived mathematical model of the gear pair with assumed assembly errors, tooth contact
analysis is performed to determine the influences of kinematic errors and the asymmetric
tooth profile. A helical gear pair made by CNC machining is used to verify the influences of
asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles on contact conditions and kinematic performance.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Popular tooth profiles include involute, cycloid and circular curves, but involute gears are more commonly used in many areas.
Gears can be created by gear hobbing, gear shaping and gear grinding. Gear hobbing uses an imaginary rack cutter. Research in
the literature on the tooth profiles of rack cutters is mainly on symmetric and asymmetric involute profiles, cycloid profile, and
symmetric parabolic profile. For example, Kapelevich [1], Pedersen [2] and Litvin [3,4] investigated the use of asymmetric involute
spur gears to increase load-carrying capacity and reduce vibration noise and weight. A parabolic curve was used to crown the
work region of a gear in [5]. Zhang and Gauo [6] studied the generation of parabolic teeth and examined the pointwise contact
properties of Litvin's parabolic gear pair [3,4]. Zanzi and Pedrero [7] presented the use of gears with surfaces being modified to
be parabolic using a grinding disk during the generation of the matching pinion.
The tooth contact analysis (TCA) method proposed by Litvin et al. [8] is used here to analyze the contact condition and kinematic
errors of helical parabolic gear pairs under assumed assembly errors. Chen et al. [9] performed simulations on the contact condition of
helical circular-arc gear pairs under assumed assembly errors. Yang [10] investigated the contact condition of gear pairs created by
rack cutters of asymmetric involute tooth profiles. Tsay [11], Simon [12] and Li [13] used the TCA method to study the contact condi-
tion of helical involute gear pairs and found that edge contact may happen during gear meshing. However, the contact condition of
asymmetric parabolic gear pairs created by rack cutters and under assembly errors has not been studied in the literature.

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: scyang57@cc.ncue.edu.tw (H.-C. Yang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2016.03.008
0094-114X/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 141

Nomenclature

ac and at design parameters of the rack cutter.

c parabolic coefficient
mn normal module
r1 and r2 the radii of the root fillets
r3 and r4 standard pitch radii of pinion and gear, respectively.
ti and u curvilinear coordinates of rack cutter where subscript i = 1–9.
^t and u ^ curvilinear coordinates of the helical pinion.
M32 and M42 co-ordinate transformation matrix from co-ordinate system x2y2z2 to x3y3z3 and x2y2z2 to x4y4z4, respectively.
N4 and N3 numbers of teeth for the gear and pinion, respectively.
N(i,j)
2 vector normal to the imaginary skew rack cutter
ðo2 o j Þ2 the distance between oj and o2 presented in terms of the coordinate system x2y2z2.
R(i,j)
1 the position vector of the proposed rack cutter where The first superscript i indicates the segments ab, bc, cd, de, fg,
gh, hi, ij, ak, k‘ and lf , and the second superscript j indicates a pinion (j = 3) or a gear (j = 4).
R(i,j)
2 the position vector of the skew imaginary rack cutter.
xiyizi coordinate systems where subscript i = 1, 2, 3 ,4, 5 and 6, 1 denotes the normal section of the imaginary skew rack
cuter. 2, 3, 4 and 5 are rigidly fixed to the imaginary skew rack cutter, the pinion, the gear and the gear housing,
respectively. 6 denotes an auxiliary coordinate system.
V2j
2 the relative velocity between the gear (or pinion) and the rack cutter represented in coordinate system x2y2z2.
ω2j2 the relative angular velocity between the gear (or pinion) and the skew rack cutter.
β helix angle.
Σt3 and Σt4 the rack cutters were used to create pinion and gear profiles, respectively.
θ1 and θ2 pressure angles.
ϕ3 and ϕ4 the gear and the pinion rotate about its own axis by an angle, respectively.
ϕ3 and ϕ4 rotary angles in TCA.
Δc the error of the center distance between points O3 and O4.
γ1 and γ2 the horizontal and the vertical misalignment angles, respectively.
K . E. kinematic errors.

In this paper, a mathematical model a rack cutter having asymmetric parabolic tooth profile is derived by using geometric
relations. Based on the obtained mathematical model an imaginary rack cutter is drawn by using Mathematica. Using the imaginary
rack cutter as the normal section of a skew rack cutter one can derive the imaginary skew rack cutter having an asymmetric parabolic
tooth profile through coordinate transformation. Based on Litvin's theory of gearing [14,15], a family of imaginary skew rack-cutter
surfaces and an equation of meshing between the skew rack-cutter and the gear blank are used to create mathematical models of a
helical gear pair. Assembly errors may occur in the assembly of the proposed helical gear and pinion having asymmetric parabolic
tooth profiles and induce a kinematic error between the gear pair. The contact condition between the helical gear pair having asym-
metric parabolic tooth profiles is first evaluated using SolidWorks. The kinematic errors of the proposed helical gear pair can be calcu-
lated by using the tooth contact analysis (TCA) method. Kinematic errors due to axial misalignment and center distance error are
simulated in a mating gear set. A pair of the proposed helical gears having asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles was manufactured
by using CNC machining and was used to demonstrate real tooth contact conditions. The helical gears are set up with assembly errors,
and actual contact conditions are studied in detail. One advantage of the present method is the ability to provide a rapid and simple
geometric model of a gear with asymmetric parabolic profile. Compare to symmetric parabolic tooth, circular-arc tooth and involute
tooth, this asymmetric parabolic gear type can reduce the size and the weight of gear and increase its load capacity. The mathematical
models and analysis methods proposed for the helical gear mechanism with asymmetric parabolic teeth should be useful for the
design and production of helical gears with asymmetric parabolic teeth.

