AGMA-02FTM10-2002.pdf
《AGMA-02FTM10-2002.pdf》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《AGMA-02FTM10-2002.pdf(17页珍藏版)》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、02FTM10 Comparison in Rating Trends in AGMA versus ISO by: O.A. LaBath and D. Richter, Gear Consulting Services of Cincinnati, LLC TECHNICAL PAPER American Gear Manufacturers Association Copyright American Gear Manufacturers Association Provided by IHS under license with AGMA Licensee=IHS Employees/
2、1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 11:19:21 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- Comparison in Rating Trends in AGMA versus ISO O.A. LaBath and D. Richter, Gear Consulting Services of Cincinnati, LLC Thestatementsandopinionscontainedhereinar
3、ethoseoftheauthorandshouldnotbeconstruedasanofficialactionor opinion of the American Gear Manufacturers Association. Abstract In the early 1980s, authors from The Cincinnati Gear Company presented several technical papers comparing the gear ratings from ISO and AGMA. These comparisons showed some in
4、teresting and diverse differences in the trends when thegeargeometrywaschangedslightly. Thesechangesincludedaddendummodificationcoefficients,helixangles,etc. There were also some interesting differences when the hardness and hardening methods were changed. These earlier papers used computer programs
5、 developed at The Cincinnati Gear Company to make both the ISO and AGMA ratings. Today, rating programs developed by an AGMA committee are available. The intent for this paper is to use these programs. Copyright 2002 American Gear Manufacturers Association 1500 King Street, Suite 201 Alexandria, Vir
6、ginia, 22314 October, 2002 ISBN: 1- -55589- -810- -6 Copyright American Gear Manufacturers Association Provided by IHS under license with AGMA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 11:19:21 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
7、-,-,- 1 Comparison of Rating Trends in AGMA Versus ISO Octave A. LaBath, PE and Dennis Richter Gear Consulting Services of Cincinnati, LLC INTRODUCTION: Many people have made comparisons of the differences in ratings between AGMA rating methods and ISO rating methods. In 1977, G. Castellani 1 was th
8、e first to point out that there was a difference in the rating trend on spur gears when you change from standard gears to gears with a profile shift. In an ASME paper 2 presented in 1980 by Imwalle, LaBath, and Hutchenson, the comparisons of AGMA and ISO ratings for 54 different gear sets were studi
9、ed. In some cases large differences were calculated. In an AGMA paper 3 presented in 1981, LaBath made a comparison of the change in calculated stresses for three sample gear sets as a function of the profile shift and one sample as a function of the helix angle. The above study on the difference in
10、 trends for corrected gears and different helix angles was included in another AGMA paper 4 also presented in 1981, by Imwalle and LaBath along with a study on 156 gear sets. In the latter two papers, Imwalle and LaBath showed that with a positive profile shift, the strength rating increases in AGMA
11、 and ISO but with different magnitudes. With a negative profile shift, the AGMA strength rating decreases and depending on the gear geometry, the ISO strength rating can go down or sometimes remain almost constant. The durability ratings also had different trends for AGMA and ISO. The comparisons in
12、 the three papers by Imwalle, LaBath, and Hutchenson were based on computer programs written at The Cincinnati Gear Company for the then current AGMA rating standards and the draft ISO standards. The computer programs were based on the interpretation of the various standards by the engineers at Cinc
13、innati Gear. In a 1989 AGMA paper 5, Dr. Hosel also reported that the rating trends were different for AGMA and DIN (ISO) with respect to the effect of profile shift on the ratings. In a 2002 paper prepared for NREL 6, Robert Errichello made a comparison of the different rating trends for AGMA and I
14、SO. The durability rating trend for AGMA and ISO with respect to profile shift was almost the same for a spur gear sample. The strength rating trend was significantly different for the spur gear example. Mr. Errichello showed that the trends for both the strength rating and the durability rating wer
15、e different for a helical gear example. Bob also showed that there was a difference in trends from AGMA and ISO for variations in the pressure angle. The comparisons made by Mr. Errichello were based on calculations made for AGMA by his GEARTECH AGMA218 program package and for ISO by the ISO 6336 Ge
16、ar Rating Program copyrighted by AGMA in 1997. Calculation Method The comparisons made in this paper will be based on calculations made using the AGMA copyrighted ISO 6336 program and the newly developed AGMA program for calculations per ANSI/AGMA 2001. These two programs are being released as “Gear
17、 Rating Suite by AGMA”. Using these two programs to do the rating comparisons, the results are independent of any one individuals opinion or interpretation of either standard. By using these programs, the input data for the gear geometry is the same for both the AGMA and the ISO ratings. This allows
18、 for a consistent trend analysis by only changing one gear geometry parameter while holding all of the other gear geometry items constant within the program. The focus of this paper is to show the trends of the two rating systems by varying specific geometry parameters one at a time. This paper is n
19、ot trying to establish a “rating constant” between the two rating standards and should not be used as such. Copyright American Gear Manufacturers Association Provided by IHS under license with AGMA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 11:19:21 MDTNo reprodu
20、ction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- 2 Examples similar to the three examples from the 1981 AGMA papers will be re-examined to determine the rating trends with respect to changes in the profile shift. An example similar to the fourth example from the 1981 papers will also be
21、re- examined to determine the rating trends with respect to changes in the helix angle. Two examples will be added to investigate the differences in rating trends with respect to pressure angle for a spur gear set and a helical gear set. We will rate the gears as carburized and hardened gearing grou
22、nd to AGMA Class Q11. This is approximately ISO Class 6. We will assume that the material is per AGMA Grade 2 and ISO MQ. We will use the upper life factor curves and rate the gearing for a life of 10,000 hours. The pinion speed will be set at 1750 rpm. An input power of 250 hp (186.3 kW) is being u
23、sed and the programs are being used to calculate the factors of safety. In each example, the first calculated factor of safety becomes the reference factor of safety. The other calculated factors of safety are then divided by the reference factor of safety to get the Factor of Safety Trend value. In
24、 the tables, we are calling the Factor of Safety Trend “FST”. This is repeated for each rating item, pinion bending, gear bending, pinion durability, and gear durability. The Factor of Safety Trend is calculated independently for AGMA and ISO. The Factor of Safety Trend value is then plotted versus
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- AGMA 02 FTM10 2002
链接地址:https://www.31doc.com/p-3729316.html