Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ii
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Contents
Page
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3 Symbols and units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4 Gear information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5 Lubrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6 Scuffing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7 Surface fatigue (micro-- and macropitting) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8 Wear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Annexes
A Flow chart for evaluating scuffing risk and oil film thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
B Normal or Gaussian probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
C Test rig gear data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
D Example calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figures
1 Distances along the line of action for external gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Transverse relative radius of curvature for external gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Load sharing factor -- unmodified profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4 Load sharing factor -- pinion driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5 Load sharing factor -- gear driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6 Load sharing factor -- smooth meshing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7 Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for mineral oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8 Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAO--based synthetic
non--VI--improved oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9 Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAG--based synthetic oils . . . . . . 15
10 Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for MIL Spec. oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11 Pressure--viscosity coefficient versus dynamic viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12 Example of thermal network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
13 Contact temperature along the line of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
14 Plot of regimes of lubrication versus stress cycle factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
15 Probability of wear related distress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Tables
1 Symbols and units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Data for determining viscosity and pressure--viscosity coefficient . . . . . . . . . 12
3 Mean scuffing temperatures for oils and steels typical of the aerospace
industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4 Welding factors, XW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5 Scuffing risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6 Stress cycle factor equations for regimes I, II and III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7 Calculation results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
iii
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
Foreword
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, in this document are provided for
informational purposes only and are not to be construed as a part of AGMA Information
Sheet 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]
The purpose of this information sheet is to provide the user with information pertinent to the
lubrication of industrial metal gears for power transmission applications. It is intended that
this document serve as a general guideline and source of information about conventional
lubricants, their properties, and their general tribological behavior in gear contacts. This
information sheet was developed to supplement ANSI/AGMA Standards 2101--C95 and
2001--C95. It has been introduced as an aid to the gear manufacturing and user community.
Accumulation of feedback data will serve to enhance future developments and improved
methods to evaluate lubricant related wear risks.
It was clear from the work initiated on the revision of AGMA Standards 2001--C95 and
2101--C95 (metric version) that supporting information regarding lubricant properties and
general tribological knowledge of contacting surfaces would aid in the understanding of
these standards. The information would also provide the user with more tools to help make
a more informed decision about the performance of a geared system. This information
sheet provides sufficient information about the key lubricant parameters to enable the user
to generate reasonable estimates about scuffing and wear based on the collective
knowledge of theory available for these modes at this time.
In 1937 Harmon Blok published his theory about the relationship between contact
temperature and scuffing. This went largely unnoticed in the U.S. until the early 1950’s
when Bruce Kelley showed that Blok’s method and theories correlated well with
experimental data he had generated on scuffing of gear teeth. The Blok flash temperature
theory began to receive serious consideration as a predictor of scuffing in gears. The
methodology and theories continued to evolve through the 1950’s with notable
contributions from Dudley, Kelley and Benedict in the areas of application rating factors,
surface roughness effects and coefficient of friction. The 1960’s saw the evolution of gear
calculations and understanding continue with computer analysis and factors addressing
load sharing and tip relief issues. The AGMA Aerospace Committee began using all the
available information to produce high quality products and help meet its long--term goal of
manned space flight. R. Errichello introduced the SCORING+ computer program in 1985,
which included all of the advancements made by Blok, Kelley, Dudley and the Aerospace
Committee to that time. It became the basis for annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and
2001--C95 which helped predict the risk of scuffing and wear. In the 1990s, this annex
formed the basis for AGMA’s contribution to ISO 13989--1.
Just as many others took the original Blok theories and expanded them, the Tribology
Subcommittee of the Helical Gear Rating Committee has attempted to expand the original
annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95 and 2101--C95. Specifically, the subcommittee
targeted the effect lubrication may have on gear surface distress. As discussions evolved, it
became clear that this should be a stand alone document which will hopefully serve many
other gear types. This should be considered a work in progress as more is learned about the
theories and understanding of the various parameters and how they affect the life of the
gear. Some of these principles are also mentioned in ISO/TR 13989--1.
AGMA 925--A03 was was approved by the AGMA Technical Division Executive Committee
on March 13, 2003.
Suggestions for improvement of this document will be welcome. They should be sent to the
American Gear Manufacturers Association, 500 Montgomery Street, Suite 350, Alexandria,
Virginia 22314.
iv
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
K.E. Acheson . . . The Gear Works--Seattle, Inc. G. Lian . . . . . . . . . Amarillo Gear Company
J.B. Amendola . . MAAG Gear AG J.V. Lisiecki . . . . . The Falk Corporation
T.A. Beveridge . . Caterpillar, Inc. L. Lloyd . . . . . . . . Lufkin Industries, Inc.
M.J. Broglie . . . . . Dudley Technical Group, Inc. J.J. Luz . . . . . . . . General Electric Company
A.B. Cardis . . . . . Exxon Mobil Research D.R. McVittie . . . . Gear Engineers, Inc.
M.F. Dalton . . . . . General Electric Company A.G. Milburn . . . . Milburn Engineering, Inc.
G.A. DeLange . . . Prager, Incorporated G.W. Nagorny . . . Nagorny & Associates
D.W. Dudley . . . . Consultant M.W. Neesley . . . Philadelphia Gear Corp.
R.L. Errichello . . . GEARTECH B. O’Connor . . . . The Lubrizol Corporation
D.R. Gonnella . . . Equilon Lubricants W.P. Pizzichil . . . Philadelphia Gear Corp.
M.R. Hoeprich . . The Timken Company D.F. Smith . . . . . . Solar Turbines, Inc.
O.A. LaBath . . . . The Cincinnati Gear Co. K. Taliaferro . . . . Rockwell Automation/Dodge
v
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
K.E. Acheson . . . The Gear Works -- Seattle, Inc. G. Lian . . . . . . . . . Amarillo Gear Company
J.B. Amendola . . MAAG Gear AG D. McCarthy . . . . Dorris Company
T.A. Beveridge . . Caterpillar, Inc. D.R. McVittie . . . . Gear Engineers, Inc.
M.J. Broglie . . . . . Dudley Technical Group, Inc. A.G. Milburn . . . . Milburn Engineering, Inc.
A.B. Cardis . . . . . Exxon Mobil Research G.W. Nagorny . . . Nagorny & Associates
R.L. Errichello . . . GEARTECH B. O’Connor . . . . The Lubrizol Corporation
D.R. Gonnella . . . Equilon Lubricants D.F. Smith . . . . . . Solar Turbines, Inc.
M.R. Hoeprich . . The Timken Company K. Taliaferro . . . . Rockwell Automation/Dodge
vi
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
American Gear Manufacturers It was clear from the work on the revision of standard
ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95 (ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95,
Association -- metric version) that supporting information regard-
ing lubricant properties and general tribological
understanding of contacting surfaces would aid in
Effect of Lubrication on understanding of the standard and provide the user
with more tools to make an informed decision about
Gear Surface Distress the performance of a geared system. One of the key
parameters is the estimated film thickness. This is
not a trivial calculation, but one that has significant
impact on overall performance of the gear pair. It is
considered in performance issues such as scuffing,
wear, and surface fatigue. This information sheet
1 Scope
provides sufficient information about key lubricant
parameters to enable the user to generate reason-
This information sheet is designed to provide able estimates about surface distress based on the
currently available tribological information pertaining collective knowledge available.
to oil lubrication of industrial gears for power
transmission applications. It is intended to serve as Blok [1] published his contact temperature equation
a general guideline and source of information about in 1937. It went relatively unnoticed in the U.S. until
gear oils, their properties, and their general tribolog- Kelley [2] showed that Blok’s method gave good
ical behavior in gear contacts. Manufacturers and correlation with Kelley’s experimental data. Blok’s
end--users are encouraged, however, to work with equation requires an accurate coefficient of friction.
their lubricant suppliers to address specific concerns Kelley found it necessary to couple the coefficient of
or special issues that may not be covered here (such friction to surface roughness of the gear teeth.
as greases). Kelley recognized the importance of load sharing by
multiple pairs of teeth and gear tooth tip relief, but he
The equations provided herein allow the user to did not offer equations to account for those variables.
calculate specific oil film thickness and instanta-
neous contact (flash) temperature for gears in Dudley [3] modified Kelley’s equation by adding
service. These two parameters are considered derating factors for application, misalignment and
critical in defining areas of operation that may lead to dynamics. He emphasized the need for research on
unwanted surface distress. Surface distress may be effects of tip relief, and recommended applying
scuffing (adhesive wear), fatigue (micropitting and Blok’s method to helical gears.
macropitting), or excessive abrasive wear (scoring). In 1958, Kelley [4] changed his surface roughness
Each of these forms of surface distress may be term slightly.
influenced by the lubricant; the calculations are
offered to help assess the potential risk involved with Benedict and Kelley [5] published their equation for
a given lubricant choice. Flow charts are included as variable coefficient of friction derived from disc tests.
aids to using the equations.
