See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315978456

Approximate determination of the joint reaction forces in the drive system

with double universal joints

Article in ARCHIVE Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 1989-1996 (vols 203-210) · April 2017
DOI: 10.1177/0954406217702681

CITATIONS READS

2 3,192

2 authors:

Gang Wang Qi Zhaohui

Dalian University of Technology Wh Univercity
20 PUBLICATIONS 151 CITATIONS 30 PUBLICATIONS 260 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

multibody system dynamics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gang Wang on 15 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Original Article

Proc IMechE Part C:

J Mechanical Engineering Science
Approximate determination of the joint 0(0) 1–17
! IMechE 2017

reaction forces in the drive system with Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

double universal joints DOI: 10.1177/0954406217702681

journals.sagepub.com/home/pic

Gang Wang1,2 and Zhaohui Qi1

Abstract
In this study, a drive system connected by rolling bearings and double universal joints is modeled as a closed-loop
multibody system. Because of the existence of redundant constraints, the joint reaction forces cannot be determined
uniquely through dynamic analysis. Based on the physical mechanism where the joint reaction forces are the resultants of
contact forces at the joint definition point, a methodology of frictionless contact analysis is presented to identify joint
reaction forces. In terms of D’Alembert’s principle, the dynamic equations of constrained multibody systems are equiva-
lent to the equilibrium equations of all bodies composed of joint contact forces, externally applied forces, and inertial
forces. The equivalent equilibrium equations provide a set of complementary equations to identify the contact positions
and contact forces in the rolling bearings and double universal joints. The drive system is also simulated using ADAMS
software, where all the joints are released and the corresponding constraint functions are replaced by the impact forces
between the joint components. Some conclusions are obtained through the comparison of numerical examples between
the proposed method and the ADAMS model. In the double universal joints, the equations are adequate and independ-
ent, which results in that the corresponding contact positions and contact forces can be solved uniquely. Then, the
correlation between the data produced by these two models is acceptable in the engineering practices. Furthermore,
contact details in the double universal joints can be obtained without the calculation of the relative motion between the
cross-pin and yokes. However, the reaction forces in the rolling bearings are indeterminate due to that their comple-
mentary equations are not independent. The proposed method has high efficiency and acceptable precision.

Keywords
Drive system with double universal joints, closed-loop multibody system, reaction force, redundant constraint, friction-
less contact analysis

Date received: 2 July 2016; accepted: 9 March 2017

manufacturing tolerances. Chen and Freudenstein3

Introduction presented an extension of Fischer’s work, and calcu-
The universal joints, also known as Hooke’s joints lated the bearing forces in the universal joints under
and Cardan joints, have been widely used in mis- high-speed conditions. Sheu et al.4 performed an
aligned shafts to transmit rotational motion and tor- elementary matrix formulation for the dynamic ana-
sion.1 In the engineering practices, a drive system, lysis of the complex rotor-bearing systems connected
connected by double universal joints, is commonly by double universal joints, in which the effects of the
assembled in the automotive drivelines. Joint articulation angles and joint frictions on the steady-
damage may lead to premature failures of the whole state responses were examined. Hummel and
mechanical system. Therefore, determining reaction Chassapis5 modeled a universal joint as a spherical
forces in the universal joints is one of the essential
procedures in driveline design, which provides neces- 1
State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis for Industrial Equipment,
sary data for wear analysis. Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China
2
As a key component in the rotary machines, the School of Ocean Science and Technology, Dalian University of
universal joint has drawn many researchers’ attention Technology, Panjin, China
during the past three decades. Using the dual-matrix
Corresponding author:
approach, Fischer and Freudenstein2 developed a spa- Gang Wang, Faculty of Vehicle Engineering and Mechanics, Dalian
tial four-bar linkage model for the displacement University of Technology, Liaoning, China, Dalian, 116024, China.
and static force analysis of a universal joint with Email: wanggang@mail.dlut.edu.cn
2 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

four-bar linkage, where the geometric parameters of handling mechanism. In addition, using the contact
the universal joint were optimized by checking the force based method, dynamic analysis of the mechan-
geometric interference between any two components. ical systems with clearance joints has been extensively
Zhang et al.6 explored the relationship between the investigated. These researches focused on different
workspace and geometric parameters of universal types of clearance joints,39–41 various kinds of mech-
joints. In recent years, dynamic stabilities of the anisms,42–46 different contact force models,47,48 and
drive system connected by universal joints have other dynamic characteristics.49–51
attracted much attention,7–10 including the torsional In the engineering practices, clearances in many
and lateral instabilities. actual joints are so tiny that the normal relative vel-
All the investigations mentioned above provide a ocity of the two joint components must be infini-
good basis for the dynamic analysis of the drive tesimal. Therefore, the noncolliding contact plays a
system. However, joint reaction forces are the neces- central role in the tiny clearance joint. On the ground
sary data for wear analysis and security design, which of physics, the mechanical mechanism for realizing the
can be regarded as the post-processing procedure of joint kinematic constraints are reaction forces, which
the dynamic analysis.11 The drive system connected could be considered as the resultant of contact forces
by double universal joints can be modeled as a with respect to the joint definition points.52–54 In this
closed-loop multibody system. Because of the exist- case, the joint contact forces can be determined on the
ence of undetermined multipliers in multibody sys- basis of their relations with the joint reaction forces.
tems with redundant constraints, the joint reaction The relations are expressed as: the resultant of the con-
forces cannot be determined uniquely through the tact forces with respect to the joint definition points are
dynamic analysis. Even though rigid multibody sys- equivalent to the joint reaction forces.
tems with redundant constraints do not have a unique This present paper is organized as follows. In the
solution to the problem of the joint reaction forces upcoming section, the transmission relationship of the
calculation, in a series of work by Wojtyra and rotational movements by double universal joints is
Fra˜ czek,12–16 several techniques were presented to briefly derived by the kinematic analysis. Moreover,
identify the reaction forces in some selected joints. the redundant constraints of the multibody model are
Moreover, de Jalón and Gutiérrez-López17 summar- indicated. Next, dynamic analysis for the drive system
ized the existence, uniqueness, and determination of is investigated by the multibody model. Then, a fric-
the solutions for accelerations and constraint forces in tionless contact analysis in the rolling bearings
the multibody systems with redundant constraints and and double universal joints is presented and a series
singular mass matrix. of equivalent equilibrium equations of the contact
Because the resultants of the contact forces with forces, inertial forces, and externally applied forces
respect to the joint definition points are the joint reac- are presented to determine the contact forces in
tion forces, contact analysis could be selected as a the rolling bearings and double universal joints.
method for determining joint the reaction forces. In Subsequently, the continuous contact force model uti-
traditional methodology of clearance joint contact lized in ADAMS software is introduced and a numer-
analysis in multibody systems,18 joints are released ical example is given to demonstrate the application of
and a pair of contact forces are applied on the adja- the proposed method, and this example is also simu-
cent bodies while considering the effects of the joint lated by ADAMS software for comparison.
clearances. Flores et al. systematically studied the
influences of the clearances in revolute,19–21 spher- Redundant constraints in the drive
ical,22,23 and translational24 joints on the kinematics
and dynamics of the multibody systems. These effects
system with double universal joints
were systematically investigated in his researches, A universal joint is composed of a cross-pin and two
including clearance sizes, friction coefficients, multiple yokes, as shown in Figure 1. The cross-pin consists of
clearance joints, and different contact force two pins perpendicular to each other. Furthermore,
models.25–27 Tian et al.28–32 performed the dynamic the driving and driven yokes are fixed on two angled
analysis of the flexible multibody systems considering shafts respectively. The universal joint is commonly
the effects of the joint clearances and lubrication. used as a transmission component in the drive sys-
Muvengei et al.33,34 studied the dynamic response of tems, and the transmission relationship of rotational
a planar rigid multibody system with stick-slip friction movements between the two angled shafts can be
in clearance joints with LuGre friction law. obtained through kinematic analysis. The compo-
Zhao et al.35–37 proposed a numerical approach for nents of the universal joint are shown in Figure 1,
the modeling and prediction of wear at revolute where three body-fixed coordinate systems are defined
clearance joints in the flexible multibody systems by on the two yokes and the cross-pin.
integrating the procedures of wear prediction with As shown in Figure 1, the base vectors i3 and j3 are
multibody dynamics. Lu et al.38 presented a 5-DOF parallel to the axes of the two angled shafts, respect-
dynamic model of vehicle shimmy system with ively. Moreover, the base vectors e1 and e2 are aligned
clearance in the universal joints of the steering with the two axes of the cross-pin. The articulation
Wang and Qi 3

