Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad = Department of Mechanical Engineering Design of Spur Gear Machine Design —II yy, oN Edited and Compiled .} by 4 Dr. Sunil Kumar Gupta Courtesy: Mechanical Engineering Design by J. E. Shigley, McGraw-Hill Design of Machine Element by V. B. Bhandari, Tata McGraw-Hill 4Design Considerations for a Gear Drive In the design of a gear drive, the following data is usually given : 1. The power to be transmitted. 2. The speed of the driving gear, 3. The speed of the driven gear or the velocity ratio, and 4. The centre distance. The following requirements must be met in design of a gear drive : (a) The gear teeth should have sufficient strength so that they will not fail under static loading or dynamic loading during normal running conditions. (b) The gear teeth should have wear characteristics so that their life is satisfactory. (c) The use of space and material should be economical. (@) The alignment of the gears and deflections of the shafts must be considered because they effect on the performance of the gears. (e) The lubrication of the gears must be satisfactory.Spur Gear - Tooth Stresses The highest stress occurs at two locations: yrce W acts act t * At the fillet region near the base of the tooth. > theBeam Strength of Gear Tooth : Lewis Equation Analysis of bending stress in gear tooth by Lewis equation based on the following assumptions: The effect of the radial component (WW), which induces compressive stresses, is neglected. It is assumed that the tangential component (W) is uniformly distributed over the face width of the gear. This is possible when the gears are rigid and accurately machined. The effect of stress concentration is neglected. It is assumed that at any time, only one pair of teeth is in contact and takes the total load.Cantilever Beam Model of Bending Stress in Gear Tooth Gear tooth is everywhere stronger than the inscribed constant- strength parabola, except for the section at a where the parabola and tooth profile are tangent. ae Wi At point a Section modulus //c is b?-/6 Bending Stress cami = M = owl Constant- Te rena parabola By similar triangles t/2 l Pr zo 2 or i= a JCantilever Beam Model of Bending Stress in Gear Tooth Bending stress in gear nee ee - bP Briol” Berle W'p °* 8G)? y =2x/3p w (b) °* by Diametral pitch=z/ Circular pitch =P = 2/p and Y=nyLewis Equation 1 Lewis Equation o= > (14-2) 2xP Lewis Form Factor Y = > (14-3) Drawbacks of Lewis equation are: * The tooth load in practice is not static. It is dynamic and is influenced by pitch line velocity. * The whole load is carried by single tooth is not correct. Normally load is shared by teeth since contact ratio is near to 13s * The greatest force exerted at the tip of the tooth is not true as the load is shared by teeth. It is exerted much below the tip when single pair contact occurs. * The stress concentration effect at the fillet is not considered.Values of Lewis Form Factor Y Values of the (for a Normal Pressure Angle of 20°, Full-Depth Teeth, and a Diametral Pitch of Unity in the Plane of Rotation) berg * Both Y and y are Teeth functions of tooth shape (but not 0.353 sizé) 13 0.261 30 0.359 + Thererey Rane 14 0.277 34 0371 : 15 0.290 38 0.384 with the number 16 0.296 B 0.397 of teeth. 17 0.303 50 0.409 * Y is always less 18 0.309 60 0.422 for a pinion 19 0.314 15 0.435 * For same 20 0.322 100 0.447 material, pinion 21 0.328 150 0.460 is always weaker 2 0.331 300 0.472 24 0.337 400 0.480 than the gear. nasDynamic Effects Effective load increases as velocity increases e Velocity factor K, accounts for this (Barth equation) e With pitch-line velocity V in meters per second, 3.05+V P Ky = 365) (cast iron, cast profile) 6.1+V 5 - v= (cut or milled profile) 6.1 3: VV Ky= a (hobbed or shaped profile) 2 K,= as (shaved or ground profile) (14-6a) (14-6b) (14-6c) (14-6d)Modified Lewis Equation (Including Velocity Factor) e The Lewis equation including velocity factor ° Metric version ee K,wW' ~ &mY (14-8) e Acceptable for general estimation of stresses in gear teeth ¢ Forms basis for