2. The normal section of the imaginary skew rack cutter

In this study, geometric relations and parameters are used to derive the asymmetric parabolic tooth profile, and the
mathematical model of the designed asymmetric parabolic tooth profile is confirmed using the Mathematica software. In Fig. 1,
the segments ab, bc, cd, de, fg, gh, hi and ij are for creating a gear, and the segments ab, bc, fg, gh, ak, kl and lf are for creating
a pinion. Here, the segments ab, bc, fg and gh represent the flank of rack cutter are used to create the work region of a gear
pair. Segments cd and hi on the normal section of the skew rack cutter generate the fillet surface of the gear blank. Similarly,
segments ak and lf on the normal section of the skew rack cutter generate the fillet surface of the pinion blank. Based on
Fig. 1, the equations for all segments of the rack cutter having an asymmetric parabolic tooth profile can be presented in terms
of x1y1z1 the coordinate system as shown next.
142 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 1. The profile of asymmetric parabolic curve.

2.1. Segments ab, bc, fg and gh

As shown in Fig. 1, the segments ab, bc, fg and gh are for generating the working regions of the gear's and pinion's tooth
profiles. Parameter θ1 is the pressure angle of the driving side, parameter θ2 is the pressure angle of the coast side. Parameter t1 is
the curvilinear coordinate along the profile. mn is the normal module of the proposed rack cutter with an asymmetric parabolic
tooth profile. c is a parabolic coefficient. Based on the geometry of the rack cutter, segments ab, bc, fg and gh can be described with
respect to the coordinate system x1y1z1 as

2 3 2 3
ab 2 πmn
6
x1
7 6 ct cos θ þ t sin θ −
6 yab 7 6
1 1 1 1
4 77
¼6 1 7¼6 7;
ab 2 ab
R1 6 ab 7 6 t 1 cos θ1 −ct 1 sin θ1 7 0≤t 1 ≤d ð1Þ
4z 5 4 0 5
1
1 1

2 3 2 3
bc 2 πmn
6
x1
7 6 ct cos θ þ t sin θ −
6 ybc 7 6
1 1 1 1
4 77
¼6 1 7¼ 6 7;
bc 2 bc
R1 6 bc 7 6 t 1 cos θ1 −ct 1 sin θ1 7 −d ≤t 1 ≤0 ð2Þ
4z 5 4 0 5
1
1 1

2 3 2 3
fg 2 πmn
6
x1
7 6 −ct cos θ þ t sin θ þ
6 y fg 7 6
2 2 2 2
4 77
R1 ¼ 6 1 7¼6 7;
fg 2 fg
6 fg 7 6 t 2 cos θ2 −ct 2 sin θ2 7 0≤t 2 ≤d ð3Þ
4z 5 4 0 5
1
1 1

2 3 2 3
gh 2 πmn
6 1 7 6 −ct 2 cos θ2 þ t 20 sin θ2 þ 4
x
7
6y 7 6
gh 7
¼6 1 7¼6 θ2 7
gh 2 gh
R1 6 gh 7 6 t 2 cos θ2 −ct 2 sin 7; −d ≤t 2 ≤0 ð4Þ
4z 5 4 0 5
1
1 1
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 143

where parameter dab is determined by the geometric limit in Fig. 1 to be

ab
d ¼ ‘1 cosð0:5π−δ1 −θ1 Þ: ð5Þ

Here δ1 is the angle of Δaba1, expressed as

−1
δ1 ¼ tan ðat =w1 Þ ð6Þ

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
‘1 ¼ w21 þ a2t ð7Þ

where at is a vertical distance from Point a to the axis x1. The length w1 of ba1 is given by
 
 2 
w1 ¼ cs1 cos θ1 þ s1 sin θ1 −0:25πmn  ð8Þ

where mn is the normal module of the gear. At Point a, we have yab

1 ¼ at in Eq. (1) and t1 = s1.
Solving Eq. (1) for s1 yields
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
cos θ1 − cos2 θ1 ‐4c sin θ1 at
s1 ¼ : ð9Þ
2c sin θ1

bc fg gh
Similarly, based on the Δbca2, Δfga3 and Δgha4 in Fig. 1, the lengths of d , d and d are given by

bc
d ¼ ‘2 cosðδ2 þ θ1 −0:5πÞ ð10Þ

fg
d ¼ ‘3 cosð0:5π−δ3 −θ2 Þ ð11Þ

gh
d ¼ ‘4 cosðδ4 þ θ2 −0:5πÞ ð12Þ

where parameters δ2, δ3 and δ4 are respectively the angles ∠c, ∠g and ∠h for Δbca2, Δfga3 and Δgha4 and given by

