SPEED REDUCER

DEJEAN_GARASA
11/06/2010
Project report on applied mechanics, dealing with sizing and then design on
computer of a speed reducer with aligned input and output based on imposed characteristics.
 Summary
Introduction
Sizing................................................................................................................................... 3
Calculate gearss ................................................................................................................. 3
2. Calculate trees
a. Tree 1..................................................................................................................................... 8
b. Tree 2................................................................................................................................... 10
c. Tree 3................................................................................................................................... 12
d. Calculate wedges
e. Calculation grooves ............................................................................................................ 16
3. Calculate bearings ........................................................................................................................... 19
Tree 1................................................................................................................................... 19
b. Tree 2................................................................................................................................... 21
c. Tree 3................................................................................................................................... 23
d. Montage bearings
Vérifications........................................................................................................................................... 27
Verification on Framework in RDM6 ....................................................................................... 27
a. Verification linking efforts
b. Checks of angles......................................................................................................... 29
2. Verification stress concentrations ........................................................................ 30
Tree 1................................................................................................................................... 30
b. Tree 2................................................................................................................................... 31
c. Tree 3................................................................................................................................... 32
Design and layoutn ............................................................................................................................. 33
Sizing of the LB coupling............................................................................................. 36
Conclusion

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 1

 IntroductIon
A speed reducer is a mechanism widely used in everyday life, particularly in
the world of automobiles or more generally in all types of motorized vehicles (aerospace,
aerospace, robotics, machine tool manufacturing, etc. ...). We find the reducers by
example in the mechanisms allowing the opening of car windows, to raise some
parking barriers or even in elevators. The study of this mechanism is therefore a source
of interest. In this project, we will conduct the study of a speed reducer with input and output.
aligned with four wheels.

We will do this work in the manner of a design office, indeed, we will have to proceed, in
first, to the sizing of the various elements of the reducer in order to minimize
the congestion and respect the different constraints that one may encounter throughout
this project. In a second phase, we will look into certain checks to see if
our reducer is feasible and if these elements do not undergo too much stress. Finally
We will carry out the graphic design using Inventor with the casing associated with the speed reducer.
and we will try to make a cut by adding the corresponding cartouche.

This project will also be an opportunity for us to put our knowledge into practice.
general mechanics and material resistance acquired during the year.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 2

 Dimensionnement
1. Gear calculation
To start this project, we had some necessary data for sizing.
Here are the characteristic data for our speed reducer.

Maximum transmissible power [P(M)] 4000 W

Reduction report [r] 0.24
Input speed *w(e)+ 750 rpm
Pressure angle [α] 20°

From there, we can deduce some essential data for the follow-up of the project.

Output speed [w(s)] ()

Input couple *Ca+ () ⁄()
Output couple [Cs] ⁄

To begin sizing our gears, we first needed to determine the number

of teeth based on our reduction ratio. Thanks to the interference part of the engagement
Constructor document provided with the subject, we created a table that gives us the
possible combinations based on the number of teeth of each gear. For more
results we have varied the reduction ratio between 0.235 and 0.245. Here is an extract of this
tableau.

za zb zc zd r
18 27 19 53 0.239
19 26 19 57 0.244
19 26 19 58 0.239
19 26 19 59 0.235
19 29 18 49 0.241
19 29 18 50 0,236
20 35 24 56 0.245
20 35 24 57 0.241
15 20 15 45 0.239
20 40 24 50 0.240
20 40 24 51 0.235
20 36 24 55 0.242
20 36 24 56 0.238
21 35 23 57 0.242
21 35 23 58 0.238
22 33 24 66 0.242
22 33 24 67 0.239
22 33 24 68 0.235
24 35 28 79 0,243
24 35 28 80 0.240
24 35 28 81 0.237
26 35 22 67 0.244

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 3

 From all these different possibilities, we now had to find the diameters of each.
gear. We started from the fact that the module was standardized, so we carried out a
table that allows us to determine the diameters, the spacing as well as the components
tangential and axial forces experienced by each shaft/gear system.

Here is a table summarizing the returned values based on the input values, some being
fixes [P(M) ; r ; w(e) ; w(s) ; Ca ; Cs ; Mna ; Mnb] and other variables *za; zb; zc; zd; β1; β2; Mna ;
Mnb].

