You are on page 1of 9

DOI 10.

1007/s00170-004-2240-2
ORI GI NAL ARTI CLE
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2006) 27: 738–746
Fakher Chaari · Tahar Fakhfakh · Riadh Hbaieb · Jamel Louati · Mohamed Haddar
Influence of manufacturing errors on the dynamic behavior of planetary gears
Received: 27 January 2004 / Accepted: 21 April 2004 / Published online: 23 February 2005
© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2005
Abstract Planetary gears are widely used in the transmissions of
helicopters, automobiles, aircraft engines, etc. They have substan-
tial advantages such as compactness and a large torque-to-weight
ratio. In this work, a plane model of a planetary gear was inves-
tigated. The energetic Lagrange formulation was used to recover
the equations of motion of the system. A modal analysis was per-
formed, and the influence of gyroscopic effect in particular was
scrutinized. The dynamic response was computed by an iterative
spectral method. The excitation is induced by time-varying the
gearmesh stiffness. The cases of a healthy planetary gear and one
with the presence of eccentricity and profile error were compared.
The influence on the transmission ratio was also studied.
Keywords Eccentricity · Gearmesh · Modal analysis ·
Planetary gears · Profile error · Spectral analysis
1 Introduction
In aerospace and automotive applications, transmissions that in-
clude planetary gear sets are widely used. The main advantages
of this transmission is its compactness and its large torque-to-
weight ratio. As with every transmission, including gear pairs,
planetary gears develop a noise induced by the gearmesh of the
sun with the planets and of the planets with the ring. On the other
hand, planetary gears may exhibit undesirable dynamic behav-
ior resulting in added noise, acoustic emissions, and unaccept-
able performance characteristics. These emissions are greatest
when the transmission works in poor conditions (profile errors
on teeth, run-out errors, teeth faults, etc.). In addition, the gy-
roscopic effect induced by the carrier rotational speed is an im-
portant parameter that alters the vibratory response. Therefore,
understanding the dynamic behavior of a planetary gear is use-
F. Chaari (u) · T. Fakhfakh · R. Hbaieb · J. Louati · M. Haddar
Mechanics Modeling and Production Research Unit,
Ecole Nationale d’Ing´ enieurs de Sfax,
BP. W. 3038, Sfax, Tunisia
E-mail: fakher.attt@gnet.tn
Tel.: +216-74-274088
Fax: +216-74-275595
ful in predicting its failure and its noise in the context of the
transmission system as a whole.
The literature on planetary gear dynamics emphasizes highly
idealized Lumped-parameter modeling wherein the gears are
rigid bodies interconnected by springs representing teeth in mesh
and support bearings. Cunliffe et al. [1], Kahraman [2], and Lin
and Parker [3] studied free vibration. Kahraman [2] used two-
and three-dimensional models to examine the dynamic response.
Saada and Velex [4] used an FEM model of the train to com-
pute the response. Much literature has attested to the fact that
a major goal in reducing gear noise is to reduce the transmission
error. This error is defined as the nonconjugacy of the gear pair
resulting in a difference of the output gear’s position from where
it would be if the gear teeth were perfect. Its major causes are
manufacturing and assembly imperfections and the deflection of
gear teeth. Eccentricities and profile imperfections usually occur
in the manufacturing process; Kharaman [2] introduces these er-
rors as displacements modeled on the line of action. It was shown
that the signal components of defects modulate the amplitude or
the frequency of the perfect system response.
In this work, numerical analysis of a single-stage planetary
gear without defects and with profile and eccentricity errors is pre-
sented. First, we develop a plane model of the planetary gear with
three degrees of freedom per element. This model involves three
types of modes: rotational, translational, and planet modes. The
influence of the gyroscopic effect was analytically scrutinized,
whichshowedthe bifurcationof translational modes due tothis ef-
fect. Dynamic responses of the model are developed using a spec-
tral iterative method, which has the outstanding propriety of di-
rectly giving the frequency response. The cases of perfect and de-
fective teeth with profile and eccentricity errors were computed.
Comparisons of the signal responses before and after intro-
ducing these defects are made in order to outline their features.
2 Model of the train
We are investigating a problem of plane vibration of a one-stage
planetary gear train with N planets, as presented in Fig. 1. The
739
Fig. 1. Model of the train
sun (s), ring (r), carrier (c), and planets ( p) are considered as
rigid bodies.
Bearings are modeled by linear springs. The gearmesh is
modeled by linear springs acting on the lines of action. Each com-
ponent has three degrees of freedom: two translations u
i
, v
j
and
one rotation w
j
, with w
j
= r
j
θ
j
( j = c, r, s, 1, . . ., N); r
j
is the
base radius. Damping is not considered here; nevertheless, it can
be introduced in parallel with gearmesh and bearing stiffness.
Radial and tangential coordinates u
p
, v
p
describe planet de-
flections; e
sp
(t) and e
rp
(t) represent the transmission error of the
sun-planet gearmesh and the planet-ring gearmesh, respectively.
Translations are measured with respect to the frame (O,

i ,

j,

k) fixed to the carrier and rotating with a constant angular
speed Ω
c
in relation to a stationary reference frame. Circum-
ferential planet positions are specified by the fixed angles ϕ
p
measured relatively to the rotating frame with ϕ
1
= 0.
The displacements δ
sp
and δ
sp
along the lines of action are
expressed by [5]:
δ
sp
= v
s
cos ϕ
sp
−u
s
sin ϕ
sp
−u
p
sin α
s
−v
p
cos α
s
+w
s
+w
p
+e
sp
(t) (1)
δ
rp
= v
r
cos ϕ
rp
−u
c
sin ϕ
rp
+u
p
sin α
r
−v
p
cos α
r
+w
r
−w
p
+e
rp
(t) (2)
with ϕ
sp
= ϕ
p
−α
s
and ϕ
rp
= ϕ
p

r
; α
s
and α
r
respectively
denote the pressure angles of the sun and the ring gears.
Applying Lagrange formulation allow us to recover the equa-
tions of motions of the 3N +9 degrees of freedom of the system.
Assembling the equations in matrix form leads to the global
equation of motion of the system:
M ¨ x +Ω
c
G ˙ x +
_
K
b
+ K
e
(t) −Ω
2
c
K

_
x = T + F(t) (3)
where x represents the vector of the degrees of freedom. It is
expressed by:
x =
_
u
c
, v
c
, w
c
, u
r
, v
r
, w
r
, u
s
, v
s
, w
s
, u
1
, v
1
, w
1
, . . .,
u
N
, v
N
, w
N
_
T
(4)
M represents the mass matrix. It is expressed by:
M =









M
c
0 0 0 0 0
0 M
r
0 0 0 0
0 0 M
s
0 0 0
0 0 0 M
1
0 0
0 0 0 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
0 0 0 0 · · · M
N









with M
j
=


m
j
0 0
0 m
j
0
0 0 I
j
/r
2
j


, j = c, r, s, 1, . . ., N
I
j
is the inertial moment of the jth element with respect to its
rotational axis.
The matrix G, which is the gyroscopic matrix, can be ex-
pressed by:
G =