AGMA method, which is preferred approachGear — Fatigue Strength * Modified Lewis stress is to be compared with fatigue strength (Endurance limit for infinite life) of true material Se = kakpkckakeky S, ka = surface condition modification factor ky = size modification factor k. = load modification factor ka = temperature modification factor ke = reliability factor! ky = miscellaneous-effects modification factor S/ = rotary-beam test specimen endurance limit Se = endurance limit at the critical location of a machine part in the geometry and condition of useGear - Endurance Limit Modified Lewis stress is to be compared with fatigue strength of true material S.= Kakgk kak ky.’ * Surface condition modification factor (k,) =a. (S,)° * Size modification factor (k,) o Height of tooth, / = a (Addendum) + b (Dedendum) = 2.25/P . o The tooth thickness r=\(4/x) (from Lewis) where x = 3¥/(2P), (Y Lewis form factor, P diametral pitch =z/p=m(module)) o The equivalent diameter d, of a rectangular section (gear) in bending is d, = 0.808V(b7). o Marin size factor k, = (d,/0.3)°!7 * Load modification factor (k,) = 1 (bending) e Temperature modification factor (k,) Reliability factor (k,)Gear - Endurance Limit ° Miscellaneous-effects modification factor (Aj) (account for gear one way bending, Moore rotating specimen both way bending) ° Gear tooth is subjected only to one-way bending. Exceptions include idler gears and gears used in reversing mechanisms ° One-way bending the steady and alternating stress components are 6, = 6,, =6/2 (Lewis stress) 1 revolution —>j Time Driving and driven gears Idler gear Lt revetution —e] (e) Load fsctuation are Driving gear Idler gear Driven gear ct teen 13Gear - Endurance Limit ¢ Ifa material exhibited a Goodman failure locus eerie Se Sur e Since S, and S,, are equal for one-way bending SiSut S= So Su ° S,=0/2, and S,’= 0.58, ut oa 25S _ 28 © 0584+ Su 0541 = 1.335, * Now k= 0/S,’= 1.33 S,’/S,’= 1.33.Gear - Endurance Limit ¢ Ifa material exhibited a Gerber failure locus e Since S, = S,, for one-way bending 5, = 5 ° S, = 0/2, and S,’=0.5S,, a = 557 i e [14/1 +405) = 1.668, © Now ky= 0/S,’= 1.66 S,’/S,’= 1.66. it 4se 3 -1+ 1 (-1+J+4 ) e Since a Gerber locus runs in and among fatigue data and Goodman does not, we will use k,= 1.66AGMA Method The American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) provides arecommended method for gear design. It includes bending stress and contact stress as two failure modes. It incorporates modifying factors to account for various situations. It imbeds much of the detail in tables and figures. Assumptions : The contact ratio is between 1 and 2. There is no interference between tips and root fillets of mating teeth and no undercutting of teeth above theoretical start of active profile. No teeth are pointed. There is backlash. (otherwise not run freely, due to excessive friction) The root fillets are standard, assumed smooth, and produced by a generating process. The friction forces are neglected.Bending Stress 1 KyKp bm J] op = W'KoK, K; where © W‘ is the tangential transmitted load, Ibf (N) K, is the overload factor K, is the dynamic factor K; is the size factor Pj is the transverse diametral pitch (b) is the face width of the narrower member, in (mm) Kym —-» is the load-distribution factor Kg is the rim-thickness factor if is the geometry factor for bending strength (which includes root fillet stress-concentration factor Kr) (m_) is the transverse metric moduleContact Stress where W', Ko, Ky. Ks, Km. , and b are the same terms as defined for Eq. (14-15). For U.S. customary units (SI units), the additional terms are Cp __. isan elastic coefficient, (/N/mm?) Cy is the surface condition factor dp is the pitch diameter of the pinion, in (mm) I is the geometry factor for pitting resistanceBending stress and related factors . . 