Input values Returned values

Maximum transmissible power [P(M)] Wheel diameter in [da]
Reduction report [r] Diameter of the wheel b [db]
Input speed [w(e)] Diameter of the wheel c [dc]
Output speed [w(s)] Diameter of the wheel d [dd]
Entry couple *Ca+ Entrance 1 [E1]
Output couple [Cs] Entraxe 2 [E2]
Number of teeth of the wheel at [za] Tangential effort between wheels a and b [T(a/b)]
Number of teeth of wheel b [zb] Tangential effort between wheels c and d [T(c/d)]
Number of teeth on the wheel c [zc] Axial effort between wheels a and b [A(a/b)]
Number of teeth of the wheel d [zd] Axial effort between the wheels c and d [A(c/d)]
Inclination angle of the teeth of wheel a and b *β1+ Standards for tangential and axial forces [Ft(a/b)]
Inclination angle of the teeth of wheel a and b *β2+ Standards for tangential and axial forces [Ft(a/b)]
Normalized module [Mna] Width coefficient of gears [k]
Normalized module [Mnb]

After multiple variations of the variables mentioned above, we arrived at a solution that
meets the specifications, meaning where the bulk is minimized as much as possible. It is necessary to
know that the fewer the number of teeth, the smaller the diameter will be. We will take some
Inclination angle values of the teeth ranging from 15° to 30°. The values chosen are therefore
the following.

Number of teeth of the wheel at [za] 15

Number of teeth of the wheel b [zb] 20
Number of teeth of the wheel c [zc] 15
Number of teeth of the wheel d [zd] 47
Inclination angle of the teeth of wheel a and b *β1+ 29.26°
Angle of inclination of the teeth of wheel a and b *β2+ 15°

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 4

We therefore needed to subsequently calculate all the different missing unknowns that the table
we used the following calculations to obtain these values.

Wheel diameter is [da]

Wheel diameter b [db]
Diameter of the wheel c [dc]
Diameter of the wheel d [dd]
Entrance 1 [E1] ⁄( )
Entrée 2 [E2] ⁄( )
Tangential effort between wheels a and b [T(a/b)]

Tangential effort between wheels c and d [T(c/d)]

Axial effort between the wheels a and b [A(a/b)] (⁄) ()
Axial effort between wheels c and d [A(c/d)] ( ) ()
(⁄)
Standards for tangential and axial forces [Ft(a/b)]
()
(⁄)
Norms of tangential and axial forces [Ft(a/b)]
()

This solution was chosen because we had two main constraints to respect,

The axial efforts must cancel each other out or be close to canceling each other out. The chosen solution allows
to have a difference of 11.24%. It is therefore considered that this condition is met.
The second condition to be respected, and not the least, is that the difference in spacing must
to be null. It seems logical that if the spacings are not the same, then trees 1 and 3
they would not be aligned, there would appear a moment that would render all the previous calculations false.
We obtained a spacing difference of 0.01 mm, so we consider this.
negligible difference, the assembly is then possible.

Now we must determine the width coefficient of the teeth [k]. It is a coefficient that
ranging from 8 to 16, we managed to minimize it as much as possible and achieve 8 for the two gears.
It is therefore necessary to perform a test on the value of the previously defined standardized module.

( )⁄
√

( )⁄
√

Once all these values are obtained, we can determine the minimum diameters of the trees.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 5

 2. Calculation of trees

Sizing the trees is one of the most important parts, it involves finding the
minimal diameter that the tree will make while trying to obtain the least expensive material. For
First, we will perform the calculation using a practical elastic resistance of the material.
important, indeed the more important it is, the smaller the diameter will be.

Here is the calculation approach we used for each material provided in the
constructor documentation.

We were first able to determine the safety factor related to fatigue.3].

()

()

Then deduce the practical elastic resistance for each material.

With s1safety coefficient related to training by thermal engine (1.4)

s2safety factor related to gear transmission (1.3)

Here is the table summarizing the calculation of Rpe

Rp 0,2 [N/mm2] Rm[N/mm2] s3 Ron[N/mm2]

Carbon fine steels
XC 25
d≤16 365 615 1.19 168.96
16 < d ≤ 40 305 565 1.08 155.22
XC 38
d≤16 490 760 1.29 208.79
16 < d ≤ 40 400 700 1.14 192.31
XC 42
d≤16 520 810 1.28 222.53
16<d≤40 430 740 1.16 203.30
XC 48
d≤16 550 855 1.29 234.89
16 < d ≤ 40 460 780 1.18 214,29

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 6

 Rp 0.2 [N/mm2] Rm [N/mm2] s3 Ron[N/mm2]
Chromium steels
38 C 4
d≤16 735 1030 1.43 282.97
16<d≤40 635 930 1.37 255.49
Chrome-molybdenum steels
34 CD 4
d≤16 835 1030 1.62 282.97
16<d≤40 715 980 1,46 269.23
42 CD 4
d≤16 930 1175 1.58 322.80
16 < d ≤ 40 815 1080 1.51 296.70
Chromium-vanadium steel
50 CV 4
d≤16 930 1225 1.52 336,54
16<d≤40 785 1080 1.45 296.70

Before varying this practical elastic resistance, we will seek to obtain the diameter while
having set the value of Rpeat 400MPa and this in an arbitrary manner.

