1 s2.0 S0094114X23000137 Main

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Mechanism and Machine Theory

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt
Research paper
Modeling and analysis of load distribution ratio and meshing

stiffness for orthogonal spur-face gear drive under point contact
Lu Liu , Lingyun Zhu , Xiangfeng Gou *
School of Mechanical Engineering, Tiangong University, Tianjin 300387, China
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Analytical models of load distribution ratio (LDR) and meshing stiffness for orthogonal spur-face
Face gear drive gear drive under point contact are established to provide the parameter basis for dynamics studies
Tooth surface equation in this paper. Meshing point tracks and contact line ranges on tooth surfaces are strictly divided
Load distribution ratio
according to the point contact ratio. Local contact stiffness at meshing point is calculated based on
Meshing stiffness
Point contact
Hertz contact theory and calculation approaches of global tooth stiffness under line and point
Analytical modeling contact are proposed and compared. Then, models of LDR and meshing stiffness are constructed
and analyzed. The results show that the global tooth stiffness decreases after considering point
contact on the basis of line contact. LDR is significantly affected by the error on tooth surface. The
meshing stiffness increases with the increase in meshing force. The contact deformation accounts
for a high proportion in the total deformation. It expands the existing modeling methods to cover
line and point contact, and lays the foundation of studies for orthogonal spur-face gear drive.
1. Introduction
Face gear drive has good development potential in aerospace field since it can significantly reduce the volume and weight of the
gearbox when achieving high reduction ratio. It has been effectively applied to the power split system of helicopters [1,2]. Load
distribution ratio (LDR) and meshing stiffness are two crucial meshing characteristics of gear drives. Their models should be estab
lished to improve the working performance of face gear drives since they significantly affect the dynamics characteristics such as the
fluctuation of meshing force and the noise level [3–7]. Nevertheless, the existing study on face gear mainly focuses on its geometric
generation and machining, and lacks the analysis of meshing characteristics [8]. There are two difficulties in the modeling of LDR and
meshing stiffness for face gear drive. Firstly, the tooth surface is relatively complex because it is enveloped by different shaper cutters
with different space attitudes. Secondly, the point contact mode is essential [2], but its effect on LDR and meshing stiffness is unclear.
Orthogonal spur-face gear drive is the most fundamental face gear drive and its models should be first proposed.
Calculations of LDR and meshing stiffness for involute spur gear pairs are still being studied [7]. Their models have been greatly
expanded by considering various factors such as tooth error [9], modification[10], crack [11], temperature [12] and so on. Chen et al.
established a meshing stiffness model considering tooth fillet-foundation for spur gear pairs [13]. Sánchez et al. [14] constructed the
approximate equations of the stiffness and LDR. Pleguezuelos et al. [15] presented models of the stiffness and LDR with modification
under variable-load conditions. Xie et al. proposed models of the stiffness and LDR considering the structure coupling effect [16], and
established the stiffness model considering gear body coupling flexibility and tooth profile error [17]. Chen et al. [18] developed a
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 20150022@tiangong.edu.cn (X. Gou).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2023.105239
Received 14 November 2022; Accepted 9 January 2023
Available online 19 January 2023
0094-114X/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Liu et al. Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239
Nomenclature
m,α Normal modulus and normal pressure angle of shaper cutter and pinion
Ns ,Np ,Nf Tooth number of shaper cutter, pinion and face gear
Ep ,Ef ;Gp ,Gf ;υp ,υf Young’s modulus of pinion and face gear materials; their shear modulus; their Poisson’s ratio
Rbs ,Ras ;Rbp ,Rap Standard radius of base circle and addendum circle for shaper cutter; for pinion
Rfi ,Rfo Inner radius and outer radius of teeth for face gear
zpi ,zpo Coordinate of both sides of the tooth width for pinion on zp -axis
(p) (p)
H Distance from the origin of Sf to the origin of Sp

Sp ,Sf ;So ,Sn Moving coordinate systems for pinion and face gear; fixed coordinate systems at their initial position
Oi ;xi ,yi ,zi Origin of coordinate system Si ; Coordinate axis of Si (i = n, p, f)
φs ,φp ,φf ;ωs ,ωp ,ωf Rotation angle parameters for shaper cutter, pinion and face gear; their angular velocity
θs ,θp ;θs0 ,θp0 ;θsa ,θpa Involute profile parameters of shaper cutter and pinion; their initial; their values at addendum position
up Tooth surface parameters for pinion along zp -axis
isf ;ϕs Tooth ratio between shaper cutter and face gear; intermediate variables for simplified equations
εpf Point contact ratio for face gear drive
→ (i) →(i)
r ,r Tooth surface radial vector of pinion and face gear in coordinate system S ,(i = n, p, f)
p f i
→
n p ,→
(i)
n f Unit normal vector on tooth surface of pinion and face gear in coordinate system Si
(i)
r ,→
→ r ;→ n ,→ n r and →
r at meshing point; →
n and →
n at meshing point
(n) (n) (n) (n) →(n) (n) (n) (n)
cp cf cp cf p f p f
ucp ,θ(n)
cp ;φcs ,θcs Tooth surface parameters at meshing point on pinion; on face gear
(n) (n)(n)
φcp ,φcf Rotation angle parameters at meshing point for pinion and face gear
(n) (n)
φcpi ,φcpo φcp at mesh-in position (MI) and mesh-out position (MO)
(n) (n) (n)
φcpds ,φcpsd φcp at double to single (DS) position and single to double position (SD)
(n) (n) (n)
F,Fi ;Fp ,Ff Total meshing force and the force distributed on i th teeth pair; the force acting on pinion and face gear
Eft ,Fft ,Gft ,Lft ,Mft ,Nft Geometric basic quantities of any position at face gear tooth surface
κp1 ,κp2 ;κf1 ,κf2 ;A,B Two principal curvatures of tooth surface for pinion; for face gear; second-order paraboloid parameters
eh ;ah ,bh ;δh Eccentricity of contact ellipse; half lengths of major axis and minor axis of contact ellipse; contact deformation at
meshing point
Γ1 ,Γ2 ,Γ3 ,Γ4 Boundaries of face gear tooth surface
Lcp ,Lcf Length of contact lines where the meshing point is located for pinion and face gear
φst ,φsb Tooth surface angle parameters of face gear at inner and outer boundary intersection
q(xh ) Line load function along the direction of major axis of contact ellipse
ηp ,ηf Stiffness proportion of each tooth slice for pinion and face gear in global tooth stiffness
Dp ,Df Division numbers of tooth slices for pinion and face gear
npi ,npo ;nfi ,nfo Serial number of tooth slice for pinion; for face gears
zlp ;xlf Coordinate of tooth slice for pinion on zp -axis; for face gear on xf -axis
(p) (f)
ΔBp ,ΔBf Thickness of tooth slices in tooth width direction for pinion and face gear
ΔAp ,ΔAf ;ΔIp ,ΔIf Cross-sectional area of tooth slice along tooth height for pinion and face gear; moment of inertia
ΔFp ,ΔFf Force acting on the tooth slice for pinion and face gear
Δkbp ,Δksp ,Δkcp Bending stiffness, shear stiffness and compression stiffness of tooth slice for pinion
Δkbf ,Δksf ,Δkcf Bending stiffness, shear stiffness and compression stiffness of tooth slice for face gear
ΔkLf ,ΔkLp ;Δkηp ,Δkηf Stiffness of tooth slice for pinion and face gear under line contact; under point contact
kLpt ,kLft ;kpt ,kft Tooth stiffness for pinion and face gear under line contact; under point contact
kh ,δh Local contact stiffness and contact deformation of face gear drive
kLt ,kt ;χ t Global tooth stiffness of face gear drive under line and point contact; their relative difference
Δδi ;ei Motion deviation of i th teeth pair; comprehensive error at the meshing point of i th teeth pair
ξipf Load distribution ratio of i th teeth pair
kpf ,δpf Meshing stiffness and meshing deformation of face gear drive
χh Percentage of local contact deformation in total deformation of face gear drive
Subscripts
s, p, f Shaper cutter, pinion, face gear
n n = i, o: inner and outer tooth slices
2
Superscripts
(ix),(iy),(iz) In coordinate system Si along the direction of xi -axis, yi -axis and zi -axis (i = o, n, p, f)
i − 1,i,i + 1;n (i-1)-th teeth pair, i th teeth pair, (i + 1)-th teeth pair; number of teeth pairs meshed at the same time
stiffness model considering the foundation types and the crack propagation paths. Luo et al. [19] constructed a method to evaluate
meshing stiffness by simulating tooth spall. Chen et al. [20] presented a calculation method of stiffness with multiple tooth surface
pitting. Chen et al. [21] deduced an analytical stiffness model considering the wear evolution process of tooth surface. Xu et al. [22]
established an improved stiffness model for plastic gear pair considering the contact conditions. Kumar et al. [23] presented a stiffness
calculation method for carburized spur gear pairs with root cracks. Sun et al. [24] constructed the models of meshing stiffness and LDR
considering the thermal effect of materials. Zheng et al. [25] developed the meshing stiffness model with high-speed centrifugal effect.
It can be known that the research on LDR and meshing stiffness for spur gear pairs has been comprehensive and deep, which provides a
basis for the design of spur gear pairs and study of other gear drives with high performance potential.
Helical and bevel gear drives are the extension of spur gear drives and their models of LDR and meshing stiffness under line contact
are proposed increasingly. Pedrero et al. [26] given a non-uniform LDR model for spur and helical gears. Wan et al. [27] proposed the
accumulated potential energy method to calculate the meshing stiffness of helical gears. Han et al. [28] presented a stiffness calcu
lation method for helical gear considering the effect of friction incorporated. Tang et al. [29] provided a method that can accurately
determine the stiffness of spur and helical gears. Feng et al. [30] presented an improved analytical method to calculate the stiffness of
helical gear pairs. Wang et al. [31] established an improved stiffness model for helical gear pairs including axial tooth bending
stiffness. Sun et al. [32] constructed a stiffness model for paralleled helical gear pairs considering the transient curve at tooth root
region. Wang and Zhu derived a stiffness model for helical gear pairs considering the surface roughness under elastohydrodynamic
lubrication [33], and modelled the improved method for cracked helical gear pairs [34]. Yang [35] proposed a stiffness calculation
method for helical gear pairs considering the effect of time-varying backlash. Gou et al. [36] calculated the meshing stiffness and LDR
of straight bevel gear drives and then established the multi-state meshing dynamics model.
Meshing characteristics under point contact should be studied deeply to optimize meshing performance since meshing by line
contact is difficult to realize in practice due to the interference of errors. Litvin et al. elaborated the tooth surface generation of face
gear [1] and then revealed the method to obtain point contact [2]. Liu et al. [8] elaborated the method to accurately calculate the point
contact ratio (PCR) of orthogonal spur-face gear drive. Liu et al. [37] developed a modeling technique to accurately simulate gear
contact. Bracci et al. [38] developed an approach to estimate the contact pattern for gear drives. Buzzoni et al. [39] constructed a
methodology to discriminate proper contact patterns from improper ones for straight bevel gears. Feng [40] presented an
energy-saving contact model to obtain complete contact features and reduce evaluation costs. Cheng et al. [41] proposed the models of
contact damping and contact stiffness considering lubrication for spur gears. Xiao and Shi [42] developed the oil film stiffness and
damping models of crowned herringbone gear under transient elastohydrodynamic. Wang et al. [43] proposed a method to calculate
the contact stiffness of spiral bevel gears under transient mixed lubrication. Liu et al. [44] presented a calculation method of meshing
stiffness under point contact for plastic helical gear metal worm drive. Hu et al. [45] analyzed the effect of meshing stiffness on the
dynamics of face gear drives. Mu et al. [46] studied the effects of meshing stiffness on the impact force for spiral bevel gears. Zhu et al.
[47] established a nonlinear dynamics model for face gear drive considering multi-state meshing. Lin et al. [48] proposed a dynamics
model for the eccentric curve-face gear transmission system.
It is necessary to calculate LDR and meshing stiffness to provide a parameter basis for dynamics study of gear transmission system.
However, their models for face gear drives are still lacking although a variety of novel face gears have been proposed. In existing
meshing dynamics studies of point contact gear drive, the LDR are generally calculated as spur gear pair [47] and the meshing stiffness
are commonly simplified as a harmonic function [46,47], which interferes with the reliability of the results. Analytical models of LDR
and meshing stiffness for orthogonal spur-face drive are established in this paper, and the modeling process can also be referenced to
construct the models of LDR and meshing stiffness for other point contact gear drives.
The paper is organized as follows. meshing point tracks and contact lines ranges on tooth surfaces are accurately divided by PCR in
Section 2 to provides the bases for Sections 3 and 4. Local contact stiffness at meshing point are calculated in Section 3. In Section 4,
calculation approaches of global tooth stiffness under line and point contact are proposed and compared. Then, models of LDR and
meshing stiffness are established and analyzed in Section 5. Finally, the main conclusions are explicated in Section 6.
2. Division of meshing point tracks and contact line ranges on tooth surfaces
Point contact should be realized theoretically in face gear drives [2]. In this section, the meshing point trajectory in space and its
tracks on tooth surfaces of orthogonal spur-face gear drive are divided respectively according to PCR. The ranges of contact line on
tooth surfaces crossed by the tracks are divided further. They are the premises for calculating the LDR and meshing stiffness.
2.1. Tooth surface equations and meshing equation of face gear drive
Tooth surface equations and meshing equation should be listed first as the foundation of this study. Face gears are generated by line
contact according to corresponding shaper cutters and the shaper used to generate orthogonal spur-face gear is exactly identical to
involute spur gear. Then, the point contact should be obtained to avoid the eccentric loading and jamming. A relatively simple method
is to make the number of teeth of the pinion meshed with the face gear less than 1 to 3 teeth of the shaper cutter according to Litvin’s
3
L. Liu et al.
4

