Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

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

Research paper

A computerized approach for loaded tooth contact analysis of

planetary gear drives considering relevant deformations
Shyi-Jeng Tsai∗, Siang-Yu Ye
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Central University, No. 300, Zhong-Da Rd., Zhong-Li District, Tao-Yuan City 32001,
Taiwan

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

Article history: This paper proposes a computerized approach based on the influence coefficient method to
Received 24 August 2017 solve the statically indeterminate problem of multiple loaded contact tooth pairs in plan-
Revised 10 December 2017
etary gear drives. The influences of the deformation on the loaded contact characteristics
Accepted 29 December 2017
are divided into three categories according to the relation of the acting load and the defor-
Available online 11 January 2018
mation on the specific tooth pairs, the gears and the gear pairs, respectively. Not only the
contact and bending deformation of the engaged teeth, but also the planet shaft deflection
and the twist deformation of the carrier and the sun gear are involved in the model. With
discretized contact region of each tooth pair, three-dimensional contact patterns with dis-
tributed stresses, including the concentrated stress due to edge effect and tip corner con-
tact, can be simulated. The simulated results are verified to have a good agreement with
FEM. A numerical example of a planetary gear set with non-modified flanks and the error-
free condition is analyzed in the paper. The effects of the deformation, the variations of
the shared loads, the contact stress, the loaded transmission errors, and the contact pat-
terns with the distributed contact stresses in the cases with/without tip corner contact are
discussed.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Planetary gear drives as a type of power-split mechanisms play a very important role for power transmission because
of various advantages, such as high gear ratio, high power density, coaxial input/output arrangement and compact design.
However either the errors or the deformations of relevant components, which cannot be ignored in actual working con-
ditions, affect significantly the contact characteristics of the engaged tooth flanks. As consequence, unevenly shared loads
among the planets or non-uniformly distributed loads on the engaged tooth flanks will occur accordingly. The maximum
transmittable power is thus restricted either by the reduced load capacity of the gear pairs or by the shortened working life
of the planet bearings. With these considerations, not only the shared loads among the planets and but also the distributed
loads on the flanks of the contact tooth pairs are the essential contact characteristics to be explored.
Among the related research works on load analysis of planetary gear drives in the past years, many studies focused on
dynamic load analysis to acquire the loading characteristics in real working conditions. However most of them are based on
the lumped parameter methods. The influences of the flank topology and the deformation of components on the meshing
stiffness and the contact stress distribution on the flanks are not included. The loaded tooth contact analysis (LTCA) models,

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sjtsai@cc.ncu.edu.tw (S.-J. Tsai).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2017.12.026
0094-114X/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 253

by contrast, can simulate the loaded contact characteristics with considering the influences of the flank topology and the
component deformations. Although most of them are static or quasi-static without consideration of dynamic effects, they
are fundamental for developing the complete load analysis model. Especially the LTCA models are very suitable to be used
for solving the statically indeterminate problem of multiple contact tooth pairs in planetary gear drives.
Among various methods for LTCA, finite element method (FEM) is often applied to solve the contact problem of gear
tooth pairs. It is not only because of the advantage of a high accuracy, but also because of involving the deformations of the
components in the analysis. However, meshing of suitable elements and positioning of accurate nodes for contact surfaces
are not only time-expensive, but the computational time is also higher. Consequently, FEM is not suitable to be applied
in the early design stage of the gear drives with flank modification, where the iterative approach is necessary. From this
viewpoint, computerized approaches are suitable to simulate the tooth contact characteristics.
Some computerized LTCA methods to simulate the load distribution on the flanks of gears, especially modified gears, are
developed at various universities, e.g. RIKOR at the TU Munich (Germany) [1–3], LVR at the TU Dresden (Germany) [4,5] and
LDP at the Ohio State University (USA) [6–8]. The influences of the deformation of the gear-shaft-bearing system as well as
the shaft misalignment can be involved in the LTCA methods. The suitable flank modification can be also designed to fulfill
the design requirements [9].
But the LTCA of a planetary gear drive is different from that of a pair of two gears, not only because multiple gear pairs
are simultaneously in contact, but also because the sun-planet and the annulus-planet gear pairs have coupled influences
with each other. Some of the LTCA approaches mentioned above are further developed to simulate the load sharing and the
load distribution in planetary gear drives. For example, Link [10] applied the program LVR [4] to analyze the stress and the
deformation in planetary gear drives, and Schulze et al. [11–13] developed furthermore a computer module based on LVR to
simulate of the load distribution in planetary gear drives considering the deformation of the related components. Neubauer
expanded the program RIKOR to analyze the loads in the planetary gear sets, even also suitable for multi-stages [14].
However, the above mentioned LTCA methods simulate only the distributed loads along the contact lines of the engaged
flanks. Although the computation is efficient, the contact patterns with distributed stress of the three-dimensional flank
surfaces cannot be obtained. Some other computerized LTCA approaches are thus proposed to offer three-dimensional con-
tact stress distribution on the flanks. For example, Pedrero et al. [15] and Sánchez [16] proposed a load distribution model
based on the minimum elastic potential criteria in order to calculate the contact stress; however the influence of flank
modification in micro level on the contact characteristics cannot be analyzed. Roda-Casanova [17] proposed a computerized
approach based on the influence coefficient method to simulate the spur gear on a misaligned shafts; however only the
contact deformation is involved in the analysis. Wu and Tsai [18] developed a computerized LTCA approach also based on
the influence coefficient method, where the gear mesh relation is analyzed by spatial gearing theory [19], and the defor-
mations due to tooth contact, tooth bending and shear are considered. The majority of both the works of Roda-Casanova
and Wu are based on Boussinesq force-displacement relation for half spaces. The contact pattern with distributed stresses
can be simulated not only for normal contact, but also for the non-Hertzian contact [18,20–22]. The approach developed
by Wu and Tsai [18] is further expended by the authors to analyze a gear pair [23,24] or multiple gear pairs [25] under
consideration of the flank modification as well as the deformation and misalignment of the shafts. The non-Hertzian contact
due to misalignment of the shaft or the extended tip corner contact can be also analyzed by using such the approach [24].
Based on the above mentioned research results of the authors in the past years, a computerized LTCA approach was fur-
ther developed for analysis of planetary gear drives. In this paper, the theoretical fundamentals of this computerized LTCA
approach based on the influence coefficient method are proposed. The deformations of the relevant components of planetary
gear drives, e.g., the gears, the planet shafts and the carrier, are considered in this approach. The influences of the distributed
loads on the deformations of the contact tooth pairs are divided into three levels, namely the level of a single tooth pair, a
gear pair and coupled multiple gear pairs. The influence coefficients are derived accordingly. On the other hand, the essential
three-dimensional topological contact conditions of the engaged tooth flanks are determined analytically [26–29] to simplify
the analysis., With the proposed LTCA approach, the contact characteristics of the planetary gear drives are calculated: (a)
the contact stress distribution on the engaged tooth flanks, (b) the load sharing of each planet, (c) the load sharing of an in-
dividual tooth pair, and (d) the tip corner contact. The results of the first two items calculated by the proposed approach will
be also compared with FEM results to verify its feasibility. The effects of the twist stiffness of the sun gear and the carrier
with the planet shafts on the contact stress distribution are also analyzed. One primary advantage of the proposed approach
is the efficient computation of the three-dimensional contact stress distribution, especially in the case of non-Hertzian con-
tact. This approach can also serve as a good design tool for planetary gear drives without or with flank modification.

2. Fundamentals of LTCA model

The developed LTCA approach for planetary gear set is based on the influence coefficient method. The concept and
related equations of the basic model for a single tooth pair will be summarized in the section, more details can be found
in the previous work [18]. This basic LTCA model is developed based on two types of relations as follows:

• the relation of the loaded deformation, the displacement and the separation distance of the engaged tooth pairs;
• the relation of the load equilibrium.

With combination of the relations, a set of equations can be derived for solving the load distribution on the flank.
254 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 1. (a) Relation of deformation and load (b) meshing on the common tangent plane.

2.1. Basic contact conditions for two engaged teeth

The teeth of gear 1 and 2 with an approaching displacement δ 1 and δ 2 , respectively, contact each other at the point Qy .
As the relation in Fig. 1(a) shows, the contact condition of two points Q1 and Q2 on the engaged teeth with a separation
distance h can be determined as,

h + wk1 + wk2 = δ, if point Q1 and Q2 are in contact; (1)

h + wk1 + wk2 > δ, if point Q1 and Q2 are out of contact. (2)

The deformation wk 1 or wk 2 consists of different deformation types under loading, e.g., contact deformation and bending
deflection of the tooth.