G
c
0 0 0 0 0
0 G
r
0 0 0 0
0 0 G
s
0 0 0
0 0 0 G
1
0 0
0 0 0 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
0 0 0 0 · · · G
N









with G
j
=


0 −2m
j
0
2m
j
0 0
0 0 0


, j = c, r, s, 1, . . ., N
The bearing stiffness matrix K
b
is written as:
K
b
=


K
cb
0 0
0 K
rb
0
0 0 K
sb


, where K
jb
=


k
ju
0 0
0 k
jv
0
0 0 k
jw


and k
ju
, k
jv
, k
jw
represent the bearing stiffness along the three
degrees of freedom: j = c, r, s.
The centripetal stiffness K

matrix is expressed by:
K

=









K
Ωc
0 0 0 0 0
0 K
Ωr
0 0 0 0
0 0 K
Ωs
0 0 0
0 0 0 K
Ω1
0 0
0 0 0 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
0 0 0 0 . . . K
ΩN









,
where K
Ωj
=


m
j
0 0
0 m
j
0
0 0 0


The gearmeshstiffness matrixis time-varying. Generally, a square
waveform is adopted to express this variation [6]; the maximum
740
value represents the gearmesh stiffness of two pairs in contact, the
minimum value represents single-pair gearmesh stiffness. It can
be divided into a mean matrix and a time varying matrix:
K
e
(t) = K + K(t) (5)
K
e
(t) is expressed by:
K
e
(t) =









K
p
c1
0 0 K
1
c2
· · · K
N
c2
0

K
p
r1
0 K
1
r2
· · · K
N
r2
0 0

K
p
s1
K
1
s2
· · · K
N
s2
K
1
c2
K
1
r2
K
1
s2
K
1
0 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. 0
.
.
. 0
K
N
c2
K
N
r2
K
N
s2
0 0 K
N










The components of this matrix are:
K
p
= K
p
c3
+ K
p
r3
+ K
p
s3
, K
p
c3
=


k
p
0 0
0 k
p
0
0 0 0


,
K
p
s3
= k
sp
(t)


sin
2
α
s
cos α
s
sin α
s
−sinα
s
cos α
s
sin α
s
cos
2
α
s
−cos α
s
−sin α
s
−cos α
s
1


,
K
p
r3
= k
rp
(t)


sin
2
α
r
−cos α
r
sin α
r
−sinα
r
−cos α
r
sin α
r
cos
2
α
r
cos α
r
−sin α
r
cos α
r
1


,
K
p
c1
= k
p


1 0 −sin ϕ
p
0 1 cos ϕ
p
−sin ϕ
p
cos ϕ
p
1


,
K
p
r1
= k
rp
(t)


sin
2
ϕ
rp
−cos ϕ
rp
cos α
r
sin ϕ
rp
−cos ϕ
rp
cos α
r
cos
2
ϕ
rp
cos ϕ
rp
sin ϕ
rp
cos ϕ
rp
1


,
K
p
s1
= k
sp
(t)


sin
2
ϕ
sp
−cos ϕ
sp
sin ϕ
sp
−sin ϕ
sp
−cos ϕ
sp
sin ϕ
sp
cos
2
ϕ
sp
cos ϕ
sp
−sin ϕ
sp
cos ϕ
sp
1


,
K
p
c2
= k
p


−cos ϕ
p
sin ϕ
p
0
−sin ϕ
p
−cos ϕ
p
0
0 −1 0


,
K
p
r2
= k
rp
(t)


−sin ϕ
rp
sin α
r
sin ϕ
rp
cos α
r
sin ϕ
rp
cos ϕ
rp
sin α
r
−cos ϕ
rp
cos α
r
−cos ϕ
rp
sin α
r
−cos α
r
−1


,
K
p
s2
= k
sp
(t)


sin ϕ
sp
sin α
s
sin ϕ
sp
cos α
s
−sinϕ
sp
−cos ϕ
sp
sin α
s
−cos ϕ
sp
cos α
s
−cos ϕ
sp
−sin α
s
−cos α
s
1


.
The external torques applied to the system are C
c
, C
r
, C
s
on the
carrier, the ring, and the sun (time constant), respectively. The
corresponding forces are:
T(t) = 0, 0, T
c
, 0, 0, T
r
, 0, 0, T
s
, 0, . . ., 0
T
where T
j
= C
j
/r
j
, j = c, r, s.
F(t) is the exciting force induced by the transmission error. It
can be written as:
F(t) = 0, F
c
, F
s
, F
1
, . . ., F
N

T
Its components are expressed by:
F
c
= k
rp
(t)e
rp
(t)
_
sin ϕ
rp
, −cos ϕ
rp
, −1
_
T
F
s
= k
sp
(t)e
sp
(t)
_
sin ϕ
sp
, −cos ϕ
sp
, −1
_
T
F
p
= k
rp
(t)e
rp
(t) −sinα
r
, sin α
r
, 1
T
+k
sp
(t)e
sp
(t) sin α
s
, cos α
s
, −1
T
, p = 1. . .N
3 Modal analysis
To compute the eigenvalues, only the mean value K of K
e
(t) is
considered. For low speeds of the carrier, the gyroscopic effect
can be neglected, whereas for high speeds, it must be taken into
account. The transmission error is considered here.
3.1 Gyroscopic effect neglected
The equation of the movement can be written as:
M ¨ x +
_
K
b
+ K
_
x = T (6)
The eigenvalue problem is:
ω
2
i

i
=
_
K
b
+ K
_
φ
i
(7)
where φ
i
is the eigenvalue vector and ω
i
the corresponding
eigenfrequency.
The planetary gear train considered has a fixed ring and four
satellites. The input element is the sun gear and the output elem-
ent is the carrier. In case 1 of Table 2, some eigenfrequencies of
this train having parameters specified in Table 1 are presented.
Remarkable modal properties are recovered for this transmis-
sion set [3]. They are summed up as follows:
• Six distinct natural frequencies. The corresponding eigenval-
ues show purely rotational movement of the carrier, the ring,
Table 1. Parameters of the planetary gear model
Sun Ring Carrier Planet
Teeth number 30 70 – 20
Module 1.7 1.7 1.7
Teeth width (mm) 25 25 25
Mass (kg) 0.46 0.588 3 0.177
I/r
2
(kg) 0.272 0.759 1.5 0.1
Base radius (m) 0.024 0.056 – 0.016
Helix angle 0

0

0

Gearmesh stiffness (N/m) k
Sp
= k
rp
= 2.10
8
Bearing stiffness (N/m) k
p
= k
Su,v
= k
ru,v
= 10
8
Torsional stiffness (N/m) k
rw
= 10
9
; k
Sw
= k
Cw
= 0
Pressure angle α
S
= α
r
= 21.34

741
Table 2. Eigenfrequencies for the two cases of neglected and non-neglected
gyroscopic effect (in Hz)
Mode type Case 1: Case 2: Case 3:

c
= 0 Ω
c
= 857 rpm Ω
c
= 1285 rpm
1986 1981
Translational 1998
2010 2015
Rotational 3166 3166 3167
3934 3933
Translational 3938
3942 3943
Planet 7998 7998 7998
Rotational 8889 8889 8889
Planet 10490 10490 10490
and the sun. The four satellites move identically and in phase.
These modes are called rotational modes.
• Six natural frequencies having a multiplicity m = 2. The car-
rier, the ring, and the sun have pure translational movement
in the corresponding modes. These modes are called transla-
tional modes.
• Three distinct natural frequencies. The carrier, the ring, and
the sun do not move; only motion of the planets occurs. The
corresponding vibratory modes are called planet modes.
Examples of modal deflections are shown in Fig. 2.
3.2 Sensitivity of eigenvalues to carrier angular speed
In this section, the gyroscopic matrix will be taken into account
in the studied system. The equation of motion is:
M ¨ x +Ω
c
G ˙ x +
_
K
b
+ K −Ω
2
c
K