1 Knke Bending stress 0, =W Kok Ks Fe 7 W’ is the tangential transmitted load, (N) Jis the geometry factor for bending strength K, is the dynamic factor K, is the overload factor K, is the size factor b is the face width of the narrower member, (mm) K,, is the load-distribution factor K,; is the rim-thickness factor m is the transverse metric moduleGeometry Factor J e Accounts for shape of tooth in bending stress equation ¢ Includes e A modified Lewis form factor Y (obtained from AGMA 908- B89) ° Fatigue stress-concentration factor Ky e AGMA equation for geometry factor is se Kr ¢ For most common case of spur gear with 20° pressure angle, J can be read directly from Figure (next slide) and Table. 20Fatigue Stress-Concentration Factor e A photo-elastic investigation gives an estimate of fatigue stress- concentration factor as L M Ky=H+ (:) (;) (14-9) where H = 0.34 — 0.458 366 26 L = 0.316 — 0.458 366 26 M = 0.290 + 0.458 366 26 __ =P "GD +b—17 Where, 7; is the fillet radius (generally 0.30/P), b is the dedendum, and d is the pitch diameter. 2Spur-Gear Geometry Factor J 06 055 050 [Load api ap of oe 2 is 7 20 0S WS BW LS TS * Manufacturing tolerances are small (high-precision gears) - use HPSTC. * Ifnot precision, one pair of teeth may take all load at tip (worst condition) 5,Spur-Gear Geometry Factor J Teeth having ® = 20°, a Number of teeth 18 19 20 21 22 24 26 28 30 34 38 45 50 60 75 100 150 300 Rack 1 0.244 86 0.247 94 0.250 72 0.253 23, 0.255 52 0.259 51 0:262 89 0.265 80 0.268 31 0.272 47 0.275 75 0.280 13 0.282 52 0.286 13, 0.289 79 0.293 53, 0.297 38 0.301 41 0.305 71 17 0.324 04 0.330 29 0.336 00 0.341 24 0.346 07 0.354 68 0.362 11 0.368 60 0.374 62 0.383 94 0.391 70 0.402 23 0.408 08 0.417 02 0.426 20 0.435 61 0.445 30 0.455 26 0.465 54 Im, b = 1.25m and r, Number of teeth in mating gear 25 0.332 14 0.338 78 0.344 85 0.350 44 0.355 59 0.364 77 0.372 72 0.379 67 0.385 80 0.396 71 0.404 46 0.415 79 0.422 08 0.431 73, 0.441 63, 0.451 80 0.462 26 0.473 04 0.484 15, 35 0.338 40 0.345 37 0.351 76 0.357 64 0.363 06 0.372 75 0.381 15 0.388 51 0.395 00 0.405 94 0.414 80 0.426 85 0.435 55 0.443 83 0.454 40 0.465 27 0.476 45 0.487 98 0.499 88 50 0.344 04 0.351 34 0.358 04 0.364 22 0.369 92 0.380 12 0.388 97 0.396 73 0.403 59 0.415 17 0.424 56 0.437 35, 0.444 48 0.455 42 0.466 68 0.478 27 0.490 23, 0.502 56 0.515 29 85 0.350 50 0.358 22 0.365 32 0.371 86 0.377 92 0.388 77 0.398 21 0.406 50 0.413 83 0.426 24 0.436 33, 0.450 10 0.457 78 0.469 60 0.481 79 0.494 37 0.507 36 0.520 78 0.534 67 300 0.355 94 0.364 05 0.371 51 0.378 41 0.384 79 0.396 26 0.406 25 0.415 OF 0.422 83 0.436 04 0.446 80 0.461 52 0.469 75 0.482 43 0.495 54 0.509 09 0.523 12 0.537 65 0.552 72 1000 0.361 12 0.369 63 0.377 49 0.384 75 0.391 48 0.403 60 0.414 18 0.423 51 0.431 79 0.445 86 0.457 35 0.473 10 0.481 93 0.495 57 0.509 70 0.524 35 0.539 54 0.555 33 0.571 73Dynamic Factor K,, e Accounts for internally generated increased load (termed as transmission error) with increased speed e Some of the effects that produce transmission error are: ° Inaccuracies produced in the generation of the tooth profile; these include errors in tooth spacing, profile lead, and runout ° Vibration of the tooth during meshing due to the tooth stiffness ° Magnitude of the pitch-line velocity ° Dynamic unbalance of the rotating members ° Wear and permanent deformation of contacting portions of the teeth ° Gear shaft misalignment and the linear and angular deflection of the shaft ° Tooth friction 24Dynamic Factor K,, e A set of quality numbers define tolerances for gears manufactured to a specified accuracy and to account the transmission error. © Quality numbers 3 to 7 include most commercial-quality gears. © Quality numbers 8 to 12 are of precision quality. ¢ The AGMA transmission accuracy-level number Q,, is basically the same as the quality number. 