THE FINAL CHAPTER
This is the last in the series of chapters excerpted from Dr. Hermann J. Stadtfeld's Gleason Bevel Gear Technology - a book written for specialists in planning, engineering, gear design and manufacturing. The work also addresses the technical
information needs of researchers, scientists and students who deal with the theory and practice of bevel gears and other angular gear systems. While all of the above groups are of course of invaluable importance to the gear industry, it is surely the students who hold the key to its future. And with that knowledge it is reassuring to hear from Dr. Stadtfeld of
the enthusiastic response he has received from younger readers
of these chapter installments.
Could you explain to me the difference between spiral bevel gear process face hobbing-lapping, face milling-grinding and Klingelnberg HPG? Which one is better for noise, load capacity and quality?
It may not be widely recognized that most of the inspection data supplied by inspection equipment, following the
practices of AGMA Standard 2015 and similar standards, are not of elemental accuracy deviations but of some form of composite deviations. This paper demonstrates the validity of this “composite” label by first defining the nature of a true
elemental deviation and then, by referring to earlier literature, demonstrating how the common inspection practices for involute, lead (on helical gears), pitch, and, in some cases, total accumulated pitch, constitute composite measurements.
This presentation is an expansion of a previous study (Ref.1) by the authors
on lapping effects on surface finish and transmission errors. It documents
the effects of the superfinishing process on hypoid gears, surface finish and transmission errors.
Some of the pressure on American manufacturers seems to be letting up. This is welcome relief, considering the squeeze they have been under for the past few years.
