Museum of Science and Industry - Search Results
Articles About Museum of Science and Industry
Articles are sorted by RELEVANCE. Sort by Date.
More Gears in Cyberspace Dial in to the web site of Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry for an online version of the museum's Gears from the Century of Progress exhibit.
Measurement institutions of seven different countries — China, Germany, Japan, Thailand, Ukraine, United Kingdom and the U.S. — participated in the implementation of the first international comparison of involute gear measurement standards. The German metrology institute Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) was chosen as the pilot laboratory as well as the organizer. Three typical involute gear measurement standards provided by the PTB were deployed for this comparison: a profile, a helix and a pitch measurement standard. In the final analysis, of the results obtained from all participants, the weighted mean was evaluated as reference value for all 28 measured parameters. However, besides the measurement standards, the measured parameters, and, most importantly, some of the comparison results from all participants are anonymously presented. Furthermore, mishandling of the measurement standards as occurred during the comparison will be illustrated.
The complete Industry News section from the August 2014 issue of Gear Technology.
An in-depth look at the major booths with the latest technology used in gear manufacturing.
The face load factor is one of the most important items for a gear strength calculation. Current standards propose formulae for face load factor, but they are not always appropriate. AGMA 927 proposes a simpler and quicker algorithm that doesn't require a contact analysis calculation. This paper explains how this algorithm can be applied for gear rating procedures.
The latest video from Koepfer America, Sandvik's Gear Up event and IMTS product previews
The complete product news section from the September / October 2014 Issue Gear Technology.
“If it’s broken, bring it on in.” That’s the advice offered by Roy Parker, president and owner of Jones Welding Company Inc.
In October, Gear Technology conducted an anonymous survey of gear manufacturers. Invitations were sent by e-mail to thousands of individuals around the world. More than 300 individuals responded to the online survey, answering questions about their manufacturing operations and current challenges facing their businesses.
The good news and the bad news about the gear industry and its role in the overall economy.
Never have so few served so many. That, in essence, describes gear makers and the role they play in our world. Think of it—although the gear cutting industry represents much less than one percent of the global workforce—the gears it produces are what make things run in practically every industry and profession imaginable. From bulldozers to Rolexes, gears are an integral part of the mix.
Results of research on trends in employment, outsourcing, machine tool investment and other gear industry business practices.
With all the advantages of building float into a planetary gear system, what advantages are there to using a carrier in the first place, rather than simply having your planets float in the system?
The complete Product News section from the October 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
The complete Product News section from the March/April 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
The complete Product News section from the May 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
The complete Industry News section from the January/February 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
The complete Product News section from the January/February 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
Sandvik presents the latest in gear milling technologies.
Preview of some of the exhibits relevant to gear manufacturing at the upcoming EMO 2013.
The new chairman of the AGMA Technical Division Executive Committee explains what's involved in the process of developing technical standards at the AGMA.
Results of research on trends in employment, outsourcing, machine tool investment and other gear industry business practices.
A response to the September 2013 Voices piece on how gear standards are written, from one who's been there.
The complete Industry News section from the September 2013 issue of Gear Technology.
Methods of examining large ring gear teeth to detect surface breaking discontinuities have often been time-consuming and limited in terms of data collected. Methods such as visual and magnetic particle inspection can miss critical discontinuities. However, a new ASTM international standard provides a more effective method for gear examination using eddy current array, a technology that has been widely used but, until now, not standardized.
In today’s globalized manufacturing, all industrial products having dimensional constraints must undergo conformity specifications assessments on a regular basis. Consequently, (standardization) associated with GD&T (geometrical dimensioning and tolerancing) should be un-ambiguous and based on common, accepted rules. Of course gears - and their mechanical assemblies - are special items, widely present in industrial applications where energy conversion and power transmission are involved.
The struggles of the manufacturing economy in 2009 are well documented. Even among those of us with long careers, most of us have never seen activity come to a screeching halt the way it did last year. 2009 was tough on all of us. So, what should we expect in 2010?