_
x = T + F(t) (8)
Fig. 2. Modal deflections for the three types of modes
The corresponding eigenvalue problem is:
_
−ω
2
i
M+ jΩ
c

i
+
_
K
b
+ K −Ω
2
c
K

__
φ
i
= 0 (9)
In this problem, equations are coupled due to the antisymmet-
ric gyroscopic matrix G in addition to the symmetric stiffness
matrix. This effect is induced by the angular carrier speed and
results in an alteration observed in the dynamic behavior of the
system.
To show the influence of the gyroscopic effect on the eigen-
values, a study of eigensensitivity to carrier angular speed is
made in this section.
Problems of eigensensitivity have been studied extensively in
the literature [7, 8]. The main scope of this study is a follow-up
of the variation of eigenvalues with respect to model parame-
ters. In our case, an important parameter that alters the vibratory
response is the gyroscopic effect, which occurs as the carrier an-
gular speed Ω
c
increases.
The scripts ( )

denote the first derivative of the eigenvalues
with respect to Ω
c
. Let an eigenvalue ω
i
having a multiplicity
m and Γ = [γ
1
, . . ., γ
m
] be the corresponding eigenvectors with
norm Γ
T
MΓ = I
m×m
. The derivation of Eq. 9 with respect to Ω
c
yields:
_
K −ω
2
i
M + jΩ
c

i
_
φ

i
+
_
−2ω
i
ω

i
M + jω
i
G + jΩ
c

i
_
φ
i
= 0 (10)
if Ω
c
= 0 we get:
_
K −ω
2
i
M
_
φ

i
=
_

i
ω

i
M− jω
i
G
_
φ
i
= f (11)
f is a Hermitian eigenvalue [7] with φ
i
= Γa
i
. Multiplying the
left side of
_

i
ω

i
M− jω
i
G
_
φ
i
by Γ
T
gives:
Γ
T
i
_

i
ω

i
M − jω
i
G
_
Γ
i
a
i
= 0 (12)

i
Γ
T
i

i
a
i
= jΓ
T
i

i
a
i
(13)
The Hermitian eigenvalue problem is:
Da
i
= ω

i
a
i
with D =
1
2

T
GΓ (14)
The eigenfrequency ω
i
at a given carrier speed Ω
c
is obtained
by the first order Taylor expansion:
ω
i
−ω
i0
= (Ω
c
−Ω
c0
) ω

i
(15)
If Ω
c0
= 0 and ω
i0
is the corresponding eigenfrequency, we
have:
ω
i
= ω
i0
+Ω
c
ω

i
(16)
For the studied case of the planetary gear, the three types of
modes are recovered:
742
Fig. 3. Variation of eigenfrequencies with respect to carrier speed
• For rotational modes, the eigenfrequencies are distinct, and
we always have γ
T
i

i
= 0. Then applying Eq. 14, we get
ω

i
= 0, which implies that rotational modes are not sensitive
to the variation of Ω
c
.
• For planet modes and for a group of eigenvectors γ
1
. . .γ
m
,
we always get γ
T
i

i
= 0 and γ
T
i

j
= 0, which implies
also that planet modes are not sensitive to the variation of Ω
c
.
• For translational modes, which are in pairs (having eigenvec-
tors γ
1
et γ
2
):
ω

i1
=
1
2
γ
T
1

2
and ω

i2
=
1
2
γ
T
2

1
= −ω

i1
Then ω

i1,2
= ±
1
2
γ
1

2
. (17)
In cases 2 and 3 of Table 2, we present the evolution of eigen-
frequencies due to the gyroscopic effect for an angular speed of
the carrier Ω
c
= 1285 rpm and Ω
c
= 857 rpm.
We note that for high speeds of the carrier, the translational
eigenfrequencies bifurcate into two distinct ones, whereas planet
and rotational eigenfrequencies remain constant. The bifurcation
increases as Ω
c
increases.
Figure 3 represents this bifurcation for a set of carrier speeds
varying up to 4000 rpm and for the three types of modes. Modes
(2, 3), (4, 5), (6, 7), and (11, 12) are translational modes. Modes
(8, 10) are rotational modes. Mode (9) is a planet mode.
4 Dynamic response
4.1 Resolution method
Several diagrams of integration of the Eq. 3 are found in litera-
ture. The most well-known is the implicit algorithm of Newmark.
However the solution is always given in the time domain, and
the frequency response is obtained by the Fourier transform. This
method needs initial conditions and significant calculation time.
The use of Fourier space is an interesting alternative for the
survey of dynamic behavior of the planetary gear. The method
developed by Perret-Liaudet [9], gives the response directly in
the frequency domain. A suitable transformation of the equation
of motion is made: the response is divided into a DC component
x
0
and a dynamic component x
d
:
x = x
0
+x
d
(18)
The static response is obtained from the equation:
¯
Kx
0
= T (19)
where
¯
K is the mean value of the stiffness matrix of the system
expressed by:
¯
K = K
b
+ K −Ω
2
c
K

(20)
where K is given by Eq. 5.
The contribution of the transmission error will be added later.
The excitation is due to the time-varying of gearmesh stiffness.
A proportional damping is considered [10]
C = 0.03M +0.03K (21)
Rewriting Eq. 8 by taking in account the transformation
yields:
M
_
¨ x
0
+ ¨ x
d
_
+(Ω
c
G +C) ( ˙ x
0
+ ˙ x
d
)
+
_
K
p
+ K + K(t) −Ω
2
c
K

_
(x
0
+x
d
) = T (22)
The dynamic component of the response x
d
can be represented
by the generalized coordinates q
d
, so we can write:
x = x
0
+φq
d
(23)
Rearranging Eq. 22 by eliminating of the static component and
taking in account Eq. 23 gives:
φ
T
Mφ ¨ q
d

T
(Ω
c
G +C) φ ˙ q
d

T
_
K
p
+ K
e
(t) −Ω
2
c
K

_
φq
d
= −φ
T
K(t)x
0
(24)
Writing Eq. 24 in the frequency domain yields:
¨ q
d
(ω) = H(ω)
_
¨t(ω) − jωΩ
c
3(N+3)

m=1;k=1
_
φ
T

_
mk
¨q
dk
(ω)

3(N+3)

m=1;k=1
+∞
_
−∞
e
−jωt
_
φ
T
K(t)φ
_
mk
q
dk
(t)dt
_
(25)
where ¨ q
d
(ω) represents the Fourier transform of q
d
,
H(ω) =
_
−ω
2
φ
T
Mφ+φ
T
¯
Kφ+ jωφ
T