−1
δ2 ¼ tan ðac =w2 Þ ð13Þ

−1
δ3 ¼ tan ðat =w3 Þ ð14Þ

−1
δ4 ¼ tan ðac =w4 Þ: ð15Þ

The lengths ‘2, ‘3 and ‘4 are respectively the hypotenuse of the triangles Δbca2, Δfga3 and Δgha4 given by
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
‘2 ¼ w22 þ a2c ð16Þ

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
‘3 ¼ w23 þ a2t ð17Þ

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
‘4 ¼ w24 þ a2c : ð18Þ

The lengths w2, w3 and w4 of the lines ca2 , ga3 and ha4 are respectively given by
 
 2 
w2 ¼ cs2 cos θ1 þ s2 sin θ1 −0:25πmn −0:25πmn ð19Þ

 
 2 
w3 ¼ 0:25πmn −cs3 cos θ2 þ s3 sin θ2 −0:25πmn  ð20Þ

  
 2 
w4 ¼ − cs4 cos θ2 þ s4 sin θ2 −0:25πmn −0:25πmn : ð21Þ
144 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Following the method of obtaining Eq. (9), the parameters s2, s3 and s4 are obtained to be
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
cos θ1 − cos2 θ1 þ 4c sin θ1 ac
s2 ¼ ð22Þ
2c sin θ1

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
cos θ2 − cos2 θ2 −4c sin θ2 at
s3 ¼ ð23Þ
2c sin θ2

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
cos θ2 − cos2 θ2 þ 4c sin θ2 ac
s4 ¼ ð24Þ
2c sin θ2

where the parameter ac is the perpendicular distance from Point a2 to the x1 axis, and at is the perpendicular distance from
Point a to the x1 axis. θ1 is the pressure angle of the driving side, and θ2 is the pressure of the coast side. Their values are listed
in Table 1.

2.2. Segments cd and hi

Segments cd and hi in Fig. 1 are for generating the fillet curves of the gear, not the pinion. t3 and t4 are curvilinear coordinates.
The mathematical models of these segments are given by
2 3
cd 2 3
x −r 2 cos α þ r2 sin t 3 −w2 −0:25πmn
6 1 7
6 ycd 7 6 −r 2 cos t 3 þ r 2 sin α−ac 7 π
¼6 1 7 ¼6 7;
cd
R1 6 cd 7 4 5 0 ≤t 3 ≤ −α ð25Þ
4z 5 0 2
1 1
1

2 3
hi 2 3
x r 4 cos α 2 −r 4 sin t 4 þ w4 þ 0:25πmn
6 1 7
6 hi 7 6 −r 4 cos t 4 þ r 4 sin α 2 −ac 7 π
R1 ¼ 6 y1 7 ¼ 6 7;
hi
6 hi 7 4 5 0 ≤t 4 ≤ −α 2 ð26Þ
4z 5 0 2
1 1
1

where r2 and r4 are the radii of the root fillets for segments cd and hi, respectively. The tangent angle at the points c and h are α
and α2, respectively. These parameters are obtained from geometric relations to be
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
r2 ¼ 4c2 s22 þ 1 ð27Þ

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
−1
α ¼ cos ð−2cs2 sin θ1 þ cos θ1 Þ= 4c2 s22 þ 1 ð28Þ

Table 1
Design parameter values.

Parameters Symbol Pinion Gear

Number of teeth Nj 24 48
Normal module mn 5 mm
Parabola coefficient c 0.02
Radii of the root fillets r1 0.2mn
Radii of the root fillets r2 0.2mn
Distance at 0.8mn
Distance ac 0.8mn
Backlash 0.05mn 0
Drive pressure angle θ1 25° 35°
Coast pressure angle θ2 35° 25°
Helix angle β 30°
Face width u 20 mm
Pitch radius (cylindrical) rj(j = 3, 4) rj = mnNj/2
Pitch radius (helical) rj(j = 3, 4) rj = mnNj cos β/2
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 145

r 4 ¼ ðr 2 −r 2 sin α Þ=ð1− sin α 2 Þ ð29Þ

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
−1
α 2 ¼ cos ð−2cs4 sin θ2 þ cos θ2 Þ= 4c2 s24 þ 1 : ð30Þ

2.3. Segments ak and lf

Segments ak and lf in Fig. 1 are for generating the fillet curve of the pinion, not the gear. t5 and t6 are curvilinear coordinates.
The mathematical models of these segments are represented by

2 3
2
ak 3
x1 r 1 cos α 3 −r 1 sin t 5 −0:25πmn þ w1
6 7
6 yak 7 6 r 1 cos t 5 −r 1 sin α 3 þ at 7 π
¼6 1 7¼6 7;
ak
R1 6 ak 7 4 5 0≤t 5 ≤ −α 3 ð31Þ
4z 5 0 2
1 1
1