In March 1989, the U.S. Trade Representative requested the U.S. International Trade Commission to conduct an investigation and prepare a report on the competitive position of the U.S. gear industry in U.S. and global markets.
Trying to figure out what’s going on in this crazy economy of ours seems a bit like reading tea leaves—one part pseudoscience and three parts wild conjecture. Of course some pundits are telling us that this bull market has legs, while others insist that we’re due for a major correction. Some pump us up with positive news, while others remind us about scary stuff like the budget deficit, the European financial crisis and unemployment.
Gear Technology’s annual state-of-the-gear-industry survey polls gear manufacturers about the latest trends and opinions relating to the overall health of the gear industry. As in years past, the survey was conducted anonymously, with invitations sent by e-mail to gear manufacturing companies around the world.
Before we get into projections and prognostications about the future, let’s take a minute to review 2012. For many in the gear industry, the year was better than expected. Some manufacturers had a very successful year leading up to an even more successful manufacturing trade show (IMTS 2012). Others were searching for more business, hoping that the general state of the economy wouldn’t make things worse. In some cases, it did.
Economic times are good right now in America and in the gear industry. We're in the seventh year of an up cycle. The tough shake-outs of the 1980s and early 90s are over. Orders are up. Backlogs are at comfortable levels. We're looking at what promises to be the biggest, most successful trade show in the industry's history coming up in Detroit in October. The most pressing question on the immediate horizon seems to be "How long can the good times go on?"
Gear manufacturers are generally an optimistic bunch, as revealed by our 2013 State-of-the-Gear-Industry Survey, which appears in this issue.
If you are like most navigators of the printed page, the first thing you read in this final 2013 issue of Gear Technology was our State of the Gear Industry Survey. And who would blame you? It’s not Sabermetrics, but once you’ve read it you’ll have a pretty clear snapshot of last year and a peek into the next. But if you also like to get a little closer to the bone about things, what follows are the collected opinions of five well-regarded people in the gear industry speaking to a number of issues with relevance.
Gear Technology’s annual State-of-the-Gear-Industry survey polls gear manufacturers about the latest trends and opinions relating to the overall health of the gear industry.
The name Gleason is practically synonymous with gear manufacturing. Since the company was founded in 1865, the technology of gear manufacturing has been its focus, its core and its competitive advantage.
From a technological perspective, there typically aren’t many EUREKA! breakthroughs in the “state of the gear industry” to report, and 2014 was really no different.
Most companies spend this time of year crystal ball gazing. Managers want to know the future so they can make projections, plan schedules, determine budgets and make major decisions that will ensure their success.
Gear Technology’s annual State-of- the-Gear-Industry survey polls gear manufacturers about the latest trends and opinions relating to the overall health of the gear industry. As in years past, the survey was conducted anonymously, with invitations sent by e-mail to gear manufacturing companies around the world.
Sometimes in the pressure to meet deadlines and handle the Crisis of the Day, we lose sight of the forest for the trees. As a partial cure for this syndrome, I recently reviewed the six interviews with gear industry leaders that have appeared in our pages during the last year, trying to get a grasp of a larger picture. It struck me with renewed force how six men, each with a lifetime of experience in this business, see the gear industry forest the same way.
Another year has passed and, because of the short term ups and downs of the economy, it's still hard to judge whether we are in an appreciably different place than we were a year ago. The economy doesn't seem to be worse than it was, but it also doesn't seem to be a whole lot better.
Over the past several months, many gear manufacturers and industry suppliers have been telling me how busy they are. Their backlogs are the largest in history, their sales the highest they’ve been in many years. They’ve invested in new capabilities, new machinery and people.
In May of this year the U.S. International Trade Commission made public its Report to the President on the condition of the U.S. gear industry. This 200+ page document is the result of a two-year study by the commission, with the help of the AGMA staff and members. It is the most comprehensive and current analytical coverage of the industry conditions and tends presently available. Because of the importance of this report to the industry, GEAR TECHNOLOGY is devoting a good portion of this issue to reprinting the Executive Summary for our readers.