2.2. Discretization of the contact region on the engaged tooth pair

Considering that the contact area of the two engaged flanks is discretized into a finite number of small units on the com-
mon tangential plane, Eqs. (1) and (2) are also valid for all the discrete units. In order to establish the relation of the induced
deformations with the three-dimensionally distributed stresses on the discrete units, the concept of the so-called influence
coefficient is introduced. The deformation wkj on the middle point Pk of a discrete unit which is caused by a load (or stress)
pj acting on another point Pj can be expressed with an influence coefficient fk,j as wk,j = fk,j ·pj , see Fig. 1(b). In general, the
influence coefficient fkj consists of various deformation influences, e.g., the contact deformation (H), the bending deflection
(B) and the shear deformation (S) of the engaged teeth. The linear equation for the influence coefficient fk,j is valid, i.e.,

fk, j = fH−k, j + fB−k, j + fS−k, j . (3)

The calculation of influence coefficients fH , fB , and fS are already proposed in the paper [18]. The total elastic deformation
wk at point Pk can be regarded as the linear sum of the deformations caused by all the contact stresses pj (j = 1, 2,…, n)
acting on the discrete units, i.e.,

n
wk = ( fk, j · p j ), (4)
j=1

The relation of deformation-displacement for point Pk , i.e., Eq. (1), is then extended to

n
( fk, j p j ) + hk = δ, (5)
j=1

where hk is the separation distance of the discrete unit k between the two contact teeth before deformation. The separation
distance hk can be calculated not only under the ideal condition, but also in the case of the modified flanks of gears, and/or
the misaligned shafts [24].
Besides the deformation-displacement relations, the condition of load equilibrium must be also fulfilled. In other words,
the sum of all the contact stress acting on the discrete units multipled with an area s is equal to the active normal force F,

n
s· pj = F. (6)
j=1
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 255

2.3. Formulation of the set of equations for solving contact stress

In the case of n discrete units on the flanks, the equations derived above consist of n equations of deformation-
displacement and one equation of load equilibrium for n unknown contact stresses pj (j = 1 to n) and one unknown
approaching displacement δ , i.e.
f11 · p1 + ··· + f1 j · p j + ··· + f 1n · pn +h1 = δ,
.. .. .. .. ..
. . . . .
f k1 · p1 + ··· + fk j · p j + ··· + fkn · pn +hk = δ,
(7)
.. .. .. ..
. . . .
f n1 · p1 + ··· + fn j · p j + ··· + fnn · pn +hn = δ,
s · p1 + ··· +s · p j + ··· +s · pn = F.
The set of n + 1 equations can be also expressed in a matrix form, namely
    
A −I P −H
= , (8)
sJ 0 δ F

where J is the unit row-vector, I is the unit column-vector, A is the sub-matrix with all the influence coefficients fk,j , P is
the sub-matrix with the contact stress pj and H is the sub-matrix with all the separation distances hj . Eq. (8) can be further
rewritten in the simplified form,
UD = S. (9)
The matrix U in Eq. (9) is composed of constant elements, while the elements in the matrix S are given. Because of
linearity, the unknown vector D in Eq. (9) for the distributed contact stresses pj and the displacement δ can be solved with
aid of LU-decomposition method effectively. Because the actual contact area is unknown before calculation, a larger contact
region must be given initially. As a consequence, some of the calculated stresses could be negative, i.e., the corresponding
units are out of contact. The matrix U and S are then reduced by excluding the influence coefficients fk,j and the separation
distance hj related to these units with negative stresses. The solving process will be iteratively repeated until no negative
pressure is calculated. The actual contact pattern can be also simulated accordingly.

3. Extended LTCA model for a planetary gear set

The basic LTCA model, described in previous section, is applied for a single tooth pair and cannot be applied directly
to simulate the actual loading conditions in planetary gear sets without considering the deformation influences of the
relevant components. In general, a planetary gear set can be regarded as a gear set with multiple sun-planet-annulus gear
pairs, where all the planets are coupled with the carrier. It is thus necessary to establish the relations between the induced
deformation of the related components and the corresponding contact stresses (loads) acting on any discrete unit. The
deformations involved in the proposed LTCA model are listed as follows:

• deformations of the single contact tooth pair, including the contact deformation, the bending deflection and the shear
deformation of each individual tooth;
• twist deformation of the sun gear;
• bending deflection of the planet shafts; and
• twist deformation of the carrier.

The deformation influences on the contact conditions of each tooth pair can be divided into different influence levels.
The categories of these deformations, the expanded LTCA model for the planetary gear set and the related influence
coefficients will be discussed and derived systematically in the following sections.

3.1. Influence levels of the deformation for coupled multiple gear pairs

Not only the contact teeth, but also the components, e.g., the sun gear, the planet shafts and the carrier, can be deformed
by a load acting on a contact tooth pair. Those deformations cause further an additional separation displacement of any
specified unit not only on the same contact tooth pair, but also on the other contact tooth pairs of the same or the different
gear. According to the relation of the tooth pair and the gear pair, the influences of the load on the deformation can be
divided into three different levels. The detailed description is given as follows, and the association of the different influence
coefficients with the influence levels is summarized in Table 1.

• Influence level 1. The influence of the acting load is only restricted within the individual contact tooth pair. The basic
LTCA model belongs to this level, where the various deformation influences, e.g. the contact deformation, the bending
deflection and the shear deformation of the teeth as well as the twist of the sun gear and the carrier, are only affected
by the load acting in the same contact tooth pair.
256 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Table 1
Various levels for influence of loads on the deformation of different components.

Influenced deformations Influence level

Location Types of deformation and For the deformation of a discrete unit on a contact tooth pair due to the force acting on a
symbols for influence discrete unit
coefficients
On the same contact tooth On another contact tooth On a contact tooth pair of
pair pair of the same gear another gear pairs
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Tooth Contact deformation fH – –

Bending deflection fB • – –
Shear deformation fS • – –
Sun Gear Twist deformation fT • • –
Carrier Twist deformation fC • • •
Planet shaft Bending deflection fF1 • • –
Bending deflection fF2 – – •

• Influence level 2. The influence of the acting load is restricted within various contact tooth pairs on the same gear. In
this case, the load acting on a discrete unit affects any discrete unit either on the same contact tooth pair or another
of the same gear. The interaction of the load and the deformation on two different tooth pairs or the same tooth pair
is coupled with the gear blank and the shaft. The twist deformation and the bending deflection of the shaft should be
considered. In the study, the influences of the twist of the sun gear and the carrier, as well as the deflection of the planet
shaft are involved in the analysis model.
• Influence level 3. The influence of the acting load on the deformation of a tooth pair is expanded to include the other
gear pairs on the same supporting component, namely the carrier. The deformation of the carrier due to the load acting
on a discrete unit in a tooth pair does not only affect the deflection of the planet shaft, on which the loaded tooth
pair locates, but also the deflection of the other planet shaft. This secondary deformation of the planet shaft due to the
primary deformation of the carrier causes thus an additional equivalent deformation of each discrete units. In general,
the deformation of the carrier consists of bending and twist deformation of the side plates. Because the influence of the
bending deformation is smaller, only the twist deformation is considered in the paper to simplify the analysis.

3.2. LTCA model for a single gear pair considering influence level 2

If the influence of the shaft deformation of a gear pair is involved in analysis, an additional equivalent deformation on
a tooth will be induced by the deformation of the shaft, which can be caused by a load acting on the same or the other
tooth of the same gear. The LTCA model in Eq. (8) can be further extended for such a single gear pair. Some assumptions
are considered in this case as follows,

• multiple tooth-pairs are in contact;

• the load acting on a tooth affects also the deformation of the other tooth because of the induced deformation of the
shaft;
• the applied normal force F is equal to the sum of all the acting loads on all the discrete units of the contact tooth pairs;
• each tooth pair has the same approach displacement δ under the applied force F.