The AGMA Aerospace Committee began investigat-
This information sheet is a supplement to ANSI/ ing scuffing in 1960, and Lemanski [6] published
AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95. It results of a computer analysis that contains data for
has been introduced as an aid to the gear manufac- 90 spur and helical gearsets, and formed the terms
turing and user community. Accumulation of feed- for AGMA 217.01 [7], which was published in 1965.
back data will serve to enhance future developments It used Dudley’s modified Blok/Kelley equation and
and improved methods to evaluate lubricant related included factors accounting for load sharing and tip
surface distress. relief.
1
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
-- Derating factors for application, misalignment ANSI/AGMA 2001--C95, Fundamental Rating Fac-
and dynamics were explicit input data; tors and Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and
Helical Gear Teeth
-- Options for coefficient of friction were part of
input data, including a constant 0.06 (as pre- ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95, Fundamental Rating Fac-
scribed by Kelley and AGMA 217.01), a constant tors and Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and
under user control, and a variable coefficient Helical Gear Teeth (Metric Edition)
based on the Benedict and Kelley equation.
ANSI/AGMA 1010--E95, Appearance of Gear Teeth
SCORING+ and AGMA 217.01 both use the same -- Terminology of Wear and Failure
value for the thermal contact coefficient of
BM = 16.5 N/[mm⋅s0.5⋅K], and they calculate the ISO 10825:1995, Gears -- Wear and Damage to
same contact temperature for spur gears if all Gear Teeth -- Terminology
derating factors are set to unity.
Annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/
AGMA 2001--C95 was based on SCORING+ and 3 Symbols and units
included methods for predicting risk of scuffing
based on contact temperature and risk of wear
based on specific film thickness. The symbols used in this document are shown in
This information sheet expands the information in table 1.
annex A of ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 and ANSI/AGMA NOTE: The symbols and definitions used in this docu-
2001--C95 to include many aspects of gear tribology. ment may differ from other AGMA standards.
2
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Table 1 (continued)
3
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
Table 1 (continued)
4
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Table 1 (concluded)
Symbol Description Units Where first
used
θoil Oil inlet or sump temperature °C Eq 91
θS Mean scuffing temperature °C Eq 94
θS Method of calculating scuffing temperature, θS -- -- Annex A
met
θ1, θ2 Temperature at which η1, η2 was measured °C Eq 70
λmin Specific film thickness -- -- Eq 104
λ 2b Specific film thickness at point i with a filter cutoff wavelength -- -- Eq 76
H
i of 2bH
λM1, λM2 Heat conductivity (pinion, gear) N/[s K] Eq 89, 90
λW&H Wellauer and Holloway specific film thickness -- -- Eq 102
my Mean value of random variable y -- -- 6.5.5
mm Mean coefficient of friction -- -- Eq 84
i
mmet Method for approximating mean coefficient of friction -- -- Annex A
mm const Mean coefficient of friction, constant -- -- Eq 85
mλ min Mean minimum specific film thickness mm Eq 109
ν Kinematic viscosity mm2/s Eq 60
ν1, ν2 Poisson’s ratio (pinion, gear) -- -- Eq 58
ν40, ν100 Kinematic viscosity at 40°C, 100°C mm2/s Eq 62
ρ Density kg/m3 Eq 60
ρM1, ρM2 Density (pinion, gear) kg/m3 Eq 89, 90
ρ1 , ρ2 Transverse radius of curvature (pinion, gear) mm 4.1.5
i i
ρn Normal relative radius of curvature mm Eq 32
i
ρr Transverse relative radius of curvature mm Eq 31
i
σx Composite surface roughness for filter cutoff wavelength, Lx mm Eq 77
σλ min Standard deviation of the minimum specific film thickness mm Eq 109
σ 2b Composite surface roughness adjusted for a cutoff mm Eq 76
H wavelength equal to the Hertzian contact width
i
τ Shear stress N/mm2 Eq 59
ω1, ω2 Angular velocity (pinion, gear) rad/s Eq 33, 34
5
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
tan β
β w = arctan cos α b
wt
(13)
C A = C F − r 2a2 − r 2b2
0.5
(16)
ε β = 0.0
Minimum contact length
(24)
6
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Figure 2 shows the transverse radii of curvature, Ã 1 4.2 Gear tooth velocities and loads
i
Rotational (angular) velocities
and à 2 , of the gear tooth profiles at a general
i πn 1
contact point defined by the roll angle, ξ(i), where (i) is ω1 = (33)
30
any point on the line of action from A to E (see figure ω1
ω2 = u (34)
1).
Operating pitch line velocity
ω 1 r w1
vt = (35)
1000
Rolling (tangential) velocities
ω1 Ã1
i
v r1 = (36)
à 1 Ã2 i 1000
i i
Ãr = ω2 Ã2
i Ã2 Ã 1
i i i
v r2 = (37)
i 1000
Sliding velocity (absolute value)
Ã1 Ã2
i i i
v s = v r1 − v r2
i
(38)
i
Entraining velocity (absolute value)
r b1
ξ(i) CF
i i
v e = v r1 + v r2
i
(39)
F t
nom
= 1000
v
P (40)
t
Figure 2 -- Transverse relative radius of Combined derating factor
curvature for external gears
K D = K o Km Kv (41)
where
à 1 = r b1ξ i (29)
i Ko is overload factor;
where Km is load distribution factor;
ξ A ≤ ξ (i) ≤ ξE Kv is dynamic factor.
(30) See ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95 for guidance in
Ã2 = CF Ã1
i i determining Ko, Km and Kv factors.
7
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
F t = F t nom K D (42) If adequate tip and root relief is designed for high
load capacity, and if the pinion drives the gear (see
Normal operating load figure 4):
Ft
F wn =
i
(45) ξ i − ξ A
XΓ = 1 + 6 for ξ A ≤ ξ i < ξ B
X Γ = 1 for ξ B ≤ ξ i ≤ ξ D (46) i 7 7 ξB − ξA
i (51)
XΓ = 1 + 1
3 3
ξ E − ξ i
ξ E − ξD
for ξ D < ξ i ≤ ξ E
X Γ = 1 for ξ B ≤ ξ i ≤ ξ D
i (52)
i
(47) ξE − ξ i
XΓ = 6 for ξ D < ξ i ≤ ξE (53)
i 7 ξE − ξD
2 1
6
3 7
1
3
1
A B D E 7
A B D E
Figure 3 -- Load sharing factor -- unmodified
profiles Figure 5 -- Load sharing factor -- gear driving
8
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
−1
1 − ν 21 1 − ν 22
Er = 2 + (58) where:
E1 E2
ν is kinematic viscosity, mm2/s;
where
ρ is density, kg/m3.
ν1, ν2 is Poisson’s ratio (pinion, gear); ASTM D445 [9] is the most widely used method for
E1, E2 is modulus of elasticity, N/mm2 (pinion, measuring the kinematic viscosity of lubricants for
gear). many different applications. The most commonly
9
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
where
Lubricant viscosity varies inversely with tempera-
ture. A truly ideal fluid would have a viscosity that is ηP is viscosity at pressure, p, mPa•s;
constant over all temperature. ASTM method D341 ηatm is viscosity at atmospheric pressure,
[10] can be used to obtain the viscosity--temperature mPa•s;
relationship. A simplified form can be used to α is pressure--viscosity coefficient, mm2/N.
estimate the kinematic viscosity of a fluid at a given
temperature if there is some viscometric information Today the model continues to be refined. So and
Klaus [12] provided a comparison of the many
available for the fluid at two other temperatures (see
models developed since the Barus equation was first
equation 61).
introduced. The continued research aided by the
log 10 log 10(ν + 0.7) = A − B × log 10 T (61) development of high pressure rheology techniques
to generate empirical information have shown that
where: the viscosity--pressure response of a fluid is also
related to its chemical structure [13, 14, 15]. This can
T is absolute temperature, K; have a profound effect on the film forming capabili-
ν is kinematic viscosity, mm2/s; ties of the fluid in question and the overall life of the
component involved.