In November, Gear Technology conducted an anonymous survey of gear manufacturers. Invitations were sent by e-mail to thousands of individuals around the world. More than 300 individuals responded to the online survey, answering questions about their manufacturing operations and current challenges facing their businesses.
Publisher Michael Goldstein discusses why some gear manufacturing companies are enjoying record years.
Results of Gear Technology research on trends in employment, outsourcing, machine tool investment and other gear industry business practices.
Nashville - One of the highlights of this year's SME Advanced Gear Processing and Manufacturing Clinic was a tour of the new GM Saturn automobile manufacturing plant outside the city. There in the Tennessee hills is a hopeful vision of the future of the American automobile industry. It may well be the future of American large-scale manufacturing in general.
Five years of effort by AGMA came to fruition in January with the publishing of a report from the Department of Commerce. This "National Security Assessment of the U.S. Gear Industry" indicates that if serious measures are not taken, the gear industry's future is in jeopardy. It also sets the tone for confronting major challenges now looming large in our industry.
It always strikes me as something of an irony that the brightest holidays of the year fall in the deepest part of the darkest season. They come when the days are the shortest, the clouds the thickest, the weather (at least in Chicago), the worst. And yet it is at precisely this time when we celebrate the happier human emotions of family, love, and charity and somewhat arbitrarily declare a "new" year.
Next year will be the 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus' famous "discovery" of America. Poor Columbus has fallen on hard times of late, what with revisionist historians smacking their lips over his more notable failures and reminding us that American natives have a vastly different point of view on this Great American Success Story. But before we relegate the Great Navigator to the scrap heap of trashed-over heros, let's take one last look at some of the positive lessons to be learned from the Columbus experience - ones that could be instructive to our current situation in the American gear industry.
Dear Editor: Re: Your editorial and "Viewpoint" by Joe Arvin. Both you and Mr. Arvin make some valid points. Your editorial appears to be a response to Mr. Arvin's "Viewpoint." This is a response to both
This past fall, I had the opportunity to travel to Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore to witness first-hand the status of the power transmission and machine tool industries in these areas. Points of interest included equipment, material handling, computerization, wage and tax structures, inventory controls, and workforce attitude.
The complete Industry News section from the November/December 2012 issue of Gear Technology.
Our up-front column highlighting what's online this issue.
Gear manufacturers are moving into an era that will see changes in both engineering practices and industry standards as new end-products evolve. Within the traditional automotive industry, carbon emission reduction legislation will drive the need for higher levels of efficiency and growth in electric and hybrid vehicles. Meanwhile, the fast growing market of wind turbines is already opening up a whole new area of potential for gearbox manufacturers, but this industry is one that will demand reliability, high levels of engineering excellence and precision manufacturing.
An offshore jack-up drilling rig is a barge upon which a drilling platform is placed. The barge has legs that can be lowered to the sea floor to support the rig. Then the barge can be “jacked up” out of the water, providing a stable work platform from which to drill for oil and gas. Jack-up drilling rigs were first introduced in the late 1950s. Rack-and- pinion-type jack-up units were introduced soon after that and have dominated the industry ever since.
Lots of us became interested in gears while taking drafting classes in high school.
Creating standards for plastic gears calls for a deft touch. The challenge is to set uniform guidelines, yet avoid limiting the creative solutions plastic offers gear designers.
The complete industry news section from the March/April 2009 issue of Gear Technology.
Dr. Phil Terry, chairman of the AGMA Technical Division Executive Committee, talks about the standards-making process.
Gary A. Bish, director of product design technology for Horsburgh & Scott, discusses his role as chairman of the AGMA mill gearing committee.
AGMA Flexible Couplings committee chairman Glenn C. Pokrandt gives an update about standards and other documents under development.
