You are on page 1of 38

AGMA 927- A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927- A01

Load Distribution Factors - Analytical


Methods for Cylindrical Gears

AGMA INFORMATION SHEET


(This Information Sheet is NOT an AGMA Standard)

Load Distribution Factors - Analytical Methods for Cylindrical Gears


American
AGMA 927--A01
Gear
Manufacturers CAUTION NOTICE: AGMA technical publications are subject to constant improvement,
revision or withdrawal as dictated by experience. Any person who refers to any AGMA
Association
technical publication should be sure that the publication is the latest available from the Association on the subject matter.

[Tables or other self--supporting sections may be quoted or extracted. Credit lines should
read: Extracted from AGMA 927--A01, Load Distribution Factors -- Analytical Methods for
Cylindrical Gears, with the permission of the publisher, the American Gear Manufacturers
Association, 1500 King Street, Suite 201, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.]
Approved October 22, 2000

ABSTRACT
This information sheet describes an analytical procedure for the calculation of the face load distribution. The
iterative solution that is described is compatible with the definitions of the term face load distribution (KH) of
AGMA standards and longitudinal load distribution (KH and KF) of the ISO standards. The procedure is easily
programmable and flow charts of the calculation scheme as well as examples from typical software are
presented.
Published by

American Gear Manufacturers Association


1500 King Street, Suite 201, Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Copyright 2000 by American Gear Manufacturers Association
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic
retrieval system or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America


ISBN: 1--55589--779--7

ii

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Contents
Page

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
1
Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3
Definitions and symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4
Iterative analytical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5
Coordinate system, sign convention, gearing forces and moments . . . . . . . . . 4
6
Shaft bending deflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7
Shaft torsional deflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8
Gap analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9
Load distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10 Future considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Annexes
A
B

Flowcharts for load distribution factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22


Load distribution examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Figures
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Base tangent coordinate system for CW driven rotation from reference end . 5
Base tangent coordinate system for CCW driven rotation from reference end 6
Hand of cut for gears and explanation of apex for bevel gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Gearing force sense of direction for positive value from equations . . . . . . . . . . 8
Example general case gear arrangement (base tangent coordinate system) . 8
View A--A from figure 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Example shaft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Calculated shaft diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Torsional increments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Shaft number 3 gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Shaft number 4 gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Total mesh gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Relative mesh gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Tooth section with spring constant Cm, load L, and deflection Cd . . . . . . . . . 19
Deflection sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Mesh gap section grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Tables
1
2
3
4

Symbols and definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2


Values for factors hand, apex, rotation, and drive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Calculation data and results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Evaluation of mesh gap for mesh #3, mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

iii

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Foreword
[The foreword, footnotes and annexes, if any, in this document are provided for
informational purposes only and are not to be construed as a part of AGMA Information
Sheet 927--A01, Load Distribution Factors -- Analytical Methods for Cylindrical Gears.]
This information sheet provides an analytical method to calculate a numeric value for the
face load distribution factor for cylindrical gearing.
This is a new document, which provides a description of the analytical procedures that are
used in several software programs that have been developed by various gear
manufacturing companies. The method provides a significant improvement from the
procedures used to define numeric values of face load distribution factor in current AGMA
standards. Current AGMA standards utilize either an empirical procedure or a simplified
closed form analytical calculation. The empirical procedure which is used in ANSI/AGMA
2101--C95 only allows for a nominal assessment of the influence of many parameters which
effect the numeric value of the face load distribution factor. The closed form analytic
formulations which have been found in AGMA standards suffer from the limitation that the
shape of the load distribution across the face width is limited to a linear form.
The limitations of the previous AGMA procedures are overcome by the method defined in
this information sheet. This method allows for including a sufficiently accurate
representation of many of the parameters that influence the distribution of load along the
face width of cylindrical gears. These parameters include the elastic effects due to
deformations under load, and the inelastic effects of geometric errors as well as the tooth
modifications which are typically utilized to offset the deleterious effects of the deformations
and errors.
The analytical method described in this information sheet is based on a thin slice model of
a gear mesh. This model treats the distribution of load across the face width of the gear
mesh as being independent of the any transverse effects. The method also represents all of
the elastic effects of a set of meshing teeth (tooth bending, tooth shear, tooth rotation,
Hertzian deflections, etc.) by one constant, i.e., mesh stiffness (Cm). Despite these
simplifying assumptions, this method provides numeric values of the face load distribution
factor that are sufficiently accurate for industrial applications of gearing which fall within the
limitations specified.
The first draft of this information sheet was made in February, 1996. This version was
approved by the AGMA membership on October 22, 2000.
Special mention must be made of the devotion of Louis Lloyd of Lufkin for his untiring efforts
from the submittal of the original software code through the prodding for progress during the
long process of writing this information sheet. Without his foresight and contributions this
information sheet may not have been possible.
Suggestions for improvement of this document will be welcome. They should be sent to the
American Gear Manufacturers Association, 1500 King Street, Suite 201, Alexandria,
Virginia 22314.

iv

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

PERSONNEL of the AGMA Helical Rating Committee and Load Distribution SubCommittee
Chairman: D. McCarthy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dorris Company
Vice Chairman: M. Antosiewicz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Falk Corporation
SubCommittee Chairman: J. Lisiecki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Falk Corporation

SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVE MEMBERS


K.E. Acheson . . .
W.A. Bradley . . . .
M.F. Dalton . . . . .
G.A. DeLange . . .
O. LaBath . . . . . .
L. Lloyd . . . . . . . .

The Gear Works -- Seattle


Consultant
General Electric Company
Prager, Inc.
The Cincinnati Gear Co.
Lufkin Industries, Inc.

J.J. Luz . . . . . . . .
D.R. McVittie . . . .
M.W. Neesley . . .
W.P. Pizzichil . . .
F.C. Uherek . . . . .

General Electric Company


Gear Engineers, Inc.
WesTech Gear Corporation
Philadelphia Gear Corp.
Flender Corporation

G. Lian . . . . . . . . .
J.V. Lisiecki . . . . .
L. Lloyd . . . . . . . .
J.J. Luz . . . . . . . .
D.R. McVittie . . . .
A.G. Milburn . . . .
G.W. Nagorny . . .
M.W. Neesley . . .
B. OConnor . . . .
W.P. Pizzichil . . .
D.F. Smith . . . . . .
K. Taliaferro . . . .

Amarillo Gear Company


The Falk Corporation
Lufkin Industries, Inc.
General Electric Company
Gear Engineers, Inc.
Milburn Engineering, Inc.
Nagorny & Associates
Philadelphia Gear Corp.
The Lubrizol Corporation
Philadelphia Gear Corp.
Solar Turbines, Inc.
Rockwell Automation/Dodge

M. Hirt . . . . . . . . .
R.W. Holzman . .
R.S. Hyde . . . . . .
V. Ivers . . . . . . . .
A. Jackson . . . . .
H.R. Johnson . . .
J.G. Kish . . . . . . .
R.H. Klundt . . . . .
J.S. Korossy . . . .
I. Laskin . . . . . . . .
J. Maddock . . . . .
J. Escanaverino .
G.P. Mowers . . . .
R.A. Nay . . . . . . .
M. Octrue . . . . . .
T. Okamoto . . . . .
J.R. Partridge . . .
M. Pasquier . . . .
J.A. Pennell . . . . .
A.E. Phillips . . . . .
J.W. Polder . . . . .

Renk AG
Milwaukee Gear Company, Inc.
The Timken Company
Xtek, Incorporated
Mobil Technology Company
The Horsburgh & Scott Co.
Sikorsky Aircraft Division
The Timken Company
The Horsburgh & Scott Co.
Consultant
The Gear Works -- Seattle, Inc.
ISPJAE
Consultant
UTC Pratt & Whitney Aircraft
CETIM
Nippon Gear Company, Ltd.
Lufkin Industries, Inc.
CETIM
Univ. of Newcastle--Upon--Tyne
Rockwell Automation/Dodge
Delft University of Technology

COMMITTEE ACTIVE MEMBERS


K.E. Acheson . . .
J.B. Amendola . .
T.A. Beveridge . .
W.A. Bradley . . . .
M.J. Broglie . . . . .
A.B. Cardis . . . . .
M.F. Dalton . . . . .
G.A. DeLange . . .
D.W. Dudley . . . .
R.L. Errichello . . .
D.R. Gonnella . . .
M.R. Hoeprich . .
O.A. LaBath . . . .

The Gear Works--Seattle, Inc.


MAAG Gear AG
Caterpillar, Inc.
Consultant
Dudley Technical Group, Inc.
Mobil Technology Center
General Electric Company
Prager, Incorporated
Consultant
GEARTECH
Equilon Lubricants
The Timken Company
The Cincinnati Gear Co.