A, B are dimensionless constants. 5.2 Film thickness equation
A and B can be determined by solving equation 61 Dowson, Higginson and Toyoda have authored
simultaneously with equations 62 and 63, using the various papers on EHL film thickness [16, 17, 18,
kinematic viscosity of the fluid measured at standard 19]. The film thickness equations given in these
temperatures of 40°C and 100°C. papers account for the exponential increase of
lubricant viscosity with pressure, tooth geometry,
log 10 log 10ν 40 + 0.7 − log 10 log 10ν 100 + 0.7 velocity of the gear teeth, material elastic properties
B= and the transmitted load. The film thickness
log 10(373.15) − log10(313.15)
(62) determines the operating regime of the gearset and
10
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
has been found to be a useful index of wear related η1 is dynamic viscosity at temperature θ1,
distress probability. Wellauer and Holloway [20] also mPa•s;
found that specific film thickness could be correlated
η2 is dynamic viscosity at temperature θ2,
with the probability of tooth surface distress. The
mPa•s;
Dowson and Toyoda [19] equation for line contact
central EHL film thickness will be used as shown θ1 is temperature at which η1 was determined,
below. °C;
Dimensionless central film thickness: θ2 is temperature at which η2 was determined,
G 0.56U 0.69 °C.
i
H c = 3.06
i W i
0.10
(65)
log 10
log 10η 2+0.9
log 10η 1+0.9
where d= (70)
(i) (as a subscript) defines a point on the line of log 10 2
θ +273.15
θ 1+273.15
action,
and the dimensionless parameters G, U(i) and W(i) when θ1 = 40°C and θ2 = 100°C,
are defined below:
log 10η 100 + 0.9
materials parameter, G d = 13.13525 log 10 (71)
log 10η 40 + 0.9
G = α Er (66)
speed parameter, U(i)
ηM ve c = log 10 log 10η 1 + 0.9
i
U i = × 10 −6 (67) − d log 10 θ 1 + 273.15) (72)
2E r à n
i
when θ1 = 40°C and θ2 = 100°C,
load parameter, W(i)
XΓ wn
c = log 10 log 10η 40 + 0.9 − 2.495752 d
i (73)
W i = (68)
Er Ãn α is pressure--viscosity coefficient, mm2/N.
i
Values range from 0.725 ¢ 10 --2 mm2/N to
where 2.9 ¢ 10 --2 mm2/N for typical gear lubri-
ηM is dynamic viscosity at the gear tooth cants. Values for pressure--viscosity
temperature, mPa•s. coefficients vs. dynamic viscosity can be
obtained from equation 74.
η M = 10 g − 0.9 (69)
α = k η sM (74)
where
d
Table 2 contains viscosity information for mineral
g = 10 cθ M + 273.15 oils, MIL--L spec. oils, polyalphaolefin (PAO) based
synthetic oils (which contain ester) and polyalkylene
θM is tooth temperature, °C (see 6.3).
glycol (PAG) based synthetic oils, as well as
The parameters c and d required for calculating ηM constants c, d, k and s for use in the equations 69
can either be taken from table 2 or calculated with through 74. These values were obtained from the
equations 70 and 72, respectively. Equations 70 and data shown in figures 7 through 11 [22]. It is
72, derived from a modification of the Walther important that the film thickness is calculated with
equation [10], will yield the parameters c and d if two values of viscosity and pressure--viscosity coeffi-
dynamic viscosities, η1 and η2, are known at two cient for the gear tooth temperature, θM, (see 6.3).
corresponding temperatures, θ1 and θ2. The central film thickness at a given point is:
Since dynamic viscosity is generally available at
h c = H c à n × 10 3 (75)
40°C and 100°C, equations 70 and 72 are modified i i i
in equations 71 and 73 to incorporate terms
(see clause 4 for à n ).
corresponding to those temperatures. i
11
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
The specific film thickness is the ratio of film shown in equation 76.
thickness divided by the composite roughness of the
contacting gear teeth and can be used to assess hc
i
performance. λ 2b =σ (76)
H 2b
i H
To determine this ratio, the cutoff wavelength for the i
composite surface roughness measurement (σx)
should be comparable to the width of the Hertzian This may not be practical because many surface
contact, 2b H . This results in σx becoming σ 2b as measuring instruments have a fixed cutoff wave-
i H
i length (usually 0.8 mm).
12
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
1 000 000
ISO VG
3200
2200
1000
680
460
10 000
320
220
Dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
150
100
1000 68
46
32
100
10
1
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Temperature (K)
13
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
Use of the radical term in equation 77 for roughness Ra x = 2π Rqx (80)
adjustment is developed below. From equations 79 and 80:
1 000 000
ISO VG
6800
100 000
3200
2200
1500
1000
10 000 680
460
320
Dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
220
150
1000
100
10
1
300200 250
350 400 450 500
Temperature (K)
Figure 8 -- Dynamic viscosity versus temperature for PAO--based synthetic non--VI--improved oils
14
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
0.5
σ 0.8 = Ra 2 2
10.8 + Ra 2 0.8 yields equation 83
i
2b H
which is equation 77 developed for a 0.8 mm cutoff
Ra 2b = Ra 0.8 L0.8 (82)
length.
H
i
Substitute equation 82 into equation 78 once 0.5
i L
hc
each for Ra1x and for Ra2x to obtain σ 2b .
H λ 2b = σ 0.8 (83)
i 0.8 2b H
Using this in equation 76, noting that
H
i i
1010000000
000 000
1000000
1 000 000
100 000
100000
Dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
1010000
000
1000
1000
100
100
ISO VG
1000
680
460
320
10
10 220
150
100
11
200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500
Temperature (K)
15
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
1000
MIL--L--23699E
MIL--L--7808K Grade 4
100
MIL--L--7808K Grade 3
Dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
10
0.1
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Temperature (K)
Mineral oil
MIL--L--7808K
Pressure--viscosity coefficient (mm2/N)
MIL--L--23699E
Synthetic oil (PAO)
0.1 Synthetic oil (PAG)
0.01
0.001
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10 000 100 000 1 000 000
Dynamic viscosity (mPa⋅s)
Figure 11 -- Pressure--viscosity coefficient versus dynamic viscosity
16
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
i
oxide films, and gear material.
bH
When gear teeth are separated by a thick lubricant i
17
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
v r2 is rolling tangential velocity of the gear, m/s boundary lubricated gears where mm may be higher
i
than 0.2, or too high for gears operating in the
(see equation 37); full--film regime where mm may be less than 0.01.
BM1 is thermal contact coefficient of the pinion The surface roughness is taken as an average of the
material, N/[mm s0.5K] (see 6.2.3); average values:
BM2 is thermal contact coefficient of the gear Ra + Ra 2x
R avgx = 1x (87)
material, N/[mm s0.5K] (see 6.2.3); 2
bH is semi--width of Hertzian contact band, mm where
i
Ra1x is pinion average surface roughness for filter
(see equation 57); cutoff length, Lx, mm;
i (as a subscript) defines a point on the line of Ra2x is gear average surface roughness for filter
action. cutoff length, Lx, mm.
In this equation, the coefficient of friction may be 6.2.2.2 Empirical equation
approximated by different expressions, for instance An empirical equation for a variable coefficient of
as proposed by Kelley [2, 4] and AGMA 217.01 [7]. friction is the Benedict and Kelley [5] equation,
The influence of surface roughness is incorporated supplemented with the influence of roughness:
in the approximation of the coefficient of friction.