2 3
lf 2 3
x1 −r 3 cos α 4 þ r 3 sin t 6 þ 0:25πmn −w3
6 7
6 ylf 7 6 r 3 cos t 6 −r 3 sin α 4 þ at 7 π
R1 ¼ 6 7¼6 7;
lf
6 lf1 7 4 5 0≤t 6 ≤ −α 4 ð32Þ
4z 5 0 2
1 1
1

where r1 and r3 are the radii of the root fillets for segments ak and lf , respectively. Parameters α3 and α4 are the tangent angles at
the Points a and f and are obtained to be

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
−1
α 3 ¼ cos ð−2cs1 sin θ1 þ cos θ1 Þ= 4c2 s21 þ 1 ð33Þ

 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
−1
α 4 ¼ cos ð−2cs3 sin θ2 þ cos θ2 Þ= 4c2 s23 þ 1 ð34Þ

ðr 1 −r 1 sin α 3 Þ
r3 ¼ : ð35Þ
ð1− sin α 3 Þ

2.4. Segments de and ij

Segments de and ij in Fig. 1 are to create the bottom land of the gear, not the pinion. t7 and t8 are curvilinear coordinates. The
mathematical models of these segments are represented by

2 3
de2 3
x1 t 7 −0:5πmn
6 7
6 de 7 6 −r2 þ r 2 sin α−ac 7
¼6 y1 7 ¼ 6 7;
de
R1 6 de 7 4 5 0 ≤t 7 ≤0:25πmn −w2 −r 2 cos α ð36Þ
4z 5 0
1 1
1

2 3
ij 2 3
x −t 8 þ 0:5πmn
6 17
6 y 7 6 −r 4 þ r 4 sin α 2 −ac 7
ij
R1 ¼ 6 7 6 7;
ij
6 ij1 7 ¼ 4 0 5 0≤t 8 ≤0:25πmn −w4 −r 4 cos α 2 : ð37Þ
4z 5
1 1
1
146 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

2.5. Segment kl

The segment kl in Fig. 1 is to create the bottom land of the pinion, not the gear. t9 is a curvilinear coordinate. The mathematical
model of the segment is represented by
2 3
kl 2 3
x t9
6 17
6 ykl 7 6 r 1 −r 1 sin α 3 þ at 7
R1 ¼ 6 1 7¼6 7; −ð0:25πmn −w1 −r1 cos α 3 Þ≤t 9 ≤0:25πmn −w3 −r 3 cos α 4 :
kl
6 kl 7 4 5 ð38Þ
4z 5 0
1 1
1

Using Eqs. (1)–(38), parameter values in Table 1 and Mathematica software, the normal sections with asymmetric parabolic
tooth profiles for imaginary skew rack cutters are obtained and illustrated in Fig. 2. Here, the rack cutters in Fig. 2a and b are
for generating the spur gear and the spur pinion, respectively.

3. The mathematical model of a skew rack cutter

As shown in Fig. 3, the coordinate system x1y1z1 is fixed on the normal section of the imaginary skew rack cuter with asym-
metric parabolic tooth profiles, and the other coordinate system x2y2z2 is fixed on the section of the imaginary skew rack cutter. o1
and o2 are the origins of x1y1z1 and x2y2z2 systems, respectively, and the distance u between o1 and o2 represents the face width.
Note that the y1 axis is parallel to the y2 axis and the z2 axis is obtained by rotating the z1 axis with respect to the y2 axis by an
angle β, which is the helix angle. The mathematical equations of the normal section of the skew rack cutter are presented in
Section 2. Using the homogeneous coordinate transformation, one can obtain the mathematical equation of the skew rack cutter
with asymmetric parabolic tooth profile as:
2 3
cos β 0 sin β u sin β
ði; jÞ 6 0 1 0 0 7
R2 6
¼4 7Rði; jÞ ð39Þ
− sin β 0 cos β u cos β 5 1
0 0 0 1

Fig. 2. Normal sections of skew imaginary rack cutters: (a) cutter for generating gears, and (b) cutter for generating pinions.
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 147

Fig. 3. The geometric relation between coordinate systems x1y1Z1 and x2y2Z2.

where R(i,j)
1 is the position vector of the proposed rack cutter shown in Section 2. The first superscript i indicates the segments ab,
bc, cd, de, fg, gh, hi, ij, ak, k‘ and lf, and the second superscript j indicates a pinion (j = 3) or a gear (j = 4). Substituting Eqs. (1)–(38)
into Eq. (39) and using symbols x(i, j)
1 , y1
(i, j)
and z(i,
1
j)
to express the three components of the position vector in Section 2, the
position vector of the imaginary skew rack cuter with asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles can be represented by

2 ði; jÞ ði; jÞ
3
x1 cos β þ z1 sin β þ u sin β
6 ði; jÞ 7
ði; jÞ 6 y1 7
R2 ðt; uÞ ¼ 6 7: ð40Þ
4 −xði; jÞ sin β þ zði; jÞ cos β þ u cos β 5
1 1
1

