JOllmal of SOllnd and Vibration (1988) 121(3),383-411

MATHEMATICAL MODELS USED IN GEAR

DYNAMICS-A REVIEW

H. NEVZAT OZGUVENt AND D. R. HOUSER

Gear Dynamics and Gear Noise Research Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, TIle
Ohio State University, Co/limbus, Ohio 43210, U.S.A.

(Received 14 January 1987)

With increased demand for high speed machinery, the mathematical modelling of the
dynamic analysis of gears has gained importance. Numerous mathematical models have
been developed for different purposes in the past three decades. In this paper the
mathematical models used in gear dynamics are discussed and a general classification of
these models is made. First, the basic characteristics of each class of dynamic models
along with the objectives and different parameters considered in modeling are discussed.
Then, the early history of the research made on gear dynamics is summarized and a
comprehensive survey of the studies involved in mathematical modelling of gears for
dynamic analysis is made. Generally, a chronological order is followed in each class
studied. The goal is not just to refer to several papers published in this field, but also to
give brief information about the models and, sometimes, about the approximations and
assumptions made. A considerable number of publications were reviewed and 188 of them
are included in the survey.

1. INTRODUCTION
There is a vast amount of literature on gear dynamics and dynamic modelling of gear
systems. The objectives in dynamic modelling of a gear system vary from noise control
to stability analysis. The ultimate goals in dynamic modelling of gears may be summarized
as the study of the following: stresses (bending stresses, contact stresses); pitting and
scoring; transmission efficiency; radiated noise; loads on the other machine elements of
the system (especially on bearings); stability regions; natural frequencies of the system;
vibratory motion of the system; whirling of rotors; reliability; life.
The concern with loads on gears goes back at least to the eighteenth century. However,
the first systematic efforts to analyze gear dynamics occurred in the 1920s and early 1930s.
In these studies the concern was the determination of dynamic loads on gear teeth through
both analytical and experimental methods. In the 1950s, the first simple mass-spring
models were introduced, the major aim still being the estimation of dynamic tooth loads.
.More involved models representing the dynamic behavior of gears in mesh appeared in
the mid 1950s with the main objectives including many of the other considerations. The
complicated models suggested in the 19705 and 1980s include effects such as three-
dimensional stiffness of gear teeth, non-linearity of system elements, and damping and
excitation effects of friction between teeth. In recent works, torsional, lateral, axial and
even plate mode vibrations of geared systems are considered, and steady state and transient
responses of the system to several gear errors are determined.
The models proposed by several investigators show considerable variations, not only
in the effects included, but also in the basic assumptions made. The interesting point is
tOn leave from The Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey; presently, in the Mechanical
Engineering Department at the Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
383
0022-460X/88/060383 + 29 503.00/0 © 1988 Academic Press Limited
384 H. NEVZAT OZGlJVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

that considerably different models have been claimed to be in good agreement with
experimental observations. This is simply due to two reasons: (1) the systems modelled
show different dynamic properties-for instance, while a gear mounted on a very short
shaft might be assumed to be rigidly mounted in the transverse direction, the same
assumption cannot be made for a gear on a long, slender shaft; (2) the purpose of
mathematical modelling differs-while only the lower vibra"tional modes of a gear system
might be sufficient in a model constructed to study only the dynamic tooth stresses, this
model might not be sufficient in the study of a noise problem in the same system. Another
reason for having good agreement of experimental results with basically different models
is that investigators have usually constructed their experimental rigs such that the basic
assumptions of their models could be satisfied.
Although it is quite difficult to group the mathematical models developed in gear
dynamics, the following classification seems appropriate.
(1) Simple Dynamic Factor Models. This group includes most of the early studies in
which a dynamic factor that can be used in gear root stress formulae is determined. These
studies include empirical and semi-empirical approaches as well as recent dynamic models
constructed just for the determination of a dynamic factor.
(2) Models with Tooth Compliance. There is a very large number of studies which
include only the tooth stiffness as the potential energy storing element in the system. That
is, the flexibility (torsional and/or transverse) of shafts, bearings, etc., are all neglected.
In such studies the system is usually modelled as a single degree of freedom spring-mass
system. There is an overlap between the first group and this group since such simple
models are sometimes developed for the sole purpose of determining the dynamic factor.
(3) Models for Gear Dynamics. Such models include the flexibility of the other elements
as well as the tooth compliance. Of particular interest have been the torsional flexibility
of shafts and the lateral flexibility of the bearings and shafts along the line of action.
(4) Models for Geared Rotor Dynamics. In some studies, the tqmsverse vibrations of
a gear-carrying shaft are considered in two mutually perpendicular directions, thus
allowing the shaft to whirl. In such models, the torsional vibration of the system is usually
considered.
(5) Models for Torsional Vibrations. The models in the third and fourth groups consider
the flexibility of gear teeth by including a constant or time varying mesh stiffness in the
model. However, there is also a group of studies in which the flexibility of gear teeth is
neglected and a torsional model of a geared system is constructed by using torsionally
flexible shafts connected with rigid gears. The studies in this group may be viewed as
pure torsional vibration problems, rather than gear dynamic problems.
Although the discussion of previous studies will be made according to the above
classification, it should be remembered that sometimes it may be very difficult to label a
certain study and some models might be considered in more than one group.
In the solution of the system equations, numerical techniques have usually been
employed. Although most of the models for which numerical techniques are used are
lumped parameter models, some investigators have introduced continuous system or finite
element models. While closed form solutions are given for some simple mathematical
models, analog computer solutions have sometimes been preferred for non-linear and
more complicated models, particularly in the earlier studies.
In some studies the main objective has been to find the system natural frequencies and
mode shapes and, therefore, only free vibration analyses are made. However, usually the
dynamic response of the system is analyzed for a defined excitation. In most of the studies,
the response of the system to forcing due to gear errors and to parametric excitation due
to tooth stiffness variation during the tooth contact cycle is determined. The models
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 385
constructed to study the excitations due to gear errors and/or tooth stiffness variation
provide either a transient vibration analysis or a harmonic vibration analysis by first
determining the Fourier series coefficients of the excitation. Some studies also include
the non-linear effects caused by loss of tooth contact or by the friction between meshing
teeth. The excitation then is taken as an impact load and a transient vibration analysis
is made.

2. HISTORY AND SIMPLE DYNAMIC FACTOR MODELS

The actual tooth load of gears in mesh consists of two main components: a statil!
component corresponding to the transmitted power (which is almost equal to the tbtal
load at low speeds of rotation) and a dynamic component which provides a fluctuating
increment due to dynamic action. The earliest studies were investigations of empirical
dynamic factors which included this dynamic increment and which could be used to
place a penalty on the load-carrying capacity of gears when their speeds increase. Therefore
the history of the dynamic modeling of gears starts with the studies determining dynamic
factors.
Although the history of loads on gears dates back almost two centuries, the dynamic
factor (which was then called speed factor) was originally suggested in 1868 by Walker
[1]. It is defined as
DF=SL/DL, (1)
where DF is the dynamic factor, SL is the static load, and DL is the dynamic load. The
concept of speed factor was originally introduced on the basis of strength considerations.
In the earliest studies, the dynamic factors were determined empirically by comparing
the gear size and strength calculations with records of tooth failures at different speeds.
Carl G. Barth first expressed the dynamic factor, based on Walker's original factors, as
DF=600/(600+ V), (2)
where V is the pitch line velocity in fpm (feet per minute). More reliable tests made
between .1910 and 1915 showed that this formula was too conservative for gears running
at speeds which were then considered to be high (about 2000 fpm) [2]. It was concluded
after these tests that in addition to pitch line velocity the major factors in establishing
the dynamic gear forces were tooth errors and the effect of gear and pinion inertias.
In 1924, Franklin and Smith [3] confirmed the formula given by Barth for gears with
a certain pitch error and showed that the constants in the formula should be changed
for gears with different pitch errors. In 1927, Ross [4] found that even the lowest dynamic
factor (which gives the highest stress) was too conservative for velocities over 4000 fpm,
and recommended the modified form
DF = 78/ (78 + J\7). (3)
Both the Barth equation and several modified forms of it are still used in some fields of
design and are given in design books. The formulae which are widely used in gear rating
standards .of the American Gear Manufacturing Association are modified versions of
these equations. However, these modifications were made after the 1950s.
The results of several works conducted by the ASME Research Committee on Strength
of Gear Teeth were published in 1931 by Buckingham [5]. The report stated that for
speeds over 5000 fpm the load-carrying capacity of gears changes very little. It was shown
that the tooth load variation depends largely upon the effective masses, the effective errors
and the speed of the gears [6]. After the development of the dynamic load equation given
386 H. NEVZAT 6ZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

in this report, which is more popularly known as Buckingham's Equation, little was done
until 1950. A detailed discussion of these pre-1950 studies was given by Fisher [1] and
Buckingham [6].
In 1950 a new era in gear dynamics was initiated which incorporated the use ofvibratory
models in the dynamic analysis of gears. Such mathematical models made it possible to
study other dynamic properties of geared systems in addition to the dynamic loads.
However, the earlier vibratory models were very simple and therefore could provide little
additional dynamic information beyond the dynamic load for the gear system. Therefore,
some of these earlier vibratory models were only used to determine the dynamic factors.
In the first spring-mass model, which was introduced by Tuplin [7-9], an equivalent
constant mesh stiffness was considered and gear errors were modelled by the ins~rtion
and withdrawal of wedges with various shapes at the base of the spring. Thus, the dynamic
loads due to transient excitation were approximated for various forms of errors. As the
problem was considered as a transient excitation problem disregarding the periodicity of
the excitation, this simple spring-mass model can be used to estimate dynamic factors
only at conditions well below resonance. The dynamic model employed by Tuplin is
shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Dynamic model employed by Tuplin. k, = equivalent constant tooth mesh stiffness; m, = equivalent
mass; w = transmitted load.

The effect of various forms of assumed tooth error was also discussed by Reswick [10]
who used a simple dynamic model consisting of two masses constrained to move in a
horizontal direction and excited by a parabolic or constant acceleration cam which was
suddenly moved downward at the pitch line velocity of engagement. The tooth stiffness
was assumed to be constant, but the fact that at certain times the load was carried by
two or more pairs of teeth while at other times only a single pair of teeth may support
the load was taken into consideration. Transient excitation was considered in the model
of Reswick; again it was acceptable only for predicting dynamic loads below resonance.
The results showed a general agreement with the predictions of Buckingham's equations
for lightly loaded gears, but differed somewhat in the case of heavily loaded gears. Reswick
concluded that dynamic loads might be ignored in many heavily loaded gears, while
dynamic loads provided an important basis for the design of lightly loaded gears.
The work of Strauch [11] published in 1953 seems to be the first study in which periodic
excitation was considered. He considered the step changes in mesh stiffness due to
changing from single pair to double pair tooth contact. He analyzed the forced vibrations
which might build up as a result of the continuous error between two unmodified involute
gears. In 1957 Zeman [12] considered the effects of periodic profile errors, assuming a
constant mesh stiffness. He analyzed the transient effects of four different forms of error,
and the steady state effect of one form of repeated error.
After the studies made in the 1930s to improve Barth's equation and in the 1950s to
determine the dynamic factor for systems operating below the resonance, Seireg and
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 387
Houser [13], in 1970, used the experimental test results they had reported previously [14]
and used a geometrical analysis of the tooth meshing action to develop a semi-empirical
formula for dynamic tooth load. The formula developed for a generalized dynamic factor
for spur and helical gears, which was meant to be used below system resonances, takes
into account gear geometries, manufacturing errors, and operating loads and speeds. The
equation was compared with the formula widely used in gear rating standards of the
American Gear Manufacturing Association (Wellauer [15]) which is given below and
with the equation of Ross [4] (equation (3»:
DF=J78/(78+JV) (4),
In 1971, Tucker [16,17] used the modified Tuplin equation [18] with the spur <1nd
helical gear tooth stiffnesses approximated from cantilever beam theory by Seireg and
Houser [13] and the equivalent mass at the pitch line defined by Buckingham [6]. Tucker
aimed to replace several dynamic factors that were then in use: three different factors
presented by AGMA [19,20], one used for aerospace gearing [21], another one used for
industrial use [22], and another for marine applications [23]. He concluded that Tuplin's
equation, derived from the assumption that the external gear tooth acts as a cantilevered
spring, could be applied to either lightly or heavily loaded gears and could be used as a
design aid by the gear engineer.
Rettig [24] suggested a vibratory model for determining the dynamic forces on gear
teeth, and presented a different simplified formula for the dynamic factor in each of the
following speed regions: sub critical, main resonance and supercritical. His model will be
discussed later.
While several complicated mathematical models were developed in the 1970s and 1980s,
the search for a simple dynamic factor formula which could easily be used to determine
gear dynamic tooth load has continued. The dynamic factor equations in current AGMA
standards (AGMA 218.01, December 1982) are functions of gear pitch line velocity and
the quality of the gears. These equations do not account for gear inertias, loading effects,
specific tooth error patterns and other system-dependent characteristics. In a recently
proposed ISO method (ISO TC/60), however, three different approaches are suggested
for the calculation of the dynamic factor. The most complex of them requires a comprehen-
sive dynamic analysis so that the vibration resonance can be considered, while the
simplified method predicts the dynamic factor for gears running only in the subcritical
zone. A recent method for calculating dynamic loads by using fairly simple equations
was developed by Wang [25] in 1985. The method is based on the laws of mechanics for
rigid bodies and theoretically requires the dynamic transmission error as the input. As a
first order approximation, Wang suggested that the static transmission error could be
assumed to be proportional to the dynamic transmission error. Wang's model consisted
of rigid disks representing equivalent inertias of gears shifted to a common shaft. Then
Newton's second law of motion was applied to each rigid disk in the equivalent system
by using the gear tooth force induced torques and a given output torque. From these
equations together with the equations obtained from the· definition of angular transmission
error and from the force equilibrium condition, the unknown gear tooth forces were
determined by simply solving a set of algebraic equations for each time increment.