29 700 XΓiwn
6.2.2 Mean coefficient of friction, m m
i
m m = 0.0127 C R log 10 2
avgx
ηMvsivei
i
Three methods may be used to determine the value ηM is dynamic viscosity of the oil at gear tooth
of m m to be used in equation 84. temperature, θM, mPa•s;
i
vs is sliding velocity, m/s (see equation 38);
i
-- input a value based upon experience, which
is a constant; ve is entraining velocity, m/s (see equation 39).
i
-- input a value from equation 85, which is also 6.2.3 Thermal contact coefficient, BM
a constant; The thermal contact coefficient accounts for the
-- input a value from equation 88, which varies influence of the material properties of pinion and
along the line of action. gear:
6.2.2.1 Approximation by a constant 0.5
B M1 = λ M1 × Ã M1 × c M1 (89)
A constant coefficient of friction along the line of 0.5
action has been assumed by AGMA 217.01 [7] and B M2 = λ M2 × Ã M2 × c M2 (90)
Kelley [2]: For martensitic steels the range of heat conductivity,
m m = m m const = 0.06 × C R (85) λM , is 41 to 52 N/[s K] and the product of density
i avg x times the specific heat per unit mass, ρM ¢ cM is
The surface roughness constant, C R , is limited about 3.8 N/[mm2K], so that the use of the average
avgx value BM = 13.6 N/[mm s0.5 K] for such steels will not
to a maximum value of 3.0: introduce a large error when the thermal contact
1.13 coefficient is unknown.
1.0 ≤ C R = ≤ 3.0 (86)
avgx 1.13 − R avgx 6.2.4 Maximum flash temperature
Equation 85 gives a typical value for gears operating To locate and determine the maximum flash tem-
in the partial EHL regime. It may be too low for perature, the flash temperature should be calculated
18
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
at a sufficient number of points (for example, 25 to tion, an accurate value of the gear tooth temperature
50) on the line of action. Calculate flash tempera- be used for the analysis.
tures at points between SAP and LPSTC during
6.3.2 Measurement and experience
double tooth contact, at LPSTC and HPSTC for
single tooth contact, and between HPSTC and EAP The tooth temperature can be measured by testing,
during double tooth contact. or determined according to experience.
If the contact temperature (see 6.4) is greater than 6.3.3 Thermal network
the mean scuffing temperature (see 6.5) for the
The tooth temperature can be calculated from a
lubricant being used, there is a potential risk for
thermal network analysis [43] (see figure 12).
scuffing (see 6.5.5).
The tooth temperature is determined by the heat flow
6.3 Tooth temperature
balance in the gearbox. There are several sources
The tooth temperature, θM, is the equilibrium tem- of frictional heat, of which the most important ones
perature of the surface of the gear teeth before they are the tooth friction and the bearing friction. Other
enter the contact zone. In some cases [26], the tooth heat sources, like seals and oil flow, may also
temperature may be significantly higher than the contribute. For gear pitchline velocities above 80
temperature of the oil supplied to the gear mesh. m/s, churning loss, expulsion of oil between meshing
teeth, and windage loss become important heat
6.3.1 Rough approximation sources that should be considered. Heat is con-
For a very rough approximation, the tooth tempera- ducted and transferred to the environment by
ture may be estimated by the sum of the oil conduction, convection and radiation.
temperature, taking into account some impediment 6.4 Contact temperature
in heat transfer for spray lubrication if applicable, and
a portion that depends mainly on the flash tempera- 6.4.1 Contact temperature at any point
ture, for which the maximum value is taken: At any point on the line of action (see figure 13) the
θ M = k sump θ oil + 0.56 θ fl max (91) contact temperature is:
where θ B = θ M + θ fl (92)
i i
ksump = 1.0 if splash lube; 1.2 if spray lube; where
θoil is oil supply or sump temperature, ° C; θM is tooth temperature, °C (see 6.3);
θfl max is maximum flash temperature, ° C, see θ fl is flash temperature, °C (see 6.2).
6.2. i
However, for a reliable evaluation of the scuffing risk, i (as a subscript) defines a point on the line of
it is important that instead of the rough approxima- action.
Pinion Oil
Case
Friction power Air
Bearings
Gear Shafts
Friction
power
Figure 12 -- Example of thermal network
19
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
A B C D E θ S = 118 + 33 ln ν 40 (95)
6.5.2 Mean scuffing temperature for oils and
Figure 13 -- Contact temperature along the line steels typical of aerospace industry
of action
Table 3 gives the mean scuffing temperature for oils
with steels typical of the aerospace industry.
When θB max (see figure 13) reaches the scuffing 6.5.3 Extension of test gear scuffing temperature
temperature of the system, scuffing is likely. The for one steel to other steels
mean scuffing temperature is the temperature at The scuffing temperature determined from test
which there is a 50% chance of scuffing. gears with low--additive mineral oils may be ex-
6.5.1 Mean scuffing temperature for mineral oils tended to different gear steels, heat treatments or
surface treatments by introducing an empirical
Scuffing temperatures for mineral oils with low welding factor.
concentrations of antiscuff additives are indepen-
θ S = X Wθ fl max, test + θ M, test (96)
dent of operating conditions. Viscosity grade is a
convenient index of oil composition, and thus of where
scuffing temperature. XW is welding factor (see table 4);
Equations 94 and 95 are approximate guides for θfl max, test is maximum flash temperature of test
mineral oils and steels typical of IAE and FZG test gears, °C;
20
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
θM, test is tooth temperature of test gears, °C. proposed which may support the gear geometry and
rotor dimensions most suitable to the gear applica-
6.5.4 Scuffing temperature for oils used in
tion. Gear drives cover a wide field of operating
hypoid gear application
conditions from relatively low pitch line velocities
Scuffing temperature for high--additive oils (hypoid with high specific tooth loads, to very high pitch line
gear oil) may be dependent on operating conditions. velocities and moderate specific tooth loads.
Therefore, the scuffing temperature should be Lubricants vary, as well, between mineral oils with
obtained from tests that closely simulate operating little or no additives to antiscuff lubricants with
conditions of the gears. substantial additives.
The flash temperature method described in 6.2
Table 4 -- Welding factors, XW through 6.5 is based on Blok’s contact temperature
Material XW theory. The flash temperature, θfl, must be added to
the steady gear tooth temperature, θM, to give the
Through hardened steel 1.00
total contact temperature, θB. The value of the
Phosphated steel 1.25 contact temperature for every point in the contact
Copper--plated steel 1.50 zone must be less than the mean scuffing tempera-
Bath or gas nitrided steel 1.50 ture of the material--lubricant system or scuffing may
Hardened carburized steel occur.
-- Less than 20% retained austenite 1.15 6.6.1 Integral temperature method
-- 20 to 30% retained austenite 1.00
The integral temperature method [29] has been
-- Greater than 30% retained austenite 0.85
proposed as an alternative to the flash temperature
Austenite steel (stainless steel) 0.45
method by which the influence of the gear geometry
imposes a critical energy level based on the
6.5.5 Scuffing risk integrated temperature distribution (for example,
numerically integrating using Simpson’s rule) along
Scuffing risk can be calculated from a Gaussian a path of contact and adopting a steady gear tooth
distribution of scuffing temperature about the mean temperature. This method involves the calculation of
value. Typically, the coefficient of variation is at least a scuffing load basically independent of speed, but
15%. Therefore, use the procedure of annex B to controlled by gear geometry. Application requires
calculate the probability of scuffing: comparison of the proposed gearset based on a test
where rig result to a known test rig gearset and tested oil.
21
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
22
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
reduced gear tooth accuracy, increased dynamic turning or branching back to the surface. Eventually,
loads and noise. Eventually, it can progress to material will dislodge from the surface forming a pit,
macropitting and gear failure. an irregular shaped cavity in the surface of the
material. With gears the origin of the crack is more
7.2.1 Micropitting risk evaluation
likely surface initiated because lubricant film thick-
Factors that influence micropitting are gear tooth ness is low resulting in a high amount of asperity or
geometry, surface roughness, lubricant viscosity, metal--to--metal contact. For high--speed gears with
coefficient of friction, load, tangential speed, oil smooth surface finishes, film thickness is larger and
temperature and lubricant additives. Common sub--surface initiated crack formation may dominate.
methods suggested for reducing the probability of In these cases an inclusion or small void in the
micropitting include: material is a source for stress concentration.
-- reduce surface roughness; Laboratory testing commonly uses a 1% limit on
-- increase film thickness; tooth surface area damage as a criteria to stop a test.