Fig. 1. Meshing coordinate systems established to realize point contact and parameters required to obtained meshing equation: (a) relationships among shaper cutter, face gear and pinion in face gear
generation and meshing, (b) parameters required for face gear drive, (c) meshing coordinate system and their position relationship. Where, (RGB: 0,0,255) and (RGB: 0,204,255) are coordinate
axes of coordinate systems Sf and Sp , respectively. (RGB: 255,0,255) is the origin of Sn and Sf . is the origin of So and Sp . (RGB: 255,0,0), and are the directions of ωs , ωf and ωp .
result [2].
Relationships among shaper cutter, face gear and pinion are shown in Fig. 1(a) and 1(b). The two-dimensional diagram for required
parameters is shown in Fig. 1(c). Four right-handed coordinate systems including fixed coordinate system at the initial position of
pinion So (Oo ,xo ,yo ,zo ), the moving coordinate system Sf (Of ,xf ,yf ,zf )fixedly connected with pinion Sp (Op ,xp ,yp ,zp ), the fixed coordinate
system at the initial position of face gear Sn (On , xn , yn , zn ) and the moving coordinate system fixedly connected with face gear are
established and their relationships are shown in Fig. 1(d). m and α are the normal modulus and normal pressure angle of shaper cutter
and pinion. Ns , Np and Nf are the number of teeth for shaper cutter, pinion and face gear, respectively. Rfi and Rfo are the inner and
outer radius of face gear teeth. zpi and zpo are the coordinates of two sides of tooth width for pinion on zp -axis, respectively. Rbs is the
(p) (p)
base circle radius of shaper cutter. H is the distance between the rotation axes of shaper cutter and pinion. It is taken as m(Ns − Np )/2 to
ensure that the pitch points are intersected by the instantaneous rotation axes of the shaper cutter, pinion and face gear [1]. ωs , ωp and
ωf are rotation speeds of shaper cutter, pinion and face gear, respectively. φp and φf are rotation angles of pinion and face gear.
The tooth surface radial vector of the face gear in S , →
r , and its unit normal vector, →n , can be expressed by Eq. (1a) and Eq. (1b),
(f) (f)
f f f
respectively [8].
⎡ ⎤
(f) ⎡ ( / ) ( / )/ ⎤
⎢ xf ⎥ (sinϕs − θs cosϕs )sin ( φs /isf ) + isf cos( φs /isf )/cosϕs
⎢ (f) ⎥
→ (1a)
(f)
r f (φs , θs ) = ⎢ yf ⎥ = Rbs (sinϕs − θs cosϕs )cos φs isf − isf sin φs isf cosϕs ⎦
⎣
⎣ ⎦
cosϕs + θs sinϕs
z(f)
f
⎡ ⎤
(fx) ⎡ ( / )⎤
⎢ nf ⎥ ( ) − sin ( φs /isf )
⎢ (fy) ⎥
→ (1b)
(f)
n f (φs , θs ) = ⎢ nf ⎥ = Q Pcosϕs + isf tan ϕs − cos φs isf ⎦
2 ⎣
⎣ ⎦
tanϕs
n(fz)
f
herein, xf , yf and zf are coordinate components of → r f . nf , nf and nf are components of → n f . φs and θs are the rotation angle
(f) (f) (f) (f) (fx) (fy) (fz) (f)
parameter and involute parameter of shaper cutter, respectively. They are tooth surface parameters of face gear since the face gear is
enveloped by the shaper. isf = Nf /Ns is the tooth number ratio. θs0 is the initial angle of involute tooth profile for shaper cutter and its
standard value can be calculated by θs0 = π/(2Ns ) − invα. ϕs , P and Q are intermediate variables, ϕs = φs + θs + θs0 , P
− 1/2
= θs (sinϕs − θs cosϕs )/isf , Q = [P2 + i2sf (1 + tan2 ϕs )tan4 ϕs + 2θs (tanϕs − θs )tan2 ϕs ] .
The tooth surface radial vector of pinion in Sp , r p , and its unit normal vector, →
→ n p , can be described as Eqs. (2a) and (2b),
(p) (p)
respectively [8].
⎡ (p) ⎤
xp ⎡ [ ( ) ( )] ⎤
) ⎢ (p) ⎥ Rbp [sin ( θp + θp0 ) − θp cos( θp + θp0 )]
(p) (
→r p up , θp = ⎢ y
⎣ p ⎦
⎥ = ⎣ Rbp cos θp + θp0 + θp sin θp + θp0 ⎦ (2a)
z (p) u p
p
⎡ ⎤
⎡
n(px) ( )⎤
p − cos( θp + θp0)
(p) ( ) ⎢ (py) ⎥
→
n p up , θp = ⎢
⎣ np ⎦ =
⎥ ⎣ sin θp + θp0 ⎦ (2b)
n(pz) 0
p
herein, xp , yp and zp are coordinate components of → r p . np , np and np are components of → n f . θp is the involute parameter of
(p) (p) (p) (p) (px) (py) (pz) (f)
tooth surface for pinion. θp0 is the initial angle of the involute tooth profile, θp0 = π/(2Np ) − invα. up is the tooth surface parameter for
pinion along its rotation axis and it is introduced to extend pinion from two-dimensional tooth profile to three-dimensional tooth
surface.
The meshing point trajectory can be obtained by solving meshing equation according to the point contact meshing principle. The
equation can be established by transforming the rotational tooth surfaces of face gear and pinion in meshing to the fixed coordinate
system S . The tooth surface radial vector for pinion with rotation in S , → r , and its unit normal vector, → n , can be expressed as Eqs.
(n) (n)
n n p p
(3a) and (3b), respectively [8].
⎡ (n) ⎤
xp ⎡ ⎤
( ) ⎢ (n) ⎥ [ ( )up ( )]
→ (3a)
(n)
⎢ ⎥
r p φp , up , θp = ⎣ yp ⎦ = ⎣ R sin φ + θ + θ − θ cos φ + θ + θ ⎦
[ ( bp p )p p0
( p p )]p (p0 )/
(n) Rbp cos φp + θp + θp0 + θp sin φp + θp + θp0 + m Ns − Np 2
zp
5
Table 1
Parameters of the orthogonal spur-face gear drive.
Parameter Notation Value Unit
Normal modulus of shaper cutter and pinion m 3 mm

Number of teeth for shaper cutter, pinion, face gear Ns ,Np ,Nf 22, 20, 100 1
Normal pressure angle α 20 ◦
Young’s modulus for material of pinion and face gear Ep ,Ef 2.06 × 1011 N/m2
Poisson’s ratio for material of pinion and face gear υp ,υf 0.27 1
Inner radius and outer radius of teeth for face gear Rfi ,Rfo 144,180 mm
Coordinate of the inner side and outer side tooth width of pinion zpi ,zpo
(p) (p) 140,180 mm
Standard radius of base circle for shaper cutter Rbs 31.009856 mm
Standard radius of addendum circle for shaper cutter Ras 36 mm
Standard radius of base circle for pinion Rbp 28.190779 mm
Standard radius of addendum circle for pinion Rap 33 mm
Angle parameter of pinion at mesh-in position φcpi
(n) − 0.243581 rad
Angle parameter of pinion at mesh-out position φcpo
(n) 0.163268 rad
Angle parameter of face gear at mesh-in position φcfi
(n) − 0.048956 rad
Angle parameter of face gear at mesh-out position φcfo
(n) 0.032725 rad
Point contact ratio of the face gear drive εpf 1.303 1
⎡ ⎤
⎡
n(nx) ⎤
p
( 0 )
(n) ( ) ⎢ (ny) ⎥
→
n p φp , up , θp = ⎢ ⎥ ⎣
⎣ np ⎦ = − cos( φp + θp + θp0)
⎦ (3b)
(nz) sin φp + θp + θp0
np
herein, xp , yp and zp are components of →

r p . np , np and np
are components of → n p . Rbp is the standard base circle radius of
(n) (n) (n) (n) (nx) (ny) (nz) (n)
pinion. The tooth surface radial vector for the face gear with rotation in S , r , and its unit normal vector, →
→ n , can be described as
(n) (n)
n f f
Eqs. (4a) and (4b), respectively [8].
⎡ ⎤
x(n) ⎡ ( / ) ( / )/ ⎤
⎢ f
⎥ (sinϕs − θs cosϕs )sin ( φs /isf − φf ) + isf cos( φs /isf − φf )/cosϕs
(n) ( )
→
r f φf , φs , θs = ⎢ (n) ⎥ ⎣
⎣ yf ⎦ = Rbs (sinϕs − θs cosϕs )cos φs isf − φf − isf sin φs isf − φf cosϕs
⎦ (4a)
(n) cosϕs + θs sinϕs
zf
⎡ ⎤
n(nx) ⎡ ( / )⎤
( ) ⎢ f
⎥ ( ) − sin ( φs /isf − φf )
→ (4b)
(n)
n f φf , φs , θs = ⎣ nf ⎦ = Q Pcosϕs + isf tan ϕs − cos φs isf − φf ⎦
⎢ (ny) ⎥ 2 ⎣
(nz) tanϕs
nf
herein, xf , yf and zf are components of → r f . nf , nf and nf are components of →

nf .
(n) (n) (n) (n) (nx) (ny) (nz) (n)
Components of radial vector and normal vector on meshing tooth surfaces of pinion and face gear are equal at meshing point
respectively according to the meshing principle [2]. Therefore, Eq. (5a) are met at the meshing point as the meshing equation of face
gear drive. Where, subscript c is added to indicate the position of meshing point. In addition, all solutions obtained by Eq. (5a) should
be met the conditions reflected by Eq. (5b) because all meshing points are on the meshing tooth surfaces of pinion and face gear at the
same time.
⎧ ( ) ( )
⎨→
⎪ r cp = → =→ =→
(n) (n) (n) (n) (n) (n) (n)
r p φ(n) (n)
cp , ucp , θcp r f φcf , φ(n)cs , θcs r cf
( ) ( ) (5a)
⎪
⎩→ n cp = →
(n) (n)
n p φ(n) (n) (n)
=→
(n)
n f φ(n) (n) (n)
=→
(n)
cp , ucp , θcp cf , φcs , θcs n cf
⎧
⎪ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪ 2 (f) 2
⎪
⎪
⎪ Rfi ≤ x(f) cf + ycf ≤ Rfo
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (f)
⎨ Rbs ≤ zcf ≤ Ras
⎪
(n)
0 ≤ θcs ≤ θsa (5b)
⎪
⎪ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪ 2 (p) 2
⎪
⎪ Rbp ≤ x(p) cp + ycp ≤ Rap
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ z(p) (p) (p)
pi ≤ zcp ≤ zpo
herein, Ras and Rap are standard addendum circle radius of shaper cutter and pinion, respectively. θsa is the involute parameter at tooth
6
L. Liu et al.
7

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of a complete meshing point trajectory for one teeth pair of face gear drive and its division according to alternating meshing caused by PCR: (a) 3D drawing of the moving
trajectory of meshing point and its four positions for division, (b) 2D projection of (a) along xn -axis and angle parameters of pinion at MI, DS, SD and MO, (c) 2D projection of (a) along zn -axis and angle
parameters of face gear at MI, DS, SD and MO, (d) PCR and division of meshing point trajectory. Where, (RGB: 0,204,0), (RGB: 153,102,0), and are positions at MI, DS, SD and MO, respectively.
In (a) (b) and (c), , and are meshing point trajectories of double meshing, single meshing and double meshing with time order. They compose a complete trajectory of one teeth pair together. ➛
is the moving direction of meshing point.
L. Liu et al.
8

Fig. 3. Calculation and division of meshing point trajectory in space, tracks and contact line ranges on tooth surfaces for pinion and face gear: (a) 2D projection of meshing point trajectory and discrete
points of tooth surfaces at MI,DS, SD and MO on yn On zn plane, (b) division of meshing point track and contact line range on pinion, (c) division of meshing point track and contact line range on face gear,
(d) 2D projection of (b) on yp Op zp plane, (e) 2D projection of (c) on xf Of zf plane. In (b), (c), (d) and (e), , , and ●, are discrete points on tooth surfaces used to distinguish the ranges of contact line.
, and in (d) and (e) are contact lines at MO, DS, SD and MO. They are boundaries of the double meshing and single meshing.
Fig. 4. Point contact deformation and relevant parameters of face gear drive: (a) contact ellipse at meshing point on one teeth pair, (b) parameters
required for the calculation of contact characteristics. Where, ● is the meshing point before deformation.
top of shaper cutter and it is calculated by θsa = tanarccos(Rbs /Ras ). xcp , ycp and zcp are coordinates of meshing point in Sp and they can
(p) (p) (p)
be obtained by substituting ucp and in Eq. (1a). xcf , ycf and zcf are coordinates of meshing point in Sf and they can be obtained by
(n) (f) (f) (f)
θ(n)
cp
substituting and in Eq. (2a).