(a)
Cross-pin
j3 g2
j1
Driving yoke (input shaft)

g1
e1 φj γ Output shaft
i1 e3 j2
i3 Universal 2
e2 Articulation angle
i 2 φi
(b) Intermediate shaf
Driven yoke (output shaft) Input shaf Universal 1

Figure 1. Components and body-fixed coordinate systems of g2

g1
universal joint.

angle between the two shafts is denoted by . The

rotations of the input and output shafts are denoted Figure 2. Arrangements of double universal joints:
by i and j , respectively. The transmission relation- (a) Z-configuration; (b) W-configuration.
ship of the rotational movements between the two
angled shafts is expressed by1
kinematic relationship indicates that the drive system
tan j ¼ tan i =cos  ð1Þ connected by double universal joints has one degree of
freedom. However, little information related to the
The rotational angle of the second shaft can be reaction forces in the universal joints is given. A mul-
given by tibody model and dynamic analysis of the drive
system connected by double universal joints are essen-
j ¼ arctanðtan i =cos  Þ ð2Þ tial for determining the joint reaction forces. As
shown in Figure 3, the drive system with double uni-
Taking the first derivative of equation (2) with versal joints is arranged in the Z-configuration.
respect to time, it gives the angular velocity A driving motor fixed on the input shaft is connected
to the ground by two rolling bearings, as well as a
dj cos  di rotor load fixed on the output shaft. Moreover, the
¼ 2
ð3Þ
dt 1  cos i sin  dt
2 driving motor and the rotor load are located at the
geometric centers of the input and output shafts,
Equation (3) indicates that the output shaft driven respectively. The corresponding geometric parameters
by a single universal joint cannot rotate with uniform of the input, intermediate, and output shafts are
speed while the articulation angle is not zero. Robert marked in Figure 3.
Hooke1 provided the idea of eliminating the nonuni- The drive system can be modeled as a multibody
formity in the rotational movement of the single uni- system with a closed loop. The multibody model con-
versal joint by connecting a second universal joint. sists of three bodies and six joints (double universal
According to equation (1), the rotational angle of joints and two pairs of rolling bearings). One can use
the third shaft is formulated as follows the Grübler–Kutzbach equation55,56 to determine the
total number of degrees of freedom
cos 2
tan k ¼ tan i ð4Þ X
cos 1 nf ¼ 6nb  nic ð5Þ
i
where 1 is the articulation angle between the input
and intermediate shafts; 2 is the articulation angle where nb is the number of movable bodies, and nic is
between the intermediate and output shafts, as the number of constraint degrees of the ith joint.
shown in Figure 2. Using equation (5), the number of degrees of free-
Equation (4) gives the condition that the output dom for the drive system nf ¼ 10. Obviously, redun-
shaft rotates in a synchronous motion with uniform dant constraints exist in this system. The source of
speed. It can be concluded that driveshafts with two redundant constraints is that, the input shaft is con-
equal articulation angles are well suitable for trans- nected to the ground by two rolling bearings with the
mitting uniform speed, i.e. the double universal joints same rotational axis to reinforce the kinematic con-
are arranged in the Z-configuration in Figure 2(a) or straint, as well as the output shaft. It is one of the
in the W-configuration in Figure 2(b). constructional reasons of redundant constraints that
The transmission relationship of the drive system some pairs of bodies are connected by two or more
can be obtained via kinematic analysis. Moreover, the joints. The most convenient way to choose the
4 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Lk

j
l1k l2k
g2 Dk
Li
Dj Bearing Bearing
i i
l1 l
2 g1 Rotor loa
Di
Bearing Bearing
Driving motor

Figure 3. Drive system connected by double universal joints.

equivalent joint is to keep only one joint and ignore acting on it. On the basis of this principle, when
all the others, which results in the uniform system accelerations of all components in the drive sys-
motion.17 Therefore, the two rolling bearings on the tem have been solved, as well as the geometric con-
input shaft can be modeled as a single revolute joint at straints of the rolling bearings and double universal
their geometric center, as well as the other two rolling joints are replaced by joint contact forces, the input,
bearings on the output shaft. In such case, the number intermediate, and output shafts as well as the two
of degrees of freedom is calculated by equation (5) cross-pins in the drive system can be considered as
again, which yields that nf ¼ 0. In the kinematic ana- unconstrained rigid bodies. Hence, the inertial
lysis, it has been proved that the drive system has one forces, externally applied forces and joint contact
degree of freedom. Therefore, the drive system must forces exerted on each body constitute a set of equiva-
have one redundant constraint, which will affect the lent equilibrium force system, which supplements the
determination of the reaction forces in the rolling equations for determining the contact parameters,
bearings and double universal joints. including contact positions and contact forces.
Furthermore, the joint reaction forces can be obtained
A contact analysis procedure for based on the details of contact positions and contact
determining reaction forces in rolling forces.
bearings and double universal joints
Motions of the drive system with
Contacts in joints are the physical mechanisms
responsible for providing the joint reaction forces to
redundant constraints
restrain the undesirable relative motion between joint The drive system is modeled as a multibody system
adjacent bodies. In other words, joint reaction forces with closed loop. In the closed-loop multibody
can be regarded as the resultant of joint contact forces system, the position, velocity, and acceleration vectors
at the joint definition point. In general, contact par- must satisfy the corresponding constraint equations in
ameters in one joint are more than the joint reaction the following
forces, and the joint reaction forces cannot be
determined because of the redundant constraints. (ðq, tÞ ¼ 0 ð6Þ
However, a set of complementary equations of the
contact parameters can be formulated by the infini- _ ¼ (q q_ þ (t ¼ 0
( ð7Þ
tesimal relative motion analysis in the joint. These
equations root in the matching requirement of the ( _ q q_ þ (
€ ¼ (q q€ þ ( _t ¼0 ð8Þ
geometric parameters of the joint components. For
instance, the top and bottom points of the cross-pin where q is the generalized coordinate vector of the
cannot be in contact with the bearing-housing of the multibody model and (q is the Jacobian matrix of
yoke at the same time. If these equations are adequate the kinematic constraint equations.
and independent for describing the contact unknowns Among many proposed constraint stabilization
in a certain joint, the reaction forces in this joint are methods, the most popular one, called the
determined. Baumgarte stabilization method,57,58 is to combine
In this section, a methodology of frictionless con- equations (6) to (8) into the following equation
tact analysis is presented to determine the reaction
forces in the rolling bearings and double universal € þ 2(
( _ þ 2 ( ¼ 0 ð9Þ
joints of the drive system based on D’Alembert’s prin-
ciple. This principle states that the inertial forces of where  and  are the positive parameters which the
a rigid body are equivalent to the external forces users choose.
Wang and Qi 5

(a) (b) (c) rb

εr
εa rs
i3 θin i3 i3
f1in f1in 1
θ 2iin ha Bearing-housing
i2 hs rt
in in i1 i1 ht
g 1 g 2 hb

f 2in
f 2in

l1 Yoke Cross-pin
Shaft

Figure 4. Reaction forces in the two rolling bearings on the

input shaft: (a) front view; (b) right view of No. 1 bearing;
l2 l3
(c) right view of No. 2 bearing.

