pitting strength - Search Results
Articles About pitting strength
The gear designer needs to know how to determine an appropriate case depth for a gear application in order to guarantee the required load capacity.
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.
A simple, closed-form procedure is presented for designing minimum-weight spur and helical gearsets. The procedure includes methods for optimizing addendum modification for maximum pitting and wear resistance, bending strength, or scuffing resistance.
The aim of our research is to clearly show the influence of defects on the bending fatigue strength of gear teeth. Carburized gears have many types of defects, such as non-martensitic layers, inclusions, tool marks, etc. It is well known that high strength gear teeth break from defects in their materials, so it’s important to know which defect limits the strength of a gear.
This is part II of a two-part paper that presents the results of extensive test programs on the RCF strength of PM steels.
This article summarizes results of research programs on RCF strength of wrought steels and PM steels.
There are three distinct gear types in angle drives. The most commonly used are bevel and worm drives. Face gear drives are the third alternative.
The focus of the following presentation is two-fold: 1) on tests of new geometric variants; and 2) on to-date, non-investigated operating (environmental) conditions. By variation of non-investigated eometric parameters and operation conditions the understanding of micropitting formation is improved. Thereby it is essential to ensure existent calculation methods and match them to results of the comparison between large gearbox tests and standard gearbox test runs to allow a safe forecast of wear due to micropitting in the future.
Flank breakage is common in a number of cylindrical and bevel gear applications. This paper introduces a relevant, physically based calculation method to evaluate flank breakage risk vs. pitting risk. Verification of this new method through testing is demonstrably shown.
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.
Gear tooth wear and micropitting are very difficult phenomena to predict analytically. The failure mode of micropitting is closely correlated to the lambda ratio. Micropitting can be the limiting design parameter for long-term durability. Also, the failure mode of micropitting can progress to wear or macropitting, and then go on to manifest more severe failure modes, such as bending. The results of a gearbox test and manufacturing process development program will be presented to evaluate super-finishing and its impact on micropitting.
An experimental and theoretical analysis of worm gear sets with contact patterns of differing sizes, position and flank type for new approaches to calculation of pitting resistance.
Understanding the morphology of micropitting is critical in determining the root cause of failure. Examples of micropitting in gears and rolling-element bearings are presented to illustrate morphological variations that can occur in practice.
This article presents a new spur gear 20-degree design that works interchangeably with the standard 20-degree system and achieves increased tooth bending strength and hence load carrying capacity.
A method to extrapolate running gear bending strength data from STF results for comparing bending performance of different materials and processes.
Columbus' first voyage to the Americas is not the only anniversary worthy of celebration this year. In 1892, on October 15, Wilfred Lewis gave an address to the Engineer's Club of Philadelphia, whose significance, while not as great as that of Columbus' voyage, had important results for the gearing community. In this address, Lewis first publicly outlined his formula for computing bending stress in gear teeth, a formula still in use today.
This article illustrates a structural analysis of asymmetrical teeth. This study was carried out because of the impossibility of applying traditional calculations to procedures involved in the specific case. In particular, software for the automatic generation of meshes was devised because existing software does not produce results suitable for the new geometrical model required. Having carried out the structural calculations, a comparative study of the stress fields of symmetrical and asymmetrical teeth was carried out. The structural advantages of the latter type of teeth emerged.
The present article contains a preliminary description of studies carried out by the authors with a view toward developing asymmetrical gear teeth. Then a comparison between numerous symmetrical and asymmetrical tooth stress fields under the same modular conditions follows. This leads to the formulation of a rule for similar modules governing variations of stress fields, depending on the pressure angle of the nonactive side. Finally a procedure allowing for calculations for percentage reductions of asymmetrical tooth modules with respect to corresponding symmetrical teeth, maximum ideal stress being equal, is proposed. Then the consequent reductions in size and weight of asymmetrical teeth are assessed.
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.
To mechanical engineers, the strength of gear teeth is a question of constant recurrence, and although the problem to be solved is quite elementary in character, probably no other question could be raised upon which such a diversity of opinion exists, and in support of which such an array of rules and authorities might be quoted. In 1879, Mr. John H. Cooper, the author of a well-known work on "Belting," made an examination of the subject and found there were then in existence about forty-eight well-established rules for horsepower and working strength, sanctioned by some twenty-four authorities, and differing from each other in extreme causes of 500%. Since then, a number of new rules have been added, but as no rules have been given which take account of the actual tooth forms in common use, and as no attempt has been made to include in any formula the working stress on the material so that the engineer may see at once upon what assumption a given result is based, I trust I may be pardoned for suggesting that a further investigation is necessary or desirable.