We will therefore detail the calculation procedure for each tree, the formulas not being the
the same. We are also looking to determine the ideal flexural modulus, which will allow us to
determine the diameter afterwards.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 7

 a. Tree 1

To perform the calculations, we consider that the wheel represents a point support on a shaft and the
the distance from each side of the wheel is equal to , this distance represents the place where the
forces are applied. It also represents the rolling medium. We will consider a
A spherical joint at A and a linear annular joint at C. We thus obtain this representation for
the tree 1.

Yes Yc

Xa
For Zc
Wheel has

To begin, we will calculate the forces considering a spherical joint at point A and
a slide at the level of C.

According to a government study, the following relationships are obtained.

( ) ⁄

*( ⁄) ⁄+ ()

⁄ (⁄)

*( ⁄ ) ⁄ + ( ) (()) ⁄ ⁄

We will now calculate the moments about x, y, and z as a function of the distance along the x-axis.
Here are the relationships used.

From 0 to 32 millimeters

From 33 to 64 millimeters

( )

( )

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 8

From there, we can deduce the bending moment as well as the ideal bending moment. One can
then trace the curve of the ideal bending moment as a function of the distance along the shaft.

Ideal bending moment for tree 1

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance on the tree (mm)

One can then determine the minimum diameter of the tree based on the distance along the axis. We
will raise the maximum value in order to subsequently determine the grooves and the
bearings. We also varied the practical elastic resistance at this stage. Thanks
In the table established previously, we sought to minimize the cost. Indeed, the more the Rpeis
low and the lower the cost of the material is. This is why we were able to use a fine steel.
carbone XC 25

Diamètre minimal de l'arbre 1

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance on the tree (mm)

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 9

We obtain the previous curve, we see therefore that the tree must endure the most effort at the center of
this one. We will therefore choose a tree with a minimum diameter of 14.45 millimeters.

XC 25 D1 14.45
D2 12.87
50 CV 4 D1 11.49
D2 10.23

The table shows the differences in diameter depending on the material used. We consider the
negligible difference compared to the diameter of the wheel a. D1 and D2 being respectively the
maximum diameter for a distance on the shaft from 0 to 32 millimeters and from 33 to 64 millimeters. It is
Why we will choose this XC 25 steel which is the least expensive, even though it is the cheapest it...
sufficient for our tree 1.

b. Tree 2

The sizing of tree 2 is somewhat different from trees 1 and 3 because it has 2 wheels.
we therefore need to define a length c which represents the sum of the lengths due to the
trees 1 and 3 and then a margin of 2 millimeters that will prevent trees 1 and 3 from touching each other
in the casing. We take this margin arbitrarily so that the wall between trees 1 and 3
soit suffisamment épaisse pour résister à la différence d’effort axial, bien que nous ayons fait en
kind of eliminating them. We do not take more because once again we are looking to minimize
the congestion. The representation thus gives the figure below.

Yes Wheel b Yc
Wheel c

Xa
For Zc

(⁄) (⁄)

⁄*( )(⁄) (⁄) (⁄)⁄ (⁄)⁄ +

⁄*(⁄)(( ) ) ⁄ +

⁄*(⁄) (⁄)( ) (⁄)⁄ (⁄)⁄ +

⁄ *( , ⁄) + ( ) ⁄ ( ) ⁄-

Once the linking efforts are obtained, we just have to find the moments along the axes.
x, y, and z then deduce the ideal bending moment, we do as for shaft 1 except that here the shaft
will be divided into 3 parts. We thus obtain the following curves.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 10

 Ideal bending moment for tree 2
120000

100000

80000

60000

40000

20000

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Distance on the tree (mm)

Minimum diameter of tree 2

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Distance on the axis (mm)

