DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulllment of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State
University
By
Yichao Guo, B.S., M.S.
Graduate Program in Mechanical Engineering
Dissertation Committee:
Prof. Robert G. Parker, Advisor
Prof. Daniel A. Mendelsohn, Coadvisor
Prof. Stephen E. Bechtel
Dr. Sandeep M. Vijayakar
c Copyright by
Yichao Guo
2011
Abstract
ii
Compound planetary gear natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena are
also systematically examined. By grouping all system parameters into tuned and mistuned parameters, the veering/crossing patterns with respect to each system parameter are determined. These patterns provide critical information on dramatic mode
shape changes when tuning a compound planetary gear during the design stage.
Gear mesh phases that are critical for analytical or computational study on compound planetary gear dynamics are dened and calculated analytically. All the mesh
phases are grouped into a hierarchical structure of systemlevel, stagelevel, and trainlevel mesh phases to simplify the subsequent analytical investigations. In addition to
providing a complete procedure to determine all the necessary relative phases, the specic relations between trainlevel relative phases are derived by applying the assembly
conditions of compound planetary gears. Such relations, together with the systematically dened mesh phases, provide the foundation for the general rules to suppress
selected dynamic responses of a general compound planetary gear through proper
mesh phasing. The resultant mesh phasing rules are crucial for the troubleshooting
of the vibration and noise problems in compound planetary gear applications.
Compound planetary gear parametric instabilities caused by mesh stiness variations are analytically explored. Systems with single or multiple mesh frequencies
are investigated. The instability boundaries are derived for dierent cases depending
on the degeneracy of the natural frequencies. Application of the welldened modal
properties yields simple, closedform expressions for instability boundaries. Some
instability boundaries vanish under specic mesh phasing conditions.
The backside mesh stiness variation is inspected in this work to address the
needs for gear vibration models that consider the gear tooth contacts on the back
iii
side. The results reveal the inherent relationship between the backside and driveside mesh stinesses. The impact of backlash on the backside mesh stiness variation
function is also quantied.
iv
Acknowledgments
Vita
Publications
Research Publications
Guo, Y., and Parker, R. G. Natural Frequency Veering and Crossing Patterns for
General Compound Planetary Gears. In preparation, 2011.
Guo, Y., and Parker, R. G. Suppression of Various Modal Responses in General
Compound Planetary Gears through Mesh Phasing. In preparation, 2011.
Guo, Y., and Parker, R. G. Parametric Instabilities of General Compound Planetary
Gear Caused by Mesh Stiness Variations. In preparation, 2011.
Guo, Y., and Parker, R. G. Backside Contact Gear Mesh Stiness. 11th International ASME Power Transmission and Gearing Conference (DETC2011/PTG48055), accepted, Washington, DC.
vii
Fields of Study
Major Field: Mechanical Engineering
viii
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
Dedication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
vi
Vita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
vii
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
xiii
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
xvi
1.
2.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
5
11
14
2.1 Purely Rotational Model and Vibration Modes of Compound Planetary Gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1 Purely Rotational Model of Compound Planetary Gears . .
2.1.2 Characteristics of Natural Frequencies and Vibration Modes
2.1.3 Summary for Purely Rotational Compound Planetary Gear
Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Rotationaltranslational Model of Compound Planetary Gears and
the Associated Modal Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1 Rotationaltranslational Model of Compound Planetary Gears
2.2.2 Modal Properties of General Compound Planetary Gears . .
2.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ix
14
15
27
32
35
35
38
40
3.
4.
5.
42
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 Eigensensitivity Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 Eigensensitivity of Tuned Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 Calculation of Eigensensitivity of Tuned Systems . . . . . .
3.3.2 Application of the Modal Strain/Kinetic Energy Distribution
Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4 Eigensensitivity of Mistuned Compound Planetary Gears . . . . . .
3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
44
47
47
55
59
67
69
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Natural Frequency Veering and Crossing Phenomena in Compound
Planetary Gears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3 Detection of Natural Frequency Veering and Crossing . . . . . . . .
4.4 Natural Frequency Veering and Crossing Pattern for Tuned Parameters
4.5 Natural Frequency Veering and Crossing Pattern for Mistuned Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
69
89
95
97
70
77
81
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.2 Relative Phases for Meshes with Dierent Mesh Periods . . . . . . 99
5.2.1 Denition of Relative Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5.2.2 Special Algorithm for Relative Phase Calculations . . . . . . 102
5.3 Mesh Phase Relations of General Compound Planetary Gears . . . 104
5.3.1 Numbering of the Components in Compound Planetary Gears 104
5.3.2 Denitions of Relative Phases in Compound Planetary Gears 105
5.3.3 Calculation of Relative Phases in Compound Planetary Gears 109
5.3.4 Relations between Trainlevel Relative Phases . . . . . . . . 117
5.4 Example Calculation of Relative Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
5.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
6.
8.
173
175
179
182
185
188
189
193
194
196
Appendices
217
217
218
219
219
220
221
221
222
222
224
225
226
228
A.
B.
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
xii
List of Tables
Table
Page
2.1
33
2.2
Natural frequencies for the example system of Figure 2.1 with parameters listed in Table 2.1. O means overall mode, P 1 means planet mode
of planet set 1, and P 2 means planet mode of planet set 2. . . . . . .
34
3.1
3.2
53
3.3
56
3.4
The lowest fourteen natural frequencies for the example system of Figure 3.1 with nominal parameters listed in Table 3.3. R means Rotational mode, T means Translational mode, P 1 means Planet mode of
planet set 1, and P 2 means Planet mode of planet set 2. . . . . . . .
57
88
4.1
xiii
4.2
4.3
4.4
88
89
95
5.1
5.2
5.3
Parameters for the example system shown in Figure 5.2. The unit for
all diameters is millimeter. Planet gear (ilm) means planet m in train
l of stage i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
5.4
5.5
Relative phases s i11,gp (t1 ), r i1d ,gp (ti1 ), and i1m(m+1),pp . The * sign
indicates the associated value in the Analytical column is actually
from numerical calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.6
5.7
6.1
6.2
The conditions for the phasing quantity k to suppress dierent responses in a meshedplanet stage.E indicates the associated responses
is excited, and S means that the related responses is suppressed. . . . 150
xiv
6.3
The conditions for the phasing quantities k and k to suppress dierent responses in a stepped stage. E indicates the associated responses
is excited, and S means that the related responses is suppressed. . . . 157
6.4
The conditions for the phasing quantities k and k to suppress dierent responses in a purely rotational model. E indicates the associated
responses is excited, and S means that the related responses is suppressed.161
6.5
Two dierent mesh phasing cases for the meshedplanet stage in Figure
6.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
6.6
Input parameters to Planetary2D for the two cases in Table 6.5. The
unit for all diameters is millimeter. Planet gear (ilm) means planet m
in train l of stage i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
6.7
Two dierent mesh phasing cases for the stepped stage in Figure 6.3.
7.1
Compound planetary gear parametric instability boundaries for dierent modal and phasing conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
8.1
Gear parameters for the example system shown in Figure 8.6. . . . . 216
xv
167
List of Figures
Figure
Page
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
A typical multistage structure. This picture is courtesy of Chris Cooley using Calyx [96] to generate a 3D FEM example system at the
Dynamics and Vibrations Laboratory of The Ohio State University
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department. . . . . . . . . . .
The example system. All gear meshes are represented by the springs
in red color. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
The two cases of a planetplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action
of the solid line from A to B, and (2) along the line of action of the
dashed line from A to B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
2.3
20
2.4
The two cases of a sun gearplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action
of the solid line from C to D, and (2) along the line of action of the
dashed line from C to D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
The two cases of a ring gearplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action
of the solid line from E to F , and (2) along the line of action of the
dashed line from E to F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
The overall mode (associated with 5 =902 Hz) of the example system
in Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1. The deections of carriers are not shown.
28
2.1
2.2
2.5
2.6
xvi
2.7
The three planet modes (associated with 14,15,16 =3067 Hz) of the example system in Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1. The mode shapes of stage
2 are not shown here, because no component in stage 2 has motion. .
29
37
The sunplanet gear mesh between central gear j and planet m in train
l of planet set i is modeled by spring with stiness jilm
and the static
gp
jilm
transmission error egp in [53]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
37
3.1
58
3.2
59
Modal (a) strain, and (b) kinetic energy distributions associated with
mode 4 (4 = 871Hz). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
60
2.8
2.9
3.3
3.4
(a) 4 versus =
Ip21 Ip21
Ip21
321 k
321
kgp
gp
321
k
gp
421 k
421
kgp
gp
,
421
k
gp
321
321
. kgp
and kgp
are the nominal and perturbed values of the
mesh stiness between the sun gear in stage 2 (central gear 3) and
421
421
planet 1 in any planet train of planet set 2. kgp
and kgp
are the
nominal and perturbed values of the mesh stiness between the ring
gear in stage 2 (central gear 4) and planet 1 in any planet train of
planet set 2. Ip21 and Ip21 are the nominal and perturbed values of
moment of inertia of planet 1 in any planet train of planet set 2. . . .
3.5
kp
4.1
3211
kp3211 k
p
,
3211
k
p
61
3211
3211
. kgp
and kgp
are the nominal and perturbed values
2 =
of the mesh stiness between the sun gear in stage 2 (central gear 3)
and planet 1 in train 1 of planet set 2. kp211 and kp211 are the nominal
and perturbed values of the bearing stiness of planet 1 in train 1 of
planet set 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
65
71
xvii
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
72
73
75
76
90
91
96
5.1
Mesh tooth variation functions for k A (t), k B (t), and k C (t). The relative
phases among these meshes are marked. The symbol denotes the
time when the pitch point of the associated gear mesh is in contact. . 100
5.2
The example system. All gear meshes are represented by the springs
in red color. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.3
Mesh tooth variation functions of all the gear meshes in stage 1 of the
example system with the related relative phases marked. The symbol
denotes the time when the pitch point of the associated gear mesh
is in contact. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
5.4
6.1
A meshedplanet stage has four planet trains. Each planet train has
two planets that are in mesh with each other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
xviii
6.2
Sunplanet mesh force uctuation showing the mesh period T and the
relative phase at two arbitrarily chosen planet trains. . . . . . . . . 139
6.3
A stepped stage has six planet trains. Each planet train has two coaxial
planets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
6.4
The nite element models for (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 2 in Table 6.5.
6.5
The simulated results for (a) sun translational response and (b) the
associated harmonic amplitudes of Case 1 in Table 6.5. Sun gear is the
input component and the input speed is 100 rpm. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
6.6
The simulated results for (a) sun translational response and (b) the
associated harmonic amplitudes of Case 2 in Table 6.5. Sun gear is the
input component and the input speed is 100 rpm. The input torque
remains the same as that for Figure 6.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
6.7
The nite element models for (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 2 in Table 6.7.
6.8
The simulated results for (a) sun translational response, (b) the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of sunplanet mesh frequency , and (c)
the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of ringplanet mesh frequency
for Case 1 in Table 6.7. Sun gear is the input component and the
input speed is 100 rpm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
6.9
The simulated results for (a) sun translational response, (b) the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of sunplanet mesh frequency , and (c)
the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of ringplanet mesh frequency
for Case 1 in Table 6.7. Sun gear is the input component and the
input speed is 100 rpm. The input torque remains the same as that
for Figure 6.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
7.1
silm
rilq
The zeromean mesh stiness variations (a) kgp
(t) and (b) kgp
(t).
gp,silm
gp,rilq
sim
(0) and
(0) are systemlevel mesh phases, cgp and criq
gp
sim
riq
are contact ratios, Tgp
and Tgp
are mesh periods, and sim
and
gp
riq
gp are trapezoid wave slope coecients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
8.1
Driveside gear contact model (solid line) and backside gear contact
model (dashed line) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
xix
163
168
8.2
Numerical simulation of Calyx on an ideal gear pair with both driveside and backside gear contacts. One pair of teeth (marked by a circle)
is in contact along the driveside line of action, and two pairs of teeth
(marked by two rectangles) are in contact along the backside line of
action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
8.3
The gear mesh contacts for an arbitrary external ideal gear pair. The
dashed line in the middle of each subgure is the center line. The
driving gear is at the right hand side of each subplot and the driving
direction is counterclockwise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
8.4
The driveside and backside gear mesh contacts for a gear pair with
2b backlash and its matching ideal gear pair. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
8.5
Backside tooth contact for the case of tooth wedging when 2c tan =
2b. b is half of the backlash along the pitch circle, c is the change of
the central distance, and is the pressure angle. . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
8.6
8.7
The drive and backside gear tooth number variation functions for
the example ideal gear pair in Figure 6. x indicates the time that
the pitch point of the drive side of the driving gear is in contact, A
indicates the time that the middle point of the drive gear tooth tip is
aligned with the center line, + indicates the time that the pitch point
of a driven gear tooth is in contact, and * indicates the time that the
middle point of a driven gear tooth tip is aligned with the center line.
211
8.8
8.9
8.10 Backside and driveside gear tooth number variation functions the
example gear pairs with zero center distance change and 2b nominal
backlash (b satises qb = 0.05). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
8.11 Backside and driveside gear tooth number variation functions the
example gear pairs with 2b nominal backlash (b satises qb = 0.05) and
= 0.025). . . . . . . . . . . . 215
c change in the center distance ( c tan
p
xx
9.1
xxi
Nomenclature
Variables
I
Moment of inertia
Number of carriers
ci
di
jn
Torsional shaft stiness between central gears j and n
kgg,
jn
jn
jn
, kgg,yy
Translational shaft stiness between central gears j and n. When kgg,xx
=
kgg,xx
jn
jn
, kgg
represents both translational shaft stiness.
kgg,yy
ih
Torsional shaft stiness between carriers i and h
kcc,
ih
ih
ih
, kcc,yy
Translational shaft stiness between carriers j and n. When kcc,xx
=
kcc,xx
ih
ih
, kcc
represents both translational shaft stinesses.
kcc,yy
ij
Torsional shaft stiness between carrier i and central gear j
kcg,
ij
ij
, kcg,yy
Translational shaft stiness between carrier i and central gear j. When
kcg,xx
ij
ij
ij
= kcg,yy
, kcg
represents both translational shaft stinesses.
kcg,xx
xxii
ilmq
kpp,
Torsional shaft stiness between planet m and q in planet train l of planet set
i
ilmq
ilmq
, kpp,
Translational shaft stiness between planet m and q in planet train
kpp,
ilmq
ilmq
= kpp, , kpp
represents both translational
l of planet set i. When kpp,
shaft stinesses.
i
kcb,
Torsional bearing stiness of carrier i
i
i
i
i
i
kcb,xx
, kcb,yy
Translational bearing stiness of carrier. When kcb,xx
= kcb,yy
, kcb
repre
jilm
kgp
(t) Mesh stiness between central gear j and planet m in train l of set i
ilmq
kpp
(t) Mesh stiness between planet m and q in train l of set i
Mass
Radius
jilm
Sgp
Sign variable for the planetplanet mesh deection between planet m and q in
Rotational coordinate,u = r.
ilmq
Spp
Sign variable for the planetplanet mesh deection between planet m and q in
jilm
gp
Mesh spring deection between central gear j and planet m in train l of set i
ilmq
pp
Mesh spring deection between central gear j and planet m in train l of set i
Equals 1 when the central gear j is a sun gear. Equals 1 when the central
gear j is a ring gear.
Rotational coordinate
Tu
Uu
x, y
Translational coordinates
gjilm Pressure angle at the mesh between gear j and planet m in train l of set i
pilmq Pressure angle at the mesh between planet m and planet q in train l of set i
pilmq The angle (for meshes planets) between positive direction of planet m to the
line connecting planets m and q in train l of set i
jilm
Mesh deection between central gear j and planet m in train l of set i
g,u
ilm
ilm
,u
, ,u
Bearing deection of planet m in train l of set i in and directions
ilmq
p,u
Bearing deection of planet m in train l of set i in and directions
ilm
xxiv
Zgr
Zpilm
gs
The angle that central gear si rotates relative to a xed reference frame
gr
The angle that central gear r i rotates relative to a xed reference frame
ci
pilm
The angle that planet m needs to rotate relative to carrier i such that the gear
teeth positions for the gear mesh between planets m and m + 1 in train 1 after
the rotation are equivalent to those in train l before the rotation
jilm
ilmq
ji1m
i1mq
and Tpp
Mesh periods of kgp
and kpp
Tgp
jilm
kgp
(t) Actual mesh tooth variation function of the mesh between central gear j
Referring time of systemlevel relative phases. It is the time when the pitch
point of the base referred mesh is in contact.
xxv
ti1
Referring time of stagelevel relative phases of stage i. It is the time when the
i
s i11
) is in contact for the rst time
pitch point of the stage i referred mesh (kgp
after t1 .
tji1m,gp
and ti1mq,pp
Referring times for trainlevel relative phases. They are the re1
1
ji1m
ferring times when the pitch points of the basetrain referred meshes kgp
and
i1mq
are in contact for the rst time after ti1 , respectively.
kpp
ji1m
jilm,gp (t1 ) Relative phase of kgp
referring to the base referred mesh with referring
time t1
i1mq
ilmq,pp (t1 ) Relative phase of kpp
referring to the base referred mesh with referring
time t1
ji1m
jilm,gp Relative phase of kgp
referring to its matching basetrain referred mesh. No
time ti1
i1mq
ilmq,pp Relative phase of kpp
referring to its matching basetrain referred mesh. No
time ti1
Subscripts
b
bearings(to ground)
carrier
xxvi
central gear
planet
ps
planet set
pt
planet train
vibration mode u
in direction
in direction
xx
yy
Superscripts
i, h
carrier
j, n
central gear
planet train
m, q
planet
xxvii
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1
Planetary gears are widely used in all kinds of transmission systems, such as wind
turbines, aircraft engines, automobiles, and machine tools, and they are classied
into two categories: simple and compound planetary gears [3133, 35, 36, 38, 47, 53].
Simple planetary gears have one sun, one ring, one carrier, and one planet set (i.e.,
singlestage). There is only one planet in each planet train (i.e., simple) (Figure
1.1). Compound planetary gears involve one or more of the following three types
of structures: meshedplanet (as shown in Figure 1.2, there are at least two more
more planets in mesh with each other in each planet train), steppedplanet (as shown
in Figure 1.3, there exists a shaft connection between two planets in each planet
train), and multistage structures (as shown in Figure 1.4, the system contains two
or more planet sets) [53]. Compared to simple planetary gears, compound planetary
gears have the advantages of larger reduction ratio, higher torquetoweight ratio, and
more exible congurations.
In spite of these advantages, vibration remains a major concern in planetary gear
applications. Vibration creates undesirable noise, reduces fatigue life of the whole
system, and decreases durability and reliability. Vibration reduction, therefore, is a
key to the applications of compound planetary gears. This requires analytical study
1
&DUULHU
6XQ*HDU
3ODQHW
5LQJ*HDU
3ODQHW
6XQ*HDU
phasing [5, 75], and the parametric instability caused by mesh stiness variations
[61, 98], are not performed.
This study aims at these research gaps and the main objectives are
1. To develop a purely rotational model for general compound planetary gears
that can clarify the confusion in previous rotational planetary gear models and
analytically prove the associated modal properties,
2. To perform an eigensensitivity analysis based on Kiracofe and Parkers rotationaltranslational model [53] and derive the eigensensitivities in compact formulae,
3. To inspect the natural frequency veering/crossing phenomena and identify any
patterns or general rules,
4. To nd a way to analytically describe and calculate all the relative mesh phases
in a compound planetary gear,
3
6XQ*HDU
5LQJ*HDU
&DUULHU
3ODQHW
3ODQHW
5. To investigate the existence of mesh phasing rules for dierent compound planetary gear models that can suppress certain vibration,
6. To study the parametric instability caused by mesh stiness variations and to
analytically determine the boundaries for instability regions,
7. To examine the backside mesh stiness and to quantify the impact of backlash
on the backside mesh stiness.
6WDJH3ODQHW6HW
6WDJH3ODQHW6HW
Figure 1.4: A typical multistage structure. This picture is courtesy of Chris Cooley
using Calyx [96] to generate a 3D FEM example system at the Dynamics and Vibrations Laboratory of The Ohio State University Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Department.
1.2
Literature Review
Planetary gear dynamics have been extensively studied since 1970. Most of the
studies, however, focus only on simple planetary gears. In the area of system modeling and modal properties, Cunlie et al. [22] developed a free vibration model for
an epicyclic gearbox and studied the eigenvalue problem of this specic system. Botman [15] studied the natural frequencies and vibration modes of a simple planetary
gear with eighteen degrees of freedom and measured the responses of planetary gears
in aircraft turbine engines [17]. Kahraman [43, 44] developed a simple singlestage
planetary gear model with time varying nonlinearity, and carried out a series of researches. He also reduced his model to a purely rotational one, and investigated the
eigenvalue problem of the purely rotational model [45]. Lin and Parker used a twodimensional (2D), lumpedparameter model for simple planetary gears to analytically
examine the vibration properties of equallyspaced [58] and unequallyspaced [56] systems. Wu and Parker inspected the modal properties of simple planetary gears when
ring gear deformations are included [79, 97]. Eritenel and Parker [25] extended the
investigation scope to helical planetary gears. They set up a threedimensional (3D)
model, and provided the mathematical proof of the modal properties that generalize
the previous ndings on 2D planetary gear models.
No research on the modeling and modal properties of compound planetary gears
was conducted until Kahraman [47] proposed a purely rotational model for compound
planetary gears. Purely rotational models greatly simplify the analytical study of
parametric instabilities and nonlinear dynamic responses while still capturing the
main dynamic behavior [5, 6, 9, 61]. Kahramans compound planetary gear model
addresses limited congurations of singlestage planetary gears, and the associated
modal properties are not analytically proved. In addition, there are inconsistencies
between this model and the purely rotational models for simple planetary gears used
by other researchers. In particular, the formulae for gear mesh deections that are
important for the correctness of the model contain mismatches. It is necessary to
clarify the confusion in planetary gear modeling and to develop a purely rotational
model that it is suitable for general compound planetary gears. In addition, the free
vibration properties for this new model should be analytically proved. This model
6
along with the associated modal properties are crucial for further analytical studies,
such as the study on parametric instabilities.
Recently Kiracofe and Parker [53] developed a rotationaltranslational lumpedparameter model for general compound planetary gears and analytically proved that
tuned compound planetary gears (all planet trains within the same planet set are
identical in system parameters) have structured modal properties. This model provides a better mathematical description of the system than the purely rotational one.
This model is briey introduced in this work due to the demands of a rened model
from some later investigations.
Sensitivity of natural frequencies and vibration modes to system parameters is
important for gear design because it shows crucial information on how to tune resonances away from system operating speeds and how to identify the parameters that
have the greatest impact on a certain natural frequency. In addition, veering phenomena occur and obstruct the tracing of eigenvalue loci when some system parameter
varies [59, 80]. It is desirable to understand the veering and crossing characters of
planetary gear natural frequencies in order to complete the understanding on the free
vibration properties for planetary gears. Few studies, however, address these topics.
The inuence of design parameters on planetary gear natural frequencies was merely
touched in a few papers, such as Botmans investigation on the change of natural
frequencies caused by planet support stiness [15], Ma and his colleagues study on
the impact of errors and misalignment on load sharing [66], the study on unequal
planet stiness by Frater et al. [28], and Saada and Velexs work on the impact of
ring gear support stiness on natural frequencies. General conclusions, however, were
not presented. The rst analytical inspection on eigensensitivity of planetary gears
7
was performed by Lin and Parker [57]. They analyzed the eigensensitivities for both
tuned and mistuned simple planetary gears using a rotationaltranslational model.
Later, Lin and Parker [59] examined the natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena and discovered the veering/crossing patterns for simple planetary gears. All
these studies are limited to simple planetary gears and no work is done for compound planetary gears. To ll the research gap, it is essential to perform a thorough
eigensensitivity analysis of the natural frequencies and vibration modes to key compound planetary gear parameters, especially the parameters associated with meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage structures. In addition, the examinations on
natural frequency veering/crossing phenomena in general compound planetary gears
is wanted to complete the understandings on compound planetary gear free vibration
problem.
Mesh phase refers to the phase lag between gear meshes and it is unique to multimesh gear systems. Proper incorporation of mesh phases into analytical models is a
key for the correctness of planetary gear models. The importance of mesh phase to
planetary gear dynamics has been recognized in past researches. Hidaka et al. [41]
explored the inuence of mesh phase on the dynamic behavior of simple planetary
gears. Lots of other studies [8, 43, 44, 48, 94] considered mesh phases in the planetary
gear dynamic models. But there are discrepancies between these studies on the understanding of mesh phases. Parker and Lin [77] claried the confusions on simple
planetary gear mesh phases and provided an analytical description of mesh phase relations in terms of fundamental gear parameters. The mesh phasing relations in [77],
however, are only for simple planetary gears and do not apply to compound planetary gears, because the meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage structures
8
that are unique to compound planetary gears add the complexity of mesh phase relations, and make some key assumptions that are necessary for the derivation of mesh
phases relations in [77], such as the assumption of one mesh frequency, be invalid
for compound planetary gears. It is, hence, critical to have a clear understanding of
compound planetary gear mesh phases and to analytically determine the mesh phases
that are needed for any analytical studies on static or dynamic responses.
Previous investigations on gear dynamics show that proper mesh phasing can
suppress selected dynamic responses and help minimize noise and vibration in the
operating range of transmission systems. Schlegel and Mard [86], Palmer and Fuehrer
[74], Hidaka et al. [41], Platt and Leopold [83], Kahraman [48], and Kahraman and
Blankenship [48] experimentally or numerically illustrated the eectiveness of simple
planetary gear mesh phasing in reducing noise and vibration. Parker [75] analytically
explained the suppression of selected translational and rotational mode responses
through mesh phasing in simple planetary gears. As an extension to [75], Ambarisha
and Parker [5] derived the rules to suppress planet mode responses in a 2D simple
planetary model through mesh phasing and proposed the mesh phasing rules for a
purely rotational simple planetary gear model. Eritenel and Parker [26] inspected
the elimination of the net force and moment uctuations at certain harmonics on
the central components (sun, ring, and carrier) of a 3D planetary gear model under
dierent mesh phasing conditions. In order to utilize mesh phasing to reduce noise and
vibration in real compound planetary gear applications, it is important to analytically
investigate and drive the mesh phasing rules which provide the guidance to suppress
selected responses by minor adjustments in fundamental system parameters.
A number of studies suggest that gear mesh stiness variation has a dramatic
impact on the static and dynamic behavior of gear systems and mesh stiness variations combines with geometric errors and tooth microgeometry modications are the
main source of parametric instability for gear systems. The parametric instabilities
of singlepair gears are extensively examined in [3, 11, 13, 70]. For multimesh gears,
Tordion and Gauvin [92] and Benton and Seireg [11] analyzed the instabilities of twostage gear systems but gave contradictory conclusions. The confusion was claried
by Lin and Parker [60]. Only a few studies explore the parametric instabilities for
planetary gears and most of them are computational investigations whose scopes are
limited to simple planetary gears. For example, August and Kasuba [8] numerically
calculated the dynamic responses of a simple planetary gear with three sequentiallyphased planets when the mesh stinesses are timevarying. Velex and Flamand [94]
did a similar work. The analytical inspection on planetary gear parametric instability
was not addressed until Lin and Parker [61] investigated the parametric instability
of simple planetary gears caused by mesh stiness variation and analytically determined the instability boundaries. Wu and Parker [98] expanded the investigative
scope to simple planetary gears with elastic continuum ring gears. Similar analytical
studies on compound planetary gears are yet to be performed. Because meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage structures distinguish compound planetary
gears from simple planetary gears, the parametric instability that is related to these
three types of structures is the focus of this study, and the key problems that are
unique to compound planetary gears, such as how multiple mesh frequencies aect
the instability boundaries, are addressed in this work.
10
1.3
Scope of Investigation
The scope of this project is to advance the modeling and understanding of compound planetary gear dynamics and analytically examine certain critical factors aecting noise and vibration of compound planetary gear. A purely rotational compound
planetary gear model and the associated modal properties are presented in Chapter 2.
These models provide the foundation for the subsequent analyses in this work. Sensitivity of natural frequencies and vibration modes to system parameters and natural
frequency veering/crossing patterns of general compound planetary gears are investigated in Chapter 3 and 4. The systematical studies on the mesh phasing relations
of compound planetary gears present in Chapter 5, and the suppression of selected
compound planetary gear dynamic responses through mesh phasing are studied in
chapter 6. In Chapter 7, the parametric instability of general compound planetary
11
gears caused by mesh stiness variation is analytically investigated. Chapter 8 examines the timevarying backside mesh stiness and its relation with the driveside
one. The detailed scope of each chapter is as follows.
Chapter 2 develops a purely rotational for general compound planetary gears that
involves any combination of meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage congurations. In addition to clarify the discrepancies in gear mesh deection expressions
and correcting errors in previously published models, this chapter presents and analytically proves the structured modal properties that are associated with the purely
rotational model. The rotationaltranslational model by Kiracofe and Parker [53] and
the welldened modal properties are also briey introduced in this chapter.