If a gear contact with another gear in three tooth pairs, the deformation-displacement relation for the kth discrete unit
of tooth pair 1 due to all the discrete loads acting on the three contact tooth pairs can be expressed as:

( f1I −k,1−1 + f1II−k,1−1 ) · p1−1 + · · · + ( f1I −k,1−n1 + f1II−k,1−n1 ) · p1−n1 + f1II−k,2−1 · p2−1 + · · · + f1II−k,2−n2 · p2−n2
     
influenced by the discrete loads of contact tooth pair 1 influenced by contact tooth pair 2

+ f1II−k,3−1 · p3−1 + · · · + f1II−k,3−n3 · p3−n3 +h1−k = δ, (10)

  
influenced by contact tooth pair 3

The influence coefficient f1II−k,2−n in Eq. (10) indicates that this coefficient of level II (superscript) is used for the
2
deformation of the unit k on tooth pair 1 (subscript before comma) due to the load acting on the unit n2 on tooth pair 2
(subscript after comma). It can be also recognized that the deformations of level 1 occur only on the units of tooth pair 1
in this case. The deformation- displacement relation for all the units on the tooth pair 1 can be further formulated in the
matrix equation,

1,1 P 1 + A 1,2 P 2 + A 1,3 P 3 + H 1 = δ I ,

AI+ II II II
(11)

where the influence coefficient matrix AI+

1,1
II
consists of the influence coefficients both of influence level 1 and 2, and the
other matrices, AII1,2 and AII1,3 , only of level 2 due to the acting loads in another contact tooth pairs. Based on the assumption
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 257

of the load equilibrium, the relation is not different from Eq. (6). Consequently, the matrix equation for the LTCA model
considering influence level 2 can be formulated as
⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
AI+
1,1
II
AII1,2 AII1,3 −I1 P1 H1
⎢ A2,1
II
AI+ II
AII2,3 −I2 ⎥⎢P2 ⎥ ⎢ H2 ⎥
⎣ AII 2,2
II
A3,2 AI+ II
−I3
⎦⎣P ⎦ = −⎣ H ⎦. (12)
3,1 3,3 3 3
s1 J1 s2 J2 s3 J3 0 δS −F

3.3. Complete LTCA model for a planetary gear set

3.3.1. Deformation-displacement relations considering influence level 3

A planetary gear set having an annulus gear, n planet gears, a sun gear and a carrier with planet shafts is analyzed
with consideration of the all the above mentioned deformations, including the additional deformations of the planet shafts
and the carrier of influence level 3. For example, the deformations of the 2nd sun-planet tooth pair of the ith planet gear
engaged with the sun gear (index SP) can be also classified according to different influence levels as follows:
• The influences of the loads on the deformations can be divided into the same gear pair type or another gear pair type
according to the relations of the gear pairs, i.e., the annulus-planet gear pair (with index AP) and the sun-planet gear
pair (SP).
• The deformation of a mentioned tooth pair due to the loads acting on another tooth pair (either SP or AP) of the same
gear belongs to influence level 2 and 3 simultaneously.
• The loads acting on all the other tooth pairs of the different planet gears have only the influence level 3.
• Only the loads acting on the same tooth pair have all the three influence levels.
The deformation-displacement relation for all the units of a mentioned contact tooth pair (with the subscript SPi-2) can
be further expanded from Eq. (11) to the following equation,
⎡ ⎤
influenced by the same gear pair type (sun−planet gear pair )
  
⎢ III ⎥
⎣ASPi−2,SP1−1 PSP1−1 + AIII PSP1−2 + · · · + AIISP+i−2
III
P
,SPi−1 SPi−1
+ AI+II+III SPi−2,SPnP −1 PSPnP −1 ⎦
PSPi−2 + · · · + AIII
  SPi−2,SP1−2    SPi−2,SPi−2    
another planet gear the same planet gear another planet gear
⎡ ⎤
influenced by another gear pair type (annulus−planet gear pair ) (13)
  
⎢ III II+III ⎥
+ ⎣BSPi−2,AP1−1 PAP1−1 + · · · + BSPi−2,APi−1 PAPi−1 + · · · + BSPi−2,APnP −1 PAPnP −1 + BSPi−2,APnP −2 PAPnP −2⎦ + HSPi−2
III III
        
another planet gear the same planet gear another planet gear

= (δ − δPi ) ISPi−2
or summarized as

nP 
tk

nP 
tk
ASPi−2,SPk− j PSPk− j + BSPi−2,APk− j PAPk− j + HSPi−2 = (δS − δPi ) ISP2−i (14)
k=1 j=1 k=1 j=1

The displacement for the contact of tooth pair SPi-2 in Eqs. (13) and (14) is equal to the difference of the displacements
of the sun gear δ S and the planet gear δ P i , i.e., δ S − δ P i . The displacement for the tooth contact of the annulus-planet gear
pairs, on the other hand, is only affected directly by the rotation of the planet. Similar to Eq. (14), the relation for the 2nd
contact tooth pair of ith annulus-planet gear pair (subscript APi-2) is

nP 
tk

nP 
tk
BAPi−2,SPk− j PSPk− j + AAPi−2,APk− j PAPk− j + HAPi−2 = δPi IAPi−2 . (15)
k=1 j=1 k=1 j=1

3.3.2. Load equilibrium relations

Two types of load equilibrium relations are considered for planetary gear sets. One is the relation between the input
torque T and the sum of all the distributed loads acting on the sun gear,

nP 
tk
sSPk− j JSPk− j PSPk− j = T /rbS . (16)
k=1 j=1

The other is the relation of torque equilibrium for each planet gear. For example of planet i, the sum of the toques caused
by the acting loads on the sun-planet tooth pairs must be equal to those on the annulus-planet tooth pairs. If two contact
sun-planet tooth pairs and one annulus-planet tooth pair are considered in this case, the equation can be expressed as:
(sSPi−1 ISPi−1 PSPi−1 + sSPi−2 ISPi−2 PSPi−2 ) − (sAPi−1 IAPi−1 PAPi−1 ) = 0. (17)
In general the number of the contact sun-planet or annulus-planet tooth pairs varies within the meshing cycle of each
gear pair.
258 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Table 2
Types and meanings of the sub-matrices.

Symbol Size Description Expression

 T
GSP (GAP ) tSP × 1 (tAP × 1) The matrix contains column vectors H for the HTSP1−1 , HTSP1−2 , · · · , HTSPnP −1 , HTSPnP −2
separation distances between the engaged
tooth flanks.
 T
PSP , PAP tSP × 1 (tAP × 1) The matrix contains column vectors P for the PTSP1−1 , PTSP1−2 , · · · , PTSPnP −1 , PTSPnP −2
distributed pressures of each contact tooth
pair.
P [δP1 , δP2 , · · · , δPnP ]
T
nP × 1 The matrix is a column vector with the nP
approaching distances δ P of the planets.
⎡ II+III +III ⎤
AI+
SP1−1,SP1−1
AIISP1 −1,SP1−2
··· AIII
SP1−1,SPnP −2
⎢ AIISP1
+III
AI+ II+III
··· SP1−2,SPnP −2 ⎥
AIII
⎢ −2,SP1−1 SP1−2,SP1−2
⎥
ASP , AAP tSP × tSP The matrix contains square matrices for the ⎢ . . .. . ⎥
influence coefficients of contact tooth pairs ⎣ .
.
.
. . .
.
⎦
due to the influences of the tooth pairs of AIII
SPnP −2,SP1−1 AIII
SPnP −2,SP1−2 ··· AIII
SPnP −2,SPnP −2
the same gear pair type.
⎡ +III ⎤
BIISP1 −1,AP1−1
BIII
SP1−1,AP2−1
··· BIII
SP1−1,APnP −1
⎢ BIII BIII ··· SP1−2,APnP −1 ⎥
BIII
⎢ SP1−2,AP1−1 SP1−2,AP2−1
⎥
BSP-AP (BAP-SP ) tSP × tAP (tAP × tSP ) The matrix contains matrices for the influence ⎢ . . .. . ⎥
coefficients of contact tooth pairs due to the ⎣ .
.
.
. . .
.
⎦
influences of the tooth pairs of another gear BIII
SPnP −2,AP1−1 BIII
SPnP −2,AP2−1 ··· BIII
SPnP −2,APnP −1
pair type.
⎡ ⎤
ISP1−1 0 ··· 0
⎢ISP1−2 0 ··· 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ 0 ISP2−1 ··· 0 ⎥
ESP (EAP ) tSP × nP (tAP × nP ) The matrix is used to convert the unknown ⎢ ⎥
displacements δ P of the planets into the
⎢ .. . .. . ⎥
⎣ . .
. . .
. ⎦
equations of deformation- displacement of
0 0 ··· ISPnP −2
the gear pairs accordingly.
T T
LSP tSP × 1 The matrix is a unit column vector to convert ISP1−1 , ITSP1−2 , · · · , ITSPnP −1 , ITSPnP −2
the unknown δ S into the equations of
deformation-displacement for the sun-planet
gear pairs.
⎡ ⎤
sSP1−1 JSP1−1 sSP1−2 JSP1−2 0 ··· 0
⎢ 0 0 sSP2−1 JSP2−1 ··· 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
SSP(AP) nP × tSP (nP × tAP ) The matrix with the various areas of the ⎢ . . . .. . ⎥
discrete units is used to calculate the sum of ⎣ .
.
.
.
.
. . .
. ⎦
the distributed loads on the corresponding 0 0 0 ··· sSPnP −2 JSPnP −2
gear pairs.
 