Using Mathematica and the parameter values shown in Table 1, the geometry of the proposed imaginary skew rack cutter is
plotted in Fig. 4.
In Fig. 5, the movable coordinate systems x2y2z2, x3y3z3 and x4y4z4 are rigidly fixed to the imaginary skew rack cutter, the
pinion and the gear, respectively. The coordinate system x5y5z5 is fixed on the gearing house. The rack cutters Σt3 and Σt4 are to
create pinion and gear profiles, respectively. For creating the gear profile, the rack cutter Σt4 translated by r4ϕ4 when the gear
rotates about its own axis by an angle ϕ4. Similarly, for creating the pinion profile, the rack cutter Σt3 translated by r3ϕ3 when
the pinion rotates about its own axis by an angle ϕ3. r3 and r4 are standard pitch radii of pinion and gear, respectively. The center

Fig. 4. The geometry of a skew rack cutter.

148 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 5. Coordinate systems of the skew rack cutter and helical gear blanks.

distance between o3 and o4 is r3 + r4. Based on the homogeneous coordinate transformation, one can obtain a set of imaginary
skew rack cutter curves by transforming from x2y2z2 to x3y3z3 and x4y4z4 as

ði;3Þ ði;3Þ
R3 ¼ M32 R2 ð41Þ

ði;4Þ ði;4Þ
R4 ¼ M42 R2 ð42Þ

where
2 3
cos ϕ3 − sin ϕ3 0 −r 3 ϕ3 cos ϕ3 þ r3 sin ϕ3
6 sin ϕ3 cos ϕ3 0 −r 3 ϕ3 sin ϕ3 −r 3 cos ϕ3 7
M32 6
¼4 7 ð43Þ
0 0 1 0 5
0 0 0 1

2 3
cos ϕ4 sin ϕ4 0 −r 4 ϕ4 cos ϕ4 þ r4 sin ϕ4
6 − sin ϕ4 cos ϕ4 0 r 4 ϕ4 sin ϕ4 þ r 4 cos ϕ4 7
M42 ¼6
4
7:
5 ð44Þ
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1

Here R(i,3
3)
is the family of the skew rack-cutter surfaces for creating the pinion. Similarly, R(i, 4
4)
is the family of the skew
rack-cutter surfaces for creating the gear. The upper index i indicates the segment ab, bc, fg, gh, ak, k‘ and lf or ab, bc, cd, de, fg, gh, hi
and ij of the imaginary skew rack cutter. The matrix M32 transforms the coordinates from system x2y2z2 to x3y3z3. Similarly, the matrix
M42 transforms the coordinates from system x2y2z2 to x4y4z4.

4. Equation of meshing

The equation of meshing between the imaginary skew rack cutters and the pinion or the gear is obtained by using the
methods of relative velocity or the methods of differential geometry. According to the theory of gearing [14,15], the equation
of meshing for the proposed gear pair with asymmetric parabolic tooth profile can be derived using the relative velocity between
the skew rack cutter and the gear (or pinion). The equation ensures that the tangent vector of the skew rack cutter and the normal
vector of the gear (or pinion) are always perpendicular to each other during the generating process. Hence, the equation of meshing
can be determined in terms of the coordinate system x2y2z2 as

 
ði; jÞ 2j
f j t τ ; u; ϕ j ¼ N2  V2 ¼ 0 ð45Þ
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 149

where tτ (τ = 1, ... ,9) are curvilinear coordinates of the proposed imaginary rack cutter in Section 2. N(i,j)
2 is a vector normal to the
imaginary skew rack cutter and is represented in terms of the coordinate system x2y2z2. The upper index i indicates the segments
of the imaginary rack cutter in Section 2, and the index j indicate the pinion (j = 3) or gear (j = 4). The normal vector N(i,j)
2 and
the relative velocity V2j 2 between the gear (or pinion) and the rack cutter can be expressed in terms of the coordinate system
x2y2z2 as

ði; jÞ ði; jÞ
∂R2 ∂R
 2
ði; jÞ ∂t τ ∂u
N2 ¼  ði; jÞ  ð46Þ
∂R ∂R2 
ði; jÞ
 2
  
 ∂t τ ∂u 

 
  d o2 o j
2j 2j ði; jÞ ð jÞ
V2 ¼ ω2  R2 þ ω2  o2 o j − 2
ð47Þ
2 dt

where ω2j _
2 ¼ ∓ϕ j k is the relative angular velocity between the gear (or pinion) and the skew rack cutter. The upper sign indicates
transforming from x2y2z2 to x3y3z3, and the lower sign represents transforming from x2y2z2 to x4y4z4. The vector ðo2 o j Þ2 is the
distance between oj and o2 presented in terms of the coordinate system x2y2z2 and represented as

o2 o j ¼ −r j ϕ j i  r j j: ð48Þ

Substituting Eq. (40) into Eqs. (45), (46) and (47), the equation of meshing between the imaginary skew rack cutter and the
helical pinion or the helical gear can be expressed by