_
−1
, (26)
and ¨t
j
(ω) represents the Fourier transform of φ
T
K(t)x
0
.
743
Eq. 25 can be written as:
¨ q
d
(ω) = H(ω)
_
¨t(ω) − jωΩ
c
φ
T
Gφ¨ q
d
(ω) −
¨
K(ω) ⊗ ¨ q
d
(ω)
_
(27)
where ⊗ denotes convolution.
¨
K(ω) is the Fourier transform of
φ
T
K(t)φ.
The resolution is driven iteratively by successive approxima-
tions beginning with an initial solution given by:
¨ q
d
(0)
(ω) = H(ω)¨t(ω) (28)
The operand ∆ is introduced:
∆(•) = −H(ω)
_
jωΩ
c
φ
T
Gφ(•) +
¨
K(ω) ⊗(•)
_
(29)
Applying this to Eq. 27, we get:
¨ q
d
(ω) = ¨ q
d
(0)
(ω) +∆( ¨ q
d
(ω)) (30)
By successive replacement of ¨ q
d
(ω) and a truncation to order
“h,” we have:
¨ q
d
(ω)
(h)
=
(+h)

k=0

(k)
_
¨ q
d
(0)
(ω)
_
(31)
where:
_

(0)
_
¨ q
d
(0)
(ω)
_
= ¨ q
d
(0)
(ω)

(k+1)
(•) = −H(ω)
_
jωΩ
c
φ
T
Gφ∆
(k)
(•) +
¨
K(ω) ⊗∆
(k)
(•)
_
(32)
Fig. 4a,b. Frequency re-
sponse (a) and time re-
sponse (b) of the dynamic
component of the carrier
bearing displacement ( f
e
=
1000 Hz)
Fig. 5a,b. Frequency re-
sponse (a) and time re-
sponse (b) of the dynamic
component of the first planet
bearing tangential displace-
ment ( f
e
= 1500 Hz)
The iterations are stopped and the frequency solution is obtained
by reaching an imposed small error between iterations.
4.2 Dynamic response of a healthy planetary gear
The fixed carrier planetary gear is supposed to be healthy. There
are transmission errors in the system F(t) = 0. The simulations
are done with two gearmesh frequencies f
e
= 1000 Hz (Ω
c
=
857 rpm) and f
e
= 1500 Hz (Ω
c
= 1285 rpm). A constant torque
of 1000 Nm is applied to sun gear; N = 4. The response on the
different bearings will be discussed.
Figure 4 represents the dynamic component of the frequency
response and the time response registered on the carrier (output
element).
Figure 5 represents the dynamic component of the frequency
response and the time response registered on the bearing of the
first planet.
It is found that the frequency response is dominated by the
gearmesh frequency and its harmonics. It is noticed that for
a healthy train, the carrier bearing is not loaded much. How-
ever, the planet bearing is loaded much more, especially in
the tangential direction. The input torque is transmitted through
the rotational degrees of freedom, which explains the light dis-
placement on the sun and carrier bearings (e.g., the carrier
bearing response given by the equation of motion isn’t di-
rectly affected by gearmesh variation but is lightly influenced by
the coupling terms due to other degree-of-freedom responses).
In general, perfect manufactured planetary gears have a low
vibratory level.
744
4.3 Effect of run-out error on dynamic response
The transmission is now assumed to have an eccentricity on the
sun gear. The eccentricity expresses the difference between the
theoretical and the real rotational axis (Fig. 6). This defect is
introduced by adding a transmission error modeled as displace-
ment on the line of action of the sun-planet gearmesh.
The introduction of this displacement in the equation of
motion yields to an exciting force, which represents an ampli-
tude modulation of the gearmesh stiffness by the eccentricity
error [11, 12].
Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the eccentricity on the sun gear
Fig. 7a,b. Frequency re-
sponse of the dynamic com-
ponent of the tangential dis-
placement of the bearing of
the second planet (a) and
the corresponding time sig-
nal (b) for e
s
=20 µm ( f
e
=
1500 Hz)
Fig. 8a,b. Frequency re-
sponse of the dynamic com-
ponent of the displacement
of the bearing of the carrier
(a) and the corresponding
time signal (b) for e
s
=
200 µm ( f
e
= 1500 Hz)
It is expressed by:
F(t) = e
sn
(t)K
e
(t) (33)
e
sn
(t) = e
s
sin
_
2π f
e
Z
s
t +ξ
sn
_
(34)
where e
s
is the eccentricity modulus, Z
s
is the tooth number of
the sun, and ξ
sn
is the phase difference between sun and planets
gearmesh. The defect frequency is:
f
d
=
f
e
Z
s
(35)
Figure 7 represents the response for an eccentricity e
s
=
20 µm of the dynamic component of the first planet bearing’s
tangential displacement.
We note an amplitude modulation of the gearmesh signal by
the eccentricity signal, which results into two sidebands around
the gearmesh frequency and its harmonics in addition of the pri-
mary defect frequency f
d
.
For the critical value of 200 µm, the gearmesh signal will be
drowned in the defect signal and the transmission will work very
poorly as shown on Figs. 8 and 9. All of the bearings will be af-
fected due to the severity of the defect, especially those of the
planets due to the exciting force expressed by Eq. 33.
4.4 Effect of a profile error on the dynamic response
Generally, profile errors are induced by the manufacturing pro-
cess, And they result in imperfections of the geometry of the
745
Fig. 9a,b. Frequency re-
sponse of the dynamic com-
ponent of the radial dis-
placement of the bearing of
the second planet (a) and
the corresponding time sig-
nal (b) for e
s
= 200 µm
( f
e
= 1500 Hz)
tooth and deviations from the perfect involute shape [13–15].
The defect considered here is similar for all teeth. The defect
frequency is equal to that of gearmesh f
e
.
Figure 10 is a schematic diagram of a profile error.
As for the eccentricity, the profile defect introduced on the
sun gear is modeled by a displacement on the line of action of the
sun-planet gearmesh. An exciting force F(t) represents an ampli-
Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of a profile error
Fig. 11a–c. Influence of a pro-
file error on the dynamic com-
ponent of the carrier bearing
displacement spectrum ( f
e
=
1000 Hz).
a Healthy gear. b Profile error
of 20 µm. c Profile error of
200 µm
tude modulation of the gearmesh stiffness signal by the profile
error signal E
s
(t).
It is expressed by:
F(t) = E
sn
(t)K
e
(t) (36)
E
s
(t) =