It can be verified that the dynamic equations of the Figure 5. Structural and geometrical parameters of the
drive system are written as follows universal joint.
" #   
M (Tq q€ F
¼ ð10Þ
(q 0 j m gin in
i ¼ gi i 2 ði ¼ 1, 2Þ ð12Þ

where M is the mass matrix; F is the generalized forces where ði1 , i2 , i3 Þ is the body-fixed coordination system
composed of applied and velocity-dependent forces; j of the input shaft.
is the vector of Lagrange multipliers; and (q q€ ¼ m is Similarly, the reaction forces in the two rolling
the compact form of equation (9). bearings on the output shaft are described by
In consideration of that, redundant constraints
fout
i ¼ fout out out out
i cos i k3  fi sin i k1 ði ¼ 1, 2Þ
exist in the multibody model of the drive system.
Therefore, the constraint Jacobian matrix (q does ð13Þ
not have full rank and the augmented matrix in equa- gout gout ði ¼ 1, 2Þ
i ¼ i k2 ð14Þ
tion (10) is not invertible. There has been a conclusion
that, by choosing a set of independent constraints, the where ðk1 , k2 , k3 Þ is the body-fixed coordination
dynamic responses of multibody systems with redun- system of the output shaft; fout 1 and fout
2 are the
out out
dant constraints can be obtained theoretically and radial contact forces; 1 and 2 are the radial con-
uniquely.17 However, the Lagrange multipliers tact angles; gout out
1 and g2 are the axial contact forces.
cannot be determined resulting in undetermined reac- In summary, there are totally 12 parameters for
tion forces of the cut joints. Furthermore, the reaction describing the reaction forces in the two pairs of roll-
forces in other joints cannot be determined uniquely ing bearings on the input and output shafts.
in the same way. In the following sections, a contact
analysis procedure will be presented for identifying
Parameters of reaction forces in the universal joints
reaction forces in the rolling bearings and double uni-
versal joints of the drive system. In particular, to sim- Universal joints are different from other joints, e.g.
plify the formulation, the effects of friction and revolute, spherical, and translational joints, whose
lubrication in the double universal joints are not con- inner and outer parts are connected to the adjacent
sidered in this work. bodies directly. Universal joints have an additional
component, called cross-pin, embedded between the
driving and driven yokes, as shown in Figure 1.
Parameters of reaction forces in the rolling bearings Radial and axial clearances exist between the cross-
As mentioned in the earlier section, the input shaft is pin and yoke. Gap functions of the contact points
connected to the ground by two rolling bearings. The play an essential role in detecting the contact pos-
reaction force in each bearing is divided into the radial itions. As a result, the contacts in the universal
and axial components. The reaction forces in the two joint should be determined by the relative motions
bearings on the input shaft are shown in Figure 4. between the cross-pin and the two yokes. Owing to
As shown in Figure 4, the description parameters the multiple contact points, a relative motion in the
of the reaction forces in the two rolling bearings on universal joint is discussed first. The structural and
the input shaft are provided as follows: the radial con- geometrical parameters of the universal joint are
tact forces fin in in
1 and f2 , the radial contact angles 1 and shown in Figure 5.
in in in
2 , as well as the axial contact forces g1 and g2 . In the The radial and axial clearances between the cross-
coordinate system fixed on the input shaft, the contact pin and the bearing-housing are calculated by the geo-
forces are expressed as metrical parameters of the universal joint, i.e.
"r ¼ rb  rs and "a ¼ hb  ht . It should be noted that
fin in in in in
i ¼ fi cos i i3  fi sin i i1 ði ¼ 1, 2Þ ð11Þ the radial and axial clearances are infinitesimal, and
the cross-pin can move in a tiny scale with respect to
6 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

(a) (b) (c)

Contact points

Contact point

Contact surface

(d) (e) (f)

Contact lines Contact surface

Contact points

Contact lines

Figure 6. Different interaction scenarios between the cross-pin and the bearing-housing of the driving yoke: (a) one contact point;
(b) one contact surface; (c) two contact points; (d) two contact surfaces; (e) three contact points; (f) three contact surfaces.

the bearing-housings of the driving and driven yokes.

Because the axial clearance is much larger than the
radial clearance, the cross-pin cannot be in con-
tact with the top and bottom surfaces of the
bearing-housing of each yoke at the same time.
Furthermore, between the cross-pin and the bearing-
housing of each yoke, there are at most three contact
positions, including contact points, lines and surfaces.
As shown in Figure 6, it illustrates different scen-
arios for the cross-pin configuration relative to the
bearing-housing of the driving yoke. As shown in
Figure 6(b), (d), and (f), the scenarios for the contact
Figure 7. Contact points between the cross-pin and the
between the cross-pin and the bearing-housing of the bearing-housing of the driving yoke.
driving yoke are the surface contacts. Considering
that the length of line contact and area of surface
contact are extremely small, only the point contact where ci ¼ cos i ; si ¼ sin i ði ¼ 1, 2, 3, 4Þ.
is represented for the simplicity in the formulation The relative motions of the cross-pin with respect
as shown in Figure 6. to the bearing-housing of the driving yoke can be
The relative motions between the cross-pin and the represented by five kinematic parameters between
bearing-housing of the driving yoke, as well as the pos- these two components,  namely, the relative micro
T
itions of contact points, are described in the coordinate displacements
 e
T ¼ "1 "2 "3 and rotations
system fixed at the geometric center of the bearing- b ¼ 0 2 3 . The displacement vector of the
housing of the driving yoke, as illustrated in Figure 7. point pi is formulated as
There are four pairs of contact points between the
cross-pin and the driving yoke bearing-housing. Then, ui ¼ e þ b  pi ð16Þ
these four contact points on the cross-pin are
expressed as The gap functions between the points p1, p2 and the
8 9 8 9 bearing-housing of the driving yoke are expressed as
< hs >
> = < hs >
> =  
p1 ¼ r s c 1 ; p2 ¼ rs c2 ; 1 ¼ "r  u1,2 c1 þ u1,3 s1
>
: >
; >
: >
; ð17Þ
rs s1 rs s2 ¼ "r  ð"2 þ 3 hs Þc1  ð"3  2 hs Þs1
8 9 8 9 ð15Þ
 