Faithful Gear Technology readers may recall that our July 2009 issue contained an update of the deliberations provided by Bill Bradley. Now, almost two years later, there is an ISO/IEC wind turbine gearbox standard out for draft international standard ballot (ballot closes 2011-05-17).
At Andrew Tool, CMMs have been an integral part of their manufacturing processes for years, but they had never faced a project with such intricate measurements, tight tolerances, heat treatments and a very short time frame requirement.
Chairman Todd Praneis of Cotta Transmission describes the activities of AGMA's Enclosed Drives technical committee.
AGMA has started to replace its 2000-A88 standard for gear accuracy with a new series of documents based largely on ISO standards. The first of the replacement AGMA standards have been published with the remainder coming in about a year. After serving as a default accuracy specification for U.S. commerce in gear products for several decades, the material in AGMA 2000-A88 is now considered outdated and in need of comprehensive revision.
This letter is in response to your article asking the readers where their interests lie. The division of Rockwell International where I work has engineering departments in Cicero.
As the international business community grows closer together, the need for understanding differences between national and international gear rating standards becomes increasingly important for U.S. gear manufacturers competing in the world market.
Curved face width (CFW) spur gears are not popular in the gear industry. But these non-metallic gears have advantages over standard spur gears: higher contact ratio, higher tooth stiffness, and lower contact and bending stresses.
With the right selection of nonstandard center distance and tool shifting, it may be possible to use standard tools to improve the gear set capacity with a considerable reduction in cost when compared to the use of special tools.
Sally Ride Science will be featured at IMTS 2014.
In our never-ending quest to bring our readers information about he unusual, the unique and-dare we say it?-the bizarre, the Addendum Staff has traveled for this issue to the wilds of Darkest Tennessee and the Museum of Appalachia. This museum of Appalachian fold art, crafts and history is located in Norris, TN, about 16 miles north of Knoxville. Among the 250,000 items collected by the museum's founder, John Rice Irwin, is a "thing," a "contraption," an "objet trouve"; to wit, Asa Jackson's mysterious machine.
Your May/June issue contains a letter from Edward Ubert of Rockwell International with some serious questions about specifying and measuring tooth thickness.
“The gear marketplace is a global marketplace.” Bill Bradley says it easily, with no special emphasis. The vice president of AGMA’s technical division sees the statement as an obvious fact.
The first edition of the international calculation method for micropitting—ISO TR 15144–1:2010—was just published last December. It is the first and only official, international calculation method established for dealing with micropitting. Years ago, AGMA published a method for the calculation of oil film thickness containing some comments about micropitting, and the German FVA published a calculation method based on intensive research results. The FVA and the AGMA methods are close to the ISO TR, but the calculation of micropitting safety factors is new.
Industrial gear standards have been used to support reliability through the specification of requirements for design, manufacturing and verification. The consensus development of an international wind turbine gearbox standard is an example where gear products can be used in reliable mechanical systems today. This has been achieved through progressive changes in gear technology, gear design methods and the continual development and refinement of gearbox standards.
Recent breakthroughs in profile grinding software are helping Anderson Precision Gears and others meet wind power’s insatiable appetite for faster production of large, high-quality gears.
In response to Ed Uberts letter, we have come a long way in gearing since WWII. The Europeans do use long addendum pinions in many cases. This modification does improve load capacity, sliding conditions and the working life of a gearset. When modifying a pinion tooth it is necessary to modify the gear tooth or adjust the center distance accordingly but we will leave that to the designers.
Hainbuch offers workholding solutions for United Gear.
Universal machines capable of cutting both spur and helical gears were developed in 1910, followed later by machines capable of cutting double helical gears with continuous teeth. Following the initial success, the machines were further developed both in England and France under the name Sunderland, and later in Switzerland under the name Maag.
AGMA and members of the Metal Powder Industries Federation (MPIF) are three years into a joint project to develop specifications and an information sheet on rating powder metal gears. According to committee vice chairman Glen A. Moore of Burgess-Norton Mfg. Co., the first phase of the project, the publication of AGMA Standard "6009-AXX, Specifications for Powder Metallurgy Gears," should be completed in late 1996 or early 1997.