m=1
E
sm
sin (2πm f
e
t +ξ
sn
) (37)
E
sm
represents the profile error modulus.
Figures 11 and 12 represent the difference between the per-
turbations of the responses for a healthy system and for a system
with profile errors on the sun gear teeth. Simulations are done
with profile errors of 20 µm and 200 µm. The gearmesh frequen-
cies are always f
e
= 1000 Hz or f
e
= 1500 Hz.
We notice the increase of the amplitude of the primary
gearmesh frequency due to the amplitude modulation effect. The
amplitudes of the harmonics change slightly.
746
Fig. 12a–c. Influence of a profile
error on the dynamic compon-
ent of the second planet bearing
displacement spectrum ( f
e
=
1500 Hz).
a Healthy gear. b Profile error of
20 µm. c Profile error of 200 µm
5 Conclusions
In this paper, a plane model of a planetarygear trainwas developed
in order to investigate the influence of manufacturing errors on
the dynamic behavior of a planetary gear. The modal analysis of
the adoptedmodel showedparticular eigenfrequencies: rotational,
translational, and planet modes. Only translational modes are af-
fected by gyroscopic effects – the frequencies bifurcate into two
distinct frequencies –whereas rotational and planet didn’t change.
A spectral iterative method was used to obtain the dynamic
response. This method was efficient in calculation times. The
excitation was induced by gearmesh stiffness. A low vibratory
level was observed for a healthy, perfectly designed and mounted
planetary gear. The presence of eccentricity or profile errors
significantly alters the dynamic behavior. A modulation of the
gearmesh signal by the defect signal is observed for an eccen-
tricity – this produced sidebands around gearmesh and around its
harmonics. An increase of the gearmesh frequency amplitude was
found for a profile error. High values of these errors, which mean
poorly manufactured gears, will have dramatic consequences on
the transmission. These surveys allow us to get a first idea of the
characterization of the dynamic behavior of planetary gears in
presence of such manufacturing errors. Future work will include
investigating the influence of assembling errors in the model.
References
1. Cunliffe F, Smith JD, Welbourn DB (1974) Dynamic tooth loads in
epicyclic gears. J Eng Ind 94:578–584
2. Kahraman A (1994) Load sharing characteristics of planetary transmis-
sions. Mech Mach Theory 29:1151–1165
3. Lin J, Parker RG (1999) Analytical characterization of the unique prop-
erties of planetary gear free vibration. J Vib Acoust 121:316–321
4. Velex P, Flamand L (1996) Dynamic response of planetary trains to
mesh parametric excitations. ASME J Mech Des 118:7–14
5. Saada A, Velex P (1995) An extended model for the analysis of the
dynamics of planetary trains. ASME J Mech Des 117:241–247
6. Fakhfakh T, Chaari F, Haddar M (2003) Etude num´ erique et exp´ erimen-
tale du comportement dynamique d’une transmission par engrenages
en pr´ esence de d´ efauts de dentures. In: 16ième Congès Français de
m´ ecanique, Nice, 1–5 September 2003
7. Friswell MI (1996) The derivatives of repeated eigenvalues and their
associated eigenvectors. J Vib Acoust 118:390–397
8. Lin J, Parker RJ (1999) Sensitivity of planetary gear natural frequen-
cies and vibration modes to model parameters. J Sound Vib 228(1):
109–128
9. Perret-Liaudet J (1996) An original method for computing the re-
sponse of a parametrically excited forced system. J Sound Vib 196:
165–177
10. Kasuba R, August R (1984) Gear mesh stiffness and load sharing
in planetary gearing. In: ASME 4th Power Transmission Conference,
Cambridge, MA, ASME Paper 84-DET-229
11. Hidaka T, Terauchi Y, Dohi K (1979) On the relation between the run-
out errors and the motion of the center of sun gear in a Stoeckicht
planetary gear. Bull JSME 22(167):748–754
12. Hidaka T, Terauchi Y, Fujii M (1980) Analysis of dynamic tooth load
on planetary gear. Bull JSME 23(176):315–323
13. Wajag P, Kahraman A (2002) Influence of tooth profile modification on
helical gear durability. ASME J Mech Des 124:501–510
14. Ma P, Botman M (1984) Load sharing in a planetary gear stage in the
presence of gear errors and misalignment. J Mech Transm Automat Des
104:1–7
15. Bodas A, Kahraman A (2001) Influence of carrier and gear manufac-
turing errors on the static planet load sharing behavior of planetary
gear sets. In: Proceedings of the JSME International Conference on
Motion and Power Transmissions, Fukuoka, Japan, November 15–17
2001

. r j is the base radius. ⎥ ⎣ 0 0 0 0 .. Bearings are modeled by linear springs. 1. which is the gyroscopic matrix. . r. u 1 . It is expressed by: x = u c . Applying Lagrange formulation allow us to recover the equations of motions of the 3N + 9 degrees of freedom of the system. ⎦ . ⎦ ⎣ 0 . the maximum (1) (3) . j = c. . s. αs and αr respectively denote the pressure angles of the sun and the ring gears. ws . a square waveform is adopted to express this variation [6]. vs . The centripetal stiffness K Ω matrix is expressed by: ⎤ ⎡ 0 0 0 0 K Ωc 0 ⎢ 0 K Ωr 0 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 0 0 K Ωs 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ KΩ = ⎢ 0 0 0 K Ω1 0 0 ⎥. i. 0 0 0 0 · · · GN ⎤ ⎡ 0 −2m j 0 0 0⎦ . . . and planets ( p) are considered as rigid bodies. vN . N with G j = ⎣2m j 0 0 0 The bearing stiffness matrix K b is written as: ⎡ ⎡ ⎤ ⎤ 0 K cb 0 k ju 0 0 K b = ⎣ 0 K rb 0 ⎦ . Translations are measured with respect to the frame (O. N 0 0 I j /r j2 Fig. 1. w1 . can be expressed by: ⎡ ⎤ Gc 0 0 0 0 0 ⎢ 0 Gr 0 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 0 0 Gs 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ G = ⎢ 0 0 0 G1 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ . Generally. ⎥ . ⎦ .. u r . It is expressed by: ⎤ ⎡ Mc 0 0 0 0 0 ⎢ 0 Mr 0 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 0 0 Ms 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ M = ⎢ 0 0 0 M1 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ . 1. it can be introduced in parallel with gearmesh and bearing stiffness. Damping is not considered here. . vr . . . The matrix G. ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ . Circumferential planet positions are specified by the fixed angles ϕ p measured relatively to the rotating frame with ϕ1 = 0. v1 . Radial and tangential coordinates u p . u s . N ). 0 0 0 0 . . where K jb = ⎣ 0 k jv 0 ⎦ 0 0 K sb 0 0 k jw and k ju . 0 0 0 0 · · · MN ⎡ ⎤ 0 mj 0 with M j = ⎣ 0 m j 0 ⎦ . . vc . wr . k jw represent the bearing stiffness along the three degrees of freedom: j = c. The displacements δsp and δsp along the lines of action are expressed by [5]: δsp = vs cos ϕsp − u s sin ϕsp − u p sin αs − v p cos αs + ws + w p + esp (t) δr p = vr cos ϕr p − u c sin ϕr p + u p sin αr − v p cos αr + wr − w p + er p (t) (2) with ϕsp = ϕ p − αs and ϕr p = ϕ p + αr . u N .. nevertheless. Assembling the equations in matrix form leads to the global equation of motion of the system: 2 M x + Ωc G x + K b + K e (t) − Ωc K Ω x = T + F(t) ¨ ˙ I j is the inertial moment of the jth element with respect to its rotational axis. 1. k jv .. . K ΩN ⎤ ⎡ mj 0 0 where K Ω j = ⎣ 0 m j 0⎦ 0 0 0 The gearmesh stiffness matrix is time-varying.739 where x represents the vector of the degrees of freedom. r. wc . ⎥ ⎣ 0 0 0 0 . . . esp (t) and er p (t) represent the transmission error of the sun-planet gearmesh and the planet-ring gearmesh. . wN T (4) M represents the mass matrix. carrier (c). s... r. j = c.. s. k) fixed to the carrier and rotating with a constant angular speed Ωc in relation to a stationary reference frame. s. . j.. respectively. v j and one rotation w j . Each component has three degrees of freedom: two translations u i . . with w j = r j θ j ( j = c. Model of the train sun (s). 0 0 0 . . ring (r). v p describe planet deflections. r. The gearmesh is modeled by linear springs acting on the lines of action..