COMMITTEE ASSOCIATE MEMBERS


M. Bartolomeo . .
A.C. Becker . . . .
E. Berndt . . . . . . .
E.J. Bodensieck .
D.L. Borden . . . .
M.R. Chaplin . . . .
R.J. Ciszak . . . . .
A.S. Cohen . . . . .
S. Copeland . . . .
R.L. Cragg . . . . .
T.J. Dansdill . . . .
F. Eberle . . . . . . .
L. Faure . . . . . . . .
C. Gay . . . . . . . . .
J. Gimper . . . . . .
T.C. Glasener . . .
G. Gonzalez Rey
M.A. Hartman . . .
J.M. Hawkins . . .
G. Henriot . . . . . .
G. Hinton . . . . . . .

New Venture Gear, Inc.


Nuttall Gear LLC
Besco
Bodensieck Engineering Co.
D.L. Borden, Inc.
Contour Hardening, Inc.
Euclid--Hitachi Heavy Equip. Inc.
Engranes y Maquinaria Arco SA
Gear Products, Inc.
Consultant
General Electric Company
Rockwell Automation/Dodge
C.M.D.
Charles E. Gay & Company, Ltd.
Danieli United, Inc.
Xtek, Incorporated
ISPJAE
ITW
Rolls--Royce Corporation
Consultant
Xtek, Incorporated

AGMA 927--A01

E. Sandberg . . . .
C.D. Schultz . . . .
E.S. Scott . . . . . .
A. Seireg . . . . . . .
Y. Sharma . . . . . .
B.W. Shirley . . . .
L.J. Smith . . . . . .
L. Spiers . . . . . . .
A.A. Swiglo . . . . .
J.W. Tellman . . . .

vi

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Det Nordske Veritas


Pittsburgh Gear Company
The Alliance Machine Company
University of Wisconsin
Philadelphia Gear Corporation
Emerson Power Transmission
Invincible Gear Company
Emerson Power Trans. Corp.
IIT Research Institute/INFAC
Dodge

F.A. Thoma . . . . .
D. Townsend . . . .
L. Tzioumis . . . . .
F.C. Uherek . . . . .
A. Von Graefe . . .
C.C. Wang . . . . .
B. Ward . . . . . . . .
R.F. Wasilewski .
H. Winter . . . . . . .

F.A. Thoma, Inc.


NASA/Lewis Research Center
Dodge
Flender Corporation
MAAG Gear AG
3E Software & Eng. Consulting
Recovery Systems, LLC
Arrow Gear Company
Technische Univ. Muenchen

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

American Gear Manufacturers


Association --

Load Distribution Factors


-- Analytical Methods for
Cylindrical Gears

1 Scope
This information sheet covers a method for the
evaluation of load distribution across the teeth of
parallel axis gears. A general discussion of the
design and manufacturing factors which influence
load distribution is included.
The load distribution factors for use in AGMA parallel
axis gear rating standards are defined, to improve
communication between users of those standards.
Historically, analytical methods for evaluating load
distribution in both AGMA and ISO standards have
been limited by the assumption that load is linearly
distributed across the face width of the meshing gear
set. The result of this assumption is often overly
conservative (high) values of load distribution factors. The method given here is considered more
correct.
1.1 Method
A simplified iterative method for calculation of the
face load distribution factor, based on combined
twisting and bending displacements of a mating gear
and pinion, is presented. The transverse load
distribution (in the plane of rotation) is not evaluated
in this information sheet. This method assumes that
the mesh stiffness is a constant through the entire
contact roll and across the face. General guidance
for design modifications to improve load distribution
is also included.

AGMA 927--A01

1.2 Limitations of method


This method is intended to be used for general gear
design and rating purposes. It is intended to provide
a value of load distribution factor and a means by
which different gear designs can be analytically
compared. It is not intended for rigorous detailed
analysis to calculate the actual distribution of load
across the face width of gear sets.
The knowledge and judgment required to evaluate
the results of this method come from experience in
designing, manufacturing and operating gear units.
This method is intended for use by the experienced
gear designer, capable of understanding its limitations and purposes. It is not intended for use by the
engineering public at large.

2 References
The following documents were used in the development of this information sheet. At the time of
publication, the editions were valid. All publications
are subject to revision, and the users of this manual
are encouraged to investigate the possibility of
applying the most recent editions of the publications
listed:
AGMA Technical Paper P109.16, Profile and
Longitudinal Corrections on Involute Gears, 1965
ANSI/AGMA 1012--F90, Gear Nomenclature,
Definitions Of Terms With Symbols
ANSI/AGMA 2101--C95, Fundamental Rating Factors And Calculation Methods For Involute Spur
And Helical Gear Teeth
ANSI/AGMA ISO 1328--1, Cylindrical Gears -- ISO
System of Accuracy -- Part 1: Definitions and
Allowable Values of Deviations Relevant to Corresponding Flanks of Gear Teeth
ISO 6336--1:1996, Calculation of load capacity of
spur and helical gears -- Part 1: Basic principles,
introduction and general influence factors
Dudley, D.W., Handbook of Practical Gear Design,
McGraw--Hill, New York, 1984
Timken Engineering Design Manual, Volume 1

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

3 Definitions and symbols


The terms used, wherever applicable, conform to
ANSI/AGMA 1012--F90.
NOTE: The symbols and definitions used in this standard may differ from other AGMA standards. The user
should not assume that familiar symbols can be used
without a careful study of their definitions.

The symbols and terms, along with the clause


numbers where they are first discussed, are listed in
alphabetical order by symbol in table 1.
3.1 Load distribution factor
The load distribution factor, KH, modifies the rating
equations to reflect the non--uniform distribution of
load along the gear tooth lines of contact as they
rotate through mesh. In past AGMA standards, the
variables Cm and Km have been associated with this
factor. In ISO standards, the variables KH, KH, KF
and KF, have been associated with the factor. In

current AGMA standards the load distribution factor,


KH, is used for both pitting resistance and bending
strength calculations. There is no separate value,
KF, for bending strength as found in ISO standards.
The magnitude of KH is affected by two components,
transverse load distribution factor and face load
distribution factor.
The transverse load distribution factor pertains to the
plane of rotation and is affected primarily by the
correctness of the profiles and indexing of the mating
teeth. Standard procedures to evaluate it have not
been established and it is assumed to be unity in this
information sheet.
The face load distribution factor is the focus of this
information sheet.
3.2 Target mesh
The target mesh is that mesh for which load
distribution is being analyzed. The target mesh
includes a target pinion and a target gear.

Table 1 -- Symbols and definitions


Symbol
A
BT
BTN
BTZ
Cm
b
D
DpG
d
din
dsh
E
FaG
FaP
Fg
Fi
FsG
FsP
FtG
FtP
G
H
I

Definition
Apex factor
Axis in the base tangent plane
Axis normal to base tangent plane
Axis in the base tangent plane perpendicular to BT
Tooth stiffness constant, for the analysis
Helical/bevel gear face width
Drive factor
Operating pitch diameter, gear
Outside effective twist diameter
Inside shaft diameter
Outside diameter, effect outside diameter of the teeth
Modulus of elasticity
Axial thrust force, gear member
Axial thrust force, pinion member
Total load in the plane of action
Gearing or external force at a distance
Separating force, gear member
Separating force, pinion member
Tangential force, gear member
Tangential force, pinion member
Modulus of elasticity in shear
Hand factor
Moment of inertia

Units
-- --- --- --- -N/mm/mm
mm
-- -mm
mm
mm
mm
N/mm2
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N/mm2
-- -mm4

First
referenced
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.2
9.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
7.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
5.3
5.4
9.2
6.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
7.1
5.3
6.1
(continued)

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Table 1 (concluded)
Symbol
IC
i
KH
Ls
Lj
L
M
MG
n
P
R
RL
RR
S
SLi
ti
V
xi
Xj
Xfi
x
y
ti
G
P

Definition

Units

Integration constant
Station number
Load distribution factor
Distance between the supports (reactions)
Load at station
Load intensity
Bending moment
Moment due to axial thrust force
Station number at end support
Power transmitted through the mesh
Rotation factor
Reaction at the left bearing
Reaction at the right bearing
Speed of shaft
Station slope value
Torsional deflection at a station
Shear
Length of face where point load applied
Distance between adjacent stations
Distance from left support to load location
Distance between stations
Deflection along the line of action
Tooth deflection at a load point
Bevel pitch angle of gear
Bevel pitch angle of pinion
Helix angle/spiral angle
Normal pressure angle

4 Iterative analytical method

-- --- --- --- -N


N/mm
N mm
N mm
-- -kW
-- -N
N
rpm
-- -mm
N
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
degrees
degrees
degrees
degrees

First
referenced
6.1
6.1
9.4
6.1
7.1
9.1
6.1
5.4
6.1
5.3
5.3
6.1
6.1
5.3
6.3
7.1
6.1
9.2
7.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.1
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3

--

tooth alignment deviations of pinion and gear;

--

tooth alignment and crowning modification;

This information sheet presents an iterative analytical method for determining a value of load distribution factor. The iterative method combines the
calculated elastic deflection of the pinion and the
gear with other misalignments. The result defines a
mesh gap in the base tangent plane which is the net
mismatch between the gear and the pinion. The
teeth in mesh are modeled by an equally spaced
series of independent parallel compression springs
which represent the mesh stiffness. The mesh gap is
then mathematically closed by compressing the
springs until the sum of the spring forces equals the
total tooth force.

