help creation tooth profile

[meccanicamg]

that he struggles with the gears....but only because everyone scores the things that he wants in place to follow the norm that from a life indicates what to write about the drawings.
I think we are....if spinner confirms us... more fine the numbers approach better with x = - 0.253.

 

[meccanicamg]

I already went off the road, in the program I find thickness of tooth 39.27, I also measured the tooth on solidworks, I inserted all the right parameters.

solidworks can't give it to you because if you use toolboxes you can't do it doesn't have profile correction and the tooth is simplified. You didn't draw the evolved point.
Try to do it with the online computer I told you it does the dxf... and you tell us.

 

[spinner3000]

solidworks can't give it to you because if you use toolboxes you can't do it doesn't have profile correction and the tooth is simplified. You didn't draw the evolved point.
Try to do it with the online computer I told you it does the dxf... and you tell us.

I used kisssoft to run the calculation, I try with the online one as you say

 

[meccanicamg]

I used kisssoft to run the calculation, I try with the online one as you say

but kisssoft can't go wrong.... I used it for years and never beaten.

 

[spinner3000]

but kisssoft can't go wrong.... I used it for years and never beaten.

I think it's very strange.
My mistake.

first of all when I make the calculation of the first formula you have indicated to me and it turns out the thickness of the tooth 43.79 so there is something that does not fit,
What calculation did you use?

 

[meccanicamg]

I think it's very strange.
My mistake.

first of all when I make the calculation of the first formula you have indicated to me and it turns out the thickness of the tooth 43.79 so there is something that does not fit,
What calculation did you use?

I used the formulas of some post first... those with numerical examples.
are taken by khk gear....which I have indicated many times in various gearboxes.

 

[spinner3000]

I used the formulas of some post first... those with numerical examples.
are taken by khk gear....which I have indicated many times in various gearboxes.

the cases are two or I have the broken calculator or I don't understand where to go ahahahahah

 

[PIETRO2002]

I think it's very strange.
My mistake.

first of all when I make the calculation of the first formula you have indicated to me and it turns out the thickness of the tooth 43.79 so there is something that does not fit,
What calculation did you use?

if you check the file I sent you comes to me 34.42 ... up to 18.7

 

[meccanicamg]

the cases are two or I have the broken calculator or I don't understand where to go ahahahahahView attachment 57786

I attach the formulas for universal helical.

 

[meccanicamg]

is not the broken calculator... .
the friendly parameters are those indicated below in orange.then you have to measure like this:

 

[meccanicamg]

I think it's very strange.
My mistake.

first of all when I make the calculation of the first formula you have indicated to me and it turns out the thickness of the tooth 43.79 so there is something that does not fit,
What calculation did you use?

x= - 0,253 ....less no more

 

[spinner3000]

I got there with the calculations. I was wrong with the application of the formula.
Now it's all clear to me, I didn't realize that the height of the tooth 18.7 was the point where I had to take the measure.
Finally.
that was what I wanted to understand to verify the correctness of the tooth! !

I exported with kisssoft the 3d with the dentatura without game and it turns out what you have linked me.

 

[spinner3000]

x= - 0,253 ....less no more

question.

How did you find that it is 0.25 profile correction?

 

[PIETRO2002]

question.

How did you find that it is 0.25 profile correction?

Consider that if you do the piece with that thickness (34.69 ) is the theoretical share without play, your client gave you 33.87!

 

[PIETRO2002]

thanks to you I have verified the goodness of the data obtained from inventor and those obtained from the program of the khk gears

 

[spinner3000]

Consider that if you do the piece with that thickness (34.69 ) is the theoretical share without play, your client gave you 33.87!

in fact browsing the various tolerances that gives me the program I approach the quota indicated in the drawing, the problem is that having gost legislation I do not find the one that corresponds with iso 1328
I'll pass them all until I find the one that gets closer to the required size

 

[spinner3000]

thanks to you I have verified the goodness of the data obtained from inventor and those obtained from the program of the khk gears

It was what I needed, because I always wondered if there was ever a way of verification... Now a world has opened to me.

 

[PIETRO2002]

in fact browsing the various tolerances that gives me the program I approach the quota indicated in the drawing, the problem is that having gost legislation I do not find the one that corresponds with iso 1328
I'll pass them all until I find the one that gets closer to the required size

I think you don't have to be crazy. You do the tooth with the slack that required you. .

 

[spinner3000]

I think you don't have to be crazy. You do the tooth with the slack that required you. .

you're right, but not knowing how to draw a tooth with an evolving profile, it came easier to extract the profile from a program, at least I know it's right

 

[PIETRO2002]

But what doesn't come back is the correction of mechanicsmg... I think there's no way to play the hypothetical creator doesn't sink any more than the theorist, but in the finishing pass he shifts, that he moves axially so as to remove on the hook. .