In Chapter 3, the systematic investigation on general compound planetary gear
eigensensitivities are performed. The method to determine the eigensensitivities in
a general compound planetary gear is rst introduced. By applying the welldened
modal properties of general compound planetary gears, the eigensensitivity expressions for both tuned and mistuned systems are simplied and expressed in compact
form. The relationships between eigensensitivities and modal strain/kinetic energies
are studied and the results indicate that the modal strain/kinetic energy distribution
plots are eective tools to identify which system parameters have the greatest impact
on tuning the related natural frequency.
Chapter 4 examines the natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena in
compound planetary gears. By calculating the coupling factors between two frequency loci and applying the welldened modal properties and eigensensitivies, the
veering/crossing patterns for general compound planetary gears are derived for rotational, translational, and planet tuned parameters, as well as mistuned parameters.
12
Compound planetary gear mesh phase relationships that are critical for the correctness of models involving mesh stiness variations are analytically investigated in
Chapter 5. This chapter denes and calculates all the mesh phases for general compound planetary gears. In addition to derive a complete and simple procedure to
determine all the necessary relative phases, the specic relationships between trainlevel relative phases are also derived by applying the assembly conditions of compound
planetary gears. The results are numerically veried by Calyx [96] that precisely
tracks gear tooth contacts without any predened relations.
In Chapter 6, the rules to suppress selected dynamic responses and resonances
through mesh phasing are analytically investigated for both purely rotational and
rotationaltranslational models of general compound planetary gears.
Chapter 7 studies the parametric instability of general compound planetary gears
that are caused by mesh stiness variations. Parametric instability boundaries are
analytically derived in closedform expressions in terms of gear parameters for dierent modal and phasing conditions. Both individual and mutual (unique to compound
planetary gears with multiple mesh frequencies) excitations are inspected in this chapter.
As the expansion of the scope for this work, chapter 8 investigates the phenomenon
of backside gear mesh contact, analytically derives the relationship between the
driveside and backside mesh stinesses, and quantitatively evaluates the impacts
of backlash on the phase lag of the backside mesh stiness. The resultant analytical
formulae are conrmed by the simulation results from Calyx [96].
13
The lumped parameter models of compound planetary gears are the bases for further dynamic analysis, and the associated modal properties are critical to understand
the dynamic behavior of such systems. In this chapter, a purely rotational model for
general compound planetary gears that greatly simplies further analytical work is
rst developed. This model claries the conicting gear mesh deection expressions
in prior research. In addition, the structured vibration properties are analytically
proven.
A rotationaltranslational compound planetary model developed by Kiracofe and
Parker [53] is briey introduced in the later part of this chapter. This model provides
more accurate description of compound planetary gears than the purely rotational
one. The welldened modal properties are essential for further analysis on general
compound planetary gear dynamics in this work.
2.1
Compared to planetary gear models with three or more degrees of freedom per
component [22, 36, 43, 53, 5659, 85, 94], purely rotational degree of freedom models
14
simplify the analytical investigation of gear vibration and nonlinear response while
keeping the main dynamic behavior generated by tooth mesh forces. Such models
have proven useful in studies of simple (no meshed or stepped planet structures),
singlestage planetary gears [6,8,9,61]. Kahraman [47] built purely rotational models
for singlestage compound planetary gears. He derived equations of motion for each
conguration and summarized the vibration properties from numerical results. The
results apply only to the specic congurations in [47].
The present work examines compound planetary gears that involve one or more
of steppedplanet, meshedplanet, and multistage congurations. The objectives are
to develop a purely rotational model that is suitable for compound planetary gears
with general congurations, to demonstrate the natural frequency and vibration mode
properties, and to analytically prove these structured vibration properties.
In addition, this study claries discrepancies in past planetary gear rotational
models that appear inconsistent in some places [6,9,45,47,61]. For example, the gear
mesh deection expressions are dierent in compound [47] and simple planetary gear
rotational models [6,45,61]. Some of these models are incorrect in handling gear mesh
deections. Others are correct but do not provide enough detail to expose the source
of dierences with other models. This study claries the confusion.
2.1.1
15
All external supports and shaft connections are modeled as linear torsional stinesses.
The gear meshes are represented by stiness elements, which could be timevarying
or nonlinear depending on the research needs.
Figure 2.1 also illustrates the concepts of planet train and planet set. A planet
set is all the planets associated with a particular carrier. Each planet set is divided
into several planet trains. Two planets are considered to be in the same planet train
if they are in mesh with each other (meshed planets) or connected to each other by
a shaft (stepped planets) [53].
Choice of Coordinates
The absolute rotations of central gear j and carrier i are gj and ci . gj and ci are
the rotations incurred by the nominal constant rotation speeds of central gear j and
carrier i, respectively. The system coordinates for central gear j and carrier i are
gj = gj gj
(2.1)
ci = ci ci
(2.2)
The coordinate for planet m in train l of planet set i (pilm ) is the rotational
vibration of this planet relative to its associated carrier i, that is,
pilm = (pilm pilm ) (ci ci )
(2.3)
where pilm is the absolute rotation and pilm is the rotation caused by the nominal
constant speed of this planet.
Researchers studying previous purely rotational planetary gear models [6,9,45,47,
61] have chosen other coordinates. In order to compare dierent models, in the rest
16
A planet train
in planet set 2
A planet train
in planet set 1
(a)
Central Gear 2
Central Gear 4
Planet
3
Planet 2
Planet 1
Planet 1
Input Shaft
Output
Shaft
Central
Gear 1
Central
Gear 3
Carrier 1
Carrier 2
Stage 2
Stage 1
(b)
Stage 1
(c)
Central Gear 2
Stage 2
Carrier 1
Train 2
Central Gear 4
Train 1
Carrier 2
Train 3
Central
Gear 1
Central
Gear 3
Train 4
Planet 3
Train 2
Train 5
Train 1
Train 6
Planet 1
Planet 2
Train 3
Planet 1
Train 4
Figure 2.1: The example system. All gear meshes are represented by the springs in
red color.
17
of this study the coordinates and variables of previous studies are cast in the notation
dened in this study.
Loci of the
centers of
planet gears
ilq
p
Upilq
i
c
A'
ilm
p
Planet q
ilm
p
Planet m
B'
ci
/LQHVRIDFWLRQ
Figure 2.2: The two cases of a planetplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action of the
solid line from A to B, and (2) along the line of action of the dashed line from A to
B.
the projection of line A1 B1 on line AB. Thus, the gear mesh deection is approximately the dierence in length between the two lines AB and A2 B2 . Let e1 be the pos
itive unit vector along line AB. AA2 = Ae1 and BB2 = Be1 (B < 0 for positive
pilq ) are the displacements of points A and B. Application of geometric and trigonometric relations in Figure 2.3 yields A = rpilm tan pilm rpilm (1/ cos pilm 1) sin pilm
pilm rpilm and B = rpilq tan pilq rpilq (1/ cos pilq 1) sin pilq pilq rpilq , where rpilm and
rpilq are the base radii of planets m and q. The mesh deection in this case is
ilmq
= A B = pilm rpilm + pilq rpilq
pp
(2.4)
In case (2), the approximate displacements of points A and B in Figure 2.2 along
the line of action are A = pilm rpilm and B = pilq rpilq . The mesh deection is
ilmq
pp
= A B = (pilm rpilm + pilq rpilq )
19
(2.5)
B
B2
ilq
p
B1
Planet q
Upilq
O2
e1
A1
O1
Planet m
ilm
p
ilm
p
A2
A
Reference frame is
attached to Carrier i
Figure 2.3: The calculation of the gear mesh deection of Case 1 in Figure 2.
Equations (2.4) and (2.5) dier by a minus sign. They are merged as
ilmq
ilmq ilm ilm
= Spp
(p rp + pilq rpilq )
pp
1
case (1) in Figure 2.2
ilmq
=
Spp
1
case (2) in Figure 2.2
(2.6)
Similarly, Figure 2.4 shows the two cases of an external gearplanet (sunplanet)
mesh between central gear j and planet m in train l of planet set i. By the above
process, the sunplanet mesh deection is
jilm
jilm j j
= Sgp
(g rg ci rgj + pilm rpilm )
gp
1
case (1) in Figure 2.4
jilm
Sgp
=
1
case (2) in Figure 2.4
(2.7)
For an internal gearplanet mesh (ringplanet mesh, shown in Figure 2.5), the
same process yields the mesh deection
jilm
jilm j j
gp
= Sgp
(g rg ci rgj pilm rpilm )
20
(2.8)
ci
ilm
p
Locus of the center
of planet gear m
g
j
C'
Planet m
Central gear j
Ucilm
Upilm
D'
C
/LQHVRIDFWLRQ
Ugj
Figure 2.4: The two cases of a sun gearplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action of
the solid line from C to D, and (2) along the line of action of the dashed line from
C to D .
Central gear j
gj
ci
Locus of the center
of planet gear m
ilm
p
j
g
F
E'
ilm
c
Upilm
F'
Planet m
/LQHVRIDFWLRQ
Figure 2.5: The two cases of a ring gearplanet mesh: (1) along the line of action of
the solid line from E to F , and (2) along the line of action of the dashed line from
E to F .
21
jilm
where Sgp
is +1 for case (1) of Figure 2.5, and 1 for case (2).
By introducing the variable j that equals +1 for an external mesh and 1 for
an internal mesh, equations (2.7) and (2.8) are merged into a general expression for
central gearplanet mesh deections as
j j
jilm
jilm
= Sgp
g rg j pilm rpilm ci rgj
gp
(2.9)
Equations (2.6) and (2.9) are the general formulae for any mesh deection in
general compound planetary gears. Comparisons between these general formulae and
the gear mesh deections in previous studies [6, 9, 45, 47, 61] show dierences in some
cases. Some of these studies derived incorrect gear mesh deection formulae, such
as [61]. Others [6,9,45,47] are correct only under certain circumstances because they
did not fully consider the sign of gear mesh deections. The dierences with prior
papers are discussed below.
The gearplanet mesh deection formulae in [6, 9, 45] are the same. The mesh
deection between central gear j and planet m in train l of planet set i from these
here. In the notation of this study,
studies is called A jilm
gp
jilm
jilm
A gp = gj rgj j (pilm + ci )rpilm ci rcilm cos gp
(2.10)
j j
j ilm ilm
i j
= g rg p rp c rg
jilm
where rcilm is the distance between the centers of carrier i and planet m, and gp
is the pressure angle of this gearplanet mesh. Equation (2.10) agrees with equation
jilm
. It applies only to case (1) in Figure
(2.9) except that it lacks the sign variable Sgp
2.4. Equation (2.9) is the general form for both cases in Figure 2.4.
here. In the
The same gearplanet mesh deection from [61] is called B jilm
gp
notation of this study, this is
i
j j
j ilm ilm
= ujg j uilm
ci ( j rpilm + rcilm )
B jilm
gp
p uc = g rg p rp
22
(2.11)
jilm
Comparing with (2.9), equation (2.11) is incorrect. In addition to missing Sgp
, the
last term in (2.11) does not equal the matching term in (2.9), that is, ci ( j rpilm +
rcilm ) = ci rgj .
Because simple planetary gears have no planetplanet meshes, no comparisons of
planetplanet mesh deection expressions can be made to previous simple planetary
gear models.
Comparisons of gearplanet and planetplanet mesh deections with the compound
planetary gear models in [47] are possible. The gearplanet mesh deection in [47] is
here. The planetplanet mesh deection between planet m and planet
called C jilm
gp
q in train l of planet set i from [47] is called D ilmq
pp . In the notation of this study,
these are
C jilm
= gj rgj j pilm rpilm ci rcilm
gp
(2.12)
=
gj rgj
j pilm rpilm
ci rgj
= (pilm ci )
rpilm + (piln ci )
rpiln
D ilmq
pp
= (pilm + pilm ci )
rpilm + (piln + piln ci )
rpiln
(2.13)
missing and all the base radii are replaced by their matching pitch radii. The presence
of pitch radii in equations (2.12) and (2.13) is as expected considering the use of pitch
radius gear mesh model in [47]. The missing sign variables, however, limit equations
(2.12) and (2.13) to case (1) in Figures 2.2, 2.4, and 2.5.
23
i=1
ci
di
l=1 m=1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
b
Igj (gj + gj )2
j=1
a
ci
di
1
2
b
a
ci
di
(2.14)
jilm jilm 2
kgp
(gp )
di
ilmq
ilmq ilmq 2
(pp ) + kpp,
(pilm pilq )2
kpp
cn )2
where ci and gj are the rotational vibrations of carrier i and central gear j, pilm is
the rotational vibration of planet m in train l of planet set i relative to its associated
carrier i, ci and gj are the nominal constant rotation speeds of carrier i and central
gear j, pilm is the nominal constant rotation speed of planet m in train l of planet
set i, ci and gj are the rotational vibration speeds of carrier i and central gear j, and
pilm is the rotational vibration speed of planet m in train l of planet set i relative to
its associated carrier i.
24
a
i=1
ci
di
i i
Ipilm pilm + kcb
c +
m=1
l=1
b
di
ci
jilm
gp
jilm jilm
kgp
gp +
ci
j=1 l=1 m=1
a
b
ij
in
kcc,
(ci cn ) +
kcg,
(ci gj ) = ci
n=i+1
j=1
ci
ci
di
di
i
ilm 2
Ice
= Ici +
Ipilm +
milm
p (rc )
l=1 m=1
l=1 m=1
i = 1, , a
(2.15)
jh
kgg,
(gj
h=j+1
a
ci
di
jilm
gp
jilm jilm
kgp
gp +
gj
ci )
gj
j = 1, , b
(2.16)
di
q=1,q=m
b
j=1
ilmq
pp
pilm
jilm
gp
jilm
k jilm gp
pilm gp
ilmq
ilmq ilmq
kpp
pp + kpp,,
(pilm pilq ) = 0
(2.17)
i = 1, , a; l = 1, , ci ; m = 1, , di
where pilm is the rotational acceleration of planet m in train l of planet set i relative
to its associated carrier i.
When all gear meshes are modeled as constant stinesses, the eigenvalue problem
is
2 M = Kiv
(2.18)
1
a T
= [c1 ca  g1 gb  ps
ps
]
Carriers Central gears Planet sets
(2.19)
25
i
i1
ic T
ps
= [pt
pt
]
i = 1, , a
(2.20)
il
= [pil1 pild ]T i = 1, , a; l = 1, , ci
pt
0 Ic,ps
Ic
Ig 0
M=
symm.
Ips
(2.21)
Kiv = Kb + Km
(2.23)
1
a
1
b
Kb = diag(kcb
, , kcb
, kgb
, , kgb
, 0, , 0)
Kc
Kc,g Kc,ps
Kg Kg,ps
Km =
symm.
Kps
(2.24)
(2.22)
(2.25)
Equation (2.18) is expanded into three groups of equations for the carriers, central
gears, and planet sets, respectively,
i
(kcb
b
2 Ici )ci
ci
di
a
Ipilm pilm +
l=1 m=1
kcih ci +
h=1
T i
ij j
kc,g
g + kic,ps ps
=0
i = 1, , a
(2.26)
j=1
j
(kgb
2Igj )gj
b
n=1
kgjn gj
a
i=1
ij i
kc,g
c
a
kji
g,ps
T
ips = 0 j = 1, , b
(2.27)
i=1
i
2 ci Iic,ps + ci kic,ps +
(Kips 2 Iips )ps
b
gj kji
g,ps = 0 i = 1, , a
(2.28)
j=1
i
i
i i
where kic,ps, kji
g,ps , Ic,ps , and ps are all c d 1 column vectors given in Appendix A.
26
2.1.2
Numerical results from (2.18) show that the natural frequencies and vibration
modes have distinctive properties when all planet trains within the same planet set
are identical and equally spaced. All vibration modes can be classied into two types:
overall modes and planet modes.
In an overall mode, all planet trains in the same planet set have identical motions.
a
di overall modes. Each mode is associated with a
There are exactly a + b +
i=1
distinct natural frequency. Figure 2.6 shows a typical overall mode for the compound
planetary gear in Figure 2.1 with the system parameters in Table 2.1.
Planet modes exist when the system has a stage with two or more planet trains.
In planet modes, only the planets in one stage have motion, and all other components
have no motion. Stage i has di sets of degenerate (for ci 3) planet modes, with
each having natural frequency multiplicity ci 1. The total number of planet modes
of stage i is (ci 1)di. In addition, any planet trains motion in this stage is a scalar
multiple of an arbitrarily chosen planet trains motion. Figure 2.7 shows a set of
planet modes of stage 1 for the system in Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1. The complete list
of natural frequencies is collected in Table 2.2.
The above properties dier from the summary of vibration properties in [47] in two
ways. Firstly, [47] separates a rigid body mode from the above two types. Secondly,
a
a
di 2 in [47], instead of a + b +
di .
the number of overall modes is a + b +
i=1
i=1
The rigid body mode that [47] separates from all other modes is actually an overall
mode. In the rigid body mode all planet trains in the same planet set have identical
motions, which is the characteristic of an overall mode. The rigid body modes exist
27
Stage1
Stage2
Figure 2.6: The overall mode (associated with 5 =902 Hz) of the example system in
Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1. The deections of carriers are not shown.
28
(a)
Stage1
(b)
(c)
Stage1
Stage1
Figure 2.7: The three planet modes (associated with 14,15,16 =3067 Hz) of the example
system in Figure 2.1 and Table 2.1. The mode shapes of stage 2 are not shown here,
because no component in stage 2 has motion.
29
in [47] because all congurations discussed therein have unconstrained input and
output components. If one or both of the input/output components are constrained
or springmounted to ground, no rigid body mode exists.
The second dierence with the summary of modal properties in [47] is because [47]
is based on a restricted set of congurations. All the congurations in [47] have a
xed central gear or carrier, so the number of degrees of freedom are reduced by one
due to that xed component.
In what follows, the above vibration mode properties are proved mathematically.
Proposed candidate modes for each type of mode based on the above properties
are shown to satisfy the eigenvalue problem. By showing that the total number of
eigenvalues obtained in this way equals the total number of degrees of freedom of the
system, the two mode types are proven to be an exhaustive list of the possible mode
types.
Overall Modes
A candidate overall mode from (2.19)(2.21) is
1
a T
ps
]
= [c1 ca g1 gb ps
i
i1
i1 T
ps = [pt pt ]
i
i1
pt
= [pi11 pi1d ]T
i = 1, , a
(2.29)
Note that all di planet trains in planet set i have the same deection. Insertion of
(2.29) into (2.26)(2.28) yields
i
2 Ici )ci 2ci
(kcb
a
kcih ci
b
ij j
kc,g
g
di
m=1
+c
Ipi1m pi1m +
i1 T
kc,pt
i1
pt
i = 1, , a
(2.30)
=0
j=1
h=1
b
j
(kgb
2 Igj )gj +
kgjn gj +
n=1
a
a
ji1 T i1
ij i
i
kc,g c + c
pt = 0
kg,pt
i=1
i=1
30
j = 1, , b
(2.31)
i11
i
. . . kpi11d
0
Ipi11
p
. . ..
.
..
2
..
. .
i1di
i1di 1
i1di di
i1di
kp
kp
0
Ipj ji11 j i11p
i11
i11
Ip
kc,p
kgp rg rp
b
2 i ..
i ..
j ..
g .
c .
+ c .
+
=0
j=1
i1di
i1di
j ji1di j i1di
Ip
kc,p
kgp rg rp
i = 1, , a
kpi111
..
.
(2.32)
Equations (2.30) and (2.31) give a and b independent equations, respectively. For
each i, the matrix equation (2.32) contains di independent component equations.
a
di linear, homogeneous equations with
Thus, equations (2.30)(2.32) yield a + b +
a
a+b+
i=1
i
i=1
a
di solutions of this
i=1
reduced eigenvalue problem, overall modes for the whole system are constructed from
(2.29).
Planet Modes
A candidate planet mode associated with stage i is
i
, 0]T
= [0 00 00 , ps
i
i
i1
i1
i1 T
ps
= [v 1 pt
, v 2 pt
, , v c pt
]
i
i1
i11
i1d T
pt = [p p ]
(2.33)
c
d
b
i1 T i1
l
l
ji1m j i1m i1m
v kc,pt pt =
v
j kgp
rg rp p = 0
i
l=1
c
i
l=1
l=1
d
c
ji1 T i1
l
ji1m j i1m i1m
v kg,pt pt =
v
( j kgp
rg rp p ) = 0 j = 1, , b
l
l=1
(2.34)
j=1 m=1
(2.35)
m=1
2 i1
i1
(Ki1
pt Ipt )pt = 0
31
(2.36)
Equation (2.34) represents the moment exerted on carrier i by the planets. This
ci
b
di
l
ji1m j i1m i1m
v = 0 or
j kgp
rg rp p = 0. The quantity
equation requires either
l=1
di
b
j=1 m=1
j=1 m=1
vl = 0
(2.37)
l=1
The same analysis applies to equation (2.35) and yields the same equation as
(2.37), which has ci 1 independent, nontrivial solutions.
Equation (2.36) is a reduced eigenvalue problem with di eigensolutions. For each
such eigensolution of (2.36), ci 1 independent planet modes, each having the same
natural frequency, can be constructed for the full system eigenvalue problem (2.18)
using (2.33) and the independent solutions of (2.37). Therefore, stage i has (ci 1)di
a
planet modes. For the whole system, the total number of planet modes is
(ci 1)di .
i=1
a
ci di modes,
i=1
which equals the total system degrees of freedom. Therefore, the overall and planet
modes discussed above form a complete set of vibration modes of a general compound
planetary gear.
2.1.3
previous planetary gear models, this study claries discrepancies in gear mesh deection expressions and corrects errors in previously published models. All vibration
modes of the system fall into the categories of overall and planet modes. The properties of these mode types are presented and proved.
Table 2.1: Parameters of the compound planetary gear
in Figure 2.1.
Number of Carriers
Number of Central
Gears
Number
of
Planet
Trains
Number of Planets per
Train
Planet Location
2
4
c1 =4, c2 =6
d1 =3, d2=1
1l1 = 2(l1)
; l = 1, , 4
4
2(l1)
2l1
= 6 ; l = 1, , 6
1l2 = 1l3 = 1l1 + 32
1l21
1l12 = 70
= 218
,
500 106 If j = 1, i = 1, m = 1
j = 2, i = 1, m = 3
jilm
j = 3, i = 2, m = 1
kgp =
j
= 4, i = 2, m = 1
Otherwise
0
6
500 10 If i = 1, m = 1, q = 2
ilmq
i = 1, m = 2, q = 1
kpp
=
0
Otherwise
i
1
3
kcb,
= 0, kgb,
= kgb,
=0
2
4
kgb, = kgb, = 500 106
jn
ih
kg,
= k
c, = 0
200 106 If i = 1, j = 3
ij
=
kcg,
Otherwise
0
100 106 If i = 1, m = 2, q = 3
ilmq
i = 1, m = 3, q = 2
kpp, =
0
Otherwise
1l1
1l2
1l3
mp = mp = mp = 0.75, m2l1
p = 2.00
Continued on next page
33
Natural
Frequency
(Hz)
0
860
902
1125
1241
1746
1899
3067
4226
5926
6314
10945
16985
16986
34
Vibration
Mode
Type
O
P1
O
P2
O
O
O
P1
O
O
O
O
P1
O
2.2
Compared to the purely rotational model in previous section, the rotationaltranslational model for general compound planetary gears developed by Kiracofe and
Parker [53] provides a better mathematical description of compound planetary gear
systems. Because this model and the associated modal properties are extensively
used and cited in the subsequent investigations, this section briey introduces this
model and the ndings by Kiracofe and Parker to prevent redundancy in the following
chapters.
2.2.1
Similar to the rotationaltranslational model for simple planetary gear by Lin and
Parker [58], each carrier, planet, and central gear in Kiracofe and Parkers model [53]
has three degrees of freedom: two translational and one rotational, bearings are
modeled as two translational springs, shaft connections are modeled as one torsional
and two translational springs, and gear meshes are modeled as springs.
Dierent from the simple planetary gear model in [58], a single xed basis is used
for all central components coordinates(carriers and central gears)in order to be compatible with multistage structures, the meshedplanet orientation angle (e.g., ilmn
the orientation angle between planets m and n in train l of planet set i in Figure 2.8)
the mesh stiness between planets
and the planetplanet mesh stinesses (e.g., ilmn
pp
m and n in train l of planet set i in Figure 2.8) are introduced to include meshedilmq
and
planet structures, and two translational shaft connection stinesses (e.g., kpp,
ilmq
the translational shaft stinesses between planet m and q in planet train l of
kpp,
35
ilmq
planet set i) and one torsional shaft connection stiness (e.g., kpp,uu
the torsional
shaft stinesses between planet m and q in planet train l of planet set i) are introduced
to incorporate steppedplanet structures.
Figure 2.8 illustrates the model of a planetplanet mesh between planets m and n
in train l of planet set i in [58], where kpilm and kpiln are the bearing stinesses of planets
m and n in train l of planet set i, ilm and iln are the angular positions of these
two planets, (pilm, pilm ) and (piln , piln ) are their radial and tangential coordinates
which are xed at each planets equilibrium position and do not translate with the
iln iln
= rpilm pilm and uiln
are the their
vibration of the associated carrier, uilm
p
p = rp p
rotational coordinates, and (rpilm , pilm ) and (rpiln , piln ) are the rotations and base radii
of these two planets, respectively. Figure 2.9 shows the model of an external central
gearplanet (i.e, sunplanet) mesh between central gear j and planet m in train l of
is the mesh stiness for this this central gearplanet
planet set i in [58], where jilm
gp
mesh, gjilm is the associated pressure angle, (xjg , ygj ) are the translational coordinates
for central gear j, rgj and gj are the rotation and base radius of central gear j, and
j
j
and kg,yy
are the translational bearing stinesses central gear j.
kg,xx
(2.38)
36
iln
p
iln
p
ilnm
ilm
p
ilm
p
eilmn
pp
ilmn
k ilm
p
ilmn
p
k iln
p
k iln
p
ilmn
pp
ilm
p
u iln
p
u ilm
p
ilm
iln
Figure 2.8: The planetplanet gear mesh between planet m and q in planet train l of
planet set i) is modeled by a spring with stiness ilmn
and the static transmission
pp
ilmn
error epp in [53].
ilm
p
rpilm
gjilm
j
g
k ilm
p
gpjilm
rgj
ilm
p
ilm
k gj, yy
k gj, xx
egpjilm
xgj
k ilm
p
u ilm
p
gjilm
gj
Figure 2.9: The sunplanet gear mesh between central gear j and planet m in train
and the static transmission
l of planet set i is modeled by spring with stiness jilm
gp
jilm
error egp in [53].
37
2.2.2
For eigenvalue analysis the linear timeinvariant form of the above rotationaltranslational model is considered, where the mesh stinesses are averages over a
mesh cycle. The imposed assumptions are that all planet trains are equally spaced
around their associated carrier, each planet set has three or more planet trains, and
all bearing and shaft stinesses are isotropic. Thus, the eigenvalue problem for a
general compound planetary gear is
(K M) = (Kb + Km 2 M) = 0
= (1c , , ac , 1g , , bg , 1ps , , aps )T
carriers
i: ic =
central gears
planet sets
i
i i T
Carrier
[xc , yc , c ]
Central gear j: jg = [xjg , ygj , gj ]T
ici T
Planet set i: ips = (i1
pt , , pt )
ildi T
Planet train l of set i: ilpt = (il1
p , , p )
T
Planet m in train l of set i : ilm
= (pilm , pilm , uilm
p
p )
(2.39)
If all planet trains in a planet set are equally spaced and have identical model
parameters, the planet set is tuned. Otherwise, the planet set is mistuned. If all the
planet sets in a system are tuned, then the whole system is tuned, otherwise it is
mistuned. For tuned systems, all modes fall into one of the following classes [53]
(A) Rotational Modes
The natural frequencies of rotational modes are distinct. All central gears and
38
carriers have rotational motion only. All planet trains within a planet set have
the same motion. Thus, a rotational mode has the form
ic = (0, 0, ci )T , i = 1, 2,...,a
(2.40)
jg = (0, 0, gj )T , j = 1, 2,..., b
(2.41)
i1
i1 T
ips = (i1
pt , pt , , pt ) , i = 1, 2,...,a
i
c trains
(2.42)
(2.43)
= (
1c , ,
ac ,
1g , ,
bg ,
1ps , ,
aps )T
(2.44)
i = (y i , xi , 0)T
ic = (xic , yci , 0)T
c
c
c
(2.45)
j = (y j , xj , 0)T
jg = (xjg , ygj , 0)T
g
g
g
ilm
il1
p
p
I cos ilm I sin ilm
=
ilm
ilm
ilm
il1
I sin
I cos
p
(2.46)
(2.47)
set having motion in a certain planet mode, the planet mode associated with
planet set h has the form
= ( 0, , 0 ,
0, , 0
, 0, , hps , 0, 0)T
(2.48)
In addition, the motion of each planet train in planet set h is a scalar multiple
of any chosen planet train in this planet set, that is,
h
2 h1
c
h1 T
hps = (w 1 h1
pt , w pt , , w pt )
(2.49)
h11
h12
h1d T
h1
)
pt = (p , p , , p
h1m
= (ph1m, ph1m , uh1m
)T ,
p
p
(2.50)
m = 1, ,di
(2.51)
l=1
d
h
c
h
sin
m=1
hlm
=0
l=1
d
h
m=1
c
h
cos
hlm
=0
wl = 0
(2.52)
l=1
2.3
Conclusion
40
The rotationaltranslational model by Kirocofe and Parker [53] is also briey introduced in this Chapter. This model, together with the associated welldened modal
properties, are critical to the parametric analysis of compound planetary gears, such
as the sensitivity of natural frequencies and vibration modes to system parameters
and the natural frequency veering and crossing patterns, which require a rened
mathematical description of the system.