Influences that may be accounted for by estimating


values and including them as equivalent misalignments of the target shaft axes are:

The method has the ability to consider the following


influences:

-- elastic deflection of a gear body if it is not a


solid disk (such as a spoke gear);

-- alignment of the axes of rotation of the pinion


and gear, including bearing clearances and
housing bore alignment;
-- mesh elastic deflections due to Hertzian
contact and tooth bending;
-- shaft elastic deflections due to twisting and
bending, resulting from the target mesh loads and
loads external to the mesh.

AGMA 927--A01

-- elastic deflection
foundations;

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

of

the

housing

and

-- equivalent elastic deflection of non--solid


body gears (such as a spoke gear);

-- displacements of the gearing due to bearing


deflection;

-- elastic deflection
foundations;

--

thermal or centrifugal effects;

--

running--in or lapping effects.

-- displacements due to bearing clearance,


alignment and deflection;

The method does not consider the following


influences:
--

tooth profile, spacing and runout deviations;

-- total tooth load including increases due to


application influences and tooth dynamics;
--

variations of stiffness of the gear teeth;

-- double helical
overloaded.

gears

with

one

helix

4.1 Methodology

of

the

--

thermal or centrifugal effects;

--

running--in or lapping effects.

housing

and

4.2 Assumptions and simplifications


The following assumptions and simplifications are
used:
--

the weight of components is ignored;

-- effects of uneven distribution of load on


meshes other than the target mesh are ignored;
load on these meshes is treated as concentrated
in the center of the mesh;

The iterative analytical method consists of the


following basic steps:

-- shear coupling between the mesh gap compression springs representing the mesh stiffness
is ignored;

1) Calculate the mesh gap resulting from an


initial uniform load distribution;

-- mesh stiffness is a constant across the full


width of tooth;

2) Calculate a new load distribution by mathematically closing the mesh gap. This is accomplished by compressing the springs until the sum
of the spring forces equals the total tooth force;

--

3) Calculate a new mesh gap resulting from the


new load distribution;
4) Repeat steps 2 and 3 until the change in load
distribution from the previous iteration is
negligible;
5) The load distribution factor is then calculated
from this final load distribution.
4.1.1 Calculated elastic deflections
Deflections which are calculated within the iterative
method include the elastic deflections of the pinion
and gear shafts, plus the mesh. Elastic shaft
deflections include shaft twist and bending. Elastic
tooth deflections include Hertzian contact and tooth
bending.

all shafts are supported on two bearings;

-- for double helical gears the net thrust force is


zero as the thrust force from each helix cancels
each other;
-- for double helical gears the tangential and
separating force is distributed equally on each
hand helix; this is generally true as long as one
member can float with respect to the other with no
external axial load applied.

5 Coordinate system, sign convention,


gearing forces and moments
5.1 Rules
The rules that govern the coordinate system, sign
convention, gearing forces and moments are:
--

the target mesh shafts are mutually parallel;

4.1.2 Equivalent misalignment inputs

-- the coordinate system for all calculations lies


in the base tangent plane;

Other displacements that are treated by combining


them as an equivalent deflection at the target mesh
include:

-- the base tangent plane is a plane tangent to


the base circles of the target mesh;

-- alignment deviations and modifications of


pinion and gear teeth;
4

-- the driving element is the element for which


contact first occurs in the root of the tooth and
traverses to the tip of the tooth;

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

-- a modified Timken sign convention is


followed;

plane and the edge of the target mesh face closest to


the reference end (see figures 1 and 2).

-- each analysis includes only the two shafts


under consideration;

For consistency in defining the positive direction of


the BTCS axes and in calculating the mesh loads, a
reference end needs to be identified. For purposes
of this information sheet, the reference end is the end
of the driving element shaft opposite the torque input
end.

-- the origin of the shaft is the bearing or point of


application of a force or moment on the target
pinion shaft which is most remote from the target
mesh toward the reference end of the shaft (see
5.2);
-- the input torque to the driving element enters
the shaft from one side only and is fully balanced
by torque in the target mesh.

Using this definition of the refence end, the positive


directions of the BTCS axes are determined as
follows:
+ BTZ: away from the reference end;

5.2 Coordinate system and sign convention

+ BTN: toward the driven element;

The coordinate system is aligned with the base


tangent plane, BTP, of the target mesh and is defined
as the base tangent coordinate system, BTCS. The
BTCS is comprised of three orthogonal axes: BT,
BTN (base tangent normal), and BTZ.

+ BT: obtained by right hand rule; BTN to BTZ.

The BTZ axis is parallel to the axes of the target


mesh shafts. The BT axis lies in the BTP and is
perpendicular to the BTZ axis. The BTN axis is
perpendicular to both the BT and the BTZ axes
(normal to the base tangent plane). The origin of the
BTCS lies at the intersection of the base tangent

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the base tangent plane and


the base tangent coordinate system for a typical
target mesh. In figure 1, the input torque is clockwise
when viewed from the reference end. In figure 2, the
input torque is counterclockwise when viewed from
the reference end.
The force, moment and deflection along the positive
direction of BT, BTN and BTZ are assigned positive
values. Along the negative direction of BT, BTN and
BTZ, they are assigned negative values.

Base tangent plane

Driver
Base diameter -driving element

Input
torque
Target shaft -driver
Target mesh
+BTZ

+BT

Base diameter -driven element


Target shaft -driven

*
Reference
end

+BTN

Driven

Figure 1 -- Base tangent coordinate system for CW driven rotation from reference end

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Target shaft -driver

Driver
Base diameter -driving element

Input
torque
+BTZ

Target mesh
Base diameter -driven element

Base tangent
plane

+BT

Reference
end

+BTN
Driven

Target shaft -driven

Figure 2 -- Base tangent coordinate system for CCW driven rotation from reference end
5.3 Gearing forces and signs

is rotation factor (see table 2);

Meshing gear members transmitting torque will


cause forces and moments to develop on the shafts
that carry these gear members. These forces and
moments will cause deflections of the shafts that will
tend to affect the alignment and ultimately the
distribution of the load across the face width of the
mesh. These elastic deflections need to be combined with all other sources of potential misalignment.

is speed of gear shaft, rpm;

The forces on the gear member are given by


equations 1 through 3. In these equations, the
values of factors H, A, R, and D are obtained using
table 2. When properly applied, these factors will
ensure that the proper direction of the forces are
determined.
The directions obtained will be
consistent with the BTCS definition presented in 5.2.
The tangential force is calculated as:
F tG =

1.91 10 7 P (D R )

S D pG b sin G

(1)

DpG is operating pitch diameter, gear, mm;


b

is helical/bevel gear face width, mm;

is bevel pitch angle, gear, degrees.

The separating force is calculated as:


F sG =

cos

FsG is separating force, gear member, N;


A

is apex (bevel) factor (see table 2);

is hand factor (see table 2);

is helix angle/spiral angle, degrees;

is normal pressure angle, degrees.

The thrust (axial) force is calculated as:


F aG =

F (A )A D H R sin cos
tG

is power transmitted through the mesh, kW;

is drive factor (see table 2);

G tan sin G

cos

FtG is tangential force, gear member, N;


P

(2)

where

where

F A D H R sin sin + tan cos


tG
G
G

where
FaG is axial thrust force, gear member, N.

(3)

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Table 2 Values for factors hand, apex, rotation, and drive


Factor description
Hand

Factor
H

Apex (bevel)

Rotation

Drive

Value
+1
--1
0
+1
--1
+1
--1
+1
--1

Condition
Right hand helix or spiral (see figure 3)
Left hand helix or spiral (see figure 3)
Spur, straight bevel, or herringbone
Apex toward reference end (see figure 3), or no apex
Apex away from reference end (see figure 3)
Clockwise viewed from reference end
Counterclockwise viewed from reference end
Driving element
Driven element
above equations. The forces must be determined for
each mesh on each of the target mesh shafts.

For gears having no helix, spiral, or pitch angles, set


the values of these angles equal to zero in equations
1 to 3.
To obtain the force for the pinion member, replace
the gear values in equations 1 through 3 with the
corresponding pinion values.

With the sign convention of figure 3 and the definition


of the BT axis, the tangential mesh load on the
driving element will introduce positive mesh displacement in the base tangent plane.

Figure 4 shows the sign convention to use for the


direction of the gear forces. The direction shown is
for the positive value of forces evaluated by the

Figure 5 shows a general arrangement. For this


example, mesh 3 is the target mesh. Shafts 3 and 4
are the target shafts.

