Spiral Bevel Gears Face Roughness Prediction Produ

materials
Article
Spiral Bevel Gears Face Roughness Prediction
Produced by CNC End Milling Centers
Álvaro Álvarez 1 , Amaia Calleja 2, * ID , Mikel Arizmendi 3 , Haizea González 4 ID
and Luis Norberto Lopez de Lacalle 5 ID

1 Ibarmia, Polígono Industrial Etxesaga, s/n, 20720 Azkoitia, Gipuzkoa, Spain; alvaro.alvarez@ibarmia.com
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Nieves Cano 12,
01006 Vitoria, Spain
3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, TECNUN-Universidad de Navarra, Paseo de Manuel Lardizabal 13,
20018 Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain: marizmendi@tecnun.es
4 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Plaza Ingeniero
Torres Quevedo 1, 48013 Bilbao, Spain; haizea.gonzalez@ehu.eus
5 CFAA—University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Parque Tecnológico de Zamudio 202,
48170 Bilbao, Spain; norberto.lzlacalle@ehu.eus
* Correspondence: amaia.calleja@ehu.eus; Tel.: +34-946-017-347

Received: 6 June 2018; Accepted: 25 July 2018; Published: 27 July 2018
Abstract: The emergence of multitasking machines in the machine tool sector presents new
opportunities for the machining of large size gears and short production series in these machines.
However, the possibility of using standard tools in conventional machines for gears machining
represents a technological challenge from the point of view of workpiece quality. Machining
conditions in order to achieve both dimensional and surface quality requirements need to be
determined. With these considerations in mind, computer numerical control (CNC) methods to
provide useful tools for gear processing are studied. Thus, a model for the prediction of surface
roughness obtained on the teeth surface of a machined spiral bevel gear in a multiprocess machine is
presented. Machining strategies and optimal machining parameters were studied, and the roughness
model is validated for 3 + 2 axes and 5 continuous axes machining strategies.
Keywords: gear manufacturing; roughness model; multitasking machines/multiprocess machines
1. Introduction
Large size spiral bevel gears are frequently used in applications [1,2] that require smooth and
silent high-power transmission. This is the case for equipment dedicated to thermal energy generation,
ship propulsion systems, wind turbines or power transmission in the aeronautical sector, among many
others. Nowadays, there is a continuous demand for energy, and consequently, there has been an
increase in the amount of equipment dedicated to energy generation and its components, such as
large sized spiral gear. Traditionally, these types of gears have been manufactured with specific gear
cutting machines. There are different methods for traditional gear cutting, for example, some of the
most commonly used are: (1) gear hobbing with perimeter cut (Gleason) [3]; (2) continuous generation
by spiral hobbing with perimeter cut (Cyclo-Palloid from Klingelnberg and Oerlikon) [4]; and (3)
continuous generation by spiral hobbing with conic type cut (Palloid from Klingelnberg) [5].
However, the eruption in the market of multitasking or multiprocess machines [6], and the
continuous improvement experienced in the area of numerical controls and CAM software, has led
to the appearance of a suitable medium for the manufacturing of these complex geometric elements
in general purpose machines and with standard tools [7,8]. This type of technology is especially
Materials 2018, 11, 1301; doi:10.3390/ma11081301 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2018, 11, 1301 2 of 20
interesting for the manufacture of high module gears (4–12 mm), where it is not so common to find
specific gear cutting machines as in the case of lower value modules. The use of standard tools is
also an advantage given the reduction in both cost and delivery times, which are parameters of vital
importance in production. Special tools for gear manufacturing are also available [9], thus providing
flexible alternatives for producing small or medium batches of large bevel gears using a five-axis
machine and a disk tool cutting method. This methodology also allows the manufacture of gears
of varied geometries, for example, straight gears, helical gears, double helical gear, bevel gears and
hypoid gears. The manufacture of gears in multitasking machines [10–17] is seen as an increasingly
widespread solution, especially given their high flexibility [18]. Four-axis [19] and 5-axis [20,21]
CNC machining can be performed for spiral bevel gears manufacturing. Some of the advantages
of this method include an increase in the versatility of the manufacturing process, both in terms of
typology and size, allowing the realization of arbitrary modifications of the different gear teeth. Surface
quality and the structure of the materials are also important for gear life, as studied in [21]. In order to
guarantee the quality of the manufactured components and gear contact [22–26], the machining process
of the gear surfaces requires special attention. Surface morphology [27] will determine machining
strategies, making it possible to machine gear sculptured surfaces [9], classified as developable ruled
surfaces [28], with flank milling strategies [29,30].
On the other hand, gears, and more specifically spiral bevel gears (bevel gears with helical teeth),
are geometrically complex components. Once the feasibility of manufacturing these components in
multi-axis general-purpose machines has been demonstrated, it is necessary to evaluate whether the
number of the machines axes involved in the machining strategy influence the resulting gear surface
quality. Since the transmission of movement and power between different axes is the main function of
this type of gears, there is a greater contact surface between the pinion and gear compared to a pair
of straight bevel gears. Due to the helix angle, spiral gears work in a gradual way, operating with
greater smoothness and more silently, allowing work at higher speed ranges. However, this type of
gear presents a greater sensitivity to contact errors than other types of gears.
Therefore, in order to ensure good gear contact, the surface roughness parameter is a parameter to
be considered and studied in the manufacture of spiral bevel gears by multi-process machines. Optimal
surface roughness values ensure good contact [31], which is translated into the correct transmission
of both movement and power, increasing the useful life of the element. It is worth mentioning that
both excessive surface roughness and polished surfaces are harmful for gear contact. On one hand,
gear rough surfaces influence component life, and, on the other hand, gear polished surfaces hinder
proper lubrication.
In this work, a predictive model of surface roughness for spiral bevel gears manufactured
by multiprocess machines with ball end mills was developed and validated. The model estimates
surface topography for each gear surface based on parameters such as tool inclination and orientation,
the geometrical cutting parameters, and mill feed and speed values. The gear machining finishing
process is optimized by the simulation of different machining conditions. Thus, it is not necessary
to perform trial and error tests, which results in cost and time savings. This optimized process also
adjusts cutting parameters depending on the required surface quality, without having to machine a
greater number of passes than strictly necessary. This also reduces machining time and tool life.
2. Spiral Bevel Gears Manufacturing Process in Multitasking Machines

The gear manufacturing process consists of several stages. First, the geometry of the component,
which directly influences the subsequent manufacturing stages, is defined.
2.1. Design
There are different options for the design of gear geometry [32–34]: Standard CAD/CAM
software (CatiaV5, Siemens NX12), specific gear design module inside standard CAD/CAM software
(GearTrax module for Solid Edge, SolidWorks and Inventor), specific CAD/CAM software (EUKLID),
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 3 of 20
software
Materials 2018,developed by REVIEW
11, x FOR PEER machine tool manufacturers (gear MILL from DMG-MORI, GearPro from
3 ofMag),
20
and, software developed by tool manufacturers (InvoMilling and Up-Gear Technology from Sandvik).
In In
thisthis
particular
particular case, thethe
case, “3d“3d
spiral bevel
spiral bevel gear software”
gear software”was wasused
usedforfor
thethe
design
design of of
thethegeargear
geometry.
geometry.TheThemain main reason for forchoosing
choosing this
this software
software waswas the reduced
the reduced cost ofcost of theinlicense
the license comparisonin
comparison to otherSpecifically,
to other software. software. Specifically,
this programthis allowsprogram allows
the design thespiral
of the design of the
bevel spiral with
geometry, bevelthe
geometry,
option to with
choosethe
Materials
option
2018,between
to choose
Gleason
11, x FOR PEER
between Gleason and Klingelnberg
REVIEWand Klingelnberg manufacturing methods.
manufacturing methods.
3 of 20
A spiral
A spiralbevel gear
bevel geometry
gear geometrywaswasselected
selected(Table 1) according
(Table to the
1) according to Gleason method,
the Gleason method,sincesince
it is it
theismost used In this
method. particular
The case, the
objective “3d
wasspiral
to bevel
choose geara software”
complex was
and used
the most used method. The objective was to choose a complex and large dimension geometry for
large the design
dimension of the gear
geometry to to
validate geometry.
thethe
capacity The
of ofmain
generalreason for
purpose choosing this
multiprocessing software was
machinesthe reduced
forfor
gear cost of the
manufacturing. license in
validate capacity general purpose multiprocessing machines gear manufacturing.
comparison to other software. Specifically, this program allows the design of the spiral bevel
geometry, with the option to choose between Gleason and Klingelnberg manufacturing methods.
Table 1. Spiral
1. Spiral
Table bevel
bevel gear
gear geometry
geometry andand parameters.
parameters.
A spiral bevel gear geometry was selected (Table 1) according to the Gleason method, since it is
the most used method.
SpiralTheBevel
objective was toDesign
Gearing choose aand
complex and large dimension geometry to
Parameters
Spiralpurpose
validate the capacity of general Bevel Gearing Design machines
multiprocessing and Parameters
for gear manufacturing.
Gear heel pitch diameter (Dp) 200 mm
Gear heel pitch diameter (Dp) 200 mm
Gear
Table 1. Spiral bevel outside
gearoutside
Gear geometry diameter
and (De)
parameters.
diameter (De) 207.6
207.6mmmm
Teeth number
Teeth number (Z) (Z) 2525
Spiral Bevel Gearing Design and Parameters
Spiral angle (β)(β) 35◦
GearSpiral angle
heel pitch diameter (Dp) 35°
200 mm
Face angle 59.5◦
Face angle
Gear outside diameter (De) 207.659.5°
mm◦
Pressure angle (α) 20
Teeth number
Pressure (Z)
angle (α) 2520°
Spiral angle (β) 35°
The The selected
selected material
material is aiscommonly
a commonly usedusedsteelsteel for manufacturing
Face angle
for manufacturing gears,gears,
F-1550F-1550
59.5° (18CrMo4)
(18CrMo4) (C
(C 0.186%,
0.186%, Si 0.259%,
Si 0.259%, Mn 0.805%,
Mn 0.805%, P 0.011%,
P 0.011%, S 0.028%,
S 0.028%, Cr 1.071%,
Pressure
Cr 1.071%,
angleMo
(α) 0.155%), and
Mo 0.155%),
20° it reaches values up
and it reaches values up
to 47
to 47 HRCHRC (Rockwell
(Rockwell Scale
Scale of of Hardness,
Hardness, part
part C).C).
The selected material is a commonly used steel for manufacturing gears, F-1550 (18CrMo4) (C
First,
First, geometric
geometric parameters
parameters werePwere introduced
introduced into Crintodesign
the the design software (module, geargear
ratio,
0.186%, Si 0.259%, Mn 0.805%, 0.011%, S 0.028%, 1.071%, Mosoftware (module,
0.155%), and gear
it reaches ratio,
values up
gear direction,
direction, teeth teeth
to 47 number, number,
pressure
HRC (Rockwell pressure
Scaleangle, angle,
etc.). With
of Hardness, etc.).
part this With this information, the software
C). information, the software generated the geometry generated
the geometry
of one of the teeth,of one
First, fromofwhich
theparameters
geometric teeth, from which
were the three-dimensional
introduced
the three-dimensional into
gearthewas
design gear(module,
software
generated. was generated.
gear ratio, gear
direction, teeth number, pressure angle, etc.). With this information, the software generated the geometry
2.2. Manufacturing
of one of the teeth, from which the three-dimensional gear was generated.
2.2. Manufacturing
Once the geometry was obtained and analyzed, the machining strategies were designed. In this
Once 2.2.
theManufacturing
geometry was obtained and analyzed, the machining strategies were designed. In this
case, the CAM software used was NX10 from Siemens.
case, the CAMOncesoftware used was
the geometry wasNX10 from
obtained andSiemens.
analyzed, the machining strategies were designed. In this
case, the CAM software used was NX10 from Siemens.
2.3. Equipment—Multiprocess Machine
2.3. Equipment—Multiprocess Machine
2.3. Equipment—Multiprocess
A multi-process Machine
machine ZVH38/L1600 (Figure 1) from Ibarmia (Azkoitia, Spain) was used for
A multi-process
gear manufacturing. machine ZVH38/L1600 (Figure
A multi-process machine ZVH38/L1600 (Figure 1)and
The machine includes 1) from
turning Ibarmia
frommilling
(Azkoitia, Spain)
Ibarmia capabilities
(Azkoitia, Spain) thewas
by was used for of
integration
used for
gear manufacturing.
3 linear gear (X, Y, The
Z) inmachine
axesmanufacturing. aThe includes
machine
mobile turning
includes
column and
andturning milling
and
2 rotary milling
axes, onecapabilities
capabilities
of themby bythe
in a the integration
integration
rotating of and
of 3(B)
head 3
linear axes (X,
linearY, Z)
axes in
(X, a
Y,mobile
Z) in a column
mobile and
column 2 rotary
and 2 axes,
rotary one
axes, oneof
ofthem
them in
in aa rotating
rotating
the other in a rotary table (C). The main advantage of multitasking machines is that the number of head
head (B) (B)
and and
the the
other in a other
machines rotaryin atable
and setups
rotary table
(C). The
required
(C).main
The main advantage
advantage
for workpiece of of multitasking machines
multitasking
manufacturing
machines isisthat
are reduced and that
often
thethe
number of of
number
limited to one.
machines and setups required for workpiece manufacturing are reduced and
machines and setups required for workpiece manufacturing are reduced and often limited to one. often limited to one.
Figure 1. Ibarmia ZVH45/L1600 ADD + PROCESS kinematic.