(n)
φcs θ(n)
cs
In this study, the face gear is driven by the pinion to increase torque and reduce speed. Accordingly, Eq. (5a) should be solved by
giving a certain angle parameter of pinion φcp and then the tooth surface parameters, (ucp ,θ(n)
cp ), (φcs ,θcs ), at meshing point and the
(n) (n) (n) (n)
angle parameter of face gear can be obtained. The meshing process is directly simulated by the solution of Eq. (5a). The angle
(n)
φcf
parameters at mesh-in position (MI) and mesh-out position (MO) of pinion, φcpi and φcpo , can be obtained and the point contact ratio
(n) (n)
(PCR) of face gear drive, εpf , can be rigidly calculated according to Ref. [8]. To calculate the LDR and meshing stiffness, meshing point
tracks and contact line ranges on the tooth surfaces should be divided according to PCR.
2.2. Calculation and division of meshing point tracks and contact line ranges on tooth surfaces
Alternating meshing is caused by the contact ratio in gear drives and then the meshing point trajectory of teeth pair in space can be
divided to clarify the meshing process. Parameters of the drive in this paper are selected as Table 1.
The meshing point trajectory can be divided into three parts here since εpf is 1.303, which are respectively double meshing, single
meshing and double meshing in time order. A complete trajectory of one teeth pair and its division are drawn in Fig. 2(a) and then
projected in Fig. 2(b) and 2(c). The relationship between the alternating meshing and trajectory is explained in Fig. 2(d). It can be seen
that four positions at tooth surfaces are boundaries of divided trajectory: MI, double to single meshing (DS), single to double meshing
(SD) and MO. Angle parameters at MI, DS, SD and MO are labeled A, B, C and D in all figures for convenience. As the basis for dividing
the trajectory, the angle parameters of pinion at DS and SD, φcpds and φcpsd , are calculated by Eq. (6).
(n) (n)
{ (n) ( )/
(n)
φcpds = φ(n) (n)
cpo + φcpi − φcpo εpf
( )/ (6)
(n) (n) (n)
φcpsd = φcpi + φ(n)
cpo − φcpi εpf
Tooth surface parameters at MI, DS, SD and MO should be obtained to find corresponding positions on tooth surfaces of pinion and
face gear. They can be solved by Eq. (5a) according to replacing φ(n)
cp with φcpi , φcpds , φcpsd and φcpo , respectively.
(n) (n) (n) (n)
Tooth surfaces are composed of contact lines because their generation process is line contact. The discrete points and contact lines
on tooth surfaces of pinion and face gear can be obtained directly by Eqs. (1a) and (2a). Meshing point tracks on tooth surfaces can be
divided by substituting the solutions (ucp ,θ(n)
cp ) and (φcs ,θcs ) into Eqs. (1a) and (2a). Then, the ranges of contact line crossed by tracks
(n) (n) (n)
can also be divided according to tooth surface parameters at MI, DS, SD and MO. The projection of tooth surfaces for one teeth pair at
MI, DS, SD and MO are calculated as shown in Fig. 3(a). The meshing point tracks and the ranges of contact line crossed by them on
tooth surfaces for pinion and face gear are also calculated and then divided as shown in Fig. 3(b)-(e). It can be seen that the four
positions and the three parts mentioned above are passed through during the moving of meshing point. A part of the contact line on
tooth surfaces doesn’t intersect with meshing point tracks. Meshing point tracks and contact line ranges on tooth surfaces of orthogonal
spur-face gear drive have been divided clearly. It provides the prerequisites for calculating LDR and meshing stiffness.
3. Calculation and analysis of local contact stiffness at meshing point
Modeling process of the LDR and meshing stiffness under point contact is from local meshing point to global gear tooth in this study.
Local contact characteristics at meshing point such as eccentricity of contact ellipse and contact stiffness are calculated based on the
Hertz elastic contact theory in this section. It provides a basis for calculating the global tooth stiffness and LDR of orthogonal spur-face
9
gear drive.
3.1. Calculation of principal curvatures on tooth surfaces
To solve the point contact characteristics of face gear drive, principal curvatures of tooth surfaces at meshing point should be
calculated according to the contact theory. The distribution of contact deformation and relevant parameters are mirrored in Fig. 4(a)
and (b). The contact ellipse is formed with the meshing point as the center. F is the meshing force acted on the meshing point. κf1 and
κf2 are two principal curvatures on face gear. κp1 and κp2 are two principal curvatures on pinion. ah and bh are half lengths of major and
minor axes of the contact ellipse, respectively. δh is the contact deformation at meshing point.
One of the principal curvatures on pinion is 0 and another can be derived by plane curvature equation. Two principal curvatures on
the tooth surface of pinion, κp1 and κp2 , can be obtained by Eq. (7).
/( )
κp1 = 0, κp2 = 1 Rbp θ(n)
cp (7)
Two principal curvatures on the tooth surface of face gear, κf1 and κf2 , can be solved by Eq. (8) based on the differential geometry
theory.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )( )̅
( )2
Lft Gft − 2Mft Fft + Nft Eft ± Lft Gft − 2Mft Fft + Nft Eft − 4 Eft Gft − F 2ft Lft Nft − M 2ft
κf1 , κf2 = ( ) (8)
2 Eft Gft − Fft2
herein, “+” and “–” in “±” correspond to κf1 and κf2 , respectively. Eft , Fft , Gft , Lft , Mft , Nft are geometric basic quantities on face gear
tooth surface and their expressions are summarized in Appendix A. κf1 and κf2 are calculated by replacing the tooth surface parameters,
φs and θs , in Eqs. (A.1)-(A.16) with the parameters at meshing point, φcs and θ(n)
cs .
(n)
3.2. Solution of local contact characteristics
Surfaces near the contact point are approximated as second-order paraboloids in Hertz contact theory. Two relationships between
the paraboloid parameters and principal curvatures are described in Eq. (9).
{ ( )/
A + B = κp1 + κp2 + κf1 + κf2 2
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )2 ( )( ) ( )2 / (9)
A− B= κp1 − κp2 + 2 κp1 − κp2 κf1 − κf2 cos2ψ + κf1 − κf2 2
herein, A and B are second-order paraboloid parameters. They can be obtained by Eq. (9) after all principal curvatures are known. ψ
= π/2 is the angle between principal curvature surfaces of κp1 and κf1 .
The eccentricity of contact ellipse, eh , is only determined by paraboloid parameters at meshing point and it should be solved to
calculate ah , bh and δh . Then, an equation containing A, B and eh are constructed as Eq. (10) according to the contact theory.
( ) / /
(1 + A / B) 1 − e2h K(eh ) E(eh ) − A B + e2h − 1 = 0 (10)
herein, K(eh )and E(eh ) are the complete elliptic integral of the first kind and second kind, respectively.
eh can be solved by Eq. (10) when A and B are obtained by Eq. (9). To simplify the solution of Eq. (10), a fitting equation of quintic
polynomial based on the least squares method is proposed and listed in Appendix B. The fitting data and equation are listed in
Table B.1, Eq. (B.1) and Table B.2, and the relative error of fitting results is shown in Fig. B.1. ah , bh , local contact stiffness kh and the
relationship between meshing force and local contact deformation are expressed as Eq. (11).
⎧ [ ( )]1/3
⎪ 3FE(eh ) 1 − υ2p 1 − υ2f
⎪
⎪ a h = ( ) +
⎪
⎪ π(1 − e2h ) κp1 + κp2 + κf1 + κf2 Ep Ef
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ [ ( )1/2 ( )]1/3
⎪
⎪ 1 − υ2p 1 − υ2f
⎪
⎨b = 3F 1 − e2h E(eh )
) +
(11)
h
π(κp1 + κp2 + κf1 + κf2 Ep Ef
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ )]1/3 (
[ )]2/3
⎪
⎪ [( )(
⎪
⎪ 1 1 − e2h κp1 + κp2 + κf1 + κf2 3 1 − υ2p 1 − υ2f
⎪
⎪ kh = 2
⎪
⎪ K(eh )E(eh ) π Ep
+
Ef
⎪
⎪
⎩
δh = kh F 2/3
herein, Ep and Ef are the Young’s modulus of material for pinion and face gear, respectively. υp and υf are the Poisson’s ratio for pinion
and face gear.
10
(a) (b)
DS MI k hi -1
MI
k h [ 1010 N / m 3/2 ]
k hi
k hi 1
eh DS
ehi 1 SD
ehi SD
ehi 1
MO MO
A B C D A B
Rotation Rotation
Fig. 5. Changes of local contact characteristics at meshing point of face gear drive considering PCR: (a) eccentricity of contact ellipse, (b) local
contact stiffness.
3.3. Analysis of local contact characteristics
Considering the alternating meshing caused by PCR, changes of eh and kh for teeth pairs in meshing process are shown in Fig. 5(a)
and 5(b), respectively. Superscripts i − 1, i and i + 1 represent the (i-1)-th teeth pair, i th teeth pair and (i + 1)-th teeth pair in this
paper, respectively. It can be seen that eih decreases gradually with rotation as shown in Fig. 4(a). Its maximum and minimum values
are 0.981028 and 0.886035, which are at MI and MO. It can be concluded that the major axis of the contact ellipse is significantly
larger than the minor axis in the whole meshing process because the minimum value of eh is still as high as 0.886035. The contact
stiffness of each teeth pair decreases monotonically with rotation as shown in Fig. 5(b). They cannot be directly added by the su
perposition principle in multi teeth pair meshing because the contact deformation changes nonlinearly with the meshing force as
reflected in Eq. (11).
4. Modeling and comparison of global tooth stiffness under line and point contact
Global tooth deformation is inevitably caused by the transmission of meshing force in gear drive, which is mainly composed of
linear superposition of bending, shear and compression deformations. It is mainly calculated by the tooth stiffness and meshing force in
the dynamics study. The model of global tooth stiffness under point contact is established in this section by expanding the tooth
stiffness under line contact on the basis of Sections 2 and 3. It is required for the calculation of LDR, and is also a key item in meshing
stiffness of face gear drive.
4.1. Analysis of relationship among meshing tracks, contact lines and tooth surface boundaries
Combination of potential energy method and tooth slicing method is commonly used to establish the analytical model of linear
tooth stiffness with three-dimensional tooth surface [7]. It has been widely applied in line contact gear drive studies such as helical
gears and straight bevel gears [27–36]. Generally, the thin slice in tooth are divided finitely along the direction of tooth width and the
meshing force on contact line is simplified as a uniform load according to the method. The stiffness of slices can be obtained after the
action point of load on the tooth profile of slice is determined. Finally, the tooth stiffness can be calculated by integrating all stiffness of
slices. However, the method cannot be directly used to calculate the tooth stiffness of face gears drives because the drives are generated
by line contact and then meshed by point contact. To adapt to the point contact, the tooth stiffness model under line contact is
established first and then expanded.
The relationship among the meshing point, contact line and tooth surface boundary of orthogonal spur-face gear drive is analyzed
before the modeling as shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b). Lcp and Lcf are the lengths of the contact lines on pinion and face gear where the
meshing points are located. It can be seen that the contact line at meshing point is located are divided into two parts by the meshing
point: the inner contact lines and outer contact lines. Their lengths are (Lcpi ,Lcpo ) and (Lcfi ,Lcfo ) for pinion and face gear, respectively.
Endpoints of contact lines close to the inner side are named as inner endpoint (IE) and the endpoints close to the outer side are named
as outer endpoint (OE). It can be seen that IE and OE move with meshing points on tooth surface boundaries in meshing process and the
boundaries where IE and OE are located are transited once on face gear.
Four boundaries, Γ1 , Γ2 , Γ3 and Γ4 are defined as shown in Fig. 6(b) to analyze the change of contact lines on face gear tooth surface.
Γ1 and Γ3 are top and bottom boundaries of the tooth surface, respectively. Γ2 and Γ4 are tooth surface boundaries cut by the outer
radius and inner radius, respectively. The intersection of Γ1 and Γ4 is named as inner boundary intersection (IBI) and the intersection of
Γ2 and Γ3 is named as outer boundary intersection (OBI). It can be seen that IE is located on Γ1 first, and then on Γ4 after passing
through IBI. OE is located on Γ2 first, and then on Γ3 after passing through OBI.
Changes of Lcpi , Lcpo , Lcf , Lcfi and Lcfo in meshing process are shown in Fig. 6(c) and (d). It can be seen that Lcpi and Lcpo increase and
decrease respectively and their sum is the tooth width of pinion. Lcfi begins to increase from 0 after MI and tends to stabilize after
passing IBI until it exits at MO. Lcfo remains stable from the MI and then decreases after passing through OBI and returns to 0 at MO.
Accordingly, the contact line at meshing point on face gear can be divided into three cases according to the changes of IE and OE on
tooth surface boundary as reflected in Fig. 6(e).
11
L. Liu et al.
12