Hand

Right hand
helix

Left hand
helix

Right hand
spiral

Left hand
spiral

Apex

Away from
reference

Toward
reference

Figure 3 -- Hand of cut for gears and explanation of apex for bevel gears

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Mating target
shaft

One target
shaft

Mate
shaft

If mate to target
shaft is on the
left, use these
positive force
directions

Ft
Fa

Fa

Fs

Fs
Ft

If mate to target shaft is on


the right, use these positive
force directions

View direction from


reference end

Figure 4 -- Gearing force sense of direction for positive value from equations

Mesh 1
Shaft 1

FtG1

FaP1

FaG1

A Driver
RH
FsG1

FtP1

Driver
LH
Shaft 2
Reference end
and origin of
shaft for mesh 2

FsP2

FsG1

FtP2

Driven
LH

Driver
RH

FaG2

Shaft 3
Reference end
and origin of
shaft for mesh 3

FaP2

Base tangent
FtG2
plane for mesh 2
Mesh 2

FsG2

FsP3

+BT

FtG3 Mesh 3
FaG3

FaP3
FtP3
+BTZ

Driven
RH
Bearing

+BTN
Base tangent coordinate
system for mesh 2

Base tangent
plane for
mesh 3

Base diameter for


member typical

+BT -- Axis along base tangent plane of target mesh


+BTN -- Axis normal to base tangent plane of target mesh

Shaft 4

FsG3

Driven
LH

CL
Gear
face

Example showing actual direction of the forces as determined from the sign of the values calculated in the
force equations.
Figure 5 -- Example general case gear arrangement (base tangent coordinate system)

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

5.4 Gearing moments

6 Shaft bending deflections

The axial thrust forces acting on the pinion and gear


cause moments. For the target mesh, the moments
can be determined for each mesh section. For each
additional mesh on the target shafts, the resulting
moment is assumed to act at the center of the face
width. For a double helical mesh the net moment will
be zero.

Gears transmitting power will impose forces and


moments on their shafts, which will cause elastic
deflections. These deflections can affect the alignment of the gear teeth and therefore affect the load
distribution across the gear face width.

The moment due to an axial thrust force on the gear


member is given by equation 4.

MG =

F aG D pG

(4)

This section presents a simplified computer programmable integration method for calculating the
bending deflection of a stepped shaft with radial
loads imposed and two bearing supports.
Rules for calculating bending deflection when calculating load distribution factor are also presented.

where
MG moment due to axial thrust force, N mm.
To obtain the moment due to an axial thrust force on
the pinion member, replace the gear values by the
corresponding pinion values.
Figure 6 shows the tangential and separating forces
and the axial thrust moments acting on shafts 3 and 4
of figure 5. These forces affect the load distribution
of mesh 3. Figure 6 demonstrates the resolution of
the shaft 3 and 4 forces and moments into the base
tangent coordinate system for mesh 3.

6.1 Simplified bending calculation routine


As explained in other sections, when calculating
shaft deflections, the area of the gear teeth is broken
into eighteen separate load application sections.
However, to simplify the explanation of the deflection
calculation method the following model and explanation will be of a stepped shaft with two supports, three
changes in diameter, and two point loads. This is as
shown in figure 7 and table 3.

Driver
LH
Base tangent coordinate
system for mesh 3

Shaft 2

+BTZ
Driven
RH

Mesh 2
FsG23

Shaft 3

Driven
LH

FtG34
FsP33

MG23
Driver
RH

+BTN

Base tangent
line

FtG23

+BT

MP33

FsG34

Shaft 4

FtP33

Target
Mesh #3

MG34

BT -- Axis along base tangent plane of target mesh


BTN -- Axis normal to base tangent plane of target mesh

Figure 6 -- View A--A from figure 5

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Table 3 -- Calculation data and results

AGMA 927--A01

10

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

--13500
22.0
1

28.0
2

35.0

+9000
28.0

25.0
4

50.0

25.0
5

44.0

22.0
6

38.0

+6180

--1680

Figure 7 -- Example shaft


All modeling will be from the left--hand support
moving toward the right--hand support. Deflection at
supports is zero. The gearing forces and any other
external forces are used to obtain the free body force
diagram. In the force diagram the forces, Fi, and the
distances they act from the left support, Xfi, are
specified.
Using standard static force analyses calculate the
reaction, RR, at the right side support by summing
the moments about the left support.
RR =

Fi Xfi
Ls

(5)

is the force applied at a distance, N;

Ls

is the distance between the two supports;

Xfi

is the distance from left support to load


location, Fi.
(6)

Then calculate the reaction at the left using the total


sum of the loads.
RL =

Fi RR

(7)

It is critical that sign convention be maintained during


the calculations with the preceding formulas.
The basic equation for small deflection of a stepped
shaft is:
d2 y
=M
EI
dx 2

is the distance between stations, mm;

is the bending moment, Nmm;

is the moment of inertia, mm4;

is the modulus of elasticity, N/mm2;

is the deflection, mm.

Integrating equation 8 twice gives deflection. The


following step by step procedure applied to the
stepped shaft as shown in figure 7 will illustrate the
procedure evaluating shaft deflection. A tabulated
form as shown in table 3 lends itself to the process.
Step 1: Divide the shaft into lengths with intervals
beginning at each force and at each change in
section (see figure 7).

where

X fi = x i + X fi1 i = 1, 2, 3, n

where

(8)

Step 2: Label the ends of intervals with station


numbers beginning at the left support with station i=1
and ending at the right support with station i = n.
Step 3: List station numbers, i, on alternate lines in
column 1 of calculation sheet (see table 3).
Step 4: List free body forces in column 4 on the
same lines as the station numbers at which they
occur. Care should be taken to designate proper
signs to forces (upward forces are considered
positive in this example).
Step 5: Calculate the shear, Vi, at each station by
summing the values in column 4. Tabulate each
shear value in column 5, one station below the
station for which it is calculated. The last shear value

11

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

should be numerically equal to but opposite in sign to


the last force listed in column 4.
V i+1 = V i + F i i = 1, 2, 3, n 1

(9)

where
V

is the shear, N;

is the station number;

is the station number at end support.

AMEI i =

Step 6: In column 6, on the same line as the station


number, list the distance to the preceding station.
Step 7: Calculate bending moment, Mi, at each
station and list the value in column 7. Value at the
first station is zero. Values at succeeding stations
are obtained by summing the products of shear
force, Vi (column 5), and distance between stations,
xi (column 6). The moment at the first and last
station, i = 1 and i = n, should be zero (i.e. M1=0.0 and
Mn = 0.0).
M i+1 = M i + V i+1x i+1 i = 1, 2, 3, n
(10)
Step 8: Calculate the moment of inertia, Ii, in
bending for each interval. Place the I value in
column 8 on the line between the two stations at
which the interval begins and ends.
Ii =

d4

sh i

d4

64

in i

i = 1, 2, 3, n

(11)

where
dsh

is the outside shaft diameter (see 6.2), mm;

din

is the inside shaft diameter, mm;

Step 9: Multiply each Ii value by modulus of


elasticity, E, and insert the EIi value in column 9 on
the same lines as corresponding Ii values. For steel
use E = 206 000 N/mm2. Dividing the EIi values by
103 before tabulating them in column 9 results in
units of m for the rest of the tabulation.
EI i = ( E )I i i = 1, 2, 3, n 1

(12)

Step 10: Divide each bending moment Mi value in


column 7 by the EIi value in column 9 which precedes
and follows it. List these two values, MEIui and MEIli,
in column 10.

12

Step 11: Obtain the average MEI values, AMEIi, for


each interval by averaging the values on the lines on
which the station is listed and the following line. List
the average values on the lines between stations in
column 11.

MEI ui =

Mi
i = 1, 2, 3, n 1
EI i

(13)

MEI li =

M i+1
i = 1, 2, 3, n 1
EI i

(14)

MEI ui + MEI li
i = 1, 2, 3, n 1
2
(15)

Step 12: Calculate the slope value, SLi, in column 12


starting with zero at station 1 (i.e., SL1=0). Succeeding values are obtained by summing the products of
AMEIi from column 11 and the xi value on the next
lower line of column 6. These values are listed on the
same lines as the stations.
SL i+1 = SL i + AMEI ix i+1 i = 1, 2, 3, n 1

(16)

Step 13: Average the slope values in column 12 at


the beginning and end of each interval. These
values, ASLi, are listed on the lines between stations
in column 13.
ASL i =

SL i + SL i+1
i = 1, 2, 3, n 1 (17)
2

Step 14: Obtain the deflection increment values, DIi,


in column 14 by multiplying the average slope value
in column 13 and the xi value from the next lower line
in column 6.
DI i = ASL ix i+1 i = 1, 2, 3, n 1

(18)

Step 15: The next step is to evaluate the integration


constant which depends on type of shaft. For the
simply supported shaft with no load outside of the
supports as shown in figure 7, the constant is
obtained by summing the deflection increment
values in column 14 to obtain Sy. The sign of Sy is
changed and the sum divided by the distance
between the reaction, Ls, to obtain the integration
constant per mm of length.
n1
Sy =

i=1

DI i

(19)

xi

(20)

Ls =

IC =

i=1
Sy
Ls

Other shaft configurations


integration constant.

