0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

4 просмотров14 страницexperimental mesh stiffness analysis

Dec 09, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

experimental mesh stiffness analysis

© All Rights Reserved

0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

4 просмотров14 страницexperimental mesh stiffness analysis

© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 14

Measurement

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

by photoelasticity technique

Naresh K. Raghuwanshi, Anand Parey ⇑

Mechanical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The mesh stiffness plays a vital role in gear dynamics. Mostly, analytical expressions are

Received 29 December 2014 being used to calculate the time varying mesh stiffness. In the present work, photoelastic-

Received in revised form 17 April 2015 ity technique has been used for measuring the stress intensity factor (SIF) for cracked gear

Accepted 29 May 2015

tooth. Subsequently SIF has been used to calculate the gear mesh stiffness. The variations in

Available online 10 June 2015

the SIF and mesh stiffness have been quantiﬁed with angular displacements of the gears.

Photoelasticity experiments have been performed for different crack lengths at the tooth

Keywords:

root of the spur gear pair. Experimental results of mesh stiffness variation are compared

Spur gear

Mesh stiffness

with one of the analytical method i.e. potential energy method, which is widely used by

Crack researchers to calculate gear mesh stiffness.

SIF Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Photoelasticity

1. Introduction [3,4]. Dolan and Broghamer [5] used photoelasticity for cal-

culating the stresses in the ﬁllets for different types of gear

Gears are used to transmit power from the driving shaft teeth. Jianfeng et al. [6] proposed a new method to mea-

to the driven shaft. The mesh stiffness of gear pair is an sure the tooth dynamic deformation by using dynamic

important parameter which affects the vibration response speckle photography; they achieved tooth dynamic defor-

of the gear box. Gear mesh stiffness varies during engage- mation for full mesh cycle by automatic image processing.

ment to disengagement of gear pairs. The mesh stiffness Ramesh et al. [7] used the photoelasticity for determining

varies due to the geometry of the gear tooth, change in the mixed mode SIFs. Abersek and Flasker [8] used weight

the load position during mesh cycle and number of tooth function method to derive the SIF and shape factor for a

contact pairs. cracked gear tooth. They used narrow gears (two dimen-

The high stress concentration at the tooth root may ini- sional stress states) for the analysis and compared analyt-

tiate crack at the root which propagates during service. ical and experimental results for an edge crack at the root

When crack is present, the SIF plays an important role to of the gear. Shao et al. [9] discussed the variation in SIF

know about crack propagation and can be measured by with change in crack length, gear module, number of teeth

photoelasticity method, which is widely used for experi- and load for crack at the pitch circle and at the tooth root of

mental stress analysis [1,2]. This method is used specially gear. Daniewicz et al. [10] presented the calculation of

for complex geometries like gears. Photoelasticity is used strain energy release rate and mesh stiffness of cracked

to determine the stress distribution in a body at each point. spur gear tooth.

Digital photoelasticity is used for accurate determination Many researchers have investigated the mesh stiffness

of stresses at every point within the interest domain by analytical modelling and numerical simulations. Yang

and Lin [11] used the potential energy method for calculat-

⇑ Corresponding author. ing the effective mesh stiffness. They included three com-

E-mail address: anandp@iiti.ac.in (A. Parey). ponents: Hertzian energy, bending energy, and axial

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.05.035

0263-2241/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

440 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

compressive energy. Tian [12] reﬁned the above model by four teeth are meshed simultaneously. In case of single

introducing the shear energy. Wu et al. [13] considered tooth contact pair the total effective mesh stiffness consists

Tian [12] method for evaluating the mesh stiffness and of gear 1 and gear 2 tooth mesh stiffness. The instanta-

studied the effect of crack propagation in the tooth root neous single tooth contact pair mesh stiffness for cracked

for different crack levels and quantiﬁed the dynamic pair in the direction of force can be written as [10,13,24],

response of a gear box. Chaari et al. [14] proposed an ana-

1

lytical method to quantify the reduction of gear mesh stiff- kcðspÞ ¼ 1

ð1Þ

þ k1 þ k1c2

ness for two common tooth faults; spalling and breakage. k1 h

Bending, ﬁllet-foundation and contact deﬂection are taken where kc2 is the tooth stiffness of cracked gear 2, the

into account by Chaari et al. [15] to derive an analytical for- subscript sp denotes the single pair, kh is the Hertzian con-

mulation of time varying gear mesh stiffness. Chen and tact stiffness, k1 is the series combination of bending stiff-

