Cracks initiated at the surface of case-hardened gears may lead to typical life-limiting fatigue failure
modes such as pitting and tooth root breakage. Furthermore, the contact load on the flank surface
induces stresses in greater material depth that may lead to crack initiation below the surface if the
local material strength is exceeded. Over time the sub-surface crack propagation may lead to gear
failure referred to as “tooth flank fracture” (also referred to as “tooth flank breakage”). This paper explains the mechanism of this subsurface fatigue failure mode and its decisive influence factors, and presents an overview of a newly developed calculation model.
Many years ago, when asked how the
five-meter gear was checked, the quality manager responded, “When they’re that big, they’re never bad!” That may have been the attitude and practice in the past, but it no longer serves the manufacturer nor the customer. Requirements have been evolving steadily, requiring gears to
perform better and last longer.
Since we began publishing in 1984, Gear Technology's mission has been to educate our readers. For 31 years, we've shown you the basics of gear manufacturing as well as the cutting edge. We take our educational mission quite seriously, and we go through steps that most publishers don't have time for or wouldn't consider.
Modern gearboxes are characterized by high torque load demands, low running noise and compact design. In order
to fulfill these demands, profile and lead modifications are being applied more often than in the past. This paper will focus on how to produce profile and lead modifications by using the two most common grinding processes—threaded
wheel and profile grinding. In addition, more difficult modifications—such as defined flank twist or topological flank corrections—will also be described in this paper.
This paper discusses the influence of tip relief, root relief, load modification, end relief and their combinations on gear stresses and transmission errors due to shaft deflections.
In some gear dynamic models, the effect of tooth flexibility is ignored when the model determines which pairs of teeth are in contact. Deflection of loaded teeth is not introduced until the equations of motion are solved. This means the zone of tooth contact and average tooth meshing stiffness are underestimated, and the individual tooth load is overstated, especially for heavily loaded gears.
This article compares the static transmission error and dynamic load of heavily loaded, low-contact-ratio spur gears when the effect of tooth flexibility has been considered and when it has been ignored. Neglecting the effect yields an underestimate of resonance speeds and an overestimate of the dynamic load.
Dear Editor:
In Mr. Yefim Kotlyar's article "Reverse Engineering" in the July/August issue, I found an error in the formula used to calculate the ACL = Actual lead from the ASL = Assumed lead.
The load carrying behavior of gears is strongly influenced by local stress concentrations in the tooth root and by Hertzian pressure peaks in the tooth flanks produced by geometric deviations associated with manufacturing, assembly and deformation processes. The dynamic effects within the mesh are essentially determined by the engagement shock, the parametric excitation and also by the deviant tooth geometry.
I received a letter from Mr. G. W. Richmond, Sullivan Machinery Company, N.H., in which in addition to correcting
mistyping, he made several suggestions
concerning my article "General Equations
for Gear Cutting Tool Calculations."