25Dynamic Factor K,, e Dynamic Factor equation Ky={\ 7 7 b (14-27) (* + ad manta A=50+56(1 — B) (14-28) B=0.25(12-Q,)°7 e Or can obtain value directly from Figure (next slide). ¢ Maximum recommended velocity for a given quality number, (14-29) (Vi)max = | [A+ (Qo —30P —— m/s 200 26Dynamic factor, K, Dynamic Factor K,, Pitch-line velocity. v,, (m/s) 20 30 Pitch-line velocity, v, (ft/min) 10000Overload Factor Ko © To account for likelihood of increase in nominal tangential load due to particular application (i.e. variation in torque due to firing of cylinders in ICE). ¢ It reflects the degree of non-uniformity of driving and load torques e Recommended values, Table of Overload Factors, Kg Driven Machine Power source Uniform Moderate shock Heavy shock Uniform 1.00 25 I Light shock 125 1.50 2.00 Medium shock — 1.50 1.75 DOSize Factor K, e Accounts for fatigue size effect, and non-uniformity of material properties for large sizes © It depends upon ° Tooth size ° Diameter of part ° Ratio of tooth size to diameter of part ° Face width ° Area of stress pattern ° Ratio of case depth to tooth size ° Hardenability and heat treatment 29Size Factor K, e AGMA has not established size factors e Could apply fatigue size factor method from Marin Equation, where gear size factor is the reciprocal of the Marin size factor k,. Applying known geometry information for the gear tooth, Calculation: e Height of tooth, / = a (Addendum) + b (Dedendum) = 2.25/P . The tooth thickness t =V(4/x) (from Lewis) where x = 3Y/(2P), (¥ Lewis form factor, P diametral pitch =z/p=m(module)) e The equivalent diameter d, of a rectangular section (gear) in bending is d, = 0.808V(b1). © Marin size factor k, = (d/0.3)-°'!” K=I/ k, =0.904(bmv(Y))°°35 e Ifusing equation, K, is less than 1, take K;=1 30Load-Distribution Factor K,, ' e Accounts for non-uniform distribution of load across the line of contact ¢ Depends on mounting (any misalignment) and face width (axial deviation in tooth form) ¢ Load-distribution factor is currently only defined for the following conditions as face load distribution factor (C,,7) ° Face width to pinion pitch diameter ratio b/d < 2 ° Gears mounted between bearings ° Face widths up to 1000 mm ° Contact across the full width of the narrowest member @ 6) 31Load-Distribution Factor K,, e Face load-distribution factor Kn = Cg = 1 + Cine(Cpp Com + CmaCe) (14-30) ¢ Grinding of tooth edges to prevent edge loading is crowning 1 for uncrowned teeth Cao ii 0.8 for crowned teeth | crowning ¢ Face width (misalignment magnification- pinion proportion factor) ‘et mamens Toon segment b Fog 70.025 bs 25mm be b ce . Cop =4 gg 70.0375 +4920") 25 0.175 Centerline of gear face Centerline of Centerline of bearing bearing Fig. 14-10 33Load-Distribution Factor K,, e Manufacturing accuracy (mesh alignment factor — account for alignment of axes of rotation) Cnq an be obtained from Eq. (14-34) with Table 14-9 Cna = A+ Bb + Cb* Table 14-9 Condition Bi c Empirical Constants Open gearing 0.247 0.0167 —0.765(10"*) A, B, and C for ‘Commercial, enclosed units 0.127 0.0158 —0.930(10~4) Eq. (14-34), Face Precision, enclosed units 0.0675 0.0128. -0.926(10~) Width F in Inches* Extraprecision enclosed gear units 0.00360 0.0102. —0.822(10~4) Source: ANSUAGMA 2001-D04. *See ANSVAGMA 2101-D04, pp. 20-22, for SI formulation e Orcan read C,,, directly from Fig. 14-11Mesh alignment factor, Cay 0.90 080 070 0.60 050 040 030 020 0.10 00, Load-Distribution Factor K,, Commercial enclosed gear units Precision enclosed gear units Exira precision enclosed gear units Of Cys 8 Bg, (14-34) 10 5 20 25 30 38 Face width (in) Fig. 14-11 35,Load-Distribution Factor K,, (approximate and conservative) e An approximate and conservative way ¢ Rule of thumb: 8m 1.2 a4 For mg < 1.2 2.249) K,=1.61n Ca?) For mg > 1.2 K,=10 0 1 jn sl es 05.06 08 10 12 2 30 4 5 678910 Backup ratio, my 38Gear Bending Fatigue Strength e The effective fatigue stress (o,) must be compared with the corresponding fatigue strength. 