Shao [16] proposed an analytical model to investigate the ness (kb1), axial compressive stiffness (ka1) and shear

effect of gear tooth crack on the gear mesh stiffness for stiffness (ks1) of uncracked gear 1 and can be calculated

tooth crack propagations along tooth width and crack as [12,13,24],

depth. Chen and Shao [17] proposed a model that estab-

lishes the relationship between the gear tooth errors and 1

k1 ¼ 1

ð2Þ

the total mesh stiffness. Pandya and Parey [18] simulated kb1

þ k1a1 þ k1s1

the crack propagation in spur gear tooth for different gear

The instantaneous single pair mesh stiffness for

parameters like pressure angle, ﬁllet radius and backup

uncracked pair in the direction of force can be written as

ratio and its inﬂuence on mesh stiffness. Pandya and

[12,13],

Parey [19] computed the total time varying mesh stiffness

for different contact ratios and compared the change in the 1

ktðspÞ ¼ ð3Þ

total effective gear mesh stiffness. Liang et al. [20] used 1

þ k1 þ k12

k1 h

potential energy method to analytically evaluate the mesh

stiffness of a planetary gear set. They used modiﬁed can- where k2 is the series combination of bending stiffness

tilever beam model and derived the analytical equations (kb2), axial compressive stiffness (ka2) and shear stiffness

of the bending, shear and axial compressive stiffness. (ks2) of uncracked gear 2 and can be calculated as [12,13],

Zhou et al. [21] developed a modiﬁed mathematical model 1

for simulating gear crack with linear growth from root of a k2 ¼ 1

ð4Þ

kb2

þ k1a2 þ k1s2

pinion and improved potential energy method for calculat-

ing mesh stiffness with considering gear body deforma- The total effective mesh stiffness for double pair kt(dp) is

tion. Zheng et al. [22] analysed the inﬂuence of friction a parallel combination of instantaneous single pairs mesh

and variations of damping ratio on dynamic transmission stiffness in the direction of force that can be written as

error. Their results show that the anti-backlash gear can [12,13],

increase the composite mesh stiffness as compared with

ktðdpÞ ¼ ktðspÞ þ kcðspÞ ð5Þ

the mesh stiffness of the normal gear pair. Mohammed

et al. [23] presented a new method for calculating the where kt(sp) and kc(sp) are the total effective mesh stiffness

mesh stiffness of cracked tooth root for the purpose of of single pair for healthy gear pair and cracked gear pair

vibration based fault analysis. respectively. The subscript dp denotes the double pair.

From the above literature it has been found that only

analytical and numerical methods are available to calcu- 2.1. Tooth stiffness of cracked gear

late the mesh stiffness. However, Pandya and Parey [24]

proposed the experimental method of mesh stiffness cal- Considering a cracked spur gear tooth of crack length a,

culation by photoelasticity. They presented the variation face width B and applied load per unit face width W. The

in mesh stiffness at three points of single tooth contact detailed derivation of tooth stiffness of cracked pinion is

pair. Their study does not indicate the mesh stiffness vari- given in [10,24] as,

ation from engagement to disengagement of the gear

tooth. In the present study, the work of Pandya and Parey WB

kc2 ¼ ð6Þ

[24] has been extended to full mesh cycle. Moreover, a d

new method to calculate the SIF has been proposed in

where W = F/B and F is the applied load on normal to the

the present study which simpliﬁes the measurement of

tooth proﬁle and d is the deﬂection of gear tooth in the

SIF without using shape factor for gear tooth proﬁle.

direction of force F. This deﬂection d is derived on the basis

of strain energy release rate and it includes the contribu-

tion of all the deformations i.e. bending deformation, axial

2. Mesh stiffness calculation of cracked spur gear pair

compressive deformation and shear deformation [24].

The SIF is assumed to be linear function of applied force

In the present study, single tooth contact pairs and dou-

F. The expression of displacement d is given as [10,24],

ble tooth contact pairs of gear system are investigated. In

Z a

single pair, two teeth are meshed and share equal force. 2B

In case of double pair, two pairs share the total force and d¼ K 2I þ K 2II da ð7Þ

EF 0

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 441

where E is the modulus of elasticity of gear material. KI and from the tooth root is x and the central line of the tooth.

KII are the Mode-I SIF and Mode-II SIF respectively. The More detail about hx and a1 calculation are given in [12,13].