< ht >
> = < ht >
> = 2 ¼ "r  u2,2 c2 þ u2,3 s2
p3 ¼ r t c 3 ; p4 ¼ rt c4 ð18Þ
>
: >
; >
: >
; ¼ "r  ð"2  3 hs Þc2  ð"3 þ 2 hs Þs2
rt s3 rt s4
Wang and Qi 7

 
where ui,j denotes the jth component of the displace- c4,1 ¼ 3 c4,2 ¼ 3
; ð30Þ
ment vector ui. s4,1 ¼ 2 s4,2 ¼ 2
The gap functions between the points p3, p4 and the
bearing-housing of the driving yoke are given by where  ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 ffi
2 2
.
2 þ3

3 ¼ "a  u3,1 ¼ "a  "1 þ rt ð3 c1  2 s1 Þ ð19Þ The last set of solutions in equation (29) and the
first set of solutions in equation (30) result in the cor-
4 ¼ "a þ u4,1 ¼ "a þ "1 þ rt ð2 s2  3 c2 Þ ð20Þ responding minimum values of the gap functions 3, 4
as the following
The gap functions of these four pairs of contact
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
points in equations (17) to (20) are not independent,
m 2
3 ¼ "a þ "1  rt 2 þ 3
2 ð31Þ
because they are evaluated using only five kinematic
parameters. If the points p1, p2 are the contact points, qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the gap functions in equations (17) and (18) must be m 2
4 ¼ "a þ "1  rt 2 þ 3
2 ð32Þ
zeroes and at their minimum values simultaneously,
which yields Hence, the corresponding correct solutions of
equations (27) and (28) are expressed as
1 ¼ "r  ð"2 þ 3 hs Þc1  ð"3  2 hs Þs1 ¼ 0 ð21Þ
3 2
c3 ¼  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; s3 ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð33Þ
2 ¼ "r  ð"2  3 hs Þc2  ð"3 þ 2 hs Þs2 ¼ 0 ð22Þ 22 þ 23 22 þ 23

@1 3 2
¼ ð"2 þ 3 hs Þs1  ð"3  2 hs Þc1 ¼ 0 ð23Þ c4 ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; s4 ¼  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð34Þ
@1 22 þ 23 22 þ 23

@2 Substituting equation (26) into equations (33)

¼ ð"2  3 hs Þs2  ð"3 þ 2 hs Þc2 ¼ 0 ð24Þ
@2 and (34), one obtains
   
Solving equations (21) to (24), one obtains the rela- 1 þ 2 2  1
c3 ¼  sin Sgn sin ;
tive motions of the cross-pin with respect to the bear- 2 2
ing-housing of the driving yoke as follows     ð35Þ
1 þ 2 2  1
s3 ¼ cos Sgn sin
"r "r 2 2
"2 ¼ ðc1 þ c2 Þ; "3 ¼ ðs1 þ s2 Þ ð25Þ
2 2    
1 þ 2 2  1
"r "r c4 ¼ sin Sgn sin ;
2 ¼ ðs2  s1 Þ; 3 ¼ ðc1  c2 Þ 2 2
ð26Þ     ð36Þ
2hs 2hs 1 þ 2 2  1
s4 ¼  cos Sgn sin
As the axial clearance is much larger than the 2 2
radial clearance, the top and bottom points p3, p4
cannot be in contact with the bearing-housing of the From the relationship of the positions of the four
driving yoke at the same time. Therefore, only the contact points pi ði ¼ 1, 2, 3, 4Þ in equations (35) and
minimum values of the gap functions, denoted by (36), one can conclude that the contact situations
equations (19) and (20), need to be monitored. between the cross-pin and the bearing-housing of
Minimizing the corresponding gap functions 3, 4 the driving yoke are point contacts while 1 6¼ 2 , as
gives the following relationships shown in Figure 6(a), (c), and (e), whereas the contact
situations are surface contacts while 1 ¼ 2 , as shown
@3 in Figure 6(b), (d), and (f).
¼ rt ð2 c3 þ 3 s3 Þ ¼ 0 ð27Þ
@3 The contact forces at the points pi ði ¼ 1, 2, 3, 4Þ on
the cross-pin are denoted by fi ði ¼ 1, 2, 3, 4Þ, as shown
@4 in Figure 7. In the coordinate system fixed on the
¼ rt ð2 c4 þ 3 s4 Þ ¼ 0 ð28Þ driving yoke, the contact forces are expressed as
@4

fi ¼ ci fi e2  si fi e3 ði ¼ 1, 2Þ ð37Þ
Both of equations (27) and (28) have two sets of
solutions as follows f3 ¼ f3 e1 ; f 4 ¼ f 4 e1 ð38Þ
 
c3,1 ¼ 3 c3,2 ¼ 3 Because the top and bottom points p3, p4 cannot be
; ð29Þ in contact with the bearing-housing of the driving
s3,1 ¼ 2 s3,2 ¼ 2
yoke at the same time, the contact forces at the
8 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

pi ði ¼ 5, 6, 7, 8Þ are denoted by fi ði ¼ 5, 6, 7, 8Þ, as

f6
shown in Figure 8. The contact forces are expressed as
f8 θ6
e1 θ8 f6 fi ¼ ci fi e3  si fi e1 ði ¼ 5, 6Þ ð44Þ
f8
f7 e1
θ7 e2 e3 f7 e3 f7 ¼ f7 e2 ; f 8 ¼ f 8 e2 ð45Þ
f5
θ5 e2

f5 The contact forces at the points p7, p8 satisfy the

following complementarity equation

Figure 8. Contact points between the cross-pin and the 04f7 ? f8 50 ð46Þ
bearing-housing of the driven yoke.
Equation (46) can be transformed into the follow-
ing nonlinear equation
points p3, p4 satisfy the following complementarity
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
equation
f 27 þ f 28  f7  f8 ¼ 0 ð47Þ
04f3 ? f4 50 ð39Þ
The universal joint connecting the intermediate and
The complementarity equation, denoted by equa- output shafts can be analyzed applying the above
tion (39), can be transformed into a nonlinear equa- methodology. Through the procedure of frictionless
tion, which yields contact analysis, the contact positions i ði ¼
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, #i ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ and the contact forces
f 23 þ f 24  f3  f4 ¼ 0 ð40Þ fi ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, gi ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ are defined for
describing contacts in the double universal joints of
Taking the similar analysis to the contact condition the drive system, resulting in 32 contact parameters.
between the cross-pin and the driven yoke, as shown Considering equations (35) and (36) and equations
in Figure 8, there are four pairs of contact points (42) and (43), the contact positions i ði ¼ 3, 4, 7, 8Þ
between the cross-pin and the bearing-housing of and #i ði ¼ 3, 4, 7, 8Þ are expressed by i ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ
the driven yoke. and #i ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ, respectively. Consequently, the
The contact points pi ði ¼ 5, 6, 7, 8Þ on the cross-pin total independent unknown variables of contact pos-
can be expressed as itions and contact forces in the double universal joints
8 9 8 9 are as follows: i ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ, #i ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ,
< rs s5 >
> = < rs s6 >
> = fi ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, and gi ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, resulting in
p5 ¼ hs ; p6 ¼ hs ; 24 unknown variables.
>
: >
; >
: >
;
r s c5 r s c6
8 9 8 9 Equivalent equilibrium equations for identifying joint
< rt s7 >
> = < rt s8 >
> = reaction forces in the drive system
p7 ¼ ht ; p8 ¼ ht ð41Þ
>
: >
; >
: >
; As shown in the previous three parts, accelerations of
r t c7 r t c8
all components in the drive system have been given, as
where ci ¼ cos i ; si ¼ sin i ði ¼ 5, 6, 7, 8Þ. well as the parameters for describing the contacts in
Applying the similar analysis, the positions of the rolling bearings and double universal joints. There
contact points p7, p8 can be formulated by the pos- are totally 36 parameters for describing the reaction
itions of contact points p5, p6, which yields forces of the rolling bearings and double universal
    joints of the drive system. After releasing all joint
5 þ 6 6  5 kinematic constraints, according to D’Alembert’s
c7 ¼  sin Sgn sin ;
2 2 principle, a set of equivalent equilibrium force systems
    ð42Þ applied on unconstrained bodies supplement the
5 þ 6 6  5
s7 ¼ cos Sgn sin equations for determining the contact positions and
2 2
contact forces. The body-fixed coordinate systems of
    these three shafts and the joint definition points are
5 þ 6 6  5
c8 ¼ sin Sgn sin ; illustrated by Figure 9.
2 2
    ð43Þ As shown in Figure 9, the joint definition vectors
5 þ 6 6  5 are defined as follows: rin in
s8 ¼  cos Sgn sin 1 and r2 are the left and right
2 2 joint definition vectors of the rolling bearings on the
input shaft; rout
1 and rout
2 are the left and right joint
The contact forces between the cross-pin and the definition vectors of the rolling bearings on the
bearing-housing of the driven yoke at the points output shaft; rp1 and rq1 are the inner and outer joint
Wang and Qi 9