JSP 1 × tSP The matrix is a row vectors for calculation of sSP1−1 JSP1−1 sSP1−2 JSP1−2 ··· sSPnP −2 JSPnP −2
the sum of the distributed loads acting on
the sun gear.

3.3.3. Formulation of the complete LTCA model

Based on the above typical equations, Eqs. (14) and (15), as well as Eqs. (16) and (17), respectively, tSP + tAP equations of
deformation-displacement and nP + 1 equations of load equilibrium can be derived. Consequently, tSP + tAP distributed loads
(or contact stresses) P on the contact tooth pairs and nP displacements δ P of the planets and one displacement δ S of the
sun gear can be solved definitely based on the derived equations. The LTCA model can be thus further summarized in a
matrix equation, i.e.

(18)

The detailed meaning and the composition of the sub-matrices in Eq. (18) are listed in Table 2. The influence matrices,
i.e., ASP , AAP , and BSP-AP , BSP-AP , are collections of the influence coefficients based on various deformations. The association of
the different types of the influence coefficients with the influence matrices is listed in Table 3. The influence coefficients of
level 2 and 3 will be derived in the following sections, while those of level 1 are already proposed in the previous work [20].

3.4. Influences coefficients due to the twist of a gear

A force FII, i acting on point PII, i of tooth II with a distance xi to the face-width end of a hollow geared shaft is considered.
A reaction torque T (= FII, i rbS ) will be induced at the face-end accordingly, as shown in Fig. 2. The twist angle φ T i on point
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 259

Table 3
Influence coefficients for different influence levels.

Influence Matrix ASP i - k ,SP j-l AAP i - k ,AP j-l , BSP i - k ,AP j-l , BAP i - k ,SP j-l

Conditions k = l, i = j K = l, i = j I = j i=j I = j
Influence level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 Level 3

Applicability of the Tooth: fH , fB , fS • – – – –

influence coefficient
Sun gear: fT • • – – –
Planet shaft & carrier: fFC1 • • •
Planet shaft & carrier: fFC2 • •

Fig. 2. Twist deformation of a geared shaft.

PII, i is equal to
T · xi FII,i · rbS · xi
φT i = , or φTi = , (19)
Jt · G Jt · G
where Jt is the polar moment of inertia of the shaft and G the shear modulus of the material. If two points, e.g., PI k and
PII k , are located on different teeth, but on the same face-width, the induced deformations are the same due to the equal
twist angle. The influence coefficients for the shaft twist is thus only dependent on the location on the face-width, and can
be divided into two different types according to whether the shaft segment is loaded or not.

(1) The shaft segment is loaded, xk  xi

In this case the induced displacement δ T on point PI ,k of the tooth I can be calculated as
xk
δT = · r · φT i (20)
xi bS
The influence coefficient fk,i for the displacement on point k due to the load acting on point i is calculated from the
definition fT k,i = δ T i / pi and FII, i = s  pi , i.e.,

2 · s · rbS
2
fTk,i = xk · , (21)
π · (r4f − ri4 ) · G
where s is the area of the discrete unit on point i.

(2) The shaft segment is not loaded, i.e., xj > xi

In this case, the twist displacement on each point Pj in the segment is equal to the deformation caused by the reaction
force acting on point Pi . Similarly, the influence coefficient fT j,i is

2 · s · rbS
2
fT j,i = xi · . (22)
π · (r4f − ri4 ) · G

3.5. Influence coefficients due to the deformation of the carrier and the planet shaft

Because the planet shafts are assembled with the carrier (Fig. 3), the deformations of the two types of components are
coupled with each other. A load acting on a tooth of a planet gear can not only cause deflection of the planet shaft (called
260 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 3. Method to obtain the equivalent stiffness.

Fig. 4. Simplified model for the deformation of the planet shaft caused by a load acting on the same shaft.

Fig. 5. Simplified model for the deformation of the planet shaft caused by a load acting on another shaft.

“deflection type 1”), on which the planet is mounted, but also the deformation of the carrier, which causes further the
deflection of the other planet shafts (called “deflection type 2”). It is thus convenient to derive an influence coefficient from
the combined deformations of the planet shaft and the carrier.
The deflection of the planet shaft, which is determined according to the integration equation,

M (z ) 1
δ (z ) = dzdz + c1 · z + c2 , (23)
E I (z )
can be solved by using the method of singularity function (see Appendix) under different boundary conditions considering
the deformation influences of the carrier.

3.5.1. Deflection type 1: Caused by a load acting on the same shaft

The deflection δ i - i (z) of the ith planet shaft due to the load acting on the planet i in this case is analyzed by using the
simplified model shown in Fig. 4. Because the bending deformation of the side plates of the carrier affects the planet shaft
less than the twist deformation, only the twist of the carrier is considered in the study to simplify the analysis. The planet
shaft can be modeled with two elastic supports having the spring stiffness of the value kCA (near the input side) and kCB
(near the output side), respectively, Fig. 4. Either the displacement δ A or δ B is caused by the reaction forces FA and FB on
both the supports simultaneously. More details are discussed in the next section.
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 261

The bending moment Mi,j along the axis, which is necessary for the deflection, is expressed with the singularity
function,

Mi,i (z ) = −FA · S(z, 0, 1 ) − MA · S(z, 0, 1 ) + Fi · S(z, zBRG , 1 ). (24)

Either the displacement δ A or δ B is caused simultaneously by the force FA and FB acting on the plate A and B of the
carrier, and can be expressed by using the equivalent stiffness accordingly, i.e.,
FA FB FA F − FA
δA = + , or δA = + ,
kA ,A kA ,B kA ,A kA ,B
FA FB FA F − FA
δB = + , or δB = + . (25)
kB,A kB,B kB,A kB,B
where the stiffness kA,B indicates the relation of the force F acting on B-side and the displacement on A-side, the others
are similar. The four unknown variables in Eqs. (23) and (24), i.e., FA , MA , c1 and c2 , are solved by the four boundary
conditions:
δ x(0 ) = δA ,
δ x(L ) = δB ,
(26)
δ x ( 0 ) = 0,
δ x ( L ) = 0.

3.5.2. Deflection type 2: Caused by a load acting on another shaft

The modeling of type 2 is similar to type 1, but no external load acts on the planet shaft i. The deflection δ i , j of the
shaft is only caused by the forced displacement δ A and δ B on the supports due to the carrier twist, which is induced by a
load Fj acting on another shaft (planet j). The bending moment Mi , j (z) in this case is

Mi, j (z ) = −FA · S (z, 0, 1 ) − MA · S (z, 0, 1 ). (27)

The unknown force FA and Moment MA in Eq. (27) and the integration constants c1 and c2 in Eq. (23) are solved with
the boundary conditions,

δ x(0 ) = δA ,
δ x(L ) = δB ,
δ x ( 0 ) = 0,
δ x ( L ) = 0, (28)
where the forced displacements δ A and δ B are the same with the case of type 1.

3.5.3. Determination of the carrier stiffness

As the model mentioned above, the planet shafts are integrated in the carrier for the analysis. The equivalent stiffness
kA,A , kA,B , kB,B and kB,A of the carrier in Eq. (25) can be obtained by using FEM. At first, each pin-hole on one side-plate of
the carrier, e.g. A, is loaded by a force with a same value, e.g. FA , so as to avoid bending deformation. The displacements
of each pin-hole on the plate A and B are obtained as δ A and δ B by FEM, respectively. With the force FA , for example, the
equivalent stiffness kA,A and kB,A can be determined by the equations,
nP · FA
kA ,A = ,
δA,A
nP · FA
kB,A = . (29)
δB,A
The same process is also applied to the case of the forces acting on side B, in order to obtain another set of the
equivalent stiffness, e.g. kB,A and kB,B .