However, for field service applications one should
-- use higher viscosity oil;
always abide by the equipment manufacturer’s
-- reduce coefficient of friction; recommendations or guidelines for acceptable limits
-- run at higher speeds if possible; of damage to any gear or supporting component.
23
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
started to get its first glimpses into the importance of defined the three regimes of lubrication at the
lubrication on the life of gearing. operating pitch diameter as follows:
It was not uncommon to see a three (3) stage -- Regime III: Full EHL oil film is developed and
industrial gear drive with problems as follows: a high separates the asperities of gear flanks in motion
speed set of gears that looked relatively undam- relative to one another;
aged, an intermediate speed set of gears that was -- Regime II: Partial EHL oil film is developed
experiencing initial pitting, and a slow speed set of and there is occasional contact of the asperities of
gears that was experiencing advanced pitting and gear flanks in motion relative to one another;
tooth breakage. In the event that all three stages -- Regime I: Only boundary lubrication exists
were designed to have similar load intensity factors with essentially no EHL film and contact of the
(K--factors and unit loads) the problem could be asperities of gear flanks in motion relative to one
particularly puzzling. Rating theory at the time another is pronounced.
indicated that with all other things equal, the higher The implementation of this theory involves what is
speed stages of gearing should have been failing currently referred to as the stress cycle factor for the
sooner than the lower speed stages, due to greater surface durability of gears, ZN, (this used to be called
stress cycles. the life factor for surface durability). Keeping in mind
At issue was the tribological condition between that regime of lubrication depends ultimately on the
surfaces of two mating teeth. Elastohydrodynamic degree of separation between asperities, Dudley
lubrication (EHL) theory showed that factors like proposed that the effect could be quantified by
relative surface velocity and local oil viscosity at the making proper adjustments to the curves that
contact area directly affected thickness of the EHL oil determine the stress cycle factor. Thus, we have as
film that separated asperities on surfaces of two follows:
mating gear teeth. For a multiple stage gear reducer, 7.4.2 Regime III
higher speed stages of gearing, with higher surface This regime of lubrication, characterized by full EHL
velocities, tended to produce thicker EHL oil films, oil film development, occurs mainly when gears have
better capable of separating asperities on mating relatively high pitch line velocity, good care is taken
teeth. Lower speed stages, with lower surface to ensure that an adequate supply of clean, cool oil is
velocities, tended to produce thinner EHL oil films, available (of adequate viscosity and formulation),
less capable of separating asperities on mating and good surface finishes are achieved on the
teeth. gearing. As such, aerospace gearing, high speed
Through the years, a great many researchers and marine gearing, and good quality industrial gear
companies inside and outside of the gear industry drives tend to have gears that operate within regime
have sought to quantify the effects of EHL oil film III. Thus, stress cycle factor curves that appear in
theory on the life of gearing. There are many ways in standards for these gears are the basis for rating
which one could hypothesize the effects of inade- gears that operate within regime III.
quate oil films on degradation of gear tooth surfaces 7.4.3 Regime II
and its results on the life of gearing. Indeed, a
This regime of lubrication, characterized by partial
comprehensive treatment of this subject could fill
EHL oil film development, occurs mainly when gears
many volumes. Added to this is the fact that this is
have moderate pitch line velocities, moderate care is
still a very active area of gear research. With this in
taken to ensure that an adequate supply of clean,
mind, it is still useful to put forth a simplified
cool oil is available (of adequate viscosity and
description of how inadequate oil films can lead to
formulation), and moderately good surface finishes
decreased life of gears. So, very simply put, thinner
are achieved on the gearing. As such, vehicle
oil films lead to a greater chance of more frequent
gearing is very characteristic of gears that operate
and more detrimental degree of contact between
within regime II. Dudley uses information from the
asperities on mating gear teeth. The more severe
stress cycle factor curves in vehicle standards to
this is, the more likely it will lead to pitting, a
create a branch from the regime III curve for cycles
recognized form of surface fatigue in gearing.
greater than 100 000. It is felt that effects of
The effects of this phenomenon on the fatigue life of operation within regime II on fatigue life will not begin
gearing were introduced by Bowen [41]. Dudley [42] to be realized until this point in the life of a gear.
24
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.90 Regime III
0.80
Stress cycle factor, ZN
0.70
0.60
0.50 Regime II
0.40
0.30
Regime I
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 1010 1011 1012
Number of load cycles, N
25
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
7.5 Estimating life with respect to surface the lubricant or embedded in flanks of mating teeth.
durability The choice of lubricant usually does not have any
direct effect on abrasive wear. Abrasive particles can
After calculating the minimum EHL film thickness be present, however, as debris from other forms of
based on 5.2, one must calculate the specific film wear such as fatigue pitting and adhesion. The
thickness. In figure 14, specific film thicknesses lubricant should not react with any systemic materi-
greater than or equal to 1.0 indicate the beginning of als or with any contaminants. Products of these
regime III and the end of regime II lubrication. reactions can be abrasive. In large open gears, the
Specific film thicknesses between 0.4 and 1.0 film thickness of highly viscous lubricants may
indicate operation within regime II and specific film prevent three--body abrasion from small particles.
thicknesses less than or equal to 0.4 indicate
regime I.
8.2 Wear risk evaluation
Once the regime of lubrication is determined, one
can calculate the stress cycle factor, ZN, shown in The boundary lubrication regime consists of exceed-
figure 14. ZN is used to calculate gear rating in ingly complex interactions between additives in the
ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95. lubricant, metal, and atmosphere making it impossi-
ble to assess accurately the chance of wear or
scuffing from a single parameter such as specific film
thickness. However, empirical data of figure 15 have
8 Wear been used as an approximate guide to the probability
of wear related distress. Figure 15 is based on data
published by Wellauer and Holloway [20] that were
Wear is a term describing change to a gear tooth obtained from several hundred laboratory tests and
surface involving removal or displacement of materi- field applications. The curves of figure 15 apply to
al, due to mechanical, chemical or electrical action. through--hardened steel gears ranging in size from
25 mm to 4600 mm in diameter that were lubricated
In the boundary lubrication regime, some wear is
with mineral--based, non--EP gear lubricants. The
inevitable. Many gears, because of practical limits on
authors [20] defined tooth flank surface distress as
lubricant viscosity, speed and temperature, must
surface pitting or wear that might be destructive or
operate under boundary lubricated conditions.
could shorten the gear life. Most of the data of figure
Mild wear occurs during running--in and usually 15 pertain to gears that experienced lives in excess
subsides with time, resulting in a tolerable wear rate of 10 million cycles.
and a satisfactory lifetime for the gearset. Wear that
occurs during running--in may be beneficial if it 8.2.1 Adjustments to the surface distress and
smoothes tooth surfaces (increasing specific film specific film thickness curves
thickness) and increases the area of contact by
removing minor imperfections through local wear. The surface distress and specific film thickness
The amount of wear that is tolerable depends on the curves (figure 15) were derived from the Wellauer
expected lifetime for the gearset, and on require- and Holloway curves. The curves are adjusted to
ments for noise and vibration. Wear rate may account for different definitions of composite surface
become excessive if tooth profiles are worn to the roughness and specific film thickness.
extent that high dynamic loads are encountered.
Excessive wear may also be caused by contamina- 8.2.1.1 Average surface roughness adjustment
tion of the lubricant by abrasive particles. When wear
becomes aggressive and is not preempted by Reference [20] used root mean square surface
scuffing or bending fatigue, wear and pitting will likely roughness. This information sheet uses average
compete for the predominate failure mode. surface roughness. The relationship between root
mean square and average surface roughness varies
8.1 Abrasive wear
with the machining process. Typically,
Abrasive wear is removal or displacement of materi-
al due to the presence of hard particles suspended in Rq x ≅ 1.11 Ra x (98)
26
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
10
5%
40%
1 80%
Specific film thickness, λ
0.1
0.01
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Pitch line velocity (m/s)
8.2.1.2 Composite surface roughness h c , of equation 75, provides film thickness values
i
adjustment
1.316 times the Dowson and Higginson [17] mini-
Reference [20] used an arithmetic average for the mum film thickness, hmin, used by the Wellauer and
composite surface roughness: Holloway paper [20].