XC 25 D1 11.03
D2 18:30
D3 14.72
50 CV 4 D1 8.77
D2 14.55
D3 11.70
38 C 4 D1 9.29
D2 15.41
D3 12.40

Here are the 3 materials that we compared, we chose a material 38 C 4, this

the material allowed us to remain with a diameter of less than 16, so we didn't have to
modify the Rondepending on the position on the tree. We therefore obtain as previously the
minimum diameter necessary in the middle of the tree.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 11

 c. Tree 3

For this last tree, we can represent it in the same way as the first [Link] we have
reverse the position of the spherical and sliding joints. Indeed, on this shaft, the spherical joint
is located at point C and the annular linear connection at point A. In the same
In the same way, we can calculate the distance from each side of the wheel ( ) and we consider
as before a punctual support at the level of the contact between the wheel and the shaft. Here is therefore the
representation of tree 3.

Yes Yc

Xa
For Zc
Wheel of

The static study on this tree yielded the following relationships.

(⁄)

⁄ * ( ⁄ )+ ( ⁄ ) ⁄

⁄ (⁄)

⁄ * ( ⁄ )+ ( ⁄ ) ⁄

Similarly, for the other two trees, we can determine the following moments x, y, and z.
moments depend on the distance on the tree.

From 0 to 20 millimeters

From 21 to 40 millimeters

( )

( )

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Speed Reducer Page 12

 Ideal bending moment for tree 3
60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance on the tree (mm)

Minimum diameter of the tree 3

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance on the tree (mm)

It is noted that, like for the first tree, the shape of the curve is the same even though it
is inverted. On the ideal bending moment curve, it is noted that the middle of the beam is
the place where the moment is maximal which indicates that the diameter will be the largest.

XC 25 D1 14,85
D2 15.09
50 CV 4 D1 11.80
D2 12.00

As for the first tree, we chose the least expensive material because here too the
The diameter difference is only 3 millimeters. We will therefore keep XC 25 steel.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 13

 d. Calculation of keys

We have done a good part of the work by determining all our minimum diameters of
our trees as well as the diameters of our gears. We now need to determine the keys.
A key allows connecting the shaft with the gear. This connection enables rotation.
the gear at the same time as the shaft. However, the keys resist a force that must not
not be too important. That is why we will check if the use of a key is possible.
The other solution is the use of grooves.

key

a
d
b
l

d nominal
a (mm) b (mm)
(mm)
6≤d<8 2 2
8 ≤ d < 10 3 3
10≤d<12 4 4
12 ≤ d < 17 5 5
17 ≤ d < 22 6 6
22≤d<30 8 7
30 ≤ d < 38 10 8
38 ≤ d < 44 12 8
44≤d<50 14 9
50 ≤ d < 58 16 10

Based on the manufacturer's data from the table above, we need to verify that the key supports
the efforts of crushing as well as shearing.

Taking tree 1 as an example, the diameter is between 12 and 17. We therefore obtain the values
of a and b following.

(⁄)

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Speed Reducer Page 14

The condition for using the keys is that we must have the width of the teeth less than the
length induced by the punching as well as that obtained by shearing. It is noted that
the use of the key is impossible. We have carried out the calculation for the other shafts. We
we are required to use grooves for all trees.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 15

 e. Calculation of flutes

To calculate the stopping elements of rotation, we just saw that we cannot take
of keys. Since we have a high output torque (Cs=212.207 N.m), we have chosen to
to take grooves that allow for better resistance to effort because grooves allow
to distribute the applied effort over a larger area than a key.

To calculate these grooves, we used the book by C. Barlier and R. Bourgeois.

Mémotech Productique design and drawing which allows us in particular to size the stops
of rotation.

We therefore followed the indicated method.

Thanks to the minimum diameter of the different trees, we can define the inner diameter "d".
cylindrical grooves with parallel sides and internal centering that we want to find. Thanks to the
the inner diameter we find the corresponding outer diameter "D" and the bearing surface
equivalent per millimeter of groove length "A".

Then we calculate the average diameter:

Then the theoretical tangential effort T to be transmitted:

The allowable pressure (contact pressure) has been provided to us, it corresponds to the resistance to
mating and worth , furthermore we consider the assembly as fixed.

We can then calculate the total minimum theoretical support area required:

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 16

This allows us to have the minimum length L:

To be sure of the values of diameters d and D, we use the verification of the conditions of
broaching

If this condition is met, we can keep the diameters d and D to make our grooves.

We therefore followed this method for the three trees and thus found the diameters of each.
grooves to be made.

Voici un tableau récapitulatif des diamètres (d et D) ([Link]éma au-dessus) des cannelures à adopter
For each of our wheels, the diameters are in millimeters.