Figure 1. Ibarmia ZVH45/L1600 ADD + PROCESS kinematic.
2.4. Machining Figure
Strategies
1. Ibarmia ZVH45/L1600 ADD + PROCESS kinematic.
2.4. Machining Strategies
Machining strategies were programmed with Siemens® NX manufacturing module. First of all,
2.4. Machining Strategies
the roughing
Machining operation
strategies was programmed
were programmed with
withtheSiemens
aim of reducing machining time, chip
® NX manufacturing thickness
module. First of all,
and cutting forces [18] as much as possible and obtaining a near to net shape geometry. As can be
theMachining
roughing operation was programmed with theSiemens
aim of reducing machining time, chip First
thickness and
seen instrategies
Table 2, thewere programmed with 2) consisted NX manufacturing module.a cavity millof all,
®
roughing operation (Figure of two different steps. First,
the roughing operation was programmed with the aim of reducing machining time, chip thickness
and cutting forces [18] as much as possible and obtaining a near to net shape geometry. As can be
seen in Table 2, the roughing operation (Figure 2) consisted of two different steps. First, a cavity mill
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 4 of 20
cutting forces [18] as much as possible and obtaining a near to net shape geometry. As can be seen in
Table 2, the roughing operation (Figure 2) consisted of two different steps. First, a cavity mill strategy
was performed, and then, a variable contour strategy was used in order to obtain a near to net shape
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20
geometry for finishing strategies. In R-I a frontal mill was used and in R-II a conical mill.
strategy was performed, and then, a variable contour strategy was used in order to obtain a near to
Table 2.InRoughing
net shape geometry for finishing strategies. strategy.
R-I a frontal mill was used and in R-II a conical mill.
Roughing
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR StrategyTable 2. RoughingTeeth
PEER REVIEW strategy.
Number Tool 4 of 20
Roughing
Cavity millStrategy
(3 + 1-axis) Teeth Number Tool
Frontal mill
strategy wasR-I
performed, and then, a variable contour strategy 1–25was used in order to obtain a near to
Cavity
Followmill (3 + 1-axis)
periphery Frontal mill
Ø4 mm
net shape geometryR-I 1–25
for finishing strategies. In R-I a frontal mill was used and in R-II a conical mill.
Follow periphery Ø4 mm
Variable contour (5-axis) Conical mill
R-II Variable contour 1–25
R-II line(5-axis)
StreamTable 2. Roughing strategy.
1–25
Conical mill
Ø3 mm
Stream line Ø3 mm
Roughing Strategy Teeth Number Tool
Cavity mill (3 + 1-axis) Frontal mill
R-I 1–25
Follow periphery Ø4 mm
Variable contour (5-axis) Conical mill
R-II 1–25
Stream line Ø3 mm
Figure 2. R-I (a) and R-II (b) roughing strategies.

Figure 2. R-I (a) and R-II (b) roughing strategies.
For finishing operations (Table 3), different strategies and conditions were tested for the gear
teeth. Different radial depths and cut patterns (zig and zig-zag) were evaluated, for both 5 continuous
For finishing operations (Table 3), different strategies and conditions were tested for the gear
axes (F-II) machining operations and 3 + 2 axes (F-I) machining. In the latter machining operation (3
teeth. Different radial depths and
+ 2), the tool axis is fixed and
cut patterns (zig
perpendicular
Figure 2. R-I (a) andto
and
the
R-II
zig-zag)
(b)head of each
roughing
were evaluated, for both 5 continuous
tooth, as can be seen in Figure 3.
strategies.
axes (F-II) machining operations and 3 + 2 axes (F-I)
Machining conditions were S = 11,900 rpm and F = 400 mm/min. machining. In the latter machining operation
(3 + 2), the tool axis is fixed and perpendicular to the head of each tooth,
For finishing operations (Table 3), different strategies and conditions as tested
were can beforseen in Figure 3.
the gear
teeth. Different radial depths and cut patterns
Table
Machining conditions were S = 11,900 rpm and F = 400 mm/min.3. (zig and
Finishing zig-zag) were
strategies. evaluated, for both 5 continuous
axes (F-II) machiningFinishing
operations and 3 + 2 axes (F-I) machining.
Strategy Teeth Number
In the latter machining
Tool
operation (3
+ 2), the tool axis is fixed and perpendicular
Surface area + Relative vector to the head of each tooth, as can be seen in Figure 3.
Table(33.+Finishing
2 axes) strategies.
Machining conditions were S = 11,900 rpm and F = 400 mm/min.
Cut pattern:
F-I 1–12 Conical mill
ZIG (1–6) ZIG/ZAG(7–12)
Finishing Strategy Table 3. Finishing strategies.
Teeth Number
Ø3 mm Tool
(Scallop 0.01–0.02–0.03 mm)
8° Taper Ball nose TiAlN
Surface areaFinishing
Surface + Relative
area + Relativevector
vector (3
Strategy
+ 2 axes) Teeth Number
(5 axes)
Number ofTool
flutes3
Cut pattern:
Cut pattern:
F-II Surface area + Relative vector (3 + 2 axes) Conical
13–25 1–12 Helix angle 45° mill
F-I ZIG (13–18) ZIG/ZAG(19–25)
ZIG (1–6) ZIG/ZAG(7–12)
Cut pattern: Ø3 mm
F-I (Scallop 0.01–0.02–0.03mm)
(Scallop mm) 1–12 Conical mill
ZIG 0.01–0.02–0.03
(1–6) ZIG/ZAG(7–12) 8 ◦ Taper Ball nose TiAlN
Ø3 mm
(Scallop
Surface area0.01–0.02–0.03 mm) (5 axes)
+ Relative vector Number of flutes3
8° Taper Ball nose TiAlN
Surface
Cut pattern: area + Relative vector (5 axes) Helix angle 45◦
F-II Cut pattern: 13–25 Number of flutes3
ZIG (13–18) ZIG/ZAG(19–25)
F-II 13–25 Helix angle 45°
ZIG (13–18) ZIG/ZAG(19–25)
(Scallop 0.01–0.02–0.03 mm)
(Scallop 0.01–0.02–0.03 mm)
Figure 3. Finishing strategies. F-I (a) 3 + 2 finishing strategy. F-II (b) 5 continuous axes finishing
strategy.
Figure 3. Finishing strategies. F-I (a) 3 + 2 finishing strategy. F-II (b) 5 continuous axes finishing
Figure 3. Finishing strategies. F-I (a) 3 + 2 finishing strategy. F-II (b) 5 continuous axes finishing strategy.
strategy.
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 5 of 20
2.5. Machining
2.5. Machining
2.5.Finally, the gear was machined. After the roughing and finishing operations, the resultant gear
Machining
is shown in Finally,
Figurethe4. gear
Machined strategies
was machined. were
After R-I (cavity
the roughing and mill) for operations,
finishing teeth 1–25theand R-II (variable
resultant gear
Finally,
is shown
the
in
gear
Figure
was
4.
machined.
Machined
After thewere
strategies
roughing
R-I
and mill)
(cavity
finishing
for
operations,
teeth 1–25 and
the
R-II
resultant
(variable
gear is
contour) after R-I and for teeth 1–25. For the finishing strategies: F-I for teeth 1–12, and F-II for teeth
showncontour)
in Figure 4. Machined strategies were R-I (cavity mill) for teeth 1–25 and R-II (variable contour)
after R-I and for teeth 1–25. For the finishing strategies: F-I for teeth 1–12, and F-II for teeth
13–25.
after R-I and for teeth 1–25. For the finishing strategies: F-I for teeth 1–12, and F-II for teeth 13–25.
13–25.
Figure 4. Roughing strategies result (a); Finishing strategies result (b).