Fig. 6. Meshing points, contact lines and their correlation with tooth surface boundaries: (a) pinion, (b) face gear, (c) change of contact line lengths on pinion, (d) change of contact line lengths on face
gear, (e) three cases of contact line on face gear divided by tooth surface boundaries where the endpoints are located. Where, (RGB: 255,153,0) used to represent the contact lines crossed with the
meshing point. and are the inner and outer contact lines, they are part of . (RGB: 153,102,255) is the intersection (IBI) of Γ1 and Γ4 . (RGB: 51,204,204) is the intersection (OBI) of Γ2 and Γ3 .
(RGB: 0,128,0) is the intersection (OE) of and boundary, Γ1 or Γ4 . (RGB: 153,0,204) is the intersection (OE) of and boundary, Γ2 or Γ3 . and are moving directions of and . is the
extension of contact line from IE ( ) to Rfi . is the extension of the contact line from OE ( ) to Rfo . ↔ is the tooth width range covered by the contact line, and . and are tooth width ranges
covered by the extension lines and , respectively.
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram for the derivation of stiffness proportion function for point contact face gear drive: (a) line load along the major axis of
contact ellipse, (b) required parameters for pinion, (b) required parameters for face gear. (RGB: 191,191,191) is a part of meshing force along
xh -axis. (RGB: 153,153,255) and (RGB: 51,204,204) are parts of the meshing force loaded on inner tooth slice and outer tooth slice. and
are the division and numbering direction of and .
It can be noted that the endpoint of contact line on face gear is not always on the inside and outside of tooth width. It is inadequate
to calculate the stiffness only considering the tooth width range covered by the contact line because the global tooth deformation is
also resisted by the tooth width outside the range. To increase the rationality of the modeling, the contact line is extended from its
endpoints IE and OE along the tooth surface boundary lines Γ1 and Γ3 to boundary Γ4 and Γ2 , respectively. Then, the calculation of
tooth stiffness is divided into three cases as reflected in Fig. 6(e). In case 1, the tooth width range is divided into the range covered by
the contact line and the range covered by the extension line from IE to the inner radius. In case 2, the tooth width range is not divided
because the contact line covers the entire tooth width. In case 3, the tooth width range is divided into the range covered by the contact
line and the range covered by the extension line from OE to the outer radius.
4.2. Modeling of tooth stiffness under line and point contact
The major axis is markedly longer than the minor axis of the contact ellipse in orthogonal spur-face gear drive and the load near the
meshing point under point contact is higher than that far away from the meshing point according to Section 3. Contact lines on tooth
surfaces are divided by meshing point according to the analysis in SubSection 4.1. In view of the points above, a simplification idea is
introduced into the modeling of the global tooth stiffness under point contact: the proportion of the stiffness of tooth slice in total tooth
stiffness is adjusted by the distance from the slice to meshing point. The proportion function is derived with the reference to Hertz
contact theory. The modeling extends the existing model of line contact gear drives by introducing the proportion of tooth slices to
adapt to the characteristics of point contact in tooth stiffness calculation as possible.
Calculation process of the tooth stiffness is as follows. Firstly, all slices are obtained by dividing the gear tooth along the direction of
width. Secondly, the load is distributed to both sides of the tooth width along the contact line with the meshing point as the initiation
point and the stiffness of all slices are solved by potential energy method. Then, all tooth slice stiffness are adjusted by the proportion to
change the condition from line contact to point contact. Finally, the tooth stiffness under point contact is calculated by integrating all
tooth slice stiffness.
A stress semi-ellipsoid is formed in contact ellipse after the meshing force is loaded as mirrored in Fig. 7(a) according to Hertz
contact theory. Where, σ is the contact stress on contact ellipse and σ max is the maximum stress at meshing point. q(xh ) is the line load
function along the major axis of the ellipse and it is derived to obtained the proportion function. The meshing force, line load and
13
contact stress in the stress semi-ellipsoid meet the relationship reflected in Eq. (12).
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
∫ ah ∫ ah ∫ bh 1− x2 /a2
h h x2h y2h 2
F= q(xh ) dxh = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ σmax 1 − 2 − 2 dyh dxh = πah bh σmax (12)
− ah − ah − bh 1− x2h /a2h ah bh 3
then, the expression of line load function, q(xc ), can be derived as Eq. (13).
3F ( / )
q(xh ) = 1 − x2h a2h ( − ah ≤ xh ≤ ah ) (13)
4ah
The derivation of proportion and the required parameters for pinion and face gear are illustrated in Fig. 9(b) and 9(c), respectively.
zp -axis and xf -axis are tooth width directions of pinion and face gear, respectively. Dpi and Dpo are the numbers of tooth slice for pinion
divided along the negative and positive direction of zp -axis from the meshing point (inner and outer), respectively. Dfi and Dfo are the
numbers of the tooth slice for face gear divided along the negative and positive direction of xf -axis, respectively. npi and npo are the
serial numbers of the inner and outer tooth slices (npi = 1,2...Dpi , npo = 1,2...Dpo ). nfi and nfo are serial numbers of the inner and outer
tooth slices for face gears (nfi = 1,2...Dfi , nfo = 1,2...Dpo ). z(p)
lpi and zlpo are the center coordinates of the slices numbered npi and npo on
(p)
zp -axis. x(f)
lfi and xlfo are the center coordinates of the slices numbered nfi and nfo on xf -axis. ΔBpi , ΔBpo , ΔBfi and ΔBfo are thicknesses of
(f)
slices numbered npi , npo , nfi and nfo , respectively. ΔFf and ΔFp are parts of meshing force acted on tooth slices of face gear and pinion,
respectively. ΔFpi and ΔFpo are used to distinguish ΔFp acting on the inner and outer tooth slices. ΔFfi and ΔFfo are used to distinguish
ΔFf acting on the inner and outer tooth slices.
ah in Eq. (13) is replaced by the distances from the meshing point to both sides of the tooth widths, respectively. ΔFpi , ΔFpo , ΔFfi and
ΔFfo attenuate elliptically as the distances from the meshing point increase. The proportion is defined as the ratio of ΔFpi , ΔFpo , ΔFfi
and ΔFfo to F. Then, relationships among the thickness, coordinates, load and stiffness proportion of tooth slices for pinion and face
gear can be described as Eqs. (14a) and (14b).
⎧ ⃒ ⃒/
⃒ (p) (p) ⃒
⎪
⎪ ΔB pn = ⃒zcp − zpn ⃒ Dpn
⎪
⎪
⎨ z(p) = ΔB ( n − 0.5)
⎪
(14a)
lpn pn pn
( ) (n = i, o)
⎪
⎪ (p)
⎪
⎪ ΔFpn = ΔBpn q zlpn
⎪
⎩ /
ηpn = ΔFpn F
⎧ ⃒ ⃒/
⎪
⎪
⎪ ΔBfn = ⃒x(f) cf − Rfn
⃒ Dfn
⎪
⎪
⎨ x = ΔB n − 0.5)
⎪ (f) (
(14b)
lfn fn fn
( ) (n = i, o)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ΔF fn = ΔB fn q x(f)
lfn
⎪
⎪ /
⎩
ηfn = ΔFfn F
herein, ηpi , ηpo , ηfi and ηfo are stiffness proportions of tooth slices numbered npi , npo , nfi and nfo , respectively. Subscripts i and o are
abbreviated as n (n = i,o) in subsequent equations and parameters. The proportions, ηpn and ηfn , of face gear drive under point contact
can be derived by Eq. (14a) and (14b) and then normalized as Eq. (15).
3 { }
ηmn (nmn ) = 1 − [(nmn − 0.5)/Dmn ]2 (m = p, f ; n = i, o) (15)
4Dmn
Subscript m = p, frepresent pinion and face gear, respectively. It can be noted that the proportion is determined by the corre
sponding serial number and division number. The distances from the meshing point to slices are replaced by serial numbers.
Tooth stiffness of face gear drive under line and point contact, kLt and kt , can be calculated by Eq. (16).
⎧ ( )− 1
⎨ kL = 1/kL + 1/kL
(16)
t pt ft
⎩ ( )− 1
kt = 1/kpt + 1/kft
herein, (kLpt , kLft ) and (kpt , kft ) are pairs of tooth stiffness of face gear drive under line and point contact. They can be calculated by
integrating all stiffness of discrete tooth slices as expressed in Eq. (17).
14
Fig. 8. Schematic diagram for the modeling of tooth stiffness for pinion and parameters required for the stiffness calculation of tooth slices. and
represent the slices numbered npi and npo , respectively. and are intersections of contact line with the inner and the outer tooth slices, and are also
the action points of ΔFpi and ΔFpo , respectively.
⎧
⎪ ∑Dmi
( ) ∑ Dmo
( )
⎪
⎪ k L
= Δk L
n L
Δkmo nmo
⎪ mi +
⎪
⎪
mt mi
⎪
⎪ nmi =1 nmo =1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ ∑Dmi ∑
Dmo
( ) ( )
(17)
η η
kmt = Δkmi nmi + Δkmo nmo (m = p, f ; n = i, o)
⎪
⎪ nmi =1 nmo =1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( ( −1( ) ( ) ( ))−
⎪
⎪ L
Δkmn nmn ) = Δkbmn nmn + Δksmn − 1 − 1
nmn + Δkcmn nmn
1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ η ( ) ( )
L
Δkmn nmn = (Dmi + Dmo )Δkmn nmn ηmn (nmn )
herein, ΔkLpn and ΔkLfn are stiffness under line contact for slices numbered npn and nfn , respectively. Δkηpn , Δkηfn are equivalent stiffness of
slices after considering the point contact on the basis of ΔkLpn and ΔkLfn . (Δkbpn , Δkspn , Δkcpn ) and (Δkbfn , Δksfn , Δkcfn ) are bending, shear
and compression stiffness of tooth slices for pinion and face gear. They can be solved further based on the potential energy method.
4.3. Calculation of bending, shear and compression stiffness for pinion
Required parameters for calculating bending, shear and compression stiffness of pinion are shown in Fig. 8. ΔFpn and ΔFpn are the
(px) (py)
components of ΔFpn along xp -axis and yp -axis, respectively. xpv and ypv are distances from any point on the tooth slice to yp -axis and the
(p) (p)
tooth root, respectively. hpn

and hpn
are distances from the action point of ΔFpn to yp -axis and the tooth root, respectively. Apn is the
(px) (py)
cross-sectional area of the slices numbered npn along the direction of tooth height. Ipn is the sectional moment of inertia along the tooth
height direction.
The potential energy on tooth slices of pinion can be expressed as Eq. (18).
[ ( ) ]2
⎧ ( )2 ∫ h(py) (px)
ΔFpn pn ΔFpn h(py)
pn − ypv
(p) (py) (px)
− ΔFpn hpn
⎪
⎪ ΔUbpn = = dy(p)
⎪
⎪ pv
⎪
⎪ 2Δkbpn 0 2Ep ΔIpn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( ) 2
⎨ ( )2 ∫ h(py) (px)
ΔFpn
ΔFpn (18)
pn
ΔU = = 1.2 dy(p) (n = i, o)
⎪
⎪ spn
2Δkspn 2Gp ΔApn pv
⎪
⎪ 0
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )2
⎪
⎪ ( )2 ∫ h(py) (py)
⎩ ΔFpn pn ΔFpn
ΔUcpn = = dy(p)
pv
2Δkcpn 0 2Ep ΔApn
herein, ΔUbpn , ΔUspn and ΔUcpn are bending, shear and compression potential energy of tooth slices, respectively. Gp is the shear
modulus of material of pinion, Gp = 0.5Ep /(1 + υp ). ΔFpn , ΔFpn , Apn and Ipn can be calculated by Eq. (19).
(px) (py)
⎧ (px)
⎪ ΔFpn = ΔFpn n(px)
pn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (py) (py)
⎨ ΔFpn = ΔFpn npn
⎪
⃒ ⃒/
(p) ⃒ (p) (p) ⃒ (n = i, o) (19)
⎪
⎪ ΔApn = ΔBpn 2xpv = 2x(p)
pv ⃒zcp − znp ⃒ Dpn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )3 / ⃒ ⃒/( )
⎩ (p) 3 ⃒ (p) (p) ⃒
ΔIpn = ΔBpn 2xpv 12 = 2x(p)pv ⃒zcp − znp ⃒ 3Dpn
15
L. Liu et al.
16

Fig. 9. Schematic diagram for the modeling of tooth stiffness for face gear and parameters required for the stiffness calculation of slices: (a) tooth slice in cases 2 and required parameters, (b) inner
extension of contact line and tooth slice in cases 1, (c) outer extension of contact line and tooth slice in cases 3. and represent slices numbered nfi and nfo , respectively. and are the division and
numbering direction. and are intersections of the contact line with the inner and outer tooth slices, and are also the action points of ΔFfi and ΔFfo , respectively. and are intersections of the inner
and outer extension line with tooth slices, respectively.
herein, npn and npn are components of the normal vector at the action point of ΔFpn on tooth slice along xp -axis and yp -axis. Then,
(px) (py)
Δkbpn , Δkspn and Δkcpn are expressed as Eq. (20) by simplifying Eq. (19).
⎧
⎪⎪
⎪⎪ ∫
[
3Dpn n(px)
(
h(py) (p)
)
− n(py) (px)
]2
⎪⎪ 1
(n)
pn − ypv pn hpn
θcp
pn
⃒ ⃒ dy(p)
⎪⎪ Δk =
2Ep x(p)
3 ⃒ (p) (p) ⃒
pv
⎪⎪ bpn 0
pv ⃒z cp − z np ⃒
⎨ ∫
( )2
1
(n)
θcp Dpn n(px)
(20)
pn
= 1.2 ⃒ ⃒ dy(p) (n = i, o)
⃒ (p) (p) ⃒
⎪⎪ Δkspn 0 2Gp x(p)
pv ⃒zcp − znp ⃒
pv
⎪⎪
⎪⎪ 1 ∫
(
Dpn n(py)
)2
⎪⎪
(n)
θcp
pn
⃒ ⃒ dy(p)
⎪⎪ Δk =
2Ep x(p)
⃒ (p) (p) ⃒
p
⎩ cpn 0
pv ⃒zcp − znp ⃒
cp is the tooth surface involute parameter at the action point of ΔFpn on the profile of tooth slices which has been solved by Eqs.
θ(n)
(5a) and (5b). θp is the involute parameter at any point on the profile. They are used to uniformly replace the parameters n(px)
pn , npn ,
(py)
h(px)
pn , hpn , xpv , ypv and dypv in Eq. (20) to simplify the calculation. Substitution equations are constructed by the tooth surface equation
(py) (p) (p) (p)
of pinion Eq.(2a) and then listed in Eq. (21).