3. MODELS WITH TOOTH COMPLIANCE

The basic characteristic of the models in this group is that the only compliance
considered is due to the gear tooth and that all other elements are assumed to be perfectly
rigid. The resulting models are either translational (Figure 2) or torsional (Figure 3). The
388 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

-
Figure 2. A general dynamic model for a gear tooth. k. = equivalent stiffness of gear tooth; m. =equivalent
mass of gear tooth; w = transmitted load.

(a) ( b)

(c) (d)

Figure 3. Some torsional models with tooth compliance. Ii = mass moment of inertia of gear i; mi. = equivalent
mass of inertia Ii; m. = equivalent mass of all inertias; k. = equivalent tooth mesh stiffness; k", = tooth mesh
stiffness; em = tooth mesh damping; e(t) = displacement input representing gear errors.

distinction between translational and torsional models is not made according to the
appearance of the model, but according to whether the translational motion of the tooth
or the rotational motion of gear is modelled. As can be seen from Figure 3(b) and (c)
some torsional models are presented in the form of their translational equivalents, while,
in general, in such models the system is idealized as a pair of inertias coupled by a spring
which permits relative motion. With torsional models one can study the torsional vibrations
of gears in mesh, whereas with translational models the tooth of a gear is considered as
a cantilever beam and one can study the forced vibrations of the teeth. In either of these
models transmission error excitation is simulated by a displacement excitation at the mesh.
The first model which might be considered in this group is Tuplin's model discussed
in the previous section [7-9]. In 1956, Nakada and Utagawa [26] considered varying
elasticities of the mating teeth in their vibratory model. In their model the torsional
vibrations of two mating gears were simulated by introducing an equivalent translational
vibratory system. The time variation of stiffness was approximated as a rectangular wave,
and closed form solutions of piecewise linear equations were obtained for different
damping cases for accurately manufactured gear tooth profiles. Another mass and
equivalent spring model was introduced in 1957 by Zeman [12]. He neglected the variation
of stiffness and analyzed the transient effects of periodic profile errors. Harris's work
[27], published in 1958, was an important contribution in which the importance of
transmission error in gear trains was discussed and photo-elastic gear models were used.
In his single degree of freedom model, Harris considered three internal sources of
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 389
vibration: manufacturing errors, variation in the tooth stiffness and non-linearity in tooth
stiffness due to the loss of contact. He treated the excitation as periodic and employed
a graphical phase-plane technique for the solution. Harris seems to have been the first
to point out the importance of transmission error by showing that the behavior of spur
gears at low speeds can be summarized in a set of static transmission error curves. Harris
also appears to have been the first to predict the dynamic instability due to parametric
excitation of the gear mesh.
Johnson [28] argued in 1958 that the model of Tuplin in which the excitation due to
profile errors is described as a number of isolated transients could apply only to a
slow-speed gear system. He showed that in heavily loaded precision gears the elastic
deformation was considerably larger than possible inaccuracies of manufacture and that
the departure from constant velocity ratio under these conditions is, therefore, a con-
tinuously varying periodic function. Johnson discussed the characteristics of the frequency
spectrum of this function. He assumed constant stiffness and took the measured trans-
mission error as a forcing function. Similar work has been reported by Kohler [29] and
Wood [30].
Utagawa [31] considered graduaIly changing stiffness and predicted individual tooth
load cycles by adopting a piecewise solution. Predicted values showed good correlation
with experimental work. In the early 1960s, Utagawa and Harada [32,33] tested gears at
higher velocities and compared measured dynamic loads with their calculated results.
Their undamped single degree of freedom model consisted of an effective mass represent-
ing the inertias of pinion and gear, and a time varying tooth stiffness with which they
investigated ground gears having pressure angle errors [32] and pitch errors [33].
Tobe [34] presented what appears to be the first model in which the dynamics of a
tooth were considered separately from the dynamics of the gear wheel, with the resulting
equations then being coupled. He modeIled a gear tooth as a cantilever beam and
formulated tooth deflection as a function of dynamic load, and combined these equations
with the equations of motion for gear wheels which are under the action of external
torques and the unknown dynamic tooth load. Thus he combined translational and
torsional models, and calculated the dynamic loads on spur gear teeth. An approximate
method was used for the solution of the resulting integral equation. The errors introduced
into the results due to the approximate solution made it impossible to study the effect of
the transmitted load on the dynamic load. In 1967, Tobe and Kato [35] analyzed the
same problem with a simpler model, but used a numerical integration technique for the
solution of the equations.
In 1963, Gregory, et al. [36,37] extended the theoretical analysis of Harris [27] and
made comparisons with experimental observations. The torsional vibratory model of
Grebory et al. included sinusoidal-type stillness variation as an approximation. They
- treated the excitation as periodic, and solved the equations of motion analyticaIly for
zero damping and on an analog computer for non-zero damping. The experimental data
[36] and the computational results [37] generaIlY confirmed Harris's contention that
non-linear effects are insignificant when damping is more than about 0·07 of critical. It
was claimed that when damping is heavy the simple theory of damped linear motion can
be used. Between 1965 and 1970, Rettig [38], Bosch [39,40] and Aida et al. [41-43]
presented the examples of other studies in this area. Each author modeIled the vibration
characteristics of gears by considering the excitation terms due to tooth profile errors and
pitch errors, and by including the variation of teeth mesh stiffness. In the model of Aida
et al. time varying mesh stillness and periodic tooth errors were considered, and the
model was used for determining stability regions and steady state gear vibrations. A
comparison with experimental measurements was also made. In 1967, Opitz [44] used
 390 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

the equations derived by Bosch [39,40] to investigate the dynamic tooth forces in spur
and helical gears. In the single degree of freedom model used, viscous damping, time
varying mesh stiffness, backlash and gear error were considered. The non-linear equation
of motion of the model was solved by using an analog computer. The theoretical results
were confirmed by measurements and were also compared with the results of other
analytical methods that were then available.
In 1967, Nakamura [45] investigated the separation of tooth meshing with a single
degree of freedom model. He accounted for single and double tooth pair contact with a
square wave tooth mesh stiffness variation and used a sinusoidal representation of tooth
errors. He adopted a numerical piecewise solution, and concluded that the largest dynamic
load occurs immediately after the separation which happens at the specific speed defined
by the amount of transmission error and tangential load.
Bol1inger and Harker [46] investigated the dynamic instability that may arise due to
varying mesh stiffness. They used a simple single degree of freedom model with an
equivalent mass representing the inertias of the gear and pinion. Mesh stiffness variation
was assumed to be harmonic, which resulted in a form of the damped, forced Mathieu
equation. The solution of the resulting equation of motion was obtained by using an
analog computer, and it was shown that the dynamic load may be reduced by increasing
the damping between the gear teeth or by reducing the amount of stiffness variation.
In 1967, Tordion and Gerardin [47] used an equivalent single degree of freedom
dynamic model to determine transmission error from experimental measurements of
angular vibrations. They first constructed a torsional multi-degree of freedom model for
a general rotational system with a gear mesh. Then, only the equations of the gears were
considered for obtaining an equivalent single degree of freedom model with a constant
mesh stiffness and a displacement excitation representing the transmission error. An
analog computer solution was used to obtain the transmission error from the measured
angular accelerations. In this paper, transmission error was proposed to be used as a new
concept for determining the gear quality, rather than using individual errors.
In 1972 Wallace and Seireg [48] used a finite element model to study the stress,
deformation and fracture in gear teeth when subjected to dynamic loading. Impulsive
loads applied at different points on the tooth surface and moving loads normal to the
tooth profile were studied. Rather than lumping the inertia of the gear and treating the
teeth in contact as massless springs connecting the two wheel bodies, in their dynamic
model they treated the gear as a continuum and included the mass of the tooth investigated.
. It was shown for the case considered that a normal mode analysis of the cantilever beam
subjected to the Hertzian impact was inadequate while the results found by the finite
element model were in good agreement with the measured strains. In 1973 Tobe and
Takatsu [49] studied gear tooth impact by coupling a torsional model for the relative
rotary motion of a gear pair with a rectilinear model for the flexural vibration of the gear
teeth. The mesh stiffness in this model was taken to be a constant which depends upon
the point of impact. This work was based on an earlier work of Tobe and Kato [35]
where the solution was obtained by numerical integration. However, in this work, an
analog computer was used to solve the problem and an approximate solution was obtained
by considering only the fundamental mode of vibration of a beam which represented a
gear tooth.
Ichimaru and Hirano [50] presented a vibratory model composed of an effective mass
of the gear blanks and the stiffness of meshing teeth. Manufacturing errors under a given
operating condition were taken as the main excitation and the interaction between the
tooth deformation and the dynamic load was theoretically investigated. Although the
model resembled the ones presented previously, the solution technique employed made
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 391
it possible to consider the mesh stiffness as a function of the position of the mesh point
along the line of action and, at the same time, linearized the equation.
Cornell and Westervelt [51] extended and improved the dynamic models of Richardson
[52] and Howland [53] to cover contact ratios up to four. The effects of system damping,
the non-linearity of the tooth pair stiffness during mesh, the tooth errors, and the tooth
profile modifications were included in the analysis. The non-linear equation of the single
degree of freedom model was obtained as a piecewise continuous, closed-form solution.
The results of their analysis showed that the tooth profile modification, system inertia
and damping, and system critical speed can significantly affect the dynamic load.
In 1978, Kubo [54] used a torsional vibratory model to predict tooth fillet stress and
to study the vibration of helical gears with manufacturing and alignment error. Periodic
change of total tooth stiffness was included in the model. Also, an analytical method for
the calculation of the contact pattern on tooth flank was presented. A good agreement
was obtained between calculated and measured values of both tooth fillet stress and the
vibratory behavior of helical and spur gears.
Remmers [55] presented a damped vibratory model in which the transmission error of
a spur gear was expressed as a Fourier series. He used viscous damping and constant
tooth pair stiffness, and considered the effects of spacing errors, load, design contact ratio
and profile modifications.
Benton and Seireg [56] presented a simple single degree of freedom model with variable
mesh stiffness and studied the steady state response, resonances and instabilities of a
pinion-gear system subjected to harmonic excitation. They used the phase-plane method
to integrate numerically the equation of motion. The numerical results were compared
with experimental data and were used to discuss the influence of harmonic excitation on
the system response.
In a single degree of freedom model Ishida and Matsuda [57,58] placed emphasis on
the sliding friction between mating teeth and they studied the effect of friction force
variation on noise and vibration [57] when the meshing stiffness was assumed to be
constant. The phase-plane method was used for the solution. They also studied the effect
of surface roughness on gear noise [58] by first determining the radial vibrations of the
gear. Then the axial displacement of the gear was determined from the calculated radial
displacement by considering the flexibility of the gear-carrying shaft. (In this respect,
their mathematical model does not fit in this group of models.) The noise radiation was
calculated from the axial vibrations of the gear.
In 1981, Wang and Cheng [59,60] used a torsional vibratory model; however, their
primary concern was developing a numerical solution to predict the minimum film
thickness, the bulk surface temperature, and the total contact temperature in spur gear
teeth contacts. The computer code developed also predicted the dynamic tooth load by
assuming that the dynamic load was not influenced by the lubricant film thickness or by
the surface temperature. This assumption made an independent dynamic load analysis
possible. Although their dynamic model was a single degree of freedom lumped model
similar to previous ones, the variable tooth stiffness of the model were obtained by a
finite element method. In a later publication [61], they discussed some typical results to
illustrate the effects of gear geometry, velocity, load, lubricant viscosity, and surface
convective heat transfer coefficient on the performance of spur gears. In this study they
determined the effects of load sharing between a pair of teeth, variable mesh stiffness,
and tooth profile error on the variations of dynamic tooth load by using the mathematical
model they had developed.
It is interesting that the most recent models in this group still do not show much
difference from the pioneer models. The complications usually arise from the inclusion
392 H. NEVZAT 6ZGlJVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