Mode-I SIF only has been considered in the present study,

the displacement expression can be written as [24], 2.3. Calculation of SIF by photoelasticity

Z a

2B

d¼ ðK 2I Þda ð8Þ The SIF is a constant parameter which can be used to

EF 0

calculate the stress components near the crack tip. The

SIF depends on the applied stress, type of cracks and geom-

2.2. Stiffness of uncracked gear etry of the specimen. The general expression of SIF is given

as [24–26],

In the present study, the stiffness of uncracked gear tooth pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

has been calculated by considering all the components of K I ¼ r paY ð16Þ

total tooth stiffness as bending stiffness (kb), axial compres- where KI, r, a and Y are the Mode-I SIF, applied stress, crack

sive stiffness (ka), shear stiffness (ks) and Hertzian contact length and shape factor. The shape factor Y depends on

stiffness (kh). Stiffness due to ﬁllet foundation is not consid- geometry of the specimen and crack length. The shape fac-

ered for simplicity. These stiffness components are calcu- tor plays an important role to evaluate the SIF especially

lated based on potential energy method [12,13,24], for gear tooth proﬁle because shape factor is changed when

The Hertzian contact stiffness kh remains constant dur- force moves on the tooth proﬁle and also by load sharing

ing the complete mesh cycle [12,13,24] and can be written ratio as in double tooth contact pair. Pandya and Parey

as, [24] used Eq. (16) to evaluate KI, they calculated r by pho-

EBp toelasticity experiment and shape factor was evaluated

kh ¼ ð9Þ analytically [8,24]. Analytical expression of shape factor

4ð1 t2 Þ

is laborious and time consuming.

where E, B and t are the modulus of elasticity, tooth face In the present work, an alternative method of SIF calcu-

width and Poisson’s ratio respectively. lation is used to extract the SIF from the modiﬁed

The bending, axial compressive and shear stiffness can Westergaard’s equations by using photoelasticity experi-

be calculated by these expressions as given in [12,13,24], ment. The advantage of this method is that there is no need

F2 F2 F2 to calculate the shape factor Y for a complicated geometry

kb ¼ ; ka ¼ ; ks ¼ ð10Þ like gear tooth proﬁle. These modiﬁed Westergaard’s equa-

2U b 2U a 2U s

tions can be employed to edge crack, centre crack and

where F is the contacting normal force on the tooth proﬁle ﬁnite body for Mode-I loading. These equations near the

and Ub, Ua and Us are the bending, axial compressive and crack tip can be written as [7],

shear potential energies respectively. These potential ener- 8 9 8 9 8 9

gies can be expressed as given in [12,13,24], < rx >

> = KI h

>

< 1 sin 2h sin 3h

2 >

= >

< rox >

=

Z ry ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

ﬃ cos 1 þ sin 2h sin 3h

2

þ 0

d 2 >

: > 2pr 2> >

; > >

Ub ¼

½F b ðd xÞ F a h

dx ð11Þ sxy ; :

sin 2h cos 3h

2

:

0

;

0 2EIx

ð17Þ

Z d

F 2a where rx, ry and sxy are the stress in x direction, stress in y

Ua ¼ dx ð12Þ

0 2EAx direction and shear stress respectively at a point r and h

near the crack tip as shown in Fig. 1. KI is the Mode-I SIF

Z d

1:2F 2b and rox is a constant stress term which is added to the rx

Us ¼ dx ð13Þ component in the classical Westergaard’s equations. Eq.

0 2GAx

where x is the distance of the section from the tooth root, Ix

is the area moment of inertia of the section at a distance x,

d is the distance between the contact point and the tooth

root, h is the distance between the contact point and the

central line of the tooth, Ax is the section area at a distance

x and G is the shear modulus.

The Fb and Fa can be calculated by resolving the force F

as [12,13,24],

F b ¼ F cos a1 and F a ¼ F sin a1 ð14Þ

where a1 is the angular variable [12].

The Ix and Ax can be calculated as [12,13],

1 3

Ix ¼ ð2hx Þ B; Ax ¼ 2hx B ð15Þ

2

where hx is the distance between the point on the tooth

curve corresponding to the section where the distance Fig. 1. Stress components near the crack tip.

442 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

(17) can be used for calculating KI using photoelasticity [7]. to the cross section of the beam at the root of the gear

For high accuracy the data collection should be collected tooth where the crack is generated. So the biaxiality ratio

near to the crack tip and crack should not be reached up is zero in the study and rox becomes equal to applied stress

to boundary [7]. This method can also be applied for long r. The r can be evaluated by photoelasticity method. The

cracks such as a/w = 0.9 where w is the width of plate, stress optic law can be written as [1]

but the zone of data collection should be very small as

Nfr

r/a < 0.03 and the angle of data collection from the crack r1 r2 ¼ ð19Þ

h

axis should be in the range of 73° < h < 139° [7]. In the pre-

sent study this method is applied on short cracks as where r1 and r2 are the maximum and minimum principle

a/w < 0.217 where w is the width of the tooth at root in stresses respectively. N is the isochromatic fringe orders, fr

the present study and the zone of data collection was car- is the material fringe constant and h is the model thick-

ried out within r/a < 0.412 at h = 90°, so the Eq. (17) can be ness. Now r2 is zero in present case due to unidirectional

applied to the problem considered in this study with sufﬁ- applied stress. So the constant stress term rox becomes

cient accuracy. equal to r1 or r. Therefore the rox can be calculated by

The rox can be expressed in terms of biaxiality ratio k as photoelasticity method as,