3.5.4. Influence coefficients due to the deflection of the supporting planet shaft
Because the planet rotates freely around the axis of the planet shaft, the load Fj-l-v acting on unit v of gear flank l of
a gear pair (e.g. sun and planet j) will induce a reaction force on another gear pair (e.g. annulus and planet j). Only the
tangential component of the applied load Fj- L-v is valid active load for the deflection δ t of the shaft j and the carrier, i.e.,

Feqv = Fj−l −v cos αw . (30)

The deflection δ t j - u (zk ) of the unit u on the position zk of the planet j can be expressed as a function of the acting
load Feqv on the shaft by using Eqs. (23)–(26). The twist deformations δ B and δ A of the carrier are also dependent on Feqv
accordingly.
262 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 6. Tooth clearances due to the shaft deformation.

On the other hand, any other planet shaft i will be also deformed in the tangential direction due to the twist of the
carrier. In this case (type 2) the deflection δ t i - u (zk ) of the unit u on the position zk of another planet i is also as a function
of Feqv by combination of Eqs. (23), (24), (27) and (28) with the calculated twist δ B , δ A .
The effective displacement of the contact tooth pair due to the loaded deformation can be regarded as the projected
distance on the line of action, as shown in Fig. 6. The influence coefficients fF i-j for both the types are derived based on the
relation of the acting load and the deflection. For example, the equation is valid for type 1,
δt j,u (zk ) cos αw
fFC1 = , (31)
Fj−l −v
or
δt j,u (zk )
f Fi− j = · cos2 αw , (32)
Feqv.
where the relation δ t j,u (zk ) / Feqv is a constant and can be obtained from the equations mentioned above. Similar relation is
also valid for the influence coefficient of type 2.

3.6. Geometric relation for tooth contact of the planetary gear set

Besides the influence coefficients, the separation distances between two engaged flanks in the proposed LTCA model
must be also determined based on the mesh relation of the gear set [29]. The separation distances are affected not only by
the topological conditions of the tooth profiles on the contact points, but also by the errors in the arrangement of gears.
However, only exact involute tooth profile, the fixed supported sun gear and error-free conditions are considered in the
paper. Some important equations on planetary gear meshing will be summarized in the section for better understanding,
more details can be found in the reference [29].

3.6.1. Separation distances between two contact tooth flanks

Another essential component in the proposed LTCA model for the three-dimensional simulation of distributed contact
stresses is the two-dimensional separation distances between each two engaged tooth flanks. The calculation can be derived
from the geometrical relation illustrated in Fig. 7. If a flanks engages another on point M, the distances h of any point Y on
the flank to the tangential plane is to be determined. The location of point Y is defined with a specific length l to point M
along the tangent t in the transverse plane. The given length l is equal to the inner product of the vectors rYM (= rY − rM )
and t, i.e.,
[rY (ξY ) − rM (ξM )] · t(ξM ) = l. (33)
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 263

Fig. 7. Geometric relation for calculation of the separation distance of a tooth.

The variable ξ Y for the point Y can be thus solved. The corresponding separation h can be calculated with substituting
the variable ξ Y into the equation:

h = [ r Y ( ξY ) − r M ( ξM ) ] · n ( ξM ) . (34)

3.6.2. Gear meshing relation

Two geometric relations of gear meshing are essential for loaded tooth contact analysis of planetary gear sets, namely
the tooth clearances between engaged flanks caused by manufacturing/assembly errors and the contact position of each tooth
pair. The clearances are important for load analysis because they affect the shared loads of the contact tooth pairs, while
the contact positions of tooth pairs determine the meshing stiffness of the gear pairs.
In order to simplify the meshing analysis, a planetary gear set with two planet (index 1 and i) is considered, Fig. 8 [29].
The geometrical relations of these two sun-planet-annulus gear pairs with a separation angel γ are at first derived. These
relations can be later expanded for the other planet gears with a different separation angel γ . It is assumed here that the
planetary gear set has planar and time-invariant errors, e.g. the position errors of pin-holes and the tooth thickness errors.
In order to analyze the tooth clearance due to the errors, the planets rotate so that no tooth clearances between all the
contact tooth pairs of the gear pairs except the sun-planet i gear pair are present. With the initial position of the contact
tooth pair of the reference sun-planet gear pair, i.e., the rolling angle ξ S1 , the tooth clearance between the engaged teeth of
the sun and the ith planet can be obtained as
m · cos α0
δPSi = [(zP + zS )(invαPSi − invαPS1 )+ (zP − |zA | ) · (invαPAi − invαPA1 )
2 (35)
+zP · (ψbP1 − ψbPi ) + γ (zS + |zA | )].
The detailed derivation of the geometrical relation can be found in [29]. Eq. (35) reveals that the clearance δ PS i is
independent on the initial contact position ξ S1 and only associated with the planar time-invariant errors. The difference
between the working pressure angles α PS1 and α PS i (or α PA1 and α PA i ), as well as the separation angle error γ in the
equation are caused by the position errors of the planet i relative to the reference planet. On the other hand, the difference
between the tooth thicknesses of the planets 1 and i leads also to occurrence of tooth clearance.
The determined clearance δ PS i could be negative, i.e., interference between the engaged teeth occurs. In order to avoid
this interference, the sun gear must rotate reversely with the interference angle. The final clearance among the engaged
tooth pair of all the planets and the sun gear can be expressed as

δres,i = δi − min{δ1 , δ2 , · · · , δn }, i = 1 to n (36)

With the contact position ξ S1 of the sun gear engaged with the reference planet 1, the contact positions of the other
tooth pairs, e.g., ξ PS1 , ξ PA1 etc., can be determined from the geometric relation in Fig. 8 based on the involute geometry
accordingly. The related equations are already proposed in the previous work [29], and will not be listed in this paper.
264 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 8. Gear mesh relation of a planetary gear train [29].

3.6.3. Variation of the contact position during gear mesh

The contact position of each tooth pair will change with the rotation angle ϕ S of the sun gear or the rotation angle ϕ C
of the carrier. Without considering the time-variant errors, e.g., eccentric errors, the unloaded transmission error does not
occur. The new contact position ξ S k of the sun gear can be also determined by the relation [29],

|zA |
ξSk = mod [φC · + ξS1 , τS ] . (37)
zP

With this angular variable ξ S k the new geometric relation of the tooth pairs is still similar to Fig. 8, and the relations
are also valid for the case.

4. Numerical example and comparison with FEM

An example from industrial application is used to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed analysis model. The
distributed contact stress on flanks and the load sharing among planets, obtained from the proposed LTCA model, are at
first compared with those from the FEM software (MSC.Marc). The effects of the deformations of the sun gear, the carrier
with the planet shafts on the distribution of the contact stress are then identified using the LTCA approach. The variation
of shared loads and contact stresses of an individual single tooth pairs, as well as the contact pattern at specific contact
positions are analyzed and discussed later.
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 265

Fig. 9. The section view of a three-stage planetary reducer for analysis.

Table 4
Parameters of planetary gear set.

Unit Sun Planet Ring

Number of teeth – 30 32 −95

Normal module mm 18
Center distance mm 575
Pressure angle deg 20 20 20
Face width mm 470 460 460
Normal profile shifting coefficient x – 0.52123 0.52188 −0.98891
Actual profile shifting coefficient xact – 0.5067 0.5024 −1.0232
Backlash mm 0.4188 0.6621
Young’s modulus GPa 210 210 210
Poison’s ratio – 0.3 0.3 0.3
Number of planets – 5
Power kW 1500
Input/Output torque (sun gear/carrier) kNm 625 / 2604.4
Input/Output speed (sun gear/carrier) rpm 22.9 / 5.5

Table 5
Parameters for equivalent stiffness of the carrier.