   
ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ
z2t x2u −x2t z2u x2 − y2t z2u −z2t y2u y2
ϕj ¼
τ τ
 τ
 τ
ð49Þ
ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ ði; jÞ
r j z2t x2u −x2t z2u
τ τ

(i,j) (i,j) (i,j)

where x2tτ , y2tτ and z2tτ represent ∂x(i,j) (i,j) (i,j) (i,j)
2 /∂tτ, ∂y2 /∂tτ and ∂z2 /∂tτ (τ= 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9), respectively. Similarly, x2u ,
(i,j) (i,j) (i,j) (i,j) (i,j)
y2u and z2u represent ∂x2 /∂u, ∂y2 /∂u and ∂z2 /∂u, respectively. The parameter values of the imaginary skew rack cutter and
the gear pair are listed in Table 1. Using Mathematica and SolidWorks with the helical angle, the complete parabolic profiles of the
helical gear and pinion with asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles are obtained and plotted in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively.

Fig. 6. The geometry of the helical pinion.

150 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 7. The geometry of the helical gear.

5. Kinematic errors and tooth contact simulation

Assembly errors may occur in the assembly of the proposed skew helical gear pair mechanism with asymmetric parabolic
tooth profiles. As shown in Fig. 8, the coordinate systems x3y3z3, x4y4z4 and x5y5z5 are fixed on the helical pinion, the helical
gear and the gear housing, respectively. The coordinate system x6y6z6 is an auxiliary coordinate system used to describe assembly
errors. The angle ϕ3 is the rotation angle of the helical pinion. The angle ϕ4 is the rotation angle of the helical gear. The misalign-
ment angle between the axis Z3 and the axis Z4 is decomposed into two components, γ1 and γ2, which represent the horizontal
and the vertical misalignment angles respectively. To obtain the angles γ1 and γ2 the coordinate system x6y6z6 may be rotated
along the x6 and y6 axes at angles γ2 and γ1 with respect to the fixed coordinate system x5y5z5. The error of the center distance
between points O3 and O4 is Δc. Table 2 lists six cases of the assembly errors. In these cases, the kinematic error under various
conditions of helical gear pair is calculated and investigated.
According to Litvin's tooth contact analysis, due to the tangency of the two contact tooth surfaces, the position vectors and unit
normal vectors must be at the same point of contact. Hence, the surface equations of the helical pinion and gear developed in
Section 4 and represented in a fixed coordinate system are needed. Therefore, the following equations must be observed when
applying the obtained geometrical model and the TCA at the point of contact:

ði;3Þ ^ 
R5 ^ ; ϕ3 −R ð5i;4Þ t; u; ϕ4 ¼ 0
t; u ð50Þ

ði;3Þ ^ 
n5 ^ ; ϕ3 −nð5i;4Þ t; u; ϕ4 ¼ 0:
t; u ð51Þ

R(i,3)
5 and R(i,
5
4)
are position vectors of the helical pinion and gear with asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles represented in the
fixed coordinate system x5y5z5, and n(i, 5
3)
and n(i,
5
4)
are their normal vectors. ^t and u
^ are curvilinear coordinates of the helical
pinion. t and u are curvilinear coordinates of the helical gear. Eqs. (50) and (51) represent only five independent equations
because, |n35 | = |n45 | = 1. However, Eqs. (50) and (51) have six unknowns. These unknown are ^t, u ^ , ϕ3 , t, u and ϕ4 . If Eqs. (50)
and (51) have a solution, one of these unknowns may be considered as a variable. Here, ϕ3 is chosen as an input variable and
a general purpose computer program is used to determine the other unknowns.
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 151

Fig. 8. The coordinate systems and their relationship used for evaluation of kinematic errors.

5.1. Evaluation of kinematic error

Using the TCA method, the kinematical error K . E. between the helical gear and pinion can be evaluated using the following
equations:

N3
K:E: ¼ ϕ4 −ϕ3 ð52Þ
N4

where N4 and N3 are numbers of teeth for the gear and pinion, respectively. ϕ3 is the rotation angle of the helical pinion. Here, the
range of the rotation angles ϕ3 is chosen as a known input. Solving Eqs. (50) and (51) with a known value for ϕ4, one can obtain
the kinematic error by using Eq. (52).
As shown in Table 2, we have six cases of assembly errors. The Case 1 is an ideal assembly. Cases 2 to 6 are used to investigate
the influence of assembly errors under a misalignment angle of 0.05° and a center distance error Δc. Here, γ1 and γ2 represent the
horizontal and vertical misalignment angles, respectively.

Table 2
Different sets of assembly errors.

Case 1 γ1 = 0, γ2 = 0, Δc = 0
Case 2 Δc = 0, γ1 = 0.05°, γ2 = 0.05°
Case 3 γ1 = − 0.05°, λ2 = 0.05°, Δc = 0
Case 4 γ1 = 0.05°, γ2 = 0, Δc = 0
Case 5 γ1 = 0, γ2 = 0.05°, Δc = 0
Case 6 Δc = 0.05 mm, γ1 = 0.05°, γ2 = 0.05°
152 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 9. The kinematic error of Case 1.

