Question 13.1: Stress Analysis of a Helical-Gear Train Problem Redesign the...
Stress Analysis of a Helical-Gear Train
Problem Redesign the spur-gear train of Examples 12-4 through , 12-5, 12-6, 12-7 (pp. 707 to 730) using helical gears and compare their safety factors.
Given The referenced examples address, respectively, the kinematics, bending stresses, surface stresses, and safety factors for a 3-gear train with the following data: W_{t} = 432.17 lb, N_{p } = 14, N_{idler} = 17, N_{g} = 49, \phi = 25°, p_{d} = 6, F = 2.667 in, pinion speed = 2 500 rpm, and 20 hp. The velocity factor K_{\nu} = 0.66 from previous calculations.
Assumptions The teeth are standard AGMA full-depth profiles. The load and source are both uniform in nature. A gear-quality index of 6 will be used. All gears are steel with \nu = 0.28. The service life required is 5 years of oneshift operation. Operating temperature is 200°F. Based on the assumption of uniform load and source, the application factor K_{a} can be set to 1. The load distribution factor can be estimated from Table 12-16 (p. 715) based on the assumed face width: K_{m} = 1.6. The idler factor K_{I} = 1 for the pinion and gear and K_{I} = 1.42 for the idler gear. The size factor K_{s} = 1 for all three gears. C_{f} = 1. K_{B} = 1. Keep the same \phi and p_{d} as the previous examples’ spur gears and try a 20° helix angle.
Table 12-16 Load Distribution Factors K_{m} |
||
Face in | Width (mm) | K_{m} |
<2 | (50) | 1.6 |
6 | (150) | 1.7 |
9 | (250) | 1.8 |
≥20 | (500) | 2.0 |
Our explanations are based on the best information we have, but they may not always be right or fit every situation.
Learn more on how we answer questions.