⎧ ( ) [ ( / ) ( / ) ( / )]
⎪ y(p)
⎪
⎪
⎪ pv θp = Rbp cos θp + θp0 − π Np + θp sin θp + θp0 − π Np − cos π Np − θp0
⎪
⎪ ( ) [ ( / ) ( / )]
⎪ x(p)
⎪
⎪ pv θp = − Rbp sin θp + θp0 − π Np − θp cos θp + θp0 − π Np
⎪
⎪ ( / )
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ dy(p)
p = Rbp θp cos θp + θp0 − π Np dθp
⎪
⎪ ( / )
⎪
⎨ (n)
n(px)
pn = cos θcp + θp0 − π Np
( / ) (n = i, o) (21)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ n (py)
= sin θ (n)
+ θ − π N
⎪
⎪ pn cp p0 p
⎪
⎪ ( )
⎪
⎪ (n)
⎪
⎪
⎪ h(px) (p)
pn = xpv θcp
⎪
⎪ ( )
⎪
⎪
⎪ h(py) (p) (n)
⎩ pn = ypv θcp
herein, Δkbpn , Δkspn and Δkcpn can be solved by substituting θ(p)

cp into Eqs. (20) and (21). Tooth slice stiffness, Δkpn and Δkpn , are
L η
obtained further and the then the tooth stiffness of pinion under line and point contact, kLpt and kpt , can be calculated by Eq. (17).
The tooth profiles of slices on pinion are the same and the action point of ΔFpn on the profile are also same according to the tooth
structure of pinion as shown in Fig. 8. Therefore, as a special case, the tooth stiffness of pinion under line and point contact are equal
here, kpt = kLpt . It is equal to the existing result calculated by the two-dimensional tooth profile, which indicate that the modeling
approach has sufficient compatibility.
4.4. Calculation of bending, shear and compression stiffness for face gear
The establishment of tooth stiffness model for face gear is relatively complex since its tooth surface is generated by the envelope.
Tooth slices of face gear and required parameters are shown in Fig. 9. ΔFfn and ΔFfn are components of ΔFfn along yf -axis and zf -axis,
(fy) (fz)
respectively. yfv and zfv are distances from any point on the tooth slice to zf -axis and the root of slice, respectively. hfn and hfn are
(f) (f) (fy) (fz)
distances from the action point of ΔFfn to zf -axis and the slice root, respectively. and zfl zfd
are distances from the action point of ΔFfn
(f) (f)
and the slice root to yf -axis, respectively. ΔAfn is the cross-sectional area of slices numbered nfi and nfo along the tooth height direction.
ΔIfn is the sectional moment of inertia. It can be seen that the stiffness of all tooth slices for face gear are different because they have
different profiles. The stiffness calculation of tooth slice is different in different tooth width range divided by IE and OE as mirrored in
Fig. 9.
The potential energy of tooth slices for face gear can be expressed as Eq. (22).
17
⎧ [ ( ) ]2
( )2 ∫ h(fz) (fy) (fz) (f) (fz) (fy)
⎪
⎪ ΔF fn fn ΔFfn hfn − zfv − ΔFfn hfn
⎪
⎪ ΔUbfn = = dz(f)
⎪
⎪ 2Δkbfn 2Ef ΔIfn fv
⎪
⎪ 0
⎪
⎪ ( )
⎪
⎨ ( )2 ∫ h(fz) (fy)
2
ΔFfn
ΔU =
ΔFfn
=
fn
1.2
(f)
dzfv (n = i, o) (22)
⎪
⎪ sfn
⎪
⎪ 2Δksfn 0 2Gf ΔAfn
⎪
⎪ ( )2
⎪
⎪ ( )2 ∫ h(fz)
⎪
⎪ (fz)
ΔFfn
⎪
⎩ ΔFfn fn
ΔUcfn = = dz(f)
fv
2Δkcfn 0 2Ef ΔAfn
herein, ΔUbfn , ΔUsfn and ΔUcfn are bending, shear and compression potential energy of tooth slices for face gear, respectively. Δkbfn ,
Δksfn and Δkcfn are bending, shear and compression stiffness of tooth slices. Gf is the shear modulus of material of face gear, Gf = 0.5Ef
/(1 + υf ). ΔFfn , ΔFfn , ΔAfn and ΔIfn can be calculated by Eq. (23).
(fy) (fz)
⎧
(fy)
⎪
⎪
⎪ ΔFfn = ΔFfn n(fy)
fn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (fz) (fz)
⎨ ΔFfn = ΔFfn nfn
⃒
(f) ⃒ (f)
⃒/ (n = i, o) (23)
ΔAfn = ΔBfn 2y(f) ⃒ Dfn
⎪
⎪ fv = 2yfv xcf − Rfn
⎪
⎪ ( )/ /
⎪
⎪ ΔI = ΔB 2y(f) 3 12 = 2y(f) 3 ⃒⃒x(f) − R ⃒⃒ ( 3D )
⎪
⎩ fn fn fv fv cf fn fn
herein, nfn and nfn are components of the normal vector at the action point of ΔFfn along yf -axis and zf -axis. Then, the expressions of
(fy) (fz)
Δkbfn , Δksfn and Δkcfn can be simplified as Eq. (24) from Eq. (22).
⎧ [ ( ) ]2
∫ φs2 3Dfn n(fy) h(fz) − z(f) − n(fz) h(fy)
⎪ 1
⎪ fn fn fv fn fn (f)
⎪
⎪ = ⃒ ⃒ dzf
⎪
⎪ Δkbfn (f) 3 ⃒ (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ φs1 2E y
f fv x − R fn
⎪
⎪ cf
⎪
⎪ ( )2
⎪
⎨ ∫ φs2 (fy)
Dfn nfn
1
1.2 (f)
⃒ dzf (n = i, o) (24)
⎪ Δk =
⎪
⃒
(f) ⃒ (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ sfn φ s1 2G f y fv xcf − R fn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )2
⎪
⎪ ∫ φs2
⎪ 1
⎪
⎪ Dfn n(fz)fn
⎩ = ⃒ ⃒ dzf
(f)
φs1 2Ef yfv ⃒xcf − Rfn ⃒

Δkcfn (f) (f)
herein, the upper and lower limits, φs2 and φs1 , are tooth surface angle parameters on the profile of tooth slices for face gear. φs2 is at
the action point of ΔFfn and φs2 is at the root of the profiles.
There are three corresponding calculation method for the stiffness of tooth slice within three tooth widths as shown in Fig. 9. They
can be jointly judged based on tooth surface angle parameters at IBI and OBI, φst and φsb , and coordinates at IE and OE, xfu and xfw . φst
(f) (f)
and φsb are used to judge the cases of contact line. They are determined by the design parameters, but cannot be expressed by explicit
solution. To solve φst and φsb by iteration, the implicit equations are expressed as Eqs. (25a) and (25b), respectively.
{( / )2 /
isf cosϕst + θ2st = R2fi R2bs
(25a)
cosϕst + θst sinϕst = 1
( / )2 /
(sinϕsb + θsa cosϕsb )2 + isf cosϕsb = R2fo R2bs (25b)
herein, ϕst = φst + θst + θs0 , ϕsb = φsb + θsa + θs0 . θst is the tooth surface involute parameter at IBI which are solved together with φst .
xfu and xfw move on tooth surface boundaries with the moving of meshing point and they are obtained by Eq. (26a) to judge further the
(f) (f)
tooth width range as shown in Fig. 9(b) and 9(c).

⎧
⎨ x(f) = x(f) ( φ(n) , θ )
(26a)
fu f cs su
( )
⎩ x(f) = x(f) φ(n) , θsa
fw f cs
where, φcs and θsu are tooth surface parameters at IE. φcs and θsa are tooth surface parameters at OE. φcs has been solved by Eq. (5a)
(n) (n) (n)
and then θsu can be solved by Eq. (26b) since zf (φcs , θsu ) = Rbs .
(f) (n)
( ) ( (n) )
cos φ(n)
cs + θsu + θs0 + θsu sin φcs + θsu + θs0 = 1 (26b)
The equations to replace parameters φs1 , φs2 , n(fy)

fn , nfn , hfn , hfn , zfv , yfv and dzfv in Eq. (24) should be obtained and uniformly
(fz) (fy) (fz) (f) (f) (f)
18
expressed to calculate the stiffness of tooth slices for face gear. Their calculation methods are determined by the position of the slices,
x(f)
lfn , and the cases of contact lines judged by φcs . Therefore, these parameters can be expressed uniformly as functions of xlfn and φcs to
(n) (f) (n)
simplify the calculation.

In Eq. (24), integration variables, zfv , yfv and differential variable dzfv are only determined by the coordinate of the slice, xlfn .
(f) (f) (f) (f)
Their expressions are listed as Eq. (27a).

( )
⎧ z(f) x(f) , φ = z(f) − z(f) = R (cosϕ + θ sinϕ ) − R (cosϕ + θ sinϕ )
⎪ fv lfn s fd f bs sr sa sr bs sv sv sv
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ [ ( )]
⎪
⎪ dθsv dθsv
⎪
⎪ (f)
⎪ dzfv = Rbs dφ sinϕsv + (θsv cosϕsv − sinϕsv ) 1 + dφ
⎨
dφs
s s
[ ( / ) / ] (n = i, o) (27a)
⎪
⎪ dθsv (sinϕsv − θsv cosϕsv ) sinϕsv tan φs isf − cosϕsv isf + isf tanϕsv
⎪
⎪ = ( / )
⎪
⎪
⎪ dφs
⎪
⎪
θsv cosϕsv sinϕsv tan φs isf − isf tanϕsv
⎪
⎩ (f) ( (f) ) ( / ) ( / )/
yfv xlfn , φs = (sinϕsv − θsv cosϕsv )cos φs isf − isf sin φs isf cosϕsv
herein, ϕsv = φs + θsv + θs0 , ϕsr = φsr + θsa + θs0 . φs is the tooth surface angle parameter of face gear and it is the intermediate variable
for the integral of Eq. (24). θsv is the tooth surface involute parameter of slice when its coordinate is xlfn . φsr is the tooth surface angle
(f)
parameter at the slice root where the tooth surface involute parameter is θsa . θsv and φsr are calculated by Eqs. (27b) and (27c) since
xf (φs , θsv ) = xlfn and xf (φsr , θsa ) = xlfn , respectively.
(f) (f) (f) (f)
( / ) ( / )/ /
(27b)
(f)
(sinϕsv − θsv cosϕsv )sin φs isf + isf cos φs isf cosϕsv = xlfn Rbs (n = i, o)
( / ) ( / )/ /
(27c)
(f)
(sinϕsr − θsa cosϕsr )sin φsr isf + isf cos φsr isf cosϕsr = xlfn Rbs (n = i, o)
Calculation methods of the upper and lower limits φs1 (x(f)

lfn , φcs ) and φs2 (xlfn ,φcs ), variables in the integrated functions nfn (xfn ,φcs ),
(n) (f) (n) (fy) (f) (n)
n(fz) (f) (n)

fn (xlfn , φcs ), n(fy)
fn (xlfn , φcs ), nfn (xlfn , φcs ) in Eq. (24) are divided into three types according to xlfn and φcs .
(f) (n) (fz) (f) (n) (f) (n)
φs1 , φs2 , nfn ,

nfn , hfn and hfn within the tooth width covered by contact lines in case 1, case 2 and case 3 are calculated by Eq.
(fy) (fz) (fy) (fz)
(28) as reflected in Fig. 9(a).

⎧
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ φs1 = φsr
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )
⎪
⎪ φ s2 = φcs
(n)
⎪
⎪ φ(n) (f) (f)
⎪
⎪ (fy) (fy) ( (n) ) cs < φst ∧ xlfi ≥ xfu ∨
⎨ nfn = nf φcs , θsl ( )
(fz) (fz) ( (n) ) φst ≤ φ(n)
cs ≤ φsb ∨ (n = i, o) (28)
⎪
⎪ nfn = n f φ cs , θ sl ( )
⎪
⎪ ( ) (n) (f) (f)
⎪
⎪ φcs > φsb ∧ xlfo ≤ xfw
⎪
⎪ h(fy)
fn = yf
(f)
φ(n)
cs , θsl
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (fz) (f) (f) (f) (f) ( (n) )
⎪
⎪ hfn = zfd − zfl = zf (φsr , θsa ) − zf φcs , θsl
⎪
⎪
⎩
herein, θls is the tooth surface involute parameter of slice where the tooth surface angle parameter is φcs . It can be obtained as Eq. (29a)
(n)
since xf (φcs , θls ) xlfn .

(f) (n) (f)
=
( / ) ( / )/ /
(29a)
(f)
(sinϕsl − θsl cosϕsl )sin φ(n)
cs isf + isf cos φ(n)
cs isf cosϕsl = xlfn Rbs (n = i, o)
herein, ϕsl = φcs + θsl + θs0 .

