AGMA is pleased to announce the publication of two new revisions: ANSI/AGMA 2116-B24, Evaluation of Double Flank Testers for Radial Composite Measurement of Gears, written by the AGMA Gear Accuracy Committee, and ANSI/AGMA 6008-B24, Specifications for Powder Metallurgy Gears written by the AGMA Powder Metallurgy Committee.
AGMA hosted an EV Town Hall last month during their Motion + Power Technology Expo (MPT Expo). This event was planned to explicitly ask the question, “Is industry ready to roll up its sleeves and start the process of sharing common outcomes that will serve as the building blocks for standards for electric vehicle technology?” Spoiler Alert: The answer was a resounding, yes. And the discussion uncovered some key issues, and perhaps a surprise or two, that will help AGMA leverage its 107 years of experience in this space to start to frame future discussions for electric vehicle standards development.
For 107 years, AGMA has been the go-to place for gear standards. We have been bringing together engineers and leaders from across our industry to keep our standards updated and in line with new technologies. We started with noise issues on electric street cars in the early 1900s, and today we lead the global ISO TC 60 committee on standards including wind-turbine gear-box development. As new technologies and gear applications emerged, AGMA has gathered experts to discuss, brainstorm, share, and collaborate on the topics of the day such as plastic gears, epicyclic gears, marine gears, wind turbine gearboxes, and, of course, gear sets for internal combustion vehicles. We have also kept updated standards on gear accuracy, materials, and lubrication. This work has led to standards that reduce costs, improve quality, and make safer products for manufacturers and consumers worldwide.
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?
During the revision of ISO 1328-1:2013 Cylindrical gears — ISO system of flank tolerance classification, ISO Technical Committee TC 60 WG2 delegates discussed proposals that the standard should be modified to ensure that it is compatible with the ISO Geometrical Product
Specification (GPS) series of standards (Refs. 1-3). This seems sensible because the gears are geometrical components, but after reviewing the implications, it was rejected because ISO TC 60 WG2 did not think the gear manufacturing industry was ready for such a radical change in measurement strategy. The feasibility of the implementation of gears into the GPS matrix of standards has been carried out and the results conclude that this is practical, provided some
key issues related to measurement uncertainty and establishing appropriate KPIs are addressed.
PTB's two microgear measurement standards and their analyses using seven measurement methods which are then presented, evaluated and compared with each other.
If you were offered an opportunity to spend quality time with leading experts in your field, where in-depth discussions and dialogues occurred on subjects that directly impacted your business, would you do it?
A reader asks: I'd like to know about the different approaches and factors considered while determining the value of Ka in regards to the DIN 3990 and AGMA standards.