[7] Nfr

rox ¼ ð20Þ

rox ¼ ð1 kÞr ð18Þ h

In Eq. (20) the isochromatic fringe order N is counted at

where k is the ratio of two applied principal stresses in x

the tooth root when crack is absent.

and y directions and r is the applied principal stress in y

The principal stresses at a point r and h from the crack

direction. If the ratio becomes unity, the modiﬁed

tip as shown Fig. 1 can be written as,

Westergaard’s equations become classical Westergaard’s

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

equations [7]. rx þ ry r r 2

x y

In the present study, the gear tooth is assumed as a can- r1 ¼ þ þ s2xy ð21Þ

2 2

tilever beam and the applied stress acting in unidirectional

Fig. 2. Flow chart of mesh stiffness calculation methodology for cracked gear by photoelasticity technique.

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 443

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

rx þ ry r r 2 The whole methodology used for mesh stiffness calcula-

x y

r2 ¼ þ s2xy ð22Þ tion in the present study can be explained by a ﬂow chart

2 2

as shown in Fig. 2.

where r1 and r2 are the maximum and minimum principal

stresses respectively.

The difference between two principal stresses from (21) 3. Experimental studies

and (22) can be written as,

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 3.1. Photoelastic model

r r 2

x y

r1 r2 ¼2 þ s2xy ð23Þ

2 Polycarbonate birefringent material was used for mak-

ing the specimen of spur gears of standard involute proﬁle.

From (19) and (23) the expression can be written as,

Advanced CNC milling machine was used for obtaining

2

Nfr rx ry 2 2 high accuracy. In this work the same material has been

¼ þ sxy ð24Þ

2h 2 used as given in [24]. Material fringe constant (fr) of this

material is 4.95 N/mm/fringe. The main parameters of

With the help of Eqs. (17) and (24), KI can be computed. gears are given in Table 1. Fig. 3 shows the specimens used

for experimental work.

Table 1

Main parameters of gears.

3.2. Description of photoelasticity setup and loading

Parameters Gear 1 and gear 2 arrangement

No of teeth 13

Diametral pitch 1.587/in. The photoelastic setup is shown in Fig. 4. A plane polar-

Module 16 mm

iscope is employed for this experiment. A plane polar-

Pressure angle 20°

Face width 6 mm iscope is constructed by four elements; light source,

Contact ratio 1.44 polarizer, model and analyzer. White light source is used

Young’s modulus 200 GPa as a light source and a digital camera is used for capturing

Poisson’s ratio 0.3 the images of isochromatic fringes. For loading and mount-

ing of gears, special type of ﬁxtures is designed. For apply-

ing the torque on gear 1 in anticlockwise direction, a

300 mm long lever is attached to the gear 1. The load can

be hanged at the end of this lever. For measuring the angu-

lar displacement of gear 2, a big protector is attached on

the ﬁxtures having least count of 0.5°. The gear 1 is free

to rotate on its axle and gear 2 is also free to rotate on

its axle but can be ﬁxed at any angle of rotation with the

help of nuts and bolts. For this, a D-shape slot is provided

to ﬁx the gear 2 at different angular positions.

length L. The applied torque T on the gear 1 in anticlock-

Fig. 3. Gear specimens used for testing. wise direction can be calculated as,

Fig. 4. Photoelastic setup (a) loading and ﬁxing arrangements of gears on photoelastic setup. (b) Photoelastic unit ready for observations.

444 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

T ¼PL ð25Þ

Torque T on the gear 1 can also be expressed as,

T ¼ F t R1 ð26Þ

pitch circle and R1 is the pitch circle radius of gear 1.

From (25) and (26) Ft can be calculated.

The normal force F on the tooth having involute proﬁle

can be calculated as,

Ft

F¼ ð27Þ

cos u

Fig. 5. Resolution of force on gear tooth. shown in Fig. 5.