41
3.1
Introduction
Simple planetary gears have only one stage and only one planet in each load
path. Compound planetary gears involve steppedplanet, meshedplanet or multistage structures [53]. Compared to simple planetary gears, compound planetary gears
provide larger reduction ratios and more exible congurations [53, 65], but they
create more noise and vibration problems [47]. Sensitivity of the natural frequencies
and vibration modes to system parameters, such as mesh stinesses and mases of
the components, provides important information for tuning resonances away from
operating speeds and minimizing dynamic response. The study in this chapter derives
the eigensensitivities of general compound planetary gears to system parameters with
the purpose of providing guidance for system design.
The variations of planetary gear natural frequencies to selected parameters have
been examined previously. Botman [16] plotted the natural frequencies versus planet
support stiness and studied the eect of carrier rotation through a numerical example. Saada and Velex [85] studied the inuence of ring gear support stiness on the
natural frequencies. These and similar works present only numerical results. Lin and
42
43
3.2
Eigensensitivity Calculation
The eigensensitivities of interest in this study are the rst and second eigenvalue derivatives and the rst order eigenvector derivative with respect to a system
parameter: u , u , and u . The analytical procedures to calculate these eigensensitivities [21, 27, 57] are introduced briey as follows.
When u is a distinct eigenvalue of (2.39), the associated eigensensitivities are
found by dierentiating (2.39) to obtain
u = Tu (K u M )u
44
(3.1)
u
Tv (K u M )u
1 T
= (u M u )u +
v
2
u v
v=1,v=u
(3.2)
(3.3)
The form of (3.2) results from series expansion of u in the basis of the eigenvectors
v , v = 1, 2, , u 1, u + 1, , .
For the case of a degenerate eigenvalue of (2.39), suppose the eigenvalue has multiplicity w such that 1 = = w . N = [1 , w ] is an arbitrary set of independent
eigenvectors normalized such that NT MN = I. The eigenvectors [1 , w ] have
the translational or planet mode properties in (2.43)(2.52). Let = NB produce a
preferred set of eigenvectors = [1 , , w ], where the w w matrix B is to be
determined, B = [1 , , w ]ww , and f = Nf (f = 1, , w). Dierentiation
of (2.39) gives
(K f M)f = (f M + f M K )Nf = f
(3.4)
D = NT (K f M )N
(3.5)
Thus, the rst order eigenvalue derivatives of the w degenerate eigenvalues of (2.39)
are the eigenvalues of D in (3.5). For the case when all the eigenvalues of D are
distinct, f is uniquely determined from (3.5) with normalization fT f = 1. Thus,
f = Nf is also determined. Like f , the w eigenvectors f also have the translational or planet mode properties in (2.43)(2.52). The set is the preferred set
compared to N, because yields a diagonal form of D in (3.5) and leads to simpler
eigenvector derivative expressions.
45
(3.6)
T ( M K )
gkf k , where gkf = k fk f f , and k = w + 1, , .
jf =
k=w+1
(3.7)
Te (2f M K + f M)f
2Te (K f M )jf
=
2(f e )
2(f e )
e = 1, , w
f = 1, , w
(3.8)
e = f
By taking the second order derivative of (2.39) [29,57,67,73], the second order eigenvalue derivatives f are calculated as
f = 2Tf (K f M )jf + Tf (K f M f M )f
(3.9)
When the matrix D has degenerate eigenvalues, the eigenvectors of D that are
associated with these degenerate eigenvalues are not unique. Therefore, the associated
rst order eigenvector derivatives of (2.39) can not be determined. Nevertheless, the
w second order eigenvalue derivatives are derived as the eigenvalues of [29, 57]
E = 2T (K f M )J + T (K f M f M )
(3.10)
46
With these closedform eigensensitivity expressions, the approximate uth eigen u and its associated eigenvector
u of the perturbed system are
value
u = u +
u =0 ( 0 ) +
u = u +
1
=0 ( 0 )2
2 u
u =0 ( 0 )
(3.11)
(3.12)
3.3
For the case when the perturbed system remains tuned, the structured modal
properties for compound planetary gears [53] are retained. The possible changing
stiness parameters considered are the mesh stinesses between planets and central
jim
imq
, kpp
), the translational support (bearing) stinesses of
gears/other planets (kgp
i
i
, kgb
, kpim ), the torsional support stinesses of carcarriers/central gears/planet (kcb
i
i
, kgb,
), and the shaft stinesses connecting any two comporiers/central gears (kcb,
nents . The changing inertia parameters are the mass and moment of inertia of each
ilm
component (mic , Ici , mjg , Igj , milm
p , Ip ). The nomenclature section states the mean
ing of all variables, superscripts, and subscripts (the same nomenclature as in [53] is
used).
3.3.1
Because the eigensensitivity calculation procedures are similar for all parameters,
explanation of one calculation for a certain stiness parameter is sucient. The
jim
are a representative example. In order to use equations
eigensensitivities to kgp
47
are
K
jim
kgp
M
jim = 0
kgp
..
(3.13)
.
i
c
l=1
jim
kgp
l=1
(Kjilm
gp )
c
Kjilm
gp
l=1
jim
kgp
..
.
..
.
ci
Kjilm
g1
ci
jim
kgp
Kjilm
g3
l=1
jim
kgp
..
(3.14)
jim
where all submatrices of K/kgp
are zero except the four submatrices indicated
in (3.13), which are coupling terms between central gear j and planet m in any train
jim
as shown below.
of stage i. These submatrices are linearly dependent on kgp
gear j is a ring gear (or a sun gear), and gjilm = ilm + j gjilm .
Because rotational, translational and planet modes have dierent multiplicity of
eigenvalues, one must consider their eigensensitivities separately.
For the case of rotational modes, one can apply (2.40)(2.42) directly because all
rotational mode eigenvalues are distinct. The expressions for the eigensensitivities
simplify further by applying the relationships
Tu
K
jilm jilm
jim v = g,u g,v
kgp
48
(3.18)
jilm
j
jilm
jilm
i
ilm i
jilm
ilm
jilm
g,u
= yg,u
cos g,u
xig,u sin g,u
+ rgi g,u
+ p,u
sin g,u
p,u
cos g,u
j uilm
p,u
(3.19)
jilm
is the mesh deection between gear j and planet m in train l of planet set
where g,u
jilm
is the same for all
i for vibration mode u. Rotational mode properties indicate g,u
the trains in planet set i. Therefore, the mesh deection between gear j and planet
jim
, where *
m in any train of planet set i in a rotational mode u is expressed as g,u
(3.20)
c
jim jilm
g,u
g,v
u
=
v
jim
kgp
u v
v=1,v=u l=1
(3.21)
c
2
2 u
jim jilm 2
(
g,u
g,v )
jim 2 =
u v
(kgp
)
v=1,v=u
l=1
(3.22)
ci
u
jim
kgp
as a modal expansion
u
jim
kgp
if its associated eigenvalue (v ) is close to u , and if the sum of the mesh deections
ci
jilm
)
of gear j and planet m in all the trains of planet set i for vibration mode v ( g,v
is large compared to those for other modes. In addition, if
ci
l=1
jilm
g,v
= 0 (e.g., when v
l=1
is a planet mode of stages other than stage i), the eigenvector v has no contribution
to u . While the rst derivative in (3.20) depends only on u (the mode associated
with u ), the second order derivative in (3.22) depends on all modes other than u ,
with the greatest contribution coming from modes with eigenvalues close to u .
49
If all planet sets have three or more planet trains, there are a + b + 3
a
di dierent
i=1
translational eigenvalues, each with multiplicity two [53]. Suppose 1 = 2 is a degenerate translational eigenvalue, and 1 and 2 are the associated pair of orthonormal
(with respect to M) translational modes of the unperturbed system. The matrix D
is derived from equation (3.5) as
M
K
jim u
jim ]
kgp
kgp
ci
jilm 2
jilm jilm
K
)
g,1
g,2
(g,1
T
= [ jim ] =
jilm jilm
jilm 2
(
kgp
g,1
g,2
g,2 )
l=1
D = T [
ci
ci
(3.23)
jilm 2
(g,1
) =
l=1
ci
jilm 2
(g,2
)
l=1
jilm jilm
g,1
g,2 = 0. Because D is diagonalized by [1 , 2 ], these two eigenvectors
l=1
form a preferred pair of translational modes. From the eigenvalues of D, the rst
order eigenvalue derivatives are
jilm
2
1
=
=
(g,1 )2
jim
jim
kgp
kgp
l=1
ci
(3.24)
Because D has a degenerate eigenvalue, the rst order eigenvector derivatives can
not be determined. The second order eigenvalue derivatives are calculated from the
eigenvalues of E in (3.10), where
ci
ci
jilm 2
jilm 2
2(g,v
) jilm jilm 2(g,v
) jilm jilm
g,2
g,1
1 v g,1
2 v g,1
v=3
v=3 l=1
l=1
E = ci
ci
jilm 2
jilm 2
2(g,v
) jilm jilm 2(g,v
) jilm jilm
g,2
g,2
1 v g,1
2 v g,2
v=3 l=1
(3.25)
v=3 l=1
The translational mode properties give E11 = E22 and E12 = E21 . Thus, E is also
diagonal and the second order eigenvalue derivatives are
2 1
jim 2
(kgp
)
2 2
jim 2
(kgp
)
ci 2(jilm jilm )2
g,v
g,1
1 v
v=3 l=1
i
c 2(jilm jilm )2
g,v
g,2
2 v
v=3 l=1
50
(3.26)
For a given planet set, planet modes of stage i exist only for ci 4, where ci is the
number of planet trains in stage i. For ci = 4, the planet mode natural frequencies
for planet set i are distinct, and the procedure to calculate the eigensensitivities is
the same as that for rotational modes. The results are as (3.20)(3.22).
For ci > 4, the planet mode frequencies for planet set i are degenerate with
multiplicity w = ci 3. Suppose this degenerate eigenvalue and its associated modes
are 1,
, w
=
=
D
=
(g,1 )2
11
jim
jim
kgp
kgp
l=1
ci
(3.27)
Because D has a single degenerate eigenvalue, the rst order eigenvector derivatives of the set of planet modes can not be determined. The second order eigenvalue
derivatives are derived by calculating the eigenvalues of E in (3.10), and the results
are
c
ijlm ijlm 2
2(g,v
g,f )
2 f
=
jim 2
f v
(kgp
)
v=w+1 l=1
i
f = 1, , w
(3.28)
The expressions (3.20), (3.24), and (3.27) suggest that the eigenvalue derivatives
are proportional to modal strain energies in the associated stiness elements. Similar expressions for changing inertia parameters relate these eigenvalue derivatives to
modal kinetic energies of the component with changing inertia. The relations between
eigenvalue sensitivities and modal strain/kinetic energies are below, where the modal
51
strain and kinetic energies are dened in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2, respectively. These
relations apply to all three types of vibration modes of compound planetary gears.
The expressions for i and are collected in Appendix B.1. The following notation
is used: i, h = 1, , a; j, n = 1, , b; l = 1, , ci ; m, q = 1, , di .
Table 3.1: The expressions of modal strain energies in vibration mode u . All other subscripts and superscripts
for modal strain energies have the same meanings as for
i
stiness parameters. For example, Ucb,u
means the modal
strain energy in the translational bearing stiness of carrier i.
i
i
i
Ucb,u
= 12 kcb
[(xic,u )2 + (yc,u
)2 ]
i
i
i
Ucb,,,u
= 12 kcb,
(c,u
)2
ij
ij
i
j
Ucg,u
= 12 kcg
[(xic,u xjg,u )2 + (yc,u
yg,u
)2 ]
ij
ij
i
j
Ucg,,u = 12 kcg, (c,u
g,u
)2
ih
ip
i
h 2
Ucc,u
= 12 kcc
[(xic,u xhc,u )2 + (yc,u
yc,u
)]
1 ih
ih
i
h 2
Ucc,,u = 2 kcc, (c,u c,u )
j
j
j
Ugb,u
= 12 kgb
[(xjg,u )2 + (yg,u
)2 ]
jn
jn
j
n 2
Ugg,u
= 12 kgg
[(xjg,u xng,u )2 + (yg,u
yg,u
)]
jn
1 jn
j
n 2
Ugg,,u = 2 kgg, (g,u g,u )
ci
jilm
jilm jilm 2 jim
ji1m
Ugp,u
= 12 kgp
(g,u ) Ugp,u =
Ugp,u
l=1
jilm
j
jilm
jilm
i
i
where g,u
= yg,u
cos g,u
xig sin g,u
+ rg,u
g,u
+
ilm i
jilm
ilm
jilm
j ilm
p,u sin g,u p,u cos g,u up,u .
ci
1 ilmq ilmq 2 imq
ilmq
ilmq
Upp,u = 2 kpp (p,u ) Upp,u =
Upp,u
l=1
ilmq
ilm
ilq
where p,u
= sin(uilmq )p,u
sin(uilqm )p,u
+
ilmq ilm
ilqm ilq
ilm
ilq
cos(u )p,u + cos(u )p,u + up,u + up,u .
ci
1 ilm
ilm
ilm 2
ilm 2
im
ilm
Upb,u = 2 kp [(,u ) + (,u ) ]Upb,u =
Upb,u
l=1
ilm
i
ilm
where ,u
= xic,u cos uilm + yc,u
sin uilm p,u
,
ilm
i
ilm
i
ilm
ilm i
ilm
,u = xc,u sin u + yc,u cos u + rc c,u p,u
.
ilmq
1 ilmq
ilm
ilp 2
ilm
ilp 2
Upp,u = 2 kpp [(p,u p,u ) + (p,u p,u ) ]
ci
imq
ilmq
Upp,u
Upp,u =
l=1
uilm
ilmq
ilmq
p,u
Upp,,u
= 12 kpp,
( rilm
imq
Upp,,u
=
ci
uilq
p,u 2
)
rpilq
ilmq
Upp,,u
l=1
52
ilm
2
ilm 2
Tp,,u
= 12 u Ipilm (uilm
p ) /(rp )
i
c
im
ilm
Tp,,u
=
Tp,,u
l=1
2 i
u
i
= (xic,u )2 + (yc,u
)2 = i Ucb,u
i
kcb
kcb
2
u
i
i
= (c,u
)2 = i Ucb,,u
i
kcb,
kcb,
(3.29)
(3.30)
2 j
u
j
2
j
2
j = (xg,u ) + (yg,u ) = j Ugb,u
kgb
kgb
(3.31)
u
2
j
j
= (g,u
)2 = j Ugb,,u
j
kgb,
kgb,
(3.32)
2
u
ilm 2
ilm 2
im
=
[(,u
) + (,u
) ] = im Upb,u
im
kp
k
p
l
(3.33)
ci
(B) Eigenvalue sensitivities to shaft stinesses between carriers/central gears and between coaxial planets:
2 ij
u
i
j
2
i
j
2
ij = (xc,u xg,u ) + (yc,u yg,u ) = ij Ucg,u
kcg
kcg
53
(3.34)
2
u
ij
i
j
= (c,u
g,u
)2 = ij Ucg,,u
ij
kcg,
kcg,
(3.35)
u
2 ih
i
h 2
= (xic,u xhc,u )2 + (yc,u
yc,u
) = ih Ucc,u
ih
kcc
kcc
(3.36)
u
2
i
h 2
ih
= (c,u
c,u
) = ih Ucc,,u
ih
kcc,
kcc,
(3.37)
2 jn
u
j
n 2
j
n 2
jn = (xg,u xg,u ) + (yg,u yg,u ) = jn Ugg,u
kgg
kgg
(3.38)
u
2
jn
j
n 2
= (g,u
g,u
) = jn Ugg,,u
jn
kgg,
kgg,
(3.39)
u
2
imq
ilm
ilq 2
ilm
ilq 2
[(p,u
p,u
) + (p,u
p,u
) ] = imq Upp,u
imq =
kpp
kpp
l
ci
c
uilm
uilq
2
u
p,u
p,u 2
imq
=
(
) = imq Upp,,u
imq
ilq
ilm
rp
kpp,
k
r
p
pp,
l
(3.40)
(3.41)
(3.42)
2
u
ilmq 2
im,q
=
(p,u
) = imq Upp,u
imq
kpp
kpp
l
(3.43)
ci
ci
2 i
u
i
= u [(xic,u )2 + (yc,u
)2 ] = i Tc,u
i
mc
mc
(3.44)
2 i
u
i
= u (c,u
)2 = i Tc,,u
i
Ic,u
Ic,u
(3.45)
2 j
u
j
2
j
2
j = u [(xg,u ) + (yg,u ) ] = j Tg,u
mg
mg
(3.46)
u
2 j
j
= u (g,u
)2 = j Tg,,u
j
Ig,u
Ig,u
(3.47)
54
u
2
ilm 2
ilm 2
im
=
[(p,u
) + (p,u
) ] = im Tp,u
u
im
mp
m
p
l=1
(3.48)
c
2
(uilm
2 im
u
p )
= u
= im Tp,,u
im
ilm
2
Ip
(rp )
Ip
l=1
(3.49)
ci
Application of the welldened modal properties (2.40)(2.48) to the derived eigensensitivities in (3.29)(3.49) and (B.1)(B.30) yields some immediate results. The rotational mode property that central gears and carriers have no translational motion
leads to the independence of all rotational modes to the masses of all central gears
and carriers, and the translational support/shaft stinesses of these components. Due
to the translational mode property that all central gears and carriers have no rotational motion, all translational modes are independent of the moments of inertia of
central gears and carriers, and the rotational support/shaft stinesses of these components. Similarly, planet mode properties ensure that all planet modes for a given
planet set are independent of all inertia and stiness parameters except for those
associated with this given planet set.
3.3.2
The formulae (3.29)(3.49) show that the modal strain/kinetic energies of compound planetary gears determine the eigenvalue sensitivities to stiness/inertia parameters. As a result, the modal strain/kinetic energy distribution plots of a certain
mode qualitatively and quantitatively give the sensitivity of the natural frequency
associated with this mode to all system parameters.
Consider the twostage compound planetary gear system shown in Figure 3.1,
where for clarity only the mesh stinesses (no bearing and shaft stinesses) are shown
55
as solid lines. The nominal system parameters are listed in Table 3.3, and the lowest
fourteen natural frequencies are listed in Table 3.4. Consider the case where practical
design or troubleshooting needs require the fourth natural frequency (4 ) to be greater
than 900 Hz, where it is 4 =871Hz with nominal parameters values. The mode
associated with 4 is a rotational mode, and its mode shape is shown in Figure 3.2.
Table 3.3: Nominal parameters of the example system
shown in Figure 3.1.
Number of Carriers
Number of Central
Gears
Number
of
Planet
Trains
Number of Planets per
Train
Planet Location
Translational Support
Stiness (N/m)
Torsional Support Stiness (Nm/rad )
Torsional Shaft Stinesses (Nm/rad )
Torsional Shaft Stinesses (Nm/rad )
2
4
c1 =4, c2 =6
d1 =2, d2=1
1l1 (0) = 2(l1)
; l = 1, , 4
4
2(l1)
2l1
(0) = 6 ; l = 1, , 6
1l2 (0) = 1l1 (0) + 32
1l21
1l12 = 70
= 218
,
500 106 If j = 1, i = 1, m = 1
or j = 2, i = 1, m = 2
jilm
or j = 3, i = 2, m = 1
kgp =
or j = 4, i = 2, m = 1
0
Otherwise
6
500 10 If i = 1
ilmq
kpp
=
0
Otherwise
i
i
kcb,xx
= kcb,yy
= 1 109
j
j
kgb,xx
= kgb,yy
= 1 109
kpilm = 1 109
i
1
3
kcb,
= 0, kgb,
= kgb,
=0
2
4
kgb, = kgb, = 500 106
jn
jn
ih
ih
kg,xx
= kg,yy
= 0,kc,xx
= kc,yy
=0
6
800 10
If i = 1, j = 3
ij
ij
= kcg,yy
=
kcg,xx
0
Otherwise
jn
ih
kg,
= k
c, = 0
200 106 If i = 1, j = 3
ij
=
kcg,
0
Otherwise
Continued on next page
56
55, 56
57
58, 59
60
Natural
Frequency
(Hz)
0
657
871
1030
1134
1152
1535
1554
1854
1946
2421
2944
3190
9083
9148
9408
11073
57
Vibration
Mode
Type
R
T
R
P2
R
T
R
T
P1
T
T
R
T
T
R
T
R
(a)
Central Gear 2
Central Gear 4
Planet 2
Planet 1
Planet 1
Input Shaft
Output
Shaft
Central
Gear 1
Central
Gear 3
Shaft
connection
beteween
Carrier 1
and Central
Gear 3
Carrier 2
Carrier 1
Stage 2
Stage 1
Stage 1
(b)
(c)
Central Gear 2
Stage 2
Central Gear 4
Train 2
Train 1
Carrier 2
Train 3
Planet
1
Central
Gear 1
Train 2
Central
Gear 3
Train 4
Train 1
Planet
2
Train 5
Train 6
Planet 1
in Train 1
Carrier 1
Train 3
Train 4
Figure 3.1: The example system for the eigensensitivity analysis in this chapter.
58
Stage 2
Stage 1
Figure 3.2: Mode shape of vibration mode 4 (4 = 871Hz) for the example system
with nominal parameter values.
The modal strain and kinetic energy distribution plots for this mode are shown
321
421
and kgp
(the mesh stinesses of the sunin Figure 3.3. The strain energies in kgp
planet and ringplanet meshes in the second stage of the example system) are the
highest modal strain energies, and the modal kinetic energy associated with Ip21 (the
moment of inertia of the planets in stage 2) is the largest modal kinetic energy. Thus,
321
421
, kgp
and Ip21 are the most eective parameters in tuning 4 .
kgp
321
421
and kgp
, and the change of Ip21 .
Figure 3.4 shows 4 versus the variation of kgp
321
421
and kgp
increase 16% from their nominal values, or Ip21 is reduced
When both kgp
by 8.2% from its nominal value, 4 is tuned to be larger than 900 Hz, which achieves
the design goal.
3.4
ilmq
ilmq
jilm
ilmq
The candidate mistuned parameters are kgp
, kpp
, kpilm , kpp
, kpp,
, milm
p , and
Ipilm , because these perturbed parameters are the only ones that break the symmetry
of planet sets to create mistuning. This study focuses on the case of one mistuned
parameter because equations (3.11)(3.13) show that the impact of multiple mistuned
59
x 10
(a)
3.5
42*1
32*1
associated with k gp,4
3
2.5
U4gb,,4
2
1.5
1
2
Ugb,,4
0.5
0
2
U1cb,4 Ucb,4 U1 U2 U3 U4 U1
U2
gb,4 gb,4 gb,4 gb,4 cb,,4
U1
cb,,4 gb,,4
U3gb,,4
2*1
11*1 21*2 32*1 42*1 1*12 1*1 U1*2
U13
U13
Ugp,4 Ugp,4 Upp,4 Upb,4 pb,4 Upb,4
U
cg,4 cg ,,4 U
gp,4 gp,4
12
x 10
2*1
10
associated with I p
(b)
8
6
4
2
0
T1c,4
T2g,4
T2c,4 T1
g,4
T3g,4 T4g,4
T1c, ,4 T2
c,,4
1*2
1*1 1*1
3
4
2
T1g,,4 Tg,,4 Tg,,4 Tg,,4 T p,4 Tp,,4 Tp,4
T1*2 T2*1
p,4
p,,4
T2*1
p,,4
Figure 3.3: Modal (a) strain, and (b) kinetic energy distributions associated with
mode 4 (4 = 871Hz).
60
950
(a)
4 (Hz)
900
=0.16
850
800
750
700
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1050
(b)
1000
4 (Hz)
950
900
=0.082
850
800
750
700
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
321
k 321 k
421
k 421 k
0.3
0.4
0.5
I 21 I21
Figure 3.4: (a) 4 versus = gp k321gp = gp k421gp , and (b) 4 versus = p I21p .
p
gp
gp
321
321
and kgp
are the nominal and perturbed values of the mesh stiness between
kgp
the sun gear in stage 2 (central gear 3) and planet 1 in any planet train of planet set
421
421
2. kgp
and kgp
are the nominal and perturbed values of the mesh stiness between
the ring gear in stage 2 (central gear 4) and planet 1 in any planet train of planet set
2. Ip21 and Ip21 are the nominal and perturbed values of moment of inertia of planet
1 in any planet train of planet set 2.
61
between central gear j and planet m in train 1 of planet set i) is the only varying
ji1m
. In order to apply equations (3.1)(3.10,
parameter, and its nominal value is kgp
K
ji1m
kgp
..
2M
ji1m 2 = 0
(kgp
)
.
Kji1m
g1
ji1m
kgp
..
.
..
.
T
Kji1m
gp
ji1m
kgp
Kji1m
gp
ji1m
kgp
Kji1m
g3
ji1m
kgp
..
(3.50)
2K
ji1m 2 = 0
(kgp
)
(3.51)
ji1m
where all submatrices of K/kgp
are zero except the four submatrices shown in
(3.51), which are coupling terms between central gear j and planet m in the rst
train of stage i. Substitution of l = 1 (for the rst train) into equations (3.15)(3.17)
ji1m
.
shows that these four submatrices depend linearly on kgp
ji1m
By applying equations (3.1)(3.3), the sensitivities of a rotational mode to kgp
are
2
u
ji1m 2
ji1m
ji1m = (g,u ) = ji1m Ugp,u
kgp
kgp
(3.52)
ji1m ji1m
g,u
g,v
u
=
v
ji1m
u v
kgp
v=1,v=u
(3.53)
2 u
2
ji1m ji1m 2
(g,u
g,v )
ji1m 2 =
(kgp )
u
v
v=1,v=u
(3.54)
62
ji1m
ji1m
where Ugp,u
is the modal strain energy in the stiness kgp
. The sensitivities of a
rotational mode or a distinct planet mode to all other possible mistuned parameters
are listed in Appendix B.2.
ji1m
are calculated by
For a pair of translational modes, the eigensensitivities to kgp
ji1m 2
(g,u
) 0
0
0
(3.55)
ji1m
is the mesh deection between gear j and planet m in train 1 of planet
where g,u
set i in vibration mode u . The eigenvalue sensitivities from the eigenvalues of D are
2
u
ji1m 2
ji1m
ji1m = (g,u ) = ji1m Ugp,u
kgp
kgp
u+1
ji1m = 0
kgp
(3.56)
ji1m
ji1m
where Ugp,u
is the modal strain energy associated with kgp
in mode u .
By applying (3.6)(3.10), the closedform expressions for the rst order eigenvector
and second order eigenvalue derivatives are
ji1m ji1m
g,v
g,u
u
=
v
ji1m
u v
kgp
v=1,v=u,u+1
ji1m ji1m
2(g,v
g,u )
2 u
=
ji1m 2
u v
(kgp
)
v=1,v=u,u+1
u+1
ji1m = 0
kgp
(3.57)
2 u+1
ji1m 2 = 0
(kgp
)
(3.58)
Equations (3.56)(3.58) show that one of a pair of translational modes is not afji1m
; the translational mode properties are
fected by the mistuned mesh stiness kgp
retained in this mode, even though the system symmetry is broken by the mistuning.
ji1m
and loses its welldened
The other translational mode, however, changes with kgp
from all other modes in (3.57). The magnitude of a contaminating mode v is deji1m
and the proximity of the associated
termined by that modes mesh deection g,v
both modes of a pair of degenerate translational modes. In theses cases, the degenerate translational natural frequency of the unperturbed system splits into two distinct
natural frequencies, and both associated modes lose their translational mode properties. Any other mistuned parameter aects only one of the pair of translational
modes and has no impact on the other mode.
Using the example system of Figure 3.1, Table 3.3, and Table 3.4, Figure 3.5(a)
shows the impact of the perturbed mesh stiness between central gear 3 and planet 1
3211
) on a pair of degenerate translational frequencies (12
in train 1 of planet set 2 (kgp
3211
and 13 ). 12 is aected by kgp
dramatically, while 13 remains unchanged. Figure
3.5(b) illustrates how the same pair of translational frequencies is changed by the
bearing stiness of planet 1 in train 1 of planet set 2 (kp211 ). The mistuned parameter
kp211 splits the loci of 12 and 13 and changes both of them.