Standards are unlike gears themselves: mundane, but complex, ubiquitous and absolutely vital. Standards are a lingua franca, providing a common language with reference points for evaluating product reliability and performance for manufacturers and users. The standards development process provides a scientific forum for discussion of product design, materials and applications, which can lead to product improvement. Standards can also be a powerful marketing tool for either penetrating new markets or protecting established ones.
Earlier this year, a relative of mine, Sidney Mandell, tragically passed away. I had the good fortune to serve with Sidney on the Board of Directors and the Executive Committee of the Machinery Dealers National Association (MDNA). Though he started before me, his MDNA career and mine overlapped for about 2 years. As I think back on the many things I learned form him, one of his favorite phrases keeps come to mind: "We walk in the footsteps of those who have gone before us."
Today motion control systems are migrating from analog to digital technology at an ever increasing rate because digital technology at an ever-increasing rate because digital drives provide performance equal to or exceeding that of analog drives, plus information to run your machine more effectively and manage your quality program and your business. Most of this data is simply not available from analog drives.
Ready or not, QS-9000 is here. If you are a first-tier supplier to one of the Big Three automotive companies, you've already heard that compliance with this new quality standard is now an entry-level requirement for doing business with Ford, General Motors and Chrysler. If you're a second-or third-tier supplier, you can expect the ripple effect of this new standard to hit your company one way or another.
Who wants or needs technical details about gearing? Who cares about it? Three out of every four people who are reading this magazine make up at least 75% of those who have an interest in the subject. The members of AGMA, EUROTRANS, JGMA and JSIM have an interest. All the people attending the Gear Expo in Detroit have an interest. Clearly, however, the people with the most pressing interest in our industry are our customers, the end users of gear products. The unfortunate reality, though, is that in many cases, these customers don't even know that's what they want.
The wind turbine industry has been plagued with gearbox failures, which cause repair costs, legal expenses, lost energy production and environmental pollution.
This is the third article in a series exploring the new ISO 6336 gear rating standard and its methods of calculation. The opinions expressed herein are htose of the author as an individual. They do not represent the opinions of any organization of which he is a member.
One of the best ways to learn the ISO 6336 gear rating system is to recalculate the capacity of a few existing designs and to compare the ISO 6336 calculated capacity to your experience with those designs and to other rating methods. For these articles, I'll assume that you have a copy of ISO 6336, you have chosen a design for which you have manufacturing drawings and an existing gear capacity calculation according to AGMA 2001 or another method. I'll also assume that you have converted dimensions, loads, etc. into the SI system of measurement.
ISO 6336 Calculation of Load Capacity of Spur and Helical Gears was published in 1997 after 50 years of effort by an international committee of experts whose work spanned three generations of gear technology development. It was a difficult compromise between the existing national standards to get a single standard published which will be the basis for future work. Many of the compromises added complication to the 1987 edition of DIN 3990, which was the basic document.
The American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to write all U.S. standards on gearing. However, in response to the growing interest in a global marketplace, AGMA became involved with the International Standards Organization (ISO) several years ago, first as an observer in the late 1970s and then as a participant, starting in the early 1980s. In 1993, AGMA became Secretariat (or administrator) for Technical Committee 60 of ISO, which administers ISO gear standards development.
The purpose of this article is to discuss ISO 4156/ANSI B92.2M-1980 and to compare it with other, older standards still in use. In our experience designing and manufacturing spline gauges and other spline measuring or holding devices for splined component manufacturers throughout the world, we are constantly surprised that so many standards have been produced covering what is quite a small subject. Many of the standards are international standards; others are company standards, which are usually based on international standards. Almost all have similarities; that is, they all deal with splines that have involute flanks of 30 degrees, 37.5 degrees or 45 degrees pressure angle and are for the most part flank-fitting or occasionally major-diameter-fitting.