Figure
Figure 4. Roughing
4. Roughing strategies
strategies result
result (a);(a); Finishing
Finishing strategies
strategies result
result (b).(b).
3. Predictive Model of Topography on Gear Flank
3. Predictive
3. Predictive Model
Model of of Topography
Topography onon Gear
Gear Flank
Flank
The developed model estimates the gear teeth surface topography depending on machining
parameters such as tool inclination and orientation, cutting geometric parameters and tool on
The developed model estimates the gear
The developed model estimates the gear teeth surface teeth surface topography
topography depending
depending onfeed and
machining
machining
speed
parameters values.
such The model was tested for two different finishing operations; a 5 continuous axes
parameters such as as tool
tool inclination
inclination andand orientation,
orientation, cutting
cutting geometric
geometric parameters
parameters andand tool
tool feed
feed and
and
machining operation and a 3 + 2 axes machining operation in order to determine the influence of the
speed values.
speed values. The
Thenumber model
modelofwas was tested
tested for
for two two different finishing operations; a 5 continuous
different finishing operations; a 5 continuous axes axes
machining axes on the surface finish.
machining
machining operation
operation and a 3 + 2 axes machining operation in order to determine the influence of the
The model follows the following steps: operation in order to determine the influence of the
and a 3 + 2 axes machining
machining
machining number
number of of axes
axes onon
thethe surface
surface finish.
finish.
1. Interdental gap points and trajectories representation (Figure 5). In this first step, for each
The model follows the following
The model follows the following steps: steps:
interpolation point the model obtains from the machining program (CL data): the tool tip point
position
1. 1. Interdental
Interdental gap (xjpoints
gap , yjpoints
, zj) and
and the
and tool axis orientation
trajectories
trajectories defined by
representation
representation a direction
(Figure
(Figure5).5).Invector
In this
this (ujfirst
, vjstep,
first , wstep,
j) in the
forfor each
each
workpiece reference system XYZ.
interpolation
interpolation pointpoint thethe model
model obtains
obtains from
from thethe machining
machining program
program (CL (CL data):
data): thethetool tooltiptip point
point
Milling trajectories can be obtained by means of the coordinates of successive tool tip points.
position (xj,(xyj, yzj), zand
position j ) andthethe
tooltool
axisaxis orientation
orientation defined
defined byby a direction
a direction vector
vector , vj ,j, vw
(uj(u ,j)win
j ) in
thethe
Figure j5a jshows the tool tip point positions obtained from the machining program jof an
workpiece
workpiece reference
reference
interdental Insystem
gap.system XYZ.
XYZ.
Figure 5b, the milling trajectories are represented. In the next steps, milling
Milling
Milling trajectories
trajectories can can
be be obtained
obtained
trajectories are evaluated after the by means
byelimination
means of
of of the coordinates
theinitial
coordinates
and finalof of successive
successive
noncutting tooltool
movements, tiptip aspoints.
points.
Figure 5a 5a
Figure
shownshows
shows
in Figurethethe tool
6a. tiptip
tool point
pointpositions
positionsobtained
obtained from
fromthethe
machining
machining program
program of of anan
interdental gap.
interdental gap.In Figure 5b,5b,
In Figure thethe
milling trajectories
milling areare
trajectories represented.
represented.In In
thethe
next steps,
next milling
steps, milling
trajectories areareevaluated
trajectories evaluatedafter
after the elimination
eliminationofofinitial
initial
andand final
final noncutting
noncutting movements,
movements, as
as shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 6a. 6a.
Figure 5. Interdental gap points (a) and trajectories (b) representation.
2. Simulation area definition (Figure 6). Secondly, as can be seen in Figure 6a, five simulation
areas are defined (in black) in the feed direction. Each of these simulation areas is defined by 6
points in the feed direction and about 30 points in the direction perpendicular to the feed
direction. The 5.
Figure dimension of gap
Interdental the points
simulation area
(a) and depends (b)
trajectories on representation.
the programmer’s criteria. The
Figure 5. Interdental gap points (a) and trajectories (b) representation.
2. Simulation area definition (Figure 6). Secondly, as can be seen in Figure 6a, five simulation
2. Simulation area definition (Figure 6). Secondly, as can be seen in Figure 6a, five simulation areas
areas are defined (in black) in the feed direction. Each of these simulation areas is defined by 6
are defined (in black) in the feed direction. Each of these simulation areas is defined by 6 points
points in the feed direction and about 30 points in the direction perpendicular to the feed
in the feed direction and about 30 points in the direction perpendicular to the feed direction.
direction. The dimension of the simulation area depends on the programmer’s criteria. The
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 6 of 20

The dimension of the simulation area depends on the programmer’s criteria. The reference
reference
trajectorytrajectory
for the studyfor the study isindefined
is defined in magenta,
magenta, corresponding
corresponding to the oneto the one
located in located in the
the middle of
middle of the simulation area. As an example, Figure 6b shows the milling trajectories
the simulation area. As an example, Figure 6b shows the milling trajectories followed by the tool followed
by
tipthe tool of
in one tipthe
in one of the simulation
simulation areas considered
areas considered in Figure 6a.in Figure 6a. Black
Black points points
in each in each
milling milling
trajectory
trajectory
represent represent the interpolation
the interpolation points
points given given
by the by the machining
machining program for program for the
the selected selected
simulation
simulation
area. Next,area. Next, the
the surface surface topography
topography generatedgenerated in each simulation
in each simulation area is predicted.
area is predicted. In order Into
order
achieveto this,
achieve this,reference
a local a local reference
system Osystem
X Y
W W W W OZW X is
W Y Z is
defined
W W defined
for each for each
simulation simulation
area area
(Step 4).
(Step
First, 4).
theFirst, the positions
positions of the toolofcenter
the tool center
point (C) inpoint (C) in the
the selected selected area
simulation simulation area are
are deduced in
deduced
Step 3. in Step 3.
Figure 6. Simulation area (a) and reference trajectory points (b) for the study definition.
Figure 6. Simulation area (a) and reference trajectory points (b) for the study definition.
3. Tool center position determination (Figure 7). In order to obtain the coordinates of the tool
3. Tool center position determination (Figure 7). In order to obtain the coordinates of the tool
center point (C) (Figure 7f), tool tip point coordinates (xj, yj, zj) and tool axis direction vector (uj,
center point (C) (Figure 7f), tool tip point coordinates (x , yj , zj ) and tool axis direction vector
vj, wj) given in the machining program and the ball end jmill, radius R needs to be taken into
(uj , vj , wj ) given in the machining program and the ball end mill, radius R needs to be taken into
account. First, the line passing through the point (xj, yj, zj) and parallel to the vector (uj, vj, wj) is
account. First, the line passing through the point (xj , yj , zj ) and parallel to the vector (uj , vj , wj ) is
considered by means of the following equation:
considered by means of the following equation:
x-xj y-yj z-zj
x −ujx j = vyj −=y jwj z − z j (1)
= = (1)
uj vj wj
Next, taking into account that the tool center point (C) is located at a distance equal to the tool
radius R from the tool tip point of coordinates (xj, yj, zj), the coordinates (x, y, z) of the tool center point
Next, taking into account that the tool center point (C) is located at a distance equal to the tool
must fulfill this equation:
radius R from the tool tip point of coordinates (xj , yj , zj ), the coordinates (x, y, z) of the tool center point
must fulfill this equation: 2 2 2
2 j + y-yj +2 z-zj = R
x-x (2)
r
2
x − xj + y − yj + z − zj = R (2)
Therefore,
Therefore, inin order
order to to obtain
obtain the
the coordinates
coordinates (x, (x, y,
y, z)
z) of
of the
the tool
tool center
center point
point when when the
the tool
tool tip
tip
point
point is located at
is located at aa point
point of of coordinates
coordinates (x
(xj,, yyj,, zzj)) and
and tool
tool axis vector
axis vector is
is (u
(uj,, vvj,, w
w j), Equations (1) and
), Equations (1) and
j j j j j j
(2)
(2) must
must be
be solved for x,
solved for x, yy and
and z.z.
The
The red
red points
points shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 7a
7a represent
represent the the positions
positions of
of the
the tool
tool center
center pointpoint (C)
(C) for
for the
the
simulation area shown in Figure 6b. The surface generated by the positions
simulation area shown in Figure 6b. The surface generated by the positions of the tool center point of the tool center point
approximates
approximates to to aa surface
surface parallel to the
parallel to the tool
tool tiptip point
point positions.
positions.
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 7 of 20
^ Tool center point positions