For a set of planet modes with a degenerate natural frequency, the procedure in
(3.4)(3.10) is applied to calculate their eigensensitivities. This degenerate eigenvalue
with multiplicity w 2 is u = u+1 = = u+w1 . The associated eigenvectors
are chosen to be the preferred eigenvectors = [u , , u+w1] that diagonalize
64
1585
(a)
Natural Frequencies (Hz)
1580
1575
1570
1565
1560
13
1555
1550
12
1545
0. 5
0. 4
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1557
(b)
1556
1555
1554
13
1553
1552
12
1551
1550
1549
1548
0. 5
0. 4
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
3211
kp3211 k
p
,
3211
kp
3211
3211
. kgp
and kgp
are the nominal and perturbed values of the mesh stiness
between the sun gear in stage 2 (central gear 3) and planet 1 in train 1 of planet set 2.
kp211 and kp211 are the nominal and perturbed values of the bearing stiness of planet
1 in train 1 of planet set 2.
65
ji1m 2
(g,u
) 0
0
K
D = T ji1m =
..
.
kgp
symm.
u
ji1m
kgp
u+1
ji1m
kgp
ji1m 2
= (g,u
) =
= =
eigenvalues yield
0
0
..
.
0 ww
2
ji1m
ji1m Ugp,u
kgp
u+w1
ji1m
kgp
=0
(3.59)
(3.60)
ji1m
ji1m
and Ugp,u
are the mesh deection and modal strain energy associated
where g,u
ji1m
in mode u .
with kgp
lational modes in equations (3.57)(3.58). Only one of the two natural frequencies
is aected. When the planet mode frequency multiplicity is greater than two, D in
(3.59) has a degenerate zero eigenvalue. Therefore, the eigenvector derivatives of these
ji1m
can not be determined.
planet modes with respect to the mistuned parameter kgp
2 u+1
ji1m 2
(kgp
)
ji1m ji1m
g,u )
2(g,v
u v
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
2
= (ku+w1
ji1m 2 =
)
gp
(3.61)
The eigensensitivities of planet modes to all other mistuned parameters are collected in Appendix B.2. Equations (3.60)(3.61) and (88)(99) reveal that only one of
a set of degenerate planet modes is aected by a single mistuned parameter and loses
it welldened modal properties. All other planet modes of the set retain their distinctive modal properties; their natural frequency is unchanged, but its multiplicity
is reduced to w 1.
66
The above analytical results show that the eigenvalue sensitivity of all mode types
to a mistuned parameter is proportional to the modal strain/kinetic energy associated
with this mistuned parameter. Therefore, as for tuned systems, inspection of the
modal strain/kinetic energy distribution for mistuned systems remains an eective
way to quantitatively determine the parameters that have the largest impact on a
certain mode.
3.5
Conclusion
The major results for the eigensensitivities of general compound planetary gears
to all stiness and inertia parameters are summarized as follows:
(1) All eigenvalue derivatives are proportional to the modal strain/kinetic energies
associated with the perturbed parameters. Application of the welldened modal
properties of general compound planetary gears simplies the eigensensitivity expressions to compact, closedform formulae for all parameter variations. For both
tuned and mistuned systems, the modal strain/kinetic energy distribution plots
give eective and straightforward means to identify which system parameters
have the greatest impact on tuning the related natural frequency. This process
can be done qualitatively and quantitatively by inspection.
(2) For tuned systems, the eigenvector sensitivities of degenerate translational and
planet modes can not be determined, although the second order eigenvalue derivatives can be. The rst and second order eigenvalue derivatives of degenerate
eigenvalues of the original system are such that degenerate eigenvalues remain
degenerate for parameter perturbations that preserve the tuned symmetry. Rotational modes are independent of translational support/shaft stinesses and masses
67
of central gears/carriers. Translational modes are independent of torsional support/shaft stinesses and moments of inertia of central gears/carriers. Planet
modes of a certain planet set are independent of any system parameters associated
with other planet sets. They are also independent of the mass/moment of inertia
parameters and support/shaft stiness parameters of all central gears/carriers.
(3) When a system is perturbed by a mistuned parameter, a degenerate translational mode natural frequency of the unperturbed system splits into two distinct
frequencies. A mistuned planet bearing stiness, translational shaft stiness between two planets in a stepped planet arrangement, or planet mass impacts both
modes associated with the two frequencies, while any other mistuned parameter
aects only one of the modes despite the apparent disruption of system symmetry. Parameter mistuning always splits degenerate planet mode frequencies
of the stage associated with the mistuned parameter into two frequencies. One
frequency keeps its original value and its associated modes retain the welldened
planet mode properties; the other frequency is distinct and its associated mode
loses the planet mode properties.
68
4.1
Introduction
Natural frequency veering is the phenomenon that two eigenvalue loci approach
each other and then abruptly veer away when a certain parameter varies, and natural frequency crossing refers to the situation that two eigenvalue loci approach and
cross each other with the variation of a parameter. These phenomena are commonly observed in dierent mechanical systems and investigated in previous studies [42, 72, 8082, 89]. All these previous studies suggest that the eigenvalue loci
veering and crossing patterns are important to the free vibration analysis and further dynamics study of a mechanical system because the vibration modes retain their
characteristics in case of crossing and they change dramatically near the vicinity of
stronglycoupled veering natural frequencies.
Planetary gear natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena are observed
by lots of researchers, such as Cunlie et al. [22], Botman [16], Saada and Velex [85],
Kahraman [43, 45], and Lin and Parker [57]. The systematical investigation on planetary gear natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena, however, was not performed until Lin and Parkers investigation in [59]. By calculating the coupling factors
69
that approximate the local curvatures of two close eigenvalue loci and applying the
structured vibration properties in [56], they derived the veering and crossing patterns
for simple planetary gears. The research scopes for all these previous studies are
limited to simple planetary gears. Due to the involving of steppedplanet, meshedplanet, and multistage structures that are unique to compound planetary gears, the
eigensensitivities for compound planetary gears dier from those for simple planetary gears [36], and the results for simple planetary gears in [59] can not be applied
to compound planetary gears. In addition, there is no published literature on the
veering and crossing patterns for compound planetary gears. It is, hence, necessary
to systematically investigate the natural frequency veering and crossing patterns for
general compound planetary gears.
4.2
the ring gear in the rst stage of the example system that is shown in Figure 3.1
with the nominal parameters and natural frequencies listed in Tables 3.3 and 3.4,
varies, both natural frequency veering and crossing happen in Figure 4.1. The loci of
translational frequencies 17 and 18 cross the locus of a rotational frequency 19 at
2
increases to roughly twice of its nominal value. The loci of 17 and
point O when kgb
18 veer away from the loci of another pair of translational frequencies 20 and 21
2
in the vicinity of point O when kgb
is 2.75 times of its nominal value.
Points A and B are on the loci of 17 and 18 in the vicinity of the locicrossing
point O. Figure 4.2 shows the translational mode shapes that associated with 17 and
70
3600
3400
D'
Veering
20, 21
3200
C'
O'
D
19
3000
Crossing
A'
B
O
B'
A
2800
17, 18
2600
2400
1.84
1.00
1.50
2.04
2.00
2.24
2.75
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
k2gb/k2gb,nominal
Figure 4.1: Natural frequency crossing and veering phenomena in the example system
2
varies.
when kgb
2
2
18 at points A (when kgb
is 1.84 times of its nominal value) and B (when kgb
is 2.24
times of its nominal value) in Figure 4.1. The mode shapes in Figure 4.2(a) are similar
to those in 4.2(b). That is, the translational modes 17 and 18 retain their modal
2
varies in the vicinity of point O. In addition, Figure 4.3 shows
properties when kgb
the rotational mode shapes at points A and B in Figure 4.1. There is no dierence
between these two mode shapes in Figure 4.3. This matches the eigensensitivity
2
has no impact on any rotational mode. Hence,
results from previous chapter that kgb
both the rotational frequency 17 and the translational frequencies 17 and 18 retain
their mode shapes and modal properties in the vicinity of the locicrossing point O
2
varies.
when kgb
Points C and D around the lociveering point O are on the loci of 17 and 18 .
Figure 4.4 demonstrates the translational mode shapes that associated with these two
71
(a)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
(b)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
Figure 4.2: Mode shapes of the translational modes associated with 17 and 18 at
points A (subgure a) and B (subgure b) in Figure 4.1.
72
(a)
(b)
Stage1
Stage2
Stage1
Stage2
Figure 4.3: Mode shapes of the rotational mode associated with 19 at points A
(subgure a) and B (subgure b) in Figure 4.1.
73
2
frequencies at points C (when kgb
is 1.5 times of its nominal value) and D in Figure
2
is three times of its nominal value). The mode shapes in Figure 4.4(a)
4.1 (when kgb
are signicantly dierent from those in 4.4(b). The components in Stage 1 have large
amplitudes and Stage 2 components barely moves in Figure 4.4(b). In Figure 4.4(b),
however, the components in Stage 2 have large amplitudes and the vibrations of Stage
1 components are insignicant. Hence, the pair of translational modes 17 and 18
experiences dramatic changes in mode shapes and modal properties in the vicinity
2
varies. Points C and D in Figure 4.1 are on the
of lociveering point O when kgb
loci of another pair of translational modes 20 and 21 . The mode shapes associated
with 20 and 21 at these two points are shown in Figure 4.5. The mode shapes
at point C are signicantly dierent from those at point D . Therefore, both pairs
of translational frequencies [17 , 17 ] and [20 , 21 ] lose their original mode shape
2
varies. Such
and modal properties in the vicinity of the locicrossing point when kgb
dramatic change in vibration mode shapes in the vicinity of natural frequency veering
is called mode localization in several studies [42, 72, 81, 82] or high mode sensitivity
in some other studies [20, 69]. Taking another look at Figures 4.4 and 4.5, the mode
shapes at point C are similar to those in point D , and the mode shapes at point
C are very close to those in point D. That is, the two pair of translational modes
[17 , 17 ] and [20 , 21 ] interchange their mode shapes and modal properties during
2
.
the natural frequency veering caused by the variation of kgb
This example indicates that natural frequency veering and crossing phenomena
present in compound planetary gears. Because slight variations in system parameters
may cause dramatic changes in the mode shapes and dynamic responses in vicinity
of natural frequency veering while mode shapes and dynamic responses have no such
74
(a)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
(b)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
Figure 4.4: Mode shapes of the translational modes associated with 17 and 18 at
points C (subgure a) and D (subgure b) in Figure 4.1.
75
(a)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
(b)
Stage1
Stage1
Stage2
Stage2
Figure 4.5: Mode shapes of the translational modes associated with 20 and 21 at
points C (subgure a) and D (subgure b) in Figure 4.1.
76
changes in the vicinity of natural frequency crossing, to understand the natural frequency veering and crossing patterns is critical for the design and troubleshooting of
compound planetary gears. In the following section, the method to detect eigenvalue
veering and crossing in dynamic systems is rst introduced. Then all the system parameters for compound planetary gears are divided into two groups: tuned parameters
(the variation of this group of system parameters does not break the axisymmetry
of any planet set) and mistuned parameters (the axisymmetry of a certain stage is
broken by the variations of this group of system parameters). The natural frequency
veering and crossing patterns for each group of parameters are investigated and the
general rules of eigenvalue loci veering and crossing for general compound planetary
gears are derived.
4.3
77
unperturbed ones, as
2
s
s = os +
 0 + 12 2 2s =0
=
2
t
t = ot +
 0 + 12 2 2t =0
=
(4.1)
Both Perkins and Mote [80] and Lin and Parker [59] believe that there exist terms that
depends on
1
s t
derivatives in equation (4.1). These terms are called the coupling factors in their
studies and the evaluation of these coupling factors for the unperturbed eigenvalue
problem provides key indications of the veering or crossing of the two eigenvalue loci
in the vicinities of s =0 and t =0 . It is because the coupling terms dominate
and
2 t
2
2 s
2
when s and t are nearly equal. The loci concavities that are determined
by the second order eigenvalue derivatives, therefore, strongly rely on these coupling
factors. One main task of this study is to locate the coupling factors in the second
order eigenvalue derivatives for compound planetary gears.
When s is a distinct eigenvalue for the eigenvalue problem of a general compound
planetary gear in (2.39), insertion of (2.2) and (3.2) into (3.3) yields the second order
eigenvalue derivative for s in terms of [s , s , s , M , K ] as
!
T
1
(K
M
)
s
s
v
v +
s =2Ts (K s M ) (Ts M s )s +
2
s
v
v=1,v=s
Ts (K s M s M )s
#2
"
2 Ts (K s M )v
T
= s s M s +
+
s v
v=1,v=s
Ts (K s M s M )s
"
#2
2 Ts (K s M )v
=
+ Ts (K s M 2s M )s
s v
v=1,v=s
78
(4.2)
When another distinct eigenvalue t is close to s , the only term in (4.2) that depends
on
1
s t
is
s,t
"
#2
2 Ts (K s M )t
=
s t
(4.3)
where s,t is the coupling factor between s and t and it is for the locus of s .
Replacing the subscript s with t in equation (4.2) yields the second order eigenvalue
derivative for t as
t
"
#2
2 Tt (K t M )v
=
+ Tt (K t M 2t M )t
t v
(4.4)
v=1,v=t
1
t s
t,s
in (4.4) is
#2
"
2 Tt (K t M )s
=
t s
(4.5)
#
"
where t,s is the coupling factor for the locus of t . Because t s and Tt (K t M )s
is a scalar, the fact that the transpose of a scalar is equal to itself gives
"
# "
#T
Tt (K t M )s = Tt (K t M )s
# "
#
"
= Ts (K t M )t Ts (K s M )t
(4.6)
(4.7)
Equation (4.7) shows that the coupling factor for t is approximately equal to that for
s with the opposite sign. The evaluation of [s,t , t,s ] for the unperturbed system
(i.e., = 0 ) quanties the strength of the veering between the loci of s and t as
follows [59,80]. Larger s,t and t,s  (the absolute values for these coupling factors)
indicates sharper changes of the loci and stronger veering. If s,t = t,s = 0, the loci
of s and t cross each other instead of veering.
79
Lin and Parker [59] extends the above quantied veering detection method to
degenerate eigenvalues of planetary gears. Let s = s+1 = = s+m1 be a
degenerate eigenvalue with multiplicity m. The general form for the second order
derivatives of the degenerate eigenvalue is [29, 59]
#2
"
2 Ti (K i M )v
i =
+ Ti (K i M 2iM )i
i v
v=1,v=s, , s+m1
(4.8)
1
i t
(4.9)
Considering s = s+1 = = s+m1 and collecting all the terms that depend on
1
t s
(4.10)
k=s
1
s t
x,(t, ,t+n1)
s t
k=t
(4.11)
s+m1
k=s
1
t s
#2
"
2 Ty (K y M )k
, y = t, , t + n 1
s t
80
(4.12)
4.4
Tuned parameters refer to the group of system parameters whose variation does
not break the axisymmetry of any planet set in a general compound planetary gear.
Based on the eigensensitivity analysis results in previous chapter, tuned parameters
can be classied into three groups: rotational, translational, and planet tuned parameters. Because any rotational mode is independent of the change of translational
stiness (bearing or shaft connection) and the change of masses in any component.
Hence, only the rotational bearing and shaft connection stinesses for carriers and
j
jn
ij
i
ih
, kgb,
, kgg,
, kcc,
, kcg,
) and the moments of inertia of carriers
central gears (kcb,
and central gears have impact on rotational frequency loci. These parameters are
rotational tuned parameters in this study. All translational bearing and shaft connecj
i
jn
ih
ij
, kgb
, kgg
, kcc
, kcg
) and the masses
tion stinesses for carriers and central gears (kcb
of carriers and central gears are translational tuned parameters in this investigation,
jilm
,
because they only impact translational frequencies and their associated modes. kgp
ilmq
ilmq
ilm
, kpp
, kpilm , milm
are system parameters that associated with certain
kpp
p , and Ip
planet in a specic planet train of stage i. The change of any of these parameters
will cause stage i to lose its axisymmetry. There is only one way to change these
parameters while keeping stage i tuned. It is to change these parameters in all the
trains of stage i instead of just in a specic planet train. Such parameter variations
are also considered to be tuned, and these parameters that impact all the trains in
imq
jim
imq
im
, kpp
, kpp
, kpim , mim
the same stage (kgp
p , and Ip ) are planet tuned parameters.
Because all compound planetary gear natural frequencies and their associated
vibration modes are classied into three dierent types: rotational, translational,
81
and planet, the veering and crossing of the two approaching natural frequency loci
always fall into one of following six cases.
(A) Two rotational frequency loci:
j
Rotational tuned parameters impact rotational frequencies [36]. Taking kgb,
explained as follows.
Let s and t be two rotational eigenvalues. Application of equations (4.3) and
(4.5) directly (or extracting the terms depending on
1
s t
in equation (B.3))
j
as
gives the coupling factors of s and s with respect to kgb,
kj
s,tgb, =
j
j 2
2(g,t
g,s
)
kj
= t,sgb,
s t
(4.13)
j
j
where g,s
and g,t
are the rotations of central gear j in rotational modes s and
j
j
= 0 or g,t
= 0, the coupling factors in equation (4.13)
t, respectively. If g,s
j
varies.
are equal to zero, and the loci of s and t cross each other when kgb,
The modal properties of rotational mode [53], however, show that the rotation
of central gear j is not zero in all rotational modes except the rigid body mode.
j
is changed. Following
Therefore, two rotational loci always veer away when kgb,
the same process, the veering/crossing patterns of two rotational frequency loci
with respect to the change of other rotational tuned parameters are determined
j
.
and the results are the same as that for kgb,
the example for planet tuned parameters. Insertion of (3.18) into equations (4.3)
82
1
s t
application of the rotational mode properties give the coupling factors of s and
jim
as
s with respect to kgp
k jim
s,tgp
2
k jim
jim jim 2
(ci g,s
g,t ) = t,sgp
s t
(4.14)
jim
jim
where g,s
and g,t
are the mesh deections between central gear j and planet
zero except in the rigid body mode, the two rotational loci veer away with the
jim
. The same result applies to other planet tuned parameters.
variation of kgp
resentative example for veering/crossing detection of two approaching translational frequency loci. s = s+1 and t = t+1 are two translational eigenvalue
loci. Application of equations (4.11) and (4.12) directly (or collecting the terms
depending on
kj
1
s t
in (B.4)) yields
kj
j
j
j
j
2(xjg,t xjg,s +yg,t
yg,s
)2 +2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s +yg,t+1
yg,s
)2
s t
j
j
j
kgb,
2(xj xj
+y j y j
)2 +2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s+1 +yg,t+1
yg,s+1
)2
s+1,t+1
= g,t g,s+1 g,t g,s+1 s+1
t
j
j
j
j
j
kgb,
2(xjg,t xjg,s +yg,t
yg,s
)2 +2(xjg,t xjg,s+1 +yg,t
yg,s+1
)2
t,s+1 =
t s
j
j
j
j
j
kgb,
2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s +yg,t+1
yg,s
)2 +2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s+1 +yg,t+1
yg,s+1
)2
t+1,s+1 =
t+1 s
gb,
=
s,tgb, = s,t+1
kj
gb,
s+1,t
=
kj
t,sgb, =
kj
gb,
t+1,s
=
(4.15)
where (xg,s ,yg,s ), (xg,s+1 ,yg,s+1), (xg,t ,yg,t ), and (xg,t+1 , yg,t+1 ) are the translations
of central gear j in translational modes s, s + 1, t, and t + 1, respectively. Because the modal properties of translational modes ensure nonzero translations
of central gear j in all translational modes, the coupling factors in (4.15) are not
83
equal to zero. As a result, the loci of two translational frequencies veer away
j
varies. It is the same for other translational tuned parameters.
when kgb
jim
kgp
s,t
jim
kgp
2(
c
l=1
= s,t+1 =
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t ) +2(
c
l=1
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t+1 )
s t
ci
jilm jilm 2
jilm jilm 2
2(
g,s+1 g,t ) +2(
g,s+1
g,t+1 )
l=1
l=1
i
c
k jim
k jim
gp
gp
s+1,t
= s+1,t+1
=
jim
kgp
t,s
jim
kgp
2(
= t,s+1 =
c
l=1
s+1 t
ci
jilm jilm 2
jilm jilm 2
g,s+1
g,t ) +2(
g,s
g,t )
l=1
jim
kgp
jim
kgp
t+1,s = t+1,s+1 =
2(
(4.16)
c
l=1
t s
jilm jilm 2
g,s+1
g,t+1 ) +2(
c
l=1
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t+1 )
t+1 s
To vanish the coupling factors in (4.16), the gear mesh deections should satisfy
jilm
jilm
jilm
jilm
jilm
g,s
= g,s+1
= 0 or g,t
= g,t+1
= 0, where g,w
, w = s, s + 1, t, t + 1 is
the mesh deection between central gear g and planet m in train l of stage i in
vibration mode w. It is, however, impossible according to the modal properties
for translational modes. As a result, the loci of translational frequencies always
jim
is altered and the same conclusion applies to other planet
veer away as kgp
tuned parameters.
(C) Two planetmode frequency loci:
Because central gears and carriers have no rotational or translational motions in
any planet mode, the change of any rotational or translational tuned parameters
has no impact on any planetmode natural frequencies. Planet tuned parameters,
hence, are the only parameters that impact planet mode. s = = s+m1 and
t = = t+n1 are two sets of planetmode eigenvalues with multiplicity m
84
jim
and n, respectively. Use kgp
as the example. Insertion of the related eigensen
sitivities in (3.28) and planet mode properties into equations (4.11) and (4.12)
yields
i
jim
kgp
x,(t, ,t+n1) =
t+n1
2(
c
l=1
jilm jilm 2
g,x
g,k )
s t
k=t
, x = s, , s + m 1
(4.17)
jim
kgp
y,(s, ,s+m1) =
s+m1
2(
c
l=1
k=s
jilm jilm 2
g,y
g,k )
t s
, y = t, , t + n 1
(4.17) and the loci of the two planetmode frequencies cross each other.
If the modes associated with s = = s+m1 and t = = t+n1 are
aliated to the same stage (m has to equal n in this case), the coupling factors
in (4.17) are not equal to zero because the planet mode properties guarantee
jim
.
that there are always mesh deections for kgp
The same result applies to other planet tuned parameters with the exception that
the planetmode frequency loci of the same stage may cross each other when the
planetmode frequencies are distinct, the associated modes are decoupled, and
ilm
the varying parameter is kpilm , milm
p , or Ip . The details of these exceptions are
1
s t
in equation
(B.3)) gives
kj
kj
j
j
j
j
2(g,t
g,s
)2 +2(g,t+1
g,s
)2
s t
gb,
=
s,tgb, = s,t+1
kj
t,sgb, =
j
kgb,
t+1,s =
j
j
2(g,t
g,s
)2
t s
j
j
2(g,t+1
g,s
)2
t+1 s
(4.18)
j
j
Because the modal properties of translational mode ensure that g,t
= g,t+1
= 0,
the coupling factors in (4.18) equal zero. The locus of the rotational frequency
j
is changed. It is the same
s , hence, crosses the locus of t = t+1 when kgb,
1
s t
kj
j
j
j
j
2(xjg,t xjg,s +yg,t
yg,s
)2 +2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s +yg,t+1
yg,s
)2
s t
j
j
j
kgb
2(xjg,t xjg,s +yg,t
yg,s
)2
t,s =
t s
j
j
j
kgb
2(xjg,t+1 xjg,s +yg,t+1
yg,s
)2
t+1,s =
t s
gb,
s,tgb = s,t+1
=
(4.19)
j
According to the modal properties of rotational mode, xjg,s and yg,s
are all equal
to zero. The coupling factors in equation (4.19), hence, are zero and the locus of
j
. The same result applies to
t = t+1 crosses that of s with the change of kgb,
86
the perturbed parameter. Insertion of (3.28) into (4.9) and 4.10 produces
i
jim
kgp
s,t
2(
jim
kgp
= s,t+1 =
c
l=1
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t ) +2(
k jim
t,sgp
2(
c
l=1
2(
c
l=1
t+1,s =
l=1
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t+1 )
s t
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t )
(4.20)
t s
jim
kgp
c
jilm jilm 2
g,s
g,t+1 )
t+1 s
(4.21)
jilm
g,t
jilm
g,t+1
=
ji1m
g,t
ji1m
g,t+1
(4.22)
The coupling factors in equation (4.22) vanishes after the insertion of the identities in (4.21) and (4.22) into (4.22). The locus of a rotational frequency, hence,
jim
varies. The same
are free to cross the loci of translational frequencies when kgp
planet tuned parameters, hence, are the only impacting parameters in this case.
Application of the same analytical process as that in Case D gives the result
that translational natural frequency loci are free to cross the loci of planetmode
frequencies as any translational or planet tuned parameter varies.
Table 4.1: Veering (V ) and crossing(X) pattern of a
general compound planetary gears with respect to the
change of any rotational tuned parameter. R means Rotational mode, T means Translational mode, P means
Planet mode. indicates that no veering/crossing is
possible.
Mode Types
R
T
P
T
X
V
X
88
R
V
X
X
T
X
P
X
R
V
X
X
T
X
V
X
P
X
X
V /X
The veering and crossing pattern of a general compound planetary gear with
respect to the change of any rotational, translational, and planet tuned parameter
are illustrated in Tables 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3, respectively. The natural frequency veering/crossing phenomena of the example system in Figures 4.1, 4.6, and 4.7 conrm
the patterns in these tables. In Figure 4.1, the loci of a pair of translational frequencies (17 , 18 ) cross the locus of the rotational frequency (19 ) and veer away from
2
varies. Figure 4.6 shows
another pair of translational frequencies (20 , 21 ) when kgb,
that the locus of a rotational frequency (57 ) crosses the loci of a pair of translational frequencies (58 , 59 ) and veers away from another rotational frequency (60 )
2
is changed. Figure 4.7 illustrates that the loci of a pair of translational
when kgb,
frequencies (55 , 56 ) cross the locus of a rotational frequency (57 ) and veer away
111
is altered.
from another pair of translational frequencies (58 , 59 ) when kgp
4.5
ilmq
jilm
ilmq
ilm
kgp
, kpp
, kpp
, kpilm , milm
are the only parameters that can break the
p , and Ip
axisymmetry of stage i and they are mistuned parameters. Similar to the previous
89
1.25
x 10
1.2
1.15
60
Veering
1.1
1.05
1
58, 59
0.95
Crossing
57
0.9
0.85
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
5.5
Figure 4.6: Natural frequency crossing and veering phenomena in the example system
2
changes.
when kgb,
90
10000
9900
9800
9700
9600
9500
58, 59
Veering
9400
9300
9200
57
9100
55, 56
9000
0.5
0.6
0.7
Crossing
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
k11*1
/k11*1
gp
gp, nominal
Figure 4.7: Natural frequency crossing and veering phenomena in the example system
111
changes.
when kgp
section, six cases are discussed based on the structured modal properties of compound
planetary gears.
(A) Two rotational frequency loci:
ji1m
as the representative exams and t are two rotational eigenvalues. Take kgp
s,tgp
2
k ji1m
ji1m ji1m 2
(g,s
g,t ) = t,sgp
s t
(4.23)
ji1m
ji1m
According to the rotational modal properties [53], g,s
and g,t
are not zero
if neither mode s nor mode t is a rigid body mode. Hence, s and t veer away
ji1m
varies and breaks the axisymmetry of stage i. It is the same for other
if kgp
mistuned parameters.
91
s crosses that of s+1 . Such crossing can not be explained by the coupling factors in equations (4.11)and (4.12), because
1
 0
s s+1 =
s+1 =
os+1
v=1,v=s,s+1
ji1m ji1m
g,s )
2(g,v
=0
s v
(4.24)
os
ji1m 2
) =0 and
Because (g,s
v=1,v=s,s+1
ji1m ji1m
g,s )
2(g,v
=0
s v
ji1m
varies. s+1 , however, is
translational modes, the locus of s changes as kgp
ji1m
. Hence, the locus of changing s naturally crosses the
not impacted by kgp
locus of unchanged s+1 . Now consider two pairs of nearly equal translational
frequencies s = s+1 and t = t+1 . Insertion of equation (3.55) into equations
(4.11) and (4.12) produces
k ji1m
s,tgp
k ji1m
gp
s+1,t
=
k ji1m
t,sgp
k ji1m
ji1m ji1m 2
ji1m ji1m 2
2(g,s
g,t ) +2(g,s
g,t+1 )
s t
ji1m
2(ji1m ji1m )2 +2(ji1m ji1m )2
kgp
s+1,t+1
= g,s+1 g,t s+1 tg,s+1 g,t+1
ji1m ji1m 2
ji1m
2(ji1m ji1m )2 +2(g,s
g,t )
kgp
t,s+1
= g,s+1 g,t t s
ji1m ji1m 2
ji1m
2(ji1m ji1m )2 +2(g,s
g,t+1 )
kgp
t+1,s+1
= g,s+1 g,t+1
t+1 s
k ji1m
gp
= s,t+1
=
gp
t+1,s
=
(4.25)
ji1m
ji1m
ji1m
ji1m
Because g,s
, g,s+1
, g,t
and g,t+1
are not equal to zero in a translational
mode, the coupling factors in equation (4.25) are nonzeros. As a result, the loci
ji1m
is perturbed
of s and s+1 veer away from those for t and t+1 when kgp
and stage i becomes mistuned. Other mistuned parameters impact two pairs of
nearlyequal translational frequencies in the same way.
