• This forum is the machine-generated translation of www.cad3d.it/forum1 - the Italian design community. Several terms are not translated correctly.

reduced project.

  • Thread starter Thread starter ale_.93
  • Start date Start date

ale_.93

Guest
Hello, everyone!
I will soon have to start a project (didactic) of a speed reducer, dimensionalizing it from scratch.
Until today I used solidworks to design any mechanical component. I wanted to ask you what you think if I started using caia or inventor for this particular application.
I also wanted to know what you think of software like kisssoft & ansys for the verification and/or simulation part.

Thank you in advance who will have the patience to answer me.

alessandro
 
kisssoft is today the most universally used program also for design, then to draw a program worth the other
 
the modelers are all identical. inventor has the form to make gears as a rule. solidworks handles modeling well. Catia does a lot of stuff.
for analysis in solidworks inventor and catia there is in everything if you have full license. ansys specialises fem.
kisssoft is the best standard for all 3d model size and output. this was born for nasa and racing sectors as formula 1 and similar. for a few years is for the mechanics of the world.
 
Hello, everyone!
someone who wants to control this relationship for choosing the band width (b) of a helical teeth wheel?
I think there's something wrong with me. that 2 does not convince me, because it forces me to choose b/mn>19 (with angle of propeller 20°).Senza titolo.webp
 
First, if you write about what you're talking about and where it rains the formula would be better, because usually formulas have a history and an explanation and a validity for more than 50 years.

the first formula is that of lewis for the determination of the module according to the torque to be transmitted, helical angle, number of teeth and material. this formula is ok. the restriction is lambda between 9 and 35 that is the b/mn relationship is an ancient inheritance to blur, in the sense that it can well be less than 9 that nothing happens.

I found the second formula nowhere to compare, neither on agma nor on iso6336 nor on various books or notes. of itself does not make much sense because the width of the gear must be greater than the minimum value of ingration. once the b/mn rule is held between 6 and 35 is enough. then it doesn't even make sense that the second formula is limited from 5 to 35 degrees because at 45 degrees you do the propellers and also at 3 degrees...
I would say that they are the usual scemances not in order to narrow the calculations in an area where everything is oversized but not dimensioned in norm.
 
As I thought. I also asked for explanations to the luminaire that gave us this formula, to know more than anything from where it comes out and to tell him that it makes no sense. As soon as I know something more, I'll take you.
Bye!
 
the second imaginary formula is the reverse formula, wrong of:

depletion factor = b* tan(beta)/transverse pass

the coating factor must be greater than or equal to 1 to have at least 1 tooth intake. clearly with the helical wheels increases b to increase the repletion, but the doctor did not say it. when it meets the audits I would say that the gear is good even if it does not answer:
- covering greater than 1
- odd teeth number or even better
- widths included in limits

each gear is to itself and should be studied well. a 30-time wide gear module is practically useless and does not transmit correctly along the tooth profile...
 
So with the formula that I post I mean a minimum replenishment of 2?
Usually the cover is asked greater than 1 to have more quietness in the engraving, no?
 
the total cover is given by the transversal more normal. the sum of the two contributions is not said to make 2. the speech of the covering greater than one is done not for noise but to ensure that the transmission of the motion takes place with more than one tooth in socket, both for reasons of load and reliability, and for not having irregularities in the motion. practically, under load I have uniformity of rotation because while the tooth is coming out from the engraving with that of the wheel conducted I already have another tooth in hold.
If I want to have quietness I have to rectify my teeth and move profile so that the crawling speed is almost nothing.
 
do guides exist for a reasonable choice of x? or do you go a little experience?
I don't know how to put x=0.3 and I'd go to check with this correction that's still all right.
 
the profile shift coefficient can take positive or negative values.
the rule is that if you go less than zero the tooth flow is worse and therefore it is to be avoided.
greater than zero improves the reach to the tooth foot and improves contact capacities.
experience can help you to use values up to 0.6.
reality is different. with kisssoft you can decide to change x depending on whether you want to improve the noise, the rate of teeth crawling or increase the tooth flow.
depending on the need we work.
 
as I do not use kisssoft for this project, but I still wanted to correct the wheels as I proceed? Can symmetric x=0.3 be okay? I don't know if there's any guidance to follow. I only heard words in lesson but nothing useful in "real" life.
thanks in advance
 
x+0.3 symmetric can go well though it is always in relation to the module and number of teeth of the two wheels
 
interasse? helical si/no angle?
However I confirm that by force of things to roll well the teeth you have to do at least on the z16 the profile shift x=+0,6 or alternatively x=0,3 on both wheels otherwise you have small pinion problems
 
Now I don't have the spreadsheet at hand. if I don't remember badly it was about 80. helical angle 20°.
x=0.6 symmetric can be ok?
 
But do not exaggerate with profile correction and if you can retouch the module and the number of teeth or the propeller. both 0,6 is little
 
Okay, thank you. I wanted to ask another question: I came to the choice of bearings.
I have seen that I need a viscosity of 400 mm2/s more or less on the bearings of the third tree (28 rpm). I need about 40 mm^2/s (435rpm). you can use the same oil for the lubrication of all bearings (shortening illumination) and if yes as you proceed. I have to use skf bearings.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
44,997
Messages
339,767
Members
4
Latest member
ibt

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 0 (members: 0, guests: 0)
Back
Top