4.1 Article

Curvature interference characteristic of conical surface enveloping conical worm

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10010-017-0250-0

关键词

Spiroid drive; Curvature interference; Undercutting; Nonlinear equation; Helicoid

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51475083]
  2. New Century Excellent Talents Project by Education Ministry of China [NCET-13-0116]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [N160304012]
  4. National Key Basic Research Development Plan of China (the 973 Program) [2014CB046303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The theory to distinguish whether the curvature interference happens or not is well established for the enveloping conical worm. Some important results, such as the meshing function, the equation of the enveloping conical worm helicoid, and the curvature interference limit function, are all obtained. The foundation of computing the curvature interference limit line is to solve the system of nonlinear equations. A technique based on the elimination method and the geometric construction is proposed, which can be employed to study the existence of the solution of a system of nonlinear equations and to solve all the solutions of this system within the given solving domain. By means of the theory and technique brought forward, it is discovered that there usually are two curvature interference limit lines separately on each side of a tooth of an enveloping conical worm. When the number of the enveloping conical worm threads is smaller, the curvature interference in general does not happen on the both sides of a tooth. The avoiding mechanism of the curvature interference is that the limit line does not exist during the real cutting mesh because the limit line is inside the entity of the enveloping conical worm and its conjugate line is outside the entity of the grinding wheel. The numerical outcome shows that, the toe on the flank has the greatest potential risk to be subjected to the undercutting.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据