1. Strength of true material from data book (Endurance limit is to be corrected for gear) 2. Strength of gear material from AGMA data (Partially corrected data for gear) 39Gear Bending Fatigue Strength 1. Strength of true material from data book (Endurance limit is to be corrected for gear) Se = kakokckakeks S, ka = surface condition modification factor kp = size modification factor k. = load modification factor kq = temperature modification factor ke = reliability factor! ky = miscellaneous-effects modification factor S!, = rotary-beam test specimen endurance limit Se = endurance limit at the critical location of a machine part in the geometry and condition of use 40AGMA Gear Bending Fatigue Strength 2. Strength of gear material from AGMA data (Partially corrected data for gear) e The published AGMA data for bending fatigue uses allowable stress numbers rather than strengths. We will refer to them as strengths for consistency. The published AGMA data for bending fatigue strength are partially corrected fatigue strength. Since they are generated with appropriately sized parts having the same geometry, surface finish etc., as the gears to be designed. e The gear strength values are only for use with the AGMA stress values, and should not be compared with other true material strengths. There are still three correction factors that need to be applied to the published AGMA bending fatigue strength data. 41Bending Strengths for Steel Gears Table 14-3 Repeatedly Applied Bending Strength 5, at 10” Cycles and 0.99 Reliability for Steel Gears Source: ANSVAGMA 2001-D04. ee cr CTE Surface Allowable Bending Stress Number S,? psi Cee A Steel? ‘Through-hardened Flame* or induction hardened with type A pattern® Flame* or induction hardened! with type B pattem’® Carburized and hardened Nitrided* (through- hardened steels) Nitralloy 135M, Nitrided*? Nitralloy N, and 2.5% ‘chrome (no aluminum) Ceca See Fig. 14-2 See Table 8* See Table 8* See Table 9* 83.5 HRISN 87.5 HRISN Dy = St (ons See Fig. 14-2 45.000 22.000 $5000 See Fig. 14-3 See Fig. 14-4 or oes See Fig. 14-2 = 55 000 - 22.000 - 65 000 or 75.000 70.000° See Fig. 14-3 = See Fig. 14-4 See Fig. 4-4Bending Strengths for Iron and Bronze Gears Table 14-4 Repeatedly Applied Bending Strength S; for Iron and Bronze Gears at 10” Cycles and 0.99 Reliability Source: ANSVAGMA 2001-D04. eee De Heat Oa So ed ec Ce cucae ecu eee eee Ea ASTM A48 gray ‘Class 20 As cast - 5000 hema Class 30 Ascast 174 HB 8500 ‘Class 40 Ascast 201 HB 13.000, ASTM A536 ductile Grade 60-40-18 Annealed 140 HB 22 000-33 000, (aodules) Iron Grade 80-55-06 Quenched and, 179 HB 2000-33 000 tempered Grade 10-70-03 Quenched and 20HB 27000-40000 tempered Grade 120-90-02 Quenched and 269 HB 31 000-44 000, tempered Bronze ‘Sand cast Minimum tensile strength $700 40.000 psi ASTM B-148 Heat treated Minimum tensile strength 23 600 Alloy 954 90 000, 43Allowable bending stress number, S, kpsi Bending Strengths for Through-hardened Steel Gears 50 40 30 20 Grade 2 S,= 102 Hy + 16 400 psi Metallurgical and quality control procedure required Grade 1 S,= 71.3 Hy + 12.800 psi 150 200 250 300 Brinell hardness, Hy Fig. 14-2 350 400 450Bending Strengths for Allowable bending stress number, S, kpsi itrided Through-hardened Steel Gears 80 70 40 a Metallurgical and quality control procedures required Grade 2 = 108.6Hy + 15 890 psi eee eee Grade 1 S, = 82.3Hy + 12 150 psi 275 300 325 350 Core hardness, Hy Fig. 14-3 45Allowable bending stress numbers, S, kpsi Bending Strengths for Nitriding Steel Gears 70 50 Metallurgical and quality control procedures required Grade 3 - 2.5% Chrome S,= 105.2Hy +29 280 psi Grade 2 ~ 2.5% Chrome S,= 105.2Hy + 22 280 psi Grade 2 — Nitralloy S,= 113.8Hy + 16 650 psi Grade 1 — 2.5% Chrome $,= 105.2H, +9280 psi nnn = ete EE rade 1 — Nitralloy S,= 86.2, + 12 730 psi 30, 250 275 300 325 Core hardness, Hy Fig. 144 350 46AGMA - Allowable Bending Stress Ss -*i_y fb KrKp /” Sj Fb =Partially corrected bending fatigue strength Syy= Fully corrected bending fatigue strength K, is the stress cycle factor for bending stress K; is the temperature factors Kz is the reliability factors S; is the AGMA factor of safety, a stress ratio So _ Spo_Ki Se Sp heKy Allowable stress op qu = 47Stress-Cycle Factors K;, e AGMA strengths are for 107 cycles and for 107 cycles K;=1 * Stress-cycle factors account for other than10’ design cycles. + Ky = 9.4518 N O18 t t Ky =6.1514N O12 1— Kz, = 4.9404 N ~©.1045 K, = 1.3558. Ky=2.3194.N 0° Ky = 1.6831 N 023 102 1083 10+ 108 106 107 108 109 1910 Number of load cycles N 48Temperature Factor K; e AGMA has not established values for this