r1out
k3
r2out
¼ mk r€ k  mk g  Fk ð53Þ
r2p r2q k2
γ2
j3
j2   X8  
r1in i3 i2 r1p γ1 Ak ~rout out
1 f1 þ ~rout
2 f2
out
 Ak~rq2 ATk Au2 þ Au2 ~qs gs
r1q s¼5
r2in
_ k þ uk  ðJk uk Þ  Mk
¼ Jk u ð54Þ

Figure 9. Local coordinate systems and joint definition

points. Moreover, the equivalent equilibrium equations of
the two cross-pins are given by

definition vectors of the first universal joint, respect- X

8

ively; rp2 and rq2 are the inner and outer joint definition fs ¼ 0 ð55Þ
s¼1
vectors of the second universal joint. The body-fixed
coordinate systems are defined as
X
8
ps  fs ¼ 0 ð56Þ
Ai ¼ ½i1 , i2 , i3 ; Aj ¼ j1 , j2 , j3 ; Ak ¼ ½k1 , k2 , k3  s¼1
ð48Þ
X
8
where the subscripts i, j, and k denote the input, inter- gs ¼ 0 ð57Þ
mediate and output shafts respectively. s¼1

Firstly, the equivalent equilibrium equations of the

X
8
input shaft are given by qs  gs ¼ 0 ð58Þ
s¼1
   in  X
4
u
Ai fin in in
1 þ f2 þ Ai g1 þ g2  A1 fs
s¼1 It needs to be noted that the inertial forces of the
¼ mi r€ i  mi g  Fi two cross-pin are ignored, because the masses of the
two cross-pins are considerably smaller than those of
 in  X
4   the shafts. At last, the complementarity equations of
Ai ~rin rin
1 f1 þ ~
in
2 f2  Ai~rp1 ATi Au1 þ Au1 ~
ps f s four sets of axial contact forces on the two cross-pins
s¼1 are rewritten as
_ i þ ui  ðJi ui Þ  Mi
¼ Ji u ð50Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f 23 þ f 24  f3  f4 ¼ 0 ð59Þ
where Au1
is the body-fixed coordinate systems of the
cross-pin in the first universal joint. qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Secondly, the equivalent equilibrium equations of f 27 þ f 28  f7  f8 ¼ 0 ð60Þ
the intermediate shaft are formulated as
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X
8 X
4 g23 þ g24  g3  g4 ¼ 0 ð61Þ
Au1 fs  Au2 gs ¼ mj r€ j  mj g  Fj ð51Þ
s¼5 s¼1 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X
8  g27 þ g28  g7  g8 ¼ 0 ð62Þ
 Aj~rq1 ATj Au1 þ Au1 ~
ps fs
s¼5
 Equations (49) to (62) provide 34 equations of
X
4 ð52Þ
 Aj~rp2 ATj Au2 þ Au2 ~
qs gs the contact forces fin in
s ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ, gs ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ fs ðs ¼
s¼1 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, gi ði ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ, fs ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ, gout
out
s
  ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ and the contact positions sin ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ,
_ j þ uj  Jj uj  Mj
¼ Jj u
s ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ, #i ði ¼ 1, 2, 5, 6Þ, sout ðs ¼ 1, 2Þ.
where Au2 is the body-fixed coordinate systems of the Unfortunately, 36 unknowns of contact positions
cross-pin in the second universal joint; qs ðs ¼ and contact forces need to be solved, which means
1, 2, . . . , 8Þ are the contact point vectors on the cross- that the number of equations is not enough.
pin of the second universal joint and gs ðs ¼ 1, 2, . . . , 8Þ Therefore, the sum of the axial reaction forces gin 1
are the corresponding contact force vectors. and in the rolling bearings on the input shaft are
Then, the equivalent equilibrium equations of the regarded as one parameter, as well as the axial reac-
output shaft are given by tion forces gout out
1 and g2 in the rolling bearings on the
output shaft. In this way, the number of equations
   out  X
8 equals to that of unknown variables, which is one of
u
Ak fout
1 þ fout
2 þ A g
k 1 þ gout
2  A 2 gs the requirements for solution uniqueness of these
s¼5
equations and determinacy of joint reaction forces.
10 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Although the equations are adequate for describing X

2 X
6

the unknown variables, equations (49) to (62) are a set gs þ gs ¼ 0 ð72Þ

s¼1 s¼5
of highly nonlinear equations which can only be
solved by numerical methods. The fsolve function in
X
2 X
6
MATLAB is adopted as the nonlinear equation qs  gs þ qs  gs ¼ 0 ð73Þ
solver. The initial values of nonlinear equations play s¼1 s¼5
an important role in the success of the algorithm. To
improve the computational efficiency, the initial where
values of equations (49) to (62) can be obtained
(  T  T
through the following steps: p1 ¼ q1 ¼ hs 0 0 ; p2 ¼ q2 ¼ hs 0 0
 T  T
(1) Firstly, the axial contact forces are set to zeroes, p5 ¼ q5 ¼ 0 hs 0 ; p6 ¼ q6 ¼ 0 hs 0
which yields ð74Þ

fi ¼ 0 ði ¼ 3, 4, 7, 8Þ; gi ¼ 0 ði ¼ 3, 4, 7, 8Þ ð63Þ (3) Finally, solving equations (64) to (73), the initial
values of the nonlinear equations in equations (49)
to (62) are given.
(2) Secondly, under the condition of the axial contact
forces being zeroes, equations (49) to (58) are In the proposed method, only contact positions
rewritten as follows and contact forces are regarded as the unknowns of
   in  the joint reaction forces. In this way, the detection and
Ai fin in in
1 þ f2 þ Ai g1 þ g2
process of switch between the different contact condi-
X
2 tions can be obtained by the history of contact forces.
ð64Þ
 Au1 fs ¼ mi r€ i  mi g  Fi When the contact force changes from zero to nonzero,
s¼1 the contact is detected; on the contrary, the contact
vanishes. The equations of joint contact analysis are a
X
2   X2   set of algebraic equations, which can be regarded as
Ai~rin
s sf in
 Ai~rp1 ATi Au1 þ Au1 ~
ps fs the post-processing procedure of the dynamic analysis
s¼1 s¼1 ð65Þ
of the multibody systems.
_ i þ ui  ðJi ui Þ  Mi
¼ Ji u