of various effects such as damping and friction which were usually neglected in most of
the early models. Rebbechi and Crisp [62,63] considered the material damping of the
gear-wheel shafts, while the compliance of the shafts was neglected. The three degree of
freedom model is reduced to a two degree of freedom model for the study of the torsional
vibrations of a gear pair, and an uncoupled equation which gives tooth deflection. The
other effects included in the model were material damping inherent to the tooth, perturba-
tions of input and output torques, arbitrary tooth profile error, time variation of that error
due to deformation, and perturbations of the base circle due to profile errors. The effects
of kinetic sliding friction at the contact point and the sliding velocity on the dynamics
of continuous meshing were also studied [63].
In one of several studies on gear dynamics, Mark modelled a gear fatigue test apparatus
[64] by assuming rigid shafts, rigid gear bodies, and rigid bearing supports. As only the
gear teeth were modelled as elastic members, his model can be considered in the group
of "models with tooth compliance". However, he included the inertia of the shafts, and
the damping between the slave gear and its shafting into the model. Thus, the system
which was composed of four gears and two shafts was assumed to have three degrees of
freedom. He used a Fourier series representation of the excitation which was discussed
in detail in his earlier publications [65,66], and thus the computations were carried out,
for the most part, in the frequency domain by using the fast Fourier transform computa-
tional algorithm.
In 1984, Spotts [67] used the famous spring-wedge analogy of Tuplin to estimate simply
the dynamic load for use in gear design problems. The dynamic load was calculated by
considering constant stiffness in a single degree of freedom model and by assuming that
it can be expressed as the multiplication of some powers of velocity, stiffness and mass.
The equation for dynamic load was then obtained by using the condition that the
expression was to be dimensionally homogeneous.
Another translational model was suggested by Lin, Huston and Coy[68] in 1984. They
investigated the effect of load speed on straight and involute tooth forms by using finite
element tooth models, and showed that for stubby tooth forms there is considerable
difference between results obtained with finite element models and results obtained with
Timoshenko beam models. Also it was shown that the tooth form itself induces gear
vibrations which becomes increasingly significant at higher speeds. In the same years,
Ostiguy and Constaninescu [69] also made a finite element analysis of a gear tooth to
evaluate the natural frequencies and mode shapes, and to study the transient response
during the meshing period. Modal analysis was used in determining the transient response
of the system under time varying moving loads. Other significant translational models
for tooth dynamics which followed the work of Wallace and Seireg [48] that was discussed
earlier have been suggested by Wilcox and Coleman [70], Chabert et al. [71], Ramamurti
and Gupta [72], and Nagaya and Uematsu [73]. In most of these studies finite element
models were used. Umezawa et al. [74] used a single degree of freedom vibratory model
including periodic variation of tooth meshing stiffness and constant damping. In their
simple model for torsional vibrations they used the errors of gears measured with a newly
developed automatic gear accuracy measuring instrument, and accurately predicted the
dynamic behavior of the tested spur gear pair. The numerical solutions in this study were
obtained by using the Runge-Kutta-Gill method. Umezawa and Sato [75,76] used a
model developed to study the influence of pressure angle error, normal pitch error and
sinusoidal tooth profile error on the vibration of the profile corrected spur gear. In a very
recent paper Umezawa, Suzuki and Sato [77] modelled a helical gear pair with narrow
facewidth. In their single degree of freedom model developed for the study of torsional
vibrations they considered variable tooth mesh stiffness, damping and tooth errors. They
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 393
proposed an approximate equation for the tooth mesh stiffness which is based on the
theoretical deflections calculated by using the finite difference method. The meshing
resonance frequencies were also calculated by using the average stiffness in a meshing
period, and it was observed that the calculated resonance frequencies were in good
agreement with experimental values. Sato et af (78] also used a single degree of freedom
model in which they assumed that the torsional shaft stiffness is small compared to the
torsional effect of the tooth mesh stiffness to study the torsional vibrations of a gear pair
subjected to random excitation. Periodic variation of tooth mesh stiffness, damping and
sinusoidal transmission error were considered in the model, and the forced response
resulting from a randomly changing external torque was calculated by using an approxi-
mate technique. Although the accuracy of the solution was not found to be sufficient, the
method was suggested to be useful in certain applications such as random fatigue problems.
One of the recent publications in this group belongs to Masuda et af. [79]. The main
objective of this study was to predict the gear noise by adding a dynamic term to Kato's
semi-empirical equation. The dynamic model they developed is not much different from
the other torsional models in which variable mesh stiffness, damping, and profile error
of the meshing tooth are considered. The analysis was also expanded to helical gears.
Recently, Lewicki [80] used the classical single degree of freedom dynamic model for
a gear pair in modifying a NASA computer program prepared for predicting gear life.
In this work he combined the models of previous investigators for tooth mesh stiffness,
dynamic load calculations and gear life. Due to the Hertzian compression considered in
the computation of tooth mesh stiffness, the tooth mesh stiffness is not independent of
dynamic load, which required an iteration cycle for the computation of dynamic load.
By using the model, dynamic loads and gear mesh life predictions were performed over
a range of speeds, numbers of teeth, gear sizes, diametral pitches, pressure angles and
gear ratios.
In another recent publication, Yang and Lin [81] modified the torsional model of Yang
and Sun [82] by adding the torque due to the friction force between the mating teeth
and by considering the bending deflection and axial compression of a gear tooth in
deriving the mesh stiffness. In their model they also included Hertzian damping and
backlash, and the Runge-Kutta method was used for solution.

4. MODELS FOR GEAR DYNAMICS

Although the mathematical models in which the stiffness and mass contribution of the
shafts carrying gears in mesh were ignored showed good agreement with the experimental
measurements, it was realized in the late 1960s and early 1970s that dynamic models in
which the shaft and bearing flexibilities were considered were necessary for more general
models. Unless the stiffnesses of these elements are relatively high or low compared to
the effective mesh stiffness, the vibration coupling of different elements cannot be neglec-
ted. The good correlation that was obtained between the experimental results and the
predictions provided by many of the single degree of freedom models of the previous
section can be explained by the fact that the experimental rigs used in such studies
satisfied the basic assumptions made in the mathematical modelling. However, in practical
applications, these assumptions may not always be satisfied. One then needs more general
models in which the flexibility and mass of the other elements are considered as well.
The models that can be considered in this group are either torsional models in which
only the torsional stiffness of the gear-carrying shafts is included, or torsional and
translational models in which both the torsional and transverse flexibility of the gear-
carrying shafts are considered. In some models the lateral vibrations of gear blanks in
394 H. NEVZAT ozaUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

two mutually perpendicular directions are considered. However, considering two coupled
lateral vibrations of a gear shaft system makes the problem a rotor dynamics problem.
Such models will be discussed in a subsequent section. Still, some of the models for
studying the lateral vibrations in two directions will be mentioned in this group because
of the difficulty in drawing absolute divisions between mathematical model t}'pes. Typical
models used for torsional, and torsional and lateral vibrations of gears are shown in
Figure 4.

(01

(bl

Figure 4. Typical models for gear dynamics: (a) torsional model; (b) torsional and translational model. I ..
I. = mass moment of inertias of prime mover and load; 12 • I J = mass moment of inertias of gears; k" = torsional
stillness of shaft i; k", = tooth mesh stiffness; k 2 • kJ = stillnesses representing lateral nexibility due to shafts and
bearings.

In an earlier work Johnson [83] used a receptance coupling technique to calculate the
natural frequencies from the receptance equation obtained by first separately finding the
receptances at the meshing point of each of a pair of geared shafts. In the model, the
varying mesh stiffness was replaced by a constant stiffness equal to the mean value of
the varying stiffness and thus, a linear system was obtained. His work was one of the first
attempts at using a mesh stiffness in coupling the vibration of gear shafts. In 1963, Tordion
[84] presented a torsional model in which the torsional vibrations of two gear shafts were
coupled by a constant mesh stiffness. In his model all non-linear effects including backlash
were neglected and the general receptance technique was used to obtain the system
response when there is a periodic transmission error (which was then called "error in
action").
Seager [85] modelled a test gear-shaft system with three degrees offreedom by assuming
laterally flexible bearings, rigid shafts and flexible gear teeth. Thus, the rocking motion
of the gear was considered in addition to the torsional and transverse motion of the gear.
An important contribution in this area came from Kohler, Pratt and Thomson [86] in
1970. Concluding from their experimental results that dynamic loads and noise result
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 395
primarily from the steady state vibration of the gear system when forced by transmission
error, they developed a six degree of freedom dynamic model with four torsional degrees
of freedom and one lateral degree of freedom in the direction of the tooth force on each
shaft. They assumed the tooth mesh stiffness to be constant in their mode\. The spectrum
analysis of the static transmission error for the single-stage reduction gear unit used was
also given. In 1971, Remmers [87] suggested a similar model and made a harmonic
vibration analysis. He prepared a program to calculate vibratory bearing forces; dynamic
tooth load, and oscillatory motion of the gears as a function of the frequency of tooth
meshing errors. Theoretical predictions' were verified by the experimental results.
Kasuba [88] used one and two degree of freedom models based on his previous work [89]
to determine dynamic load factors for gears which were heavily loaded. He used a torJional
vibratory model which considered the torsional stiffness of the shaft. He also argued that
the rigidity of the connection shafts is much lower than the rigidity of the gear teeth in
meshing, and then decoupled the meshing system. The tooth error in mesh was represented
by a pure sine function having the frequency of tooth meshing. In his model meshing
stiffness was time varying.
Wang and Morse [90] constructed a torsional model including shaft and gear web
stiffnesses as well as a constant mesh stiffness. The torsional response of a general gear
train system to an external torque was obtained by the transfer matrix method. The
torsional natural frequencies and mode shapes determined from a free vibration analysis
correlated well with experimental results at low frequencies~ Later, Wang [91] extended
this work to the linear and non·linear transient analysis of complex torsional gear train
systems. In this later model he considered the variation of tooth stiffness, and included
gear tooth backlash, linear and non-linear damping elements and multi-shock loadings.
Three different numerical methods that can be used in the solution of non-linear systems
that cannot be approximated piecewise linearly were also briefly discussed in his work.
Fukuma et af. [92] published a series of reports on gear noise and 'vibration in whiCh
both experimental and analytical studies were reported. In these studies three-dimensional
vibrations of the gears were studied by including the flexibility of the shafts and bearings.
The mass of the shafts was lumped and a multi-degree of freedom model was obtained.
The gear mesh was modeled as a translational and a torsional spring with time varying
stiffness. The Runge-Kutta-Merson process was employed to solve the system equations.
In 1975 Salzer and Smith [93], and in 1977 Salzer, Smith and Welbourn [94] discussed
the real time modelling of gearboxes and offered analog computer solutions, claiming
that digital computers sometimes suffer frequency or memory limitations. They proposed
a six degree of freedom model for a car gearbox which included time dependent gear
tooth stiffness, non-linear bearing stiffness and loss of tooth contact. An audible output
was obtained by driving an amplifier and loudspeaker. Transmission error excitation was
generated by using a rectified sine wave representing periodic tooth profile errors. Spacing
errors were also included in the model. Salzer [95] developed a more detailed model for
a commercial gearbox in his dissertation published in 1977. Still, a minimum complexity
mathematical model was developed. The dynamic behavior of the gears, shafts and
bearings was represented by three torsional and five lateral freedoms. Lateral freedoms
were granted only at bearing locations by assuming that the intermediate shafting was
rigid. However, the flexibility of both the lay shaft and the output shaft was considered
by adjustirig the parameters employed for bearing stiffnesses. A constant mesh stiffness,
which was allowed to drop to zero on tooth separation, was assumed for tooth mesh. It
was shown that relatively small adjacent pitch errors were of greater significance than
usually imagined, and significant reductions in dynamic loads were predicted by reducing
bearing stiffnesses. In the same year Astridge and Salzer [96] analyzed a spiral bevel
396 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