factor. e For temperatures up to 250°F (120°C), Kr= 1 is acceptable. _ 460+Tp K rT 620 T; is the oil temperature in °F. 49Reliability Factor Kp Accounts for statistical distributions of material fatigue failures Does not account for load variation Use below table Since reliability is highly nonlinear, if interpolation between table values is needed, use the least-squares regression fit, 0.658 — 0.0759 In(l — R) 0.5 < R < 0.99 (14-38) 0.50 — 0.109 In(1 — R) 0.99 < R < 0.9999 ke={ Kr (Yz) 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.85 0.70 50Safety Factors S; Included as design factors in the strength equations ¢ Can be solved for and used as factor of safety _ Fully corrected bending strength Spy _ Sjo Ki 5; bending stress Sy py Kr Kz 1 KmKp where 0, = W'KoK,K, bay e Or, can set equal to unity, and solve for traditional factor of safety as n = 04/0, SISummary for Bending of Gear Teeth 1 [or Eq. (a), Sec. 14-10}; p. 759 [ Eq. (14-30); p. 759 Gear Eq, (14-40): p. 764 bending ate K, ange stress equation ne ~ Fig. 14-6; p. 753 Ba (1415) Eq. (14-27); p. 756 Table below o0(S))io? Tables 14-3, 14-4; pp. 748, 749 Gear e— Fig. 14-14; p. 763 bending i Yy endurance ip Ky Kp. h eee \ ON table 14-10, £9 (14-38) pp. 763,764 Eq. (14-17) Lif 7 < 250°F Bending factor of spa Sty Krk) safety Eq, (14-41) 32Surface Durability Wear: failure of the surfaces of gear teeth Pitting: a surface fatigue failure due to many repetitions of high contact stresses Scoring: a lubrication failure Abrasion: wear due to presence of foreign material 53Surface Durability e Another failure mode is wear due to contact stress. ¢ Modeling gear tooth mesh with contact stress between two cylinders, Fe ¢ Maximum pressure (compressive stress) _2F Pmax = Bi 0 U where —Pmax = largest surface pressure F = force pressing the two cylinders together 1 = length of cylinders 12 pa (28 [=o fe) + [0-9/2] gage al (1/d,) + (1/d2) zSurface Durability e Converting to terms of gear tooth, the surface compressive stress (Hertzian stress) is found. (Replace F by W/cos®, d by 2r, by b, Prax BY Gc) ot w' (1/r) + (1/12) aBeosd [(1— 07) JE] + [0 — 19) JE] ¢ Critical location is usually at the pitch line, where mi r= esa (14-12) © Define elastic coefficient from denominator of Eq. (14-11), 12 (14-11) ry (14-13) 55Surface Durability e Incorporating elastic coefficient and velocity factor, the contact stress equation is Kywt (1 1\7!2 re--Glgoma (nt) a e Again, this is useful for estimating, and as the basis for the preferred AGMA approach. 56Contact Stress where W', Ko, Ky, Ks, Km, , and b are the same terms as defined for Eq. (14-15). For U.S. customary units (SI units), the additional terms are Cp is an elastic coefficient, VIbf/in? (N/mm?) Cy is the surface conditior dp ° is the pitch diameter of the pinion, in (mm) I is the geometry factor for pitting resistance 37Surface Strength Geometry Factor I © Called pitting resistance geometry factor by AGMA eee 2 i TT sin@\dp * dg Ng _ d¢ mg =—=— and dg=m,d 6, dp G Gc Op 1,1 2 2) met+i1 % % dpsin@ mg kw! 1 dpb cos@sin@ (_ mg 2 meg +1 0, = —d¢ = Cp * Compressive stress (~0¢) of cylindrically contact stress 38Surface Strength Geometry Factor I © Called pitting resistance geometry factor by AGMA cos@sin® mg, 2 meg +1 cos@sin@ mg, 2 mg — external gears internal gears 59Elastic Coefficient Cp © Obtained from Eq. (14-13) or from Table 14-8. 1/2 G= (14-13) The elastic coefficient accounts for differences in both materials.Elastic Coefficient Pinion og Modulus Pinion of ae eieet rity Ep MPa* Steel 2.0X105 Maleable) i 7xio'| 181 | 174 | 172 | 168] 158 | 154 Nodular | i7x10°| 179 | 172 | 170 | 166 | 156 | 152 Cast Iron | 15Xi0°| 174 | 168 | 166 | 163 | 154 | 149 Ateminwm) joxio® | 162 | 158 | 156 | 154 | 145 | 141 Tin bronze| 1.1X10° | 158 154 152) 149 141 137 61Surface Condition Factor C, e The surface condition factor C, is used only in the pitting resistance equation e To account for detrimental surface finish ¢ No values currently given by AGMA e Use value of 1 for normal commercial gears It depends on ° Surface finish as affected