u
-20 M
-18
-21
-22 p -20 M
Z (mm)
-23 A ^
q
B -22
E Reference trajectory
-24
-24 E Reference trajectory
-25
Tool tip point positions Tool tip point positions
-26 -26
-91 -92
-93 -35 -94 -35
-95 -37 -36 -96 -37-36
(b) Y (mm) X (mm) (c) Y (mm) X (mm)
Ball end mill geometry
Tool axis
R
Z (mm)
Tool center point C
cutting edge
R
(f) Tool tip point
Figure 7. Tool center points (red) in relation to tool tip points (black) and to tool axis orientation and
Figure 7. Tool center points (red) in relation to tool tip points (black) and to tool axis orientation and
local reference system OWXWYWZW attached to workpiece (gear tooth). (a) Tool center points position.
local reference system OW XW YW ZW attached to workpiece (gear tooth). (a) Tool center points position;
(b) M point definition. (c) Reference trajectory. (d) Tool tip and center point positions. (e) Reference
(b) Mforpoint definition;
the prediction (c) Reference
of the topographytrajectory;
generated (d) Tool
in the tip and
surface center
of gear point
teeth. positions;
(f) Ball end mill(e) Reference for
geometry.
the prediction of the topography generated in the surface of gear teeth; (f) Ball end mill geometry.
4. Definition of workpiece local coordinate system. In order to predict the surface topography
4. generatedofinworkpiece
Definition each simulation area, a localsystem.
local coordinate coordinate system
In order to O WXWYWZW attached to the
predict the surface topography
workpiece (gear tooth surface) is defined. The definition
generated in each simulation area, a local coordinate system O of this local coordinate system for each
W XW YW ZW attached to the
simulation area is based on the tool tip point positions and the tool axis orientations given in the
workpiece (gear tooth surface) is defined. The definition of this local coordinate system for
machining program for the reference milling trajectory shown in magenta in Figures 6 and 7.
each simulation area is based on the tool tip point positions and the tool axis orientations given in
The origin OW and the axis ZW are the elements of this system that are obtained first. In order to
theachieve
machining program for the reference milling trajectory shown in magenta in Figures 6 and 7.
this, a set of auxiliary elements (a point M and two unit vectors u and q) is considered.
TheFirstly,
origintwoOWinterpolation ZW are
and the axispoints, the elements
named of thisare
A and B, which system
locatedthat arecenter
in the obtained
of thefirst. In order to
reference
achieve this,(Figure
trajectory a set of7b)
auxiliary elements
are selected. (a point
The middle pointMDand two
of the unitinterpolation
linear vectors û and q̂) is points
between considered.
Firstly,
A and two
B isinterpolation
considered. The points, named(xAD,and
coordinates yD, zB, which
D) of pointare located
D are in theascenter
calculated of the
a function of reference
the
trajectory (Figure
coordinates (xA, 7b)
yA, zare selected.
A) and (xB, yB, zThe
B) ofmiddle
points Apoint
and B: D of the linear interpolation between points
A and B is considered. The coordinates xA +xB (xD , y yDA,+y zD ) of point
zA +zD
B
are calculated as a function of the
coordinates (xA , yA , zA ) and x(xDB =, yB2, zB ) ; of
yD points
= ; and
zD = B:
B
(3)
2 A 2
Taking into account the tool axis
x orientation
+ xB wheny the+tool
y B tip goes from
z +zpoint A to point B, the
B
position of the tool center point = Athe tool
x D when ; tip = isAlocated
y Dpoint = DAcan be
; atz Dpoint calculated through (3)
2 2 2
Equations (1) and (2). Therefore, this position defined in this paper as point M (Figure 7b), with
coordinates (xM, yM, zM), can be obtained from the resolution of the following equations:
Taking into account the tool axis orientation when the tool tip goes from point A to point B,
xM -xDthe ytool-y zM -zD
the position of the tool center point when = M Dtip = point is located at point D can be calculated
(4)
uAB vAB wAB
through Equations (1) and (2). Therefore, this position defined in this paper as point M (Figure 7b),
with coordinates (xM , yM , zM ), can be
(x obtained
-x )2 + y from
-y the
2
+ (zresolution
-z )2 = R of the following equations:
(5)
M D M D M D
xM − yM −
x D of tool y D givenz M −z
where (uAB, vAB, wAB) is the direction vector = axis, = by theD machining program, when the (4)
u v
AB point M is AB
tool tip goes from point A to point B. The w
calculated for AB
each simulation area and employed
q
( x M − x D )2 + ( y M − y D )2 + ( z M − z D )2 = R (5)
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 8 of 20
where (uAB , vAB , wAB ) is the direction vector of tool axis, given by the machining program, when the
tool tip goes from point A to point B. The point M is calculated for each simulation area and employed
for the definition of the local system attached to each simulation area. In this paper, it is assumed that
axis ZW of the local system passes through this point M.
Next, the vector defining the direction of axis ZW is calculated by considering two unit vectors.
A unit vector û = (ux , uy , uz ) parallel to the tool linear motion direction between points A and B is
defined as:
p
û = where p = ( x B − x A , y B −y A , z B −z A ) (6)
|p|
A second unit vector q̂ = (qx , qy , qz ) that takes into account the direction at point M of the middle
points of the milling trajectories selected in the simulation area is also defined (Figure 7c). Once the
unit vectors û and q̂ are obtained, a unit vector ŵ = (wx , wy , wz ) perpendicular to û and q̂ is defined as
follows:
û = û × q̂ (7)
This vector ŵ is assumed to coincide with the direction of axis ZW (Figure 7d). In addition, in
order to define the position of the origin OW , it is assumed that this point is located at a distance R from
the point M. Therefore, taking into account that point OW is also located on a line passing through
point M and parallel to vector ŵ, the coordinates (xOw , yOw , zOw ) of point OW are obtained by solving
these equations:
xOw − x M yOw −y M z −z
= = Ow M (8)
wx wy wz
q
( xOw − x M )2 + (yOw −y M )2 + (zOw −z M )2 = R (9)
Once the origin OW and the axis ZW have been obtained, axes XW and YW are defined. The axis XW
is assumed to have the same direction as the unit vector û (Figure 7d). Therefore, the axis XW coincides
with the feed direction of the tool between points A and B. Finally, the axis YW is perpendicular to axes
XW and ZW . The direction of axis YW is defined by a unit vector v̂ = (vx , vy , vz ) calculated as the cross
product between vectors ŵ and û:
v̂ = ŵ × û (10)
Figure 7e shows an equivalent representation of Figure 7d. In Figure 7e, the local system
OW XW YW ZW is taken as a reference for the prediction of the topography generated in the surface of
gear teeth. The surface topography will be simulated in a rectangular area defined along axes XW
and YW , as shown in Figure 7e. In order to model the surface roughness, the equations expressing
the trajectories of tool cutting edges in this local system are deduced in Step 6 as a function of the
ball end mill geometry (Step 5), the tool axis orientation and the milling trajectories followed by the
tool in the simulation area. Firstly, the coordinates of points defining the milling trajectories and
the direction vector of tool axis orientations expressed in the workpiece system XYZ (given by the
machining program and obtained in Step 1) must be transformed into the local system OW XW YW ZW .
In order to express the coordinates of a point in the local system OW XW YW ZW from its coordinates
in the workpiece system XYZ, a homogeneous transformation matrix T is defined as a function of the
unit vectors û, v̂ and ŵ and the coordinates of the origin OW in the system XYZ. The coordinates (xj , yj ,
zj ) of the tool tip point positions given in the machining program can be expressed in the local system
OW XW YW ZW , (xj W , yj W , zj W ), as:
xW xW xW
          
xj ux vx wx xOw j j j xj
 yj   uy vy wy yOw   yW   yW   yW   yj 
 = T−1 
 j  j  j
 =   = T W  →  W (11)
       
 W
zj uz vz wz zOw zj
 
    z j   zj   zj   
1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 9 of 20
Similarly, a direction vector (uj , vj , wj ) given in the machining program can be expressed in the
local system OW XW YW ZW , (uj W , vj W , wj W ) by means of a matrix T1 depending on the unit vectors û, v̂
and ŵ
 W   W   W 
uj uj uj
    
uj ux vx wx 0 uj
 W   vW   vW 
 v j  2018, 11,  v j 
 xuFOR PEER
 y vy REVIEW wy 0 
 Materials
  v 9 of20
 j 
 =   W  = T1  jW  →  jW  = T1 −1  (12)
   
 wj   uz vz wz 0   w j   wj 
 
 wj   wj 
Similarly, a direction vector (uj, vj, wj) given in the machining program can be expressed in the
1 system OW0XWYW0ZW, (u0jW, v1jW, wjW) by1 means of a matrix
local 1 T1 depending1 on the unit vectors1 u, v
and w:
Once the tool tip point positions and the tool axis orientations are expressed in the local system
uj u v w 0 uW
j uW
j uW
j uj
OW XW YW ZW , the equations for the cutting edge
x x x trajectory are deduced. In order to achieve this,
vj uy v y w y 0 v W vW vW -1 vj
the geometry of the tool wcutting j = T1
= edges is first modeled. j → j = T1 w (12)
j u v w 0
z wj
z z W
wj wj W W j
1 0 0 0 1 1
5. 1 1 1
Tool geometric modelization (Figure 8). The roughness model is developed for a ball end mill
Oncewhose
geometry, the toolbehavior
tip point positions
resembles andthat
the of
toola axis orientations
conical areonly
tool that expressed in thethe
cuts with local system area of
spherical
OWXWYWZW, the equations for the cutting edge trajectory are deduced. In order to achieve this, the
the tool tip for gear teeth finishing trajectories. Figure 8a shows schematically the 3D geometry of
geometry of the tool cutting edges is first modeled.
a ball end mill of radius R and helix angle i0 . For simplicity, only one of the edges is represented
in5.the Tool
figuregeometric
(Figure modelization (Figure 8). The
8b), but the developed roughness
model model is developed
is generalized for a ball
for a Nt edge end
mill. Itmill
is assumed
geometry, whose behavior resembles that of a conical tool that only cuts with the spherical area
that the cutting edge represented in this figure represents one of the edges of the milling cutter,
of the tool tip for gear teeth finishing trajectories. Figure 8a shows schematically the 3D geometry
whichofis areferred to as a k edge, where k = 1, 2, ..., N . To define the position of a point located on
ball end mill of radius R and helix angle i0. tFor simplicity, only one of the edges is
the edge k, a reference
represented system
in the figure OT X8b),
(Figure T YTbut
ZTthe
attached
developedto the ballis end
model mill is for
generalized defined:
a Nt edge mill.
It is assumed that the cutting edge represented in this figure represents one of the edges of the
n The reference
milling system
cutter, which origintoOas
is referred T is
a klocated on the
edge, where k =tool
1, 2,tip being
..., N coincident
t. To define with the
the position of atool axis
n The axis ZT corresponds to the tool axis T T T T
point located on the edge k, a reference system O X Y Z attached to the ball end mill is defined:
n  TheThe
axis XT is radial
reference system and
origintangent to edge
OT is located 1 tool
on the projection
tip beingin the plane
coincident the tool axispoint OT
containing
with
 andThe
perpendicular to ZTtoaxis
axis ZT corresponds the tool axis
n  TheThe axis
axis YTXTisisperpendicular
radial and tangentto to edge
axes XT1 projection in the plane
and YT forming containing point
a right-handed OT and
system.
perpendicular to ZT axis
 angle
The position The axis
ϕk ofYTcutting
is perpendicular to axes
edge k with XT andto
respect YT axis
forming
XT acan
right-handed system.
be expressed as:
The position angle ϕk of cutting edge k with respect to axis XT can be expressed as:
2π
ϕk = 2π (k − 1) (13)
ϕ = Nt(k − 1)
k
(13)
Nt
a) b)
Figure 8. Ball end mill geometry (a) and k edge geometry definition (b).
Figure 8. Ball end mill geometry (a) and k edge geometry definition (b).
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 10 of 20
The position of a cutting edge point P(i, k), located at a height zi on the edge k, can be written
in the tool reference system OT XT YT ZT as a function of (a) the radius Ri and the position angle β i of
cutting edge point at height zi and (b) the position angle ϕk of edge k as follows:

x PT(i,k) = Ri · cos( β i + ϕk (14)
y TP(i,k) = Ri · sin( β i + ϕk ) (15)
z TP(i,k) = zi (16)
where, from ball end mill geometry, the radius Ri and the position angle β i are:
q
Ri = 2Rzi − (zi )2 (17)
βi = zi ·tan(i0 )/R (18)
Next, the equations of trajectories followed by cutting edge points are deduced.
6. Tool axis orientation and points trajectories determination (Figures 9 and 10). In this step,
the trajectory followed by any cutting edge point in a five-axis milling operation is expressed
as a function of cutting parameters, tool axis orientation and milling trajectories defined in the
machining program. The cutting parameters are the feed value (F) in mm/min and the spindle
speed (S) in rpm. Therefore, the tool feed in mm per revolution can be calculated as:
mm F (mm/min)
f = (19)
rev S(rpm)
In order to define the cutting trajectories, as an example, the linear motion shown in Figure 7e,
when the tool tip point goes from a point O to a point I in a milling trajectory of the simulation area,
is considered. The procedure presented below is carried out in every section of the milling trajectories
located inside the simulation area.
From the machining program, the coordinates (xO , yO , zO ) and (xI , yI , zI ) of points O and I and
the direction vector (uOI , vOI , wOI ) of tool axis orientation during this linear motion can be known.
By means of the matrices given by Equations (11) and (12), the coordinates (xO W , yO W , zO W ) and (xI W ,
yI W , zI W ) of these points and the direction vector (uOI W , vOI W , wOI W ) can be expressed in the local
system OW XW YW ZW attached to each simulation area.
Taking into account the feed direction of the ball end mill along the linear motion between points
O and I, feed values fx , fy and fz along axes XW , YW and ZW can be defined. In order to achieve this,
a unit vector r̂ = (rx , ry , rz ) that considers the tool feed direction between points O and I, is defined as a
function of their coordinates:
q
r̂ = where q = xW W W W W W
I − x O , y I − yO , z I − zO (20)
|q|
The components fx , fy and fz of the tool feed can be expressed as:
f x = f rx (21)
f y = f ry (22)
f z = f rz (23)
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 11 of 20
By means of feed values fx , fy and fz, the position of the tool tip point along the linear displacement
between points O and I is expressed as a function of the tool rotation angle α in radians. In Figure 9,
it is assumed that the tool tip point is located at a point O1 whose coordinates are:
W W α
xO1 = xO + fx (24)
2π
W W α
Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW yO1 = yO + fy 11 of 20 (25)
2π
W W W α α
zO1 = =z zO
zO1 O + fz z 2π
W+ f
(26) (26)
2π
wherewhere
the tool
therotation angleangle
tool rotation α goes from
α goes from I -ααO
0 to0αto , being
I-α αIαand
O, being I and
αOαO, ,the
thetool
tool rotation angleswhen
rotation angles when the
tool tip point is located at points I and O, respectively.
the tool tip point is located at points I and O, respectively.
ZW
Tool rotating
axis
Z1
C
β Feed direction
OW
R Trajectory point O defined in machining
O , yO , zO
program, with coordinates xW W W
γ O1 Tool axis projection on X1Y1 plane

Y1
XW X1 YW
Figure 9. 5-axis milling scheme with tool tilt angle β and lead angle γ.
Figure 9. 5-axis milling scheme with tool tilt angle β and lead angle γ.
In order to simplify the deduction of cutting edge trajectories, the tool axis orientation is defined
In
in order to by
this step simplify
means the deduction
of two of cutting
angles, which edge trajectories,
are represented in Figurethe
9: atool axis orientation
tilt angle β and a lead is defined
angle
γ.
in this step by means of two angles, which are represented in Figure 9: a tilt angle β and a lead angle γ.
 The tilt angle β is defined as the angle between the tool rotating axis and the axis Z1, which is
The tilt angle β is defined as the angle between the tool rotating axis and the axis Z1 , which is
parallel to axis ZW.
parallel to axis ZW .
 The lead angle γ is the angle between the projection of the tool rotating axis into plane X1Y1
The lead
(which angle γ is the
is parallel angle
to plane XWbetween the projection
YW) with respect the tool rotating axis into plane X1 Y1
to axis XWofdirection.
(which is parallel to plane XW YW ) with respect to axis XW direction.
These angles β and γ can be written as function of the tool axis direction vector (uOIW, vOIW, wOIW):
W W W
These angles β and γ can be written as function W tool axis direction vector (uOI , vOI , wOI ):
of the
β = acos(w ) OI (27)
W
vOI

W
βγ = acos ( w
= a tan(− W )
OI (27)
uOI (28)
vW
γ = a tan(− uOI
W ) (28)
OI
In order to obtain the equations expressing the trajectory of cutting edge points in the local
In order to obtain the equations expressing the trajectory of cutting edge points in the local system
system OWXWYWZW from their coordinates in the tool system OTXTYTZT, three auxiliary systems
OW X W Y Z Z ,from
O1XW1Y1W
their coordinates in the tool system OT XT YT ZT , three auxiliary systems O1 X1 Y1 Z1 ,
1 O2X2Y2Z2 and O3X3Y3Z3, shown in Figure 10, are defined as a function of:
O2 X2 Y2 Z2 and O3 X3 Y3 Z3 , shown in Figure 10, are defined as a function of:
• The current position of the tool tip point given by the coordinates of point O1 (Figure 9). A
• The current position
translation of Othe
of system 1X1Ytool tip point
1Z1 with respectgiven by the
to system OWXcoordinates
WYWZW (Figure of10a)
point O1 (Figure 9).
is considered.
A translation of system
The system O1X1Y1Z1 isO X Y Z
1 shifted with respect to system O X
1 1 1 in XW, YW and ZW by distances
W W Y Z
xO1 W, yO1
W (Figure 10a) is considered.
W and zO1 respectively.
W W
The homogeneous transformation matrix TW1(fx, fy, fz, α) of this translation in XW, YW and ZW is:
1 0 0 xW
O1 O + fx α⁄(2π)
1 0 0 xW
0 1 0 yW 0 1 0 yW + fy α⁄(2π)
TW1 , , , α = O1 = O (29)
0 0 1 zW
O1 0 0 1 O + fz α⁄(2π)
zW
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 12 of 20
The system O1 X1 Y1 Z1 is shifted in XW , YW and ZW by distances xO1 W , yO1 W and zO1 W respectively.
The homogeneous transformation matrix TW1 (fx , fy , fz , α) of this translation in XW , YW and ZW is:
W + f α/ (2π )
   
1 0 0 W
xO1 1 0 0 xO x
W 0 1 0 W
yO + f y α/(2π )
 0 1 0 yO1   
TW1 f x , f y , f z , α =  = (29)
   
0 0 1 W
zO1 W + f α/ (2π ) 
   0 0 1 zO z

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
• The lead angle γ (Figure 10b). The system O2 X2 Y2 Z2 is rotated by an angle γ about axis Z1 in
clockwise direction. The homogeneous transformation matrix T12 (γ) of this rotation about Z1 -axis is:
 
cos(γ) sin(γ) 0 0
 − sin(γ) cos(γ) 0 0 
T12 (γ) =  (30)
 
0 0 1 0

 
0 0 0 1
• The tilt angle β (Figure 10c). The system O3 X3 Y3 Z3 is rotated by an angle β about axis Y2 in a
clockwise direction. The homogeneous transformation matrix T23 (β) of this rotation about Y2 -axis is:
 
cos( β) 0 sin( β) 0
 0 1 0 0 
T23 ( β) =  (31)
 
− sin( β) 0 cos( β) 0

 
0 0 0 1
• The rotation angle α (Figure 10d). The tool system OT XT YT ZT is rotated by an angle α about axis
Z3 in clockwise direction. The homogeneous transformation matrix T3T (α) of this rotation about
Z3 -axis is:  
cos(α + αO ) sin(α + αO ) 0 0
 − sin α + α
( O ) cos( α + αO ) 0 0 

T3T (α) =  (32)