In the present study, the values of known parameters

are as following: P = 66 N, L = 300 mm, R1 = 104 mm and

pressure angle u = 20°. Finally, the normal force F on the

tooth proﬁle is calculated as 202.6 N. In single tooth con-

tact the load sharing is taken as the normal force F but in

case of double tooth contact the load sharing factor is

chanced from engagement to highest point of single tooth

contact (HPSTC) 0.2F to 0.7F and from lowest point of sin-

gle tooth contact (LPSTC) to disengagement as 0.7F to 0.2F

for gear 2 as shown in Fig. 6 [27].

These images have been captured by a digital camera.

After that images have been processed in greyscale for

counting the fringe orders. For calculating the applied

Fig. 6. Load-sharing factor from engagement to disengagement for gear 2. stress at the tooth root (without crack) isochromatic fringe

Fig. 7. Isochromatic fringe patterns of healthy gears for double tooth contact pairs in images (a–f) at angular displacement b = 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°, 12°

respectively.

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 445

patterns are captured at different angular displacement as engagement to highest single tooth contact point (HSTCP),

shown in Figs. 7–9. The starting point of engagement is (b = 0–12°). Similarly, Fig. 8 shows the fringes during single

considered at the end of the tooth tip of gear 2. Fig. 7 shows tooth contact pair, (b = 13–25°) and Fig. 9 shows the

isochromatic fringes during double tooth contact pair from fringes during double tooth contact pair from lowest single

Fig. 8. Isochromatic fringe patterns of healthy gears for single tooth contact pair in images (a–f) at angular displacement b = 13°, 15°, 17.5°, 20°, 22.5°, 25°

respectively.

Fig. 9. Isochromatic fringe patterns healthy gears for double tooth contact pair in images (a–f) at angular displacement b = 26°, 28.5°, 31°, 33.5°, 36°, 39°

respectively for double tooth pair contact.

446 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

Fig. 10. Isochromatic fringe patterns near the crack tip of cracked gear tooth (a = 2 mm) in images (a–r) at angular displacement b = 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°,

12°, 13°, 15°, 17.5°, 20°, 22.5°, 25°, 26°, 28.5°, 31°, 33.5°, 36°, 39° respectively.

tooth contact point (LSTCP) to disengagement (b = 26–39°). Now, cracks are introduced at the tooth root of the gear

Observed fringe orders N at the tooth root for healthy gear 2 and the isochromatic fringes near the crack tip were cap-

tooth are tabulated with angular displacement of gears in tured from engagement to disengagement. Observed fringe

Table 2. patterns for 2 mm crack are shown in Fig. 10 at different

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 447

Fig. 11. Isochromatic fringe patterns near the crack tip of cracked gear tooth (a = 3 mm) in images (a–r) at angular displacement b = 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°,

12°, 13°, 15°, 17.5°, 20°, 22.5°, 25°, 26°, 28.5°, 31°, 33.5°, 36°, 39° respectively.

angular displacement. Obtained fringe patterns are used should be negative. Similarly, Figs. 11–13 show the fringe

for counting the fringe orders N near the crack tip at r patterns for 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm crack lengths during

and h coordinate. For simplicity, all the fringe orders are full mesh cycle, eighteen observations were taken for each

counted at h = 90°. After digital image processing these crack during engagement to disengagement. With the help

data are tabulated in Table 3. In isochromatic patterns of these fringe patterns SIFs are computed from engage-

the loops are found backward tilted that shows the rox ment to disengagement.

448 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

Fig. 12. Isochromatic fringe patterns near the crack tip of cracked gear tooth (a = 4 mm)in images (a–r) at angular displacement b = 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°, 12°,

13°, 15°, 17.5°, 20°, 22.5°, 25°, 26°, 28.5°, 31°, 33.5°, 36°, 39° respectively.

force was calculated from (8). The deﬂections of cracked

The photoelasticity experiment was conducted to calcu- gear tooth for full mesh cycle are shown in Table 4. The

late applied stress and Mode-I SIF. With the help of these stiffness of cracked gear tooth was calculated from (6) by

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 449

Fig. 13. Isochromatic fringe patterns near the crack tip of cracked gear tooth (a = 5 mm) in images (a–r) at angular displacement b = 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°,

12°, 13°, 15°, 17.5°, 20°, 22.5°, 25°, 26°, 28.5°, 31°, 33.5°, 36°, 39° respectively.