Summary of the flutes

Tree 1 d 16
D 10
Tree 2 d 16 Wheel b
D 20
d 16 Wheel c
D 20
Tree 3 d 18
D 22

Example for tree 1, wheel 1:

We have a minimal diameter imposed by our calculations equal to 15.45 mm

We therefore choose the standardized diameters: 16-20

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Gear Reducer Page 17

The condition is met, the gear diameters are correct. It should be noted that for shaft 2 we
we took for C, the input pair divided by the first reduction ratio:

Nm and for tree 3, the output torque: C = 212.207 Nm.

We will now look for the suitable bearings for our speed reducer.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 18

 3. Calculation of bearings
For the bearings, we based our choice on a concern for space economy in
width. Indeed, we have large wheels so our speed reducer will take up a
long rectangular space, we therefore tried to reduce the longitudinal bulk. We
we have therefore, first calculated the measured load (C/P) * P that would have been involved, for the trees 2
and 3, with ball bearing widths greater than those with roller bearings
conics, we have therefore chosen to use the latter.

Here is the legend used for bearing search:

Comments or conditions to check

Conclusion or important value
Value found in the tables
Calculated value in advance
Bearing reference

Tree 1

For tree 1, we first took the theoretical loads (tables), which are small loads and
I noted that the conditions were met for the first roll, and we therefore kept this.
bearing. To see if the second bearing was functioning, we had to calculate a new C: C’
and see if it met the condition C'<C(theoretical), which was the case. Therefore, we obtained our
first two bearings.

It is important to note that for the condition considering a Ka, we took this Ka equal to
the value of the axial force due to the first gear. It is necessary to verify that:

( )

Tree 1 liaison efforts

Xa 0.82982737
Ya -0.025272968
Za 0.74057848
Yc 0.86640247
Zc=Za (for a=b) 0.74057848
F(r1)=racine(Y(A)²+Z(A)²) 0.741009587
F(r2)=sqrt(Y(C)²+Z(C)²) 1,139784947
Ka 0.829767687

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 19

Tree1 Bearing 1 Bearing 2
Fr(1 or 2) 0.74100959 1,13978495
X 1 1
Y 0 0
P = X*Fr + Y*Ka 0.74100959 1,13978495
L=nb*60*5000 225000000 225000000
L 225 225
C/P = L^(1/n) 5.07755639 5.07755639
C(measured)=C/P*P 3.76251796 5.78732234
C theoretical corresponding (tables) 15.4 15.4ref1&2=30202 A
X 1 1
Correspondent (tables) 1,88 1.88
Fr/Yi 0.39415404 0.60626859 Fr1/Y < Fr2/Y
0.5 * (Fr2/Y - Fr1/Y) = Q 0.10605728 0.14419884
Is Ka >= Q? Load condition okay? OK OK Ka >=Q
Do 0.19707702 1.02684471
e 0.32 0.32
Fa/Fr 0.26595745 0.90091092
Fa/Fr <= e Fa/Fr > e OK for the first wheel
P' with the Fai 2.38638202
We recalculate a new C
C'(measured)=C/P*P' 12.1169893
C(measured)2 less than C(theoretical)2 => The bearing is good

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 20

 b. Tree 2

For tree 2, we were fortunate to see that the first condition was met, and this from the
first rolling test. We had good results in both cases:

Where e is given by the manufacturer.

We had previously checked the condition on Ka:

In this case, the axial efforts due to the gears 'counteract' each other, and we then take Ka as the
absolute value of the difference of these two axial efforts:

Efforts to connect tree 2

Xa 0.105093712
Yes -0.491699777
For 0.375648365
Yc -1.44087022
Zc -2.38354818
F(r1)=sqrt(Y(A)²+Z(A)²) 2.433735934
F(r2)=sqrt(Y(C)²+Z(C)²) 2,785212544
|Aa/b-Ac/d|=Ka 0.11

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 21

 Tree2 Bearing 1 Bearing 2
Fr(1 or 2) 2.43373593 2.78521254
X 1 1
Y 0 0
P = X*Fr + Y*Ka 2.43373593 2.78521254
L=nb*60*5000 225000000 225,000,000
L 225 225
C/P=L^(1/n) 5.07755639 5,07755639
C(measured)=C/P*P 12.3574314 14,1420738
C theoretical corresponding (tables) 15.4 15.4ref1&2 = 30202 A
X 1 1
Correspondent (tables) 1.88 1.88
Fri/Yi 1,29454039 1.48149603 Fr1/Y < Fr2/Y
0.5 * (Fr2/Y - Fr1/Y) = Q 0.09347782 0.09347782
Ka >= Q Load condition ok? OK OK
Do 0.6472702 0.75236391
e 0.43 0.43
Fri 0.26595745 0.270128
Fa1/Fr1 < e Fa2/Fr2 < e
The two bearings comply with the conditions

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 22

 c. Tree 3

For the third tree, we verified that the chosen bearing 1 was good thanks to the first.
condition concerning the efforts Fr, Fa and e.