0 0 1 0 


0 0 0 1
where αO is the tool rotation angle when the tool tip point is located at point O.
Finally, the trajectory of any cutting edge point P(i, k) located at a height zi on the edge k, as shown
in Figure 8, is expressed in the system OW XW YW ZW of the gear tooth (Figure 9) as a function of the
previous transformation matrices TW1 (fx , fy , fz , α), T12 (γ), T23 (β) and T3T (α) and the coordinates of the
cutting edge point P(i, k) in the tool system OT XT YT ZT (Equations (14)–(16) in Step 5):
   
xW
P(i,k )
x PT(i,k)
 W   T 
 y P(i,k)
 = TW1 f x , f , f , α ·T12 (γ)·T23 ( β)·T3T (α)· y P(i,k)
  

 zW  y z  zT

 (33)
 P(i,k)   P(i,k) 
1 1
Once the cutting edge trajectories are obtained, surface topographies generated in each simulation
area are obtained through the procedure described in Step 7.
xW
P(i,k) xTP(i,k)
yW yTP(i,k)
P(i,k) = TW1 fx , fy , fz , α ·T12 ()·T23 ()·T3T (α)· (33)
zW
P(i,k) zTP(i,k)
1 1
Materials 2018,
Once11,the
1301
cutting edge trajectories are obtained, surface topographies generated in each simulation13 of 20
area are obtained through the procedure described in Step 7.
YW Y1 Y1 Y2
P
γ
y1P O1
α y2P
f Feed direction → Z1 X1
yW y 2π P
P y1P
O
yW
O
O1≡O2 X1
ZW xW fx
α
x1P XW γ x1P
O 2π Z1≡Z2 Projection of tool axis
X2
xW x2P on plane X1Y1
(a) 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Materials P (b) 13 of 20
Z2 Z3≡Tool axis ZT Y3 YT
α
C
α
z3P yTP
R
β P
P y3P
z2P
α
Y3≡Y2 X2 O3≡OT x3P
β x2P X3
O3≡O2 α
Z3≡ZT
(c) x3P X3 (d) xTP XT
Figure 10. Definition of auxiliary systems O1X1Y1Z1 (a,b), O2X2Y2Z2 (c) and O3X3Y3Z3 (d).
Figure 10. Definition of auxiliary systems O1 X1 Y1 Z1 (a,b; O2 X2 Y2 Z2 (c) and O3 X3 Y3 Z3 (d).
7. Surface topographies determination (Figure 11). The surface topography in the gear teeth is
7. Surface topographies
obtained from successivedetermination
point positions (Figure The points
11). edge
of cutting surface topography
located on the Ntin the with
edges geartheteeth is
obtained from successive
tool rotating movement. point positions
The surface of cutting
topography edge points
is simulated located onarea
in a rectangular Nt edges
the defined with the
along
toolaxes XW and
rotating YW, as shown
movement. The in Figuretopography
surface 7e. This areaisissimulated
divided intoin aarectangular
discrete number area of planesalong
defined
perpendicular to axes X and Y . For each plane, taking into account
axes XW and YW , as shown in Figure 7e. This area is divided into a discrete number of planes
W W the trajectories of cutting
edge points to given byXEquation (33), the model predicts the area swept by the tool cutting edges
perpendicular axes W and YW . For each plane, taking into account the trajectories of cutting
during the tool rotation and feed motion. The profile generated at each plane is obtained from
edge points given by Equation (33), the model predicts the area swept by the tool cutting edges
the lowest positions of marks left by cutting edge points. By considering the profiles generated
during the tool rotation and feed motion. The profile generated at each plane is obtained from
in those planes, the 3D surface topography in the rectangular area can be predicted. This allows
the lowest positions
the profiles of marks
generated along left
axesbyXWcutting
and YW edge points. ByAsconsidering
to be analyzed. an example,the profiles
Figure generated
11 shows the in
those planes,
surface the 3D surface
topography predictedtopography in the rectangular
for the simulation area selected area can be 6b.
in Figure predicted.
In FigureThis 11a, allows
a 3D the
profiles generated along axes
representation of the predicted W X and Y to
surface topography
W be analyzed.
is shown. When the 2D profiles generated at the
As an example, Figure 11 shows
surface topography
two planes (YW = 0predicted
and XW = 0)for arethe simulation
considered area11b,c),
(Figure selected
it caninbeFigure
observed 6b.that
In Figure
profiles11a,
are a 3D
representation of the predicted
not only composed of roughness surface
marks topography
left by tooliscutting
shown. When
edges. In the 2D 11b,
Figure profiles generated at
the straight
twosections
planes defining
(YW = 0the and tool
XW trajectory
= 0) are(red line) can be
considered observed.
(Figure In Figure
11b,c), it can11c,
bethe form of the
observed thatgear
profiles
tooth surface can also be observed. In order to analyze the surface roughness,
are not only composed of roughness marks left by tool cutting edges. In Figure 11b, the straight the effect of tool
trajectory
sections in each
defining themilling pass is removed
tool trajectory (red line)forcan eachbe profile
observed. predicted
In Figurealong11c,YW-axis.
the formAs aof the
consequence, roughness profiles (in black) are obtained. In Figure 11c, the form of the gear
gear tooth surface can also be observed. In order to analyze the surface roughness, the effect of
surface is also removed from the predicted profile and the roughness profile in black is obtained.
tool trajectory in each milling pass is removed for each profile predicted along YW -axis. As a
In Figure 11d, the predicted surface roughness without the influence of the milling trajectory is
shown. It can be observed that the step over between milling passes has a significant influence
surface is topography
on the also removed andfrom the predicted
the roughness profile and
peak-to-valley the roughness
values. However, for profile in black
this case, is obtained.
the effect of
In Figure 11d,
tool feed on the predicted
roughness surface roughness without the influence of the milling trajectory is
is less.
Predicted and
on the topography surface topography
the roughness peak-to-valley values. However, for this case, the effect of
tool feed on roughness is less.
8
4
0
-4
-8
-0.5 -0.5
-0.25 -0.25
0 0
0.25 0.25
trajectory in each milling pass is removed for each profile predicted along YW-axis. As a
surface is also removed from the predicted profile and the roughness profile in black is obtained.
In Figure 11d, the predicted surface roughness without the influence of the milling trajectory is
Materials 2018,
on11,
the1301 14 of 20
topography and the roughness peak-to-valley values. However, for this case, the effect of
tool feed on roughness is less.
Predicted surface topography
8
4
0
-4
-8
-0.5 -0.5
-0.25 -0.25
0 0
0.25 0.25
Materials Y W (mm)
2018, 11, x FOR PEER X W (mm)
(a) 0.5REVIEW
0.5 14 of 20
Roughness profile at X W=0 along YW-axis

5
2.5
0
-2.5
-0.75 -0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75

YW (mm)
5
2.5
-2.5
(c) -0.75 -0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75
YW (mm)
Figure 11. 3D simulated surface topography (a), roughness profiles (b,c) and surface roughness (d):
Figure 11.
ball 3Dmill
end simulated surface
with 3 mm topography
diameter (a); roughness
and Nt = 3 cutting edges andprofiles (b,c)
feed value f = and
0.18 surface
mm/rev. roughness (d):
ball end mill with 3 mm diameter and Nt = 3 cutting edges and feed value f = 0.18 mm/rev.
4. Model Validation Results
4. Model In order to validate

Validation Resultsthe surface roughness predictive model explained in the previous section,
measured roughness after gear machining, and model predicted roughness, were compared.
In order to validate the surface roughness predictive model explained in the previous section,
measured roughness
4.1. Gear Roughnessafter gear machining, and model predicted roughness, were compared.
Measurement
For measuring gear surface roughness (Ra and Rz) (Table 4), confocal tridimensional Leica® DMC
4.1. Gear Roughness Measurement
3D and contact profilometer Taylor Hobson® Form Taylorsurf were used for the 3D and 2D roughness
measurement,
For gear surface roughness (Ra and Rz ) (Table 4), confocal tridimensional Leica® DMC
measuringrespectively.
3D and contact profilometer Taylor Hobson® Form Taylorsurf were used for the 3D and 2D roughness
Table 4. Roughness measured results for gear teeth after finishing strategies.
measurement, respectively.
Scallops Measured Roughness Values
Teeth Number Machining Strategy
Table 4. Roughness measured results for (mm) Ra (µm)
gear teeth after Rz (µm)
finishing strategies.
1 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.01
1.68 8.64
2 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.01 Measured Roughness Values
Teeth Number 3 3 + 2 AXES Strategy
Machining ZIG Scallops
0.02 (mm)
2.72 Ra (µm) 13.03 Rz (µm)
4 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.02
1 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.01
5 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.03 1.68 8.64
2 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.01 4.66 20.83
6 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.03
3 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.02
7 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01 2.72 13.03
4 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.02 1.91 10.12
8 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01
5 9 3 + 2 AXES
3 + 2 AXES ZIGZIG-ZAG 0.020.03 4.66 20.83
6 3 + 2 AXES ZIG 0.03 2.71 15.43
10 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02
7 11 3 + 2 AXES
3 + 2 AXESZIG-ZAG
ZIG-ZAG 0.030.01
4.83 1.91 22.20 10.12
8 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01
12 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.03
9 13 3 + 2 AXES5 AXES ZIG-ZAG ZIG 0.010.02
1.34 2.71 7.78 15.43
10 3 + 2 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02
14 5 AXES ZIG 0.01
11 15 3 + 2 AXES5 AXES ZIG-ZAG ZIG 0.020.03
2.62 4.83 13.44 22.20
12 3 + 2 AXES
16 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG ZIG 0.020.03
17 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
4.58 19.63
18 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
19 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01
4.24 20.03
22 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02 6.86 31.62
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 15 of 20
Table 4. Cont.
Measured Roughness Values

Teeth Number Machining Strategy Scallops (mm)
Ra (µm) Rz (µm)
13 5 AXES ZIG 0.01
1.34 7.78
14 5 AXES ZIG 0.01
15 5 AXES ZIG 0.02
2.62 13.44
16 5 AXES ZIG 0.02
17 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
4.58 19.63
18 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
4.24 20.03
22 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02 6.86 31.62
7.68 35.63
As it is mentioned in Section 3, the developed model predicts surface roughness in 5 different

gear tooth zones. Nevertheless, surface roughness is only measured in two zones, always avoiding
tooth edges (zones 1 and 5) and coinciding with the intermediate tooth zone. This fact must be taken
into consideration when comparing predicted and measured roughness values. Therefore, for model
validation, measured roughness values were compared to predicted values from zones 2–4.
4.2. Gear Roughness Prediction