Table 2

Isochromatic fringe orders (N) at tooth root for healthy gear tooth.

b 0° 2.5° 5° 7.5° 10° 12° 13° 15° 17.5° 20° 22.5° 25° 26° 28.5° 31° 33.5° 36° 39°

N 6 5 5 4 4 3 7 7 7 6 6 6 3 3 4 4 5 5

450 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

Table 3

Photoelasticity experimental data near the crack tip.

b (°) Crack

2 mm 3 mm 4 mm 5 mm

N r (mm) h (°) N r (mm) h (°) N r (mm) h (°) N r (mm) h (°)

Double tooth contact 0 6 0.90 90 7 0.85 90 7 0.90 90 7 1.03 90

2.5 6 0.83 90 7 0.80 90 7 0.87 90 7 0.98 90

5 5 0.90 90 6 0.82 90 6 0.93 90 6 1.10 90

7.5 5 0.89 90 5 0.92 90 5 0.98 90 6 0.88 90

10 4 0.98 90 5 0.86 90 5 0.94 90 6 0.81 90

12 4 0.97 90 5 0.81 90 5 0.90 90 5 1.03 90

Single tooth contact 13 9 0.84 90 9 0.94 90 10 0.91 90 10 1.01 90

15 8 0.98 90 9 0.86 90 9 1.10 90 10 0.92 90

17.5 8 0.94 90 9 0.75 90 9 1.03 90 10 0.88 90

20 8 0.84 90 8 0.92 90 9 0.98 90 10 0.99 90

22.5 8 0.91 90 8 0.95 90 8 1.15 90 10 0.77 90

25 8 0.95 90 8 0.99 90 8 1.10 90 10 0.79 90

Double tooth contact 26 4 0.75 90 5 0.86 90 5 0.90 90 5 0.96 90

28.5 4 0.89 90 5 0.89 90 5 0.92 90 5 0.96 90

31 5 0.60 90 5 0.93 90 5 0.96 90 6 0.72 90

33.5 5 0.65 90 5 1.02 90 5 1.02 90 6 0.82 90

36 5 0.84 90 6 0.77 90 6 0.79 90 6 0.91 90

39 5 0.91 90 6 0.87 90 6 0.92 90 6 1.03 90

Deﬂections of cracked gear tooth at different angular displacements (b). tooth was calculated by potential energy method as

b (in degrees) Deﬂections for different crack lengths (mm) described in Section 2.2. After that, instantaneous mesh

a = 2 mm a = 3 mm a = 4 mm a = 5 mm

stiffness was evaluated for single tooth contact pair and

double tooth contact pair from (1) and (5) respectively.

0 0.00082 0.00155 0.00219 0.00313

For crack length a = 1 mm, it was difﬁcult to count the

2.5 0.00049 0.00092 0.00134 0.00189

5 0.00028 0.00054 0.00082 0.00122 fringe orders near the crack tip for keeping the r/a ratio

7.5 0.00021 0.00033 0.00048 0.00073 small. Therefore, experiment was performed on crack

10 0.00013 0.00026 0.00038 0.00056 lengths starting from 2 mm and up to 5 mm by 1 mm

12 0.00011 0.00020 0.00028 0.00041

increment. Experimentally calculated Mode-I SIF for differ-

13 0.00033 0.00055 0.00085 0.00118

15 0.00031 0.00051 0.00086 0.00108

ent crack lengths at 18 points during mesh cycle are shown

17.5 0.00030 0.00044 0.00081 0.00103 in Fig. 14. The values of SIF in Fig. 14 are given in

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

20 0.00026 0.00042 0.00073 0.00092 MPa mm. It has been observed that the values of SIFs

22.5 0.00028 0.00044 0.00069 0.00086

for double tooth contact pair are less as compared with sin-

25 0.00029 0.00046 0.00064 0.00088

26 0.00008 0.00020 0.00028 0.00038

gle tooth contact pair. The highest SIF for 2 mm crack has

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

28.5 0.00011 0.00024 0.00035 0.00045 been observed around 24 MPa mm for single tooth con-

31 0.00014 0.00034 0.00046 0.00060

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

tact pair and 16:5 MPa mm for double tooth contact pairs

33.5 0.00019 0.00044 0.00062 0.00085

as shown in Fig. 14. When the crack length is increased the

36 0.00035 0.00068 0.00093 0.00135

39 0.00057 0.00116 0.00163 0.00230 SIF also increased. Higher SIF during b = 13–25°, indicates

that the stresses are higher for single tooth contact pair.

Fig. 14. Variation in Mode-I SIF for full mesh cycle by photoelasticity method.