X
6 X
2 Continuous contact force model in
Au1 fs  Au2 gs ¼ mj r€ j  mj g  Fj ð66Þ ADAMS software
s¼5 s¼1
In the traditional contact analysis of clearance joints,
X
6  a continuous contact model, in which the local
 Aj~rq1 ATj Au1 þ Au1 ~
ps fs deformation and contact forces are treated as continu-
s¼5 ous, provides the intra-joint impact forces.18 Adams/
X
2  ð67Þ Solver models the contact as a unilateral constraint,
 Aj~rp2 ATj Au2 þ Au2 ~
qs gs i.e. as a force that has zero value when no penetra-
s¼1 tion exists between the specified geometries, and a
 
_ j þ uj  Jj uj  Mj
¼ Jj u force that has a positive value when penetration
exists between two geometries. Therefore, dynamic
   out  X
6 analysis of the drive system is also investigated in
u
Ak fout
1 þ fout
2 þ A g
k 1 þ gout
2  A 2 gs ADAMS software for comparison, and the rolling
s¼5
bearings and double universal joints are released
¼ mk r€ k  mk g  Fk ð68Þ and replaced by continuous contact forces to restrict
the relative motions. The general form of the con-
  X6   tinuous contact force model in ADAMS software is
Ak ~rout out
1 f1 þ ~rout
2 f2
out
 Ak~rq2 ATk Au2 þ Au2 ~
qs gs
given by59
s¼5
_ k þ uk  ðJk uk Þ  Mk
¼ Jk u ð69Þ
Fn ¼ K  n þ stepð, 0, 0, dm , cm Þ  _ ð75Þ
X
2 X
6
where K is the generalized contact stiffness coefficient,
fs þ fs ¼ 0 ð70Þ
s¼1 s¼5  represents the relative penetration or deformation
between the colliding bodies, and _ is the penetration
X
2 X
6 velocity at the contact point. The exponent n is gen-
ps  fs þ ps  fs ¼ 0 ð71Þ erally set to 1.5 for the steel materials.
s¼1 s¼5 The generalized contact stiffness coefficient
depends on the material and the radii of the solids
Wang and Qi 11

in contact, which can be calculated by

Damping coefficient C

1=2
4 R1 R2
K¼ ð76Þ
cm 3ð 1 þ 2 Þ R2  R1

Step function
where the parameter k is given by

2
1 k
k ¼ ðk ¼ 1, 2Þ ð77Þ
Penetration d Ek

dm In ADAMS software, the instantaneous damping

coefficient is a cubic step function of the penetration
Figure 10. Schematic diagram of the step function.
as shown in Figure 10.
The instantaneous damping coefficient is given by
8
> 0, 40
< 
2
Table 1. Geometric parameters of the drive system. stepð, 0, 0, dm , cm Þ ¼ 
c
d2 m
3  d2m , 0 5  5 dm
>
: m
2
Value, J (kgm ) cm , 5d
Length, Diameter, Mass,
Body L (m) D (m) m (kg) J1 J2 J3 ð78Þ

Input shaft 1.00 0.05 118.857 2.942 1.895 2.942

Intermediate 1.50 0.05 33.764 6.531 0.0152 6.531
shaft
Output shaft 1.00 0.05 118.857 2.942 1.895 2.942

Table 2. Geometric parameters of the rolling bearings and

double universal joints.

Value Value Value

Parameter (mm) Parameter (mm) Parameter (mm)

l1i 400 l1 20.0 hs 29.25

l2i 400 l2 52.5 ht 19.25
l1k 400 l3 7.5 rt 6.25
l2k 400 ha 30.0 rs 4.75
du 15 hb 20.0 rb 5.00
Figure 12. Angular velocity of the intermediate shaft.

Figure 11. Angular velocities of the (a) input and (b) output shafts.
12 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Figure 13. Contact forces in the universal joint connecting the input and intermediate shafts: (a) radial contact force F1; (b) radial
contact force F2; (c) axial contact force F3; (d) axial contact force F4; (e) radial contact force F5; (f) radial contact force F6; (g) axial
contact force F7; (h) axial contact force F8.
where the parameter dm is a positive real value spe- set to 1% of the generalized stiffness coefficient
cifying the boundary penetration to apply the max- denoted by equation (76).
imum damping coefficient cm. dm defines the
penetration at which Adams/Solver turns on full
damping. A reasonable value for this parameter is
Numerical example
that: dm ¼ 0.01 mm. ADAMS software advises that A numerical example is given to validate the proposed
the value of the maximum damping coefficient cm is method in this section. Contact forces in the rolling
Wang and Qi 13

Figure 14. Reaction forces in the rolling bearings on the input shaft: (a) left bearing; (b) right bearing; (c) axial direction.

bearings and double universal joints are calculated by In the ADAMS model, the Gear Stiff integrator
the proposed methodology. Moreover, to validate the (GSTIFF) is used for integrating the differential
proposed method for determining the joint reaction equations of motion. GSTIFF is a variable-order,
forces of the multibody system with redundant con- variable-step, multi-step integrator with a maximum
straints, the drive system is also simulated by integration order of six, which offers the benefits of
ADAMS software with releasing the rolling bearings high speed, high accuracy of the system displace-
and double universal joints and adding the collisions ments, and robustness in handling a variety of ana-
between the joint components. lysis problems. In the simulation, the integration
The drive system is composed of the input, inter- tolerance is set to 0.001 and the step size is 0.005 s.
mediate and output shafts as well as the double uni- Furthermore, we have chosen the integrator formula-
versal joints with the same size. The material tion (SI2), which takes into account the constraint
parameters of all components are as follows: derivatives when solving the equations of motion
Young’s modulus of elasticity E ¼ 2.07  1011 Pa; and monitors the integration error on the impulse of
Poisson’s ratio v ¼ 0.29; mass density ¼ 7850 kg/ the Lagrange multipliers in the system.
m3. The geometric parameters of these three shafts The input and output angular velocities are pre-
are shown in Table 1 (see Figure 3). sented in Figure 11(a) and (b), respectively. As
The geometric parameters of the double universal shown in Figure 11(a), it can be seen that the selected
joints are shown in Table 2 (see Figures 3 and 4), two solutions provided the results with acceptable
where du is the thickness of the universal joint. error. It is indicated that the velocities of adjacent
Using the parameters in Table 2, the radial and bodies are not considerably affected by tiny joint
axial clearances in the double universal joints are cal- clearances. Comparing Figure 11(a) with (b), it can
culated as follows: "r ¼ rb  rs ¼ 0:25 mm and be seen that the input and output angular velocities
"a ¼ hb  ht ¼ 0:75 mm. The drive system is arranged proved to be uniform, which is coincident with the
in Z-configuration, and the two articulation angles 1 conclusion in the section ‘‘Redundant constraints in
and 2 are both 30 . The input shaft is driven by a the drive system with double universal joints’’.
variable torque, which is denoted by The angular velocity of the intermediate shaft is
M ¼ 10  5 cosð2 tÞ Nm. Meanwhile, the gravity shown in Figure 12. The difference of the angular
acceleration is g ¼ 9.8 m/s2 acting in the negative ver- velocities from this paper and ADAMS software is
tical direction. relatively small. It can be concluded that tiny
14 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Figure 15. Reaction forces in the rolling bearings on the input shaft under horizontal gravity: (a) left bearing; (b) right bearing;
(c) axial direction.