The developed roughness model analyses 5 gear tooth zones and predicts surface roughness and
generates surface topography and roughness profiles in each of these 5 zones. Thanks to this, different
roughness profiles are predicted along tool feed direction XW . They are simulated for different tool
edges number (Nt) and feed values (f ) as can be seen in Figures 10 and 11.
In Table 5, roughness values for each gear tooth flank depending on machining type, cutting
patterns and programmed scallop height are shown. These values also depend on tooth flank (concave
or convex), and on the analyzed zone (1–5). In Table 5, the first of the rows corresponds to the concave
flanks and the second to convex ones.
In this case, taking into account that the selected gear design method corresponds to the Gleason
method, the roughness values (Ra and Rz ) are slightly different in the 5 analyzed zones. This is a
consequence of the Gleason method, which generates a gear with a variable gearing height. For this
reason, in the areas closest to the outer diameter, the obtained roughness values are higher.
The shape of the roughness profiles is a consequence of the straight sections between two points
of the machining program (interpolation points) that define tool trajectory. The distance between the
different interpolation points within the same path is approximately 0.56 mm.
In the left-side figures (Figures 12 and 13), the straight sections defined by machining G1 (linear
movement) are represented by a red line. The blue color represents the roughness profile. As can be
seen, the roughness profile depends on the tool edge number (Nt ) and programmed tool feed value (f ).
In the right-side figures (Figures 12 and 13), the form associated to workpiece component is eliminated,
and for each roughness profile, both the arithmetic mean roughness parameter (Ra ) and the average
roughness parameter (Rz ) are obtained.
different interpolation points within the same path is approximately 0.56 mm.
In the left-side figures (Figures 12 and 13), the straight sections defined by machining G1 (linear
movement) are represented by a red line. The blue color represents the roughness profile. As can be
seen, the roughness profile depends on the tool edge number (Nt) and programmed tool feed value
(f). In the right-side figures (Figures 12 and 13), the form associated to workpiece component is
Materials 2018, 11, 1301
eliminated, and for each roughness profile, both the arithmetic mean roughness parameter (Ra) and16 of 20
the average roughness parameter (Rz) are obtained.
Figure 12. Predicted roughness profiles for different feed values and for the same tool.
Figure 12. Predicted roughness profiles for different feed values and for the same tool.
Table 5. Roughness predicted results for gear teeth.
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5

Scallop
Teeth N◦ Machining Strategy Ra Rz Ra Rz Ra Rz Ra Rz Ra Rz
(mm)
(µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm) (µm)
3+2 1.2 5.19 1.39 5.74 1.56 6.6 1.73 7.31 1.85 7.66
1, 2 ZIG 0.01
AXES 2.1 9 1.89 8.68 1.65 7.92 1.41 6.92 1.18 6.72
3+2 2.44 10.43 2.8 11.75 3.27 13.5 3.49 15.38 3.89 16.42
3, 4 ZIG 0.02
AXES 4.33 18.71 3.82 16.37 3.39 14.47 2.88 13.15 2.36 11.1
3+2 3.72 16.39 4.31 18.6 4.93 20.16 5.42 22.35 5.7 24.45
5, 6 ZIG 0.03
AXES 5.96 26.13 5.57 23.29 4.71 20.94 3.97 17.4 3.28 14.62
3+2 1.19 5.16 1.35 5.77 1.65 9.29 1.66 7.07 1.83 7.75
7, 8 ZIG-ZAG 0.01
AXES 2.2 9.58 1.93 8.63 8.63 7.89 1.46 7.3 1.19 6.2
3+2 2.28 9.8 2.63 11.44 11.44 14.38 3.34 17.21 3.47 15.01
9, 10 ZIG-ZAG 0.02
AXES 4.32 18.36 3.86 16.5 16.5 14.43 2.9 12.7 2.36 10.53
3+2 3.41 14.75 3.96 16.95 16.95 19.71 5.07 20.07 5.35 19.98
11, 12 ZIG-ZAG 0.03
AXES 6.17 27.68 5.58 24.67 24.67 21.78 4.15 18.08 3.32 14.68
1.11 4.63 1.3 5.35 1.48 5.97 1.62 6.67 1.82 7.34
13, 14 5 AXES ZIG 0.01
2.3 9.68 2.19 8.93 1.93 8.21 1.68 7.42 1.46 6.52
2.25 9.2 2.59 10.52 2.95 11.93 3.32 13.39 3.6 14.66
15, 16 5 AXES ZIG 0.02
4.92 19.95 4.51 18.28 4.06 16.59 3.54 15.13 3.15 13.45
3.43 14.42 4.05 16.66 4.6 18.75 5.3 21.1 5.49 22.9
17, 18 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
7.16 29.17 6.56 26.78 5.84 25.04 1.58 23.39 4.89 20.33
1.06 4.61 1.24 5.5 1.41 6.23 1.58 6.59 1.72 7.12
19, 20 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01
2.5 9.61 2.22 8.63 2.02 7.67 1.92 7.35 1.59 6.37
2.22 8.34 2.47 9.59 2.86 11.05 3.25 12.44 3.43 13.34
21, 22, 23 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02
5.16 20.07 4.61 17.6 4.25 16.78 3.77 15.46 3.36 13.91
3.2 11.76 3.71 13.62 4.27 16.91 4.87 19.54 5.37 20.01
24, 25 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.03
7.35 30.22 6.72 27.63 5.91 25.06 5.5 22.63 4.76 19.97
3.43 14.42 4.05 16.66 4.6 18.75 5.3 21.1 5.49 22.9
17, 18 5 AXES ZIG 0.03
7.16 29.17 6.56 26.78 5.84 25.04 1.58 23.39 4.89 20.33
1.06 4.61 1.24 5.5 1.41 6.23 1.58 6.59 1.72 7.12
19, 20 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.01
2.5 9.61 2.22 8.63 2.02 7.67 1.92 7.35 1.59 6.37
2.22 8.34 2.47 9.59 2.86 11.05 3.25 12.44 3.43 13.34
21, 22, 23 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.02
5.16 20.07 4.61 17.6 4.25 16.78 3.77 15.46 3.36 13.91
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 17 of 20
3.2 11.76 3.71 13.62 4.27 16.91 4.87 19.54 5.37 20.01
24, 25 5 AXES ZIG-ZAG 0.03
7.35 30.22 6.72 27.63 5.91 25.06 5.5 22.63 4.76 19.97
Figure 13. Predicted