(21)
will

change

the

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

--13500
22.0
1

35.0

28.0
2

+9000
28.0

25.0
4

25.0
5

44.0

50.0

+6180

22.0
6

38.0

--1680

+10000 (N)
0.0
--10000 (N)

Shear Diagram, V

350000 (Nmm)

0.0
--150000 (Nmm)

Moment Diagram, M

+0.01 (1/mm)

0.0

--0.01 (1/mm)

M Diagram
EI

0.4 (mrad)

0.0

Slope Curve

0.0
--10 (mm)

Deflection Curve

Figure 8 -- Calculated shaft diagrams

13

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Step 16: The integration constant for each section,


ICSi, is now calculated. Multiply integration constant,
IC, calculated in step 15 by xi value on the next lower
line from column 6 to obtain the constant for each
section. List these values in column 15 on the same
line as the average slope and deflection increments.
ICS i = ( IC )x i+1 i = 1, 2, 3, n 1

(22)

Step 17: Column 16 is the calculated deflection.


Place zero at left support location, i.e. y1=0.0,
because support locations must have zero deflection. For all other stations the deflection values are
obtained by summing together the deflection increment and integration constant values from columns
14 and 15. These deflection values are inserted on
the same line as the station. As a math check when
summing the values of yi the calculated value at the
right support location, yn, should be very close to
zero.
y i+1 = y i + DI i + ICS i i = 1, 2, 3, n 1
(23)
6.2 Rules
When using the shaft bending deflection routine
explained in 6.1 to calculate load distribution, the
following rules apply:
--

This is a two dimensional deflection analysis;

--

Shear deflections are not included;

-- The length between any two stations is critical


to the accuracy of this calculation. Rules for
station length are: no longer than 1/2 diameter of
the station; no longer than 3 times the shortest
section of the non--gear tooth portion of the shaft;
no longer than 30 mm.
When in doubt about the number of stations, if
adding more does not significantly change the
calculation results, the number of original stations
is adequate.

-- The effective bending outside diameter of the


teeth is the (tip diameter minus root diameter)/2
plus the root diameter;
-- The moment couple applied to single helical
gears due to the thrust component of tooth
loading can be modeled as equal positive and
negative forces at a location just to the left and
right of the gear tooth area.

7 Shaft torsional deflection


Meshing gear sets transmitting torque will also twist
the shafts that carry the gear elements. The twist will
cause deflection at the teeth that will affect the load
distribution across their face width.
7.1 Torsional deflection
The torque input end is subjected to full torque. The
torque value decreases along the face until it
becomes zero at the other end. Hence the direction
of torque path is of importance.
Consider a cylindrical shaft with circular cross
section with outside effective twist diameter, d, inside
diameter, din, and incremental length, Xj, as shown in
figure 9.
The equation for torsional twist can be found in
machinery design text. The torsional deflection must
be calculated over the length of the tooth face. The
twist must be converted from radians to a deflection
in the base tangent plane. Equation 24 is in a form
that allows summation using the discreet stations
used in this document. This results in the equation:
1
2
i i
X
L

j
j4 d
j
=
1
j
=
1

10 3
t i =

(24)

G d 4 d 4in

where
ti

is torsional deflection at a station, mm;

When calculating bending deflection for load distribution factor, the following rules also apply:

Lj

is load at a station, N;

Xj

-- Only forces acting in the base tangent plane


are considered;

is the distance between adjacent stations,


mm;

is effective twist diameter (see 7.2), mm;

-- When calculating shaft deflections, the area


of the gear teeth is broken into eighteen equal
sections;

din

is inside diameter, mm;

is station number;

is shear modulus (83 000 N/mm2 for steel).

14

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Undeformed
position

Facewidth

X1
X2

L1

X3

L2

X4

L3

X5

L4
din
Torsional
deflection

Torque
input

L5
L6

Torque
input

Li Load on teeth

Figure 9 -- Torsional increments


At the first point of interest on the tooth where j = 1,
the summation of Xj will be zero and the torsional
deflection is zero. Continued calculation of the
torsional twist toward the end of the tooth face where
torque is being applied results in a maximum
torsional deflection, see figure 9.
Equation 24 is an approximation which yields
reasonable results for gearing. The theoretically
correct equation would be an integration.
A slightly more accurate approximation is found in
equation 25.

t i =

(i 1) k

10 3

L j X k8 d 2
k = 1j = 1

(25)

G d 4 d 4in

7.2 Rules

-- the outside effective twist diameter of tooth


section is the root diameter plus 0.4 times the normal module;
-- the twist of all elements except the target
mesh being analyzed is ignored;
CAUTION: Equations 24 and 25 only cover torques in
the target mesh that arise from gear tooth loading. Other torques may require additional modeling.

8 Gap analysis
Elastic bending and torsional deflections, tooth
modifications, lead variations and shaft misalignments cause the gear teeth to not be in contact
across the entire face width. The distance between
non contacting points along the face width of the
mating teeth is defined as the gap. This gap is closed
to some degree when the gear set is loaded due to
the compliance of the gear teeth along the face width
of the target mesh.

Since the angle is small, it is assumed that the


deflection in the base tangent plane is proportional to
the twist angle.

Bending deflection: Use the values obtained from


the bending analysis for each shaft increment of the
target mesh. Retain the positive or negative sign of
the bending deflection.

The rules that apply to this shaft torsional deflection


are:

Torsional deflection: Use the values from the


torsional analysis for each shaft increment of the

15

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

on the shaft, bearing clearance, housing bore


non--parallelism, etc. At design stage, values should
be based on expected manufacturing accuracy.
Incorporate expected shaft misalignment so as to
increase mesh gap (check both directions).

target mesh. Retain the positive or negative sign of


torsional deflection.
Tooth modification: Tooth modification accounts
for lead modification and crowning. The sign
convention for tooth modification as illustrated in
table 4 is the following: if the load direction on the
teeth is positive, removal of metal at an individual
station is entered as a positive value; if the direction
of load on the teeth is negative, the removal of metal
at an individual station is entered as a negative
value.

At final verification stage use actual shaft misalignment. The shaft misalignment that corresponds to
material removal on the tooth flank has the same
sign as the load on the tooth flank when entered in
table 4.

At final verification stage use actual lead variation


measured for the gear set. The lead variation
corresponding to material removal from the tooth
flank has the same sign as the load on the tooth flank
when it is entered in table 4.

Use the deflections, modifications, variations and


misalignment values with proper positive or negative
signs for each shaft of the target mesh to form table
4. In table 4, the shaft gap is the algebraic sum of all
deflections, tooth modifications, lead variation and
misalignment. The difference between the individual
shaft gap positions is the total mesh gap. To
evaluate load distribution by the iterative method the
relative gap is used. Relative mesh gap at each
station of interest is obtained by subtracting the least
total mesh gap from the total mesh gap at the station.
The last column in table 4 reflects the relative mesh
gap.

Shaft misalignment: Shaft misalignment accounts


for the error in concentricity of the bearing diameters

Table 4 is an example of the mesh gap evaluated for


mesh #3 of general arrangement shown in figure 5.

Lead variation: The actual lead variation of the gear


set is not available at the design stage. At this stage
lead variation based on the expected ANSI/AGMA
ISO 1328--1 tolerance of the gear set may be used.
The lead variation must be incorporated so as to
increase the total mesh gap (check both directions).