Input side A Output side B

Displacement δ due to FA (input side) [mm] δ A, A = 0.529 δ B, A = 0.298

Displacement δ due to FB (output side) [mm] δ A, B = 0.291 δ B, B = 0.289
Equivalent stiffness k due to FA (input side) [kN/mm] kA, A = 856.82 kB, A = 1521
Equivalent stiffness k due to FB (output side) [kN/mm] kA, B = 1557.6 kB, B = 1568.4

4.1. Design parameters for the analysis case

The final stage of a three-stage planetary reducer (see Fig. 9) is chosen as the study case for analysis. The parameters
of the planetary gear set are listed in Table 4. Five planet gears are separated equally around the sun gear to carry out the
high torque. The tooth profile is assumed as exact involute without any flank modification in the case.
The equivalent stiffness of the carrier is obtained from FEM result by using CAD software Autodesk Inventor, see Fig. 10.
The total load with a value of 453.26 kN is applied either on the input side or on the output side of the carrier. The
displacements δ and the calculated equivalent stiffness k of the carrier on the each side under various loading conditions
are summarized in Table 5.

4.2. Selection of the discrete unit size

Similarly to FEM, the size of the discrete units affects also the analysis results. The suitable size is selected according to
the convergence condition of the analysis results. The gearing data in Table 4 is used as example for the convergence test. In
order to avoid the stress concentration in the analysis, the maximum contact stress of the gear set with modified flanks and
no errors is analyzed in various unit sizes, respectively. The area of the common plane for analysis is 460 × 4 mm2 for all
266 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 10. Determination of the carrier stiffness with aid of CAD software.

Fig. 11. Convergence test for the number of discrete units of sun-planet gear pairs according to the maximum contact stress.

the cases. The number of discrete units used for analysis is selected as 9 × 9 = 81, 11 × 11 = 121, 13 × 13 = 169, 15 × 15 = 225,
19 × 19 = 361, 23 × 23 = 529, 27 × 27 = 729 and 33 × 33 = 1089, respectively.
The sun gear engages with the planets at the rotation angle of 0.45 rad in the analysis case. Single tooth pair contact
occurs in the gear meshing of the sun-planet gear pair, while double tooth pair contact in the annulus-planet gear pair.
As the diagram in Fig. 11 shows, the value of maximum contact stress of the sun-planet gear pair increases with a larger
number of units, but the difference between the adjacent data will be reduced strongly when the unit number is larger
than 225. The shared load in this case is constant, because of single tooth pair contact. The corresponding comparative
result is therefore not presented.
Because double tooth pair contact occurs in the case of annulus-planet gear pairs, the shared load and the contact stress
must be checked. As the diagrams in Figs. 12 and 13 illustrate, the analysis has a good converged results when the unit
number is also greater than 225. With consideration of the calculation efficiency and accuracy, the unit number is selected
as 529 in the following calculation.

4.3. FEM analysis approach

4.3.1. Analysis model

The FEM model of the planetary gear set, illustrated in Fig. 14, consists of the carrier with the planet shafts, Fig. 14(b),
and the gears, Fig. 14(c) and (d). The influences of the twist of the sun gear shaft and the deformation of the carrier are
involved in the FEM analysis. The element type is Hex8 (6 faces and 8 nodes). No special elements are necessary to be
placed at the points of contact for solving the contact problem by using the FEM software (MSC.Marc), because the special
algorithm, so-called Solver Constrain Method, is applied. The FE-model includes 577,970 elements and 715,730 nodes.
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 267

Fig. 12. Convergence test for the number of discrete units of annulus-planet gear pairs according to the shared load.

Fig. 13. Convergence test for the number of discrete units of annulus-planet gear pairs according to the maximum contact stress.

4.3.2. Setting of FEM

The setting of the boundary conditions is shown in Fig. 15. The transmitted torque is applied on the face-end of the
sun gear shaft. Each planet gear is connected to the axis of the planet shaft with rigid link elements, so as to rotate freely
around the planet shaft. The nodes either on the output end of the carrier shaft or on the outer circumference of the
annulus gear are all defined as fixed. The Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio of all the components is equal to 206 GPa
and 0.3, respectively.

4.4. Comparison with FEM

In order to compare with FEM, the distributed contact stress along the face-width and the load sharing among planets
are calculated by the proposed LTCA approach and FEM. The torque with a value of 500 kNm is applied on the sun gear
(input side). The FEM results are shown in Fig. 16.

4.4.1. Distributed contact stress along the face-width

Figs. 17 and 18 show the variation of the contact stress along the face-width of a sun-planet and an annulus-planet
tooth pair, respectively. The results from the LTCA approach have a good agreement with those obtained from FEM, where
the maximum difference is less than 10%. The variation of the contact stress in the annulus-planet tooth pair increases from
the input side of the carrier to the output side, Fig. 17, because of the larger stiffness of the carrier on the output side. This
increasing trend of the contact stress is reduced in the sun-planet tooth pair and varies more evenly because of the larger
twist stiffness of the sun gear on the input side, Fig. 18.

4.4.2. Load sharing among planets

In order to compare the analysis results of load sharing between the two approaches, the planetary gear sets without
and with a tangential position error of pin hole are considered, respectively. The tangential position error ε t = 0.02 mm is
268 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 14. FEM models of planetary gear with carrier.

Fig. 15. The boundary condition of the planetary gear.

 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 269

Fig. 16. FEM results: deformation and contact normal stress.

Fig. 17. Comparison of contact stress of the annulus-planet gear with FEM and numerical results.

assigned to planet 5 and the tooth clearance is calculated as 0.0367 mm accordingly. The numerical LTCA results are almost
the same as those obtained by FEM, where the maximum difference is less than 0.03% in the case without an error, and
2% with an error, see Fig. 19. In the error-free case, nearly evenly shared loads are obtained, Fig. 19(a). In the case with an
position error on planet 5, uneven shared loads are distributed in the five planets, especially the adjacent planets 1 and 4
share the larger load, although the sun gear is floating, Fig. 19(b).

4.5. Influences of the various deformation on the contact stress distribution

Among the various deformations mentioned in the proposed model, the deformations of the sun gear and the carrier
with the planet shafts can cause uneven stress distribution in the axial direction. In order to explore their influences on the
contact characteristics, three different cases are analyzed by using the proposed LTCA approach and compared with each
other:

• Case A: only the deformations related to the tooth, namely influence level 1, are considered;
• Case B: twist deformation of the sun gear is also considered additionally;
• Case C: all the mentioned deformations are considered.

Either the contact stress of the sun-planet or the annulus-planet tooth pair in Case A is distributed almost evenly along
the face-width, only the concentrated stress occurs on both the face-ends due to edge effect, as the results in Figs. 20 and
21 show.
As Fig. 20 clearly shows, the twist deformation of the sun gear (Case B) cause unevenly distributed stress of the
sun-planet tooth pair, where the enlarged stress occurs near the input side and reduced stress near the output side. The
trapezoid-shaped contact pattern, as illustrated in Fig. 22(a), shows that not only the stress but also the contact area is
270 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 18. Comparison of contact stress of the sun-planet gear with FEM and numerical results.

Fig. 19. Comparison of load sharing of the planetary gear set with FEM and numerical results.

enlarger near the input side of the sun gear. This strongly non-uniform variation of the contact stress is also caused by
the reduced twist stiffness due to the hollow design of the sun gear. However, this twist deformation has no effect on the
stress distribution of the annulus-planet tooth pair, that is why the calculated results in Case A and B are almost the same,
Fig. 21. The corresponding contact pattern, as shown in Fig. 22(b), is saddle-shaped.
The influence of the combined deformation of the carrier with the planet shafts can be observed with comparison of the
analysis results of the annulus-planet tooth pair in Case B (A) and C, see Fig. 21. The difference shows that the stiffness of the
carrier on the output side is more rigid than elsewhere. This effect is opposite to that of the twist deformation of the sun
gear. As a consequence, the unevenly distributed stress of the sun-planet tooth pair due to the twist of the sun gear is thus
compensated by the twist of the carrier with the planet shafts. As the result in Fig. 20 shows, the compensated stress dis-
tribution is almost the same with Case A in this study case. The corresponding contact patterns are illustrated in Fig. 23(a).
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 271

Fig. 20. Influences of the various deformations on the contact stress of the sun-planet gear.

Fig. 21. Influences of the various deformations on the contact stress of the annulus-planet gear.

Fig. 22. Contact stress distribution of the tooth pairs without consideration of the influence of the carrier with the planet shafts.

4.6. Contact stress distribution on flanks at specified contact positions

The characteristics of the contact stress distribution and the corresponding contact pattern of the tooth pairs are
analyzed for different contact position of the gear pairs, including in normal tooth contact and tip corner contact.
272 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 23. Contact stress distribution at single and double contact position.