Figure roughness
13. Predicted roughnessprofiles
profilesfor
for tools
tools with differentedge
with different edgenumbers
numbers
andand working
working withwith
different feed values.
different feed values.
4.3. Gear
4.3. Gear Roughness
Roughness Predictive
Predictive Model
Model Validation
Validation
Figure 14 shows a comparison, for the same gear tooth, between the profile generated after gear
Figure 14 shows a comparison, for the same gear tooth, between the profile generated after gear
measurement (after the machining process) and the profile generated by the developed roughness
measurement (after the machining process) and the profile generated by the developed roughness
predictive model. The variations shown in some roughness profiles peaks correspond to the
predictive model.
trajectory Theinterpolating
when variations shown
betweenin the
some roughness
different profiles peaks
interpolation points correspond to the
that make up the same
trajectory
whenmachining
interpolating between
path. the different interpolation points that make up the same machining path.
Figure
Figure 14. Roughness
14. Roughness comparisonof
comparison ofpredictive
predictive model
modelvs.
vs.measured
measuredroughness.
roughness.
4. Discussion
The obtained roughness results, which determine gear quality, agree with cited works related to
gear manufacturing in CNC machines, and, indicate improved surface quality and process versatility.
Moreover, more detailed results are added in this work for optimal machining strategies and
predicting roughness.
There are several aspects to mention in relation to machining strategies, cutting parameters and
roughness results. On one hand, for 3 + 2 axis machining, for both zig and zig-zag strategies, the
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 18 of 20
5. Discussion
The obtained roughness results, which determine gear quality, agree with cited works related
to gear manufacturing in CNC machines, and, indicate improved surface quality and process
versatility. Moreover, more detailed results are added in this work for optimal machining strategies
and predicting roughness.
There are several aspects to mention in relation to machining strategies, cutting parameters
and roughness results. On one hand, for 3 + 2 axis machining, for both zig and zig-zag strategies,
the obtained Ra and Rz values are slightly different for the zig strategy. The tool works down milling
and machining time is increased due to non-cutting movements. Machining time is almost doubled.
For 5 continuous axis machining, obtained results show differences that need to be taken into account.
For zig cutting patterns, obtained roughness values for Ra and Rz are considerably lower than the
ones obtained for zig-zag cutting patterns, about 50% lower. If both, 3 + 2 axis and 5 continuous
axis machining are compared, better surface roughness values were obtained for 5 continuous axis
machining with zig cutting pattern. On the contrary, the worst surface roughness results are obtained
for 5 continuous axis machining with zig-zag cutting pattern. In relation to programmed stepovers,
when programmed stepovers are reduced and the tool works up milling, the tool tends to go back to
already machined path increasing roughness values. This is called ‘rail effect’ and is a consequence
of tool deflection, which could explain why surface roughness values are higher for those machining
trajectories with zig-zag cutting patterns.
The surface roughness prediction model was also used to analyze 5 axes and 3 + 2 axes machining
strategies behavior. In the 3 + 2 axes machining case, the roughness values obtained from concave
and convex gear flanks were similar. Instead, in the 5 continuous axis machining case, obtained
surface roughness values were higher in convex gear flanks. Thanks to the developed roughness
model, this problem can be corrected by changing the tool axis attack angle in the machining surface
in order to improve surface roughness. Indirectly, the model also detects the so-called ‘rail effect’
previously mentioned, that is, the obtained roughness values almost doubled. The presented model
also determined the influence of cutting parameters such as tool feed values (mm/rev) and tool
edge number. Thus, it can be concluded, that for a higher tool edge number (maintaining tool
feed values), the obtained roughness results were significantly lower. Clearly there is a direct link
between programmed feed values and obtained roughness results. The results showed that a small
increase in the feed value has a significant effect on the final surface quality obtained. After roughness
values analysis in the tool feed direction and comparing these with those generated in the direction
perpendicular to it, it is clear that the roughness due to the application of the different stepovers,
for the same feed value programmed, is always higher. This makes it a more restrictive parameter,
which is why it is measured in each of the different machined flanks.
6. Conclusions
In recent years, technological advances have enabled gear manufacturing in general purpose
machines. This is a feasible process that is less limited to gear size and geometry than traditional
technologies. The machining of gears in multitasking machines is presented here as a real application
for this type of technology due to its flexibility, size and the variety of geometries that can be machined
in this type of machine. It can be concluded that the presented roughness predictive model fulfills
its function, making it possible to predict and control the cutting strategies and parameters to obtain
the required surface finish. The use of standard tools for the machining of gears requires less time
for tool supply, provides a greater variety range and competitive time and costs. In addition, it is
possible to exchange tools between different machines. Specific gear manufacturing machines require
‘blank’ material for gear manufacturing. On the contrary, general purpose machines with multitasking
technology enable the entire gear machining in a single machine and take a single reference in
the workpiece. This ensures tight execution times and the required quality consecution. Therefore,
the presented study has demonstrated that although spiral bevel gears geometry is a complex geometry,
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 19 of 20
it is possible to machine it with 3 + 2 machining axes kinematics. The rotary axis can be positioned
and fixed from the beginning for a more robust process. The obtained surface roughness values
are acceptable in this case. Moreover, 3 + 2 machining is cheaper because less interpolated axes are
required. Also, 3 + 2 axes programming is not as challenging as 5 axes programming. This work
validates the developed surface topography model for a ball mill. There is concordance between
experimentally obtained values and theoretical values obtained by the model. Moreover, the obtained
values for different programmed stepovers maintain the same tendency. Topographical simulation
becomes an essential tool after the programming of each of the finishing strategies because it optimizes
machining results without resorting to the trial and error method. Thus, costs and time is reduced,
which is desirable under current market conditions.
Author Contributions: Á.Á. and A.C. designed and performed the experiments. Additionally, M.A. developed
roughness model. A.C. wrote the paper. H.G. analyzed roughness measurements. Finally, L.N.L.d.L. contributed
to the resources (machine, tools, material, etc.) and supervised all of the work carried out in this research.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: Thank you to the Department of Education, and to the Universities and Research program of
the Basque Government for their financial support, by means of the ZABALDUZ program. We also thank the UFI
in Mechanical Engineering department of the UPV/EHU for its support of this project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; and in the
decision to publish the results.
References
1. Qin, Z.; Luo, Y.; Li, K.; Peng, H. Optimal design of a novel hybrid Electric powertrain for tracked vehicles.
Energies 2017, 10, 2141. [CrossRef]
2. Xu, G.; Hua, D.; Dai, W.; Zhang, X. Design and performance analysis of a coal bed gas drainage machine
based on incomplete non-circular gears. Energies 2017, 10, 1933. [CrossRef]
3. Stadtfeld, H.J. Gleason Bevel Gear Technology: The Science of Gear Engineering and Modern Manufacturing Methods
for Angular Transmissions; Gleason Works: Rochester, NY, USA, 2014; ISBN 9780615964928.
4. Watson, H.J. Gear Milling. In Modern Gear Production; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 1970; Chapter 8;
pp. 146–158. ISBN 9780080158358.
5. Lechner, G. Klingelnberg spiral bevel gears. J. Mech. 1968, 3, 217–218. [CrossRef]
6. Calleja, A.; Gonzalez, H.; Polvorosa, R.; Ortega, N.; Lopez-de-Lacalle, L.N. Multitasking machines: Evolution,
resources, processes and scheduling. DYNA 2017, 92, 637–642. [CrossRef]
7. Klocke, F.; Brumm, M.; Staudt, J. Quality and surface of gears manufactured by free form milling with
standard tools. In Proceedings of the International Gear Conference, Lyon, France, 26–28 August 2014;
pp. 26–28.
8. Shih, Y.P.; Sun, Z.H.; Wu, F.C. A disk tool cutting method for bevel gear manufacture on a five-axis machine.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 94, 855–865. [CrossRef]
9. Suh, S.H.; Jih, W.S.; Hong, H.D.; Chung, D.H. Sculptured surface machining of spiral bevel gears with CNC
milling. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2001, 41, 833–850. [CrossRef]
10. Uzun, M. The investigation on manufacturing time of a new type concave-convex gear by a CNC milling
machine. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015, 77, 1275–1280. [CrossRef]
11. Dudás, I.; Bodzás, S.; Dudás, I.S.; Mándy, Z. Development of spiroid worm gear drive having arched profile
in axial section and a new technology of spiroid worm manufacturing with lathe center displacement. Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2015, 79, 1881–1892. [CrossRef]
12. Li, J.B.; Ma, H.J.; Deng, X.Z. An approach to realize the networked closed-loop manufacturing of spiral bevel
gears. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 89, 1469. [CrossRef]
13. Lin, C.; Fan, Y.; Zhang, Z. Additive manufacturing with secondary processing of curve-face gears. Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 2016, 86, 9–20. [CrossRef]
14. Li, Z.; Wang, B.; Ma, W. Comparison of ironing finishing and compressing finishing as post-forging for
net-shape manufacturing. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 86, 3333–3343. [CrossRef]
Materials 2018, 11, 1301 20 of 20
15. Hyatt, G.; Piber, M.A.; Chaphalkar, N.; Kleinhenz, O.; Mori, M. Review of New Strategies for Gear Production.
Procedia CIRP 2014, 14, 72–76. [CrossRef]
16. Kawasaki, K.; Tsuji, I.; Abe, Y.; Gunbara, H. Manufacturing method of large sized spiral bevel gears in cyclo
palloid system using multi axis control and multitasking machine tool. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Gears, Garching, Germany, 4–6 October 2012; Volume 1, pp. 337–348.
17. Bouquet, J.; Hensgen, L.; Klink, A.; Jacobs, T.; Klocke, F.; Lauwers, B. Fast production of gear prototypes—A
comparison of technologies. Procedia CIRP 2014, 14, 77–82. [CrossRef]
18. Tang, J.; Yang, X. Research on manufacturing method of planning for spur face-gear with 4-axis CNC planer.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 82, 847–858. [CrossRef]
19. Deng, X.; Li, G.; Wei, B.; Deng, J. Face-milling spiral bevel gear tooth surfaces by application of 5-axis CNC
machine tool. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2014, 71, 1049–1057. [CrossRef]
20. Álvarez, A.; Calleja, A.; Ortega, N.; López de Lacalle, LN. Five-Axis Milling of Large Spiral Bevel Gears:
Toolpath Definition, Finishing, and Shape Errors. Metals 2018, 8, 353. [CrossRef]
21. Fuentes, A.A.; Ruiz-Orzaez, R.; Gonzalez-Perez, I. Numerical approach for determination of rough-cutting
machine-tool settings for fixed setting face-milled spiral bevel gears. Mech. Mach. Theory 2017, 112, 22–42.
[CrossRef]
22. Litvin, F.L.; Wang, A.G.; Handschu, R.F. Computerized generation and simulation of meshing and contact of
spiral bevel gears. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 1998, 158, 35–64. [CrossRef]
23. Artoni, A.; Gabiccini, M.; Guiggiani, M. Optimization of the loaded contact pattern in hypoid gears by
automatic topography modification. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2010, 131, 011008. [CrossRef]
24. Stadtfeld, H.J.; Gaiser, U. The ultimate motion graph. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2000, 122, 317–322. [CrossRef]
25. Ding, H.; Tang, J.; Zhou, Y.; Zhong, J.; Wan, G. A multi-objective design for machine setting correction
correlating to high tooth contact performance in spiral bevel gears based on nonlinear interval number
optimization. Mech. Mach. Theory 2017, 113, 85–108. [CrossRef]
26. Ding, H.; Tang, J.; Zhong, J.; Zhou, Y. A hybrid modification approach of machine-tool setting considering
high tooth contact performance in spiral bevel and hypoid gears. J. Manuf. Syst. 2016, 41, 228–238. [CrossRef]
27. Bae, I.; Schirru, V. An Approach to Find Optimal Topological Modification to Duplicate Tooth Flank Form of
the Existing Gear. In Proceedings of the International Gear Conference, Lyon, France, 26–28 August 2014;
pp. 34–43.
28. Zhou, Y.; Zezhong, C.C.; Tang, J. A New Method of Designing the Tooth Surfaces of Spiral Bevel Gears With
Ruled Surface for Their Accurate Five-Axis Flank Milling. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 2017, 139, 061004. [CrossRef]
29. Zhou, Y.; Zezhong, C.C.; Tang, J.; Liu, S. An innovative approach to NC programming for accurate five-axis
flank milling of spiral bevel or hypoid gears. Comput. Aided Des. 2017, 84, 15–24. [CrossRef]
30. Calleja, A.; Bo, P.; González, H.; Bartoň, M.; López de Lacalle, LN. Highly accurate 5-axis flank CNC
machining with conical tools. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 97, 1605–1615. [CrossRef]
31. Litvin, F.L.; Fuentes, A. Gear Geometry and Applied Theory; PTR Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA,
2004.
32. Artetxe, E.; Olvera, D.; López de Lacalle, L.N.; Campa, F.J.; Olvera, D.; Lamikiz, A. Solid subtraction model
for the surface topography prediction in flank milling of thin-walled integral blade rotors (IBRs). Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 2016, 90, 741–752. [CrossRef]
33. Xing, Y.; Qin, S.; Wang, T. Study of Subdivision Surface Modelling for Spiral Bevel Gear Manufacturing.
In Proceedings of the 6th CIRP-Sponsored International Conference on Digital Enterprise Technology; Springer:
Berlin, Germany, 2010; Volume 66. [CrossRef]
34. Teixeira, J.; Guingand, M.; de Vaujany, JP. Designing and Manufacturing Spiral Bevel Gears Using 5-Axis
Computer Numerical Control (CNC) Milling Machines. J. Mech. Des. 2013, 135, 024502. [CrossRef]
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Spiral Bevel Gears Face Roughness Prediction Produ

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spiral Bevel Gears Face Roughness Prediction Produ

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

materials

and Luis Norberto Lopez de Lacalle 5 ID

Keywords: gear manufacturing; roughness model; multitasking machines/multiprocess machines

Materials 2018, 11, 1301; doi:10.3390/ma11081301 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

2. Spiral Bevel Gears Manufacturing Process in Multitasking Machines

Figure 1. Ibarmia ZVH45/L1600 ADD + PROCESS kinematic.

Figure 2. R-I (a) and R-II (b) roughing strategies.

Figure 4. Roughing strategies result (a); Finishing strategies result (b).

Figure 5. Interdental gap points (a) and trajectories (b) representation.

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20

^ Tool center point positions

Tool center point C

(f) Tool tip point

y TP(i,k) = Ri · sin( β i + ϕk ) (15)

βi = zi ·tan(i0 )/R (18)

The components fx , fy and fz of the tool feed can be expressed as:

γ O1 Tool axis projection on X1Y1 plane

Predicted surface topography

Roughness profile at X W=0 along YW-axis

-0.75 -0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75

4. Model In order to validate

Measured Roughness Values

As it is mentioned in Section 3, the developed model predicts surface roughness in 5 different

4.2. Gear Roughness Prediction

Table 5. Roughness predicted results for gear teeth.

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5

Materials 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 20

Figure 13. Predicted

You might also like