024 0◦ Ring Carrier Planet The external torques applied to the system are Cc . . Cr . Tr . k Sw = kCw = 0 α S = αr = 21. ⎣ . 0.. r. − sin αs − cos αs 1 ⎤ ⎡ 2α − cos αr sin αr − sin αr sin r p K r3 = kr p (t) ⎣− cos αr sin αr cos2 αr cos αr ⎦ .5 0. Remarkable modal properties are recovered for this transmission set [3].272 0.. 0 0 0 ⎡ ⎤ − sin ϕsp cos ϕsp ⎦ .. whereas for high speeds.1 0. − cos ϕsp . . K c1 = k p ⎣ 0 − sin ϕ p cos ϕ p 1 ⎤ ⎡ 2ϕ − cos ϕr p cos αr sin ϕr p sin r p p K r1 = kr p (t) ⎣− cos ϕr p cos αr cos2 ϕr p cos ϕr p ⎦ . some eigenfrequencies of this train having parameters specified in Table 1 are presented.v = kru. respectively.7 25 0. Ts . . 0 −1 0 ⎡ − sin ϕr p sin αr sin ϕr p cos αr p K r2 = kr p (t) ⎣ cos ϕr p sin αr − cos ϕr p cos αr sin αr − cos αr ⎡ sin ϕsp cos αs sin ϕsp sin αs p K s2 = ksp (t) ⎣− cos ϕsp sin αs − cos ϕsp cos αs − sin αs − cos αs p K s1 ⎤ kp 0 0 p K c3 = ⎣ 0 k p 0⎦ .46 0. 1 Table 1. 0. . .177 0. . FN T (5) Its components are expressed by: ··· ··· ··· 0 0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ . 0. cos αs . it must be taken into account. ⎤ sin ϕr p − cos ϕr p ⎦ . only the mean value K of K e (t) is considered. − sin αr cos αr 1 ⎤ ⎡ 1 0 − sin ϕ p p 1 cos ϕ p ⎦ . 3. Tc . the gyroscopic effect can be neglected. 0. . p = 1.7 1. . j = c. . 0 where Tj = C j /r j .108 k p = k Su. . In case 1 of Table 2. . 1 where φi is the eigenvalue vector and ωi the corresponding eigenfrequency.740 value represents the gearmesh stiffness of two pairs in contact. and the sun (time constant).759 1.588 3 0. . The planetary gear train considered has a fixed ring and four satellites. . Cs on the carrier. Parameters of the planetary gear model Sun Teeth number Module Teeth width (mm) Mass (kg) I/r 2 (kg) Base radius (m) Helix angle Gearmesh stiffness (N/m) Bearing stiffness (N/m) Torsional stiffness (N/m) Pressure angle 30 1.1 Gyroscopic effect neglected The equation of the movement can be written as: M x + Kb + K x = T ¨ The eigenvalue problem is: ω2 Mφi = K b + K φi i (7) (6) The components of this matrix are: ⎡ K p = K c3 + K r3 + K s3 . It can be written as: F(t) = 0. −1 . The transmission error is considered here. − cos ϕr p .7 25 25 0. the ring. s.N . N K c2 p K c1 F(t) is the exciting force induced by the transmission error.056 – 0. sin αr . sin ϕr p cos ϕr p 1 − cos ϕsp sin ϕsp sin2 ϕsp ⎣− cos ϕsp sin ϕsp = ksp (t) cos2 ϕsp − sin ϕsp cos ϕsp ⎤ ⎡ − cos ϕ p sin ϕ p 0 p K c2 = k p ⎣ − sin ϕ p − cos ϕ p 0⎦ . 0 ⎦ 0 KN N⎤ K c2 N K r2 ⎥ ⎥ N⎥ K s2 ⎥ ⎥ Fc = kr p (t)er p (t) sin ϕr p . the minimum value represents single-pair gearmesh stiffness. The input element is the sun gear and the output element is the carrier. −1 Fp = kr p (t)er p (t) − sin αr . The corresponding forces are: T(t) = 0. 1 T T T T 0 p K r1 0 1 K r2 . For low speeds of the carrier. 0. ⎡ p K s3 p p p ⎤ cos αs sin αs − sin αs sin2 αs 2α = ksp (t) ⎣cos αs sin αs cos s − cos αs ⎦ . . the ring. Fc . −1 ⎤ − sin ϕsp − cos ϕsp ⎦ .016 0◦ 0◦ k S p = kr p = 2. They are summed up as follows: • Six distinct natural frequencies. N K r2 1 0 K c2 1 0 K r2 p 1 K s1 K s2 1 K s2 K 1 + ksp (t)esp (t) sin αs . F1 . Fs . The corresponding eigenvalues show purely rotational movement of the carrier. −1 Fs = ksp (t)esp (t) sin ϕsp . T 70 – 20 1. It can be divided into a mean matrix and a time varying matrix: K e (t) = K + K(t) K e (t) is expressed by: ⎡ ⎢ 0 ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ 0 K e (t) = ⎢ 1 ⎢ K c2 ⎢ ⎢ . 0.v = 108 krw = 109 . N K s2 0 0 3 Modal analysis To compute the eigenvalues.34◦ .

. and the sun have pure translational movement in the corresponding modes. 3. The equation of motion is: 2 M x + Ωc G x + K b + K − Ωc K Ω x = T + F(t) ¨ ˙ In this problem. These modes are called rotational modes. The derivation of Eq. Eigenfrequencies for the two cases of neglected and non-neglected gyroscopic effect (in Hz) Mode type Case 1: Ωc = 0 1998 3166 3938 7998 8889 10490 Case 2: Ωc = 857 rpm 1986 2010 3166 3934 3942 7998 8889 10490 Case 3: Ωc = 1285 rpm 1981 2015 3167 3933 3943 7998 8889 10490 The corresponding eigenvalue problem is: 2 −ω2 M + jΩc Gωi + K b + K − Ωc K Ω i φi = 0 (9) Translational Rotational Translational Planet Rotational Planet and the sun.. The carrier. The scripts ( ) denote the first derivative of the eigenvalues with respect to Ωc .2 Sensitivity of eigenvalues to carrier angular speed In this section. Multiplying the left side of 2ωi ωi M − jωi G φi by Γ T gives: ΓiT 2ωi ωi M − jωi G Γi ai = 0 2ωi ΓiT MΓi ai = jΓiT GΓi ai (12) (13) The Hermitian eigenvalue problem is: Dai = ωi ai with D = 1 T jΓ GΓ 2 (14) The eigenfrequency ωi at a given carrier speed Ωc is obtained by the first order Taylor expansion: ωi − ωi0 = (Ωc − Ωc0 ) ωi (15) If Ωc0 = 0 and ωi0 is the corresponding eigenfrequency. and the sun do not move. which occurs as the carrier angular speed Ωc increases. • Three distinct natural frequencies. To show the influence of the gyroscopic effect on the eigenvalues. . The four satellites move identically and in phase. Examples of modal deflections are shown in Fig. This effect is induced by the angular carrier speed and results in an alteration observed in the dynamic behavior of the system. the ring. 2. Modal deflections for the three types of modes For the studied case of the planetary gear.741 Table 2. the gyroscopic matrix will be taken into account in the studied system. γm ] be the corresponding eigenvectors with norm Γ T MΓ = Im×m . The corresponding vibratory modes are called planet modes. The main scope of this study is a follow-up of the variation of eigenvalues with respect to model parameters. 9 with respect to Ωc yields: K − ω2 M + jΩc Gωi φi i + −2ωi ωi M + jωi G + jΩc Gωi φi = 0 if Ωc = 0 we get: K − ω2 M φi = 2ωi ωi M − jωi G φi = f i (11) (10) (8) f is a Hermitian eigenvalue [7] with φi = Γai . The carrier. the three types of modes are recovered: . 2. the ring. only motion of the planets occurs. 8]. a study of eigensensitivity to carrier angular speed is made in this section. we have: ωi = ωi0 + Ωc ωi (16) Fig. equations are coupled due to the antisymmetric gyroscopic matrix G in addition to the symmetric stiffness matrix. These modes are called translational modes. Problems of eigensensitivity have been studied extensively in the literature [7. . • Six natural frequencies having a multiplicity m = 2. an important parameter that alters the vibratory response is the gyroscopic effect. In our case. Let an eigenvalue ωi having a multiplicity m and Γ = [γ1 .