Table 4 -- Evaluation of mesh gap for mesh #3, mm


Shaft #3

Shaft #4

Station
number

Bending
deflection

Torsional
deflection

Tooth
modification

Lead
variation

Shaft misalignment

11.8

--9.1

5.0

0.0

11.7

--8.9

3.5

0.3

10

11.5

--8.5

2.7

11

11.3

--7.9

2.0

12

11.0

--7.1

13

10.7

14

Total
mesh
gap

Relative
mesh
gap

--4.2

11.9

0.0

--5.4

12.8

0.9

--1.3

--6.5

14.1

2.2

--1.8

--7.6

15.6

3.7

--1.0

--2.3

--8.8

17.3

5.4

0.0

--1.3

--2.8

--10.3

19.7

7.8

4.4

0.0

--1.5

--3.3

--11.8

22.0

10.1

--11.0

3.0

0.0

--1.7

--3.8

--13.5

25.4

13.5

--10.5

1.6

0.0

--2.0

--4.3

--15.2

29.9

18.0

0.8

0.0

--2.2

--4.8

--16.1

34.9

23.0

Shaft #3
gap

Bending
deflection

Torsional
deflection

Tooth
modification

0.0

7.7

--12.8

8.6

0.0

0.8

7.4

--12.7

8.4

0.0

0.6

1.3

7.6

--12.6

8.0

0.0

0.8

1.8

8.0

--12.4

7.4

0.0

1.3

1.0

2.3

8.5

--12.1

6.6

--6.1

0.7

1.3

2.8

9.4

--11.8

10.3

--4.9

0.0

1.5

3.3

10.2

15

9.9

--3.5

0.0

1.7

3.8

16

9.5

--2.1

1.0

2.0

4.3

17

9.1

--0.8

3.5

2.2

4.8

18.8

16

Lead
variation

Shaft misalignment

Shaft #4
gap

0.0

0.0

--0.3

--0.8

--0.6
--0.8

0.0

5.6

--11.4

11.9
14.7

--9.9

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

20
18
16

SHAFT #3

14
12

Micrometers

10
8
6
4
2
0
8
--2

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

15

16

17

--4
--6
--8
--10
--12
--14
--16
--18
--20

Figure 10 -- Shaft number 3 gap

20
18
16
14
12

Micrometers

10
8
6
4
2
0
8
--2

10

11

12

13

14

--4
--6
--8
--10
--12
--14
--16

SHAFT #4

--18
--20

Figure 11 -- Shaft number 4 gap

17

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION


20
18
16

SHAFT #3

14
12

Micrometers

10
8
6
4
2
0
8
--2

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

14

15

16

17

--4
--6
--8
--10
--12

SHAFT #4

--14
--16
--18
--20

Figure 12 -- Total mesh gap

20
18
16
14
12

Micrometers

10
8

SHAFT #3

6
4
2
0
8
--2

10

11

12

13

--4
--6
--8
--10
--12
--14
--16

SHAFT #4
SHAFT #4

--18
--20

Figure 13 -- Relative mesh gap

18

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

9 Load Distribution

Clause 8 explains the methods used to calculate the


mesh gap. This gap in the mesh must be accommodated by deflection of the teeth, t, as shown in figure
14 and equation 26.

9.1 Tooth deflection


This method uses the concept of a tooth mesh
stiffness constant, Cm, to compare the tooth load
intensity and tooth deflection with the total load and
overall mesh gap. For simplicity, the base tangent
plane along the line of action is used and multiple
teeth in contact are ignored. Effectively the mesh is
analyzed as if it were a spur set. For the purpose of
illustrating this concept, this clause will use only 6
sections in the mesh area. Hertzian contact and
tooth bending deflections are combined to produce a
single mesh stiffness constant, Cm, and the mesh is
assumed to be a set of independent springs (as
shown in figure 14).
The tooth deflection at a given point is a linear
function of the load intensity at that point and the
tooth mesh stiffness as shown in equation 26 below.
(26)

L i = ti C m

AGMA 927--A01

9.2 Mesh gap analysis


The mesh gap analysis divides the target mesh into
discreet equal length sections, Xi, with point loads,
Li, applied in the center of each of these sections
(see figure 15). For double helical, analyze each
helix separately. Since the method for calculating
mesh gap uses point loads, while the tooth deflections per equation 26 are based on load intensity, the
point loads must be converted to load intensity. This
is shown in equation 27.
L
L i = i
Xi

(27)

where
Xi

is length of face where point load is applied,


mm;

Li

is load at a specific point i, N.

where
Li

is load intensity, N/mm;

ti

is tooth deflection at a load point i, mm;

L1

Cm is tooth stiffness constant for the analysis,


N/mm/mm (~11 N/mm/mm for steel gears).

L2

L3

L4

L5

L6

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6
Xi

Cm

Face width
Bearing
Figure 15 -- Deflection sections

Li

mesh
gap,
i

Face width
Figure 14 -- Tooth section with spring constant
Cm, load L, and deflection
This assumed linearity differs from previous AGMA
(AGMA 218) and ISO (ISO 6336--1, C) analytical
methods where the load distribution was assumed
as a straight line over the whole face width.

Note that load is not applied directly on the ends of


the tooth. This should improve accuracy as mesh
stiffness is generally lower at the ends of the teeth,
but it is assumed constant in this analysis. Also note
that the tooth is divided into equal length sections
such that all values of Xi are equal. In addition, the
sum of the individual loads must equal the total load
on the gearset as shown in equation 28.
F g = L 1 + L 2 + L 3 + + L n

(28)

where
Fg

is total load in plane of action, BTP, N.

The difference in load intensity between any two


points, i and j, is proportional to the difference in

19

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

mesh gap between these two points multiplied by the


tooth stiffness constant. Notice the switch in terms.
The absolute tooth deflection is not used, rather the
change in mesh gap which is equal to the change in
tooth deflection is used. Therefore, equation 29
below can be derived from equation 26 (see figure
16).

(29)

L i L j = i j C m

In terms of the point loads used in the mesh gap


analysis, equation 29 may be rewritten as:
Li Lj
= i j C m
Xi Xj

(30)

Li L1

= i 1 C
Xi X1

(31)

Or:

XL C

(32)

XL C

(33)

L1 = X 1

And:
Li = Xi

Sum up the values for all locations using equation 31


and get equation 34 below. Remember, only one
value of tooth stiffness, Cm, is used and the tooth
face width is broken into equally spaced segments:

XL XL + XL XL + XL XL

Face width
Total pinion deflection

= 1 1 + 2 1 + n 1 C m
(34)
Simplifying equation 34 gives:

XL + XL + XL nXL
1

Mesh gap,i

= 1 1 + 2 1 + n 1 C m
(35)
0.0

The sum of all loads always equals the base tangent


plane load, Fg, and all values of Xi are equal, so:

XL + XL + XL = XF
1

(36)

Solving the equations for the value of L1 gives:


Total gear deflection

L1 =

F g C m X i

i
i

1 1 + 2 1

+ n 1
Figure 16 -- Mesh gap section grid

(37)

Using equation 33 the rest of the values for loads can


be calculated.

9.3 Summation and load solution

9.4 KH evaluation from loads

Sign convention is very important and is explained


further in clause 5. Areas with greater mesh gap
have lower tooth load and areas with lower mesh gap
have higher tooth load. Using figure 16 as a guide,
note that in equation 30 as mesh gap, i, gets larger,
the load, Li, must get smaller.

For the first iteration, a uniform load distribution


across the mesh is assumed and gaps are calculated. From these initial gaps, an uneven load
distribution is calculated. This new load distribution
is then used to calculate a new set of gaps. This
iteration process is continued until the newly calculated gaps differ from the previous ones by only a
small amount. Usually only a few, 2 or 3, iterations
are required to get an acceptable error (less than 3.0
mm change in gaps calculated).

One location is selected as a reference, in this


example it is location 1 (see figure 16). A sum of the
values for all locations referenced to location 1 can
then be created. This is done by setting term j in
equation 30 to location 1 and rearranging the
equation as shown below:
20

The loads that correspond to the final iteration that


results in negligible change in gaps calculated are

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

then used to calculate the load distribution factor, KH.


This is defined as the highest or peak load divided by
the average load.
KH =

L i peak
L i ave

(38)

where:
Fg
L i ave = n

(39)

9.5 Partial face contact


Initially all loads on the face width are assumed in the
same direction, i.e., have the same sign. If there is
not full contact across the face width some stations
will have their load value change sign. This indicates
tooth separation and there is no tooth contact at that
location, and therefore, the load must be zero at that
location. The method used to correct this condition
relies on the difference in load between stations
being a function of the change in deflection between
stations. Therefore, even if a change in sign is
calculated, the difference in load between stations
with tooth contact will be correct.
To find the actual loads at these stations do the
following. Sum all the loads that had a change in sign
and divide by the total number of loads that had a
change in sign. Subtract this value from each load
that did not have a change in sign. Set the value of
load to zero at all stations that had a change in sign.
The sum of loads at all stations that have contact will
now equal the total load on the face width and the
difference in load between these stations has not
changed.
9.6 Restatement of rules
The rules that govern the loads on the face width are:
-- The sum of the individual loads on the face
width, Li, must equal the total load on the gearset,
Fg;
-- The change in load intensity, Li -- Lj, between
any two locations on the face width must equal the
change in tooth deflection, ti -- tj, or change in
mesh gap, i -- j, between those locations;

AGMA 927--A01

-- Areas on the face width with more mesh gap


(mesh misalignment) have lower tooth load and
areas with lower mesh gap (mesh misalignment)
have higher tooth load;
-- Areas where load changes sign represent
areas where the teeth are not in contact and their
sum must be included in the loads that did not
change sign, i.e., Li = Fg;
-- The face width shall be divided into eighteen
sections for the actual gap analysis and load distribution factor calculations.