4.6.1. Normal tooth contact

Two various cases are considered in the analysis: the sun and the planet gear are either in single pair tooth contact or
in double tooth contact. The saddle-shaped distributed contact stresses of the tooth pairs are simulated by the proposed
approach, where tip corner contact does not occur, as illustrated in Fig. 23. The variation of the stress along the major
axis of the contact pattern is uneven in the annulus-planet tooth pairs, and more uniform in the sun-planet, as the similar
results show in Figs. 17 and 18. Because of the curvature relation of concave-convex contact, the minor axis length of the
annulus-planet tooth pairs is larger than that of the sun-planet, but the contact stress is smaller.

4.6.2. Tip corner contact

The contact stresses are analyzed for various contact positions before the beginning and after the end of normal
contact. A typical 3D stress distribution of those analysis results is shown in Fig. 24. Fig. 25 shows the variation of the
stress distribution along the minor axis at the various contact positions for both the gear pairs. The tooth contact with
concentrated stresses occurs on the tip corner of one engaged gear flank, while the contact position varies within the root
area of another gear flank.

4.7. Variation of shared loads and contact stresses of an individual tooth pair

Two different conditions are involved in the calculation by using the proposed LTCA approach: without and with
consideration of tip corner contact beyond the normal line of action. The influences of tip corner contact on the shared
loads and the contact stresses are discussed as follows.

4.7.1. Variation of shared loads

The curve in solid line in Fig. 26 shows the variation of the load shared by a sun-planet tooth pair from the contact
begin (A) to end (E) in a meshing cycle, where the tip corner contact is not considered. The variation shows no difference
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 273

Fig. 24. Typical Stress distribution due to tip corner contact.

Fig. 25. Variation of the stress distribution of sun-planet and annulus-planet gear due to tip corner contact on the flanks.

with the normal spur gear pair. The shared load varies abruptly at the position B and D, where the number of contact tooth
pair changes [24].
If tip corner contact is considered in the calculation, the teeth engage each other also in the additional contact regions
A’A and EE’, as the dashed line in the diagram shows. The shared loads in the region BB’ and D’D, respectively, are reduced
accordingly.
The load shared by an annulus-planet tooth pair in both the contact cases varies also similarly to the sun-planet tooth
pair, Fig. 27. The planet gear is here regarded as driving, and the tooth contact begins on the dedendum of the planet tooth.
The total contact region AE (without tip corner contact) or A’E’ (with tip corner contact) in the annulus-planet gear pair
is larger than the sun-planet, i.e., the contact ratio is also higher. However, the region A’A is larger than EE’, namely, the
tip corner contact occurs more likely on the addendum of the annulus than the planet. The load shared by the tooth pair
in the region AB is larger than in DE, because of reduced mesh stiffness. These facts are also similar to the conventional
internal gear pair.
274 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

Fig. 26. Variation of load shared by a sun-planet tooth pair in a meshing cycle.

Fig. 27. Variation of load shared by an annulus-planet tooth pair in a meshing cycle.

Fig. 28. Variation of contact stress of the sun-planet tooth pair during gear meshing.

4.7.2. Variation of contact stresses

Fig. 28 illustrates the variation of the maximum contact stress in a sun-planet tooth pair within a meshing cycle without
and with consideration of tip corner contact. The change of the contact stress on the flank has a good correlation with the
variation of the shared load. In the case without tip corner contact, stress concentration still occurs near the position A and
E because of the edge effect.
In the case of tip corner contact, the maximum concentrated contact stress occurs within the region AA’ and EE’, but not
at the position A or E. Afterwards the tip edge of the planet contacts the flank of the sun gear at position A’, for example,
the maximum contact stress increases until to the maximum value and then decreases to the normal value where no stress
concentration is present.
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 275

Fig. 29. Variation of contact stress of an annulus-planet tooth pair within a meshing cycle.

Fig. 30. Variation of the loaded transmission error and the number of contact tooth pairs of a planetary gear drive.

Similar results are also found in the tooth pair of the annulus-planet gear pair, as the diagram in Fig. 29 shows. Because
the equivalent curvature of the contact tooth pair is the largest at the begin of tooth contact, the contact stress of the tooth
pair is reduced gradually from position A to B, from B to D and also from D to E, respectively. The influence of the tip
corner contact on the variation of contact stress is similar to the case of sun-plane tooth pair. The maximum contact stress
in this case occurs within the region A’A.
With summing up the results on the influences of tip corner contact, the variation of the contact stress and the shared
load becomes therefore more gentle without jumping, and the loaded contact ratio is also enlarged. However, this additional
tooth contact is a type of non-Herztian contact and will cause damage on the tooth flanks. More detailed will be discussed
in the next section.

4.8. Variation of the loaded transmission errors

The displacement δ S of the sun gear in Eq. (18) can be also converted as the angular displacement of the sun gear.
This angle represents the torsional stiffness or the loaded transmission error of the drive. The diagram in Fig. 30 illustrates
the relation between the loaded transmission errors and the number of the contact tooth pairs of the sun-planet and the
276 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

annulus-planet gear pairs. Because the tooth numbers of the sun gear and the annulus are a multiple of the number of
planet gears, respectively, the change in the number of engaged tooth pairs of each gear pair are the same.
As Fig. 30 shows, the loaded transmission error will be enlarged, when the number of the tooth pairs in contact
decreases. The change in contact location of the tooth pair has less influence on the meshing stiffness. Two different
cases are also discussed here. In the case without consideration of tip corner contact, the influence of the number of the
tooth pairs in contact is very obvious to recognize. The largest loaded transmission error is about 105 arcsec (on the sun
gear) with the two tooth pairs in contact for each sun-planet-annulus gear pair, while the minimum transmission error
is about 66 arcsec with four tooth pairs in contact. The tooth pairs in tip corner contact affects strongly the variation of
the LTE. However, the meshing stiffness of the sun-planet gear pair due to tip corner contact is smaller than that of the
annulus-planet gear pair. This influence on the variation of LTE can be clearly recognized from the diagram in Fig. 30.

5. Conclusions

The loaded contact characteristics of planetary gear drives are complicated, not only because of the statistically indeter-
minate problem, but also because of multiple sun-planet-annulus gear pairs in simultaneous contact. The authors proposed
a novel computerized LTCA model based on influence coefficient method. The influences of loads on deformation of contact
tooth pairs are divided into three different levels, where the relevant deformations of components, such as the carrier and
the planet pins, are considered. With combining the gear meshing analysis, the three-dimensional topologic conditions
of the contact surfaces are involved in the proposed LTCA model. The analysis results in the paper show thus that not
only actual contact patterns with distributed contact stresses, but also non-Hertzian contact in gear drives, such as stress
concentration due to edge effect and tip corner contact, can be simulated.
The essential loaded contact characteristics of planetary gear drives are analyzed with an industrial example by using
the computerized LTCA approach. The analysis results enable us to draw the following conclusions:

(1) The proposed approach is verified with FEM. Both the analysis results have a good agreement, where the maximum
difference is less than 10%. It means that the LTCA model is reliable and time-saving for calculation of loaded tooth
contact in comparison to FEM. The proposed computerized approach is very suitable to be used as an efficient design
tool for planetary gear drives.
(2) The deformations of the tooth do not affect the variation of the stress distribution along the face-width, but those of
the sun gear and the carrier with the planet shafts have strong influences.
(3) The deformation of the sun gear causes unevenly distributed stresses of the sun-planet tooth pair, where the stress
near the input side of the sun gear is enlarged. But this deformation does not have any influence on the stress distri-
bution of the annulus-planet tooth pair.
(4) The combined deformation of the carrier with the planet shafts causes either the stresses of the sun-planet or the
annulus-planet tooth pair to become unevenly distributed.
(5) Because the influences of the sun gear and the carrier with the planet shafts are compensated, the contact stresses
distribution along the face-width of the sun-planet tooth pairs is nearly uniform. However, the distributed stress of
annulus-planet tooth pairs increases from the input to the output side, because the twist of the sun gear has not
effect on this variation.
(6) The unavoidable tip corner contact of tooth pair causes the shared loads with more even variation and reduces the
loaded transmission errors, but also creates the unwanted contact stress concentration. It occurs more easily on the
contact of tip edge of the annulus with the dedendum of the planet gear than the others. Tip relief on the flanks of
the annulus is necessary.