27
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
Finally, the units of pitch line velocity, vt, were Q (x) = 80%
adjusted from feet per minute to meters per second. P (x) = 20%
Note that specific film thickness is dimensionless.
x 80% = − 0.84163389
8.2.2 Wear risk probability
Use several film thickness values from figure 15 to
The curves of figure 15 can be fitted with the find how mean minimum specific film thickness,
following equations: mλ min, and standard deviation of the minimum
−1 specific film thickness, σλ min, vary with pitch line
λ 5% = 2.68863
vt + 0.47767 (106) velocity. An example is shown below:
−1
v t = 5 m∕s
λ 40% = 4.90179
vt + 0.64585 (107) λ 5% = 0.9849
−1 λ 40% = 0.6149
λ 80% = 9.29210
vt + 0.95507 (108)
This gives the following equations that are solved for
σλ min:
Using the following definition, the mean minimum
specific film thickness, mλ min, and the standard
deviation, σλ min, can be calculated by simultaneous
1.6449 = 0.9849 − m λ min
σ λ min
solution (two equations in two unknowns) using any
two of the adjusted Wellauer and Holloway curves
(5% and 40%, 40% and 80%, or 5% and 80%):
0.2534 = 0.6149 − m λ min
σ λ min
1.6449 σ λ min = 0.9849 − m λ min
λ min − m λ min (109)
x= σ λ min (ref [24]) 0.2534 σ λ min = 0.6149 − m λ min
λ80%:
m λ min = 5.43389
vt + 0.71012 (110)
28
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
29
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
30
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Annex A
(informative)
Flow chart for evaluating scuffing risk and oil film thickness
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]
START
P1
31
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
P1
ω1 (Eq 33)
CF (Eq 15) ω2 (Eq 34)
CA (Eq 16) vt (Eq 35)
CC (Eq 17) (Ft)nom (Eq 40)
CD (Eq 18) KD (Eq 41)
CE (Eq 19) Ft (Eq 42)
CB (Eq 20) Fwn (Eq 43)
Z (Eq 21) wn (Eq 44)
Er (Eq 58)
R avg (Eq 87)
x
εα (Eq 22) CR (Eq 86)
avgx
nr = fractional part of εα m m const (Eq 85)
σx (Eq 78)
β=0 no
helical gear
P2
yes
spur gear
εβ (Eq 24)
32
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
P2
i=1
Tip = 0
i = i+ 1
no
Tip = 2
i = nop + 6
no
yes
Driver = 1
P3
no
33
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
P3
K = 0.8
yes
θM = 0 yes
no
mmet = 2
(θM input) no
no (ηM & α input)
ηM = 0
ηM = 0
yes mmet = 1 yes
yes
no mm const (Eq 85)
no ηM* (Eq 69)
mm const (Eq 85) mm const = mmet (ηM & α
input) α* (Eq 74)
Call subroutine
Max_Flash_Temp
θfl max
Call subroutine
Max_Flash_Temp Call subroutine
θfl max θM (Eq 91)
Max_Flash_Temp
θfl max
P3A
yes θM1 = θM
θM = 0
no
θM (Eq 91) (θM input) Call subroutine ηM* (Eq 69)
Max_Flash_Temp
α* (Eq 74)
θfl max
yes ηM = 0 mm const = 0
P3A
ηM (Eq 69)
no
(εo & α input) same
α (Eq 74) Call subroutine
page
Max_Flash_Temp
θfl max
θM (Eq 91)
* See table 2 for constants in these equations calculated per 71 and 73.
34
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
P4
G (Eq 66)
hmin = 100
i=i+1
U(i) (Eq 67)
no
yes
Hc(i) (Eq 65)
θ B max (eq 93)
yes
no
hmin = hc(i)
35
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
P5
yes
P scuff < 0.10
Srisk = low
no
yes
θ S met = 0
yes
P scuff ≤ 0.30
θS (eq 96)
Srisk = moderate
no test gears no
(need θfl max, test, S risk = high
θM test & XW input)
yes
θ S met = 1
Rq1x (Eq 98)
θS (eq 94) Rq2x (Eq 98)
no
Rqx avg (Eq 99)
R&O Mineral Oil
λmin (Eq 105)
yes
θ S met = 2
no
no θS (Eq 95) v t ≤ 5 m∕s
y = λ min
Call subroutine m y = m λ min
“Probability”
σ y = σ λ min
Return POF
Pscuff = POF
36
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Subroutine “Probability”
y, m y, σ y input
x (eq B.1)
yes
|x| > 1.6448
Q = 0.05
no
t (eq B.4)
ZQ (eq B.3)
Q (eq B.2)
yes
x>0
no POF = 1.0 -- Q
POF = Q
Return POF
37
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
Subroutine “Max_Flash_Temp
i=1
θfl max = 0
no mm const = 0
yes
mm is a (given) constant
or calculated by equation
85 (AGMA 217.01 and νs(i) or XΓ(i)
yes
Kelley) < εmach**
no
yes
i=i+ 1
i = nop + 6
yes
Return
**Eq 88 is not valid at vs(i) = 0 or XΓ(i) = 0 or near zero, and Eq 84 is not valid at bH(i) = 0 or near zero.
εmach is a small finite number (e.g., 10 --10). In case the calculated mm(i) < 0, set mm(i) = 0.
38
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Annex B
(informative)
Normal or Gaussian probability
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]
For random variables that follow normal (Gaussian) Q is the tail area of the normal probability
distributions, the following procedure [24] can be function;
used to calculate probabilities of failure in the range ZQ is the normal probability density function.
of 5% to 95%:
Probability of failure:
y − m y (B.1) if x > 0, then:
x= σy
probability of failure = 1 -- Q;
where else
x is the standard normal variable; probability of failure = Q
y is the random variable; where
39
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
40
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Annex C
(informative)
Test rig gear data
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]
41
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
FZG
Symbol Units FZG “A” FZG “A10” FZG “C” NASA Ryder AGMA IAE
“C -- GF”
Primary wear Scuffing Scuffing Pitting (micro Micropitting Pitting Scuffing Pitting (micro Scuffing
assessment & macro) & macro)
a mm 91.5 91.5 91.5 91.5 88.9 88.9 91.5 82.55
mn mm 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.175 3.175 3.629 5.08
αn deg 20 20 20 20 20 22.5 20 20
β deg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
αwt deg 22.44 22.44 22.44 22.44 20 22.5 21.31 26.25
z1 -- -- 16 16 16 16 28 28 20 15
z2 -- -- 24 24 24 24 28 28 30 16
b mm 20 10 14 14 6.35/2.8 6.35 14 4.76
ra1 mm 44.385 44.385 41.23 41.23 47.625 47.22 40.82 45.02
ra2 mm 56.25 56.25 59.18 59.18 47.625 47.22 58.18 47.69
x1 -- -- 0.8635 0.8635 0.1817 0.1817 0 0 0.2231 0.3625
x2 -- -- -- 0.5103 --0.5103 0.1715 0.1715 0 0 0.0006 0.3875
Quality number -- -- 5 5 5 5 13 13 12--13 5
Quality standard ISO 1328 ISO 1328 DIN 3962 DIN 3962 AGMA 2000 AGMA 2000 AGMA 2000 ISO 1328
Ra1 mm 0.3 -- 0.7 0.3 -- 0.7 0.3 -- 0.5 0.4 -- 0.6 0.3 -- 0.4 0.46 -- 0.64 0.5 -- 0.8 0.3 -- 0.8
Ra2 mm 0.3 -- 0.7 0.3 -- 0.7 0.3 -- 0.5 0.4 -- 0.6 0.3 -- 0.4 0.46 -- 0.64 0.5 -- 0.8 0.3 -- 0.8
n1 rpm 2170 2170 2250 2250 10000 10000 2250 4K -- 6K
θoil deg C 90--140 90--120 90--120 90 49 -- 77 74 80 70 -- 110
Ref document -- -- ISO 14635--1 ISO/WD FVA Info FVA Info NASA ASTM -- -- IP166/77
ASTM 14635--2 Sheet Sheet TP -- 2047 D1947--83 (1992)
D5182--97 54/7 54/I--IV (1982) (1984)
CEC
L--07--A--95
Pinion torque Nm 3.3 -- 534.5 3.3--534.5 135 -- 376 28 -- 265 0 -- 100 0 -- 270 250 -- 400 20 -- 407
range
42
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Annex D
(informative)
Example calculations
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, are provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a part of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear Surface Distress.]