clearances will not affect the kinematic behavior of the direction is adjusted to the positive horizontal
mechanical systems. direction and the other parameters of this model
The contact forces between the driving yoke and remain unchanged. In this case, the reaction forces
the cross pin in the first universal joint are presented of the rolling bearings on the input shaft are
in Figure 13. The frequency variation of the contact shown in Figure 15. As shown in Figure 15(a) and
forces from the ADAMS model is slightly higher, (b), the radial reaction forces are not in accord-
which may be caused by the large stiffness of the con- ance with the ADAMS model, whereas the axial
tinuous contact force model and the numerical error reaction force has extremely small differences with
of the stiff differential equations. Except some peaks respect to the ADAMS model. Therefore, the reaction
in the contact force curves, the obtained results of the forces in the rolling bearings are indetermination
proposed method are slightly larger than those from whether this type of joint is released or not.
the ADAMS model. For the wear analysis and secur- Furthermore, the reaction forces in the universal
ity design, this numerical precision may be acceptable joints are consistent with each other and are not
in engineering practice. given here.
The reaction forces of the rolling bearings on the The main reason of different determinacies in the
input shaft are given in Figure 14. On the one hand, as rolling bearings and universal joints may depend on
shown in Figure 14(a) and (b), the radial reaction that whether the complementary equations are
forces in the two bearings are consistent with those adequate and independent for solving the unknowns
of the ADAMS model at the order of magnitude. On of reaction forces in the cut-off joint or not.
the other hand, there are great differences in the axial Furthermore, details about the contact in the double
reaction force between the proposed method and the universal joints can be obtained without the calcula-
ADAMS model. Therefore, a conclusion can be sum- tion of the relative motion and the invasion depths
marized that some of reaction forces in the rolling between the cross-pin and yokes. Therefore, a high
bearings are indeterminate. efficiency and acceptable precision can be promised
To investigate which ones of the reaction forces in using the procedure of frictionless contact analysis
the rolling bearings are indeterminate, the gravity in this paper.
Wang and Qi 15

Conclusion 4. Sheu PP, Chieng WH and Lee AC. Modeling and ana-
When a drive system with double universal joints lysis of the intermediate shaft between two universal
is modeled as a closed-loop multibody system, joint joints. J Vib Acoust 1996; 118: 88–99.
reaction forces cannot be determined due to the redun- 5. Hummel SR and Chassapis C. Configuration design
and optimization of universal joints with manufacturing
dant constraints. A procedure of frictionless contact
tolerances. Mech Mach Theory 2000; 35: 463–476.
analysis is presented for identifying the reaction
6. Zhang G, Du J and To S. Study of the workspace of a
forces in the rolling bearings and double universal class of universal joints. Mech Mach Theory 2014; 73:
joints. Based on D’Alembert’s principle, when all accel- 244–258.
erations of the drive system have been solved, and con- 7. Asokanthan SF and Meehan PA. Non-linear vibration
straint functions of the rolling bearings and double of a torsional system driven by a Hooke’s joint. J Sound
universal joints are replaced by contact pairs, the iner- Vib 2000; 233: 297–310.
tial forces, externally applied forces and contact forces 8. Mazzei AJ and Scott RA. Effects of internal viscous
constitute an equivalent equilibrium force system, damping on the stability of a rotating shaft driven
which provide the relations for determining contact through a universal joint. J Sound Vib 2003; 265:
positions and contact forces. Moreover, a continuous 863–885.
9. DeSmidt HA, Wang KW and Smith EC. Coupled tor-
contact model in ADAMS software is presented for
sion-lateral stability of a shaft-disk system driven
comparison, where the joints are released and collisions
through a universal joint. J Appl Mech 2002; 69:
between the joint components are considered. 261–273.
The kinematic motions simulated by the proposed 10. Bulut G and Parlar Z. Dynamic stability of a shaft
method and ADAMS software are consistent with system connected through a Hooke’s joint. Mech
each other. The contact forces in the double universal Mach Theory 2011; 46: 1689–1695.
joints of the proposed method are slightly larger than 11. Blajer W. On the determination of joint reactions in
those of ADAMS software, but the tendency is con- multibody mechanisms. J Mech Des 2004; 126: 341–350.
sistent. The comparison proves the presented method 12. Wojtyra M. Joint reaction forces in multibody systems
of high efficiency and acceptable precision. In sum- with redundant constraints. Multibody Syst Dyn 2005;
mary, the reaction forces in the rolling bearings of 14: 23–46.
13. Wojtyra M. Joint reactions in rigid body mechanisms
the drive system are indeterminate, whereas those of
with dependent constraints. Mech Mach Theory 2009;
the double universal joints can be obtained by releas- 44: 2265–2278.
ing joint constraints. Different determinacies of the 14. Fra˜ czek J and Wojtyra M. On the unique solvability of
rolling bearings and universal joints may depend on a direct dynamics problem for mechanisms with redun-
that whether the complementary equations are ade- dant constraints and Coulomb friction in joints. Mech
quate and independent for solving the unknowns of Mach Theory 2011; 46: 312–334.
reaction forces or not. There are two requirements of 15. Wojtyra M and Fra˜ czek J. Comparison of selected
determination of joint reaction forces as follows: the methods of handling redundant constraints in multi-
number of complementary equations equals to that of body systems simulations. J Comput Nonlin Dyn 2013;
the unknown variables and the complementary equa- 8: 021007–9.
tions are independent. 16. Wojtyra M and Fra˜ czek J. Solvability of reactions in
rigid multibody systems with redundant nonholonomic
constraints. Multibody Syst Dyn 2013; 30: 153–171.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
17. de Jalón JG and Gutiérrez-López MD. Multibody
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with dynamics with redundant constraints and singular
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of mass matrix: Existence, uniqueness, and determination
this article. of solutions for accelerations and constraint forces.
Multibody Syst Dyn 2013; 30: 311–341.
Funding 18. Flores P, Ambrósio J, Claro JP, et al. Kinematics and
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup- dynamics of multibody systems with imperfect joints:
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this Models and case studies. Berlin: Springer Science &
article: This work was supported by the National Natural Business Media, 2008.
Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11372057). 19. Flores P, Ambrósio J and Claro JP. Dynamic analysis
for planar multibody mechanical systems with lubri-
References cated joints. Multibody Syst Dyn 2004; 12: 47–74.
1. Seherr-Thoss HC, Schmelz F and Aucktor E. Universal 20. Flores P and Ambrósio J. Revolute joints with clear-
joints and driveshafts: Analysis, design, applications. ance in multibody systems. Comput Struct 2004; 82:
Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006. 1359–1369.
2. Fischer IS and Freudenstein F. Internal force and 21. Flores P, Ambrósio J, Claro JCP, et al. Spatial revolute
moment transmission in a Cardan joint with manufactur- joints with clearances for dynamic analysis of multi-
ing tolerances. ASME J Mech Transm Autom Des 1984; body systems. Proc IMechE, Part K: J Multi-body
106: 301–311. Dynamics 2006; 220: 257–271.
3. Chen CK and Freudenstein F. Dynamic analysis of a 22. Flores P, Ambrosio J, Claro JCP, et al. Dynamics of
universal joint with manufacturing tolerances. ASME J multibody systems with spherical clearance joints.
Mech Transm Autom Des 1986; 108: 524–532. J Comput Nonlin Dyn 2006; 1: 240–247.
16 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