92
s+1 = = s+m1 = os
v=1,v=s, ,s+m1
ji1m ji1m
2(g,v
g,s )
=0
s v
(4.26)
ji1m
) is not zero, the locus of
Because planet mode properties ensure that (g,s
changing s naturally crosses the loci of s+1 , , s+m1 which are straight
lines. For such frequency loci crossing, coupling factors do not exist. Similar
to Case B in this section, insertion of the eigensensitivities into equation (4.1)
provides the answer to such crossing phenomenon.
Consider another case that two sets of planetmode eigenvalues, s = =
ji1m
is at its nominal
s+m1 and t = = t+n1 , are close to each other when kgp
factors. Thus, the loci are free to cross each other in this situation. If the
two sets of planet modes are not decoupled, both sets of planet modes have
to be for the same stage and their multiplicity should be equal. Insertion of
the related eigensensitivities in (3.60)(3.61) and planet mode properties into
equations (4.11) and (4.12) yields
ji1m ji1m 2
t+n1
2(g,x
g,k )
, x = s,
s t
k=t
ji1m ji1m 2
s+m1
ji1m
2(g,y
g,k )
kgp
=
, y = t,
y,(s,
,s+m1)
t s
k=s
k ji1m
gp
x,(t,
,t+n1) =
93
, s+m 1
(4.27)
, t +n1
The fact that gji1m is not zero in any planet mode leads to nonzero coupling
factors in (4.27). The loci of s , , s+m1 , hence, always veer away from
ji1m
is changed. The same results
the loci of t , , t+n1 in this case when kgp
produces
k ji1m
s,tgp
k jim
t,sgp
ji1m
kgp
ji1m ji1m 2
ji1m ji1m 2
2(g,s
g,t ) +2(g,s
g,t+1 )
s t
jilm jilm 2
2(g,s
g,t )
t s
jilm jilm 2
2(g,s
g,t+1 )
t+1 s
k ji1m
gp
= s,t+1
=
t+1,s =
(4.28)
Dierent from Case D for tuned parameters, the identities in (4.21)(4.22) can
not be applied to (4.28) because only the central gearplanet mesh spring in
train 1 deforms. The coupling factors in (4.28), hence, do not vanish and veering
occurs when gji1m changes. It is the same for all other mistuned parameters.
(E) One rotational or translational frequency locus and one planetmode frequency
locus:
Application of the same analytical process as that in Case D in this section yields
the result that rotational or translational natural frequency loci always veer away
from the loci of planetmode frequencies as any mistuned parameter changes.
The above results for the veering/crossing patterns for mistuned parameters are
summarized Table 4.4. Compared to Tables 4.14.3, Table 4.4 shows more occurrences
of veering. The natural frequency veering/crossing phenomena of the example system
in Figure 4.8 conrm the results in Table 4.4. Figure 4.8 shows that one of the pair
of translational frequencies, 55 , crosses the locus of other translational frequency of
94
1111
the same pair, 56 when kgp
changes, and similar crossing phenomenon happens to
another pair of translational frequencies, 58 and 59 . Such split of translational frequency loci are caused by the break of axisymmetry as analyzed previously. Dierent
from Figures 4.6 and 4.7, the rotational frequency locus (57 ) in Figure 4.8 veers away
from the translational frequency locus (56 ) as predicted in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Veering (V ) and crossing(X) pattern of a general compound planetary gears with respect to the change
of any mistuned parameter. R means Rotational mode, T
means Translational mode, P means Planet mode. V /X
indicates that both veering and crossing are possible.
Mode Types
R
T
P
4.6
R
V
V
V
T
V
V /X
V
P
V
V
V /X
Conclusion
This study thoroughly investigates the natural frequency veering and crossing
of general compound planetary gears. By checking whether the axisymmetry in all
stages are retained, all system parameters are divided into tuned and mistuned parameters. Tuned parameters are further classied as rotational, translational, and
planet tuned parameters based on the eigensensitivity analysis result of previous
chapter. Taking advantage of the coupling factors which are eective measurements
for the veering of natural frequency loci and utilizing the structured modal properties, the veering/crossing patterns with respect to each group of tuned parameters
are determined. The veering/crossing patterns for mistuned parameter are derived
in a similar way. Dierent from the veering/crossing patterns with respect to the
95
9500
9450
Crossing
59
9400
58
9350
9300
9250
9200
Veering
57
9150
Crossing
9100
9050
0.8
56
55
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
k1111
/k1111
gp
gp, nominal
Figure 4.8: Natural frequency crossing and veering phenomena in the example system
1111
changes.
when kgp
96
5.1
Introduction
Previous research shows that for a simple planetary gear dierent mesh phases
between the multiple sunplanet and ringplanet meshes signicantly inuence the
dynamic response [5, 48, 56, 61, 75, 77, 86, 87, 94, 97]. From these studies, one would
expect that proper selection of mesh phases will also reduce the vibration and noise of
compound planetary gears. In order to properly optimize mesh phases in the design
stage, a complete understanding of all the mesh phase relations in general compound
planetary gears is needed. Any static or dynamic model must accurately represent
the mesh phases. This study presents these mesh phase relations.
A rotationaltranslational model for general compound planetary gears was developed by Kiracofe and Parker [53] to characterize modal properties. In this model,
each component has one rotational and two translational degrees of freedom. Bearings
and shaft connections are modeled by one torsional and two translational stinesses.
Gear meshes are modeled by linear stinesses. Because the number of teeth in contact
changes as the system rotates, the mesh stinesses vary, exciting the system vibration. To introduce timevarying mesh stiness or static transmission error excitation
97
to Kiracofe and Parkers model or any similar one, it is crucial to know the relative
phases between all gear meshes in the system as the gears rotate. Such calculations
require the mesh phase relations in this study.
Parker and Lin [77] claried the mesh phase relations for simple planetary gears.
The mesh phase relations of general compound planetary gears have not been studied
in the published literature except that Guo and Parker presented their preliminary
investigation on compound planetary gear mesh phasing in [54]. The diculty is that
the variety of compound congurations and the large number of gear meshes make
description of the mesh phase relations dicult. In addition, the gear meshes in a
compound planetary gear may have dierent mesh periods. The purpose of this study
is to systematically dene all the relative mesh phases in a general compound planetary gear, to dene the relative phase relations between the meshes with dierent
mesh periods, and to give a comprehensive approach to calculate these relative phases
and the relations between them.
The derived results are required for any simulation that does not track the actual tooth contact conditions of geometrically precise gears and teeth as the gears
rotate. Most commercial gear software does not track this contact; instead they use
lumped stiness representations of the tooth mesh. The same is true for conventional
lumpedparameter gear models used in the literature. The results herein provide all
needed results to calculate the required phases.
98
5.2
5.2.1
The mesh phase relations in this study are described by the relative phases between
mesh tooth variation functions. Mesh tooth variation functions track the number of
teeth in contact at each gear mesh as the gears rotate. These functions take only
integer values. Actual mesh stiness and static transmission error variations are
continuous functions whose mesh phase relations are identical to those of mesh tooth
variation functions [77], even though the shape of those periodic quantities are not the
rectangular functions studied here. The shapes of any of these quantities is immaterial
here. Our purpose is to examine only the phases between these quantities.
To accurately describe relative mesh phases in compound planetary gears, it is
necessary to dene the following terms: referred mesh, referring mesh and reference
point. A referred mesh is the gear mesh that serves as the reference for other gear
meshes. A gear mesh that refers to the referred mesh in a certain relative phase is
called the referring mesh. For example, in Figure 5.1 gear meshes A and B are the
referred and referring mesh, respectively, for the relative phase AB . Reference points
are the matching points in the mesh cycle of the referred and referring meshes. The
reference point in the referred mesh can be any point in the mesh cycle. The reference
point in the referring mesh must be the point that uniquely matches the reference
point in the associated referred mesh. In this study the pitch points of the referring
and referred meshes serve as the reference points for all relative phases. One could
also choose, for example, the highest point of single tooth contact. The choice of
reference point is arbitrary and does not aect the results that follow.
The denition of a relative phase between two meshes with dierent mesh periods
99
(t )T
A 1
C
2T
2
1
(t 2)T
C
t1
B
t2
t3
2T 
B
C(t 4 )T
t4
B
(t 4 )T
t5
2
1
T
0
t1
t2
2
1
0
B
B
t1 A(t 1)T
Figure 5.1: Mesh tooth variation functions for k A (t), k B (t), and k C (t). The relative
phases among these meshes are marked. The symbol denotes the time when the
pitch point of the associated gear mesh is in contact.
100
is described in Figure 5.1. The mesh periods of meshes A and B are T A and T B ,
respectively. Mesh A is the referred mesh, and mesh B is the referring mesh for the
relative phase AB . The mesh tooth variation function of mesh A is k A (t) with the
pitch point in contact at t = t1 . The mesh tooth variation function of mesh B is
k B (t). The pitch point of mesh B is in contact for the rst time at t2 (t2 > t1 ). Then
the relative phase of k B (t) referring to k A (t) is AB (t1 ) =
t2 t1
,
TB
referring time of this relative phase. Therefore, the value of AB (t1 ) is between 0 and
1, and AB (t1 )T B is a portion of the referring mesh period T B . The referring time
of a relative phase is the time when the reference point (i.e., the pitch point) of the
referred mesh is in contact. The referring time between gear mesh A and B in Figure
5.1 can also be at t1 + nT A , where n is any integer.
According to the above denition of relative phases, when mesh A and mesh B
have the same mesh periods, the relative phase between gear mesh A and B remains
the same for any choice of reference point (or referring time). There is no need to
specify the referring time in this case, and AB (t1 ) simplies to AB . Otherwise, the
referring time must be specied.
The above denition of relative phase provides a way to determine the relative
phase between any two gear meshes that have dierent mesh periods. For the example
shown in Figure 5.1, the mesh tooth variation function of mesh B is k B (t), and the
pitch point of mesh B is in contact at t = t2 . B ( ) is a timeshifted mesh tooth
variation function of mesh B. Its shape is identical to k B (t) but its origin ( = 0) is
shifted to be mesh Bs reference or pitch point. The absolute time is t; is a relative
time coordinate with = 0 being when mesh B is at its reference point. Because
the pitch point of mesh B is in contact at t = t2 in Figure 5.1, the timeshifting
101
(5.2)
The mesh tooth variation functions B ( ) for all the mating gear pairs are typically
generated by straightforward gear geometry analysis or gear design software, with
each mesh having its own = 0 corresponding to a particular reference point in that
meshs mesh period. These functions do not depend on the system conguration.
Changing back to t as the absolute time and applying the relationships in equations
(5.1) and (5.2), the mesh tooth variation of mesh B as a function of absolute time,
which is the crucial quantity, is
k B (t) = B t AB (t1 )T B t1
(5.3)
Equation (5.3) shows the important role of relative phases in the correct representations of mesh tooth, stiness, or static transmission error variation functions.
Because the correctness of any static or dynamic compound planetary gear analysis
relies on the correct representations of these functions at each gear mesh, the relative
phases are critical.
5.2.2
Figure 5.1 shows the relative phases among meshes k A (t), k B (t), and k C (t). Gear
meshes A and B are at their pitch points at t1 and t2 , where t2 = t1 + AB (t1 )T B .
Suppose AB (t1 ) and BC (t2 ) are known relative phases. Because meshes A, B, and C
102
may have dierent mesh periods, the direct addition of AB (t1 ) and BC (t2 ) does not
yield AC (t1 ). The following algorithm is needed to nd AC (t1 ).
According to the denition of BC (t2 ), t3 = t2 + BC (t2 )T C is the time when mesh
C is at its pitch point for the rst time after t2 . As shown in Figure 5.1, mesh C
experiences multiple mesh periods from t1 to t3 . Therefore,
t3 t1
TC
might be greater
than 1 and can not be used directly as the value of AC (t1 ). The operator dec( ) is
needed to force
t3 t1
TC
positive, the operator drops the whole number part and keeps the decimal part, for
example, dec(1.2) = 0.2. When the argument is negative, its output is the decimal
part of the argument plus 1, for instance, dec(1.2) = 0.8. Thus, AC (t1 ) is calculated
as
AC (t1 )
t3 t1
= dec
TC
C
B (t2 )T C + t2 t1
= dec
TC
C
B (t2 )T C + AB (t1 )T B
= dec
TC
(5.4)
(5.5)
Likewise, when AB (t1 ) and AC (t1 ) are known, the relative phase of mesh B referring
to mesh C is determined as follows. The times t3 = t1 +AC (t1 )T C +T C and t4 = t3 +T C
are the times when mesh C is at its pitch point. Each one of them can serve as the
103
referring time for CB . Choosing the referring time t4 as the example, CB (t4 ) is
t5 t4
t2 t4
B
C (t4 ) = dec
= dec
TB
TB
B
A (t1 )T B + t1 t4
= dec
(5.6)
TB
B
A (t1 )T B AC (t1 )T C 2T C
= dec
TB
where t5 is the time when the pitch point of mesh B is in contact for the rst time
after t4 , and t2 = t5 2T B . When T A = T B = T C , equation (5.6) simplies to
CB = dec(AB AC )
5.3
5.3.1
(5.7)
The concept of a planet train is illustrated in Figure 5.2. The number of planet
trains in planet set i is ci . Train 1 is chosen arbitrarily within the planet set. All
other planet trains in planet set i are numbered sequentially in the counterclockwise
direction. Each planet train has di planets. The numbering of the planets in any
planet train is as follows: the planet in mesh with its associated sun gear is numbered
as planet 1 of the planet train; the planet next to it in the train is numbered as planet
2; the rule continues until planet di is numbered.
5.3.2
All gear meshes in a compound planetary gear are classied into meshes between
a central gear and a planet (gearplanet meshes) or meshes between two planets
jilm
(t) represents the mesh tooth variation functions of the
(planetplanet meshes). kgp
ilmq
(t) is the
mesh between central gear j and planet m in train l of planet set i. kpp
mesh tooth variation between planet m and planet q in train l of planet set i. The
jilm
ilmq
and Tpp
. With the previously dened numbering
associated mesh periods are Tgp
i
ilm(m+1)
jilm
s il1
r ild
ilmq
is either kgp
or kgp
, and kpp
is actually kpp
convention, kgp
jilm
ilmq
and kpp
being the referred and referring meshes,
The relative phase for kgp
ilmq,pp
(t1 ), where t1 is the referring time. All other relative
respectively, is denoted jilm,gp
A planet train
in planet set 2
(a)
A planet train
in planet set 1
Central Gear 4
Central Gear 2
Carrier 1
Planet 1
Planet 2
Planet 2
Planet 1
Output
Shaft
Input Shaft
Central
Gear 1
Central
Gear 3
Carrier 2
Stage 1
Stage 2
(c)
(b)
Train 2
Train 2
Train 1
Train 1
Train 3
Central
Gear 1
Central
Gear 3
Planet 2
Planet 2
Planet 1
Planet 1
Train 3
Central Gear 2
Carrier 2
Carrier 1
Central Gear 4
Train 4
Figure 5.2: The example system. All gear meshes are represented by the springs in
red color.
106
s 111
) is chosen to be the base referred mesh in this study, although this
planet set 1 (kgp
selection is arbitrary. jilm,gp (t1 ) and ilmq,pp (t1 ) represent the systemlevel relative
jilm
ilmq
and kpp
referring to the base referred mesh with referring time t1 ,
phases of kgp
respectively. These are the important quantities, and they are needed for every mesh.
B. Stagelevel Relative Phases
If a certain gear mesh in stage i serves as the referred mesh for all other gear meshes
in the same stage, such a referred mesh is called the stage i referred mesh. All relative
phases that use this gear mesh as their referred mesh are stagelevel relative phases. In
this study, the gear mesh between the stage i sun gear and planet 1 of train 1 in planet
i
s i11
) is always chosen as the stage i referred mesh. jilm,gp (ti1 ) and ilmq,pp (ti1 )
set i (kgp
jilm
ilmq
and kpp
, respectively, referring to the stage
are the stagelevel relative phases of kgp
i
s i11
i referred mesh with referring time ti1 . The referring time ti1 = t1 + s i11,gp (t1 )Tgp
i
s i11
is the time when the pitch point of mesh kgp
is in contact for the rst time after t1 .
107
phases are called trainlevel relative phases. Train 1 of stage i in each stage is called
the base train in stage i, and the gear meshes in train 1 of stage i are called the
basetrain referred meshes in stage i. They serve as the referred meshes for train) and ilmq,pp (ti1mq,pp
) are the trainlevel relative
level relative phases. jilm,gp (tji1m,gp
1
1
jilm
i1mq
and kpp
referring to their basetrain referred meshes in stage i with
phases of kgp
i
s i11
ji1m
= t1 + s i11,gp (t1 )Tgp
+ ji1m,gp (ti1 )Tgp
and ti1mq,pp
= t1 +
referring times tji1m,gp
1
1
i
s i11
i1mq
+ i1mq,pp (ti1 )Tpp
, respectively.
s i11,gp (t1 )Tgp
Dividing the problem into this structure of systemlevel, stagelevel, and trainlevel, relative phases is convenient. One can analyze the simpler stage and trainlevel
relative phases rst. Then, by applying equation (5.4), the important systemlevel
relative phase of any gear mesh is one of
jilm,gp
(t1 )
jilm,gp(t1 ) =1111,gp
$"
jilm
ji1m
jilm,gp (tji1m,gp
)Tgp
+ ji1m,gp (ti1 )Tgp
1
%
i
si i11
jilm
/Tgp
+
s i11,gp (t1 )Tgp
=dec
(5.8)
ilmq,pp
(t1 )
ilmq,pp (t1 ) = 1111,gp
(t1
)Tpp + i1mq,pp (ti1 )Tpp
%
si i11,gp
si i11
ilmq
+
(t1 )Tgp
/Tpp
=dec
(5.9)
where i = 1, , a, j = 1, , b, l = 1, , ci , m, q = 1, , di , and q = m.
The denitions of system, stage, and trainlevel relative phases and equations
(5.8)(5.9) apply to both spur and helical compound planetary gears with any gear
tooth shape, including prole and lead modications. Neither of the helix angle or
the detailed gear tooth shape is used in the above denitions or derivations.
108
5.3.3
Equations (5.8)(5.9) show that s i11,gp , ji1m,gp , i1mq,pp (ti1 ), jilm,gp (tji1m,gp
), and
1
ilmq,pp (ti1mq,pp
) are the only phases needed to determine any systemlevel relative
1
phases. We focus on the calculation of these relative phases.
i
s i11
s i11,gp (t1 ) is the systemlevel relative phase between kgp
and the base referred
mesh with the referring time t1 . Its appearance in equations (5.8) and (5.9) indicates
that it impacts all the systemlevel relative phases in stage i. It can not be derived
analytically because it depends on manufacturing, assembly, and conguration of the
compound planetary gear. The denition of relative phases shows how to determine
1
s 111
is at its pitch
it by experiment or simulation. Suppose the base referred mesh kgp
i
s i11
is at its pitch point, the relative
point at t = t1 . By locating the time ti2 when kgp
phase is
si i11,gp
(t1 ) = dec
ti2 t1
si i11
Tgp
(5.10)
s i11
s i11
is the mesh period of kgp
.
where Tgp
i
In practice one might choose s i11,gp (t1 ) to achieve certain behavior based on static
or dynamic simulations. One can then design the hardware (e.g., the relative clocking
angle between two central gears on a single shaft) to achieve the desired phase.
B. Calculation of stagelevel relative phases
ji1m,gp (ti1 ) and i1mq,pp (ti1 ) are stagelevel relative phases. Applying the numbering
i
convention, ji1m,gp (ti1 ) is either s i11,gp (ti1 ) or r i1d ,gp (ti1 ), and i1mq,pp (ti1 ) is actually
i1m(m+1),pp (ti1 ), where 1 m di 1. According to the denition of stagelevel
i
relative phases, s i11,gp (ti1 ) is zero. r i1d ,gp (ti1 ) and i1m(m+1),pp (ti1 ) are calculated
109
below.
If there is no steppedplanet structure in planet set i, all the gear meshes in stage
i have the same mesh period. Hence, no referring time is needed for such stagelevel
i
relative phases. By applying (5.5) and (5.7) in this case, r i1d ,gp and i1m(m+1),pp are
i
i11,gp
srii11,gp
di = 1
i
dec( i112,pp + r i12,gp )
di = 2
i112,pp
r i i1di ,gp
si i11,gp
'
&
=
(5.11)
i 2
d
i1(u+1)(u+2),pp
i112,pp
r i i1di ,gp
i
d >2
i1u(u+1),pp
+ i1(di 1)di ,pp
dec si i11,gp +
u=1
i1m(m+1),pp
i112,pp
di = 2
si i11,gp
=
m1
i1(u+1)(u+2),pp
dec si112,pp
+
i1u(u+1),pp
di > 1
i i11,gp
(5.12)
u=1
where all needed quantities in (5.11) and (5.12) are analytically determined in terms
of gear parameters by the procedure described in [77] based on gear geometry.
Now we introduce a steppedplanet structure between planet v 1 and planet v
(1 < v di and di 2). The gear mesh conditions require that the mesh periods of
i
i1m(m+1)
s 111
and kpp
all the gear meshes before the steppedplanet structure are equal (kgp
where 1 m v 2), and all the mesh periods after the steppedplanet structure
i
i1m(m+1)
r 11d
and kpp
are equal (kgp
whose referring and referred meshes have the same mesh period are independent of
110
the referring time. r i1d ,gp (ti1 ) and i1m(m+1),pp (ti1 ) are
ri i12,gp
sii11,gp (ti1 )
)
(
i123,pp
i123,pp i Tpp
r i i1di ,gp
(t
)
+
dec
i
1 T r i i1di
i123,pp
gp
( s i11,gp i112,pp
)
i112,pp Tpp
r i1di ,gp i
dec
(t
)
i
1
i112,pp
r i i1di
s i11,gp Tgp
v3
r i i1di ,gp i
i112,pp
i112,pp
i1(u+1)(u+2),pp Tpp
Tpp
(t1 ) =
dec si112,pp
i
i
i i11,gp
r i1d
r i i1di
i1u(u+1),pp
Tgp
Tgp
u=1
i1v(v+1),pp
i1(v2)(v1),pp
+i1(v2)(v1),pp (t1
)+
'
di 2
i
i
i1(w+1)(w+2),pp
r i1d ,gp
i1w(w+1),pp
+i1(d
i 1)di ,pp
di = 2
di = 3, v = 2
di = 3, v = 3
di 4
w=v
(5.13)
i
Do
not
exist.
d
=
2
Eq.(5.12)
di > 2, and 1 m v 2
v3
i112,pp
i112,pp
i1(u+1)(u+2),pp Tpp
u=1
i1v(v+1),pp
i1(v2)(v1),pp
)+
i1(v2)(v1),pp (t1
m1
i1(w+1)(w+2),pp
i1w(w+1),pp
di > 2, and v 2 m di 1
w=v
(5.14)
i
i1(v2)(v1),pp
s i11
and t1
where ti1 = t1 + s i11,gp (t1 )Tgp
i1(v2)(v1)
kpp
is in contact for the rst time after ti1 . All quantities needed in (5.13) and
i1v(v+1),pp
i1(v2)(v1),pp
i1(v2)(v1),pp
111
With the numbering convention in this study, jilm,gp is either s il1,gp or r ild ,gp ,
i
and ilmq,pp is ilm(m+1),pp . The expressions for s il1,gp , r ild ,gp , and ilm(m+1),pp are
summarized in Table 5.1. These trainlevel relative phases are determined by the
tooth numbers of the sun, ring, or planet gears, the relative planet position angle
il (refer to Nomenclature), the relative planet rotation angle pilm (discussed later),
and the rotation direction of the sun, ring, or planet gears relative to the associated
carrier. The above denitions dier from the denitions of trainlevel relative phases
for simple planetary gears in [77] in two ways. First, the planet gear tooth numbers
and the relative planet rotation angle pilm are present in Table 5.1. Second, the sign
of the argument inside the operator dec( ) is determined by the rotation directions
of the sun, ring, or planet gears relative to their associated carrier, instead of the
absolute rotation direction of the planets. The rst dierence is caused by the need
to determine the relative phases for planetplanet meshes that do not exist in simple
planetary gears. The second dierence is because the sign determination method
in [77] only applies to a restricted set of simple planetary gear congurations. One
of the sun gear, ring gear, or carrier must be xed for the method of using the
absolute planet rotation direction to determine the sign of the relative phases to
work. For other congurations, such as torquesplit dierential congurations or
compound planetary gears that contain multiple planet gears in the same train, the
method in [77] fails. The method in this study has no such conguration limitations.
The rotation directions of the sun, ring, or planet gears relative to their associated
carrier are determined by simple kinematic analysis. The sign of the argument inside
112
the operator dec( ) for each trainlevel relative phase is uniquely determined.
In what follows, the derivation of the formulae and the sign determination method
i
in Table 5.1 are explained. For the sunplanet meshes in stage i, Zgs tooth meshes
are completed if the sun gear nishes a complete revolution relative to its associated
i
carrier (that is, gs ci = 2). Consider sun gear si starting from an arbitrary state.
When this sun gear rotates il > 0 relative to its associated carrier (the rotation
direction is counterclockwise due to the positive value of il ),
Zgs il
2
completed for the sunplanet mesh in train 1 of stage i. Let this sun gears mesh tooth
i
s
(t), where ccw in the subscript indicates counterclockwise
variation function be kccw
rotation. The current gear teeth positions of train 1 are exactly the same as those
si
Z
of train l before the sun gear rotated il relative to its carrier. Therefore, dec( g2 )
il
yields the relative phase of the sunplanet mesh in train l referring to that in train 1
(rst row of Table 5.1). When sun gear si rotates 2 + il relative to its associated
carrier (the rotation direction is clockwise due to the negative value of 2 + il ),
the completed tooth mesh number for the sunplanet mesh in train 1 of stage i is
Zgs (2+il )
.
2
The present gear teeth position for the sunplanet gear mesh of train 1
is the same as that for the sunplanet gear mesh of train l before the sun gear rotated.
Thus, the relative phase of the sunplanet mesh in train l referring to that in train 1 in
i
Zgs (2+il )
),
2
argument is caused by the clockwise rotation (when the sun gear rotates clockwise,
i
s
s
(t) is equivalent to kccw
(t)). Dropping the
its mesh tooth variation function kcw
si il1,gp
Z s il
dec( g2 )
(second row
of Table 5.1). The same analytical process applies to the derivation of the trainlevel
i
5.1.
The analytical process to derive the trainlevel relative phases for planetplanet
gear meshes is as follows. For the case that there is no steppedplanet structure in
the planet trains of stage i, Zpilm tooth meshes are completed for the mesh between
planets m and m + 1 when planet m nishes a complete revolution relative to carrier
i. The next step is to determine pilm , the angle that planet m must rotate relative to
carrier i such that the gear teeth position for the gear mesh between planets m and
m + 1 in train 1 after the rotation is equivalent to that in train l before the rotation.
Z
Z
Once pilm is calculated as described below, dec( p 2 p ) and dec( p 2 p ) are the
ilm ilm
ilm ilm
relative phases of the mesh between planet m and m + 1 in train l referring to that in
train 1 when planet m rotates counterclockwise and clockwise, respectively, relative
to its associated carrier (
ilm(m+1),pp in Table 5.1).
According to the previous derivation of the relative phases for sunplanet meshes,
the gear teeth positions in train 1 after the sun gear rotates il counterclockwise or
2 il clockwise relative to carrier i are exactly those in train l before the rotation.
Therefore, the problem to determine ilm(m+1),pp reduces to calculation of the angle
that planet m rotates relative to carrier i after the sun gear rotates il counterclockwise or 2 il clockwise relative to carrier i.
Meshedplanet gear kinematics gives
Zgs
pilm ci
m
= (1)
Zpilm
gsi ci
i
(5.15)
where pilm , gs , and ci are the absolute rotations of planet m in train l of planet
set i, the sun gear in stage i, and carrier i, respectively. For counterclockwise sun
i
gear rotation relative to its associated carrier, substitution of il = gs ci and
114
i
Zgs il
Zpilm
(5.16)
For clockwise sun gear rotation relative to its associated carrier, substitution of 2
i
il = gs ci and pilm = pilm ci into equation (5.15) gives
Zgs (2 il )
Zpilm
i
pilm = (1)m
(5.17)
This study addresses the case where there is one stepped structure in a planet set
because it is rare to have two or more steppedplanet structures in the same stage.