As we had:

We had to verify the following condition:

Where Ka is the axial force due to the second gear.

The conditions were directly checked by the bearing 1, however we had to search.
another solution for the second bearing. Indeed, the new load C' was higher than C
theoretical. We then restarted the process to find a new measured C: C''
lower than the value of the new theoretical C.

Efforts to link tree 3

Xa 0.93489946
Yes 2.07887656
For 1.74454613
Yc -0.7641527
Zc=Za (for a=b) 1.74454613
F(r1) = sqrt(Y(A)² + Z(A)²) 2.713884476
F(r2)=racine(Y(C)²+Z(C)²) 1.904565711
Ka 0.93486

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 23

Tree3 Bearing 1 Bearing 2
Fr(1 or 2) 2.71388448 1.904565711
X 1 1
Y 0 0
P = X*Fr + Y*Ka 2.71388448 1.904565711
L=nb*60*5000 225000000 225000000
L 225 225
C/P = L^(1/n) 5.07755639 5,077556392
C(measured)=C/P*P 13.7799015 9.670539801
C theoretical corresponding (tables) 15.4 15.4ref1 = 30202 A
X 1 1
Correspondent (tables) 1.88 1.88
Fr/Y 1,44355557 1.013066868 Fr1/Y > Fr2/Y

Ka >= 0 Is the charge condition okay? OK OK Ka >=0

Do 0.72177779 1,656,637,786
e 0,32 0.32
Fri 0.26595745 0.869824431
Fa/Fr <= e Fa/Fr > e OK for the roller 1
P' 3.876305323
A new C is recalculated.
C'(measured)=C/P*P' 19,68215887
The new C(measured) is greater than the theoretical C
We start again to find a good bearing 2.
C theoretical corresponding (tables) 20,8ref2=30203 A
X 1
Correspondent (tables) 1.74
Fri/Yi 1,44355557 1.094577995 Fr1/Y > Fr2/Y

Ka >= 0 ? Load condition ok? OK OK

Do 0.72177779 1.656637786
e 0.35
Fri 0.869824431
e
P'' 3.644376033
We recalculate a new C2
C''(measured)=C/P*P'' 18.50452482
We have the new C2 measured lower than the theoretical C from the table.

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Gear Reducer Page 24

 Summary of the chosen bearings and their respective dimensions:

Summary table of rotations Bearing 1 Bearing 2

Tree 1 Reference 30202 A 30202 A
Internal diameter (mm) 15 15
Outside diameter (mm) 35 35
Width (mm) 11.75 11.75
Tree 2 Reference 30202 A 30202 A
Inner diameter 15 15
Outer diameter 35 35
Width 11.75 11.75
Tree 3 Reference 30202 A 30203 A
Inner diameter 15 17
Outer diameter 35 40
Width 11.75 13.25

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 25

 d. Assembly of the bearings

In the documentation, Attachment and play of the bearings, we find the adjustment play during the
fixation of the bearings. We have Indeed, we have a ratio equal to 5.078. So we enter
In the case of normal charges for the documentation, and we will have a set of adjustments on the tree:
j6/k6 and in housing in the H7/J7 casing.

While researching bearing assemblies, we noticed that the rollers

Conics were generally mounted in an X configuration in the case of a rotating shaft, which is the case here.

Another advantage of the X assembly is that it allows for a space-saving in width.

regarding the O-frame assembly, indeed, the points of application of the loads are close together with a
direct assembly when an O mount moves them away.

However, to use direct mounting (in X), one must check a condition, the gap between the
two bearings (long guidance) must be greater than 1.5 times the diameter of the shaft. In our case,
we have:

( )

We are fine: , there will be no additional labeling. If we had some

bearings too close and mounted in X, we would have poor stiffness because of the direct mounting
bring the points of application of the loads closer (support centers of the bearings) which tends to
decrease the stability of the shaft guidance, which leads to wobbling effects.