10 Future considerations
10.1 Differential thermal conditions
Temperature differences are developed between the
pinion and mating gear elements and they may vary
along the face width. Both of these phenomena
produce distortions that may require lead compensations to achieve acceptable load distribution.
Under running conditions the pinion element of a
gear set operates at a higher temperature than its
mating gear. This thermal differential will cause
pinion base pitch increases that exceed those of the
cooler mating gear.
In speed reducers the base pitch differential increase is partially offset by elastic tooth deformations (refer to 5.1). Profile modification is often used
to compensate for this.
In helical gear meshes there is also a temperature
differential along the face width due to the heat
generated as lubricant is displaced in wave--like
fashion from leading end to trailing end of the helix.
Lead correction may be used to compensate for this.
10.2 Mesh stiffness variations
The stiffness of a gear tooth at any given location
along its length is buttressed by adjacent tooth
length. A tooth portion at mid--face width is buttressed on both sides and has greater stiffness than
a similar tooth portion at the tooth end.

21

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Annex A
Flowcharts for load distribution factor

Input
Elastic
Data

Non--elastic
Data
Bending

No

is
P&G
Done
Yes
Torsional

No

is
P&G
Done
Yes
Gap Analysis

Load Distribution

No

New
Gap
Difference
Small

Yes
Output

Figure A.1 -- Overall flow chart


22

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Case ID

U.S.

SI

Units
?

Units
Labels
Manual
Adjustment
in BTCS
Target mesh
data
External forces,
moments, torques
(Timken convention)

Convert to
BTCS

Analysis

Yes

Test

No

Output
KH
Figure A.2 -- Data flow

23

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

INPUT Values
The gear mesh is divided into sections of equal length with loads placed in the center of each section.
The sign convention is critical, positive loads and deflections are in same direction.
Cm = tooth stiffness constant
N = total number of sections
i (j) = gap at each section
Li (j) = initial load at each section
Xi (j) = length of each section
k = number of sections across the face width

X (j) = Z (1) -- Z (j) relative gap from section 1 to section j


X3 = sum [W (j) / Y (j) -- X (j) * e] for j = 1 to k sum of deflection and load
X6 = sum [W (j)] for j = 1 to k total load, this must remain constant
M3 = X6/k average load on each section
W4 = Y(1)*X3/k new load on first section [new W(1)]

W (j) = Y (j) * [W4/Y(1) + X(j) * e] new load on each section

does any station have a load


reversal (i.e., teeth are not
contacting) or
[X6/abs (X6)] * W(j) < 0

Yes

sum all loads with a reversal


XTOT = sum {[X6/abs (X6)] * W(j) <0}
KTOT = sum number of stations where
there is load reversal

add XTOT/KTOT to all stations


without a load reversal

No

CALL SUBROUTINE
calculate deflections and perform
gap analysis based on new load
distribution

No

set all stations with a load


reversal to zero (0.0)

Find maximum value of W(j)


Y5 = max [abs W(i): abs W(k)]
calculate misalignment factor
C5 = Y5/abs (M3)

does new gap analysis differ


from last gap analysis by a
significant amount
Yes

OUTPUT
C5 = misalignment factor Km
Z(j) = final gap analysis
W(j) = final load distribution

Figure A.3 -- Overall flow chart detail of program CmSolve


24

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

INPUT Values
The helix is divided into sections of equal length with loads placed in the center of each section.
The sign convention is critical.
G = shear modulus
m = total number of sections
D(j) = major diameter at section j (outside diameter minus 4 standard addendums)
A(j) = inside diameter at section j
W(j) = load at each section j (in base tangent plane)
Y(j) = length of each section
A = sign multiplier to correct for direction of torsional deflection

for j = 1 to m
L(j) = L(j--1) + W(j) sum of load to station j
U(j) = U(j--1) + Y(j--1) sum of length to station j
T(j) = A * L(j) * U(j) * 4D(j)2/[G * 3.1416 * (D(j)4 -- A(j)4)] torsional deflection

OUTPUT
T(j) = torsional deflection across mesh

Figure A.4 -- Torsional flow chart of program CmSolve

25

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Annex B
Load distribution examples

B.1 KH example calculation


In this example a pinion shaft with dimensions as
shown in figure B.1, and with a total load, Fg, of
104 090 N upward is analyzed for mesh gap. This
load is broken into six even loads of 17 348 N each
and gives the shaft deflection shown in table B.1. In
this gap analysis the deflection of the gear is very
small and is assumed to be a straight line. The
values are carried to the significant digits shown to
keep round--off error to a minimum and should not be
confused with the precision of the deflection analysis. A miscellaneous misalignment of 5.08 mm in the
direction to increase mesh gap was included to
account for manufacturing and assembly errors.
Refer to figure B.2 for gap analysis information.

Solve for L1 using equation 37 and then all other


values of L using equation 33 The values for
deflection are micrometers (1 10 --6 meters) and a
value of Cm = 11 N/mm/mm is used.

XL + XL + XL = 4560
1

L 1 = [4560 (0 2.73 2.23 + 1.61 + 8.78


+ 19.2) 11] 22.83 = 16 320
(B.1)
6

Bending and shear deflection

75

Fg = Li = 104 090 N

L1

L4
L2 L3

Miscellaneous
mismatch

65

L
L5 6

Torsional deflection
115.6

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6

55
115.6

22.83
135.6

137

Face width

Rotation
135.6

Mesh gap

Torque path
45

Bearing support
Figure B.1 -- Example sections

22.8

45.7

68.5

91.3

114

Figure B.2 -- Gap analysis

Table B.1

Sta. No., i
1
2
3
4
5
6

26

Bending
67.35
72.05
74.45
74.45
72.05
67.35

Deflections, micrometers
Torsional
Misc.
0.00
0.00
--0.94
--1.03
--2.82
--2.06
--5.64
--3.07
--9.40
--4.08
--14.1
--5.08

Total, i
67.35
70.08
69.58
65.74
58.57
48.18

i -- 1
0.00
--2.73
--2.23
1.61
8.78
19.20

Load
Li, N
17 348
17 348
17 348
17 348
17 348
17 348

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Solve for other values of L using equation 33:

L 2 = 22.83 16 320 2.73 11 = 15 630


22.83
(B.2)
L 3 = 22.83 16 320 2.23 11 = 15 760
22.83
(B.3)
L 4 = 22.83 16 320 + 1.61 11 = 16 720
22.83
(B.4)
L 5 = 22.83 16 320 + 8.78 11 = 18 520
22.83
(B.5)
L 6 = 22.83 16 320 + 19.2 11 = 21 140
22.83
(B.6)
Using the non--uniform loads calculated, re--calculate the deflections and new loads in an iteration until
sufficient accuracy has been attained. In this
example, further analysis gives values shown in
table B.2. Therefore:
K H = 21 140 = 1.22
17 350

(B.7)

Sufficient accuracy was achieved in this example on


the first calculation, and although further iterations
did change the values, they did not change the
overall accuracy of the KH calculation. Only six
stations across the face width were used, and this
may not insure sufficient accuracy. However this
example was also run with 20 load stations across
the face width and it only changed the KH value by
4% to 1.27. So within the accuracy of the procedure,
it is not necessary to have large numbers of load
stations. Use of computers make this a moot

AGMA 927--A01

question, as more stations and iterations are not


hard to process.
It is necessary to investigate the effects of miscellaneous misalignment in the other direction, and in
varying amounts, as this can have a big impact on
the KH for a gearset. For this example a miscellaneous misalignment of 5.08 mm in a direction to
reduce mesh gap gave a KH = 1.18.
In this example the deflection of the gear was not
considered. In some cases the deflection of the
mating element could make a major impact, especially in overhung designs or multiple reduction units.
This procedure is dependent only on the total
mismatch between the gear teeth and can be used
with equal ease when deflections of both parts are
considered.

B.2 CmSolve example calculation


In this example the load distribution factor for a low
speed mesh of a double reduction parallel shaft gear
drive is shown. The dimensions, loading and
deflections are as shown in Table B.3 with a figure.
This data is also presented as it appears in the form
of the input and output data files to the computer
program CmSolve. The computer software program
CmSolve was developed to do an analysis as
described in this document. It was used to do an
international comparative analysis in an effort to
improve the calculation of load distribution for load
capacity determinations.

Table B.2
Sta. no., i
1
2
3
4
5
6

Bending
66.98
71.72
74.21
74.31
72.02
67.41

Deflections, micrometers
Torsional
Misc.
0.00
0.00
--0.87
--1.03
--2.58
--2.06
--5.23
--3.07
--8.98
--4.08
--14.1
--5.08

Total, i
66.98
69.82
69.57
66.01
58.95
48.24

i -- 1
0.00
--2.85
--2.59
0.97
8.02
18.7

Load
Li, N
16 410
15 690
15 760
16 660
18 430
21 140

27

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Table B.3 -- CmSolve example

CmSolve Version

4.2.1

01/15/00

AGMA

07:01:00 AM

ISO Double -- LS Pinion -- CW -- fma=(fHB1**2+fHB2**2)**0.5

Crowned

**********************DEFLECTIONS***********************
LENGTH

STATION

LOAD

BENDING

TORSIONAL

MISC.

