The Basics of Gear Theory, Part 2: Bevel Gears: by The Book
The Basics of Gear Theory, Part 2: Bevel Gears: by The Book
The Basics of Gear Theory, Part 2: Bevel Gears: by The Book
Geometric Flank Form Rules Generating Gears of Bevel Gears ally discussed (Figs. 9–10). The generating
1. Flank lines 2 times steady differentiable with Parallel Depth Tooth gear axis of the pinion is labeled in the top
• No steps The kinematic requirements conditions part of the figure as “Pinion Generating
• No edges (elbows) are applied in this next section to the Gear Axis.” The pinion cutter rotates
• No steps in curvature changes four methods in Figures 12–15. It has around the “pinion cutter axis,” which is
2. Steady monotonic rising or falling been assumed that conformance to the parallel to the generating gear axis. The
flank lines
geometric flank form rules is given in all generating gear plane is equal to the pitch
• No inflection points
• No maxima and no minima cases. In order to achieve congruent gen- plane. It contains the axis Z4 and stands
• Special case straight bevel gears erating gears, certain geometric and kine- perpendicular to the drawing plane. The
3. Spiral angle rises along flank line from matic features in the bevel gear genera- same rules explained for the pinion gen-
inside to outside tors are required. The greatest influence eration apply also for generating the ring
• Special case straight bevel gears is the tooth depth characteristic along the gear. In addition to the generating gear
4. Pressure angle not allowed below limit face width (tapered or parallel). orientation and axis location, the blade
pressure angle (meshable profile) Method “A” (Fig. 12) was already glob- profiles are also congruent (see pinion cut-
5. Spiral angle limit not exceeded
Violation of the rules will reduce the
mesh performance and can even result in
the complete loss of the ability to trans-
mit motion and torque. An example of
this is Zerol gears (see Chap. 4, General
Explanations, Fig. 26). Zerol gears have
an arc-shaped flank line with zero degree
spiral angle in the middle of the face
width; this violates rules 2 and 3. The
consequence is an instant contact zone
moving during meshing from the out-
side to the inside, and then back to the
outside. This gives a consolidated contact
area (tooth bearing) with a tendency to
split into parts. The results are mesh dis-
turbances that increase with higher flank
line curvatures.
Figure 12 Generating model for bevel gears with parallel tooth depth Method A, generated pinion
and ring gear.
tooth (Fig. 20). The tapered depth tooth H present different solutions for this con- Although both cutting edges match at the
has a number of advantages based on flict which are compared based on their calculation point, the cone elements gen-
the original idea of the spherical invo- kinematic coupling conditions. erated by the pinion and gear cutter devi-
lute. The tooth depths and the tooth pro- Graphic “E” (Fig. 21) would require ate from each other due to a cutter axis
files have proportions connected to the a horizontally oriented generating gear orientation difference of К1 + К2 (Fig. 22;
distance from the gear axes. The phe- plane, which is perpendicular to the pre- Ref. 5). The kinematic coupling require-
nomenon known as undercut (left tooth sentation plane and includes the pitch ments 1 and 2 are not satisfied, whereas
profile, Fig. 16) is virtually eliminated or line. The employed machine design coupling requirement 3 is only slightly
reduced. allows the tilting of the cutter head about violated. Method “E” exists as a produc-
However, the generation of bevel gears К into the root line direction only in con- tion process with and without a hypoid
with tapered depth teeth causes conflict nection with a generating gear orienta- offset. The profiles of the resulting non-
between the desired generating gear axis tion — which is also parallel to the root conjugate flank forms are octoids of the
and the practical possible generating gear line. The results are two non-matching second order. The flank form deviations
axis orientation. The methods E, F, G and generating gear axes for pinion and gear. of method “E” are a maximum compared
to the other methods discussed in this
chapter. With the configuration of meth-
od “F” (Fig. 23) the attempt is made to
keep the systematic errors as small as
possible (Refs. 6–7). In spite of the col-
linear generating gear axes, both cutter
heads are tilted about the angles К1 + К2
in order for the blade tips to follow the
root lines of the work gears. Coupling
requirement 2 is fulfilled, the generat-
ing gear axes are identical, and the cut-
ter cone elements match perfectly in the
area of the calculation point. However,
the cutter head tilt creates two slightly
internal conical generating gears, which
is why the conical generating tooth sur-
faces increasingly deviate with increas-
ing distance from the calculation point.
Figure 21 Generating model for bevel gears with tapered depth teeth — Method E, octoid of the Coupling conditions 1 and 3 are not
second order. precisely fulfilled. The generated pro-
file form is consistent with an octoid of
the first order. Method “F” creates small
flank form deviations that consist mostly
of profile crowning.
Arrangement “G” (Fig. 24) shows the
form cutting of a ring gear and the gen-
erating of a pinion with a tilted cutter
head. The tilt angle К1 is equal to the root
angle К1 of the pinion (in case of a gear
box shaft angle of 90°). Although the
two cutting edges match in the calcula-
tion point, the generating gear flank cone
elements are deviating from each other
with distance from the calculation point.