gearbox, as a first step towards the analysis of the more complex rotor gearboxes of
helicopters. A 78 degree of freedom lumped-mass model was used for the dynamic analysis
in which the natural frequencies, mode shapes, and forced responses to displacement
excitation represented by transmission errors were determined. The model included linear
representations of bearing and housing stiffnesses.
In 1975, Rettig [24] modeled a single gear stage with six degrees of freedom, four
lateral and two torsional, with all lateral freedoms being in the same direction. He
considered a variable tooth mesh stiffness and presented simplified formulae for the
calculation of dynamic factors in three different regions: subcritical, main resonance and
supercritical regions. A comparison of the theoretical values with the experimental
measurements was also given.
Tobe, Sato and Takatsu [97] in 1976 presented a statistical method of finding the
relation between transmission errors and dynamic loads by using a torsional model with
a periodic tooth mesh stiffness and torsional stiffnesses for gear carrying shafts. Monte
Carlo simulation was employed to find maximum dynamic loads by means of an analog
computer. In 1977, Tobe and Sato [98] made a similar, but more detailed analysis in
which they assumed that the transmission error of a gear pair is composed of a certain
random component due to the irregularities of clearances and elastic deformations of
wear of bearings and gear teeth, and a harmonic component caused by the eccentricity
or pressure angle error. The effect of the random components of the error on dynamic
load was investigated by using a torsional model. In addition to time varying mesh
stiffness, backlash was also included in the model. Analog computer solutions were
obtained.
In 1977, Drosjack and Houser [99] modelled three gears in mesh to simulate pitch line
pitting. The torsional dynamic model developed included an equivalent circuit of an
electric generator as well as variable tooth mesh stiffnesses. Both time and frequency
domain responses were obtained by using Runge-Kutta integration techniques. A good
correlation between theoretical predictions and experimental observations suggested that
such a modelling process might be successfully utilized in diagnostic procedures for
geared systems.
The four degree of freedom torsional model for a lightly loaded geared system by Azar
and Crossley [100] was directed towards studying tooth impact in spur gears. They
considered sinusoidally changing tooth mesh stiffness, and included the effects of backlash,
torsional stiffness of shafts, and tooth form error. The digital simulation results compared
well with the experimental values found for the unloaded case, and it was concluded
that the model could be used to predict the torsional vibrations of lightly loaded spur
gear systems.
Tordion and Gauvin [101] studied the dynamic stability of a two-stage gear system by
using a torsional dynamic model. The parametric vibrations due to variable meshing
stiffness were studied and the influence of the phase angle between meshing stiffnesses
was presented. An intermediate shaft carrying a gear at each of its ends was assumed to
be rigid and the system was modeled with three degrees of freedom. Their result showed
that the phase angle between the two meshing stiffnesses acting on the shaft strongly
influences the range of frequencies over which instability occurs. In 1980, Benton and
Seireg [102] used a multi-degree of freedom torsional model to study the influence of
several factors on the stability and resonances of geared systems. These factors were
system inertia, variation in tooth mesh stillness, contact ratio and damping in the mesh.
Assuming that the tooth mesh stiffness in most geared systems is considerably higher
than the torsional stiffness of the shafting connecting gears, the gear pair was uncoupled
from the rest of the system, and the ellect of the system on the gear pair was included
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 397
as external loads which were calculated from the analysis of the system assuming rigid
teeth.
The object of the study of Kiyono, Aida and Fujii [103] was to obtain a simple model
of helical gear pairs which would show the differences between dynamic behaviors of
helical and spur gears. In the model constructed they considered the torsional, lateral,
longitudinal and rotational freedoms. The natural frequencies of the system were calcu-
lated by neglecting the dynamic-coupling terms and by assuming constant tooth stiffness.
The influence of gear carrying shafts was included by using equivalent frequency depen-
dent stiffnesses and masses of the shafts. Later, in 1981, Kiyono, Fujii and Suzuki [104]
developed a two degree of freedom model to study the transverse vibrations of bev~1
gears. This appears to be the first study in modelling bevel gears mathematically sci that
the difference between the vibrations of bevel gears and spur and helical gears can be
investigated. Some fundamental characteristics of the vibrations of bevel gears in free
vibrations, such as the effects of contact ratio, flexibility of shafts and damping ratios on
the stability of vibrations, were studied. It was found that the fundamental difference
between the dynamics of bevel gears and spur and helical gears was caused by the change
in the mesh direction which was considered in the model with a rotating spring-damper
element.
Kishor [105] constructed a four degree of freedom torsional model of the gear train
which consisted of two gears, two disks and two shafts. The non-linear vibrations due to
gear errors were studied for the constant tooth mesh stiffness model. An approximate
solution method was employed to solve the system equations. Toda and Tordion [106]
proposed a four degree of freedom torsional model for a gear system similar to the one
analyzed by Kishor. However, they included the non-linearity of the tooth mesh stiffness,
damping and tooth separation, and studied the effects of the transmission error excitation
on the dynamic response of the system. The results were obtained with a hybrid computer
and were given in the form of the tooth separation charts.
In the 1980s more and more complicated models have been developed in order to
include several other effects and to obtain more accurate predictions, while some simple
models were still developed for the purpose of simplifying dynamic load prediction for
gear standards. In 1980, Smith [107) used a four degree of freedom model for a gear pair
in which he considered two rotations and two transverse motion along the pressure line.
However, he assumed uncoupled vibrations and calculated the force between teeth from
a given transmission error. The dynamic force predicted by a relatively simple method
at particular frequencies was found to be sufficiently accurate for the study of gear impact
noise in diesel drives.
Furya el al. [108] suggested a torsional model in which a lumped parameter system
was used for gears and a distributed parameter system for transmission shafts. Thus the
natural frequencies of the gear system were examined over higher orders. The model, in
which constant tooth mesh stiffness is assumed and the excitation caused by tooth profile
errors and pitch errors is considered, was used to investigate the dependency of the
natural frequencies of a gear system on the dynamic tooth load. Analytical and experi-
mental observations led to the conclusion that under a regulated operating condition the
dynamic increment in the tooth load is dominated by a specific natural frequency of the
system, which makes it possible to model a gear pair as a single degree of freedom
vibratory system. However, it was concluded that this is not the case under rough operating
conditions.
The model of Kubo and Kiyono (109) for a helical gear pair included torsional and
translational degrees of freedom. Shaft stiffness, as well as variable tooth mesh stiffness
were considered. The model was used to estimate the dynamic exciting force due to both
398 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

profile and lead errors and due to periodic change of tooth stiffness with progress of
meshing. Several tooth error forms were investigated and it was concluded that the convex
tooth form error is the most harmless among the different kinds studied.
In an interesting study of Lees and Pandey [110], in 1980, the mathematical model of
a gear system and bearing vibrations measured at the bearing were used to estimate the
gear errors and resulting tooth forces. Estimated profile errors were found to be in good
agreement with measured values. A finite element model of a gearbox was used to establish
a direct link between vibrations and gear forces. Additional components were used in
this finite element model to represent a gear mesh. It was also shown how tooth pitch
errors give rise to harmonic components in the spectrum at frequencies which are'
independent of shaft speed.
Sakai et a1. [111] developed a torsional model for the rattling noise analysis of an
automotive gearbox. The non-linear characteristics of backlashes of the gear teeth and
also backlashes of the clutch hub splines were considered in this five degree of freedom
non-linear model. Analog computer solutions were obtained and the effects of several
parameters of the gear train on the noise level were studied.
The torsional model of Hlebanja and Duhovnik [112] was used to determine the
dynamic tooth forces due to pitch errors. A special emphasis was placed on systems with
large inertias (e.g., systems with flywheels) and high contact ratio gear pairs. In addition
to variable mesh stiffness, torsional stiffness of shafts and bearings were also included in
their four degree of freedom model. In this study it was concluded that the effect of pitch
error on the power transmitted is more pronounced at small loads. Winter and Kojima
[113] considered also the translational vibrations of gears in the pressure line direction,
and used a four degree of freedom model for a gear pair. Tooth backlash was included
in the model which was combined with a dynamic model of a practical system to study
the gear tooth loads when tooth separation occurs.
In an extensive work of Kasuba and Evans [114] the gear mesh stiffness in engagement
was calculated as a function of transmitted load, gear profile errors, gear tooth deflections
and gear hub deformation, as well as the position of contact. A unique feature of this
model is that off-line-of-action contact was computed. Also they introduced the distinction
between "fixed-variable gear mesh stiffness" which is calculated by making several
simplifications, and "variable-variable gear mesh stiffness" which they calculated. Their
torsional vibratory model was not much different from previous torsional models except
for the variable-variable mesh stiffness. With the model, in which the mesh damping was
included as well, the response to variable-variable mesh stiffness and the profile error-
induced interruptions of the stiffness function were calculated. Their computer program
calculates the mesh stiffness, the static and dynamic loads, the variations in transmission
ratios, sliding velocities and the maximum contact pressures acting on the gear teeth as
they move through the contact zone. Kasuba [115, 116] used the same model to study the
tooth mesh stiffness and dynamic load characteristics for several cases of normal contact
ratio and high contact ratio gearing. Later, Pintz and Kasuba [117] extended this method
to internal spur gears with high contact ratios. While the Runge-Kutta integration method
was used to integrate the differential equations of motion, an iterative procedure was
applied to solve the statically indeterminate problem of multi-tooth pair contacts, load
sharing, and operational contact ratios as influenced by both the gear mesh and the radial
deflections of components. It was concluded in this study that internal spur gear drives
have lower dynamic load factors than the equivalent external spur gear drives.
Troeder et a1. [118] constructed a model considering torsional, lateral and axial vibra.
tions of a helical gear pair-shaft-bearing system. Fourier expansion of tooth mesh stiffness
in the form of a square wave was used in the model. Tooth profile errors, as well as pitch
errors were considered in the model developed for a parametric study. The effect of
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 399
torque change was studied and the numerical results were compared with the results of
an approximate study [119].
In 1983, Bahgat, Osman and Sankar [120] analyzed the dynamic loads on spur gears
by using an approach similar to the one employed by Tobe [34]. They first formulated
the vibration of a gear tooth by considering a moving load on a cantilever beam shaped
like an involute profile. Then the equations of motion for the torsional vibrations of a
gear pair·were expressed in terms of an unknown dynamic load, and the resulting equations
were solved simultaneously. The solution was obtained by using a harmonic series
expansion satisfied at three discrete positions during a very small period of time within
the contact period. A numerical example was solved to illustrate the procedure.
In 1984, Lees [121] suggested a simple torsional model consisting of four inertias and
two torsional springs which represent a machine with a pair of gears. Although the tooth
mesh stiffness was assumed to be infinite, this model is included in this group rather than
in the last group, simply because the gear profile errors were considered in the model.
The model was used to predict dynamic loads in gear teeth and it was shown that, although
the formulation was nonlinear, a linearized version ·was adequate in many instances.
An eight degree of freedom model of Kii~iikay [122] for single stage spur and helical
gears included the axial vibrations of rigid disks which represented gear blanks, as well
as torsional, transver~e and tipping motions. Periodic tooth mesh stiffness, tooth errors
and external torques were considered, as were load dependent contact ratio and non·
linearities due to the separation of the teeth. However, stability analysis was made by
using a linearized model. Steady state solutions for the determination of dynamic tooth
displacements and loads were found by using perturbation methods and the linearized
model. The behavior of the non-linear model was also investigated. It was concluded
that the approximate solution obtained for the linearized model was very appropriate for
the determination of dynamic load.
In 1985, Kumar, Sankar and Osman [123] used a torsional model for a single stage
spur gear system in order to determine the dynamic tooth load and to study the stability
of the system. A new state-space approach was developed for the solution. This straightfor-
ward method was found to be less time-consuming for obtaining a time domain solution
of the mathematical model of the gear system. The model was used to study the effects
of changes in contact position, operating speed, backlash, damping and stiffness upon
the dynamic load.
In 1985 Iida, Tamura and Yamada [124] studied the excitation effect of friction between
gear teeth by considering only the vibration in the tooth sliding direction and ignoring
the vibration in the other directions in order to simplify the mathematical model. In their
single degree of freedom model they considered only the flexibility of the gear carrying
shaft. Their harmonic analysis revealed that the peak value of the vibrational amplitude
response curve caused by friction is almost independent of lubricant viscosity and
transmitted power.
Ohnuma el al." [125] used a non-linear four degree of freedom torsional model of a
diesel engine drive shaft system in order to study idling rattle of manual transmission.
The dynr.mics of the flywheel and clutch, backlash between the driven shaft gears and
drive shaft pinion and various idler gears as well as clutch hub spline backlash were
considered in the mathematical model. The Runge-Kutta-Gill technique was employed
for numerical integration. Thus, rattle noise was estimated for a defined engine torque
output and the calculated values were· compared with measured ones. In this· model,
equivalent values for tooth mesh stiffness and damping were used.
In two recent papers of Nielsen, Pearce and Rouverol [126,127] gear noise induced
by transmission error was investigated. They analyzed the torsional vibrations of a gear
with a single degree of freedom mathematical model obtained by assuming that torsional
400 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