******************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
******************************************************************************
***** GENERAL AND GEOMETRY INPUT DATA *****
SCORING+ EX.#1
Input unit (=1 SI, =2 Inch) (iInputUnit) 1.000000
Output unit (=1 SI, =2 Inch) (iOutputUnit) 1.000000
Gear type (=1 external, =2 internal) (iType) 1.000000
Driving member (=1 pinion, =2 gear) (iDriver) 2.000000
Number of pinion teeth (z1) 21.000000
Number of gear teeth (z2) 26.000000
Normal module (mn) 4.000000 mm
Helix angle (Beta) 0.000000 deg
Operating center distance (aw) 96.000000 mm
Normal generating pressure angle (Alphan) 20.000000 deg
Standard outside radius, pinion (ra1) 46.570900 mm
Standard outside radius, gear (ra2) 57.277000 mm
Face width (b) 66.040000 mm
Profile mod (=0 none, =1 hi load, =2 smooth) (iTip) 1.000000
***** Material input data *****
Modulus of elasticity, pinion (E1) 206842.718795 N/mm^2
Modulus of elasticity, gear (E2) 206842.718795 N/mm^2
Poisson’s ratio, pinion (Nu1) 0.300000
Poisson’s ratio, gear (Nu2) 0.300000
Average surface roughness at Lx, pinion (Ra1x) 0.508000 mu m
Average surface roughness at Lx, gear (Ra2x) 0.508000 mu m
Filter cutoff of wavelength x (Lx) 0.800000 mm
Method for approximate mean coef. friction (Mumet) 1.000000
Welding factor (Xw) 1.000000
***** Load data *****
Pinion speed (n1) 308.570000 rpm
Transmitted power (P) 20.619440 kW
Overload factor (Ko) 1.000000
Load distribution factor (Km) 1.400000
Dynamic factor (Kv) 1.063830
***** Lubrication data *****
Lubricant type (=1 Mineral, =2 Synthetic,
=3 MIL--L--7808K, =4 MIL--L--23699E) (iLubeType) 1.000000
ISO viscosity grade number (nIsoVG) 460.000000
Kinematic viscosity at 40 deg C (Nu40) 407.000000 mm^2/s
***** Input temperature data *****
Tooth temperature (ThetaM) 82.222222 deg C
Thermal contact coefficient, pinion (BM1) 16.533725 N/[mm s^.5K]
Thermal contact coefficient, gear (BM2) 16.533725 N/[mm s^.5K]
Oil inlet or sump temperature (Thetaoil) 71.111111 deg C
Parameter for calculating tooth temperature (ksump) 1.000000
Dynamic viscosity at gear tooth temperature (EtaM) 43.000000 mPa⋅s
Pressure--viscosity coefficient (Alpha) 0.022045 mm^2/N
Method of calculating scuffing temperature (Thetasmet) 2.000000
Maximum flash temperatrue of test gears (Thetaflmaxtest) 0.000000
Tooth temperature of test gear (ThetaMtest) 0.000000
Number of calculation points (nNop) 25.000000
43
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
******************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
******************************************************************************
***** GEOMETRY CALCULATION *****
Gear ratio (u) 1.238095
Standard pitch radius, pinion (r1) 42.000000 mm
Standard pitch radius, gear (r2) 52.000000 mm
Pinion operating pitch radius (rw1) 42.893617 mm
Transverse generating pressure angle (Alphat) 20.000000 deg
Base radius, pinion (rb1) 39.467090 mm
Base radius, gear (rb2) 48.864016 mm
Transverse operating pressure angle (Alphawt) 23.056999 deg
Transverse base pitch (pbt) 11.808526 mm
Normal base pitch (pbn) 11.808526 mm
Axial pitch (px) ----------------
Base helix angle (Betab) 0.000000 deg
Operating helix angle (Betaw) 0.000000 deg
Normal operating pressure angle (Alphawn) 23.056999 deg
Distance along line of action -- Point A (CA) 7.715600 mm
Distance along line of action -- Point B (CB) 12.913884 mm
Distance along line of action -- Point C (CC) 16.799142 mm
Distance along line of action -- Point D (CD) 19.524126 mm
Distance along line of action -- Point E (CE) 24.722409 mm
Distance along line of action -- Point F (CF) 37.598080 mm
Active length of line of action (Z) 17.006810 mm
Transverse contact ratio (EpsAlpha) 1.440214
Fractional part of EpsAlpha (nr) 0.440214
Axial contact ratio (EpsBeta) 0.000000
Fractional part of EpsBeta (na) 0.000000
Minimum contact length (Lmin) 66.040000 mm
44
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
**********************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
**********************************************************************************
***** LOAD SHARING RATIO AND bH *****
Roll
Index Ang(rad) XGamma Rhon(mm) bH Index
(A) 0.19549 0.14286 6.13226 0.05982 (A)
(B) 0.32721 1.00000 8.47833 0.18610 (B)
(C) 0.42565 1.00000 9.29314 0.19484 (C)
(D) 0.49469 1.00000 9.38554 0.19581 (D)
(E) 0.62641 0.00000 8.46633 0.00000 (E)
45
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
**********************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
**********************************************************************************
**** Calculate flash temperature ****
Index K Mum XGamma bH (mm) vs (m/s) vr1 (m/s) vr2 (m/s) Thetafl (C) Index
(A) 0.80 0.1090 0.1429 0.059822 0.5306 0.2493 0.7799 13.6320 (A)
(B) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.186102 0.2269 0.4173 0.6442 22.0835 (B)
(C) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.194840 0.0000 0.5428 0.5428 0.0000 (C)
(D) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.195806 0.1592 0.6309 0.4717 14.7688 (D)
(E) 0.80 0.0000 0.0000 0.000000 0.4628 0.7989 0.3360 0.0000 (E)
( 11) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.191471 0.1167 0.4783 0.5950 11.0832 ( 11)
( 12) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.192930 0.0753 0.5012 0.5765 7.1033 ( 12)
( 13) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.194098 0.0339 0.5241 0.5580 3.1799 ( 13)
( 14) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.194979 0.0075 0.5470 0.5395 0.7011 ( 14)
( 15) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.195577 0.0489 0.5699 0.5210 4.5531 ( 15)
( 16) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.195895 0.0903 0.5928 0.5025 8.3886 ( 16)
( 17) 0.80 0.1090 1.0000 0.195934 0.1317 0.6157 0.4840 12.2201 ( 17)
( 18) 0.80 0.1090 0.8179 0.176983 0.1731 0.6386 0.4655 13.8125 ( 18)
( 19) 0.80 0.1090 0.7011 0.163420 0.2145 0.6615 0.4470 15.2621 ( 19)
( 20) 0.80 0.1090 0.5842 0.148569 0.2559 0.6844 0.4285 15.9136 ( 20)
( 21) 0.80 0.1090 0.4674 0.132141 0.2973 0.7073 0.4100 15.6888 ( 21)
( 22) 0.80 0.1090 0.3505 0.113623 0.3386 0.7302 0.3915 14.4671 ( 22)
( 23) 0.80 0.1090 0.2337 0.091964 0.3800 0.7531 0.3730 12.0443 ( 23)
( 24) 0.80 0.1090 0.1168 0.064352 0.4214 0.7760 0.3545 7.9953 ( 24)
( 25) 0.80 0.0000 0.0000 0.000000 0.4628 0.7989 0.3360 0.0000 ( 25)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The max. flash temp. occurs at point (10) (Thetaflmax) 25.646608 deg C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dynamic viscosity at the gear tooth temperature (EtaM) 43.000000 mPa⋅s
Pressure--viscosity coefficient (Alpha) 0.022045 mm^2/N
46
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
**********************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
**********************************************************************************
********** P4 -- Specific film thickness **********
Material parameter (eq 66) (G) 5010.821688
47
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
**********************************************************************************
SCUFFING AND WEAR RISK ANALYSIS ver 1.0.9 -- AGMA925--A03
SCORING+ EX.#1
DATE:2002/04/18 TIME:08:08:23
**********************************************************************************
48
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
Bibliography
The following documents are either referenced in the text of AGMA 925--A03, Effect of Lubrication on Gear
Surface Distress, or indicated for additional information.