Much about ISO 9000 is the subject of noisy debate. But on one thing almost everyone, true believers and critics alike, agrees: Getting ISO 9000 certification can be expensive. Companies can expect to spend at least $35,000 for basic certification and six-month checkup fees over a three-year period. These figures do not include hidden costs like time and money spent on internal improvements required to meet ISO 9000 certification. But the really big-ticket items in the process are employee time and the cost of bringing in outside consultants. Many ISO 9000 consultants charge upwards of $1,800 a day.
A study of AGMA 218, the draft ISO standard 6336, and BS 436: 1986 methods for rating gear tooth strength and surface durability for metallic spur and helical gears is presented. A comparison of the standards mainly focuses on fundamental formulae and influence factors, such as the load distribution factor, geometry factor, and others. No attempt is made to qualify or judge the standards other than to comment on the facilities or lack of them in each standard reviewed. In Part I a comparison of pitting resistance ratings is made, and in the subsequent issue, Part II will deal with bending stress ratings and comparisons of designs.
The authors of last issue's article comparing AGMA, ISO and BS methods for Pitting Resistance Ratings are commended. Trying to compare various methods of rating gears is like hitting a moving target in a thick forest. The use of different symbols, presentations, terminology, and definitions in these standards makes it very difficult. But the greatest problem lies with the authors' use of older versions of these documents. ISO drafts and AGMA standards have evolved at the same time their work was accomplished and edited.
AGMA introduced ANSI/AGMA 2015–2–A06— Accuracy Classification System: Radial System for Cylindrical Gears, in 2006 as the first major rewrite of the double-flank accuracy standard in over 18 years. This document explains concerns related to the use of ANSI/AGMA 2015–2–A06 as an accuracy classification system and recommends a revised system that can be of more service to the gearing industry.
The use of dimensionless factors to describe gear tooth geometry seems to have a strong appeal to gear engineers. The stress factors I and J, for instance, are well established in AGMA literature. The use of the rack shift coefficient "x" to describe nonstandard gear proportions is common in Europe, but is not as commonly used in the United States. When it is encountered in the European literature or in the operating manuals for imported machine tools, it can be a source of confusion to the American engineer.
Industry News from October/November 1984 Gear Technology.
In Part I differences in pitting ratings between AGMA 218, the draft ISO standard 6336, and BS 436:1986 were examined. In this part bending strength ratings are compared. All the standards base the bending strength on the Lewis equation; the ratings differ in the use and number of modification factors. A comprehensive design survey is carried out to examine practical differences between the rating methods presented in the standards, and the results are shown in graphical form.
Question: What is functional measurement and what is the best method for getting truthful answers?
On of the key questions confronting any company considering ISO 9000 certification is, how much is this going to cost? The up-front fees are only the beginning. Dissect the ISO 9000 certification procedure with an eye for hidden costs, and two segments of the process will leap out - the cost of consultants and the cost of making in-house improvements for the sake of passing certification. Most of these costs can be controlled by careful selection f the right consultant in the first place.
I noted with interest the beginning of Gear Technology's three-part series on ISO 9000 certification. I also recently attended Brown & Sharpe's/Leitz gear metrology seminar. Both events caused me to smile and reflect.
What follows is the first of three articles we will be running on ISO 9000 and what it means for the gear industry. This first article will cover what ISO 9000 is, what some of its benefits - and problems - are, and whether your company should be a candidate for this certification process. In our next issue, we will consider the important question of how, when, and if to hire an ISO 9000 consultant. The final article in this series will discuss ways to save money while streamlining the certification process in your company.
ISO 9000 is the latest hot topic in marketing and manufacturing circles. Everyone seems to be talking about it, but few seem to understand it completely. depending on whom one talks to, it's either the greatest thing to hit industry since the assembly line, another cash cow for slick consultants, a conspiracy on the part of Europeans to dominate global markets, or the next necessary step to compete in the global economy of the twenty-first century. It may be all of the above.
Three experts tackle the question of profile shift in this issue's edition of "Ask the Expert."