modes can be uncoupled from other vibration modes. Their aim was to see which design
parameter would be most effective for noise control.
The mathematical models developed by Sato and Matsuhisa [128] in 1981, by ada,
Koide and Miyachika [129] in 1985 and by ada et al. [130] in 1986 are quite different
from previous discrete models. It was noted by the authors that to advance the study on
the dynamic behavior of thin-rimmed gears it would be necessary to investigate the flexural
vibrations of the gear body. In these models, the gear body was taken as a circular plate
and its flexural vibrations were studied by using Mindlin's method. The effects of the
gear teeth were considered in the proper boundary conditions. Natural frequencies and
frequency responses were calculated and compared with measured values. In the later
two works by ada et al. [129,130], the circumferential, radial and axial accelerations aAd
stresses were also measured under several running conditions, and the results were used
to investigate the effects of web arrangement in spur and helical gears on vibration and
dynamic loads.
Recently, Lin and Huston [131] used a torsional model to develop a computer program
for the design of spur gear systems. Variable tooth mesh stiffness was calculated by taking
a tooth as a cantilever beam and by considering also the flexibility of the fillet and
foundation and the local compliance due to contact forces. Damping due to lubrication
of gears and shafts were expressed with constant damping coefficients, and the friction
between gear teeth was included in the model with a frictional torque. The model was
developed for low contact ratio gear pairs and the transverse fiexibilities of the shafts
and bearings were not considered. A linearized-iterative procedure was used for the
numerical solution. The model was used to study the effects of several parameters such
as friction, damping, tooth geometry, stiffnesses, etc., upon the system behavior.

5. MODELS FOR GEARED ROTOR DYNAMICS

Pioneer models of this group are those for studying whirling of gear-carrying shafts,
rather than the dynamics of the gear itself. Although investigators have studied whirling
of disk-carrying shafts for many years, it was not until the I960s that the influence of the
constraint imposed by the gear on the whirling of geared shafts was considered in rotor
dynamics problems. Seireg [132], in 1966, investigated the whirling of geared shafts
experimentally, but he did not develop any model for the analytical study of the problem,
although he gave an empirical procedure for predicting the main resonance frequency.
The receptance model of Johnson [83] discussed in the previous section, however, might
be considered to be the first attempt to include the constraints imposed by gears in rotor
dynamics. The extensive model of Fukuma et al. [92] which is also discussed in the
previous section, could also be included in this group, since it is a three-dimensional
model and several possible motions of the gear and shaft are considered. However, their
model was not developed for rotor dynamics studies, but for gear dynamic problems.
In 1975, Mitchell and Mellen [133] presented experimental data indicating the tor-
sional-lateral coupling in a geared high speed rotor system. They pointed out that
mathematical models based on uncoupled lateral-torsional effects fail to provide the
necessary information for a proper design of high-performance machinery.
In 1977, Lund [134] developed a rather simple model to study critical speeds, stability
and forced response of a geared rotor. His analysis was based on the development of a
set of influence coefficients at each gear mesh by using the Holzer method for torsional
vibrations and the Myklestad-Prohl method for lateral vibrations. The results were coupled
through impedance matching at the gear meshes. He assumed constant tooth mesh stiffness,
and calculated the forced response of the system caused by mesh errors or by mass
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 401
unbalance. He treated the excitation terms in his analysis such that they were assumed
to be at the same frequency. A linear model was used to determine the natural frequencies
of the system as well as the dynamic loads.
Hamad and Seireg [135, 136] investigated the whirling of pinion-gear systems supported
on hydrodynamic bearings. First they considered the shaft of the gear to be rigid and
ignored the effect of the transmitted load [129]. The model was extended by assuming
that the gear rotor was also supported on isoviscous fluid bearings [136]. In this later
work, they also considered the transmitted gear load and its effect on whirl amplitude
and stability of balanced and unbalanced gears. However, the model developed did not
take account of the torsional vibrations. The solution was obtained by using a digital
phase-plane method.
Daws and Mitchell [137,138] analyzed gear coupled rotors by developing a three-
dimensional model in which variable mesh stiffness was considered as a time varying
three dimensional stiffness tensor. The "force coupling" caused by the interaction of gear
deflection and the time varying stiffness was considered in their model which predicted
the forced response of the system to excitations due to unbalanced rotors and mesh errors.
The transfer matrix method extended to branched gear systems was used for the solution.
Daws and Mitchell, however, did not consider the "dynamic coupling" terms in their
model. Later, Mitchell and David [139] showed that the magnitude of the dynamic
coupling terms is potentiaily as large as the magnitude of the linear terms that are included
in most rotor analyses. David [140] investigated the dynamic coupling in non-linear
geared rotor systems. He improved the model of Daws, in particular by including the
second order coupling terms. It was found that the inclusion of dynamic coupling effects
changed the predicted response amplitudes of a trial system by four' to eight orders of
magnitude at some frequencies. It was also shown that th~ dynamic coupling is capable
of producing system responses of the same magnitude as the unbalanced response. With
the same model, David and Mitchell [140,141] also studied the effects of linear dynamic
coupling terms by solving a trial problem and concluded that these terms produced
significant changes in the predicted response at all of the frequencies associated with
tooth passing. In all of these studies, the transfer matrix method was employed by
developing the method for nonlinear systems whenever it was necessary. Blanding [142]
also used the transfer matrix method in his dissertation published in 1985. The main
emphasis in this work was placed on the derivation of the time varying stiffness tensor
representing the involute spur gear mesh. The effects considered in the stiffness derivation
were bending, shear, compression and local contact deformation.
In the model developed by Buckens [143] in 1980 several simplifying assumptions are
made but the elasticity and damping of the bearings as well as those of the shafts, and
the damping due to friction at the contact between the gear teeth are retained. In his
model it was assumed that the contact between the gears is never interrupted.
Iida et al. [144-147] have published a series of papers between 1980 and 1986 on the
coupled torsional-transverse vibrations of geared rotors. Transverse vibrations in tooth
sliding and power transmitting directions were considered and it was shown that transverse
vibrations couple with torsional vibrations even though gyroscopic effects are neglected.
Ignoring the compliance of the gear tooth and other non-linear effects resulted in a linear
model which was used to determine the natural frequencies and mode shapes. In their
early work [144], a two shaft - two gear system was analyzed by assuming that one of
the shafts was rigid, and the response to gear eccentricity and mass unbalance was
determined. In later papers, a two shaft - four gear system was modeled by considering
the torsional flexibilities of all shafts, but the transverse flexibility of only one shaft. In
their recent paper [147], however, all shafts were assumed rigid in the transverse direction
but the countershaft was assumed to be softly supported. The theoretically determined
402 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

natural frequencies were compared with experimental values. The change in the natural
frequencies with the angle between the power transmitting directions of two gear pairs
placed on a shaft was studied by using their models.
In 1981, Hagiwara, Ida and Kikuchi [148] used a simple model to study the vibration
of geared shafts due to unbalanced and run-out errors. The lateral flexibilities of shafts
were considered using discrete stillness values. Journal bearings were represented by
damping and stillness matrices of order two which were calculated from Reynolds
equation as a function of constant tooth force, rotating speed, clearance and oil viscosity.
A constant mesh stiffness was assumed and the backlash and tooth separation were not
considered in the analysis. It was both analytically and experimentally observed that
unbalance forces and gear errors can excite both torsional and lateral modes, and large
displacements can be observed in torsional modes.
Iwatsubo, Arii and Kawai [149] studied the rotor dynamics problem of geared shafts
by including a constant mesh stillness and the forcing due to unbalanced mass but by
neglecting the tooth profile error and backlash. The transfer matrix method was employed
in the solution and free and forced vibration analyses were made. In a subsequent paper
[150] the authors solved a similar problem by including the effects of periodic variation
of tooth mesh stillness and a tooth profile correction. In this study a stability analysis
was also made by assuming a rectangular mesh stiffness variation.
Neriya, Bhat and Sankar[151, 152] found the finite element formulation very useful
in the dynamic analysis of geared trained rotors, since the coupling action in the gear
pairs could be easily incorporated into the mass and stillness matrices. They modeled a
single gear as a t~vo mass - two spring - two damper system, one of the set representing
a tooth and the other the gear itself. In their earlier work [153] the shafts were assumed
to be massless and an equivalent discrete model including lateral and torsional stillness
of shafts \vas used. In the later studies [151,152], the shafts in the system were modeled
by finite elements, and the coupling action between torsion and flexure was introduced
in the model at the pair locations. A constant mesh stillness was assumed and the natural
frequencies of the resulting linear system were obtained. The response of the system to
mass unbalance and to geometric eccentricity in the gear, and the resulting dynamic tooth
load were calculated by using undamped modes of the system and equivalent modal
damping values. Several numerical results were presented and discussed.