Although the gear meshing analysis of the planetary gear drive proposed in the paper is based on planar analytical
method, spatial numerical methods based on gearing theory [19] is very suitable applied in the LTCA model for the cases of
flank modification and various errors. The proposed LTCA model is also suitable for analysis of planetary gear drives with
various load balancing mechanisms, such as floating sun gear and flexible pin mechanism. The related research works have
been finished and will be published in the future.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan for their financial support (#102-2221-
E-008-020-MY3) and the Gear Plant of Formosa Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd., Taiwan for the their technical support.

Appendix. Singularity function for a shaft under a point load

The bending deflection of the planet shaft under loading, on which the gear is mounted, causes an additional displace-
ment δ (z) between the contact teeth. The deflection can be modeled by using singular function S(x,a,n),

( x − a )n , x > a
S(x, a, n ) = . (A1)
0, x ≤ a
 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278 277

Table A1
Definition of singularity function.

Type Relation Singularity function S

Equation Illustration

Point Load L S (x, a, −1 )

 x
Function of the shear force V = − L dx 0 S (x, a, −1 ) dx = S (x, a, 0 )

 x
Function of the bending moment M= V dx 0 S (x, a, 0 ) dx = S (x, a, 1 )

d2 δ
x
Function of the curvature K= dx2
= −M
EI 0 S (x, a, 0 ) dx = S (x, a, 1 )

 x
Function of the inclination angle θ = ddδx = K dx 0 S (x, a, 1 ) dx = S (x, a, 2 )/2
 x
Function of the deflection δ = θ dx 0 S (x, a, 2 ) dx = S (x, a, 3 )/3

According to the definition of the singularity function S (Table A1), various forces acting on the shaft can be expressed
as

n
L (z ) = Fi · S(z, ai , −1 ). (A2)
i=1

The bending moment M(z) varies along the axis can be expressed as

n
M (z ) = Fi · S(z, ai , 1 ). (A3)
i=1

The bending deflection δ (z) along the shaft can be determined according to the equation

M (z ) 1
δ (z ) = dzdz + c1 · z + c2 , (A4)
E I (z )
The reciprocal of the inertia of moment 1/I(z) can be also calculated with aid of the singularity function as
   
1 1  u
I1 I1
= 1+ − · S(z, b j , 0 ) (A5)
I (z ) I1 Ij I j−1
j=2

The unknown integration constants c1 and c2 are determined according to the corresponding boundary conditions.

Supplementary materials

Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.
2017.12.026.

References

[1] G. Schmidt, Berechnung der Wälzpressung schrägverzahnter Stirnräder unter Berücksichtigung der Lastverteilung. (Calculation of hertz-stress of helical gears
under consideration of load distribution), TU München, 1973.
[2] T. Placzek, Lastverteilung und Flankenkorrektur in gerad- und shrägverzahnten Stirnradstufen. (Load distribution and flank modification in spur gear and
helical gear stage), TU München, 1988.
[3] P. Oster, W. Liebhardt, EDV-Programm zur Ermittlung der Zahnflankkorrekturen am Ritzel (Computer program for calculation of pinion flank-modification).,
Antriebstechnik 18 (1–2) (1979) 23–26.
[4] J. Börner, N. Kurz, F. Joachim, “Effective analysis of gears with the program LVR (stiffness method), VDI Berichte 1665 (2) (2002) 721–736.
[5] A. Hohrein, Untersuchungen zur Last- und Spannungsverteilung an schrägverzahnten Stirnrädern. (Research on load and stress distribution of helical
gears) (1997) Diss.
[6] D.R. Houser, Gear mesh misalignment, Gear Solutions (June) (2006) 35–43.
[7] M.A. Hotait, D. Talbot, A. Kahraman, An investigation of the influence of shaft misalignment on bending stresses of helical gears with lead crown, Gear
Technol. (November/December) (2008).
[8] M. Hotait, A. Kahraman, Experiments on root stresses of helical gears with lead crown and misalignments, J. Mech. Des. 130 (7) (2008).
278 S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye / Mechanism and Machine Theory 122 (2018) 252–278

[9] W. Predki, J.W. Vriesen, Calculating gear tooth corrections for planetary gears – theoretical basis and practical benefit, VDI-Berichte 1904.1 (2005)
311–326.
[10] H Linke, U Trempler, F. Baumann, Analysis on the stress of toothings of planetary gearings, VDI Berichte 1904.1 (2005) 345–355.
[11] T. Schulze, W. Gründer, C. Hartmann-Gerlach, et al., “Load distribution in planetary gears under consideration of all relevant influences, in: Proceedings
of MPT2009-Sendai JSME International Conference on Motion and Power Transmissions May 13–15, Matsushima Isles Resort, Japan, 2009, pp. 545–550.
[12] T. Schulze, C. Hartmann-Gerlach, B. Schlecht, Calculation of load distribution in planetary gears for an effective gear design process, AGMA, 2010
Technical Paper 10FTM08.
[13] T. Schulze, C. Hartmann-Gerlach, B. Schlecht, Design and optimization of planetary gears under consideration of all relevant Influences, VDI-Berichte
2108.2 (2010) 769–780.
[14] B. Neubauer, M. Otto, K. Stahl, Efficient calculation of load distribution and design of tooth flank modifications in planetary gear systems: static load
and deformation analysis in a fully coupled mechanical model of a gear box structure with LAPLASn, VDI-Berichte 2255.1 (2015) 549–558.
[15] J.I. Pedrero, I.I. Vallejo, M. Pleguezuelos, Calculation of tooth bending strength and surface durability of high transverse contact ratio spur and helical
gear drives, J. Mech. Des. 129 (August (1)) (2006) 69–74.
[16] M.B. Sánchez, J.I. Pedrero, M. Pleguezuelos, Contact stress calculation of high transverse contact ratio spur and helical gear teeth, Mech. Mach. Theory
64 (June) (2013) 93–110.
[17] V. Roda-Casanova, F. Sanchez-Marin, J.L. Iserte, An approach for solving the contact problem in spur gear transmissions considering gear misalignments,
in: Proc. the ASME IDETC/CIE 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2015.
[18] S.-H. Wu, S.-J. Tsai, Contact stress analysis of skew conical involute gear drives in approximate line contact, Mech. Mach. Theory 44 (2009) 1658–1676.
[19] F.L. Litvin, A. Fuentes, Gear Geometry and Applied Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[20] S.-H Wu, S.-J. Tsai, Contact stress analysis of concave conical gear drives, in: Proceedings of the First IFToMM Asian Conference Mechanism and Machine
Science, October 22–25, Taipei, Taiwan, 2010.
[21] S.-H. Wu, S.-J. Tsai, Geometrical design of skew conical involute gear drives in approximate line contact, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
223 (2009) 2201–2211.
[22] S.-J. Tsai, S.-H. Wu, Skewed conical gear drives with high surface durability: design, analysis and validation, VDI-Berichte 2108.1 (2010) 659–670.
[23] H.-Y. Yeh, S.-J. Tsai, R.-J. Kuo, Contact characteristics of spur gear pairs with and without tip relieves along and beyond the normal line of action,
IFToMM Asian Conference on Mechanism and Machine Science, 2014.
[24] S-Y Ye, S.-J. Tsai, A computerized method for loaded tooth contact analysis of high-contact-ratio spur gears with or without flank modification consid-
ering tip corner contact and shaft misalignment, Mech. Mach. Theory 97 (2016) 190–214.
[25] S.-Y. Ye, S.-J. Tsai, Loaded tooth contact analysis of power-split gear drives considering shaft deformation and assembly errors, in: Proceedings of the
ASME IDETC/CIE 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2015.
[26] S.-J. Tsai, G.-L. Hwang, S.-Y. Ye, An analytical approach for load sharing analysis of planetary gear drives, in: Proceedings of 13th World Congress in
Mechanism and Machine Science, Guanajuato, México, 2011, pp. 19–25.
[27] S.-J. Tsai, S.-Y. Ye, G.-L. Hwang, An approach for analysis of load sharing in planetary gear drives with a floating sun gear, in: Proceedings of the 11th
ASME International Power Transmission and Gearing Conference PTG-2011. August 28–31, Washington DC, USA, 2011.
[28] S.-J. Tsai, G.-L. Huang, S.-Y. Ye, Tooth contact analysis of planetary gear sets with a floating sun gear, 2nd IFToMM Asian Conference on Mechanism
and Machine Science, 2012.
[29] S.-J. Tsai, G.-L. Huang, S.-Y. Ye, Gear meshing analysis of planetary gear sets with a floating sun gear, Mech. Mach. Theory 84 (2015) 145–163.