(n)
The inner extension part in cases 1 is marked in Fig. 9(b). It can be seen that the extension line from IE to inner radius are all on the
top of meshing surface of face gear. φs1 , φs2 , nfi , nfi , hfi and hfi within the tooth width covered by the inner extension line are
(fy) (fz) (fy) (fz)
calculated by Eq. (30).

⎧
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ φs1 = φsr
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ φ s2 = φsτ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ n(fy) = n(fy)
fi (φsτ , θsτ )
(30)
fi (f) (f)
(fz) (fz) φ(n)
cs < φst ∧ xlfi < xfu
⎪
⎪ n = n (φs τ , θ sτ )
⎪
⎪
fi fi
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ h(fy)
fi = y(f)
f (φsτ , θsτ )
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ hfi = z(f)
(fz) (f) (f) (f)
⎪
⎩ fd − zfl = zf (φsr , θsa ) − zf (φsτ , θsτ )
19
Fig. 10. Calculation process of the global tooth stiffness under line and point contact for face gear in meshing process.
herein, φsτ and θsτ are tooth surface parameters at the top of the tooth slice with coordinate xlfi . They can be obtained together by Eq.
(f)
(31) since zf (φsτ , θsτ )

= Rbs and xf (φsτ , θsτ ) xlfi .
(f) (f) (f)
=
{ ( / ) ( / ) / /
θsτ sin φsτ isf + isf cos φsτ isf cosϕsτ = x(f) Rbs
lfi
(31)
cosϕsτ + θsτ sinϕsτ = 1
here, ϕsτ = φsτ + θsτ + θs0 .

The outer extension part in cases 3 is marked in Fig. 9(c). It can be seen that the extension line from OE to outer radius are all on the
20
L. Liu et al.
21

Fig. 11. Distribution maps of stiffness for tooth slices along tooth widths with rotation in face gear drive: (a) for pinion without considering proportion, (b) for face gear without considering proportion,
(c) for pinion considering proportion, (d) for face gear considering proportion. Where, is the change of zcp and xcf with rotation.
(p) (f)
Fig. 12. Change of global tooth stiffness of face gear drive: (a) point contact tooth stiffness for all teeth pair with rotation, (b) total tooth stiffness
under line and point contact, and their relative difference.
bottom boundary of meshing surface of face gear. However, the value of hfo in the tooth bottom is 0, which will cause the stiffness of
(fz)
the tooth slice to become infinite. Therefore, the extension line cannot coincide with the boundary of the tooth bottom and a small
distance should be maintained between them as shown in Fig. 9(c). Where, hfo is taken as a small quantity, Δhfo . Then, φs1 , φs2 , nfo ,
(fz) (fz) (fy)
nfo , hfo and hfo within the tooth width covered by the inner extension line are calculated by Eq. (32).
(fz) (fy) (fz)
⎧
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ φs1 = φsr
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ φs2 = φsd
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ n(fy) (fy)
fo = nfo (φsd , θsd )
φ(n) (f) (f)
cs > φsb ∧ xlfo > xfw (32)
⎪
⎪
⎪ nfo = n(fz)
(fz)
fo (φsd , θsd )
⎪
⎪
⎪ h(fy) (f)
⎪
⎪ fo = yf (φsd , θsd )
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ hfo = Δh(fz)
(fz)
⎪
⎪ fo
⎪
⎪
⎩
herein, φsd and θsd are tooth surface parameters at the position where a distance of Δhfo from the root of the slice with coordinate xlfo .
(fz) (f)
They are obtained by Eq. (33) since zf (φsd , θsd ) zfd and xf (φsd , θsd ) xlfo .
(f) (f) (fz) (f) (f)
= − Δhfo =
⎧ / /
⎨ θsd sin( φ /isf ) + isf cos( φ /isf ) cosϕ = x(f) Rbs
(33)
sd sd sd lfo
⎩ (f) (fz)
Rbs (cosϕsd + θsd sinϕsd ) = zfd − Δhfo
herein, zfd can be calculated as Eq. (27c). Δhfo is taken as 0.2–0.5 mm has almost no effect on the global tooth stiffness calculation and
(f) (fz)
it is taken as 0.25 mm in this paper. It is because that the tooth stiffness of pinion is small relatively when the tooth stiffness of face gear
is high. The global tooth stiffness of teeth pair is less than that of its any tooth in meshing because they are equivalent to the series
connection of springs.
The calculation process for face gear tooth stiffness under line and point contact are described in Fig. 10. The global tooth stiffness
of orthogonal spur-face gear drive can be obtained as Eq. (17).
4.5. Calculation and comparison of tooth stiffness under line and point contact
Global tooth stiffness of face gear drive under line and point contact are determined by the meshing point tracks, contact line ranges
and the tooth widths according to SubSections. 4.1-4.4. Division numbers of tooth slice for pinion and face gear, Dpi and Dfi , are
selected as 120 in this paper. To compare the stiffness of all slices, the outer division numbers, Dpo and Dfo , are taken by Eq. (34) to
adaptively ensure ΔBpi =ΔBpo and ΔBfi =ΔBfo as much as possible.
⌊ ( )/( )⌋ ⌊ ( )/( )⌋
Dpo = Dpi z(p) (p)
po − zcp z(p) (p)
cp − zpi ; Dfo = Dfi Rfo − xcf(f) xcf(f) − Rfi (34)
Other parameters are the same as Table 1. Stiffness distribution maps of slices for one tooth of the pinion and face gear under line
and point contact in meshing process are shown in Fig. 11. It can be seen that, under line contact, the stiffness of all tooth slices for
pinion, ΔkLpn , is equal along the tooth width and the stiffness of slices for face gear, ΔkLfn , increases monotonically from the inner radius
to outer radius. It is noteworthy that, under point contact, the stiffness of tooth slices near and far from the meshing point is amplified
and reduced, respectively. Δkηpn gradually decreases along both sides of the tooth width until it returns to zero. Δkηfn first increases and
then decreases along the outer radius side from the meshing point until 0 and decreases along the inner radius side until 0. It can be
22
Fig. 13. Schematic diagram for the modeling of LDR: (a) relationship between the contact ratio and the number of teeth pairs participating in
meshing, (b) modeling principle of LDR and relevant parameters.
deduced that the characteristics of point contact are effectively highlighted by introducing proportion functions, ηpn and ηfn . The tooth
stiffness of face gear drive can be adaptively adjusted according to the position of meshing point. Furthermore, it can also be known
that the stiffness of all tooth slices along the tooth width of pinion and face gear are decrease and increase with rotation, respectively.
Changes of global tooth stiffness for all teeth pair considering the contact ratio under point contact, kt , of orthogonal spur-face gear
drive are shown in Fig. 12(a). Where, ki−t 1 , kit and ki+1
t are tooth stiffness of (i-1)-th teeth pair, i th teeth pair and (i + 1)-th teeth pair,
respectively. The total tooth stiffness in double meshing area is a linear superposition of the tooth stiffness of all teeth pairs because it is
linear. It can be seen that kit increases first and then decreases in complete meshing process. The total tooth stiffness, kt is relatively
stable in the double meshing area.
Changes of global tooth stiffness under line and point contact, kt and kLt , and their relative difference, χ t = (kLt − kt ) /kt × 100%, are
reflected in Fig. 12(b). It can be seen that the tooth stiffness under point contact kt is significantly smaller than that under line contact
kLt . χ t varies with rotation and its maximum and minimum values are 147.13% and 101.05214%, respectively. It can be concluded that
the linear tooth stiffness of orthogonal spur-face gear drive will decrease significantly after considering point contact.
5. Modeling and analysis of load distribution ratio and meshing stiffness
Calculations of local contact stiffness and global tooth stiffness under point contact are completed in Sections 3 and 4. They are the
basis for calculating LDR and can also be integrated into the meshing stiffness as the main component of time-varying meshing stiffness
(TVMS). As the basic of design and study in gear drives, LDR and meshing stiffness should be calculated. Their models, results and
coupling relationship for orthogonal spur-face gear drive are established, analyzed and revealed in this section, respectively.
5.1. Load distribution ratio between teeth pairs
Multi teeth pairs meshing exists in normal gear drives because the contact ratio must be greater than 1 to ensure the continuous
transmission condition. LDR is defined as the ratio of the meshing force on each teeth pair in the total meshing force and it reflects the
distribution characteristics of meshing force in multi teeth pairs meshing. The calculation approach for LDR should be clarified since it
is an important meshing characteristic and also a precondition for calculating meshing stiffness.
The motion deviation of each teeth pair at meshing point is equal in meshing process because the pitch of meshing points along the
normal direction is equal. The model of LDR can be constructed according to its definition and the deformation coordination rela
tionship. Schematic diagrams for the modeling are shown in Fig. 13. Where, i represents i th teeth pair and n is the total number of teeth
pairs participating in meshing at the same time, i = 1,2…n. F is the total meshing force for the drive which is generated by the driving
moment and load moment on pinion and face gear, Tp and Tf . Fi is the distributed meshing force on i th teeth pair. ξipf is the LDR of i th
teeth pair. δipf is the meshing deformation at meshing point of i th teeth pair and it is the sum of contact deformation and tooth
deformation. ei is the comprehensive error at meshing point of i th teeth pair which is the deviation value between actual tooth surface
and ideal tooth surface. Δδi is the motion deviation of i th teeth pair and it is the sum of δipf and ei . The number of teeth pairs
participating in meshing at the same time is 1 or 2 since PCR is 1.303.
The meshing force, deformations and LDR are met the equations listed in Eq. (35) in multi teeth pairs meshing according to the
analyses in Sections 3 and 4.
23
(a) (b)
MI DS
LDR
LDR
SD MO
i 1 i 1 i i 1
pf 0.1 kN pf pf pf
i
pf 0.5 kN e2 e1 1 m
i 1
2.5 kN e2 e1 1 m
pf
A B C D A B
Rotation Rotation
Fig. 14. Changes of LDR with rotation under different total meshing forces and errors: (a) global change of LDR when F = 500 N and local
enlargement when F = 100 N, 500 N and 2500 N, (b) change of LDR when e2 − e1 =1 μm, 0 and − 1 μm.
(a) (b)
2.5 kN
0.5 kN
k pf [ 108 N / m]
[ 108 N / m]
0.1 kN
MI
DS
SD
k i 1
k i +1 MO
pf pf
k i
pf k pf
A B C D A B
Rotation Rotation
Fig. 15. Changes of meshing stiffness with rotation: (a) meshing stiffness of each teeth pair when total meshing force is 500 N, (b) total meshing
stiffness of teeth pairs when total meshing force is 100 N, 500 N and 2500 N.
⎧
⎪
⎪ Δδ1 = Δδ2 = ⋯ = Δδn
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Δδi = δipf + ei = δit + δih + ei
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ /
⎪
⎪ δit = Fi kti
⎪
⎪
⎨ ( / )2/3
δih = Fi khi (i = 1, 2…n) (35)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∑ n
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ F= Fi
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ i=1
⎪
⎪ /
⎪
⎪
⎩ ξipf = Fi F
herein, δih and δit are the contact deformation and tooth deformation of i th teeth pair. kih and kit are the local contact stiffness and global
tooth stiffness of i th teeth pair. Then, a set of equations representing LDR can be derived by Eq. (35) as Eq. (36).
[( )− 1/3 ( / )2/3 / ]− 1 ⎡ ⎤
ξipf F 1 khi + 1 kti ∑n
ξipf = [( ⎣1 − 1 ( )−
ei − ej
/ ⎦ (i, j = 1, 2…n) (36)
∑
n )− 1/3 ( / ) / ] − 1
F 1/3 ( / )2/3
2/3 j=1 ξj F 1 khj + 1 ktj
ξjpf F 1 khj + 1 ktj pf
j=1
where, j represents the j-th meshing teeth pair which is used in the summation in Eq. (36) to distinguish it from i. It can be seen that Eq.
(36) is a system of nonlinear discrete equations. There are corresponding n-term calculation equations of LDR (ξ1pf ,ξ2pf …ξnpf ) in Eq. (36)
when n teeth pairs participate in meshing. Therefore, Eq. (36) is closed and solvable when F, kih and kit are determined. Calculations of
kih and kit have been elaborated in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. Eq. (36) can be solved by iterative method and the iterative equations
can be directly constructed by Eq. (36).
The LDR of one teeth pair increases with the relative increase in its stiffness when the error effect is not considered (ei − ej = 0) as
mirrored in Eq. (36). It can intuitively explain that a large stiffness means strong deformation resistance, and then it carries more
meshing force under the same deformation condition. Eq. (36) has wide applicability which can be reflected by its derivation process.
It is applicable to the calculation of LDR for gear drives when the contact stiffness is calculated by Hertz contact theory.
Selected parameters are the same as Table 1. Changes of LDR when F = 500 N and ei − ej =0 are shown in Fig. 14(a). Then, meshing
24
forces with 5-fold relationship, (100 N, 500 N, 2500 N), are loaded as shown in local enlargement in Fig. 15(a). Where, ξi−pf 1 , ξipf and ξi+1
pf
are LDR of (i-1)-th teeth pair, i th teeth pair and (i + 1)-th teeth pair, respectively. It can be seen that the LDR of one teeth pair increases
slightly with rotation in the first double meshing area and decreases in the second double meshing area. The LDR of the newly meshed
teeth pair is higher than that of the meshed teeth pair. The total meshing force has little effect on LDR.
Changes of LDR with and without errors are shown in Fig. 14(b). It is obvious that the LDR are significantly affected by the error.
The meshing force distributed on the new meshing teeth pair is approximately 82% of the total meshing force when the error of the
new meshing tooth pair is 1 μm greater than that of the meshed tooth pair, e2 − e1 = 1 μm. The LDR of new meshing teeth pair is about
34% when e2 − e1 = − 1 μm.
The effect of error is not discussed more deeply in this paper. It is because that the PCR may be changed when the error is
significantly higher than the tooth deformation and the effect of contact ratio has a great impact on LDR and TVMS. Therefore, the
influence of errors on PCR, LDR and TVMS will be discussed in-depth and systematically in another study.
5.2. Meshing stiffness of teeth pair
The deformation of teeth pairs is mainly composed of the contact deformation and tooth deformation. The relationship among the
meshing force, deformations, LDR and stiffness of teeth pairs can be expressed collectively as Eq. (37).
⎧ /
⎪
⎪
⎪ δit = Fi kti
⎪
⎪
⎪ δi = ( F /ki )2/3
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ h i h
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ δipf = δit + δih
⎪
⎪
⎨
∑ (37)
n
(i = 1, 2…n)
⎪
⎪ F= Fi
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ i=1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Fi = ξipf F
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ /
⎪
⎪ i
⎩ kpf = Fi δipf
herein, kipf is the meshing stiffness of i th teeth pair. Then, δipf and kipf , can be derived as Eq. (38) by Eq. (37).
⎧ ( / )2/3 /
⎪
⎨ δipf = ξipf F khi + ξipf F kti
[( ) / ]− 1 (i = 1, 2…n) (38)
⎩ ki = ξi F − 1/3 ( 1/ki )2/3 + 1 ki
⎪
pf pf h t
It can be known that kipf is determined by the contact stiffness, tooth stiffness, total meshing force and LDR. Fi and F cannot be
3/2
eliminated in Eq. (38) due to the nonlinear relationship, Fi = kih (δih ) . The relationships among total meshing stiffness, total meshing
force and total deformation of all teeth pairs participating in meshing at the same time can be described as Eq. (39).
⎧ ( / )2/3 /
⎪
⎪ δipf = Fi khi + Fi kti
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∑n
⎪
⎨ F= Fi
i=1
(i = 1, 2…n) (39)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 1 2 n
⎪
⎪ δpf = δpf .... = δpf = δpf
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ /
kpf = F δpf
herein, δpf and kpf are the total deformation and total meshing stiffness of all teeth pairs, respectively. kpf can be obtained as Eq. (40) by
substituting Eq. (38) into Eq. (39).
n [(
∑ )− 1/3 ( / ]− 1
/ )2/3
kpf = ξipf F 1 khi + 1 kti (i = 1, 2…n) (40)
i=1
kipf and kpf can be obtained by substituting kih , kit , ξipf and F into Eq. (38) and Eq. (40), respectively.
Change of meshing stiffness with rotation is shown in Fig. 15(a). Where, ki−pf 1 , kipf and ki+1
pf are meshing stiffness of teeth pair for (i-1)-
th teeth pair, i th teeth pair and (i + 1)-th teeth pair, respectively. The total meshing stiffness, kpf , decreases with rotation in the single
and double meshing areas. kipf and kpf change suddenly at DS and SD. It can be inferred that the meshing impact may be caused by the
sudden change of stiffness and all meshed teeth pairs will be impacted. The total meshing stiffness under different total meshing forces
are obtained as shown in Fig. 15(b). It can be seen that kpf increases with increase in F.
It can be concluded that, under point contact, there is a significant coupling relationship among the meshing force, LDR and
stiffness in orthogonal spur-face gear drives. The LDR and meshing stiffness change with the meshing force due to the failure of linear
25
(a) (b)
2.5 kN
m] 0.5 kN
[%]
6
0.1 kN
[ 10
h
2.5 kN
pf
i
0.5 kN
0.1 kN
A B C D A B
Rotation Rotation
Fig. 16. Changes of meshing deformation with rotation and the composition percentage under different total meshing forces: (a) total deformation
of face gear drive, (b) percentage of local contact deformation in total deformation.
superposition principle and they can be solved in order only on the premise that the total meshing force is obtained.
Contact stiffness and tooth stiffness are combined as the meshing stiffness in this paper and they are the part of TVMS. The
foundation stiffness of face gear drive is another part of TVMS and its calculation approach will be established separately due to the
lack of relevant studies and large content.
5.3. Deformations of teeth pair
The percentage of local contact deformation in total deformation, χ h , is defined as χ h = δh /δpf × 100%. Three groups total meshing
forces with 5-fold relationship, (100 N, 500 N, 2500 N), are loaded. Changes of δpf and χ h with rotation under different total meshing
forces are shown in Fig. 16(a) and 16(b), respectively. It can be seen that δpf increases nonlinearly with the increase in F and its
maximum value appears at SD. χ h decreases nonlinearly with the increase in the meshing force and its minimum value is 78.413269%
under the high meshing force, F = 2500 N. It is indicated that, under point contact, contact deformation is the main part of the total
deformation in the meshing process of orthogonal spur-face gear drive.
6. Conclusions
Analytical models of LDR and meshing stiffness for orthogonal spur-face gear drive under point contact are proposed in this paper.
The main conclusions are summarized as follows.
The meshing point trajectory in space, meshing point tracks on tooth surfaces and contact lines covered by the tracks are divided
precisely according to the PCR, meshing equation and tooth surface equations of face gear drive. The eccentricity of contact ellipse and
the local contact stiffness of one teeth pair decreases and increases with rotation respectively when pinion is the driving. The major axis
of contact ellipse is markedly longer than the minor axis in meshing process.
The modeling approach of global tooth stiffness for the face gear drive under point contact is presented by expanding the existing
stiffness model under line contact. The stiffness proportion of each tooth slice is distributed effectively and adaptively by this approach
in the calculation of tooth stiffness under point contact. The total tooth stiffness is stable relatively in the double meshing area, and
increases first and then decreases in the single meshing area. The tooth stiffness of face gear drive decreases significantly when the line
contact is adjusted to point contact.
Models of LDR and meshing stiffness for the face gear drive are established by integrating the local contact stiffness and global tooth
stiffness. They can be solved only when the total meshing force is determined due to the nonlinearity caused by point contact. The LDR
is greatly affected by the tooth surface error at meshing point, but is less affected by the total meshing force. Meshing stiffness of each
teeth pair suddenly changes at the alternating meshing position. The proportion of contact deformation in total deformation of face
gear drive decreases gradually with the increase in total meshing force, but its value is large throughout. Its minimum value is
78.413269% in meshing process when meshing force is 2500 N.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Lu Liu: Methodology, Software, Formal analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Lingyun Zhu: Data curation, Funding acquisition, Supervision. Xiangfeng Gou: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing,
Funding acquisition, Project administration.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
26
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This investigation is financially supported by the Natural Science Key Foundation of Tianjin, China (Grant No. 16JCZDJC38500,
19JCZDJC38700), by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51365025), by the Tianjin Research Innovation
Project for Postgraduate Students (Grant No. 2021YJSS060).
Appendix A
Equations for calculating principal curvatures on face gear tooth surface.

