4.

Gear design
Part -II
 Detailed Gear Stressing
 Although suitable for initial selection of a gear, the Lewis
equation is inadequate for detailed design calculations
where life of the machine is critical or where the gears are
highly loaded.
 International standards are available detailing the calculation
of bending and contact stresses for gears.
This chapter outlines the American Gear Manufacturers
Association (AGMA) standards for the calculation of bending
and contact stresses in gears.
 Two fundamental stress equations are used in the AGMA
methodology, one for bending stress and another for pitting
resistance (contact stress).
The treatment aims to demonstrate one approach to fatigue.
 AGMA Equations for
Spur and Helical Gears
 AGMA equations for Bending stress
 The AGMA formula for bending stress is given in SI units by

1 KB Km
  Wt K o K v K s (1)
bm J
W t tangential transmitte d load (N)
K o overload factor K m load distributi on factor
K v dynamic factor K s size factor
K B Rim - thickness factor m metric module (mm)
b face width of the narrower member (mm)
J geometry factor for bending strength
 AGMA equations for Contact stress
 The fundamental equation for pitting resistance (contact
stress) is

Km C f
c  Cp Wt K o K v K s (2)
d pb I
C p elastic coefficien t N
mm2
C f surface condition factor
d p pitch diameter of the pinion (mm)
I geometry factor for pitting resistance
 Allowable Bending Stress
 The equation for the allowable bending stress is

St YN
 all  (3)
S F KT K R

St allowable bending stress N
mm2

YN stress cycle factor for bending stress
K T temperatur e factors
K R reliabilit y factors
S F AGMA factor of saftey, a stress ratio
 Allowable Contact Stress
The equation for the allowable contact stress is
Sc Z N CH
 c ,all  (4)
S H KT K R
S c allowable contact stress N  mm2

Z N stress cycle life factor
C H hardness ratio factors for pitting resistance
K T temperatur e factors
K R reliabilit y factors
S H AGMA factor of saftey, a stress ratio
 AGMA allowable stress numbers (strengths)
AGMA allowable stress numbers (strengths) for bending and
contact stress are for

 Unidirectional loading

 10 million stress cycles (107 cycles)

 99 percent reliability
 Allowable bending stress number for
through-hardened steels St at 107 cycles and 0.99
(x 6.89 MPa) reliability

Grade 2
St  0.703H B  113 MPa

Grade 1
St  0.533H B  88.3 MPa
 Allowable bending stress number for nitrided through hardened steel
(x 6.89 MPa) gears (i.e.,AISI 4140, 4340), St

Grade 2
S t  0.749 H B  110 MPa

Grade 1
St  0.568H B  83.8 MPa
 Contact-fatigue strength Sc at 107 cycles and 0.99
reliability for through- hardened steel gears.
(x 6.89 kPa)

Grade 2
S c  2.41H B  237 MPa

Grade 1
S c  2.22 H B  200 MPa
 Discussion on Modifying
Factors for Stress Calculation
in GEARS
 Geometry Factors I and J
We have seen how the factor Y is used in the Lewis equation to
introduce the effect of tooth form into the stress equation. The
AGMA factors I and J are intended to accomplish the same purpose
in a more involved manner.
The determination of I and J depends upon the face-contact ratio
This is defined as

Where is the axial pitch and b is the face width. For spur gears, = 0
Low-contact-ratio (LCR) helical gears having a small helix angle or a
thin face width, or both, have face-contact ratios less than unity (≤ 1),
and will not be considered here. Such gears have a noise level not too
different from that for spur gears. Consequently we shall consider here
only spur gears with mF = 0 and conventional helical gears with > 1.
 Bending-Strength Geometry Factor J

Spur-gear geometry factors J. Source: The graph is from AGMA 218.01, which is consistent with tabular data
from the current AGMA 908-B89. The graph is convenient for design purposes.
Helical-gear geometry factors J’ Source: The graph is from AGMA 218.01, which is
consistent with tabular data from the current AGMA 908-B89. The graph is convenient
for design purposes.
 Pitting-resistance geometry factor, I
The geometry factor I for external spur and helical gears is

 cos t sin t mG
 2m external gears
 N mG  1
I 
 cos t sin t mG internal gears (5)
 2mN mG  1
where mN is load sharing ratio. mN  1 for spur gears
Now define speed ratio mG as
NG dG
mG  
Np dp
 Pitting-resistance geometry factor, I
 For helical gears having a face-contact ratio mF > 2.0, a
conservative approximation is given by the equation load-
sharing ratio mN
pN
mN  (6)
0.95Z

where pN is the normal base pitch and Z is the length of the

line of action in the transverse plane
 The quantity Z, for use in Eq.(6), can be obtained from the
equation


Z  rp  a   r
2 2
bP   r
1
2
G  a  r
2 2
bG   r
1
2
p  rG sin t
where rP and rG are the pitch radii and rbP and rbG are the base-
circle radii of the pinion and gear, respectively.