When there is a steppedplanet structure between planets v 1 and v in stage i, one
of dec(
Zpilm pilm
)
2
or dec(
Zpilm pilm
),
2
clockwise or clockwise, still gives the relative phase of the mesh between planet m
and m + 1 in train l referring to that in train 1, once pilm is known. This is the
same as above for meshed planets. The calculation of pilm , however, needs to account
for the steppedplanet structure. If m v 2 (the planetplanet mesh is before
the steppedplanet structure), the planetplanet mesh has the same mesh period as
the sunplanet mesh in the same stage. Thus, compound planetary gear kinematics
ensure that equations (5.15)(5.17) still apply. If m v (the planetplanet mesh
is after the steppedplanet structure), the mesh period of the planetplanet mesh is
generally dierent from that of the sunplanet mesh in the same stage but the same
as for the ringplanet mesh in the same stage. Therefore, the calculation of pilm in
i
this case should be based on (gr ci ), the rotation of the ring gear relative to its
associated carrier. Planetary gear kinematics gives
i
Zgr
pilm ci
di m
=
(1)
Zpilm
gri ci
115
(5.18)
Relative
Phase
si il1,gp
Rotation Direction
Relative to Carrier
i
gs ci
>0
gs ci < 0
r ild ,gp
si il1,gp
= dec
<0
pilm > 0
= dec
pilm < 0
Zgr il
2
i
Zgr il
= dec 2
ilm(m+1),pp = dec
ilm(m+1),pp
i
Zgs il
= dec 2
r i ildi ,gp
r i ildi ,gp
Zgs il
2
gr ci > 0
i
gr ci
si il1,gp
Zpilm pilm
2
ilm(m+1),pp
( ilm ilm=)
Z
dec p 2 p
For counterclockwise ring gear rotation relative to its associated carrier, substii
tution of il = gr ci and pilm = pilm ci into equation (5.18) yields (compare to
equation (5.16))
i
pilm = (1)d m
116
i
Zgr il
Zpilm
(5.19)
Similarly, for clockwise ring gear rotation relative to its associated carrier, pilm is
calculated from equation (5.18) as (compare to equation (5.17))
pilm
di m
= (1)
i
Zgr (2 il )
Zpilm
(5.20)
Kinematic analysis of the compound planetary gear system is required to determine the rotation direction of each component, and the relative planet rotation angle
pilm . With such kinematic analysis, the formulae in Table 5.1 apply to any conguration of compound planetary gear and agree with Parker and Lins results in [77] for
the twelve simple planetary gear congurations.
All the above derivations are independent of the gear tooth type (spur or helical
gears) and the detailed gear tooth shape. Therefore, the results apply to both spur
and helical gears with arbitrary gear tooth shape.
5.3.4
Because gear tooth numbers and relative planet position angles of compound
planetary gears must satisfy system assembly conditions, there are specic relations
i
117
(5.21)
where nil is an arbitrary integer. Insertion of equation (5.21) into the results in Table
5.1 and invoking compound planetary kinematics yield
& i '
Zgs il
si il1,gp
= dec
2
&
'
&
'
i
i
2nil Zgr il
Zgr il
i
i
= dec
= dec
= r ild ,gp
2
2
(5.22)
When di 2, insertion of (5.16) into the trainlevel relative phase for planetplanet meshes in Table 5.1 and application of meshedplanet gear kinematics for the
rotation direction of planet m relative to carrier i yield
'
&
ilm ilm
Z
p
p
ilm(m+1),pp = dec (1)m
2
'
&
si il
Z
i
g
= s il1,gp
= dec (1)m (1)m
2
(5.23)
By applying meshedplanet kinematics for the rotation direction of the ring gear
i
r i ildi ,gp
Zgr il
= dec (1)
2
i
'
di
(5.24)
2nil
Zgri + (1)di +1 Zgsi
(5.25)
2n
(1)
Z
i
i
i
g
r ild ,gp = dec (1)d
2
&
'
i
Z s il
i
2di g
= dec (1)
= s il1,gp
2
i
(5.26)
Equations (5.23) and (5.26) show that s il1,gp , ilm(m+1),pp , and r ild ,gp are equal
when di 2.
118
2 v di . The relations between s il1,gp , r ild ,gp , and ilm(m+1),pp are investigated
for the following two cases.
i
(I) When 1 m v 2, the relationship between ilm(m+1),pp and s il1,gp is the same
as equation (5.23) because the rotation direction of planet m relative to carrier i is
determined in the same way and the same trainlevel relative phase formula in Table
5.1 is applied. That is to say, the trainlevel relative phases whose referring meshes
are located between the sun gear and the steppedplanet structure are all equal.
(II) When v m di 1, insertion of (5.19) into the formulae of ilm(m+1),pp in Table
5.1 and use of kinematics to determine the rotation direction of planet m relative to
carrier i yields
&
Zgr il
2
i
di m
Zgr il
2
i
= dec (1)
di 1
'
'
(5.27)
Applying steppedplanet kinematics for the rotation direction of the ring gear in stage
i relative to carrier i, the ringplanet relative phase in Table 5.1 becomes
'
&
r i il
Z
i
i
i
g
r ild ,gp = dec (1)d 1
2
(5.28)
Equations (5.27) and (5.28) show that the trainlevel relative phases whose referring
meshes are located between the ring gear and the steppedplanet structure are equal
119
2Zpilv
1s =
i
2r =
il(v1)
Zgsi Zp
(5.29)
il(v1)
2Zp
il(v1)
Zgri Zp
+ (1)di Zgsi Zpilv
i
where nils and nilr are integers, 1s is the angle that carrier i rotates when the ring
gear r i is xed and the sun gear rotates one tooth counterclockwise relative to the
i
xed reference frame, and 2r is the angle that carrier i rotates when the sun gear
si is xed and the ring gear rotates one tooth counterclockwise relative to the xed
reference frame. The above assembly condition indicates that when the sun and ring
gears rotate through nils and nilr tooth meshes (that is, the sun and ring gears rotate
2nil
s
Zgsi
and
2nil
r
,
Zgr i
the position of train l before the rotation. At the same time, because both the sun
and ring gears rotate integer numbers of teeth, a new planet train can be installed at
the position of train 1 before the rotation with exactly the same gear teeth positions
as train 1.
The above process not only illustrates the installation of a new planet train in
a stepped compound planetary gear but also indicates the numbers of tooth meshes
that the sun and ring gears complete when train 1 moves to the position of train l.
The angles that the sun and ring gears rotate relative to carrier i during the above
il
il
s
r
il ) and ( 2n
il ). Thus, the numbers of gear meshes
assembly process are ( 2n
Z si
Z ri
g
that the sun and ring gears complete are nils il Zgs /2 and nilr il Zgr /2, which
i
directly reect how many mesh cycles that the sunplanet and ringplanet meshes in
120
train l are ahead of or behind those in train 1. Application of the operator dec() to
these two numbers yields the trainlevel sunplanet and ringplanet relative phases
between train l and train 1 as
i
r i ildi ,gp
dec(nilr
i
il Zgr /2)
Because nils and nilr are integers and they have innite combinations to satisfy (5.29),
the outcomes of s il1,gp and r ild ,gp in (5.30) have only two possibilities: dec(il Zgs /2)
i
i
i
and dec(il Zgr /2). For example, if il Zgs /2 = 0.8, dec(nils 0.8) = 0.2 =
dec(0.8) when nils = 2 and dec(nils 0.8) = 0.8 = dec(0.8) when nils = 1. Thus,
equation (5.30) simplies to
i
i
s il1,gp = dec(il Zgs /2)
(5.31)
i
those of train l before the sun gear rotation. Thus, the positive sign is used such
i
i
that s il1,gp = dec(il Zgs /2). If the sun gear si rotates clockwise relative to carrier i
i
and the sunplanet mesh in train 1 completes il Zgs /2 tooth meshes, the gear teeth
positions of train 1 are exactly the same as those of train ci l before the sun gear
rotates. In order to make the gear teeth positions of train 1 be the same as those
i
i
of train l, the sunplanet mesh in train 1 needs to complete Zgs il Zgs /2 tooth
121
meshes. In this case, the negative sign is used in the input arguments to dec( ) such
i
i
i
i
i
i
that s il1,gp = dec(il Zgs /2) = dec(Zgs il Zgs /2). It is the same for r ild ,gp .
5.4
The twostage compound planetary gear shown in Figure 5.2 is used as an example.
The rst stage has steppedplanet structure, and the second stage has meshedplanet
structure. All the gears are numbered according to the convention previously specied, as shown in Figure 5.2. The parameters are listed in Tables 5.2 and 5.3. The
following illustrates the analytical procedure to calculate all the systemlevel relative
1
s 111
as their referred mesh.
phases with the base referred mesh kgp
122
Tooth
Number
Diametral
Pitch
Pressure
Angle
Base
Diameter
Outer Diameter
Root
Diameter
Stage 1
Central Planet Planet Central Central
Gear 1 gear
gear
Gear 2 Gear 3
(1l1) (1l2)
35
38
62
151
29
Stage 2
Planet Planet Central
gear
gear
Gear 4
(2l1) (2l2)
29
33
153
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
25o
25o
24o
24o
25o
25o
25o
25o
79.25
86.11
113.28 275.84
52.58
52.58
59.69
277.37
88.39
61.72
61.72
69.60
324.10
76.96
89.41
52.58
52.58
60.45
305.31
115.57 305.31
The numerical results throughout this example are from numerical simulation of
mesh tooth variation functions calculated by Planetary2D, a multibody nite element
program with precise tracking of numbers of teeth in contact at all gear meshes [95].
123
The software calculates the tooth variation functions based on exact gear kinematics and precise tooth geometry with no preset or userdened mesh phase relations.
Hence, the relative phases calculated from the numerical solution of mesh tooth variation functions are a reliable and independent benchmark to verify the analytical
results. The simulation results of mesh tooth variation functions with all the relative
phases marked are shown in Figure 5.3 and Figure 5.4.
Kinematic analysis yields all the mesh periods and the rotation directions of all
components. The analytically calculated mesh periods compare well to numerical
results in Table 5.4. As with all results that follow, the errors in the numerical results
depend on the number of steps analyzed in a mesh cycle.
To begin the process, the base referred mesh of the system and the referring time
1111
is selected as the base
of the base referred mesh are chosen. In this example, kgp
referred mesh, and the referring time of the base referred mesh is t1 = 0 at the pitch
point. This denes the origin of the absolute time axis and simplies the use of
equations (5.8) and (5.9) to calculate systemlevel relative phases.
124
The key relative phases s i11,gp (t1 ), r i1d ,gp (ti1 ), and i1m(m+1),pp (ti1 ) are calculated
from equations (5.10)(5.14) with the results given in Table 5.5. In this example, the
systemlevel relative phase between the stage 2 referred mesh and the base referred
mesh (
3211,gp (t1 )), which depends on assembly conditions, is specied as zero. In real
applications, equation (5.10) and simulation or experiments are needed to calculate
such relative phases. In addition, the stage 1 relative phase 2112,gp (t11 ) depends not
only on the gear parameters of the stage 1 sun, planet, and ring gears but also on the
steppedplanet structure (the relative clocking angle between the two coaxial planets
in the same train); no analytical formula is available to calculate it. Its analytical
value in Table 5.5 takes the numerical result directly, which is found by recording
the time when the pitch points of the referring and referred meshes are in mesh and
applying equation (5.4). Whenever a system has multiple stages or stepped planets
there are relative angles that depend on manufacturing or assembly. In these cases,
experiments or simulation with precision contact tracking are needed as used above.
If that is impractical, one can do sensitivity studies to see if these relative angles
aect the response of interest in that specic system.
Kinematic analysis to nd the rotation directions of each sun, ring, and planet
relative to its associated carrier and the formulae in Table 5.1 yield the analytical
results for jilm,gp and ilmq,pp that are listed in Table 5.6. The numerical results
conrm the analysis.
125
^
~
(0)=0 (t
1111,gp
1111,gp
1
1
)=0
1111, gp
=0
k1111
( t)
gp
3
2
1
0
k1121
(t)
gp
k1131
( t)
gp
1121
2112, gp
T gp
~ (t1 ) T
1121, gp
1131, gp
Tgp
1131
2
1
2112 0
gp
k2112
(t)
gp
3
2
1
0
k2122
(t)
gp
2122, gp
T gp
2122
2
1
0
2132
k gp (t)
3
2
1
0
2132, gp
T gp
2132
0.5
time (s)
Figure 5.3: Mesh tooth variation functions of all the gear meshes in stage 1 of the
example system with the related relative phases marked. The symbol denotes the
time when the pitch point of the associated gear mesh is in contact.
126
Table 5.5: Relative phases s i11,gp (t1 ), r i1d ,gp (ti1 ), and
i1m(m+1),pp . The * sign indicates the associated value in
the Analytical column is actually from numerical calculation.
Stage Referring Relative
Numtime
phase
ber
t1 = 0
1111,gp (t1 )
Stage
t11 = 0
1111,gp (t11 )
1
t11 = 0
2112,gp (t11 )
t1 = 0
3211,gp (t1 )
t21 = 0
3211,gp (t21 )
Stage
t21 = 0
4212,gp (t21 )
2
2
t1 = 0
2112,pp (t21 )
Analytical
Numerical
0
0
0.277*
0
0
0.0770
0.0689
0
0
0.277
0
0
0.077
0.069
Error range
of numerical
result
0
0
0.0031
N/A
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
11l1,gp
Stage
1
21l2,gp
32l1,gp
Stage
2
42l2,gp
2l12,pp
1111,gp
1121,gp
1131,gp
2112,gp
2122,gp
2132,gp
3211,gp
3221,gp
3231,gp
3241,gp
4212,gp
4222,gp
4232,gp
4242,gp
2112,gp
2212,gp
2312,gp
2412,gp
Numerical
=0
= 0.667
= 0.333
=0
= 0.667
= 0.333
=0
= 0.250
= 0.500
= 0.750
=0
= 0.250
= 0.500
= 0.750
=0
= 0.250
= 0.500
= 0.750
127
1111,gp
1121,gp
1131,gp
2112,gp
2122,gp
2132,gp
3211,gp
3221,gp
3231,gp
3241,gp
4212,gp
4222,gp
4232,gp
4242,gp
2112,gp
2212,gp
2312,gp
2412,gp
=0
= 0.663
= 0.331
=0
= 0.665
= 0.335
= 0.001
= 0.254
= 0.503
= 0.753
= 0.002
= 0.253
= 0.501
= 0.752
= 0.003
= 0.252
= 0.500
= 0.751
Error
range
of
numerical
result
0.0031
0.0031
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
Finally, all systemlevel relative phases jilm,gp (t1 ) and ilmq,pp (t1 ) are calculated
from equations (5.8) and (5.9). The results in Table 5.7 agree with the numerical
benchmark.
Thus, the relative phases of all the gear meshes referring to the base referred mesh
are determined and veried with an independent numerical benchmark that can be
considered exact within the given error limits resulting from discretization of the mesh
cycles.
11l1,gp (t1 )
Stage
1
21l2,gp (t1 )
32l1,gp (t1 )
Stage
2
42l2,gp (t1 )
2l12,pp (t1 )
Analytical
Numerical
1111,gp (0) = 0
1121,gp (0) = 0.667
1131,gp (0) = 0.333
2112,gp (0) = 0.268
2122,gp (0) = 0.935
2132,gp (0) = 0.601
3211,gp (0) = 0
3221,gp (0) = 0.250
3231,gp (0) = 0.500
3241,gp (0) = 0.750
4212,gp (0) = 0.013
4222,gp (0) = 0.263
4232,gp (0) = 0.513
4242,gp (0) = 0.763
2112,pp (0) = 0.069
2212,pp (0) = 0.319
2312,pp (0) = 0.569
2412,pp (0) = 0.819
128
1111,gp (0) = 0
1121,gp (0) = 0.663
1131,gp (0) = 0.331
2112,gp (0) = 0.268
2122,gp (0) = 0.935
2132,gp (0) = 0.608
3211,gp (0) = 0
3221,gp (0) = 0.250
3231,gp (0) = 0.502
3241,gp (0) = 0.751
4212,gp (0) = 0.013
4222,gp (0) = 0.263
4232,gp (0) = 0.513
4242,gp (0) = 0.763
2112,pp (0) = 0.070
2212,pp (0) = 0.318
2312,pp (0) = 0.570
2412,pp (0) = 0.819
Error
range
of
numerical
result
0.0031
0.0031
0.0048
0.0048
0.0048
^
~ (t )=0
(0)=0
1
3211, gp
2
3211,gp
(a)
3211, gp
=0
3221
T gp
kgp
3221
3221, gp
k2112
pp
1
0
3231
gp
T gp
3
k2412
pp
0.5
1.5
2
time (s)
2.5
~ (t ) T
4212, gp
2
1
(c)
2412, pp
2412
T pp
2
1
0
3.5
2312
T pp
3241
2312, pp
0
3241, gp
1
0
3231, gp
3241
k2312
pp
3231
T pp
2112
pp
k gp
2212
2
1
kgp
2212, pp
k2212
pp
k3211
gp
~(t ) T
2112, pp
(b)
0.5
1.5
2
time (s)
2.5
3.5
4212
gp
k4212
gp
4222, gp
2
1
4222
T gp
k4222
gp
3
2
1
0
k4232
gp
4232
T gp
2
1
0
3
k4242
gp
4232, gp
4242, gp
4242
T gp
2
1
0
0.5
1.5
2
time (s)
2.5
3.5
Figure 5.4: Mesh tooth variation functions of the gear meshes in stage 2 of the
example system with the related relative phases marked. The symbol denotes the
time when the pitch point of the associated gear mesh is in contact.
129
With all the systemlevel relative phases calculated, analytical expressions for
the mesh tooth (or mesh stiness or static transmission error) variations of all gear
meshes in the system are determined by applying equation (5.3) after straightforward
calculation of ( ) for each gear pair based on basic gear geometry [77] or gear design
software.
For example, the Fourier series expansion of the mesh tooth variation function for
the gear mesh between the ring gear and planet 2 in train 2 of stage 2 is (the pitch
point is in contact when = 0)
4222
gp ( )
=
=
"
u=0
4222
4222
eu sin ugp
+ fu cos ugp
#
(5.32)
u=0
Application of (5.3) with 4222,gp (0) = 0.263 from Table 5.7 yields the analytical
4222
as a function of absolute
expression of the mesh tooth variation function for kgp
time, which is
4222
kgp
(t) =
(5.33)
u=0
The mesh tooth variation functions such as equation (5.33) are critical to study
any feature of the example systems static or dynamic response that involves mesh
tooth, mesh stiness, or static transmission error variations.
5.5
Conclusions
phases between all of the gear meshes. This study denes and calculates all the mesh
phases for general compound planetary gears, including those with any combination of
multiple mesh frequencies, multiple stages, meshed planets, and stepped planets. In
addition to organizing these mesh phases into a hierarchical structure of systemlevel,
stagelevel, and trainlevel mesh phases to simplify the analysis, this study derives a
complete and simple (other than the notation) procedure to determine all the necessary relative phases. The specic relationships between trainlevel relative phases
that are critical for any analytical study on the suppression of compound planetary
gear dynamic response through mesh phasing are derived by applying the assembly
conditions of compound planetary gears. All derived results are veried through an
example, where the numerical benchmark is geometrically exact and the only error is
a quantiable mesh cycle discretization error.
131
6.1
Introduction
Noise and vibration problems remain major concerns for compound planetary
gears [47, 53]. When planetary gears operate at speeds where the mesh frequency or
an integer multiple of it is near one of the system natural frequencies, large dynamic
tooth loads and loud noise are generated due to the resonant response, reducing the
life of the whole transmission system. Proper design of mesh phasing by adjusting
certain fundamental design parameters, such as the gear tooth number and number
of planets, is able to eliminate selected resonant responses in the operating range of
the system [5, 32, 75, 77].
Studies on the suppression of dynamic response through mesh phasing trace back
to Schlegel and Mards experimental measurements on the eectiveness of planet
phasing on noise reduction [86] and Seagers detailed analysis using a static transmission error model [87]. Later, Palmer and Fuehrer [74], Hidaka et al. [41], Platt and
Leopold [83], Kahraman [43], and Kahraman and Blankenship [48] experimentally
or numerically illustrated the eectiveness of simple planetary gears mesh phasing
to reduce noise and vibrations in transmission systems. Parker and Lin developed
132
a rotationaltranslational lumpedparameter model and discovered the unique vibration properties [56], identied the specic mesh phase relations [77], and analytically
explained the eectiveness of planet mesh phasing to suppress certain translational
and rotational mode responses [75]. The results in [75] show that the symmetrybased
rules even hold when nonlinear tooth contact occurs, provided the response retains
the symmetry of system geometry. Filling a gap in [75], Ambarisha and Parker [5]
provided the analytical explanation for the suppression of planet mode responses in
the rotationaltranslational model through mesh phasing and derived the rules to suppress degenerate mode responses in purely rotational planetary gear models. All these
studies, however, are restricted to simple planetary gears. No published literature has
examined the suppression of compound planetary gear vibration modes through mesh
phasing numerically or analytically. The questions of whether the mesh phasing rules
of simple planetary gears in [5, 75] can be applied to general compound planetary
gears and what are the impacts of meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage
structures that are unique to compound planetary gears on the rules to suppress
dynamic responses through mesh phasing are addressed in this work.
Recent progresses on compound planetary gear dynamics provide bases for this
investigation. Kahraman [47] developed a purely rotational model for limited congurations of singlestage planetary gears. Kiracofe and Parker [53] developed a
rotationaltranslational model for general compound planetary gears and proved that
all the vibration modes of compound planetary gears are classied as rotational, translational, and planet modes, each having distinct properties. Guo and Parker [35] set
up a purely rotational model for general compound planetary gears and analytically
proved its modal properties. Guo and Parker [32] systematically denes the relative
133
phases in general compound planetary gears and analytically derives the mesh phase
relations for all the gear meshes in the system.
This chapter utilizes the above research results on compound planetary gears
to analytically examine the general rules to suppress certain dynamic responses and
resonances of general compound planetary gears through planet mesh phasing for both
purely rotational and rotationaltranslational models. Because the analytical process
to derive the rules is based on the symmetry of each planet set and the periodicity of
gear tooth meshes without explicit modeling of the dynamic mesh forces or system
responses, the results are independent of any choice of dynamic gear mesh force model.
6.2
134
u (t)u yield
planetary gear in (2.38) with Tv on the left and insertion of (t) =
u=1
v (t) + Tv K
(6.1)
u=1
where u is the modal coordinate for mode u. Similar to [5], f((t), t) is used to
u (t)u in this study and it collects the forces caused by gear meshes,
denote K
u=1
shaft connections, and bearing supports in equation (2.38). The term Tv F(t) is equal
to zero because of the modal property that all central components have no motion
in any planet mode. The suppression of planet mode v, hence, solely depends on the
vanishing of Tv f((t), t) which is denoted as
Qv (t) = Tv f((t), t)
(6.2)
where Qv (t) is the planet modal force for planet mode v) in this study.
Table 6.1 summarizes the above general criteria to suppress dierent types of
responses in compound planetary gears.
Table 6.1: The general criteria to suppress dierent types
of responses in general compound planetary gears. , F ,
and Q represent net force, net torque, and planet modal
force, respectively.
Responses Types
Rotational Response
Translational Response
Planet Response
For multistage compound planetary gear systems, the excitation forces in each
stage are transmitted throughout the system via the connections between stages.
The whole system is considered to be excited if any stage of the system is excited.
136
The rules to suppress dynamic responses of a multistage system are actually the
sum up of the rules from each stage. Thus, breaking the multistage system down
into separate stages and analyzing the suppression/excitation criteria in each stage
is an eective way to investigate multistage systems. This study, hence, focuses
on a single compound planetary gear stage having one or both of meshedplanet
and steppedplanet structures [32, 53]. For a single compound planetary gear stage,
there are two possible cases: (a) a stage has meshedplanet structures only (i.e.,
meshedplanet stage), and (b) a stage has a stepped planet structure in each train
and may also involve meshedplanet structures (i.e., stepped stage). The following
study investigates the suppression or excitation of selected responses for both cases
using the criteria in Table 6.1.
6.2.1
An arbitrary planetary stage, numbered as stage 1, has c1 (c1 3) equallyspaced planet trains. Each planet train includes d1 planets. These d1 planets in
each planet train have only meshedplanet structures. All planet trains are numbered
from train 1 to train c1 in the counterclockwise direction. The planet in each train
that is in mesh with the sun gear is numbered as planet 1, and the planet in mesh
with planet 1 is numbered as planet 2. The numbering continuous until planet d1 ,
which is the planet in mesh with the ring gear in each train (Figure 6.1). Same as
simple planetary gears, meshedplanet stages have a single mesh frequency . The
key stipulation to use Table 6.1 to derive the rules to suppress the selected responses
through mesh phasing is that the net torques (), the net forces (F ), and the planet
modal forces (Q) are periodic functions with the fundamental frequency equal to the
137
Meshedplanet Stage
Stage 1
Train 2
Train 1
Train 3
Sun Gear
Planet 2
Planet 1
Carrier
Ring Gear
Train 4
Figure 6.1: A meshedplanet stage has four planet trains. Each planet train has two
planets that are in mesh with each other.
mesh frequency =
1
T
is consistent with the periodic mesh contact at mesh frequency and it was conrmed
to be necessary for the validation of mesh phasing rules in studies on the simple
planetary gear dynamics [5, 9, 34, 61, 75, 98]. This assumption implies that the rules
that are derived in this study are not valid in cases of transient responses, nonlinear
responses that contain sub/superharmonic components, and vibrations driven by
parametric uctuations that are locked at the natural period [23].
Cancellation of Net Force and Torque on Central Components
The net force acting on a central component is essentially the sum of the related
gear mesh forces. Taking the sun gear in a meshedplanet stage as the representative
example, the sunplanet gear mesh forces are the only excitation forces acting on the
sun gear. Due to cyclic symmetry, the sunplanet mesh forces in the same stage have
138
T
Plant train c i
Mesh Period T
Plant train 1
time
Figure 6.2: Sunplanet mesh force uctuation showing the mesh period T and the
relative phase at two arbitrarily chosen planet trains.
the same shape but dier in phases [23, 37, 75] (as shown in Figure 6.2). According
to the denition of compound planetary gear mesh phases [37], the phases between
sunplanet gear meshes in the same stage are trainlevel relative phases which are
determined in Table 5.1. Without losing generality, the mesh force between the sun
gear (central gear s) and planet 1 in train l of this stage (stage 1) Fs1l1 is
Fs1l1 = Fs1l1 1l1 + Fs1l1 1l1
(6.3)
where 1l1 and 1l1 are unit vectors that dene the radial and tangential coordinates
for planet 1 in train l of stage 1 and they retain the xed angular separation 1l from
the carrier 1 xed basis {i, j}. Transforming the coordinate basis in (6.3)to {i, j}
gives
(
)
(
)
Fs1l1 = Fs1l1 cos 1l Fs1l1 sin 1l i + Fs1l1 sin 1l + Fs1l1 cos 1l j
(6.4)
Fs1l1 and Fs1l1 are the periodic mesh forces between the sun gear and planet 1 in
train l in and directions and the relationship between them and the associated
139
Fs111 (t
s1l1,gp
where s1l1,gp is the trainlevel sunplanet relative phase between train l and train 1
and it is (refer to Table 5.1)
&
s1l1,gp
= dec
Zgs 1l
2
'
(6.6)
where the sign is determined by the positiveness of (gs c1 ). Let the Fourier series
expansion for Fs111 and Fs111 be
Fs111 (t)
Fs111 (t) =
"
=0
"
es111
sin (t) + gs111 cos (t)
hs111
sin (t) + js111 cos (t)
#
(6.7)
=0
" s111
#
s1l1
e sin t 2
s1l1,gp + gs111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp =
F,
=0
"
#
hs111
sin t 2
s1l1,gp + js111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp =
=0
=0
s1l1
F,
=0
(6.8)
s1l1
s1l1
= es111
sin t 2
s1l1,gp + gs111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp and F,
=
where F,
sin t 2
s1l1,gp + js111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp are the mesh forces between
hs111
the sun gear and planet 1 in train l in and directions at the th harmonic of mesh
frequency. Summing up the sunplanet mesh forces (equation (6.4)) in all the trains
140
and insertion of (6.8) yield the net force acting on the sun gear (central gear s) as
1
s11
c
Fs1l1
l=1
c1 (
Fs1l1
)
(
)
1l
s1l1
1l
s1l1
1l
s1l1
1l
l=1
c (
c (
)
)
s1l1
1l
s1l1
1l
s1l1
s1l1
sin 1l + F,
cos 1l
=i
F, cos F, sin + j
F,
1
=0 l=1
=0 l=1
Fs11
=0
(6.9)
Once the four terms
)
)
)
c1 (
c1 (
c1 (
s1l1
s1l1
s1l1
cos 1l ,
sin 1l ,
cos 1l , and
F,
F,
F,
l=1
l=1
l=1
)
c1 (
s1l1
sin 1l in (6.9) are all equal to zero, Fs11
, the net force acting on the
F,
l=1
sun gear at th harmonic of mesh frequency, vanishes and the associated translational responses are suppressed. In the rest part of this section, the condition to
make these four terms be zero is rst investigated.