1. Blok, H., Les Températures de Surface dans les Conditions de Graissage sans Pression Extrême,
Second World Petroleum Congress, Paris, June, 1937.
2. Kelley, B.W., A New Look at the Scoring Phenomena of Gears, SAE transactions, Vol. 61, 1953,
pp. 175--188.
3. Dudley, D.W., Practical Gear Design, McGraw--Hill, New York, 1954.
4. Kelley, B.W., The Importance of Surface Temperature to Surface Damage, Chapter in Engineering
Approach to Surface Damage, Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1958.
5. Benedict, G. H. and Kelley, B. W., Instantaneous Coefficients of Gear Tooth Friction, ASLE transactions,
Vol. 4, 1961, pp. 59--70.
6. Lemanski, A.J., “AGMA Aerospace Gear Committee Gear Scoring Project”, March 1962.
7. AGMA 217.01, AGMA Information Sheet -- Gear Scoring Design for Aerospace Spur and Helical Power
Gears, October, 1965.
8. SCORING+, computer program, GEARTECH Software, Inc., 1985.
9. ASTM D445--97, Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (the
Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity).
10. ASTM D341--93(1998), Standard Viscosity -- Temperature Charts for Liquid Petroleum Products.
11. ASTM D2270--93(1998), Standard Practice for Calculating Viscosity Index From Kinematic Viscosity at
40 and 100°C.
12. So, B. Y. C. and Klaus, E. E., Viscosity--Pressure Correlation of Liquids, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 23, 4,
409--421, 1979.
13. Novak, J. D. and Winer, W. O., Some Measurements of High Pressure Lubricant Rheology, Journal of
Lubricant Technology, Transactions of the ASME, Series F, Vol. 90, No. 3, July 1968, pp. 580 – 591.
14. Jones, W. R., Johnson, R. L., Winer, W. O. and Sanborn, D. M., Pressure--Viscosity Measurements for
Several Lubricants to 5.5x10 8 N/m 2 (8x10 4 psi) and 149°C (300°F), ASLE Transactions, 18, pp. 249 – 262,
1975.
15. Brooks, F. C. and Hopkins, V., Viscosity and Density Characteristics of Five Lubricant Base Stocks at
Elevated Pressures and Temperatures, Preprint number 75--LC--3D--1, presented at the ASLE/ASME
Lubrication Conference, Miami Beach, FL, October 21 – 23, 1975.
16. Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R., New Roller -- Bearing Lubrication Formula, Engineering, (London),
Vol. 192, 1961, pp. 158--159.
17. Dowson, D. and Higginson, G.R., Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication -- The Fundamentals of Roller and
Gear Lubrication, Pergamon Press (London), 1966.
18. Dowson, D., Elastohydrodynamics, Paper No. 10, Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs., Vol. 182, Pt. 3A, 1967,
pp. 151--167.
19. Dowson, D. and Toyoda, S., A Central Film Thickness Formula for Elastohydrodynamic Line Contacts,
5th Leeds--Lyon Symposium Proceedings, Paper 11 (VII), 1978, pp. 60--65.
49
AGMA 925--A03 AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
20. Wellauer, E. J. and Holloway, G.A., Application of EHD Oil Film Theory to Industrial Gear Drives,
Transactions of ASME, J. Eng., Ind., Vol. 98., series B, No 2, May 1976, pp. 626--634.
21. Moyer, C. A. and Bahney, L.L., Modifying the Lambda Ratio to Functional Line Contacts, STLE Trib.
Trans. Vol. 33 (No. 4), 1990, pp. 535--542.
22. Viscosity and pressure -- viscosity data supplied by Mobil Technology Company and Kluber Lubrication.
23. Sayles, R.S. and Thomas, T.R., Surface Topography as a Nonstationary Random Process, Nature, 271,
pp. 431--434, February 1978.
24. Handbook of Mathematical Functions, National Bureau of Standards (NIST), U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., 1964.
25. Rough Surfaces, edited by Thomas, T.R., Longman, Inc., New York, 1982, p. 92.
26. Errichello, R., Friction, Lubrication and Wear of Gears, ASM Handbook, Vol. 18, Oct. 1992, pp. 535--545.
27. Blok, H., The Postulate About the Constancy of Scoring Temperature, Interdisciplinary Approach to the
Lubrication of Concentrated Contacts, NASA SP--237, 1970, pp. 153--248.
28. ANSI/AGMA 9005--E02, Industrial Gear Lubrication.
29. Winter, H. and Michaelis, K., Scoring Load Capacity of Gears Lubricated with EP--Oils, AGMA Paper No.
P219.17, October, 1983.
30. Almen, J.O., Dimensional Value of Lubricants in Gear Design, SAE Journal, Sept. 1942, pp. 373--380.
31. Borsoff, V.N., Fundamentals of Gear Lubrication, Summary Report for Period March 1953 to May 1954,
Bureau of Aeronautics, Shell Development Company, Contract No. 53--356c, p. 12.
32. Borsoff, V.N., On the Mechanism of Gear Lubrication, ASME Journal of Basic Engineering, Vol. 81,
pp. 79--93, 1959.
33. Borsoff, V.N. and Godet, M.R., A Scoring Factor for Gears, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1963,
pp. 147--153.
34. Borsoff, V.N., Predicting the Scoring of Gears, Machine Design, January 7, 1965, pp. 132--136.
35. ANSI/AGMA 6011--H98, Specification for High Speed Helical Gear Units.
36. Nakanishi, T. and Ariura, Y., Effect of Surface--Finishing on Surface Durability of Surface--Hardened
Gears, MPT ‘91, JSME International Conference on Motion and Power Transmissions, 1991, pp. 828--833.
37. Tanaka, S., et al, Appreciable Increases in Surface Durability of Gear Pairs with Mirror--Like Finish,
ASME Paper No. 84--DET--223, 1984, pp. 1--8.
38. Ueno, T., et al, Surface Durability of Case--Carburized Gears on a Phenomenon of ‘Gray Staining’ of
Tooth Surface, ASME Paper No. 80--C2/DET--27, 1980, pp. 1--8.
39. Olver, A.V., Micropitting of Gear Teeth -- Design Solutions, presented at Aerotech 1995, NEC
Birmingham, October 1995, published by I. Mech. E., 1995.
40. FVA Information Sheet “Micropitting”, No. 54/7 (July, 1993) Forschungsvereinigung Antriebstechnik e.V.,
Lyoner Strasse 18, D--60528, Frankfurt/Main.
41. Bowen, C. W., The Practical Significance of Designing to Gear Pitting Fatigue Life Criteria, ASME Paper
77--DET--122, September 1977.
42. Dudley, D.W., Characteristics of Regimes of Gear Lubrication, International Symposium on Gearing and
Power Transmissions, Tokyo, Japan, 1981.
43. Blok, H., The Thermal--Network Method for Predicting Bulk Temperatures in Gear Transmissions, Proc.
7th Round Table Discussion on Marine Reduction Gears held in Finspong, Sweden, 9--10 September 1969.
44. Blok, H., Thermo--Tribology -- Fifty Years On, keynote address to the Int. Conf. Tribology; Friction,
Lubrication and Wear -- 50 Years On, Inst. Mech. Engrs., London, 1--3 July 1987, Paper No. C 248/87.
50
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION AGMA 925--A03
45. Ku, P.M. and Baber, B.B., The Effect of Lubricants on Gear Tooth Scuffing, ASLE Transactions, Vol. 2,
No. 2, 1960, pp. 184--194.
46. Winter, H., Michaelis, K. and Collenberg, H.F., Investigations on the Scuffing Resistance of High--Speed
Gears, AGMA Fall Technical Meeting Paper 90FTM8, 1990.
47. ANSI/AGMA 6002--B93, Design Guide for Vehicle Spur and Helical Gears.
48. Barish, T., How Sliding Affects Life of Rolling Surfaces, Machine Design, 1960.
49. Massey, C., Reeves, C. and Shipley, E.E., The Influence of Lubrication on the Onset of Surface Pitting in
Machinable Hardness Gear Teeth, AGMA Technical Paper 91FTM17, 1991.
51
PUBLISHED BY
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
1500 KING STREET, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22314