4.7 Article

An improved analytical method for mesh stiffness calculation of spur gears with tip relief

Journal

MECHANISM AND MACHINE THEORY
Volume 98, Issue -, Pages 64-80

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2015.11.017

Keywords

Time-varying mesh stiffness (TVMS); Gear pairs; Extended tooth contact (ETC); Fillet-foundation stiffness; Tip relief

Funding

  1. Program for the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [N130403006, N140301001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation
  3. Civil Aviation Administration of China [U1433109]
  4. State Key Laboratory for Strength and Vibration of Mechanical Structures [SV2015-KF-08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to the effects of gear flexibility, the extended tooth contact (ETC) can appear, which is the phenomenon that the incoming tooth pair gets into contact ahead of the theoretical start of contact and the outgoing tooth pair is out of contact later than the theoretical end of contact. A large calculation error for the time-varying mesh stiffness (TVMS) calculation can be caused if the effects of ETC are ignored, especially under the larger torques. In this paper, an improved analytical method (IAM) suitable for gear pairs with tip relief is established to determine time-varying mesh stiffness (TVMS), where the effects of ETC, nonlinear contact stiffness, revised fillet-foundation stiffness, and tooth profile modification are considered. Based on the improved analytical model, TVMS under different torques, lengths, and amounts of profile modification is compared with that obtained from analytical finite element approach [29] and from FE method. The results show that TVMS obtained from the IAM agrees well with that from FE method and from analytical FE approach [29], and the computational efficiency of the IAM is also much higher than that of FE method. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available