We will now move on to the checks to see if our reducer can

function without deformation and without undergoing stresses greater than normal values
data provided by the documentation.

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Speed Reducer Page 26

 VerIfications
1. Verification on Frame in RDM6
a. Verification of liaison efforts

To check the efforts at the joints, we use the Ossature software from RDM6. To model the wheels,
We placed a square beam with a section significantly larger than the diameter of the tree.

We notice in the drawing below that the input torque is indeed 50.9 Nm. We see
also that the effort according to z corresponds well to the coupling effort = 740.5 N. However, we
there is a sign error on the y-axis, certainly due to the direction of the forces during modeling
on the software.

Let's look at a second example, for tree 2 we notice that there is a little moment in .
This result is due to the slight difference in tangential efforts, we can verify it:

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 27

We can definitely find 0.2 in .

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 28

 b. Angle verifications

Page 84 of Lifespan indicates a condition to be met, it is a condition on the

labeling. The course gives us and√ we want to check that this value is less than
0.06°.

Let's check this condition for tree 2 for example:

The condition is met, which means that the bearings of shaft 2 are strong enough.

Tree 1 gives us The conditions are therefore also

respected for tree 1.

The tree 3 to , which also verifies the condition.

Our bearings are therefore quite resistant. They will be able to function well with an angle of
labeling under their normal conditions.

It is important, in the checks, to see if the trees will be strong enough not to be
deformed, this is what we are going to study now.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 29

 2. Verification of stress concentrations
The goal here is to check the compatibility of the diameters of the trees with the shape defects that are present.
find. To do this, we use the available documentation to assess the coefficients of
constraints for each accident with the aim of recalculating an ideal bending moment involving
a new shaft diameter that we want to be less than the minimum diameter.

At first, we had set a curvature radius of 1 mm out of a concern for saving space but
the new calculated diameters were much too large, so we decided to fix the radius
with a curvature of 4 mm in order to achieve better results, for this, we must first look into
What case are we in:

Or:

a. Tree 1

We have L=32 mm and d=15 mm so we are in the first case. This is the case of two
distant shoulders. We have therefore dealt with each of these two shoulders separately.

For the left shoulder, there is a moment of bending and twisting (due to the resistance of the
wheel on the input torque). For the one on the right, however, there is only a bending moment at
take into account because the tree is free and therefore does not undergo any twisting.

The calculation of for tree 1 gives:

We will take these two coefficients into account for the left part and only the for
the right part.
We then obtain two new diameters by modifying the values of our tables:

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 30

These two diameters are slightly too large because they should be less than 15 mm.
this means that the efforts are greater than the practical elastic resistance and the shaft will then
deformed. To avoid this problem, the radius of curvature should be increased by 1 or 2 mm. It should be
so increase the width of our casing and slightly shift our bearings.

b. Tree 2

First double shoulder, we have the same shaft diameters and the same length L,
The change lies in the fact that here the left side is free and only undergoes a
bending moment and the right part that undergoes two moments. Indeed, a torsional moment is
created when wheel b drives wheel c.

We therefore obtain the same results as before:

For the right double shoulder, we enter the second case.

Indeed, L = 20 mm and d = 15 mm. Consequently, we had to replace D = 16 mm with a diameter

equivalent

So t becomes (21–15)/2 = 3 and we get:

Nous nous servirons des deux coefficients pour la partie de droite et uniquement du coefficient de
constraint due to bending for the right part.

Nous obtenons les diamètres suivants :

And:

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 31

Only the last diameter satisfies the condition for resistance. The other three are greater.
In terms of real diameter, we are in the same situation as before.

c. Tree 3

We are also in the second case, indeed, L = 20 mm and, on the left, d = 17 mm and at
right, d = 15 mm.

So we have two new t, , and we therefore find four new coefficients that
the two on the right which are the same as before. For the free left side, we do not
consider the bending moment. For the right side, we will use both as there is a couple of
torsion due to the resistance of the device that will be fixed at the output of the speed reducer. We
let's obtain:

And:

We then obtain:

Once again these diameters are slightly too large. By putting a radius of curvature equal to
8 mm all our diameters would meet the condition. Such a radius of curvature seems excessive to us.
So we will not draw it on the drawing. The second solution would be to modify the diameters.
to increase trees (to increase them) in order not to exceed the elastic plastic resistance anymore.

Now that the checks are done, we can move on to the design on
computer using Inventor software. This design will allow us to have an approach
visual and therefore more practical of the reducer.