by, but not limited to, cutting, shaving, lapping, grinding, shot peening © Residual stress ° Plastic effects (work hardening)AGMA Gear Contact Fatigue Strength 2. Strength of gear material from AGMA data (Partially corrected data for gear) e The published AGMA data for surface fatigue uses allowable stress numbers rather than strengths. The published AGMA data for surface fatigue strength are partially corrected fatigue strength. ¢ The gear strength values are only for use with the AGMA stress values, and should not be compared with other true material strengths. © There are still four correction factors that need to be applied to the published AGMA surface fatigue strength data. 63Contact Strength for Steel Gears Table 14-6 Repeatedly Applied Contact Strength S, at 107 Cycles and 0.99 Reliability for Steel Gears Source: ANSUAGMA 2001-04. pe ba deed Allowable Contact Stress Number,? 5., psi ed one ro ee eee Steel’ Through hardened* See Fig. 14-5 See Fig. 1-5 See Fig. 14-5 - Flame’ or induction SOHC 170000 190 000 — hardened S4HRC 175 000 195 000 i Carburized and See Table 9* 180 000 225 000 275 000 hardened’ Nitrided! (dhrough 83.5 HRISN 150000 163.000 175 000 hardened steels) 84.5 HRISN 155 000 168 000 180 000 2.5% chrome Nitrided* 87.5 HRISN 155 000 172.000 189 000 (no aluminum) Nitralloy 135M. Nitrided’ 90.0 HRISN 170.000 183 000 195 000 Nitvalloy N Nitvided* 90.0 HRISN 172.000 188 000 205 000 2.5% chrome Nitvidea* 90.0 HRISN 176000 196 000 216 000 (no aluminum)Contact Strength for Iron and Bronze Gears Table 14-7 Repeatedly Applied Contact Strength S, 107 Cycles and 0.99 Reliability for Iron and Bronze Gears Source: ANSUAGMA 2001-04, Oe ear] cro Ra Dey De Bs Bae rl ASTM AAS gray Class 20 Ascast = '50.000-60 000 cast iron Class 30 As cast 174 HB 65 000-75 000 Class 40 Ascast 201 HB 75 000-85 000 ASTMAS36 ductile Grade 60-40-18, Annealed 140 HB 77000-92000 (nodular) iron Grade 80-55-06 ‘Quenched and 179 HB 77 000-92. 000 tempered Grade 10-70-03 Quenched and 229 HB 92 000-112 000 tempered Grade 120-90-02 Quenched and 269 HB 103 000-126 000 tempered - Sand cast Minimum tensile 30.000 strength 40.000 psi ASTM B-148, Heat treated Minimum tensile 65000 Alloy 954 strength 90 000 psiAllowable contact stress number, S,, Contact Strength for Through-hardened Steel Gears 1000 Ib/in? 3 a 150 125 Metallurgical and quality control procedures required Grade 2 5, = 349 Hy +34 300psi Grade | S, = 322 Hy + 29 100psi 200 250 300 350 400 Brinell hardness, Hy 450AGMA - Allowable Contact Stress CLCu Sse=sy 5S} fe KrKp fe Sj Fe =Partially corrected surface fatigue strength Spc= Fully corrected surface fatigue strength C;, is the stress cycle factor for contact stress K; is the temperature factors Kz is the reliability factors C;, is Hardness ratio factor (only for gear) Spe _ Se CC, Allowable stress o¢au = = = SET H = Su KrKp o7Hardness-Ratio Factor Cy e Since the pinion is subjected to more cycles than the gear, it is often hardened more than the gear. ¢ The hardness-ratio factor accounts for the difference in hardness of the pinion and gear. ¢ C,,;is only applied to the gear. That is, C,,= 1 for the pinion. For the gear, (according to mating material of gears) > Through-hardened pinion mated with a through hardened gear Cy =1.0+ A'(mg — 1.0) (14-36) A’ =8.98(107) (7) —.29(1073) 1.2 < 28? <7 HpG Ape ¢ Hgp and Hyg are the Brinell hardness of the pinion and gear, e Eq. (14-36) in graph form is given in Fig. 14-12. 68Hardness-Ratio Factor Cy Hardness-ratio factor, Cy 6 Z = a = 3 2 3 6 When Har 10, Ago Use Cy=1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 «18 20 Single reduction gear ratio mgHardness-ratio factor, Cy Hardness-Ratio Factor » Surface-hardened pinion (48 Rockwell C or greater) mated with through-hardened gears. 1.16 Lig Liz 1.10 1.08 1,06 104 102 Cu = 1+ B'(450 — Hp) Surface Finish of Pinion, f,, microinches, R, When f, > 64 use C= 1.0 00 180 200 250 300 350 400 Brinell hardness of the gear, Hy; (14-37) where B’=0.00075 exp[-0.0112 fp] and Jp is the surface finish of the pinion expressed as root-mean-square roughness R, in u inches Fig. 14-13 eeStress-Cycle Factor C, * Contact-stress fatigue are based on 107 load cycles applied * for 107 cycles C,= 1 CL 10? 