⎧ ( )2 ( )2 ( )2
⎪
⎪ ∂x(f) ∂y(f) ∂z(f)
⎪
⎪ Eft = f
+ f
+ f
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∂φs ∂φs ∂φs
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (f) (f) (f) (f)
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∂x ∂xf ∂y ∂yf ∂z(f) ∂z(f)
⎪
⎪ Fft = f + f + f f
⎪
⎪ ∂φs ∂θs ∂φs ∂θs ∂φs ∂θs
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )2 ( )2 ( )2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∂x(f)
f ∂y(f)
f ∂z(f)
f
⎪
⎪ Gft = + +
⎪
⎪ ∂θs ∂θ s ∂θs
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂xf ∂y(f) ∂z(f)
⎪ f f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂φs ∂φs ∂φs ⃒⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ (f) ⃒ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂x ∂y(f) ∂z(f) ⃒/
⎪
⎪ Lft = ⃒⃒ f f f ⃒ Eft Gft − F 2ft
⎪
⎪ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂ θ s ∂ θ s ∂ θ s ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ 2 (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂ xf ∂2 y(f)
f ∂2 z(f)
f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ 2 2 2
⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂φs ∂φs ∂φs ⃒⃒
⎨ ⃒
⃒ ⃒ (A.1)
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂x(f) ∂y(f) ∂z(f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ f f f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂φ s ∂ φ s ∂ φ s ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒/√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂xf(f) ∂y(f) ∂z(f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ M = ⃒ f f ⃒ Eft Gft − F2ft
⎪
⎪
ft
⃒ ∂θs ∂ θ ∂ θ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ s s ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ 2 (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂x ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ f ∂2 y(f)f ∂2 z(f) f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ∂ φ
⃒ s s ∂ θ ∂ φ ∂ θ s ∂ φ ∂ θ s⃒
⎪
⎪ s s
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂xf ∂y(f)
f ∂z(f)
f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂ φ ∂ φ ∂ φ ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ s s s ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂x(f) ∂y(f) ∂z(f) ⃒/
⎪
⎪ N = ⃒ f f f ⃒ Eft Gft − F2ft
⎪
⎪ ft ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂ θ s ∂ θ s ∂ θ s ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪ ⃒ 2 (f) ⃒
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ∂ xf ∂2 y(f)f ∂2 z(f)
f ⃒
⎪
⎪ ⃒ 2 2 2
⃒
⎪ ⃒ ∂θs ⃒⃒
⎩ ⃒ ∂θs ∂θ s
[( ) ( ) ]
∂xf(f) 1 φ sinϕs − θs cosϕs tanϕs φ
= Rbs cosϕs + θs sinϕs − sin s + + isf cos s (A.2)
∂φs cosϕs isf isf cosϕs isf
[( ) ( ) ]
∂y(f) 1 φ sinϕs − θs cosϕs tanϕs φ
f
= Rbs cosϕs + θs sinϕs − cos s − + isf sin s (A.3)
∂φs cosϕs isf isf cosϕs isf
∂z(f)
f
= Rbs (θs cosϕs − sinϕs ) (A.4)
∂φs
27
( )
∂xf(f) φ tanϕs φ
= Rbs θs sinϕs sin s + isf cos s (A.5)
∂θs isf cosϕs isf
( )
∂y(f) φ tanϕs φ
f
= Rbs θs sinϕs cos s − isf sin s (A.6)
∂z(f)
f
= Rbs θs cosϕs (A.7)
∂θs
{ [( ) ] }
∂2 x(f) cos(2ϕs ) + θs sin(2ϕs ) + i2sf (1 + 2tan2 ϕs ) φ 1 tanϕs φs
f
= Rbs cos s − 1 + 2 (sinϕs − θs cosϕs ) + 2 sin (A.8)
∂φ2s isf cosϕs isf isf cosϕs isf
{ [( ) ] }
∂2 y(f) cos(2ϕs ) + θs sin(2ϕs ) + i2sf (1 + 2tan2 ϕs ) φ 1 tanϕs φs
f
= − Rbs sin s + 1+ (sinϕ s − θ s cosϕ s ) + 2 cos (A.9)
∂φs2 isf cosϕs isf i2sf cosϕs isf
∂2 z(f)
f
= − Rbs (cosϕs + θs sinϕs ) (A.10)
∂φ2s
[( ) ( ) ]
∂2 x(f) tanϕs φ sinϕs 1 + 2tan2 ϕs φ
f
= Rbs θs cosϕs − sin s + θs + isf cos s (A.11)
∂φs ∂θs cosϕs isf isf cosϕs isf
[( ) ( ) ]
∂2 y(f) tanϕs φ sinϕs 1 + 2tan2 ϕs φ
f
= Rbs θs cosϕs − cos s − θs + isf sin s (A.12)
∂φs ∂θs cosϕs isf isf cosϕs isf
∂2 z(f)
f
= − Rbs θs sinϕs (A.13)
∂φs ∂θs
[ ]
∂2 x(f) φ 1 + 2tan2 ϕs φ
f
= Rbs (sinϕs + θs cosϕs )sin s + isf cos s (A.14)
∂θ2s isf cosϕs isf
[ ]
∂2 y(f) φ 1 + 2tan2 ϕs φ
f
2
= Rbs (sinϕs + θs cosϕs )cos s − isf sin s (A.15)
∂2 z(f)
f
= Rbs (cosϕs − θs sinϕs ) (A.16)
∂θ2s
Appendix B
Quintic polynomial for fitting: (Fig. B.1)