6. OTHER MATHEMATICAL MODELS

Another extreme in the dynamic modelling of gears is to neglect the flexibility of gear
teeth and to consider the problem as a torsional vibration problem. A model for such an
analysis consists of torsional springs representing the torsional flexibility of gear-carrying
shafts, and rigid disks representing the interia of gears and shafts. Although such models
were generally used to determine the natural frequencies of multi-gear-shaft systems
[154-156], some investigators have used the rigid gear tooth assumption even in determin-
ing dynamic loads or the effect of gear errors upon the dynamic behavior of the system.
For instance, in 1968 Rieger [157,158] modelled a drive train for torsional vibrations by
assuming rigid gears, and studied the ellect of various types of gear errors. In this model,
even the inertia of each gear was neglected. Mahalingam and Bishop [159] used modal
analysis in the solution of a torsional model of a pair of gears. The response of the system
to a displacement excitation representing periodic or transient static transmission error
was calculated. Radzimovsky and Mirarefi [160] modelled a gear testing machine for
torsional vibrations by assuming rigid gear teeth. They studied the effects of several factors
on the efficiency of gear drives and the coefficient of friction. Although some further
 MATIIEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 403
assumptions such as no geometric errors in gears and equal load sharing between gear
teeth in mesh were made, a close correlation was obtained between experimental and
theoretical results. Ikeda and Muto [161] studied the vibrations of a gear pair due to
transmission errors and tooth frictions by again using the rigid gear tooth assumption.
Their single degree of freedom model included gear inertias, torsional flexibility of the
shaft, and damping. The calculated gear vibrations compared well with the experimental
values in the frequency range tested. Also in the models of Wang [162,163] rigid gear
teeth were assumed. He developed two models [162]: a two mass model without an elastic
element and a three mass - one spring system. In both models time varying backlash,
impact and displacement excitations were considered, and dynamic loads due to backlash
impact were calculated by using a piecewise linear iteration technique. The theoretical
predictions were experimentally verified [162,163] and it was shown that severe tooth
loads may occur in lightly loaded gears due to impact. In another paper, Wang [164]
derived Hertzian impact formulas for a crossed helical gear pair as an example· for
Hertzian impact loads arising in rotational systems with backlash. These studies and his
models, which cannot easily be grouped according to the classification made here lead
to his interesting model which was discussed previously [25]. Another example for a
mathematical model with rigid teeth assumption to calculate dynamic gear tooth load is
the model of Osman, Bahgat and Sankar[l65, 166]. They studied the effect of bearing
clearances on the dynamic response and dynamic tooth loads of spur gears and reached
the conclusion that bearing clearances have considerable effects on the dynamics of gears,
especially at high speed. Their analysis basiCally relies on the geometric computation of
some angles and the use of rigid body dynamics.
There are also various studies mainly aimed at modelling complex systems containing
several gears as well as other mechanical or electrical elements, such as rolling mill
drives [167-169], machine tool gear drives [170], aircraft transmissions [96,171-179] and
other gear units [111, 125, 155; 180-184] some of which have already been discussed in
the preceding sections. While lumped-parameter models with several simplifying assump-
tions were employed in most of these analyses, models with finite elements were also
employed in some analyses [174, 175, 179]. Inclusion of other elements, especially the
elements with non-linear properties, usually complicated the models. Among such studies
the extensive program of gearbox modelling carried out by Badgley, Laskin, et al. [171-
173, 176] and by Sciarra, Howells et al. [174, 175, 179] are especially important. The
models developed in these studies are specifically for a helicopter rotor-drive, although
the methods employed are general and can be applied to different gearboxes. Several
papers published during the first stage of the research for this program have been
summarized by Badgley and Hartman [173]. More recently Sciarra et al. [174] described
the results of this extensive research. Dynamic tooth forces were calculated by using a
torsional model. The calculated tooth forces were then used in a finite element model of
the structural part of the gearbox in order to determine its forced response.
There have also been numerous studies on the dynamic modelling of planetary gear
trains which are not included in this review.
Before closing, it is worth mentioning that several different aspects of the researches
in gear dynamics were discussed by giving further references in several papers, in particular
in references [68, 74, 102, 106, 114, 123, 185-188]. Finally, papers written in languages
other than English have also been discussed in several references [74, 86, 88, 114, 122, 182].

REFERENCES
1. A. FISHER 1961 Machinery 98, 545-552. Factors in calculating the load-carrying capacity of
helical gears.
404 II. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

2. G. H. MARX and L. E. CUTTER 1915 Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical

Engineers 37, Strength of gear teeth.
3. L. J. FRANKLIN and C. H. SMITH 1924 Transactions of TIle American Society of Mechanical
Engineers 46, Effect of inaccuracies on strength of gears.
4. A. A. Ross 1927 American Gear ManufaclI/rers Association Paper. High speed gears.
5. E. BUCKtNGHAM 1931 Dynamic Loads on Gear Teeth. New York: American Society of
Mechanical Engineers Special Publication.
6. E. BUCKINGHAM 1949 Analytical Mechanics of Gears. New York: McGraw-Hili.
7. W. A. TUPLIN 1950 Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 16, 162-167. Gear
tooth stresses at high speed.
8. W. A. TUI'LIN 1953 l\laciline Design 25,203-211. Dynamic loads on gear teeth.
9. W. A. TUPLIN 1958 Proceedings of the International Conference on Gearing, Instill/tion of
Mechanical Engineers, 24-30. Dynamic load on gear teeth.
to. J. B. RESWICK 1955 Transactions of the American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers 77, 635-644.
Dynamic loads on spur and helical gear teeth.
11. H. STRAUCH 1953 Zeitschrift des Vereines Deutscher Ingiere 95, 159-163. Zahnradschwin-
gungen (Gear vibrations).
12. J. ZEMAN 1957 Zeitschrift des Vereines Dell/scher Ingiere 99, 244. Dynamische Zusatzkrafter
iOn Zahnbradgetrieben.
13. A. SEIREG and D. R. HOUSER 1970 Joumal of Engineering for Industry. TransactiollS of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 192, 504-515. Evaluation of dynamic factors for
spur and helical gears.
14. D. R. HOUSER and A. SEIREG 1970 Joumal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 192,495-503. Investigation of dynamic factors in
spur and helical gears.
15. E. J. WELLAUER 1959 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 59-A-121. An analysis
of factors used for strength rating helical gears.
16. A. I. TUCKER 1971 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 71·DE·l. Dynamic loads
on gear teeth, design applications.
17. A. I. TUCKER 1971. Mechanical Engineering, 29-33. Gear design: dynamic loads.
18. W. A. TUI'LIN 1961 Gear Load Capacity. New York: John Wiley.
19. American Gear ManllfaclI/rers Association Paper 215.01. Information sheet for surface durabil-
ity (pitting) of spur, helical, herringbone, and bevel gear teeth.
20. American Gear ManllfaclI/rers Association Paper 225.01. Information sheet for strength of
spur, helical, herringbone, and bevel gear teeth.
21. American Gear Manufacturers Association Paper 411.02. Design procedure for aircraft engine
and power takeoff spur and helical gears.
22. D. W. DUDLEY 1969 American Gear ManllfaclI/rers Association Paper 159.02. Proposed
application factors for industrial and high speed gearing.
23. F. A. THm..lA 1969 Society of Nal'Ql Architects and Marine Engineers Paper. An up-do-date
look at marine gear tooth loading.
24. H RETTIG 1975 Proceedings of the Intemational Federation of the TIleory of Machines and
Mechanisms 4th lVorid Congress, Newcastle. Vibrations in gear drives; test results and calcula-
tion method for dynamic tooth forces.
25. C. C. WANG 1985 Journal of Mechanisms, TrallSmissions, and Automation in Design, Transac-
tions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 107, 301-311. On analytical evaluation
of gear dynamic factors based on rigid body dynamics.
26. T. NAKADA and M. UTAGAWA 1956 Proceedings of the Sixth Japanese National Congress on
Applied Mechanics, 493-497. The dynamic loads on gears caused by the varying elasticity of
the mating teeth of spur gears.
27. S. L. HARRIS 1958 Proceedings ofthe Institution of Mechanical Engineers 172,87-112. Dynamic
loads on the teeth of spur gears.
28. D. C. JOHNSON 1958 Proceedings of the Intemational Conference on Gearing, IlIStill/tion of
Mechanical Engineers, 18-23. Excitation of resonant vibrations by gear tooth meshing effects.
29. H. KOHLER 1959. Ph.D. TIlesis, Unit'CTsity of Sheffield. The mechanism and measurement of
dynamic loading in spur gears.
30. B. WOOD 1960 Ph.D. TIlesis, Unit'ersity of Leeds. Sources of vibration excitation in spur gears.
31. M. UTAGAWA 1958 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers I, 397-403.
Dynamic load on spur gear teeth.
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 405
32. M. UTAGAWA and T. HARADA 1961 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers
4,706-713. Dynamic loads on spur gear teeth at high speed (influence of the pressure angle
errors and comparison between the reduction gear and the speed-up gears).
33. M. UTAGAWA and T. HARADA 1962 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers
5,374-381. Dynamic loads on spur gear teeth having pitch errors at high sp£ed.
34. T. TOBE 1961 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 4, 417-422. Dynamic
loads on spur gear teeth.
35. T. TOBE and M. KATO 1967 Proceedings of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers
Semi-International Gearing Symposium, 189-198. Dynamic loads on the teeth of spur gears.
36. R. W. GREGORY, S. L. HARRtS and R. G. MUNRO 1963-1964 Proceedings of the Institlllion
of Mechanical Engineers 178, 207-226. Dynamic behavior of spur gears.
37. R. W. GREGORY, S. L. HARRIS and R. G. MUNRO 1963-1964 Proceedings of the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers 178, 166-173. Torsional motion of a pair of spur gears.
38. H. RETTIG 1965 Konstruktion I, 41-53. Zahnkrafte und Schwingungen in Stirnradgetrieben.
39. M. BOSCH 1965 Industrie-Anzeiger 87, 2469-2478. Das dynamische Verhalten von Stirnrad-
getrieben unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der Verzaqhnungsgenauigkeit.
40. M. BOSCH 1966 Industrie-Anzeiger 88, 267-274. Das dynamische Verhalten von Stirnrad-
getrieben unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der Verzahnungsgenauigkeit (It).
41. T. AIDA, 1968 Transactions of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 34, 2226-2264.
Fundamental research on gear noise and vibration.
42. T. AIDA, 1969 Transactions of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 35, 2113-2119.
Fundamental research on gear noise and vibration, II.
43. T. AIDA, S. SATO and H. FUKUMA 1967 Proceedings of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers Semi-International Gearing Symposium, 151-160. Properties of gear noise and its
generating mechanism.
44. H. OPITZ 1967 Proceedings of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers Semi-III/ernational
Gearing Symposium, 199-209. Dynamic behaviour of spur and helical gears.
45. K. NAKAMURA 1967 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 10, 846-854.
Tooth separations and abnormal noise on power-transmission gears. .
46. J. G. BOLLINGER and R. J. HARKER 1967 TIle Journal of the Industrial Mathematics Society
17,39-55. Instability potential of high speed gearing.
47. G. V. TORDION and H. GERARDIN 1967 Proceedings of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers Semi-International Gearing Symposium, 279-284. Dynamic measurement of the
transmission error in gears.
48. D. B. WALLACE and A. SEJREG 1973 Journal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 95,1108-1115. Computer simulation of dynamic
stress, deformation and fracture of gear teeth.
49. T. TOBE and N. TAKATSU 1973 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 16,
1031-1037. Dynamic loads on spur gear teeth caused by teeth impact.
50. K. lCH IMARU and F. HtRANO 1974. Journal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 96, 373-381. Dynamic behavior of heavy-loaded
spur gears.
51. R. W. CORNELL and W. W. WESTERVELT 1981 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions
ofthe American Society of Mechanical Engineers 100,69-76. Dynamic tooth loads and stressing
for high contact ratio spur gears.
52. H. RICHARDSON 1958 Massachusells Instilllte of Technology Dynamics and COll/rols Labora-
tory Research MemorandulII 7454. Static and dynamic load, stress, and deflection cycles in
spur-gear systems.
53. J. HOWLAND 1958 M.S. TIlesis, Massachusells Ins tillite of Technology. An investigation of
dynamic loads in spur-gear teeth.
54. A. KUDO 1978 Journal ofMechanical Design, TransuctiollS ofthe American Society ofMechanical
Engineers 100,77-84. Stress condition, vibrational exciting force, and contact pattern of helical
gears with manufacturing and alignment errors.
55. E. P. REMMERS 1978 JOl/rnal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers 10, 715-722. Gear mesh excitation spectra for arbitrary tooth spacing
errors, load, and design contact ratio.
56. M. BENTON and A. SEIREG 1978 JOl/rnal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American
Society ofMechanical Engineers 100,26-32. Simulation of resonances and instability conditions
in pinion-gear systems.
406 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