Coupling requirement 2 is not satisfied,
while the coupling requirements 1 and 3
are fulfilled.
By applying the artifice in Figure 25, a
nearly exact bevel gear pair is created in
spite of the tapered depth teeth and the
plain generating gears (Method “H”). The
crossing angle of the generating gear axes
is like in case of method “E,” or the sum
of the dedendum angles. The particu-
Figure 22 Blade cone element deviation in case of different axes of rotation.
with the rolling quality of bevel gears Summary cases of smaller batches, a skiving with
• At the beginning of this chapter some coated carbide blades is also possible.
with parallel depth teeth (cut in a con-
thoughts about plausible explanations • The goal with regards to face milled
tinuous cutting process). Also, the cutting bevel gears was to convey the knowl-
times of the two methods with modern of the gearing law were discussed.
• Involute gearing was then presented edge that they have, with only some
machines and tools are basically identical. unimportant exceptions, a tapered
as the consequential result of the engi-
A further advantage of the single tooth depth form. It is possible to grind
neering demand for a robustly func-
indexing (face milling) method lies in face milled gears very precisely and
tioning, easy-to-manufacture tooth
the possibilities for hard finishing after form. efficiently based on their tooth depth
soft cutting and heat treatment. The flank • A simplified explanation of the analogy taper and circular flank lines. Lapping
lines of face milled bevel gears are cir- between the cylindrical gear and bevel as well as skiving of face milled
cular arcs, which make it possible to use gear generating principle helps clarify bevel gears are today’s only excep-
grinding (not only lapping) as a hard fin- things in making the bevel gear gen- tions — which are not often applied.
ishing process. A suitable grinding wheel erating methods easier to understand. References
duplicates the silhouette of the cutting Based on this general understanding 1. Buckingham, E. Spur Gears, McGraw-Hill Book
edges in a cutter head (stock allowance garnered at this point, a closer rela- Company, Inc., New York and London 1928.
tionship of how the different bevel and 2. Niemann, G. and H. Winter. Maschinenelemente
taken into account). The grinding wheel I, II & III, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg,
hypoid gear generating methods are
profile is basically dressed like the profile New York, Tokyo, 1983.
conducted is developed. 3. Dudley, D. Dudley’s Gear Handbook, McGraw-
at the right side in Figure 17. The crossed • The chapter continues to a deeper Hill, Inc. New York 1991.
profiles required in the continuous cut- comprehension of the theory and 4. Schriefer, H. “Verzahnungsgeometrie
ting process (face hobbing; left, Fig. 17) understanding the pros and cons of the und Laufverhalten bogenverzahnter
make it clear that it is physically impossi- different methods. Kegelradgetriebe,” Dissertation, RWTH Aachen,
ble to dress those profiles onto a suitable • There is an acknowledgement that face 1983.
5. Stadtfeld, H.J. “Anforderungsgerechte
grinding wheel. hobbed bevel gears always feature par- Auslegung bogenverzahnter Kegel-Radgetriebe,”
allel depth teeth and are not suitable Dissertation, RWTH Aachen, 1987.
for grinding due to their flank form 6. Brandner, G. “Kreisbogenverzahnte Kegelräder,”
and tooth thickness taper. Maschinenbautechnik, 3. Jg. Issue 5 May 1954.
• Hard finishing of face hobbed bevel 7. Richter, E.H. “Geometrische Grundlagen der
gears is generally done by lapping. In Kreisbogenverzahnung und ihre Herstellung,”
Konstruktion, Issue 3, 1958.
Dr. Hermann J. Stadtfeld received in 1978 his B.S. and in 1982 his M.S. degrees in
mechanical engineering at the Technical University in Aachen, Germany; upon receiving his
Doctorate, he remained as a research scientist at the University’s Machine Tool Laboratory. In
1987, he accepted the position of head of engineering and R&D of the Bevel Gear Machine Tool
Division of Oerlikon Buehrle AG in Zurich and, in 1992, returned to academia as visiting professor
at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Dr. Stadtfeld returned to the
commercial workplace in 1994 — joining The Gleason Works — also in
Rochester — first as director of R&D, and, in 1996, as vice president R&D.
During a three-year hiatus (2002–2005) from Gleason, he established a
gear research company in Germany while simultaneously accepting
a professorship to teach gear technology courses at the University of
Ilmenau. Stadtfeld subsequently returned to the Gleason Corporation in
2005, where he currently holds the position of vice president, bevel gear
technology and R&D. A prolific author (and frequent contributor to Gear
Technology), Dr. Stadtfeld has published more than 200 technical papers
and 10 books on bevel gear technology; he also controls more than 50
international patents on gear design, gear process, tools and machinery.
basics
at www.geartechnology.com