(26) and t j (ω) represents the Fourier transform of φ T K(t)x0 . (6. the eigenfrequencies are distinct. 24 in the frequency domain yields: 3(N+3) qd (ω) = H(ω) t(ω) − jωΩc φ T Gφ 4 Dynamic response 4. and (11. 3. which implies also that planet modes are not sensitive to the variation of Ωc . The excitation is due to the time-varying of gearmesh stiffness.03M + 0. 8 by taking in account the transformation yields: M x0 + xd + (Ωc G + C) (x0 + xd ) ˙ ¨ ˙ ¨ 2 + K p + K + K(t) − Ωc K Ω (x0 + xd ) = T (22) 1 Then ωi1. and the frequency response is obtained by the Fourier transform. we present the evolution of eigenfrequencies due to the gyroscopic effect for an angular speed of the carrier Ωc = 1285 rpm and Ωc = 857 rpm. we always get γiT Gγi = 0 and γiT Gγ j = 0. 23 gives: φ T Mφqd + φ T (Ωc G + C) φqd ¨ ˙ 2 + φ T K p + K e (t) − Ωc K Ω φqd = −φ T K(t)x0 (24) Writing Eq.γm . the translational eigenfrequencies bifurcate into two distinct ones. • For translational modes. 3). Then applying Eq. The bifurcation increases as Ωc increases. . 5). . The contribution of the transmission error will be added later. we get ωi = 0. H(ω) = −ω2 φ T Mφ + φ T K φ + jωφ T Cφ −1 . 5. 3 are found in literature. The method − m=1. so we can write: x = x0 + φqd (23) In cases 2 and 3 of Table 2.742 developed by Perret-Liaudet [9]. Variation of eigenfrequencies with respect to carrier speed 2 K = K b + K − Ωc K Ω (20) • For rotational modes. 14. Figure 3 represents this bifurcation for a set of carrier speeds varying up to 4000 rpm and for the three types of modes.03K (21) Rewriting Eq. A proportional damping is considered [10] C = 0. 7). Modes (2. which are in pairs (having eigenvectors γ1 et γ2 ): 1 T ωi1 = γ1 Gγ2 2 1 T and ωi2 = γ2 Gγ1 = −ωi1 2 (17) where K is given by Eq. However the solution is always given in the time domain. This method needs initial conditions and significant calculation time. 12) are translational modes. gives the response directly in the frequency domain.k=1−∞ mk qdk (t)dt (25) where qd (ω) represents the Fourier transform of qd .k=1 3(N+3) +∞ − jωt mk qdk (ω) e φ T K(t)φ m=1. A suitable transformation of the equation of motion is made: the response is divided into a DC component x0 and a dynamic component xd : x = x0 + xd The static response is obtained from the equation: K x0 = T (19) (18) where K is the mean value of the stiffness matrix of the system expressed by: Fig. 22 by eliminating of the static component and taking in account Eq. (4. which implies that rotational modes are not sensitive to the variation of Ωc . The most well-known is the implicit algorithm of Newmark. Rearranging Eq.2 = ± γ1 Gγ2 .1 Resolution method Several diagrams of integration of the Eq. We note that for high speeds of the carrier. The use of Fourier space is an interesting alternative for the survey of dynamic behavior of the planetary gear. Mode (9) is a planet mode. • For planet modes and for a group of eigenvectors γ1 . Modes (8. 2 The dynamic component of the response xd can be represented by the generalized coordinates qd . and we always have γiT Gγi = 0. . 10) are rotational modes. whereas planet and rotational eigenfrequencies remain constant.

perfect manufactured planetary gears have a low vibratory level. In general. However. A constant torque of 1000 Nm is applied to sun gear. The input torque is transmitted through the rotational degrees of freedom. Figure 5 represents the dynamic component of the frequency response and the time response registered on the bearing of the first planet.g.2 Dynamic response of a healthy planetary gear The fixed carrier planetary gear is supposed to be healthy. the carrier bearing response given by the equation of motion isn’t directly affected by gearmesh variation but is lightly influenced by the coupling terms due to other degree-of-freedom responses). 25 can be written as: qd (ω) = H(ω) t(ω) − jωΩcφ T Gφqd (ω) − K (ω) ⊗ qd (ω) (27) where ⊗ denotes convolution.. 5a. which explains the light displacement on the sun and carrier bearings (e. especially in the tangential direction. The resolution is driven iteratively by successive approximations beginning with an initial solution given by: qd (0) (ω) = H(ω)t(ω) The operand ∆ is introduced: ∆(•) = −H(ω) jωΩcφ T Gφ(•) + K (ω) ⊗ (•) Applying this to Eq. Frequency response (a) and time response (b) of the dynamic component of the carrier bearing displacement ( f e = 1000 Hz) Fig.b. we get: qd (ω) = qd (0) (ω) + ∆ (qd (ω)) (30) (29) (28) The iterations are stopped and the frequency solution is obtained by reaching an imposed small error between iterations. It is found that the frequency response is dominated by the gearmesh frequency and its harmonics. There are transmission errors in the system F(t) = 0. Figure 4 represents the dynamic component of the frequency response and the time response registered on the carrier (output element). the planet bearing is loaded much more.” we have: qd (ω)(h) = where: ∆(0) qd (0) (ω) = qd (0) (ω) ∆(k+1) (•) = −H(ω) jωΩcφ T Gφ∆(k) (•) + K (ω) ⊗ ∆(k) (•) (32) (+h) k=0 ∆(k) qd (0) (ω) (31) Fig.b.743 Eq. By successive replacement of qd (ω) and a truncation to order “h. 27. N = 4. 4a. K (ω) is the Fourier transform of φ T K(t)φ. 4. It is noticed that for a healthy train. The simulations are done with two gearmesh frequencies f e = 1000 Hz (Ωc = 857 rpm) and fe = 1500 Hz (Ωc = 1285 rpm). Frequency response (a) and time response (b) of the dynamic component of the first planet bearing tangential displacement ( f e = 1500 Hz) . the carrier bearing is not loaded much. The response on the different bearings will be discussed.