57. K. ISHIDA and T. MATSUDA 1980 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 80-
C2/ DET-69. Study on pitch circle impulse noise of gear.
58. K. ISHIDA and T. MATSUDA 1980 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 80-
C2/DET-70. Ellect of tooth surface roughness on gear noise and gear noise transmitting path.
59. K. L. WANG and H. S. CHENG 1981 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 103,177-187. A numerical solution to the dynamic
load, film thickness and surface temperature of spur gears: Part I Analysis.
60. K. L. WANG and H. S. CHENG 1981 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 103, 188-194. A numerical-solution to the dynamic
load, film thickness, and surface temperatures in spur gears, Part 2, results.
61. K. L. WANG and H. S. CHENG 1983 NASA Lell"is Research Center Adr:anced POlI"er Trans-
mission and Technology 503-518. A computer code for performance of spur gears.
62. B. REBBECHI and J. D. C. CRISP 1981 Proceedings of the International Symposillm on Gedring
and POlI"er Transmissions, Japanese Society ofMechanical Engineers 2,61-66. A new formulation
of spur-gear vibration.
63. B. REBBECHI and J. D. C. CRISP 1983 Proceedings of the International Federation of the
TIleory of Machines and Mechanisms Sixth World Congress, Nell" Delhi, 802-806. The kinetics
of the contact point and oscillatory mechanisms in resilient spur gears.
64. W. D. MARK 1982 NASA CR 3626. Transfer function method for gear system dynamics
applied to conventional and minimum excitation gearing designs.
65. W. D. MARK 1978 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 63, 1409-1430. Analysis of the
vibratory excitation of gear systems: basic theory.
66. W. D. MARK 1979 JOllrnal of the Acoustical Society of America 66, 1758-1787. Analysis of the
vibratory excitations of gear systems. 11: Tooth error representations, approximations, and
applications.
67. M. F. SPOTIS 1984 Machine Design 56, 84-88. Estimating dynamic loads on gear teeth.
68. H. LIN, R. L. HUSTON and J. J. COY 1984 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper
84-DET-226. Dynamic analysis of straight and involute tooth forms.
69. G. L. OSTIGUY and I. CONSTANTINESCU 1984 Proceedings ofthe Second International Modal
Analysis Conference, Union College I, 286-291. Dynamic response of gear teeth.
70. L. WILCOX and W. COLEMAN 1973 Journal of Engineering for Industry, Tra/lSactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 95, 1139-1148. Application of finite elements to the
analysis of gear tooth stresses.
71. G. CHABERT, T. T. DANG and R. MATHIS 1978 JOllrnal of Engineeringfor Industry, Transac-
tions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 96, 85-93. An evaluation of stresses and
deflection of spur gear teeth under strain.
72. V. RAMAMURTI and L. S. GUPTA, 1979 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper
79-DET-38. Dynamic stress analysis of a spur gear tooth.
73. K. NAGA YA and S. UEMATSU 1981 Joumal ofMechanical Design, Transactions ofthe American
Society of Mechanical Engineers 103,357-363. Ellects of moving speeds of dynamic loads on
the deflections of gear teeth.
74. K. UMEZAWA, T. SATO and J. ISHIKAWA 1984 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 27, 102-109. Simulation on rotational vibration of spur gears.
75. K. UMEZAWA, S. SATO and K. KOHNO 1984 Blllletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 27, 569-575. Influence of gear errors on rotational vibration of power transmission
spur gears,·1. Pressure angle error and normal pitch error.
76. K. UMEZAWA and T. SATO 1985 Bulletin of Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 28
2143-2148. Influenl !""Jf gear error on rotational vibration of power transmission spur gear
(2nd report-waved form error).
77. K. UMEZAWA, T. SUZUKI and T. SATO 1986 Blllletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 29,1605-1611. Vibration of power transmission helical gears (approximate equations
of tooth stillness).
78. K. SATO, S. YAMAMOTO, O. KAMADA and N. TAKATSU 1986 Blllletin ofthe Japanese Society
of Mechanical Engineers 29, 1586-1589. Approximate solution of a gear system subjected to
random excitation.
79. T. MASUDA, T. ABE and K. HATIORI 1986 JOllmal of Vibration ACOllstics, Stress and Reliability
in Design, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 85-DET-2.
Prediction method of gear noise considering the influence of the tooth flank finishing method.
80. D. LEWICKI 1986 NASA Technical Paper 2610. Predicted ellect of dynamic load on pitting
fatigue life for low-contact ratio spur gears.
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 407
81. D. C. H. YANG and J. Y. LIN 1986, Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and AlIIomation
in Design, TrallSactions ofthe American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers Paper 86-DET-64.
Hertzian damping, tooth friction and bending elasticity in gear impact dynamics.
82. D. C. H. YANG and T. SUN 1985 Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and AlIIomation in
Design, Transactions of the American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers Paper 85-DET-2. A
rotary model for spur gear dynamics.
83. D. C. JOHNSON 1962 Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 4, 241-250. Modes and
frequencies of shafts coupled by straight spur gears.
84. G. V. TORDION 1963 American Gear Manl/facll/rers Association Paper 209.04. The mechanical
impedance approach to the dynamics (torsional vibrations) of geared systems.
85. D. SEAGER 1969 American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers Paper 69- VIBR-16. Dynamic
behavior of helical gears.
86. H. K. KOHLER, A. PRATT and A; M. THOMSON 1970 Proceedings of the Instill/tion of
Mechanical Engineers 184, 111-121. Dynamics and noise of parallel axis gearing.
87. E. P. REMMERS 1971 American Societ)'ofMechanical Engineers Paper 71-DE-23. The dynamics
of gear pair systems.
88. R. KASUBA 1971 American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers Paper 71-DE-26. Dynamic loads
on spur gear teeth by analog computation.
89. R. KASUBA 1961 Ph.D. 171esis, Unirersity of Illinois. An analytical and experimental study of
dynamic loads on spur gear teeth.
90. S. M. WANG and I. E. MORSE 1972 JOl/rnal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 94, 583-594. Torsional response of a gear train
system.
91. S. M. WANG 1974 JOl/rnal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers 96, 51-59. Analysis of non-linear transient motion of a geared
torsional.
92. H. FUKUMA, T. FURUKAWA and T. AIDA 1973 Bulletin of the Japanese Societ)' of Mechanical
Engineers 16, 1094-1107. Fundamental research on gear noise and vibration (6th report,
generation mechanism of radial and axial vibration of spur'gears).
93. M. W. SALZER and J. D. SMITH 1975 Proceedings of the International Federation of the 171eory
of Machines and Mechanisms Fourth World Congress, Newcastle 1, 175-177. Real time simula-
tion of gearboxes.
94. M. W. SALZER. J. D. SMITH and D. B. WELnouRN 1977 Proceedings of the World Congress
on Gearing, Paris I, 297-308. Simulation of noise from gears when varying design and
manufacturing parameters.
95. M. W. SALZER 1977 Ph.D. 171esis, Cambridge Unh'ersit)'. The dynamics of a layshaft gearbox.
96. A. ASTRIDGE and M. SALZER 1977 Proceedings of the 17lird EI/ropean Rotorshaft and Power
Lift Aircraft, 1-10. Gearbox dynamics-modelling of a spiral bevel gearbox.
97. T. TonE, K. SATO and N. TAKATSU 1976 BI/lletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 19,808-813. Statistical analysis of dynamic loads on spur gear teeth (ellect on shaft
stiffness).
98. T. TonE and K. SATO 1977 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers 20,
882-889. Statistical analysis of dynamic loads on spur gear teeth.
99. M. J. DROSJACK and D. R. HOUSER 1977 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper
77-DET-123. An experimental and theoretical study of the effects of simulated pitch line
pitting on the vibration of a geared system..
100. R. C. AZAR and F. R. E. CROSSLEY 1977 JOl/rnal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions
of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 99, 792-798. Digital simulation of impact
phenomenon in spur gear systems.
101. G. V. TORDION and R. GAUVIN 1977 Journal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the
American Societ)' of Mechanical Engineers 99, 785-791. Dynamic stability of a two-stage gear
train under the influence of variable meshing stillnesses.
102. M. BENTON and A. SEIREG 1981 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers 103, 372-378. Factors influencing instability and resonances
in geared systems.
103. S. KIYONO, T. AIDA and Y. FUJII 1978 BI/lletin ofthe Japanese Society ofMechanical Engineers
21,915-922. Vibration of helical gears I-theoretical analysis.
104. S. KIYONO, Y. FUJII and Y. SUZUKI 1981 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 24, 441-446. Analysis of vibration of bevel gears.
408 H. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