DEJEAN_GARASA Project CAD 2: Speed Reducer Page 32

 Conception et dessin
We have completed all the calculations, so we will move on to the design on the computer, we
We will choose the Inventor software rather than Catia primarily for the Design Accelerator function.

Here is a brief presentation of the entire collection.

We can see here Tree 1 created in Inventor, the bearings are installed. We chose to
Put circlips to lock them in translation. We will use washers that we can
washers on the lathe that will allow to block the gear in translation. These washers will come to
placed between the bearing and the gear wheel. This solution was chosen because it is simple and
cheap to implement, it also helps avoid generating accidents on the tree. These
washers are not represented to avoid overloading the drawing. On the left side,
find the part of the tree that will receive an LB type coupling, this one is not represented on the
drawing.

The chosen solution imposes certain assembly conditions; indeed, it will be necessary to...
time to mount the gear before mounting the bearings. Both the gear and the bearings.
requires a tight assembly. It will therefore be necessary to use a cold spray, or any other
Means to cool the shaft. A heat gun will then be used to heat the
bearings as well as the gear wheel to mount them on the shaft.

We will not elaborate on tree 3, it follows exactly the same principle. Except that this one requires a
coupling of the type groove that we have not represented.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 33

Let's move on to tree 2, for the bearings it is the same principle as before.
The main difference lies in the technique of locking the wheels at the center of the shaft. We have
I thought about increasing the diameter of the shaft to allow the gear wheels to be locked in place.
from assembly, no additional parts are necessary. Between the bearings and the
wheels use washers once again.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 34

Finally, here is the last piece of the puzzle and not the least. It is the cover, this is where
the trees will settle. We have planned locations for the bearings, these
the places must be machined perfectly. They will need to be well polished before coming to put
the bearings, it is a tight assembly so we will use the same technique as previously
described. For the other locations, there is no need to make the surfaces flat, small
imperfections will be tolerated. At the entrance and exit of the trees, we will come to put some
joint spi. This will create the seal of the housing with the outside. A bath will be found
oil in the crankcase to lubricate the whole assembly.

The upper part of the casing is not represented, it will be fixed hot to fit the
forms of bearings. Between the two parts of the housing, we will put gasket paste, as the gasket is
too complicated to achieve.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 35

Here below is the plan as requested. We will not insert any values into the plan.
in the plan because all the necessary values are detailed in the report, and to avoid overloading
more the drawing.

Sizing of the coupling LB

With a view to a practical use of the speed reducer, we will now define what
elastic coupling we can input.

Our diameter is 15 mm and a torque of 5.93 daNm, so we will consider all possibilities.
proposed in the docs except for the first one. To avoid clutter, we have chosen
the reference elastic coupling 103 but this will surely have to be changed depending on
the device that will be connected to the input of the reducer.

This coupling will help to compensate for radial and angular misalignments while
transmitting the desired torque to the speed reducer. Depending on the use of this reducer
the elastic coupling will need to be changed.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Gear Reducer Page 36

 ConclusIon
During this project, we were able to realize the importance of proper sizing and
from the very beginning, indeed, a tiny mistake in a formula or a slight laxity on some
constraints to be checked can lead to significant issues in the later stages.
Unlike the previous project, we did not confine ourselves to sizing but
we also had to carry out checks. This added a new dimension to
project and thus allowed us to realize other difficulties that they face
the engineers in the design office. This also allowed us to learn many
mechanical concepts such as tipping or the different types of bearings (balls,
rouleaux, X, O ...

From a human perspective, we have had to face many problems during this
project and notably and especially from the start where we had enormous difficulties finding a
solution that works, which led us to try several times with solutions that
almost met the requested conditions. We then realized the
consequences of our approximations (incorrect spacings, divergence in calculations of
bearings ...). We therefore had to consult each other many times and motivate ourselves again to
start over many times since the beginning. This finally allowed us to find
a solution and also to highlight certain delicate aspects of teamwork, which
asked each of us for a slight reconsideration in order to continue. We have
also acquired a certain methodology as well as better accuracy in research of
feasible solutions.

The design of such a project would be interesting in order to finalize it; however, it would require a
large amount of equipment. It would still be interesting to see such a system implemented
application to fully understand the usefulness of a speed reducer. It would also be
interesting to see this reducer working with a LB coupling at the input with some
constraints of misalignments upstream in order to understand the coupling mechanism well
elastic that seems very interesting to us.

DEJEAN_GARASA CAD Project 2: Speed Reducer Page 37