Although there is plenty of information and data on the determination of geometry factors and bending strength of external gear teeth, the computation methods regarding internal gear design are less accessible. most of today's designs adopt the formulas for external gears and incorporate some kind of correction factors for internal gears. However, this design method is only an approximation because of the differences between internal gears and external gears. Indeed, the tooth shape of internal gears is different from that of external gears. One has a concave curve, while the other has a convex curve.
Tooth contact under load is an important verification of the real contact conditions of a gear pair and an important add-on to the strength calculation according to standards such as ISO, AGMA or DIN. The contact analysis simulates the meshing of the two flanks over the complete meshing cycle and is therefore able to consider individual modifications on the flank at each meshing position.
In the design of any new gear drive, the performance of previous similar designs is very carefully considered. In the course of evaluating one such new design, the authors were faced with the task of comparing it with two similar existing systems, both of which were operating quite successfully. A problem arose, however, when it was realized that the bending stress levels of the two baselines differed substantially. In order to investigate these differences and realistically compare them to the proposed new design, a three-dimensional finite-element method (FEM) approach was applied to all three gears.
The load capacity rating of gears had its beginning in the 18th century at Leiden University when Prof. Pieter van Musschenbroek systematically tested the wooden teeth of windmill gears, applying the bending strength formula published by Galilei one century earlier. In the next centuries several scientists improved or extended the formula, and recently a Draft International Standard could be presented.
The geometry factor, which is a fundamental part of the AGMA strength rating of gears, is currently computed using the Lewis parabola which allows computation of the Lewis form factor.(1) The geometry factor is obtained from this Lewis factor and load sharing ratio. This method, which originally required graphical construction methods and more recently has been computerized, works reasonably well for external gears with thick rims.(2-6) However, when thin rims are encountered or when evaluating the strength of internal gears, the AGMA method cannot be used.
Worm gears display unique behavior of surfaces because of the presence of wear phenomena in addition to contact pressure phenomena.
Aircraft transmissions for helicopters, turboprops and geared turbofan aircraft require high reliability and provide several thousand hours of operation between overhauls. In addition, They should be lightweight and have very high efficiency to minimize operating costs for the aircraft.
The powder metal (P/M) process is making inroads in automotive transmission applications due to substantially lower costs of P/M-steel components for high-volume production, as compared to wrought or forged steel parts. Although P/M gears are increasingly used in powered hand tools, gear pumps and as accessory components in automotive transmissions, P/M-steel gears are currently in limited use in vehicle transmission applications. The primary objective of this project was to develop high-strength P/M-steel gears with bending fatigue, impact resistance and pitting fatigue performance equivalent to current wrought steel gears.
Micropitting has become a major concern in certain classes of industrial gear applications, especially wind power and other relatively highly loaded, somewhat slow-speed applications, where carburized gears are used to facilitate maximum load capacity in a compact package. While by itself the appearance of micropitting does not generally cause much perturbation in the overall operation of a gear system, the ultimate consequences of a micropitting failure can, and frequently are, much more catastrophic.
A study was performed to evaluate fault detection effectiveness as applied to gear-tooth pitting-fatigue damage. Vibration and oil-debris monitoring (ODM) data were gathered from 24 sets of spur pinion and face gears run during a previous endurance evaluation study.
Point-surface-origin (PSO) macropitting occurs at sites of geometric stress concentration (GSC) such as discontinuities in the gear tooth profile caused by micropitting, cusps at the intersection of the involute profile and the trochoidal root fillet, and at edges of prior tooth damage, such as tip-to-root interference. When the profile modifications in the form of tip relief, root relief, or both, are inadequate to compensate for deflection of the gear mesh, tip-to-root interference occurs. The interference can occur at either end of the path of contact, but the damage is usually more severe near the start-of-active-profile (SAP) of the driving gear.
In this paper, a method is presented for analyzing and documenting the pitting failure of spur and helical gears through digital photography and automatic computerized evaluation of the damaged tooth fl ank surface. The authors have developed an accurate, cost-effective testing procedure that provides an alternative to vibration analysis or oil debris methods commonly used in conjunction with similar test-rig programs.