5.2. Results of kinematic error

Fig. 9 shows that the obtained kinematic error is zero for the ideal assembly (i.e., Case 1), which verifies that the developed
program for calculating the kinematic error is correct. Cases, 2–5 have no-zero horizontal (γ1) and vertical (γ2) axes misalignment
angles. For Cases 2–5, the kinematic errors are calculated and shown in Fig. 10. These curves are not parallel lines. When the slope
of the curve is large, its kinematic error is large due to large assembly errors. We find that, if γ1 N 0 and γ2 b 0, or γ1 b 0 and
γ2 N 0, the kinematic error is small. When γ1 and γ2 are both positive, its kinematic error is the largest. Therefore, when the pro-
posed helical gear pair with asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles is installed on the gear housing, the misalignment angles γ1 and
γ2 are better to have opposite signs. Cases 2 and 6 are used to explore the influence of the center distance error. Here, the error of
the center distance is assumed to be Δc = 0.05 mm. Because the curves in Fig. 11 are parallel lines, it indicates that the kinematic
error is not a function of the rotation angle of the gear under the center distance error.

5.3. Simulation of tooth contact

This paper uses SolidWorks software to simulate the contact situation of the helical gear pair during the gear's operation. Case
1 is the ideal assembly and shown in Fig. 12, where the lower tooth is the helical gear and the upper tooth is the helical pinion.
The gear's rotation angle ranges from −8° to 5°. The helical gear and pinion begin contact when the rotation angle is −8°. When
the rotation angle increases, the contact area gradually moves to the tooth flanks, and the two teeth disengage in five degrees.
Fig. 12 shows that contact areas between the helical gear pair appear on both sides of the tooth, but the intermediate portion
of the work region of the helical gear pair is seldom in contact.
Case 2 has misalignment angles γ1 = 0.05° and γ2 = 0.05°. Fig. 13 shows that gear's rotation angle ranges from −11° to 6°. The
helical gear and pinion begin contact at −11°. When the rotation angle increases, the contact area gradually moves to the tooth
flanks, the contact area gradually decrease and the two teeth disengage in six degrees.
Case 3 has misalignment angles γ1 = − 0.05° and γ2 = 0.05∘. Fig. 14 shows that the helical gear and pinion begin contact
at − 11°. When the rotation angle increases, the contact area gradually moves to the tooth flanks, the contact area gradually
decreases, and the two teeth disengage in six degrees. Case 3 is similar to Case 2.

Fig. 10. The kinematic error of Cases 2, 3, 4 and 5.

 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 153

Fig. 11. The kinematic errors of Cases 2 and 6.

Case 4 has misalignment angles γ1 = 0.05° and γ2 = 0∘. Fig. 15 shows that the gear's rotation angle ranges from −11° to 5°.
The helical gear and pinion begin contact at − 7°. When the rotation angle increases, the gear pair only has edge contact. In
other words, if the helical gear pair has only a non-zero misalignment angle γ2 under assembly, the running gear may easily
experience edge wear.
Case 5 has misalignment angles γ1 = 0° and γ2 =0.05°. Fig. 16 shows that the helical gear and pinion begin contact at −11°.
When the rotation angle increases, the contact area gradually increases and moves to the tooth flanks, and then the contact area
gradually decreases. The two teeth finally disengage in six degrees. This case has a tooth frank contact situation. From the contact
simulations and kinematic errors, one can conclude that it is better to have γ1 and γ2 in opposite signs.

6. Real contact of a running gear pair

Installation and testing of a real helical gear pair is shown in Fig. 17. The number of teeth for the gear and pinion are 48 and
24, respectively. The normal module of the helical gear pair is 5 mm. The helical gear pair with asymmetric parabolic tooth
profiles was manufactured using a computer numerically controlled (CNC) machine. After the gear pair was installed, a DC
motor was mounted on the pinion to drive the gear pair. The surface of the helical pinion was coated with blue paints in

Fig. 12. Contacts at different rotation angles under ideal assembly.

154 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 13. Contacts at different rotation angles under Case 2 assembly error.

order to reveal the contact area between the proposed helical pair. The assembly of the helical gear pair was installed with
unknown assembly errors because there was no accurate measurement tool to assure the error. The assembly errors include
misalignment and center distance errors. Thus, the operation can be used to observe the contact situation between the proposed
helical pair. The speed was maintained at 40 rpm. After running for forty minutes, the blue paint on the gear's tooth surface was
scraped, as indicated by the red circles in Fig. 18. In other words, the helical gear pair with asymmetric parabolic tooth profiles
experienced edge contact.

Fig. 14. Contacts at different rotation angles under Case 3 assembly error.
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 155

Fig. 15. Contacts at different rotation angles under Case 4 assembly error.