When gs c1 > 0, insertion of equation (6.6) into the rst term
c1
s1l1
cos 1l1
F,
l=1
and application of sin(dec()) = sin , the property of the operator dec( ), yield
c (
1
s1l1
F,
cos 1l
l=1
1
c
" s111
#
e sin t 2
s1l1,gp + gs111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp cos 1l
=
(6.10)
l=1
c
(
(
)
)
s 1l
s111
s 1l
=
sin
Z
cos
Z
es111
+
g
cos 1l
g
1
l=1
141
(6.11)
Insertion of (6.11) into (6.10) and application of the trigonometric identities yield
c (
1
s1l1
F,
cos 1l
l=1
c
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
sin t
+
=
cos
1
c
c1
l=1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
cos
g cos t
c1
c1
c1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
cos
cos
= e sin t
c1
c1
l=1
c1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
cos
sin
+
e cos t
1
1
c
c
l=1
c1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
cos
g cos t
cos
+
c1
c1
l=1
c1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
sin
cos
g sin t
c1
c1
1
es111
(6.12)
l=1
Zgs
k = mod
c1
(6.13)
where mod( ab ) yields the integer reminder of the integer division between a and b when
a
b
a
b
142
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
sin t
cos
cos
1
1
c
c
l=1
c1
2Zgs (l 1)
2(l 1)
s111
cos
sin
e cos t
c1
c1
l=1
c1
es111
sin t
2(k + 1)(l 1)
2(k 1)(l 1)
+ cos
=
cos
1
1
2
c
c
l=1
c1
s111
e cos t
2(k + 1)(l 1)
2(k 1)(l 1)
+ sin
sin
2
c1
c1
l=1
1
es111
(6.14)
For an arbitrary integer k, the trigonometric identities that are necessary to simplify
(6.14) are
c1
sin
2(l1)k
c1
=0
0, k/c1 = integer
2(l1)k
=
cos
c1
c1 , k/c1 = integer
l=1
l=1
c1
(6.15)
Application of (6.15) to (6.14) gives that the rst two terms in (6.12) becomes zero
)
c1 (
s1l1
cos 1l ,
F,
when k = 1, c1 1 and it is the same for other terms in (6.12).
l=1
)
c1 (
s1l1
sin 1l ,
F,
l=1
)
)
c1 (
c1 (
s1l1
s1l1
cos 1l , and
sin 1l in (6.9) are found to be vanished when
F,
F,
l=1
l=1
( s 1l )
Z
1
k = 1, c 1. When gs c1 < 0, replacing s1l1,gp with dec g2
in the above
is canceled out when k = 1, c1 1
process yields the same result. Therefore, Fs11
and the associated translational responses of the sun gear at th harmonic of mesh
frequency are suppressed.
143
The net torque acting on the sun gear is the sum of torques that are caused by
the sunplanet mesh forces in the tangential direction and it is
1
s11
rgs
c
Fs1l1
l=1
1
rgs
c
s1l1
F,
l=1 =0
1
c
" s111
#
s
h sin t 2
= rg
s1l1,gp + js111 cos t 2
s1l1,gp
where
(6.16)
=0 l=1
s11
=0
s11
rgs
c1 "
#
s1l1,gp
s111
s1l1,gp
hs111
+
j
is the
sin
cos
l=1
net torque acting on the sun gear at th mesh frequency. Insertion of (6.6), (6.11),
and (6.13) into the expression of s11
and application of the trigonometric identities
yield
1
= rgs hs111
s11
c
c1
)
)
(
(
1l s
s s111
1l s
sin t Zg + rg j
cos t Zg
l=1
l=1
c1
l=1
c1
2(l 1)k
2(l 1)k
s111
cos
j
sin
1
c
c1
l=1
1
c
l=1
c1
2(l 1)k
2(l 1)k
s111
sin
+
j
cos
1
c
c1
l=1
(6.17)
!
where the sign of 1l Zgs comes from s1l1,gp and it is determined by the positiveness
of gs c1 (Table 5.1).
Direct application of the trigonometric identities in (6.15) to (6.17) yields the
and the phasing quantity k as
relationship between s11
= 0,
s11
k = 0
= 0,
s11
k = 0
(6.18)
144
Equation (6.18) reveals that the net torque acting on the sun gear at th harmonic
of mesh frequency vanishes and the associated rotational response of the sun gear is
suppressed when the phasing quantity k = 0.
The net force and torque acting on other central components, the ring and the
carrier, follow exactly the same rule as that for the sun gear to vanish at th harmonic
of mesh frequency. One strong argument from [5] is that the absence of any net force
on the sun in the th harmonic implies there is no sun translation and thus no
response in any translational modes at this harmonic. Because translational modes
are the only modes involving the translation motions of the ring or carrier, at the th
harmonic of mesh frequency the translational motions for both ring and carrier are
suppressed. This implies that the th harmonic of the net forces on these components
vanish. Similar arguments based on rotational modal properties hold for the net
torque cancellations of the ring and carrier.
Another way to determine the net force or torque cancellation rules for the ring
gear is to apply the above analytical process to the ring gear with the exception
that the sunplanet mesh phase s1l1,gp should be replaced by the ringplanet mesh
1 ,gp
phase r1ld
condition for the ring gear, hence, is the same as that for the sun gear.
Because the gear mesh forces do not act on the carrier directly, the excitation forces
for the carrier in a meshedplanet stage are dierent from those for the sun and ring
and the above analytical procedure cannot be applied to carrier directly. Free body
diagram analysis on the carrier indicates that the reaction forces of the planet bearing
forces for the entire planet set are the excitation sources for the carrier, and the same
145
analysis on a single planet shows that the planet bearing force is associated with
not only sunplanet and ringplanet mesh forces but also planetplanet mesh forces.
Previous studies on planetary gears [5, 6, 34, 75, 90] indicate that it is reasonable to
assume that the bearing force for a planet is periodic and the harmonic contents of
the bearing forces are dominated by the mesh forces involving this planet. The net
force and torque acting on the carrier, hence, retain the harmonic structures (i.e.,
mesh periods and relative phases) of the sunplanet, ringplanet, and planetplanet
mesh forces. Replacing the harmonic structure associated with sunplanet mesh forces
in equations (6.3)(6.14) with the harmonic structure that sum up sunplanet, ringplanet, and planetplanet mesh forces and applying the mesh phase relations that all
the trainlevel mesh phases are equal to each other along the same train in a meshedplanet stage (as show in equation (5.22)) produce the result that the th harmonic
of net force and torque acting on the carrier vanish in the same way as that for the
sun gear.
Cancellation of Planet Modal Forces
Let mode v be a planet mode for stage 1. As introduced in the beginning of
this section, the suppression of this planet mode at th harmonic of mesh frequency
depends on the vanishing of the planet modal force Qv (t) = Tv f((t), t). fips ((t), t)
collects the elements of f((t), t) in equation (6.1) that are associated with planet set
1 and it is
T
11
1c1
= fpt ((t), t), , fpt ((t), t)
T
1l1
1ld1
f1l
((t),
t)
=
f
((t),
t),
,
f
((t),
t)
p
pt
p
f1ps ((t), t)
" 1lm
#T
f1lm
((t), t), f1lm ((t), t), f1lm ((t), t)
p ((t), t) = f
where m = 1, , d1 .
146
(6.19)
Insertion of the planet modal properties in (2.48)(2.51) and equation (6.19) into
the expression of the modal force Qv give
1
Qv =
c
T 11
w l 1l
fpt
pt,v
l=1
1
c
d
l=1
m=1
w l p11m f1lm
c
d
l=1
m=1
w l p11m f1lm
c
d
l=1
m=1
w l u11m
f1lm
p
(6.20)
where w l is the scalar multiplier that satises (2.52). Kiracofe and Parker [53] point
out the closedform solution for w l is
1
cos(n + 1)11
w
2
w cos(n + 1)12
n .
w = ..
=
..
.
1
c1
w
cos(n + 1)1c
+ n
sin(n + 1)11
sin(n + 1)12
..
.
1
sin(n + 1)1c
(6.21)
1, 2, , (c1 3)/2
1, 2, , (c1 2)/2
when c1 is odd
when c1 is even
(6.22)
the planet in the train (the value of m), the Fourier series expansion of the dynamic
147
force f1lm varies. When m = 1, f1l1 is impacted by a sunplanet mesh force and a
planetplanet mesh force. Its Fourier series expansion, hence, is
s1l1
s1l1,gp + gs1l1 cos t 2
s1l1,gp +
f1lm =
e sin t 2
=1
sunplanet mesh
h1l12
sin t 2
1l12,pp + j1l12 cos t 2
1l12,pp
(6.23)
planetplanet mesh
Because all the trainlevel mesh phases along the same train equal each other in a
i
meshedplanet stage (i.e., s il1,gp = r ild ,gp = ilm(m+1),pp ), replacing s1l1,gp and
1l12,pp with 1l in equation (6.23) and combining the sine and cosine terms yield
f1l1
" 1l1
#
E sin t 2
=
1l + G1l1
1l
cos t 2
(6.24)
=1
"
#
E1lm sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l
cos t 2
(6.25)
=1
Q =
c
d
w l p11m
l=1 m=1
c1
#
E1lm sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l
cos t 2
=1
d1
=1 l=1 m=1
"
"
#
w l p11m E1lm sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l
cos t 2
Q
=1
148
(6.26)
where Q is the th harmonic of Q . Insertion of (6.21) and (6.6) into the expression
of Q gives
1
Q =
c
d
l=1 m=1
)
)
(
(
1l Z s
cos
I1
I2
I3
c1
(6.27)
I4
d1
l=1 m=1
p11m (I1 I3 + I1 I4 + I2 I3 + I2 I4 )
d1
c1
p11m I1 I3
l=1 m=1 n
yields
1
c
d
l=1 m=1
p11m I1 I3
c
d
l=1 m=1
2(k n 1)(l 1)
2(k + n + 1)(l 1)
+ cos
=
sin(t) cos
2
c1
c1
m=1
n
l=1
*
2(k n 1)(l 1)
2(k + n + 1)(l 1)
+ sin
cos(t) sin
c1
c1
(6.28)
c1
d1
p11m E1lm n
)
(
p11m E1lm n cos(n + 1)i1 sin t 1l Zgs
d1
c1
p11m I1 I3 = 0 if k + n + 1 = c1
l=1 m=1 n
1
l=1 m=1 n
p11m I2 I3 , and
c1
d1
l=1 m=1 n
l=1 m=1 n
Table 6.2 summarizes the above results for the suppression of dierent responses
in a meshedplanet stage. Because the trainlevel relative phases along the same
train in a meshedplanet stage equal each other, the resultant mesh phasing rules are
the same as those for a simple planetary gear in [5, 75] and the planetplanet mesh
parameters, such as planet tooth numbers, has no impact on the mesh phasing rules.
Table 6.2: The conditions for the phasing quantity k to
suppress dierent responses in a meshedplanet stage.E
indicates the associated responses is excited, and S means
that the related responses is suppressed.
k
Cancellations
F , , and Q
k = 0
F = 0, =
Q=0
1
k = 1, c 1
F = 0, =
Q=0
1
k = 0, 1, c 1 F = 0, =
Q = 0
6.2.2
of Translational
Rotational Planet
0,
0,
0,
stages show that all the gear meshes that involve planets 1 to 1 in each train
have the mesh frequency of and all other gear meshes have the mesh frequency of
150
Zp1l
(6.29)
1l(1)
Zp
sunplanet 1 mesh
= 1l
1l(+1),pp
= =
1l12,pp
= 1l
1l(2)(1),pp
planet (2)planet (1) mesh
r1ld1 ,gp
(6.30)
ringplanet d1 mesh
Dierent from meshedplanet stages (equation (6.5)), the gear mesh forces for the gear
meshes along train l in a stepped stage no longer contain just and its harmonics.
As long as = , and its harmonics will participate into the harmonic structure of
all the gear mesh forces along train l. Because stepped stages retain cyclic symmetry,
if train l is brought to the position of a dierent planet train y, the mesh stiness
variations, meshes forces, and the associated responses along train l should be exactly
the same as those for train y when train y is at the same position. The mesh forces
along train l, hence, are periodic and have phase relations with the mesh force in other
trains. Combination of equation (6.30) with the above properties for the mesh forces
in a stepped stage yields the assumption on the harmonic structure of any gear mesh
force in train l as follows. Any gear mesh force in train l contains and its harmonic
151
Stepped Stage
Stage 1
(a)
Ring Gear
Carrier
Planet 2
Planet 1
Output Shaft
Input Shaft
Sun Gear
Train 2
(b)
Ring Gear
Train 1
Train 3
Planet 2
Train 4
Sun Gear
Planet 1
Train 6
Train 5
Carrier
Figure 6.3: A stepped stage has six planet trains. Each planet train has two coaxial
planets.
152
terms that are subjection to the trainlevel relative phase 1l and and its harmonic
terms that are subject to a dierent trainlevel relative 1l . The terms that contain
and its harmonics are decoupled with those containing and its harmonics. This is
the key stipulation in this section to derive the mesh phasing rules for stepped stages
and its validation is conrmed by the simulation results performed by Calyx [96].
The sunplanet mesh force in train l of a stepped stage is examined rst. Equations
(6.3) and (6.4) are still valid for the sunplanet mesh force in lth train of a stepped
stage. Dierent from mesh planet stages, Fs1l1 and Fs1l1 in a stepped stage contain
additional terms that are functions of t and are subject to 1l as follows.
s111
s111
(t 2
1l ) + F,
(t 2
1l )
Fs1l1 = F,
(6.31)
s111
s111
Fs1l1 = F,
(t 2
1l ) + F,
(t 2
1l )
s111
s111
s111
s111
Expansion of F,
(t 2
1l ), F,
(t 2
1l ), F,
(t 2
1l ), and F,
(t
2
1l ) in (6.31) into Fourier series yields
Fs1l1 =
=
Fs1l1 =
=
"
=0
=0
=0
=0
#
#
" s111
s111
s111
sin
(t)
+
g
cos
(t)
+
cos (t)
es111
e, sin (t) + g,
,
,
=0
s1l1
F,,
+
s1l1
F,,
=0
"
" s111
#
#
s111
s111
hs111
h, sin (t) + j,
sin
(t)
+
j
cos
(t)
+
cos (t)
,
,
=0
s1l1
F,,
+
s1l1
F,,
=0
(6.32)
s1l1
s1l1
and F,,
are the mesh forces between the sun gear and planet 1 in train
where F,,
s1l1
and
l in and directions at the th harmonic of the mesh frequency , and F,,
s1l1
are the mesh forces of the same gear mesh in and directions at the th
F,,
The net force acting on the sun gear in a stepped stage, hence, becomes
1
s11
c
Fs1l1
l=1
=0
c (
1
s1l1
s1l1
cos 1l F,,
sin 1l
F,,
!
c1 (
)
s1l1
s1l1
sin 1l + F,,
cos 1l +
+j
F,,
l=1
l=1
Fs11
,
c (
c (
)
)
s1l1
1l
s1l1
1l
s1l1
s1l1
=0
l=1
l=1
Fs11
,
=0
Fs11
,
Fs11
,
=0
(6.33)
s11
The cancellation of Fs11
, and F, in (6.33) indicates that the translational responses
(6.34)
1
Fs11
, = 0, when k = 1, c 1
r
d1 1 Zg
k = mod (1)
c1
(6.35)
where Zgr is the tooth number of the ring gear in the stepped stage. Replacing the rel(
)
d1 1 Zgr il
1l
ative phase in equation (6.10) with = dec (1)
[37] and application of
2
the same process in equations (6.10)(6.15) with the exception that (6.13) is replaced
154
Fs11
, = 0, when k = 1, c 1
Similar to the net torque acting on the sun gear in a meshedplanet stage, the net
torque acting on the sun gear in a stepped stage is the sum of torques that are caused
by the sunplanet mesh forces in the tangential direction . Insertion of (6.32) into
c1
s11 = rgs Fs1l1 yields
l=1
1
s11
rgs
c
s1l1
F,
l=1 =0
=0
rgs
c
" s111
#
s111
h, sin t 2
1l + j,
cos t 2
1l +
l=1
s11
,
1
c
" s111
#
s
h, sin t 2
rg
1l + js111 cos t 2
1l
=0
=0
l=1
s11
,
s11
,
(6.37)
s11
,
=0
s11
s11
, and , are direct indications of the suppression of rotational responses at
s11
in equation
= n or = n in a stepped stage. s11
, has the same form as
phasing quantity k with k and application of the same process as that in (6.17)
give the rule to suppress s11
, as
s11
, = 0,
k = 0
s11
,
k = 0
(6.38)
= 0,
The net forces and torques acting on the ring gear and carrier have the same
harmonic structures as those for the sun gear in (6.33) and (6.37). Their cancellation
155
conditions at = n or = n , hence, are the same as those for the sun gear in
(6.36) and (6.38).
The general planet modal force expression in (6.20) is valid for stepped stages as
well. Similar to the sunplanet mesh force in (6.31), and its harmonics participate
in the planet modal forces for stepped stages and they are decoupled with terms.
d1
c1
"
#
Q =
d
c
" 1lm
#
1l
w l p11m E,
sin t 2
1l + G1lm
cos
+
,
=1 l=1 m=1
Q,
1
d
c
" 1lm
#
w l p11m E,
sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l
, cos t 2
=1 l=1 m=1
Q,
=1
Q,
Q,
=1
(6.39)
The cancellation of Q, suggests the suppression of Q at the th harmonic of
. Because all the terms in (6.20) have the same harmonic structure as Q , the
modal force Qv , as well as the associated planet mode response, is suppressed at
th harmonic of mesh frequency. Similarly, the cancellation of Q, indicates the
suppression of the planet mode response at th harmonic of .
Because Q, has the same expression as Q in (6.27), the condition to suppress
Q, is the same as that for Q . That is,
Q, = 0, when k = 0, 1, c1 1
(6.40)
Q,
= 0, when k = 0, 1, c 1
1
156
(
1
Insertion of 1l = dec (1)d 1
Zgr il
2
0, when k = 0, 1, c1 1
=
Table 6.3 sums up the above rules to suppress dierent responses in a stepped
stage. Due to the existence of two mesh frequencies, and , in a stepped stage,
two dierent phasing quantities, k and k are needed to determine the suppression
of resonant responses at = n and = n , respectively.
Table 6.3: The conditions for the phasing quantities k
and k to suppress dierent responses in a stepped stage.
E indicates the associated responses is excited, and S
means that the related responses is suppressed.
k
Cancellations
F , , and Q
= n
F = 0, =
Q=0
F = 0, =
Q=0
F = 0, =
Q = 0
of Translational
at
Cancellations
F , , and Q
= n
F = 0, =
k = 0
Q=0
1
F = 0, =
k = 1, c 1
Q=0
1
k = 0, 1, c 1 F = 0, =
Q = 0
of Translational
at
k = 0
k = 1, c1 1
k = 0, 1, c1 1
k
Rotational Planet
0,
0,
0,
Rotational Planet
0,
0,
0,
157
6.3
All the vibration modes for purely rotational compound planetary model are classied into two types: overall modes and planet modes [35]. Similar to the rotational
modes for rotationaltranslational models, each overall mode is associated with a distinct natural frequency, all the planet trains within the same stage have identical
motions, and all the central components have rotational motions. The net torques
acting on the sun, ring, and carrier, hence, are the direct measurement of the excitation/suppression of overall mode responses in a purely rotational model. Because the
excitation sources are still the mesh forces in purely rotational models, the harmonic
structures of these net torques are the same as those in a rotationaltranslational
model in (6.17) and (6.38). The cancellation rules for these net torques in a purely
rotational model, therefore, are the same as those in a rotationaltranslational model
in equations (6.18) (for meshedplanet stages) and (6.39) (for stepped stages).
Equation (6.1) is generic for both rotationaltranslational and purely rotational
models and it indicates that the excitation/suppression of planet responses can be
determined by the planet modal force Qv . Let an arbitrary meshed planet stage be
numbered as stage 1. v is a planet mode for this stage. The associated planet
modal force Qv has the same form as that for a rotationaltranslational in equation
(6.20) with the exception that w l , the scalar multiplier for a rotationaltranslational
model, should be replaced by v l , the scalar multiplier for a purely rotational model
that satises (2.37). Ambarisha and Parker [5] gives the closedform solution for v l
158
as
v=
v1
v2
..
.
vc
1 1
c
y
=
y=1
sin y 11
sin y 12
..
.
1
sin y 1c
(6.42)
1 1
c1
d1 c
y sin y i1
Q =
l=1 m=1 y=1
J1
)
)
(
(
1l s
p11m E1lm sin t 1l Zgs + G1lm
cos t Zg
J2
c1
d1
(6.43)
J3
c1 1
p11m (J1 J2 + J1 J3 )
1 1
c1
d1 c
p11m J1 J2 gives
c
1
d c
p11m J1 J2
c
1
d c
c1 1
p11m E1lm y=1
)
(
i1
1l s
sin y sin t Zg
c1 1
p11m E1lm y=1
2(k y)(l 1)
2(k + y)(l 1)
+ sin
sin(t) sin
=
2
c1
c1
l=1 m=1 y=1
*
2(k + y)(l 1)
2(k y)(l 1)
cos
cos(t) cos
c1
c1
(6.44)
c1
d1
c1 1
1 1
c1
d1 c
p11m J1 J2 =
Q =
d
c
" 1lm
#
w l p11m E,
sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l +
, cos t 2
=1 l=1 m=1
Q,
1
d
c
" 1lm
#
w l p11m E,
sin t 2
1l + G1lm
1l
, cos t 2
=1 l=1 m=1
Q,
Q,
=1
Q,
=1
(6.45)
The cancellation of Q, in (6.45) is exactly the same as Q in (6.43). Substitution
)
(
1
Z r il
(the trainlevel relative phase expression in Table 5.1)
of 1l = dec (1)d 1 g2
)
(
d1 1 Zgr
, and
into the expression of Q, in (6.45), insertion of k = mod (1)
c1
application of the same analytical process as above produce the cancellation condition
for Q, as k = 0.
Table 6.4 summarizes the above results to suppress dierent responses in a purely
rotational model for compound planetary gears. Comparing with the results for
rotationaltranslational models in Tables 6.2 and 6.3, the condition to suppress the
overall mode responses in a purely rotational model is the same as that to suppress
the rotational responses in a rotationaltranslational model. In addition, the condition to suppress the planet responses in a purely rotational model is identical to
the conditions to suppress planet and translational responses simultaneously in a
rotationaltranslational model.
160
6.4
Planet
S
E
To numerically validate the analytical results on the phasing rules for compound
planetary stages in previous section, numerical simulations are performed for compound planetary stages with dierent mesh phasing congurations using Plantary2D
[95], a nite element software that precisely calculates dynamic responses for planetary gear systems without any preset or userdened mesh phase relations and
is proved to be the benchmark for analytical studies on planetary gear dynamics [6, 9, 75, 76].
For the meshedplanet compound stage shown in Figure 6.1, two dierent mesh
phasing cases that are listed in Table 6.5 are simulated. The input parameters to
Planetary2D are listed in Table 6.6. All gears are steel spur gears with Youngs
modulus equaling 207 109 N/m2 , density being 7595kg/m3, and Poissons ratio
equaling 0.3. In both cases, the four planet trains are equallyspaced, sun gear is the
161
input component, ring gear is xed, carrier is the output, and all teeth are unmodied.
The nite element models for both cases are shown in Figure 6.4.
Table 6.5: Two dierent mesh phasing cases for the
meshedplanet stage in Figure 6.1.
Gear Tooth Numbers
for Sun, Ring, and Planets
Case 1
Case 2
k = mod(Zgs /c1 )
=1 =2 =3 =4
1
The changes in gear tooth numbers from Case 1 to Case 2 are minor and the
kinematic properties, such as gear ratios, remain almost the same for both cases.
Such little changes in gear numbers, however, have great impact on the dynamic
responses of the system. The phasing quantities in Table 6.5 suggest that in Case 1
translational responses are excited at all odd orders of mesh frequency harmonics, and
rotational responses are only excited every fourth harmonic of mesh frequency. For
Case 2, translational responses are suppressed at all the harmonics of mesh frequency,
and rotational responses are suppressed at odd orders of mesh frequency harmonics.
The complete suppression of translational responses and the suppression of rotational
responses at the rst order of mesh frequency make Case 2 be the better design in the
view of noise and vibration reduction. These analytical results are conrmed by the
simulation results in Figures 6.56.6. Figure 6.5a shows the periodic sun translational
response, and its rst four harmonic amplitudes are listed in Figure 6.5b. The fact
that the amplitudes of the rst and third harmonics are much higher than those for
the second and fourth harmonics matches the analytical results for Case 1 in Table
6.5 that the even order of harmonics for the sun translational response are suppressed
162
(a) Case 1
(b) Case 2
Figure 6.4: The nite element models for (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 2 in Table 6.5.
163
Diametral
Pitch
Pressure
Angle
Base
Diameter
Outer Diameter
Root
Diameter
Sun
Gear
Case 1
Planet Planet Ring
Gear Gear Gear
(1l1) (1l2)
Sun
Gear
Case 2
Planet Planet Ring
Gear Gear Gear
(1l1) (1l2)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
25o
25o
24o
24o
25o
25o
25o
25o
52.58
52.58
59.69
277.37
52.58
52.58
59.69
277.37
61.72
61.72
69.60
324.10
61.72
61.72
69.60
324.10
52.58
52.58
60.45
305.31
52.58
52.58
60.45
305.31
The conguration (the number of planet trains and the arrangement of the two
stepped planets) of the example system shown in Figure 6.3 is the similar to the
practical planetary gear system in [19]. Two mesh phasing cases in Table 6.6 are
simulated (all the gear parameters in Table 6.6 are completely dierent from the gear
system in [19] with the exception of the gear tooth numbers for Case 1). All gears
164
D
Sun Translational Response (m)
15
10
10
15
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
time (sec)
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Figure 6.5: The simulated results for (a) sun translational response and (b) the associated harmonic amplitudes of Case 1 in Table 6.5. Sun gear is the input component
and the input speed is 100 rpm.
165
(a)
Sun Translational Response (m)
10
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
time (sec)
(b)
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Figure 6.6: The simulated results for (a) sun translational response and (b) the associated harmonic amplitudes of Case 2 in Table 6.5. Sun gear is the input component
and the input speed is 100 rpm. The input torque remains the same as that for Figure
6.5.
166
are spur gears in the calculation and the nite element models for these two cases are
demonstrated in Figure 6.7.
Table 6.7: Two dierent mesh phasing cases for the
stepped stage in Figure 6.3.
Gear Tooth Numbers
Case 1
Case 2
Phasing Quantities
k = mod(Zgs /c1 )
=1 =2 =3 =4
0
0
0
0
d1 1 r 1
Zg /c )
k = mod((1)
=1 =2 =3 =4
0
0
0
0
s 1
k = mod(Zg /c )
=1 =2 =3 =4
2
4
0
2
d1 1 r 1
Zg /c )
k = mod((1)
=1 =2 =3 =4
4
2
0
4
Similar to the two case in Table 6.5, the dierences in gear tooth numbers for the
two case in Table 6.7 are slight such that the gear ratios are the almost the same
for both cases. The dynamic responses for these two cases, however, dier dramatically. The phasing quantities in Table 6.7 suggest that the translational responses are
suppressed at all the harmonics for both mesh frequencies (i.e, for any k or k ) for
both cases. For Case 1, the rotational responses are excited at all the harmonics for
both mesh frequencies because both k and k equal zero. For Case 2, the rotational
responses are only excited at every third harmonic of both mesh frequencies. These
analytical results are veried by the simulation results in Figures 6.86.9. The simulation results in Figure 6.8 conrms that the sun rotational response is excited at all
harmonics of and . For Case 2, due to the adjustments in mesh phasing, the sun
167
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.7: The nite element models for (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 2 in Table 6.7.
168
rotational response in Figure 6.9 is only excited at every third harmonics for and
. The phenomenon that the fundamental frequency of the sun rotational response
in Figure 6.9a is three times of that in Figure 6.8a further conrms the analytical
results that is based on the phasing quantity calculation in Table 6.7.
Making the translational bearing/shaft stinesses in the above cases be stier (at
least one hundred times of their original values) and conducting the simulations to
calculate the rotational responses for the sun, and planet gear for the same cases
in tables 6.5 and 6.7 yield the numerical results that agree with the rules in Table
6.4. The mesh phasing rules for purely rotational models, hence, is also numerically
veried.