(eh eh ) / eh [%]
A/ B
Fig. B.1. Relative error between the exact and fitting results, eh and eεh .
28
Table B.1
48 groups of data solved by Eq. (10) for fitting.
A/B eh A/B eh A/B eh A/B eh A/B eh A/B eh
0.02 0.996268 0.18 0.954036 0.34 0.872316 0.50 0.776112 0.66 0.652007 0.82 0.482132
0.04 0.991849 0.2 0.938235 0.36 0.861558 0.52 0.762322 0.68 0.633893 0.84 0.455413
0.06 0.986775 0.22 0.929818 0.38 0.850455 0.54 0.748090 0.7 0.615056 0.86 0.426790
0.08 0.981125 0.24 0.921066 0.40 0.839000 0.56 0.733395 0.72 0.595430 0.88 0.395852
0.1 0.974900 0.26 0.911980 0.42 0.827185 0.58 0.718212 0.74 0.574939 0.90 0.362013
0.12 0.974977 0.28 0.902563 0.44 0.815001 0.60 0.702516 0.76 0.553489 0.92 0.324368
0.14 0.968389 0.3 0.892815 0.46 0.802436 0.62 0.686274 0.78 0.530970 0.94 0.281401
0.16 0.961401 0.32 0.882733 0.48 0.789477 0.64 0.669451 0.80 0.507242 0.96 0.230232
Table B.2
Fitting coefficient in Eq. (B.1).
c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5
1.00981307 − 0.47621870 1.53093009 − 6.17140383 8.28238146 − 4.05782568
/
eh ≈ eεh = c0 + c1 (A / B) + c2 (A/B)2 + c3 (A/B)3 + c4 (A/B)4 + c5 (A/B)5 0<A B<1 (B.1)
References
[1] F.L. L.itvin, J. Wang, R. Bossler, et al., Application of face-gear drives in helicopter transmissions, J. Mech. Des. 116 (3) (1994) 672–676, https://doi.org/
10.1115/1.2919434.
[2] F.L. L.itvin, A. Fuentes, Gear Geometry and Applied Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 508–546.
[3] T. Lin, H. Ou, R. Li, A finite element method for 3D static and dynamic contact/impact analysis of gear drives, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 196 (2007)
1716–1728, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2006.09.014.
[4] Z. Cao, Z. Chen, H. Jiang, Nonlinear dynamics of a spur gear pair with force-dependent mesh stiffness, Nonlinear Dyn. 99 (2020) 1227–1241, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11071-019-05348-0.
[5] W. Yu, C.K. M.echefske, M. Timusk, Influence of the addendum modification on spur gear back-side mesh stiffness and dynamics, J. Sound Vib. 389 (2017)
183–201, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2016.11.030.
[6] F.L. L.itvin, D. Vecchiato, K. Yukishima, et al., Reduction of noise of loaded and unloaded misaligned gear drives, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 195 (2006)
5523–5536, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2005.05.055.
[7] J.D.M. Marafona, P.M.T. Marques, R.C. Martins, et al., Mesh stiffness models for cylindrical gears: a detailed review, Mech. Mach. Theory 166 (2021) 104472,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2021.104472.
[8] L. Liu, L. Zhu, X. Gou, Calculation of line and point contact ratio for orthogonal spur-face gear drive, Int. J. Mech. Sci. (2022), 107758, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijmecsci.2022.107758.
[9] Z. Chen, Y. Shao, Mesh stiffness calculation of a spur gear pair with tooth profile modification and tooth root crack, Mech. Mach. Theory 62 (2013) 63–74,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2012.10.012.
[10] Y. Sun, H. Ma, Y. Huangfu, et al., A revised time-varying mesh stiffness model of spur gear pairs with tooth modifications, Mech. Mach. Theory 129 (2018)
261–278, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2018.08.003.
[11] H. Ma, R. Song, X. Pang, et al., Time-varying mesh stiffness calculation of cracked spur gears, Eng Fail Anal 44 (2014) 179–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engfailanal.2014.05.018.
[12] R. Lu, W. Tang, Analytical calculation models for mesh stiffness and backlash of spur gears under temperature effects, Proc. IMechE Part C: J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
236 (8) (2022) 4450–4462, https://doi.org/10.1177/09544062211049860.
[13] Z. Chen, J. Zhang, W. Zhai, et al., Improved analytical methods for calculation of gear tooth fillet-foundation stiffness with tooth root crack, Eng Fail Anal 82
(2017) 72–81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2017.08.028.
[14] M. Sánchez, M. Pleguezuelos, J. Pedrero, Approximate equations for the meshing stiffness and the load sharing ratio of spur gears including hertzian effects,
Mech. Mach. Theory 109 (2017) 231–249, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2016.11.014.
[15] M. Pleguezuelos, M.B. Sánchez, Analytical model for meshing stiffness, load sharing, and transmission error for spur gears with profile modification under non-
nominal load conditions, Appl. Math. Model. 97 (2021) 344–365, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2021.03.051.
[16] C. Xie, L. Hua, J. Lan, et al., Improved analytical models for mesh stiffness and load sharing ratio of spur gears considering structure coupling effect, Mech. Syst.
Signal Process. 111 (2018) 331–347, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.03.037.
[17] C. Xie, X. Shu, A new mesh stiffness model for modified spur gears with coupling tooth and body flexibility effects, Appl. Math. Model. 91 (2021) 1194–1210,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2020.11.003.
[18] K. Chen, Y. Huangfu, H. Ma, et al., Calculation of mesh stiffness of spur gears considering complex foundation types and crack propagation paths, Mech. Syst.
Signal Process. 130 (2019) 273–292, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.05.014.
[19] Y. Luo, N. Baddour, M. Liang, A shape-independent approach to modelling gear tooth spalls for time varying mesh stiffness evaluation of a spur gear pair, Mech.
Syst. Signal Process. 120 (2019) 836–852, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.11.008.
[20] T. Chen, Y. Wang, Z. Chen, A novel distribution model of multiple teeth pits for evaluating time-varying mesh stiffness of external spur gears, Mech. Syst. Signal
Process. 129 (2019) 479–501, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.04.029.
[21] W. Chen, Y. Lei, Y. Fu, et al., A study of effects of tooth surface wear on time-varying mesh stiffness of external spur gear considering wear evolution process,
Mech. Mach. Theory 155 (2021), 104055, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.104055.
[22] Z. Xu, W. Yu, S. Yimin, A refined analytical model for the mesh stiffness calculation of plastic gear pairs, Appl. Math. Model. 98 (2021) 71–89, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apm.2021.04.032.
[23] V. Kumar, A. Kumar, S. Kumar, et al., TVMS calculation and dynamic analysis of carburized spur gear pair, Mech. Syst. Signal. Process. 166 (2022), 108436,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.108436.
29
[24] Z. Sun, S. Chen, Z. Hu, et al., Analytical models for thermal deformation and mesh stiffness of spur gears under steady temperature field, Eng. Fail Anal. 133
(2022), 105972, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105972.
[25] X. Zheng, W. Luo, Y. Hu, et al., Analytical approach to mesh stiffness modeling of high-speed spur gears, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 224 (2022) 107318, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107318.
[26] J.I. P.edrero, M. Pleguezuelos, M. Artés, et al., Load distribution model along the line of contact for involute external gears, Mech. Mach. Theory 45 (5) (2010)
780–794, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2009.12.009.
[27] Z. Wan, H. Cao, Y. Zi, et al., Mesh stiffness calculation using an accumulated integral potential energy method and dynamic analysis of helical gears, Mech.
Mach. Theory 92 (2015) 447–463, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2015.06.011.
[28] L. Han, L. Xu, H. Qi, Influences of friction and mesh misalignment on time-varying mesh stiffness of helical gears, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 31 (7) (2017)
3121–3130, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-017-0602-6.
[29] X. Tang, L. Zou, W. Yang, et al., Novel mathematical modelling methods of comprehensive mesh stiffness for spur and helical gears, Appl. Math. Model. 64
(2018) 524–540, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2018.08.003.
[30] M. Feng, H. Ma, Z. Li, et al., An improved analytical method for calculating time-varying mesh stiffness of helical gears, Meccanica 53 (2018) 1131–1145,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-017-0746-6.
[31] Q. Wang, B. Zhao, Y. Fu, et al., An improved time-varying mesh stiffness model for helical gear pairs considering axial mesh force component, Mech. Syst.
Signal. Process. 106 (2018) 413–429, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.01.012.
[32] R. Sun, C. Song, C. Zhu, et al., Computational studies on mesh stiffness of paralleled helical beveloid gear pair, Int. J. Precision Eng. Manuf. 22 (2021) 123–137,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-020-00452-3.
[33] S. Wang, R. Zhu, An improved mesh stiffness model of helical gear pair considering axial mesh force and friction force influenced by surface roughness under
EHL condition, Appl. Math. Model. 102 (2022) 453–471, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2021.10.007.
[34] S. Wang, R. Zhu, An improved mesh stiffness calculation model for cracked helical gear pair with spatial crack propagation path, Mech. Syst. Signal. Process.
172 (2022), 108989, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.108989.
[35] H. Yang, W. Shi, Z. Chen, et al., An improved analytical method for mesh stiffness calculation of helical gear pair considering time-varying backlash, Mech. Syst.
Signal. Process. 170 (2022), 108882, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.108882.
[36] X. Gou, G. Li, L. Zhu, Dynamic characteristics of a straight bevel gear drive system considering multi-state meshing and time-varying parameters, Mech. Mach.
Theory 171 (2022), 104779, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2022.104779.
[37] J. Liu, X. Shu, H. Kanazawa, et al., A model order reduction method for the simulation of gear contacts based on Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian formulation,
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 338 (2018) 68–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.039.
[38] A. Bracci, M. Gabiccini, A. Artoni, et al., Geometric contact pattern estimation for gear drives, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 198 (2009) 1563–1573,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2009.01.009.
[39] M. Buzzoni, G. D’Elia, E. Mucchi, et al., A vibration-based method for contact pattern assessment in straight bevel gears, Mech. Syst. Signal. Process. 120 (2019)
639–707, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.10.002.
[40] Y. Feng, An energy-conserving contact theory for discrete element modelling of arbitrarily shaped particles: contact volume based model and computational
issues, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 373 (2021), 113493, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.113493.
[41] G. Cheng, K. Xiao, J. Wang, Contact damping and stiffness calculation model for rough surface considering lubrication in involute spur gear, Int. J. Appl. Mech.
13 (7) (2021), 2150078, https://doi.org/10.1142/S1758825121500782.
[42] Z. Xiao, Investigation on stiffness and damping of transient non-Newtonian thermal elastohydrodynamic point contact for crowned herringbone gears, Tribol.
Int. 137 (2019) 102–112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2019.04.041.
[43] Z. Wang, W. Pu, X. Pei, et al., Contact stiffness and damping of spiral bevel gears under transient mixed lubrication conditions, Friction 10 (4) (2022) 545–559,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40544-020-0479-8.
[44] F. Liu, Y. Chen, H. Xie, et al., Study on the meshing stiffness of plastic helical gear meshing with metal worm via point-contact, Mech. Mach. Theory 176 (2022),
105040, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2022.105040.
[45] Z. Hu, J. Tang, S. Chen, et al., Effect of mesh stiffness on the dynamic response of face gear transmission system, J. Mech. Des. 35 (2013), 071005, https://doi.
org/10.1115/1.4024369.
[46] Y. Mu, Z. Fang, W. Li, Impact analysis and vibration reduction design of spiral bevel gears, Proc. IMechE Part K: J. Multi-body Dyn. 0 (2019) 1–9, https://doi.
org/10.1177/1464419319827398.
[47] L. Zhu, J. Shi, X. Gou, Modeling and dynamics analyzing of a torsional-bending-pendular face-gear drive system considering multi-state engagements, Mech.
Mach. Theory 149 (2020), 103790, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.103790.
[48] C. Lin, Y. Wang, Y. Hu, et al., Nonlinear dynamic analysis of eccentric curve-face gear transmission system, J. Sound Vib. 520 (2022), 116596, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jsv.2021.116596.
30

1 s2.0 S0094114X23000137 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0094114X23000137 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanism and Machine Theory

Modeling and analysis of load distribution ratio and meshing

H Distance from the origin of Sf to the origin of Sp

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

Normal modulus of shaper cutter and pinion m 3 mm

herein, xp , yp and zp are components of →

herein, xf , yf and zf are components of → r f . nf , nf and nf are components of →

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

substituting and in Eq. (2a).

3. Calculation and analysis of local contact stiffness at meshing point

3.1. Calculation of principal curvatures on tooth surfaces

3.2. Solution of local contact characteristics

3.3. Analysis of local contact characteristics

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

are the division and numbering direction of and .

4.2. Modeling of tooth stiffness under line and point contact

4.3. Calculation of bending, shear and compression stiffness for pinion

tooth root, respectively. hpn

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

of pinion Eq.(2a) and then listed in Eq. (21).

herein, Δkbpn , Δkspn and Δkcpn can be solved by substituting θ(p)

φs1 2Ef yfv ⃒xcf − Rfn ⃒

tooth width range as shown in Fig. 9(b) and 9(c).

The equations to replace parameters φs1 , φs2 , n(fy)

simplify the calculation.

Their expressions are listed as Eq. (27a).

Calculation methods of the upper and lower limits φs1 (x(f)

n(fz) (f) (n)

φs1 , φs2 , nfn ,

(28) as reflected in Fig. 9(a).

since xf (φcs , θls ) xlfn .

herein, ϕsl = φcs + θsl + θs0 .

calculated by Eq. (30).

(31) since zf (φsτ , θsτ )

here, ϕsτ = φsτ + θsτ + θs0 .

Mechanism and Machine Theory 182 (2023) 105239

5. Modeling and analysis of load distribution ratio and meshing stiffness

5.1. Load distribution ratio between teeth pairs

5.2. Meshing stiffness of teeth pair

5.3. Deformations of teeth pair

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Declaration of Competing Interest

Data will be made available on request.

Equations for calculating principal curvatures on face gear tooth surface.

Quintic polynomial for fitting: (Fig. B.1)

1.00981307 − 0.47621870 1.53093009 − 6.17140383 8.28238146 − 4.05782568

You might also like