This paper intends to determine the load-carrying capacity of thermally damaged parts under rolling stress. Since inspection using real gears is problematic, rollers are chosen as an acceptable substitute. The examined scope of thermal damage from hard finishing extends from undamaged, best-case parts to a rehardening zone as the worst case. Also, two degrees of a tempered zone have been examined.
No matter how well gears are designed and manufactured, gear corrosion can occur that may easily result in catastrophic failure. Since corrosion is a sporadic and rare event and often difficult to observe in the root fillet region or in finely pitched gears with normal visual inspection, it may easily go undetected. This paper presents the results of an incident that occurred in a gear manufacturing facility several years ago that resulted in pitting corrosion and intergranular attack (IGA).
In earlier studies, surface roughness has been shown to have a significant influence on gear pitting life. This paper discusses how high surface roughness introduces a wear mechanism that delays the formation of pits. Accompanied by a full-page technical review.
This article discusses the potential effects observed for different antiwear and EP chemistry on the micropitting of cylindrical gears.
Influences of Load Distribution and Tooth Flank Modifications as Considered in a New, DIN/ISO-Compatible Calculation Method
Most research on micropitting is done on small-sized gears. This article examines whether those results are also applicable to larger gears.
In this study, limiting values for the load-carrying-capacity of fine-module gears within the module range 0.3–1.0 mm were determined and evaluated by comprehensive, experimental investigations that employed technical, manufacturing and material influence parameters.
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.
Spur gear endurance tests were conducted to investigate the surface pitting fatigue life of noninvolute gears with low numbers of teeth and low contact ratios for the use in advanced application. The results were compared with those for a standard involute design with a low number of teeth. The gear pitch diameter was 8.89 cm (3.50 in.) with 12 teeth on both gear designs. Test conditions were an oil inlet temperature of 320 K (116 degrees F), a maximum Hertz stress of 1.49 GPa (216 ksi), and a speed of 10,000 rpm. The following results were obtained: The noninvolute gear had a surface pitting fatigue life approximately 1.6 times that of the standard involute gear of a similar design. The surface pitting fatigue life of the 3.43-pitch AISI 8620 noninvolute gear was approximately equal to the surface pitting fatigue life of an 8-pitch, 28-tooth AISI 9310 gear at the same load, but at a considerably higher maximum Hertz stress.
Results from the Technical University of Munich were presented in a previous technical article (see Ref. 4). This paper presents the results of Ruhr University Bochum. Both research groups concluded that superfinishing is one of the most powerful technologies for significantly increasing the load-carrying capacity of gear flanks.
How do we know when the gear material we buy is metallurgically correct? How can we judge material quality when all gear material looks alike?
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.
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.
If you make hardened gears and have not seen any micropitting, then you haven’t looked closely enough. Micropitting is one of the modes of failure that has more recently become of concern to gear designers and manufacturers. Micropitting in itself is not necessarily a problem, but it can lead to noise and sometimes other more serious forms of failure. Predicting when this will occur is the challenge facing designers.
The search for greater gear life involves improvement in cost, weight and increased power output. There are many events that affect gear life, and this paper addresses those relating to fatigue, gear tooth pitting, fatigue strength losses due to the heat treating processes and shot peening technique. The capability of shot peening to increase fatigue strength and surface fatigue life eliminate machine marks which cause stress risers, and to aid in lubrication when properly controlled, suggests increased use and acceptance of the process.
In the gearing industry, gears are lubricated and cooled by various methods. At low to moderate speeds and loads, gears may be partly submerged in the lubricant which provides lubrication and cooling by splash lubrication. With splash lubrication, power loss increases considerably with speed. This is partially because of churning losses. It is shown that gear scoring and surface pitting can occur when the gear teeth are not adequately lubricated and cooled.
Pitting and micropitting resistance of case-carburized gears depends on lubricants and lubrication conditions. Pitting is a form of fatigue damage. On this account a short time test was developed. The test procedure is described. The "pitting test" was developed as a short time test to examine the influence of lubricants on micropitting. Test results showing the influence of case-carburized gears on pitting and micropitting are presented.
Surface coatings or finishing processes are the future technologies for improving the load carrying capacity of case hardened gears. With the help of basic tests, the influence of different coatings and finishing processes on efficiency and resistance to wear, scuffing, micropitting, and macropitting is examined.