TOTAL

RELATIVE

(MM)

NUMBER

(N*100)

(MU--M)

(MU--M)

(MU--M)

(MU--M)

(MU--M)

36.223

15.4

15.4

6.7

44.706

18.0

--0.1

--9.5

8.5

7.0

13.41

52.231

20.5

--0.3

--17.9

2.3

13.2

20.11

10

58.850

22.8

--0.7

--25.3

--3.2

18.6

26.81

11

64.605

25.0

--1.2

--31.7

--7.9

23.4

33.52

12

69.535

26.9

--1.9

--37.0

--12.0

27.4

40.22

13

73.668

28.7

--2.8

--41.2

--15.4

30.8

46.92

14

77.030

30.3

--4.0

--44.5

--18.1

33.6

53.62

15

79.640

31.7

--5.3

--46.7

--20.3

35.7

60.33

16

81.508

32.8

--6.8

--47.8

--21.8

37.3

67.03

17

82.642

33.7

--8.5

--48.0

--22.8

38.2

73.73

18

83.040

34.4

--10.5

--47.0

--23.1

38.5

80.44

19

82.694

34.9

--12.6

--45.1

--22.8

38.2

87.14

20

81.590

35.1

--14.9

--42.1

--21.9

37.3

93.84

21

79.708

35.1

--17.4

--38.0

--20.3

35.8

100.55

22

77.017

34.8

--20.0

--33.0

--18.1

33.6

107.25

23

73.483

34.4

--22.7

--26.9

--15.2

30.7

113.95

24

69.064

33.7

--25.5

--19.7

--11.6

27.0

LOAD DISTRIBUTION FACTOR CM=

1.179508

MISC MISALIGNMENT VALUE

19.707 MICRO--METER PER HELIX

CROWN AMOUNT VALUE

37.533 MICRO--METER PER HELIX

100

Double Reduction Low Speed

80

Load / Deflection

60
40
20
0 5

10

15

20

--20
--40
--60

Location Across Face -- Station Number

Saved File Image of Input Data


28

25

LOAD (N*100)
BENDING (MU--M)
TORSIONAL (MU--M)
MISC. (MU--M)
TOTAL (MU--M)
RELATIVE (MU--M)

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

0,-3,0,.364,0
0,3,0,.364,0
0,4.22,0,.2685,0
0,4.22,0,.2675,0
1763.0507,4.22,0,.001,0
0,4.22,0,.1319,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.2639,0
1584.0435,4.22,0,.1319,0
0,4.2,0,.001,0
-1763.0507,4.2,0,.4115,0
0,4.2,0,.4125,0
-2621.35,11.451,0,1.5,0
7735.76,11.451,0,1.5,0
2621.35,3.5,0,.3,0
0,3.5,0,.3,0
0,3,0,.46,0
0,3,0,.46,0
0,-3,0,0,0
3.77,0,6,0,0,25
2.632,-775.8483,1477.6644
1,1
10.5,4.091,16.604,9,20
0,0,-696.528,85,-99,0,1574.8031
300,340.48,1,4.22
2,.728,0,3,0
2,.537,0,4.22,0
0,0,0,0,0
0,0,0,0,0
0,0,0,0,0
18,4.75,28512.7834,4.22,0
0,0,0,0,0
2,.825,0,4.2,0
2,3,0,11.451,0
2,.6,0,3.5,0
2,.92,0,3,0
1
7.2,2.707,11.37,20,11,1,3
AGMA
ISO Double - LS Pinion - CW - fma=(fHB1**2+fHHB2**2)**0.5
0

29

AGMA 927--A01

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

Printed Image of Program Output Page 1


CmSolve Version 4.2.1
01-15-2000
ISO Double - LS Pinion - CW - fma=(fHB1**2+fHB2**2)**0.5
AGMA
STA.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

EXTERNAL
FORCE N
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7835.78
0.00
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
0.00
-7835.78
0.00
-11650.44
34381.16
11650.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

FREE BODY
FORCE N
-95459.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
7835.78
0.00
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
7040.19
0.00
-7835.78
0.00
-11650.44
34381.16
11650.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
-65645.28

*SHAFT DIAMETER*
OUTSIDE INSIDE
-76.200
76.200
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
107.188
106.680
106.680
106.680
290.855
290.855
88.900
88.900
76.200
76.200
-76.200

0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

SHAFT
LENGTH
9.246
9.246
6.820
6.795
0.025
3.350
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
6.703
3.350
0.025
10.452
10.478
38.100
38.100
7.620
7.620
11.684
11.684
0.000

LENGTH ****** DEFLECTION *****


FACE
BENDING
TORS.
TOTAL

0.0
6.7
13.4
20.1
26.8
33.5
40.2
46.9
53.6
60.3
67.0
73.7
80.4
87.1
93.8
100.5
107.2
114.0

SHAFT DIMENSIONS USED FOR TORSIONAL DEFLECTION CALCULATION


OUTSIDE DIAMETER 95.7580
INSIDE DIAMETER 0.0000
TOOTH STIFFNESS CONSTANT = 2.632

30

X10^6

07:10:04

0.0
4.2
8.2
11.0
13.7
13.7
15.0
17.5
19.9
22.1
24.2
26.1
27.8
29.3
30.6
31.7
32.6
33.2
33.6
33.8
33.8
33.5
33.1
32.4
32.0
32.0
30.3
28.2
19.7
11.1
9.2
7.2
3.8
0.0

0.0
-0.2
-0.5
-1.0
-1.7
-2.5
-3.5
-4.7
-6.0
-7.5
-9.2
-11.0
-13.0
-15.2
-17.5
-20.0
-22.7
-25.5

15.0
17.4
19.4
21.1
22.5
23.6
24.3
24.6
24.6
24.2
23.4
22.2
20.6
18.6
16.3
13.5
10.4
6.9

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

AGMA 927--A01

Printed Image of Program Output Page 2


CmSolve Version 4.2.1
01-15-2000
ISO Double - LS Pinion - CW - fma=(fHB1**2+fHB2**2)**0.5
AGMA
STA 7
STA 7
STA 7
LENGTH
(MM)
0.00
6.70
13.41
20.11
26.81
33.52
40.22
46.92
53.62
60.33
67.03
73.73
80.44
87.14
93.84
100.55
107.25
113.95

24
24
24

CM= 1.186654
CM= 1.179403
CM= 1.179508
STA.
NO.

LOAD
(N)

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

3622.3
4470.6
5223.1
5885.0
6460.5
6953.5
7366.8
7703.0
7964.0
8150.8
8264.2
8304.0
8269.4
8159.0
7970.8
7701.7
7348.3
6906.4

MAX LD= 8354.2725


MAX LD= 8303.2282
MAX LD= 8303.9630

TOT LD= 126723


TOT LD= 126723
TOT LD= 126723

07:10:04

AVE LD= 7040


AVE LD= 7040
AVE LD= 7040

SUM 239200.325
SUM 247301.066
SUM 247066.229

****************** DEFLECTIONS ******************


BENDING TORSIONAL
MISC. TOTAL
RELATIVE
CORR
(MU-M)
(MU-M)
(MU-M) (MU-M)
(MU-M)
(MU-M)
15.4
18.0
20.5
22.8
25.0
26.9
28.7
30.3
31.7
32.8
33.7
34.4
34.9
35.1
35.1
34.8
34.4
33.7

0.0
-0.1
-0.3
-0.7
-1.2
-1.9
-2.8
-4.0
-5.3
-6.8
-8.5
-10.5
-12.6
-14.9
-17.4
-20.0
-22.7
-25.5

0.0
-9.5
-17.9
-25.3
-31.7
-37.0
-41.2
-44.5
-46.7
-47.8
-48.0
-47.0
-45.1
-42.1
-38.0
-33.0
-26.9
-19.7

15.4
8.5
2.3
-3.2
-7.9
-12.0
-15.4
-18.1
-20.3
-21.8
-22.8
-23.1
-22.8
-21.9
-20.3
-18.1
-15.2
-11.6

0.0
7.0
13.2
18.6
23.4
27.4
30.8
33.6
35.7
37.3
38.2
38.5
38.2
37.3
35.8
33.6
30.7
27.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

LOAD DIST FACTOR CM= 0.000000


LOAD DIST FACTOR CM= 1.179508
LOAD DISTRIBUTION FACTOR = 1.179508
MISC MISALIGNMENT VALUE =-19.707 MICRO-METER PER HELIX
CROWN AMOUNT VALUE =37.533 MICRO-METER PER HELIX

31

PUBLISHED BY
AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
1500 KING STREET, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22314