108 104 108 10 107 108 10? 10!0 Number of load cycles NV |Safety Factors S; and S;, Included as design factors in the strength equations ¢ Can be solved for and used as factor of safety - Ste Ci Cy _ Ste = call KrKp call e Or, can set equal to unity, and solve for traditional factor of safety as Nn = Oy/oSummary for Surface Wear of Gear Teeth 1 or Eq. (a), Sec. 14-10}; p. 759 ri (14-30); p. 759 cond es contact 7 stress * x. AK i Q equation |. (14-23); p. 755 Eq, (14-16) ae , Eq, (14-13), Table 14-8; pp. 744, 757 Eq. (14-27); p. 756 Table below ‘go(S,)ig? Tables 14-6, 14-7; pp. 751, 752 Fig. 14-15; p. 763 pan Szhcja— Section 14-12, gear only; pp. 761, 762 ‘endurance alt= 51 Ky Kp strength Eq, (14-18) Table 14-10, Eq, (14-38); pp. 763, 764 Lif T<250°F Gear only Wear - factor of SeZy CuK Ky safety % Eq. (14-42) 3Comparison of Factors of Safety e Bending stress is linear with transmitted load. ¢ Contact stress is not linear with transmitted load ¢ To compare the factors of safety between the different failure modes, to determine which is critical, ° Compare S; with S,/ for linear or helical contact ° Compare S; with S,/ for spherical contact (crowned teeth) e Hardness Protocol: © Core hardness required in case of bending ° Case hardness required in case of contact 74Comparing Pinion and Gear (Bending) 1 KyK, (Op)p = (w'¥oK, Koo 7 *) for Pinion P 1 Kynk; (Gp)¢ = (w: KoK,K; oa 7 *) for Gear G * Factor of safety i we Stok /(KrKe) oon), Ge ES), e Equating the factors of safety, substituting for stress and strength, canceling identical terms (Kg virtually equal or exactly equal), 1 ,\ (Ki)e VD (Siu), = Sto), Ca De 75Comparing Pinion and Gear (Bending) e The repeatedly applied bending strength stress-cycle factor K;, comes from below Figure, where for a particular hardness. °K, =a ie (L = number of load cycle = N in figure) 50 Ky =94518N -O' t t Ky = 6.1514 NOR as Sd 1 Wl L— Ky, =4.9404.1N 01085 40 400 HB 160H8 -——— Ky = 1.3558 KL 10-4~ x, > si94n it Lo. og [- Ku=23194Nn 09 08 ox 07 Kyp= 16x31 N 0083 07 06 06 os + 05 1 108 108 105 108 107 108 10 1010 Number of load cycles NComparing Pinion and Gear (Bending) : _Nc(Teeth) _ Lp _ Lp Gear ratio mg = Np(Feeth) ~ Lg then Lg = me (K,)p =a@ a for pinion i B (Ky¢ =a g =a (=) for gear mg sp We (Sto), = (Sto), MG De Normally, mg > 1 and Jg > Jp , so above equation shows that the gear can be less strong (lower Brinell hardness) than the pinion for the same safety factor 7Comparing Pinion and Gear (Contact) Ka G (6,)p =| Cp |WtKoKyK, ab - for Pinion : a G (Gg =| Cp |[WtKoKyK, for Gear dpb T G (ude = (A) Je = (LehuGul Krke) ms 5 “2 Gp Ia e Equating the factors of safety, substituting for stress and strength, canceling identical terms (Kg virtually equal or exactly equal), ; 1, Cie (1 (5c), = Stolp (z), 78Comparing Pinion and Gear (Contact) e Similar to bending C (Ge = mb and value of 8 comes from Figure. (ie Serene lo 09 07 06 09 07 06 ww wt haat [Number of fad eycles N Since Cy, is so close to unity usually (Ste)g = (Ste), m6 9Addition study materialsSpur-Gear Geometry Factor J AGMA Bending Geometry Factor} for 20”, Full-Depth Teeth with Tip Loading 2 7 7 a 2 a = 735 cometh 5c En > ¢ Bees +c een 7c Me 2 uu ” vou vu viviu n uu uu YB UU 028 028 2% YU Yv YB UY UU 024 025 025 025 % UYU UV UY UU UU 024 026 025 026 026 026 ss UU UU UU 024 028 025 028 026 028 028 028 ms uu 028 029 025 029 026 029 028 029 029 029 Table 12-13 AGMA Bending Geometry Factor J for 25”, Full-Depth Teeth with HPSTC Loading Pinion teeth 2 um 7 2 26 35 35 3s ——=_ ol dDdlCUO Zz uu “4 UU 0a 0a 7 UU 088 036 036 036 a UU 033 039 036 039 039 039 26 = -U_s«U_sO33_ O41 037 042 040 O42 043 0.43 35 «US «U038 048 037 045 040 045 043 046 046 046 55 Us«Us034 047 038 048 041 049 044 049 047 050 051 051 135 U_U_035 051 038 052 042 053 045 053 048 054 053 056 057 057 * U- undercutting occurs with that combination due to interference between tip of gear tooth and the root-flank of pinion.