Recall from the previous class, the radius of the base circle is

rb  r cos t
 The Elastic Coefficient Cp
 Values of Cp may be computed directly from the equation
below or obtained from Table.
1
  2

 
 1 
Cp   (7)
 1   p2 1  G2  
   
  E p E G 


The Elastic Coefficient Cp
 Dynamic Factor Kv
 Dynamic factors are used to account for inaccuracies in the
manufacture and meshing of gear teeth in action.
Transmission error is defined as the departure from uniform
angular velocity of the gear pair.
B
 A  200V 
K v    V in m/s
 (8)
 A 
where A  50  56 1  B 
B  0.2512  Qv  3
2

 Quality numbers 3 to 7 will include most commercial-quality

gears.
 Quality numbers 8 to 12 are of precision quality. The AGMA
transmission accuracy- level number Qv could be taken as
the same as the quality number.
 Dynamic Factor Kv

Dynamic factor Kv (ANSI/AGMA 2001-D04, Annex A)

A=Q9

B=Q6

C=Q4
 Overload Factor Ko
 The overload factor Ko is intended to make allowance for all

externally applied loads in of the nominal tangential load Wt

in a particular application.

 There are other similar factors such as application factor or

service factor.
 Overload Factor Ko
Estimate for overload factors (After Mott, 1999)
 Surface Condition Factor Cf
 The surface condition factor Cf is used only in the pitting
resistance equation.
It depends on,
• Surface finish as affected by, but not limited to, cutting,
shaving, lapping, grinding, shotpeening
• Residual stress
• Plastic effects (work hardening)
 Standard surface conditions for gear teeth have not yet
been established. When a detrimental surface finish effect
is known to exist, AGMA specifies a value of Cf greater than
unity.
 Size Factor Ks
 The size factor reflects non-uniformity of material properties
due to size. Size factor is intended to factor in material non
uniformity due to tooth size, diameter, face width, etc.

 AGMA has not established factors for general gearing; use

Ks = 1 unless there is information to warrant using a larger
value.

 Generally, the size factor Ks is usually taken as unity. Higher

values can be used if there is any non-uniformity in the
material properties due to size.
 Size Factor Ks
 The size factor reflects non-uniformity of material properties
due to size.

K s  0.8433 bm Y  
0.0535
(a)

 If Ks in Eq. (a) is less than 1, use Ks = 1.

 Generally, the size factor Ks is usually taken as unity. Higher

values can be used if there is any non-uniformity in the
material properties due to size.
 Load-Distribution Factor Km
 The load-distribution factor modified the stress equations to
reflect non-uniform distribution of load across the line of contact.
 The ideal is to locate the gear “midspan” between two bearings
at the zero slope place when the load is applied. However, this is
not always possible.
 The following procedure is applicable to
• Net face width to pinion pitch diameter ratio b/d ≤ 2
• Gear elements mounted between the bearings
• Face widths up to 40 inch (1.016 meter)
• Contact, when loaded, across the full width of the narrowest
member
 The load-distribution factor under these conditions is currently
given by the face load distribution factor, Km where

K m  1  Cmc C pf C pm  Cma Ce 
 K m  1  Cmc C pf C pm  Cma Ce  (9)
For uncrowned teeth Cmc  1 and for crowned Cmc  0.8
Cmc = lead correction factor
b Cpf = pinion proportion factor
If b  0.0254m then C pf   0.025 Cpm = pinion proportion modifier
10d Cma = mesh alignment factor
Ce = mesh alignment correction factor
b
If 0.0254m  b  0.4318m then C pf   0.0375  0.4921b
10d
b 2
If 0.4318m  b  1.016m then C pf   0.815b  0.3534b
10d
For values of b/10d  0.05, then set b/10d  0.05 in to the previous
equations.
For a straddle - mounted pinion with S1 /S  0.175 use C pm  1
For a straddle - mounted pinion with S1 /S  0.175 use C pm  1.1
Cma  A  Bb  Cb 2 where coefficien ts A, B and C can be found from Table
For gearing adjusted at assembly or if compatibil ity is improved by lapping or both,
Ce  0.8 for all other condtions take Ce  1

Definition of distances S1 and S used

for evaluating Cpm (ANSI/AGMA
2001/C95).
Coefficients used in Determining Cma
 Hardness-Ratio Factor CH
 The hardness ratio factor is used only for the gear. Its
purpose is to adjust the surface strengths to account for
different hardnesses of the gear and pinion. The hardness
ratio factor for a gear is given by

C H  1  A' mG  1 (10)

H BP
-3 3 H BP
where A'  8.89  10  8.29  10 for 1.2   1.7
H BG H BG
H BP H BP
 1.2, A'  0  1.7, A'  0.00698
H BG H BG
where H BP and H BG are the Brinell hardness of the pinion and
gear, respective ly
 Stress-Cycle factor (YN and ZN )
 The AGMA strengths as given in Figs. for Bending Fatigue
and for contact-stress fatigue are based on 107 load cycles
applied.

 The purpose of the load cycle factors YN and ZN is to modify

the gear strength for lives other than 107 cycles. Values for
these factors are given in the following Figs.

Note:
 For 107 cycles YN = ZN = 1 on each graph.
 The equations for YN and ZN change on either side of 107
cycles.
Repeatedly applied bending strength stress-cycle factor
YN (ANSI/AGMA 2001-D04.)

