“It appears that undercut can be eliminated in some cases but in most cases, the elimination of undercut, for example by increasing the root fillet radii of a pinion, results in performance problems in the operation with its mate. My question is, when can I eliminate undercut and why is it not possible in most cases?”
“ It is very hard to find out any paper regarding ‘tiger stripes’ failure, created by electrical discharge current over the gear teeth.” I wish to have some more information on this issue + how it affects the vibration / noise signatures; why does it creates the tiger stripes profile; how deep are the pittings; why does it create the noise and the possibility of running a gear with this failure?”
We know that for cylindrical gears we have the standard DIN 3964 for defining deviations of shaft center distance and shaft position tolerances of casings. And for bevel gears? Is there some specific standard for defining deviations of center distance and shaft position tolerances of casings (orthogonal shafts), as DIN 3964 do?
A reader asks: We are currently revising our gear standards and tolerances and a few questions with the new standard AGMA 2002-C16 have risen. Firstly,
the way to calculate the tooth thickness tolerance seems to need a "manufacturing profile shift coefficient" that isn't specified in the standard; neither is another standard referred to for this coefficient. This tolerance on tooth thickness is needed later to calculate the span width as well as the pin diameter. Furthermore, there seems to be no tolerancing on the major and minor diameters of a gear.
Question: I am a gear engineer for a motor manufacturer in China. I am writing about noise generated from cross-helical gear assembly error. I want to learn the relationship between the misalignment (center distance change and cross-angle shift) and transmission error. It is better under the loading and theory conditions. What is the trend of cross-helical gear development (use ZI worm and involute helical gear, point contact)?