105. B. KISIIER 1979 Proceedillgs of the International Federatioll of the TIII?ory of Machilles alld
hlechallisms Fiftll World COllgress, MOlltreal, 1122-1125. Effect of gear errors on non-linear
vibrations of a gear train system.
106. A. TODA and G. V. TORDION 1979 Proceedings of /he Ill/emational Federation of the 171f!or)'
of Machines and Mechanisms Fiftlr World COllgress, MOil/real, 1130-1133. Dynamic behavior
of a mechanical system with gear transmission error.
107. J. D. SMITH 1980 Proceedings of the Illstill/te of Acoustics Conference, Lougilborough 151-160.
Gear impact noise in diesel drives.
108. Y. FURUYA, K. SETO, K. YAMADA and M. YAMANOUCHI 1980 Dulletill of /i1e Japanese
Society of MeclJallical Engineers 23,300-308. Influence of torsional vibrations of a gear train
system on tooth load.
109. A. KUDO and S. KIYONO 1980 Dulletin of the Japanese Society of Mecilanical E,igilleers 23
1536-1543. Vibration excitation of cylindrical involute gears due to tooth form error.
110. A. W. LEES and P. C. PANDEY 1980 Proceedings of /he COllferellce 011 Rotor Dynamics,
Institution of Mechallical Ellgilleers, 103-108. Vibration spectra from gear drives.
111. T. SAKAI, Y. 001, K. YAMAMOTO, T. O.GASAWARA and M. NARITA 1981 Society oj
Automotive Ellgilleers Paper 810773. Theoretical and experimental analysis of rattling noise
of automotive gearbox.
112. J. HLEDANJA and J. DUHOVNIK 1981 Proceedillgs, Illtemational Symposium of Gearillg alld
Power Transmissiolls, Tokyo, 43-48. Power transmission between teeth at small loads.
113. H. WINTER and M. KOJIMA 1981 Proceedillgs, Illtemational Symposium of Gearing and Power
TrallSmissions, Tokyo, 67-72. A study on the dynamics ofgeared system-estimation of overload
on gears in system
114. R. KASUIlA and J. W. EVANS 1981 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions oflhe American
Society of Mechanical Engineers 103, 398-409. An extended model for determining dynamic
loads in spur gearing.
115. R. KASUBA 1981 NASA CP 2210403-419. A method for static and dynamic load analysis
of standard and modified spur gears.
116. R. KASUBA 1981 Proceedings, Inlernational Symposium of Gearing and Power Transmissiolls,
Tokyo, 49-54. Dynamic loads in normal and high contact ratio spur gearing.
117. A. PINTZ and R. KASUBA 1985 Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automalion in
Design, Transactions of lire American Society of Mechanical Engineers 107,424-429. Dynamic
load factors in internal spur gear drives.
118. C. TROEDER, H. PEEKEN, A. LAscHETand K. TOOTEN 1983 Proceedings oflile In/ernalional
Federalion of Ihe TIleory of Mac/lines and Meclranisms Sixlh World Congress, New Delhi, 2,
936-943. Causes and ellect of torque change in hammering of toothed gears.
119. W. PINNEKAMP 1982 Konstnlktion 34. Dynamische Analyse eines Antriebes mit Zahnspiel.
120. B. M. BAIIGAT, M. O. M. OSMAN and T. S. SANKAR 1983 Journal of Mechanisms, Trans-
missions, and Automa/ion ill Design, Transaclions of the American Sociely of Mechanical
Engineers lOS, 302-309. On the spur-gear dynamic tooth·load under consideration of system
elasticity and tooth involute profile.
121. A. W. LEES 1984 Proceedings of the 17lird Inlematiollal Conference 011 Vibralions in ROla/illg
Machinery, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 73-79. Dynamic loads in gear teeth.
122. F. KU<;:UKA Y 1984 Proceedillgs of tile TIlird Intemational Conference on Vibrations ill Rotating
Machnlery, Instill/tion of Mechanical Engineers, 81-90. Dynamic behaviour of high speed gears.
123. A. S. KUMAR, T. S. SANKAR and l\1. O. M. OSMAN 1985 Joumal ofMechanisms, Transmissions,
and Automation in Design, Transactions of the American Sociely of Mecilanical Engineers 107,
54-60. On dynamic tooth load and stability of a spur·gear system using the state-space
approach.
124. H. LIDA, A. TAMURA and Y. YAMADA 1985 Bullelin of Ihe Japanese Societ)' of Mechanical
Engineers 28, 1512-1519. Vibrational characteristics of friction between gear teeth.
125. S. OHNUMA, S. YAIIATA, M. INAGAWA and T. FUJIMOTO 1985 Sociely of AUlOmo/h'e
Engineers Paper 850979. Research on idling rattle of manual transmission.
126. M. A. NIELSEN, W. J. PEARCE and W. S. ROUVERAL 1985 American Gear Manllfac/llrers
Associa/ion Paper 85FTM 12. Minimizing gear noise excitation.
127. W. J. PEARCE, M. A. NIELSON and W. S. ROUVERAL 1986 Proceedings of Ihe Second World
Congress on Gearing, Paris, 587-598. Reducing gear noise excitation.
128. S. SATO and H. MATSUIIlSA 1981 Proceedings, Illlerna/ional Symposium of Gearing and Power
Transmissions, Tokyo, 19-24. Noise and vibration of a thin helical gear.
 MATIIEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 409
129. S. ODA, T. KOIDE and K. MIYACIIIKA 1985 BlIlletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 28, 2434-2441. Dynamic behavior of thin-rimmed helical gears with various web
arrangements, I.
130. S. ODA, K. MIYACHIKA, T. KOIDE and T. FUJII 1986 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of
Mechanical Engineers 29,241-248. Dynamic behavior of thin· rimmed spur geJlrs with various
web arrangements. -
131. H. H. LIN and R. HUSTON 1986 NASA CR 179473. Dynamic loading on parallel shaft gears.
132. A. SEIREG 1966 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 66- WAI MD-6. Whirling of
shafts in geared systems.
133. L. D. MITCHELL and D. M. MELLEN 1975 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper
75-DET-75. Torsional-lateral coupling in a geared high-speed rotor system.
134. J. W. LUND 1978 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers 100, 535-538. Critical speeds, stability and response of a geared train
of rotors.
135. B. M. HAMAD and A. SEIREG 1979 Proceedings of the International Federation on the 11leory
of Machines and Mechanisms, Fifth World Congress, MOlllrcal, 1109-1112. Whirl of geared
systems supported on hydrodynamic bearings.
136. B. M. HAMAD and A. SEIREG 1980 Journal of Engineering for Power, Transactions of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers 102, 508-510. Simulation of whirl interaction in
pinion.gear systems supported on oil film bearings.
137. J. W. DAWS 1979 Ph.D. Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institll/e and State UniL'ersity. An
analytical investigation of three dimensional vibration in gear-coupled rotor systems.
138. L. D. MITCHELL and J. W. DAWS 1983 Society of AllIomotiL'e Engineers Transactions 9,
3366-3379. A basic approach to gearbox noise prediction.
139. L. D. MITCHELL and J. W. DAVIJ> 1985 JOllrnal of Vibration, Stress, and Reliability in Design,
Transactions ofthe American Society of Mechanical Engineers 107, 112-116. Proposed solution
methodology for the dynamically coupled nonlinear geared rotor mechanics equation.
140. J. W. DAVID 1984 Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Unil·ersity. Analytical
investigation of dynamic coupling in nonlinear geared rotor systems.
141. J. W. DAVID and L. D. MITCHELL 1985 JOllrnal of Vibration, Acoustics, Stress, and Reliability
in Design, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 85-DET-ll.
Dynamic coupling in geared rotor systems.
142. J. M. BLANDING 1985 Ph.D. 11lesis, Virginia Polytechnic IllS tillite and State Unit:ersity. An
analytical study and computer analysis of three-dimensional steady state vibration of multishaft
geared·rotor systems.
143. F. BUCKENS 1980 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 80-C21 DET·6. On the
damped coupled torsional and flexural vibrations of gear-controlled parallel shafts.
144. H. IIDA, A. TAMURA, K. KIKUCH and H. AGATA 1980 BlIlletin of the Japanese Society of
Mechanical Engineers 23, 2111-2117. Coupled torsional-flexural vibration of a shaft in a
geared system of rotors (1st report).
145. H. IIDA and A. TAMURA 1984 Proceedings of. the Conference on Vibrations in Rotating
Machinery, Institll/ion of Mechanical Engineers 67-72. Coupled torsional-flexural vibration of
a shaft in a geared system.
146. H. IIDA, A. TAMURA and M. OONISHI 1985 Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 28, 2694-2698. Coupled dynamic characteristics of a counter shaft in a gear train
system.
147. H. IIDA, A. TAMURA and H. YAMAMOTO 1986 BlIlletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 29,1811-1816. Dynamic characteristics of a gear train system with softly supported
shafts.
148. N. HAGIWARA, M. IDA and K. KIKUCHI 1981 Proceedings, International Symposium of
Gearing and Power Transmissions, Tokyo, 85-90. Forced vibration of a pinion·gear system
supported on journal bearings.
149. T. IWATSUBO, S. ARII and R. KAWAI 1984 BlIlletin of the Japanese Society of Mechanical
Engineers 27, 271-277. Coupled lateral-torsional vibration of rotor system trained by gears
(I. Analysis by transfer-matrix method).
ISO. T. IWATSUBO, S. ARII and P. KAWAI 1984 Proceedings of the 11lird International Conference
on Vibrations in Rotating Machinery, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 59-66. The coupled
lateral torsional vibration of a geared rotor system.
lSI. S. V. NERIYA, R. B. BHAT and T. S. SANKAR 1985 American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Paper 85-DET-124. Vibration of a geared train of rotors with torsional-flexural coupling.
410 II. NEVZAT OZGUVEN AND D. R. HOUSER

152. S. V. NERIYA, R. B. BHAT and T. S. SANKAR 1985. 17Je Shock and Vibration BlIlletin 55,
13-25. Coupled torsional-flexural vibration of a geared shaft system using finite element
analysis.
153. S. V. NERIYA, R. B. BHAT and T. S. SANKAR 1984 TIle Slwck and Vibration BlIlletin 54,
67-75. Effect of coupled torsional-flexural vibration of a geared shaft system on the dynamic
tooth load.
154. S. MAHALINGHAM 1968 Aeronal/tical Jo I/rn aI, Royal Aeronal/tical Society 72, 522-526.
Coupled vibration of geared systems.
155. T. A. H. PIXTON and R. ALI 1978 Proceedings of the Institl/tion of Mechanical Engineers,
AI/gl/st/ September, 64-66. Analysis of torsional vibration of an automotive gearbox.
156. S. SANKAR 1979 JOl/rnal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society oj
Mechanical Engineers 101, 546-553. On the torsional vibration of branched systems using
extended transfer matrix method.
157. N. F. RIEGER 1968 American year Manl/factl/rers Association Paper PI09.20. Gear-excited
torsional vibrations of machine drive systems.
158. N. F. RIEGER 1969 Machine Design 4, 115-119. Drive train vibrations.
159. S. MAHALINGAM and R. E. D. BISHOP 1974 JOl/rnal of SOl/nd and Vibration 36, 179-189.
Dynamic loading of gear teeth.
160. E. RADZIMOVSKY and A. MIRAREFI 1975 JOl/rnal of Engineering for Indl/stry, Transactions
of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 97, 1274-1281. Dynamic behavior of gear
systems and variation of coefficient of friction and efficiency during the engagement cycle.
161. H. IKEDA and E. MUTO 1981 Proceedings, International Symposil/m of Gearing and Power
Transmissions, Tokyo, 31-36. The simulations of the gear vibrations based on the actual
transmission errors and the tooth frictions.
162. C. C. WANG 1978 lOl/rnal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society oj
Mechanical Engineers 100, 363-373. Rotational vibration with backlash: Part 1.
163. C.C. WANG 1981 lOl/mal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers 103,387-397. Rotational vibration with backlash: Part 2.
164. C. C. WANG 1980 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 80-C2/ DET-55. On
derivation of Hertzian impact formula in the geared rotational systems.
165. M. O. M. OSMAN, B. M. BAHGAT and T. S. SANKAR 1981 Proceedings, International
Symposil/m ofGearing and Power Transmissions, Tokyo, 79-84. The effect of bearing clearances
on the dynamic response in gearing.
166. B. M. BAHGAT, M. O. M. OSMAN and T. S. SANKAR 1982 lOl/rnal of Mechanical Design,
Transactions of 17Je American Society of Mechanical Engineers 104, 724-730. On the dynamic
gear tooth loading as affected by bearing clearances in high speed machinery.
167. N. F. RIEGER and A. J. SMALLEY 1970 American Gear Manl/factl/rers Association Paper
229.14. Dynamic loads on gear teeth from transient shock.
168. J. SLAVIK 1983 Proceedings of the International Federation 011 the TIleory of Machines and
Mechanisms Sixth World Congress, New DellJi, 1327-1330. Dynamics of torsional driving
systems of heavy mills.
169. A. K. TIEU and P. J. GOODlSON 1985 lOllmal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, alld Automation
in Design, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 84-DET-14.
The effects of dynamic loads on the gearing of a rolling mill drive.
170. E. I. RIVIN 1980 American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper 80-DET-l04. Compilation
and compression of mathematical model for a machine transmission.
171. I. LASKIN, F. K. ORCUTT and E. E. SHIPLEY 1968 U.S. Army Aviation Laboratories, Ft.
Eustis, Virginia, Technical Report 68-41 (AD675457). Analysis of noise generated by UH-l
helicopter transmission.
172. R. H. BADGLEY and 1. LASKIN 1970 US Army Air Mobility Research and Development
Laboratories, Ft. Ellstis, Virginia, Tecllllical Report 70-12 (AD 869822). Program for helicopter
gearbox noise prediction and reduction.
173. R. H. BADGLEY and R. M. HARTMAN 1974 lournal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions
of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 96, 567-577. Gearbox noise reduction:
prediction and measurement of mesh-frequency vibrations within an operating helicopter
rotor-drive gearbox_
174. J. J. SCIARRA, R. W. HOWELLS, J. W. LENSKI JR., R. J. DRAGO and E. G. SCHAFFER 1978
U.S. Army Research and Technology Laboratories, Ft. Ellstis, Virginia, Technical Report 78-2A.
Helicopter transmission vibration and noise reduction program.
 MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN GEAR DYNAMICS 411

175. R. W. HOWELLS 1978 Power Transmission Design 20, 46-49. Transmission design with finite
element analysis: Parts 1,2,3 and 4.
176. R. M. HARTMAN and R. H. BADGLEY 1974 U.S. Army Air Mobility Research and Technology
Laboratory, Ft. Eustis, Virginia, Technical Report 74-58 (AD 784132). Model 301 HLH/ ATC
transmission noise reduction program.
177. M. A. BOWES, N. GIANSANTE, R. B. BOSSLER and A. BERMAN 1977 U.S. Army Air Mobility
Research and Technology Laboratory, Ft. Eustis, Virginia, Technical Report 77 -14. Helicopter
transmission vibration and noise reduction program.
178. M. A. BOWES 1977 American Helicopter Society Preprint 77.33·76. Development and evaluation
of a method for predicting the vibration and noise characteristics of helicopter transmissions.
179. R. H. DRAGO, J. W. LENSKI and A. ROYAL 1979. Proceedings of the International Federati~n
of the 17,eory of Machines and Mechanisms Fifth World Congress, Montreal, 910-913. An
analytical approach to the source of noise and vibration in highly loaded mechanical p<'lwer-
transmission systems.
180. J. THEISSEN and G. DIEKHANS 1983 American Gear Manufacturers Association Paper 429.07.
Dynamic gear forces in gear units with alternating output torques.
181. Y. INOUE and A. SEIREG 1984 Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in
Design, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Paper 84-DET-209.
Simulation of dual drive branched gear systems during selective engagement of the prime
movers.
182. J. BARAN and K. MARCHELEK 1973 Nonlinear Vibration Problems 1,547-559. The dynamic
investigation of the multi.degree gear transmission model with variable stiffness coefficient.
183. F. KUC;:UKAY 1986 Zeitschrift fir Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanit 66, 57-59. Rassel-
schwingungen in PKW-Getrieben.
184. A. LASCHET and C. TROEDER 1984 Compllters in Mechanical Engineering 3,32-43. Torsional
and nexural vibrations in drive systems: A computer simulation.
185. E. ERRICHELLO 1979 Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers 101, 369-371. State-of-the-art review: gear dynamics.
186. D. B. WELBOURN 1979 Proceedings of the Conference on Noise and Vibrations of Engines and
Transmissions, Instill/lion of Mechanical Engineers, 9-14. Fundamental knowledge of gear
noise-a survey.
187. D. R. HOUSER 1985 OEM Conference Proceedings, Philadelphia. Gear noise sources and their
prediction using mathematical models.
188. D. R. HOUSER 1986 Gear Noise Shorl Course Notes. Ohio State University: Columbus, Ohio.