And they result in imperfections of the geometry of the Fig. 6). 12]. All of the bearings will be affected due to the severity of the defect. For the critical value of 200 µm.b. Schematic diagram of the eccentricity on the sun gear Fig. The eccentricity expresses the difference between the theoretical and the real rotational axis (Fig. 7a. We note an amplitude modulation of the gearmesh signal by the eccentricity signal.4 Effect of a profile error on the dynamic response Generally. 6. 4. the gearmesh signal will be drowned in the defect signal and the transmission will work very poorly as shown on Figs. 8 and 9. It is expressed by: F(t) = esn (t)K e (t) 2π fe esn (t) = es sin t + ξsn Zs (33) (34) where es is the eccentricity modulus.b. The defect frequency is: fd = fe Zs (35) Figure 7 represents the response for an eccentricity es = 20 µm of the dynamic component of the first planet bearing’s tangential displacement. especially those of the planets due to the exciting force expressed by Eq. Z s is the tooth number of the sun. profile errors are induced by the manufacturing process. which represents an amplitude modulation of the gearmesh stiffness by the eccentricity error [11. 8a. which results into two sidebands around the gearmesh frequency and its harmonics in addition of the primary defect frequency fd . 33. Frequency response of the dynamic component of the tangential displacement of the bearing of the second planet (a) and the corresponding time signal (b) for es = 20 µm ( f e = 1500 Hz) Fig.3 Effect of run-out error on dynamic response The transmission is now assumed to have an eccentricity on the sun gear. This defect is introduced by adding a transmission error modeled as displacement on the line of action of the sun-planet gearmesh. The introduction of this displacement in the equation of motion yields to an exciting force. and ξsn is the phase difference between sun and planets gearmesh.744 4. Frequency response of the dynamic component of the displacement of the bearing of the carrier (a) and the corresponding time signal (b) for es = 200 µm ( f e = 1500 Hz) .

Schematic diagram of a profile error E sm represents the profile error modulus. a Healthy gear. The defect considered here is similar for all teeth. Fig. An exciting force F(t) represents an ampli- tude modulation of the gearmesh stiffness signal by the profile error signal E s (t). b Profile error of 20 µm. c Profile error of 200 µm . 11a–c. The defect frequency is equal to that of gearmesh f e . 10. Simulations are done with profile errors of 20 µm and 200 µm. As for the eccentricity. Influence of a profile error on the dynamic component of the carrier bearing displacement spectrum ( f e = 1000 Hz). The gearmesh frequencies are always f e = 1000 Hz or f e = 1500 Hz. the profile defect introduced on the sun gear is modeled by a displacement on the line of action of the sun-planet gearmesh. We notice the increase of the amplitude of the primary gearmesh frequency due to the amplitude modulation effect. Frequency response of the dynamic component of the radial displacement of the bearing of the second planet (a) and the corresponding time signal (b) for es = 200 µm ( f e = 1500 Hz) tooth and deviations from the perfect involute shape [13–15].b. 9a.745 Fig. Figure 10 is a schematic diagram of a profile error. Figures 11 and 12 represent the difference between the perturbations of the responses for a healthy system and for a system with profile errors on the sun gear teeth. It is expressed by: F(t) = E sn (t)K e (t) ∞ (36) (37) E s (t) = m=1 E sm sin (2πm f e t + ξsn ) Fig. The amplitudes of the harmonics change slightly.

J Mech Transm Automat Des 104:1–7 15. Nice. Kahraman A (2002) Influence of tooth profile modification on helical gear durability. and planet modes.746 Fig. J Vib Acoust 118:390–397 8. Kahraman A (1994) Load sharing characteristics of planetary transmissions. b Profile error of 20 µm. c Profile error of 200 µm 5 Conclusions In this paper. J Vib Acoust 121:316–321 4. Chaari F. Cambridge. Friswell MI (1996) The derivatives of repeated eigenvalues and their associated eigenvectors. Bodas A. Kahraman A (2001) Influence of carrier and gear manufacturing errors on the static planet load sharing behavior of planetary gear sets. Lin J. The excitation was induced by gearmesh stiffness. J Sound Vib 228(1): 109–128 9. November 15–17 2001 . Wajag P. In: 16ième Congès Français de e e m´ canique. a Healthy gear. Terauchi Y. Perret-Liaudet J (1996) An original method for computing the response of a parametrically excited forced system. Fakhfakh T. A modulation of the gearmesh signal by the defect signal is observed for an eccentricity – this produced sidebands around gearmesh and around its harmonics. Welbourn DB (1974) Dynamic tooth loads in epicyclic gears. 12a–c. High values of these errors. References 1. Kasuba R. Fukuoka. The presence of eccentricity or profile errors significantly alters the dynamic behavior. Terauchi Y. Parker RJ (1999) Sensitivity of planetary gear natural frequencies and vibration modes to model parameters. MA. Mech Mach Theory 29:1151–1165 3. which mean poorly manufactured gears. 1–5 September 2003 e 7. ASME Paper 84-DET-229 11. A spectral iterative method was used to obtain the dynamic response. Smith JD. Dohi K (1979) On the relation between the runout errors and the motion of the center of sun gear in a Stoeckicht planetary gear. An increase of the gearmesh frequency amplitude was found for a profile error. Botman M (1984) Load sharing in a planetary gear stage in the presence of gear errors and misalignment. Bull JSME 23(176):315–323 13. ASME J Mech Des 117:241–247 6. a plane model of a planetary gear train was developed in order to investigate the influence of manufacturing errors on the dynamic behavior of a planetary gear. Parker RG (1999) Analytical characterization of the unique properties of planetary gear free vibration. Hidaka T. perfectly designed and mounted planetary gear. Velex P. will have dramatic consequences on the transmission. Cunliffe F. Only translational modes are affected by gyroscopic effects – the frequencies bifurcate into two distinct frequencies – whereas rotational and planet didn’t change. A low vibratory level was observed for a healthy. Flamand L (1996) Dynamic response of planetary trains to mesh parametric excitations. These surveys allow us to get a first idea of the characterization of the dynamic behavior of planetary gears in presence of such manufacturing errors. Bull JSME 22(167):748–754 12. Fujii M (1980) Analysis of dynamic tooth load on planetary gear. Haddar M (2003) Etude num´ rique et exp´ rimene e tale du comportement dynamique d’une transmission par engrenages en pr´ sence de d´ fauts de dentures. August R (1984) Gear mesh stiffness and load sharing in planetary gearing. Future work will include investigating the influence of assembling errors in the model. In: ASME 4th Power Transmission Conference. This method was efficient in calculation times. Velex P (1995) An extended model for the analysis of the dynamics of planetary trains. In: Proceedings of the JSME International Conference on Motion and Power Transmissions. The modal analysis of the adopted model showed particular eigenfrequencies: rotational. translational. J Eng Ind 94:578–584 2. Japan. ASME J Mech Des 124:501–510 14. Ma P. J Sound Vib 196: 165–177 10. Hidaka T. Lin J. ASME J Mech Des 118:7–14 5. Saada A. Influence of a profile error on the dynamic component of the second planet bearing displacement spectrum ( f e = 1500 Hz).