23. Flores P and Lankarani HM. Spatial rigid-multibody joints using a new hybrid contact force model. Int J
systems with lubricated spherical clearance joints: Mech Sci 2012; 54: 190–205.
Modeling and simulation. Nonlin Dyn 2010; 60: 99–114. 40. Kang J. Dynamic instability of a spherical joint under
24. Flores P, Ambrósio J, Claro JCP, et al. Translational various contact areas. Proc IMechE, Part C: J
joints with clearance in rigid multibody systems. Mechanical Engineering Science 2015; 229: 54–58.
J Comput Nonlin Dyn 2008; 3: 0110071–10. 41. Xu LX and Yang YH. Modeling a non-ideal rolling ball
25. Flores P and Lankarani HM. Dynamic response bearing joint with localized defects in planar multibody
of multibody systems with multiple clearance joints. systems. Multibody Syst Dyn 2015; 35: 409–426.
J Comput Nonlin Dyn 2012; 7: 031003–13. 42. Erkaya S, Doğan S and Ulus S. Effects of joint clear-
26. Flores P, Ambrósio J, Claro JCP, et al. Influence of the ance on the dynamics of a partly compliant mechanism:
contact-impact force model on the dynamic response of Numerical and experimental studies. Mech Mach
multi-body systems. Proc IMechE, Part K: J Multi- Theory 2015; 88: 125–140.
Body Dynamics 2006; 220: 21–34. 43. Erkaya S, Doğan S and Şefkatlıoğlu E. Analysis of the
27. Koshy CS, Flores P and Lankarani HM. Study of the joint clearance effects on a compliant spatial mechan-
effect of contact force model on the dynamic response ism. Mech Mach Theory 2016; 104: 255–273.
of mechanical systems with dry clearance joints: 44. Geng X, Wang X, Wang L, et al. Non-probabilistic
Computational and experimental approaches. Nonlin time-dependent kinematic reliability assessment for
Dyn 2013; 73: 325–338. function generation mechanisms with joint clearances.
28. Tian Q, Zhang Y, Chen L, et al. Dynamics of spatial Mech Mach Theory 2016; 104: 202–221.
flexible multibody systems with clearance and lubri- 45. Pereira C, Ambrósio J and Ramalho A. Dynamics of
cated spherical joints. Comput Struct 2009; 87: 913–929. chain drives using a generalized revolute clearance joint
29. Tian Q, Zhang Y, Chen L, et al. Simulation of planar formulation. Mech Mach Theory 2015; 92: 64–85.
flexible multibody systems with clearance and lubri- 46. Zhang X, Zhang X and Chen Z. Dynamic analysis of a
cated revolute joints. Nonlin Dyn 2010; 60: 489–511. 3-RRR parallel mechanism with multiple clearance
30. Tian Q, Liu C, Machado M, et al. A new model for dry joints. Mech Mach Theory 2014; 78: 105–115.
and lubricated cylindrical joints with clearance in spa- 47. Pereira C, Ramalho A and Ambrosio J. An enhanced
tial flexible multibody systems. Nonlin Dyn 2011; 64: cylindrical contact force model. Multibody Syst Dyn
25–47. 2015; 35: 277–298.
31. Tian Q, Sun Y, Liu C, et al. Elastohydrodynamic lubri- 48. Alves J, Peixinho N, Silva MTD, et al. A comparative
cated cylindrical joints for rigid-flexible multibody study of the viscoelastic constitutive models for friction-
dynamics. Comput Struct 2013; 114–115: 106–120. less contact interfaces in solids. Mech Mach Theory
32. Tian Q, Xiao Q, Sun Y, et al. Coupling dynamics of a 2015; 85: 172–188.
geared multibody system supported by elastohydrody- 49. Li J, Yan S, Guo F, et al. Effects of damping, friction,
namic lubricated cylindrical joints. Multibody Syst Dyn gravity, and flexibility on the dynamic performance of a
2014; 33: 259–284. deployable mechanism with clearance. Proc IMechE,
33. Muvengei O, Kihiu J and Ikua B. Dynamic analysis of Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 2013; 227:
planar multi-body systems with LuGre friction at dif- 1791–1803.
ferently located revolute clearance joints. Multibody 50. Varedi SM, Daniali HM, Dardel M, et al. Optimal
Syst Dyn 2012; 28: 369–393. dynamic design of a planar slider-crank mechanism
34. Muvengei O, Kihiu J and Ikua B. Numerical study of with a joint clearance. Mech Mach Theory 2015; 86:
parametric effects on the dynamic response of planar 191–200.
multi-body systems with differently located frictionless 51. Yaqubi S, Dardel M and Daniali HM. Nonlinear
revolute clearance joints. Mech Mach Theory 2012; 53: dynamics and control of crank-slider mechanism with
30–49. link flexibility and joint clearance. Proc IMechE,
35. Zhao B, Zhang ZN and Dai XD. Modeling and predic- Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 2016; 230:
tion of wear at revolute clearance joints in flexible mul- 737–755.
tibody systems. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical 52. Qi Z, Xu Y, Luo X, et al. Recursive formulations for
Engineering Science 2014; 228: 317–329. multibody systems with frictional joints based on the
36. Zhao B, Dai XD, Zhang ZN, et al. Numerical study of interaction between bodies. Multibody Syst Dyn 2010;
parametric effects on joint wear in the flexible multi- 24: 133–166.
body systems with different flexibilities and clearance 53. Qi Z, Wang G and Zhang Z. Contact analysis of deep
sizes. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology groove ball bearings in multibody systems. Multibody
2014; 228: 819–835. Syst Dyn 2015; 33: 115–141.
37. Zhao B, Zhang ZN and Dai XD. Modeling and predic- 54. Wang G, Qi Z and Wang J. A differential approach for
tion of wear at revolute clearance joints in flexible mul- modeling revolute clearance joints in planar rigid multi-
tibody systems. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical body systems. Multibody Syst Dyn 2016. DOI: 10.1007/
Engineering Science 2014; 228: 317–329. s11044-016-9552-5.
38. Lu J, Xu Y, Hu C, et al. 5-DOF dynamic model of 55. Müller A. Generic mobility of rigid body mechanisms.
vehicle shimmy system with clearance at universal Mech Mach Theory 2009; 44: 1240–1255.
joint in steering handling mechanism. Shock Vib 2013; 56. Bartkowiak R and Woernle C. Necessary and suffi-
20: 951–961. cient mobility conditions for single-loop overcon-
39. Bai ZF and Zhao Y. Dynamic behaviour analysis of strained nH mechanisms. Mech Mach Theory 2016;
planar mechanical systems with clearance in revolute 103: 65–84.
 Wang and Qi 17

57. Baumgarte J. Stabilization of constraints and integrals forward dynamics of constrained multibody systems.
of motion in dynamical systems. Comput Meth Appl J Comput Nonlin Dyn 2011; 6: 0110191.
Mech Eng 1972; 1: 1–16. 59. Khemili I and Romdhane L. Dynamic analysis of a
58. Flores P, Machado M, Seabra E, et al. A parametric flexible slider-crank mechanism with clearance. Eur J
study on the Baumgarte stabilization method for Mech A/Solids 2008; 27: 882–898.

View publication stats