7. Conclusions

A mathematical model of a tooth with asymmetric parabolic curves is presented in this paper. First, a mathematical model
of the imaginary skew rack cutter having teeth of an asymmetric parabolic profile is derived using geometric relations and
coordinate transformation. A software program is used to confirm that the proposed imaginary skew rack cutter with asymmetric
parabolic teeth is correct. The gearing theory is used to derive the parametric expression of the imaginary skew rack cutter and
their equation of meshing. Based on the developed mathematical models, the geometries of three-dimensional helical gear and
pinion are illustrated. Simulations of meshing and contact of misaligned helical gear pair with asymmetric parabolic teeth are
performed.

Fig. 16. Contacts at different rotation angles under Case 5 assembly error.
156 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157

Fig. 17. Test setup of the helical gear pair.

Results show that kinematic errors are insensitive to the center distance error but are sensitive to the misaligned angles. When
the horizontal and vertical misalignment angles γ1 and γ2 have opposite signs kinematic errors are smaller than other cases with
different assembly errors. Moreover, contact simulations show that when the rotation angle increases, the contact area gradually
moves to the tooth flanks, the contact area gradually decreases, and then the two teeth disengage. If the helical gear pair only has
a non-zero misalignment angle γ1 or γ2, the tooth contact between the gear pair is edge contact. For an ideal assembly, the helical
gear pair has two contact areas on the gear's tooth.
To demonstrate the real contact situation of a driving pinion and a driven gear, a computer numerically controlled (CNC)
machine was used to make an asymmetric parabolic helical gear pair. The envelope of family of the imaginary rack-cutter surfaces
illustrated using Mathematica computer-aided design (MCAD), a software package that facilitates a pragmatic approach to
determine geometric properties of the assembly errors. Another advantage of MCAD is the ability to provide a rapid and simple
geometric model of the imaginary rack cutter and its generated surfaces for the process of CAD and CAM software packages. This
is indistinct contrast with the significant complexity associated with a full analytical approach. Because we discuss the assembly
error of the proposed gear, the reason for experimentation and the theoretical results is mainly attributed human's uncertain
assembly error in the assembly process of the proposed gear pair with asymmetric parabolic profile. If one have precision measure
machine to do the assembly of the proposed gear with asymmetric parabolic profile, the experimentation must be better. The
mathematical models and analysis methods proposed for the helical gear mechanism with asymmetric parabolic teeth should
be useful for the design and production of helical gears with asymmetric parabolic teeth.

Fig. 18. Tooth contact areas revealed after running for 40 min.
 Y.-J. Chen et al. / Mechanism and Machine Theory 101 (2016) 140–157 157

Acknowledgment

The first author is grateful to the National Science Council of the Republic of China for supporting this research under Grant
NSC 102-2221-E-018-009.

References

[1] A. Kapelevich, Geometry and design of involute spur gears with asymmetric teeth, Mech. Mach. Theory 35 (2000) 117–130.
[2] N.L. Pedersen, Improving bending stress in spur gears using asymmetric gears and shape optimization, Mech. Mach. Theory 45 (2010) 1707–1720.
[3] F.L. Litvin, D. Vecchiato, K. Yukishima, A. Fuentes, I.G. Perez, K. Hayasaka, Reduction of noise of loaded and unloaded misaligned gear drives, Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Eng. 195 (2006) 5523–5536.
[4] F.L. Litvin, Q. Lian, A.L. Kapelevich, Asymmetric modified spur gear drives: reduction of noise, localization of contact, simulation of meshing and stress analysis,
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 188 (2000) 363–390.
[5] F.L. Litvin, Theory of Gearing, NASA, Washington. DC., U.S.A., 1989.
[6] S.Y. Zhang, H. Gauo, Tooth contact analysis of parabolic gear with new type of profile, Appl. Mech. Mater. 365–366 (2013) 294–298.
[7] C. Zanzi, J.I. Pedrero, Application of modified geometry of face gear drive, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 194 (2005) 3047–3066.
[8] F.L. Litvin, J. Lu, D.P. Townsend, M. Howkins, Computerized simulation of meshing of conventional helical involute gears and modification of geometry, Mech.
Mach. Theory 34 (1999) 123–147.
[9] C.K. Chen, C.Y. Wang, Compensating analysis of a double circular-arc helical gear by computerized simulation of meshing, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. C J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
215 (2001) 759–771.
[10] S.C. Yang, Study on an internal gear with asymmetric involute teeth, Mech. Mach. Theory 42 (2007) 977–994.
[11] C.B. Tsay, Helical gears with involute shaped teeth: geometry, computer simulation, tooth contact analysis, and stress analysis, ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. 110
(1988) 482–491.
[12] V. Simon, Computer simulation of tooth contact analysis of mismatched spiral bevel gears, Mech. Mach. Theory 42 (2007) 365–381.
[13] S. Li, Finite element analyses for contact strength and bending strength of a pair of spur gears with machining errors, assembly errors and tooth modifications,
Mech. Mach. Theory 42 (2007) 88–114.
[14] F.L. Litvin, Gear Geometry and Applied Theory, Prentices-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1994.
[15] F.L. Litvin, A. Fuentes, Gear Geometry and Applied Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2004.