N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452 451

Spur gear specimens without tooth proﬁle modiﬁcation pairs has been observed higher than single tooth contact

have been tested with accuracy and the tooth tip contact pair in case of photoelasticity method. When crack length

effect has been observed at the time of engagement and is increased the mesh stiffness reduction has been

disengagement. The tooth tip contact increases the stresses observed higher by photoelasticity method. Trend of mesh

at the engagement and disengagement positions; hence stiffness variation during single tooth contact pair and

the SIF is also higher at these points. double tooth contact pairs has been found a good match

The deﬂections are given in millimetres (mm) in Table 4 for higher crack lengths. For 2 mm crack the mesh stiffness

for cracked tooth which is in contact during meshing for during single tooth contact pair is decreasing and for

different crack lengths i.e. 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm. longer cracks (4 mm and 5 mm) it is increasing from

From Table 4, it is clear that the deﬂections are increasing HPSTC to LPSTC in both the methods as shown in Fig. 15.

with the increase in crack lengths. The variation in deﬂec- It has been observed that while comparing the experi-

tion of cracked gear tooth with angular displacement of mental results with Wu et al. [13] results, the mean mesh

gears have been observed as deﬂection of cracked gear stiffness of experiments is lower than analytical values. As

tooth is higher during single tooth contact pair than double the crack length increases percentage difference between

tooth contact pairs. It can be seen that the deﬂections is experimental values and analytical values is increasing.

higher during single tooth contact pair due to higher load Table 5 shows the percentage difference in mean mesh

because of load sharing ratio equal to one. At the time of stiffness between experimental and analytical values. The

engagement and disengagement the deﬂections are higher mean mesh stiffness for 2 mm crack has been observed

due to tooth tip contact which increases the contact stres- by photoelasticity experiment as 4.991 105 N/mm

ses as well as stress concentrations at the crack tip. These whereas by Wu et al. [13] the mean mesh stiffness is

deﬂections were used to calculate the stiffness of the obtained as 5.886 105 N/mm. The percentage difference

cracked tooth. in mean mesh stiffness between two methods is

Mesh stiffness has been calculated by photoelasticity 15.21%. Similarly for 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm cracks the

method and potential energy method of Wu et al. [13]. percentage differences are tabulated in Table 5.

The comparative study of mesh stiffness by two methods

is shown in Fig. 15. This study shows the trend of mesh Table 5

stiffness variation by two methods and found almost same Comparison of mean mesh stiffness in N/mm (105).

but lower values of mesh stiffness has been observed by

Methods 2 mm 3 mm 4 mm 5 mm

photoelasticity experiment than potential energy method crack crack crack crack

(Wu et al. [13]). It has been observed that the difference

Wu et al. [13] 5.886 5.850 5.810 5.767

in mesh stiffness values between two methods is small

Photoelasticity 4.991 4.233 3.761 3.463

for 2 mm crack and it is higher when crack is increased. Percentage difference 15.21% 27.63% 35.26% 39.94%

The variation in mesh stiffness during double tooth contact

Fig. 15. Mesh stiffness comparison by photoelasticity experiment and Wu et al. [13] for different crack lengths.

452 N.K. Raghuwanshi, A. Parey / Measurement 73 (2015) 439–452

characteristics and SIF of gears, Eng. Fail. Anal. 32 (2013) 63–80.

[10] S.R. Daniewicz, J.A. Collins, D.R. Houser, The stress intensity factor

Photoelasticity technique has been used to measure the and the stiffness for a cracked spur gear tooth, J. Mech. Des. 116

SIF for different crack lengths. Modiﬁed Westergaard’s (1994) 697–700.

[11] D.C.H. Yang, J.Y. Lin, Hertzian damping, tooth friction and bending

equations were used to calculate the SIF experimentally.

elasticity in gear impact dynamics, J. Mech., Transm., Automat. Des.

The mesh stiffness values were computed for single tooth 109 (2) (1987) 189–196.

contact pair as well as double tooth contact pairs for full [12] X.H. Tian, Dynamic simulation for system response of gearbox

including localized gear faults, Master’s Thesis, University of Alberta,

mesh cycle. The results obtained by photoelasticity exper-

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 2004.

iments have been compared with analytical method. The [13] S. Wu, M.J. Zuo, A. Parey, Simulation of spur gear dynamics and

experimental values of mesh stiffness have shown good estimation of fault growth, J. Sound Vib. 317 (3–5) (2008) 608–624.

trend of mesh stiffness variation with established Wu’s [14] F. Chaari, W. Baccar, M.S. Abbes, M. Haddar, Effect of spalling or

tooth breakage on gearmesh stiffness and dynamic response of a

analytical method from engagement to disengagement one-stage spur gear transmission, Eur. J. Mech.-A/Solids 27 (4)

but the difference in the magnitude of mesh stiffness (2008) 691–705.

between two methods has been found large. Wu’s model [15] F. Chaari, T. Fakhfakh, M. Haddar, Analytical modelling of spur gear

tooth crack and inﬂuence on gear mesh stiffness, Eur. J. Mech.-A/

does not include the effect of rim deformation, involute Solids 28 (2009) 461–468.

proﬁle error, etc. In our photoelasticity experiment the [16] Z. Chen, Y. Shao, Dynamic simulation of spur gear with tooth root

photoelasticity setup frame is considered as a rigid body. crack propagating along tooth width and crack depth, Eng. Fail. Anal.