For Commercial
Applications

For Critical
Applications
Pitting resistance stress-cycle factor ZN.
(ANSI/AGMA2001-D04.)
 Reliability Factors KR
 The reliability factor accounts for the effect of the statistical
distributions of material fatigue failures. Load variation is not
addressed here. The gear strengths St and Sc are based on
a reliability of 99 percent.

Source: ANSI/AGMA 2001-D04.

 Temperature Factor KT
 For oil or gear-blank temperatures up to 250°F (120°C), use
KT = 1

 For higher temperatures, the factor should be greater than

unity.
 Rim-Thickness Factor KB
 When the rim thickness is not sufficient to provide full support
for the tooth root, the location of bending fatigue failure may
be through the gear rim rather than at the tooth fillet. In such
cases, the use of a stress-modifying factor KB or (TR) is
recommended.
This factor, the rim-thickness factor KB, adjusts the estimated bending
stress for the thin-rimmed gear. It is a function of the backup ratio mB,
tR
mb 
ht
where t R  rim thickness below the tooth and ht  the tooth height
The rim - thickness factor is given by
 2.242
1.6ln mB  1.2
KB   mB (11)
1 mB  1.2

Rim thickness factor KB.

Source :ANSI/AGMA 2001-D04.

 Safety Factors SF and SH
 The ANSI/AGMA standards 2001-D04 and 2101-D04
contain a safety factor SF guarding against bending fatigue
failure and safety factor SH guarding against pitting failure.
The definition of SF is
(12)

The definition of SH is
(13)

 With the definition, compare SF with SH2 (or SH3 for crowned
teeth) when trying to identify the threat to loss of function with
confidence.
 Design of a Gear Mesh
A useful decision set for spur and helical gears includes
• Function: load, speed, reliability, life, Ko
• Unquantifiable risk: design factor nd
• Tooth system: ф , ψ, addendum a, dedendum b,
a priori decisions
root fillet radius
• Gear ratio mG, Np, NG
• Quality number Qv

• Module (mm)
• Face width b
design decisions
• Pinion material, core hardness, case hardness
• Gear material, core hardness, case hardness
 The steps after the priori decisions
The steps are, after the a priori decisions have been made,
• Choose a module
• Examine implications on face width, pitch diameters, and
material properties.
If not satisfactory, return to module decision for change.
• Choose a pinion material and examine core and case hardness
requirements.
If not satisfactory, return to module decision and iterate until no
decisions are changed.
• Choose a gear material and examine core and case hardness
requirements.
If not satisfactory, return to pitch decision and iterate until no
decisions are changed.
With these plan steps in mind, we can consider them in more
detail.
 Steps presented in detail
First select a trial diametral pitch P (used only with English units)
or module m (used only with SI or metric units)
Pinion bending:
• Select a median face width for this module or pitch,
b =11.5m (SI units) or b = 4π/P (English units)
• Find the range of necessary ultimate strengths
• Choose a material and a core hardness
• Find face width to meet factor of safety in bending
• Choose face width
• Check factor of safety in bending
Gear bending:
• Find necessary companion core hardness
• Choose a material and core hardness
• Check factor of safety in bending
 cont’d…
Pinion wear:
• Find necessary Sc and attendant case hardness
• Choose a case hardness
• Check factor of safety in wear
Gear wear:
• Find companion case hardness
• Choose a case hardness
• Check factor of safety in wear
Completing this set of steps will yield a satisfactory design.
Additional designs with modules (diametral pitches) adjacent to
the first satisfactory design will produce several among which to
choose.
A figure of merit is necessary in order to choose the best.
 cont’d…
 In steel gears, wear is usually controlling and (SH)P and (SH)G
can be brought close to equality.

 The use of softer cores can bring down (SF )P and (SF )G, but
there is value in keeping them higher.
A tooth broken by bending fatigue not only can destroy the
gear set, but can bend shafts, damage bearings, and produce
inertial stresses up and down stream in the power train,
causing damage elsewhere if the gear box locks.
 Gear Materials
 The least expensive gear material is usually ordinary cast
iron, ASTM (or AGMA) grade 20.
 Grades 30,40,50,and 60 are progressively stronger and
more expensive.
 Cast-iron gears typically have greater surface fatigue
strength than bending fatigue strength. Their internal
damping tends to make them quieter than steel gears.
 As a rule of thumb, a good combination is often a steel
pinion mated to a cast-iron gear.
 Of the non-ferrous metals, bronzes are most often used for
making gears.
 Gear Materials
 Non-metallic gears made of acetal, nylon, and other plastics
are generally quiet, durable, reasonably priced, and can
often operate under light loads without lubrication.
 Their teeth deflect more easily than those of corresponding
metal gears. This promotes effective load sharing among
teeth in simultaneous contact, but results in substantial
hysteresis heating if the gears are rotating at high speed.
 Since non-metallic materials have low thermal conductivity,
special cooling provisions may be required.
 Design procedures for gears made of Non-metallic materials
are similar to those for gears made of metals, but are not yet
as reliable.