18 (8) (2011) 2149–2164.

However, the efﬁciency of photoelasticity experiment to [17] Z. Chen, Y. Shao, Mesh stiffness calculation of a spur gear pair with

calculate the mesh stiffness is quite high. This method tooth proﬁle modiﬁcation and tooth root crack, Mech. Mach. Theory

includes rim deformation, bending deformation, axial 62 (2013) 63–74.

[18] Y. Pandya, A. Parey, Simulation of spur gear tooth for different gear

deformation, shear deformation, etc. Further, the efﬁciency parameters and its inﬂuence on mesh stiffness, Eng. Fail. Anal. 30

can also be improved with the modiﬁcation in the photoe- (2013) 124–137.

lasticity setup by taking rigid structure and by using digital [19] Y. Pandya, A. Parey, Failure path based modiﬁed gear mesh stiffness

for spur gear pair with tooth root crack, Eng. Fail. Anal. 27 (2013)

photoelasticity. The photoelasticity technique can be used

286–296.

as an alternate to analytical method for calculation of mesh [20] X. Liang, M.J. Zuo, M. Pandey, Analytically evaluating the inﬂuence of

stiffness of cracked gears. In future, this work will be crack on the mesh stiffness of a planetary gear set, Mech. Mach.

extended for planetary gears. Theory 76 (2014) 20–38.

[21] X. Zhou, Y. Shao, Y. Lei, M. Zuo, Time-varying meshing stiffness

calculation and vibration analysis for a 16 degree of freedom

References dynamic model with linear crack growth in a pinion, J. Vib. Acoust.

134 (2012). 011011-1-11.

[1] J.W. Dally, W.F. Riley, Experimental Stress Analysis, McGraw-Hill, [22] Z. Yang, J.Z. Shang, Z.R. Luo, Effect analysis of friction and damping

New York, 1978. on anti-backlash gear based on dynamics model with time-varying

[2] J.F. Doyle, J.W. Phillips, Manual on Experimental Stress Analysis, ﬁfth mesh stiffness, J. Cent. South Univ. 20 (2013) 3461–3470.

ed., Society for Experimental Mechanics, 1989. [23] O.D. Mohammed, M. Rantatalo, J.O. Aidanpaa, Improving mesh

[3] E.A. Patterson, Digital photoelasticity: principles, practice and stiffness calculation of cracked gears for purpose of vibration-based

potential, Strain 38 (2002) 27–39. fault analysis, Eng. Fail. Anal. 34 (2013) 235–251.

[4] I.A. Wang, P. Wang, Complete fringe order determination in digital [24] Y. Pandya, A. Parey, Experimental investigation of spur gear tooth

photoelasticity using fringe combination matching, Strain 39 (2003) mesh stiffness in the presence of crack using photoelasticity

121–130. technique, Eng. Fail. Anal. 34 (2013) 488–500.

[5] T.J. Dolan, E.L. Broghamer, A photoelasticity study of stresses in gear [25] K. Prashant, Elements of Fracture Mechanics, Tata McGraw Hill, New

tooth ﬁllets, University of Illinois, Bulletin No. 335, vol. 31, 1942. Delhi, 2009.

[6] L. Jianfeng, A. Xing, T. Zhiren, Measurement of gear tooth dynamic [26] T.L. Anderson, Fracture Mechanics, third ed., Taylor & Francis, Boca

deformation using dynamic speckle photography, Chin. Sci. Bull. 43 Raton, 2005.

(6) (1998) 514–518. [27] G.K. Sfantos, V.A. Spitas, T.N. Costopoulos, G.A. Papadopoulos, Load

[7] K. Ramesh, S. Gupta, A.A. Kelkar, Evaluation of stress ﬁeld parameter sharing of spur gears in mesh an analytical and experimental study,

in fracture mechanics by photoelasticity – revisited, Eng. Fract. Technical Report, National Tech. Univ. Athens, No. TR-SM-0303,

Mech. 56 (1) (1997) 25–45. March 2003.

[8] B. Abersek, J. Flasker, Stress intensity factor for cracked gear tooth,

Theoret. Appl. Fract. Mech. 20 (1994) 99–104.