6.5
Conclusion
The chapter analytically investigates the general rules to suppress certain dynamic responses and resonances of compound planetary gears through mesh phasing
for purely rotational and rotationaltranslational models. For meshedplanet stages,
the excitation or suppression of various modal responses at th harmonic of mesh
frequency is solely determined by the phasing quantity k . The resultant rules are
the same as those for simple planetary gears and the planetplanet gear meshes have
no impact on the mesh phasing rules for meshedplanet stages due to the specic
trainlevel relative phase relations that are determined by the assembly conditions.
For stepped stages, due to the existence of two generally dierent mesh frequencies,
two dierent phasing quantities, k and k , are required to determine the excitation
or suppression of various modal responses at th harmonic of one mesh frequency and
th harmonic of the other one. For multistage systems, the mesh phasing rules are
169
(a)
150
100
50
50
100
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
time (sec)
(b)
Harmonic Amplitudes for
Sun Rotational Response ()
120
100
80
60
40
20
(c)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 6.8: The simulated results for (a) sun translational response, (b) the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of sunplanet mesh frequency , and (c) the amplitudes
of rst sixth harmonics of ringplanet mesh frequency for Case 1 in Table 6.7. Sun
gear is the input component and the input speed is 100 rpm.
170
(a)
150
100
50
50
0.05
0.1
0.15
(b)
0.2
0.25
time (sec)
120
100
80
60
40
20
(c)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 6.9: The simulated results for (a) sun translational response, (b) the amplitudes of rst sixth harmonics of sunplanet mesh frequency , and (c) the amplitudes
of rst sixth harmonics of ringplanet mesh frequency for Case 1 in Table 6.7.
Sun gear is the input component and the input speed is 100 rpm. The input torque
remains the same as that for Figure 6.8.
171
the sum of the rules from individual stage which is either a stage with meshedplanet
structure only or a stepped stage. The results of this study are critical to the design of
compound planetary gear systems and are eective in troubleshooting the vibration
and noise problems in real compound planetary gear applications.
172
7.1
Introduction
Mesh stiness variation is a primary excitation of gear noise and vibrations [60,61,
98] and is typically represented by timevarying mesh stinesses that parametrically
excite gear systems in analytical studies [61]. When the operating speed of the system
meets certain conditions, instabilities that are caused by mesh stiness parametric
excitations will occur such that noise and vibrations are created, the dynamic load on
each component of the system is dramatically increased, and the chance of hardware
failure, such as the damages in gear teeth and bearings, is greatly increased [61, 98].
In order to prevent gear systems from operating in the instability regions, it is crucial
to investigate the parametric instabilities caused by mesh stiness variations and to
identify the instability boundaries at the design stage of the system.
Parametric instability for a single gear pair was investigated analytically and numerically in several studies [4, 12, 14, 71]. The experimental work on the parametric
instabilities in a spur gear pair was performed by Kahraman and Blankenship [49].
Nonlinear phenomena such as gear tooth contact loss, perioddoubling and chaos
were also observed in their study. As for the parametric instability of multimesh
173
gear systems, very limited studies were performed. The studies on the instabilities of
twostage gear systems by Tordion and Gauvin [93] and Benton and Seireg [10] gave
contradictory conclusions. This was claried by Lin and Parkers investigation [60]
which provided analytical formulae to allow designers to suppress particular instabilities by changing gear mesh parameters, such as contact ratios and mesh phasing.
Liu and Parker [63] examined the nonlinear resonant vibrations of idler gears that are
parametrically excited by mesh stiness variation. The study on the planetary gear
parametric instability was rst performed by Lin and Parker [61] who analytically
investigated the parametric instability of simple planetary gear using a purely rotational model. Bahk and Parker [9] used the same purely rotational model to study
the nonlinear resonant vibration of simple planetary gears parametrically excited by
mesh stiness variations. Wu and Parker [98] extended the parametric instability
investigation scope to simple planetary gears having an elastic continuum ring gear.
Compound planetary gear parametric instability, however, is not investigated in
any previous studies mainly due to the complexity in modeling, the complex mesh
phasing relations caused by meshedplanet and steppedplanet structures, and multifrequency excitations incurred by steppedplanet and multistage structures. Studies
in previous chapters develop the lumpedparameter models for compound planetary
gears, dene and clarify the complex mesh phasing relations, and derive the rules
that govern the suppression of selected dynamic responses through mesh phasing. All
these provide necessary foundations for the current problem of parametric instability
for compound planetary gears.
Compared to the rotationaltranslational compound planetary gear model in [53],
the purely rotational model developed in chapter 2 greatly simplies the analytical
174
work on gear dynamics while keeping the main dynamic behavior generated by mesh
stiness variations. The work in [61] conrms the eectiveness of a purely rotational
model in capturing the parametric instability properties for simple planetary gears.
The study in this chapter, hence, uses the purely rotational model to investigate compound planetary gear parametric instabilities. By applying the method of multiple
scale, the welldened modal properties in chapter 2, and the mesh phase relations
in chapter 5, the instability boundaries are analytically obtained and the general
instability existence rules are derived.
7.2
Meshedplanet, steppedplanet, and multistage structures are unique to compound planetary gears. Meshed planets introduce new planetplanet meshes to the
system. Steppedplanet and multistage structures allow the system to have multiple
silm
(t) is the time varying mesh stiness between central gear s
mesh frequencies. kgp
and planet m in train l of stage i and its mesh frequency is 1i . If all other gear meshes
along train l in the same stage have the same mesh frequency, stage i is either a simple
stage (a stage that is equivalent to a simple planetary gear) or a meshedplanet stage.
Otherwise, there exists a steppedplanet structure along train l and there is always a
central gearplanet mesh having a mesh frequency dierent from 1i . Without losing
rilq
(t) is the mesh stiness between central gear r and planet q along train
generality, kgp
175
silm
rilq
mesh stiness kgp
(t) and kgp
(t) are
silm
sim
silm
kgp
(t) = kgp
+ kgp
(t)
(7.1)
rilq
(t)
kgp
riq
kgp
rilq
+ kgp
(t)
sim
riq
silm
rilq
silm
rilq
where kgp
and kgp
are mean values for kgp
(t) and kgp
(t), and kgp
(t) and kgp
(t)
are zeromean mesh stiness variations. Similar to [98], trapezoidal waves are used
to approximate the mesh stiness variations due to its advantage over rectangular
waves in case of corner contacts. Figure 7.1 shows the trapezoidal approximations for
silm
rilq
(t) and kgp
(t). gp,silm(0) and gp,rilq (0) are the systemlevel relative phases for
kgp
silm
rilq
(t) and kgp
(t) and the referring time 0 indicates that the pitch point of the base
kgp
referred mesh is in contact at t = 0. The contact ratios for these two mesh stinesses
sim
and criq
=
are csim
gp
gp and the mesh periods are Tgp
2
1i
riq
and Tgp
=
2
.
2i
sim
and riq
gp
gp
silm
are the slope coecients for the nonparallel sides of the trapezoidal waves for kgp
(t)
rilq
(t) and they are in the range of [0,
and kgp
1
]
4
(0 and
1
4
correspond to rectangular
slm
rlq
and 2kvg
are the peaktopeak amplitudes
and triangle waves, respectively). 2kvg
silm
rilq
(t) and kgp
(t).
for kgp
silm
rilq
(t) and (b) kgp
(t) yields
Fourier expansion of kgp
silm
slm
(t) = 2kvg
kgp
rilq
kgp
(t) =
[Agp,silm
sin 1i t + Bgp,silm cos ii t]
=1
rlq
2kvg
[Agp,rilq
=1
(7.2)
sin 2i t + Bgp,rilq cos 2i t]
176
(a)
~ silm
k gp (t)
si*m
^ gp,silm(0)Tgp
si*m
gp
si*m
gp
si*m
(c gp
1)T
si*m
2k vg
~ rilq
k gp (t)
ri*q
^ gp,rilq (0)Tgp
ri*q
gp
ri*q
gp
ri*q
(c gp
1)T
ri*q
2k vg
silm
rilq
Figure 7.1: The zeromean mesh stiness variations (a) kgp
(t) and (b) kgp
(t).
gp,silm
gp,rilq
sim
riq
(0) and
(0) are systemlevel mesh phases, cgp and cgp are contact
sim
riq
ratios, Tgp
and Tgp
are mesh periods, and sim
and riq
gp
gp are trapezoid wave slope
coecients.
177
"
#
sin(2sim
gp )
sin (csim
+ 2
gp,silm(0)) sin(csim
gp
gp )
sim
2
2
gp
"
#
sin(2sim
gp )
cos (csim
+ 2
gp,silm(0)) sin(csim
Bgp,silm =
gp
gp )
sim
2
2
gp
"
#
sin(2riq
gp )
gp,rilq
riq
gp,rilq
=
sin
(c
+
2
(0))
sin(criq
A
gp
gp )
22
riq
gp
"
#
sin(2riq
gp )
gp,rilq
riq
gp,rilq
=
cos
(c
+
2
(0))
sin(criq
B
gp
gp )
riq 2 2
gp
=
Agp,silm
=
slm
gp
slm
kvg
sim
kgp
and rlq
gp =
rlq
kvg
riq
kgp
(7.3)
1111
is the mesh stiness for the base referred mesh,
tions. Without losing generality, kgp
(7.4)
rlq
rlq
gp = ggp
slm
rlq
, ggp
= O(1) are relative variation coecients. Application of the anawhere ggp
lytical process in equations (7.1)(7.4) to all other gear meshes in the same compound
planetary gear yields the Fourier expansions for these gear meshes. Substitution of
the resultant Fourier expansions for all the gear meshes into the stiness matrix for
the purely rotational model (2.23) gives
K(t) = Kb + Km = Kb + Ko + Kv (t)
Km
= Kiv + Kv (t)
a
"
Ki11 sin 1i t + Ki12 cos 1i t +
= Kiv + 2
(7.5)
=1 i=1
#
Ki21 sin 2i t + Ki22 cos 2i t
where Kiv = Kb + Ko is the timeinvariant part of K(t), Kv (t is the timevarying
part of K(t), Ko has the same form as Km with all the mesh stiness substituted by
178
their mean values, and Ki11 , Ki12 , Ki21 , and Ki22 are the Fourier coecient matrices
for stage i gear meshes with 1i and 2i mesh frequencies, respectively. They have
the same form as Km with all the mesh stinesses that have the mesh frequency of
1i (for Ki11 and Ki12 ) or 2i (for Ki21 and Ki22 ) being substituted by the production
of relative variation coecients, their mean values, and the associated Fourier coefsilm
sim sim gp,silm
silm
(t) in Ki11 is replaced by ggp
kgp A
and kgp
(t) in
cients (for example, kgp
sim sim gp,silm
kgp A
), and all other terms in these two matrices are
Ki12 is replaced by ggp
zeros.
7.3
Parametric instabilities occur when harmonics of the mesh frequency are close to
particular combinations of the natural frequencies [60, 61, 98], that is,
e + f
(7.6)
(7.7)
where the timeinvariant mass and stiness matrices, M and Kiv , are the same as
those in (2.18), and the timevarying stiness matrix Kv (t) is the same as that in
179
a
(7.5). Let = [1 , , ] ( = a + b +
i=1
n2 zn
+ 2
a
"
Ki11,nw
sin 1i t + Ki12,nw
cos 1i t +
w=1 =1 i=1
Ki21,nw
#
sin 2i t + Ki22,nw
cos 2i t zw = 0
(7.8)
, Ki12,nw
, Ki21,nw
, and Ki22,nw
is the same for the rest of this chapter), and Ki11,nw
(7.9)
(7.10)
a
"
2 zn1
2 zn0
2
1
1
2
+
z
=
2
sin
t
+
K
cos
t
+
K
n1
n
i
i
i11,nw
i12,nw
t2
t
w=1 =1 i=1
#
cos 2i t zw1
Ki21,nw sin 2i t + Ki22,nw
(7.11)
180
n = 1, ,
(7.12)
where j is the imaginary unit and cc means the complex conjugate of preceding terms.
Substitution of (7.12) into (7.11) gives
Cn
2 zn1
+ n2 zn1 = 2jn ejn t
2
t
a
j(n +1 )t
j(n 1 )t
i
i
jKi11,nw
+ Ki12,nw
+ jKi11,nw + Ki12,nw
e
e
w=1 =1 i=1
jKi21,nw
j(n +2 )t
i
e
Ki22,nw
j(n 2 )t
i
Cw
+ jKi21,nw + Ki22,nw e
+ cc n = 1, ,
(7.13)
The equations matching with (7.13) in [60, 61, 98] are inconsistent and this study
conrms that the discrepancies are caused by the typos in [60, 61]. The resultant
equation (7.13) agrees with that in [98].
Without losing generality, when a harmonic of 1i is close to the sum of two natural
frequencies e + f and the harmonics of other mesh frequencies do not approach
e + f , secular terms present in (7.13) and parametric instability happens. Such
parametric instability that is caused by a individual mesh frequency is classied as
individualexcitation type of instability in this study, and the condition is
1i = e + f +
(7.14)
7.3.1
Depending on the degeneracy of e and f , the solvability conditions for 7.13 are
classied into three cases: (A) two distinct eigenvalues (distinctdistinct), (B) one
distinct eigenvalue and one degenerate eigenvalue (distinctdegenerate), and (C) two
degenerate eigenvalues (degeneratedegenerate). Similar to previous studies [61, 98],
to derive the boundaries for single mode and combination instabilities is focus for each
cases. The denition of the single mode instability for compound planetary gears is
dierent from that in [98]. In addition to the requirement of e = f , e and f have
to be the same type of natural frequencies. All other cases belong to combination
instabilities. That is, if e is an overall frequency and f is a planet frequency, the
instability at f + e is always a combination one regardless the equality of these
two frequencies. Such denition of single mode has no mathematical impact on the
following derivation of instabilities but prevents the confusions in terminology.
Case (A): distinctdistinct
When both e and f are distinct, elimination of the secular terms in (7.13)
requires [60]
Ce
+ Ki12,ef
)e = 0
+ Cf (jKi11,ef
Cf
+ Ce (jKi11,f
2jf
=0
e + Ki12,f e )e
2je
(7.15)
(7.16)
Cf = (Rf + jIf )e
(Ki11,ef
)2
(7.17)
(Ki12,ef
)2
+
1
[e + f ef /(e f )]
(7.18)
where ef is the instability indicator of the width for the instability region. If
e(f +x1) vanishes, the width for the instability region is zero and the instability
at 1i = e + f vanishes. For single mode instability, equation (7.16) can be further
simplied as
1i =
,
1
[2e ee /e ]
(7.19)
where ee = (Ki11,ee
)2 + (Ki12,ee
)2 is the instability indicator.
+
2je
=0
Cf +x1 (jKi11,e(f
+x1) + Ki12,e(f +x1) )e
x=1
u
2jf +x1
Cf +x1
+ Ce (jKi11,(f
= 0,
+x1)e + Ki12,(f +x1)e )e
x = 1, , u
(7.20)
The solutions for (7.20) have the same form as (7.16). With similar algebraic process
of the associated 2(u + 1) 2(u + 1) eigenvalue problem as that in (7.17)(7.19), the
183
x=1
2
2
where e(f +x1) = (Ki11,e(f
+x1) ) + (Ki12,e(f +x1) ) and
u
x=1
(7.21)
bility indicator. Single mode instabilities do not exist for this case because e and
f +x1 , x = 1, , u are always dierent types of natural frequencies.
Case (C): degeneratedegenerate
When e = = e+v1 (v 2) and f = = f +u1 (u 2) are two
degenerate natural frequencies, the solvability conditions of (7.13) yield v+u equations
as
Ce+y1
Cf +x1 (jKi11,(e+y1)(f
+
2je+y1
=0
+x1) + Ki12,(e+y1)(f +x1) )e
x=1
u
y = 1, , v
2jf +x1
Cf +x1
+
n
Ce+y1 (jKi11,(f
=0
+x1)(e+y1) + Ki12,(f +x1)(e+y1) )e
y=1
x = 1, , u
(7.22)
The solutions of (7.22) have the same form as (7.16), producing a 2(v + u) 2(v + u)
eigenvalue problem. Previous studies on simple planetary gears indicate that it is
dicult to derive the instability boundaries from such a large size coecient matrix
directly. Provided with modal and mesh phasing conditions, this type of instability
is possible to be determined analytically and such analysis is performed in the later
part of this study.
Single model instability is possible for this case in compound planetary gears
because any degenerate planet frequency belongs to this type. Let e = = e+v1 .
Similar to the distinctdistinct case, the vanishing of the unbounded responses in
184
(7.13) gives
Ce+y1
Ce+x1(jKi11,(e+y1)(e+x1)
2je+y1
+ Ki12,(e+y1)(e+x1)
)e = 0
+
x=1
v
y = 1, , v
(7.23)
The associated coecient matrix for (7.23) is a 2v 2v one. Similar to the combination instability, analytical solution can not be derived directly from the coecient
ther simplied the coecient matrix. Numerical evaluation can still determine the
instability boundaries.
7.3.2
. u
.
2
1
1
e(f +x1) /(e f )] case (b)
i = i = [e + f /
x=1
1i =
(7.24)
2
2
where e(f +x1) = (Ki11,e(f
+x1) + Ki21,e(f +x1) ) + (Ki12,e(f +x1) + Ki22,e(f +x1) ) (x =
u
e(f +x1) is the instability indicator. The forcing of e = f in
1, , u) and
x=1
(7.24) gives the single mode instability boundaries for case (a).
185
For case (c), the solvability conditions of (7.13) produce v + u equations for combination instabilities as
Ce+y1
Cf +x1 (jKi11,(e+y1)(f
2je+y1
+
+x1) + Ki12,(e+y1)(f +x1) )
x=1
)
e = 0, y = 1, , v
+ (jKi21,(e+y1)(f +x1) + Ki22,(e+y1)(f
+x1)
u
Cf +x1
+
Ce+y1 (jKi11,(f
2jf +x1
+x1)(e+y1) + Ki12,(f +x1)(e+y1) )
y=1
(7.25)
For single mode instabilities, the associated solvability conditions are simplied as
Ce+y1
Ce+x1 (jKi11,(e+y1)(e+x1)
+ Ki12,(e+y1)(e+x1)
)
+
(7.26)
x=1
= 0, y = 1, , v
+ (jKi21,(e+y1)(e+x1) + Ki22,(e+y1)(e+x1) ) e
v
2je+y1
Compared with (7.22) and (7.23), the additional terms in (7.25) and (7.26) are caused
by the excitation from th harmonic of 2i . Same as the individualexcitation type,
the instability boundaries cannot be analytically determined from the coecient matrix of (7.25) and (7.26).
,
The above analytical expressions for instability boundaries indicate that Ki11,ef
, Ki21,ef
, and Ki22,ef
are critical for the determination of the instability boundKi12,ef
aries and they are called key instability terms in this investigation. Algebraic manipulation of equations (7.5), (7.7), and (7.8) yields the analytical expression for these
186
Ki11,ef
eT Ki11 f
c
i
sim sim
ggp
kgp
s,m
silm silm
Agp,silm
gp,e
gp,f
m,q
c
i
imq imq
gpp
kpp
ilmq ilmq
App,ilmq
pp,e
pp,f
Ki12,ef
eT Ki12 f
c
i
sim sim
ggp
kgp
s,m
silm silm
Bgp,silmgp,e
gp,f
m,q
c
i
imq imq
gpp
kpp
ilmq ilmq
Bpp,ilmq pp,e
pp,f
Ki21,ef
= eT Ki21 f =
c
i
riq riq
ggp
kgp
r,q
(7.27)
rilq rilq
Agp,rilq
gp,e
gp,f
t,w
c
i
itw itw
gpp
kpp
iltw iltw
App,iltw
pp,e
pp,f
Ki22,ef
eT Ki22 f
c
i
riq riq
ggp
kgp
r,q
rilq rilq
Bgp,rilq gp,e
gp,f
t,w
c
i
itw itw
gpp
kpp
iltw iltw
Bpp,iltw pp,e
pp,f
m and q in train l of planet set i in vibration mode e) are given in (2.6) and (2.9),
respectively. Equation (7.27) shows that key instability terms depend on modal gear
187
mesh deections and the Fourier coecients in terms of mesh parameters (contact
ratios, peaktopeak amplitudes of mesh stiness variation, and etc.). Insertion of
(7.3) and (7.27) into (7.18), (7.21), (7.22), (7.23), (7.24), (7.25), and (7.26) yields the
expressions for the instability boundaries or associated governing equations in terms
of mesh parameters, and the impacts of mesh parameters on the instability regions
can be predicted parametrically.
7.4
Impacts of Modal Properties and Mesh Phasing Conditions on Compound Planetary Gear Instabilities
Studies in previous chapters show that compound planetary gears, similar to simple planetary gears, have welldened modal properties and unique dynamic response
excitation/suppression patterns depending on dierent mesh phasing conditions. Because dierent modal properties and mesh phasing conditions impact modal gear
mesh deections which determines the key instability terms in (7.27), it is important
to understand how compound planetary gear parametric instability boundaries are
aected by dierent modal properties and mesh phasing conditions. To simplify the
modal structure of the following discussions, the investigation scope is limited to the
systems with three or more planet trains in each stage (i.e., ci 3) such that any distinct frequency is associated a overall mode and any degenerate frequency is a planet
frequency. The results of chapters 5 and 6 show that there are two mesh phasing
conditions for stage i phasing quantities k (i.e., k = 0 and k = 0) and k (i.e.,
k = 0 and k = 0), respectively. Combining these mesh phasing conditions with
the parametric instabilities types for compound planetary gears, the following situations are studied: (i) individual excitation with zero phasing quantity (k = 0), (ii)
individual excitation with nonzero phasing quantity (k = 0), (iii) mutual excitation
188
with zero phasing quantities (k , k = 0), (iv) mutual excitation with nonzero phas 0), and (v) mutual excitation with mixed phasing
ing quantities (k == 0 and k =
quantities (k = 0 and k = 0, or vice versa).
7.4.1
Due to the high similarity, the investigations on situations (i) and (iii) are combined in this section. The individual excitation with zero phasing quantity is rst
investigated and the three cases of instabilities, (1) distinctdistinct, (2) distinctdegenerate, and (3) degeneratedegenerate, are addressed as follows.
Case (1): distinctdistinct
The distinct natural frequencies in this study can only be overall frequencies. For
two arbitrary distinct natural frequencies, e and f , the overall mode properties lead
to
silm
sim
gp,e
= gp,e
silm
sim
gp,f
= gp,f
(7.28)
ilmq
pp,e
imq
pp,e
ilmq
imq
pp,f
= pp,f
Replacing l with for these Fourier coecients, moving them out of the summations
189
m,q
Ki12,ef
= eT Ki12 f =
(7.29)
s,m
m,q
ef = (Ki11,ef
)2 + (Ki12,ef
)2
s,m
m,q
s,m
!2
imq imq pp,imq imq imq
ci gpp
kpp A
pp,e pp,f
!2
imq imq pp,imq imq imq
ci gpp
kpp B
pp,e pp,f
m,q
(7.30)
sim sim
imq imq
Because gp,e
gp,f and pp,e
pp,f are not zero for any overall modes except the rigid
body mode, ef is not equal to zero in general. The instability boundary, hence,
does not vanish for most of the cases. Under certain circumstances, however, ef
in (7.30) may be canceled out. For example, the condition that sin(csim
gp ) = 0
for all central gearplanet meshes with 1i mesh frequency and sin(cimq
pp ) = 0 for
all planetplanet meshes with 1i mesh frequency is sucient to force all the Fourier
, Bgp,sim , App,imq
, and Bpp,imq to be zero. For such a particular
coecients Agp,sim
190
silm silm
gp,e
gp,(f +x1) = 0,
x = 1, , u
(7.31)
l=1
Therefore, Ki11,e(f
+x1) and Ki12,e(f +x1) (x = 1, , u) are zero and the instability
zero because only the components in one stage have motions in any planet mode.
Equation (7.25), hence, is simplied as
Ce+y1
= 0, y = 1, , v
Cf +x1
2jf +x1
= 0, x = 1, , u
2je+y1
(7.32)
Ce+y1 and Cf +x1 are bounded in equation (7.32) and it suggests that the instability
at 1i = e +f vanishes when the two planet frequencies are for two dierent stages.
When the two planet frequencies are for the same stage, u has to equal to v for this
case. Let e = = e+u1, f = = f +u1 (u 2), and e = f . Application of
the planet mode properties (2.33), insertion of the Fourier coecients in (7.3) and the
closedform solutions for v l in (6.42) into (2.6) and (2.9), and use of the trigonometric
191
silm silm
gp,e
gp,f = 0
l=1
ci
silm silm
gp,e
gp,e = sim
gp,e
l=1
c
(7.33)
ilmq ilmq
pp,e
pp,f = 0
l=1
ci
ilmq ilmq
pp,e
pp,e = imq
pp,e
l=1
ilmq
where silm
gp,e and pp,e are not equal to zero. Insertion of (7.33) into (7.22) directly
gives the same equation as (7.32). The instability boundaries, hence, vanish for this
case. This result agrees with the mesh phasing rules in chapter 6 that planet mode
responses are suppressed when k == 0.
For single mode instability, however, the instability may exist. Insertion of (7.33)
into (7.23) gives
&
'
Ce+y1
imq
sim
+ Ce+y1 j
Agp,sim
Xgp,e+y1
+
App,imq
Ypp,e+y1
2je+y1
s,m
m,q
&
'!
imq
sim
Bgp,sim Xgp,e+y1
+
Bpp,imq Ypp,e+y1
+
e = 0
s,m
m,q
y = 1, , v
(7.34)
imq
sim
sim sim sim
imq imq imq
= ggp
kgp gp , and Ypp,e+y1
= gpp
kpp pp . Equation (7.34)
where Xgp,e+y1
192
imq
sim
Agp,sim
Xgp,e+y1
+
App,imq
Ypp,e+y1
(e+y1)(e+y1) =
&
+
s,m
s,m
1i =
m,q
sim
Bgp,sim Xgp,e+y1
'2
imq
Bpp,imq Ypp,e+y1
y = 1, , v
m,q
+
1
[2e
max ((e+y1)(e+y1) )/e ]
y=1, , v
(7.35)
Because (e+y1)(e+y1) in equation (7.35) is not equal to zero for any planet mode,
single mode instabilities always exist for planet frequencies as long as the Fourier
coecients are not equal zero. In another word, the mesh phasing rules in chapter
6 that planet responses are suppressed when k = 0 is no longer hold in case of the
single mode instabilities for planet frequencies. This result agrees with the ndings
in previous studies on simple planetary gears [61, 98].
For mutual excitations with zero phasing quantities(k , k = 0, and 1i = 2i =
e + f ), the same analytical process as above applies and the results are the same
and Ki22,ef
participate in all the instability expressions
with the exception that Ki21,ef
7.4.2
When stage i phasing quantities (k , k ) are not zero, application of the trigono, Bgp,silm, App,ilmq
, and
metric identities in (6.15) to the Fourier coecients Agp,silm
Bpp,ilmq yields
= Bgp,silm = App,ilmq
= Bpp,ilmq = 0
Agp,silm
(7.36)
Equation (7.36) is valid for any individual or mutual excitations with nonzero phasing
quantities.
193
=0
Ki11,ef
(7.37)
Ki12,ef
=0
is, the instability for case (I) vanishes for nonzero phasing quantity. It is the same for
single mode instabilities. Such result indicates that the mesh phasing rule that overall
mode responses are always suppressed when k = 0 still holds for distinctdistinct
type of instabilities.
For cases (II) and (III), it is dicult to obtain simple expressions for the instability
boundaries and the instability conditions have to calculated from equations (7.20),
and Ki12,ef
in these equations equal zero (such
(7.22), and (7.23). As long as Ki11,ef
and Ki22,ef
participate in all
quantity and the results are the same except that Ki21,ef
the instability expressions and equations (7.24), (7.25), and (7.26 are used for cases
(II) and (III).
7.4.3
194
0 leads to
condition of k =
=0
Ki21,ef
(7.38)
Ki22,ef
=0
Insertion of (7.29) and (7.38) into the expression of the associated instability indicator
in (7.24) gives
)2 + (Ki12,ef
)2
ef = (Ki11,ef
s,m
m,q
s,m
!2
imq imq pp,imq imq imq
ci gpp
kpp A
pp,e pp,f
!2
imq imq pp,imq imq imq
ci gpp
kpp B
pp,e pp,f
m,q
(7.39)
The righthand side of equation (7.39) is identical to that (7.30) and it is the result
and Ki22,ef
(caused by k =
0) and
of the mutual eects of the cancellation of Ki21,ef
, Bgp,silm , App,ilmq
, and Bpp,ilmq
planettrain independent Fourier coecients Agp,silm
(cased by k = 0). The instability boundaries for this case of mutual excitation with
mixed phasing quantities, hence, do not vanish in general and follow the same rule
as that for case (A) of individual excitation with zero phasing quantity.
For cases () and (), simple expressions cannot be derived and equations (7.24),
(7.25), and (7.26) have to used to determine the associated instability boundaries.
,
The vanishing of the instability boundaries is still possible for these cases, if Ki11,ef
, Ki21,ef
, and Ki22,ef
are all zeros.
Ki12,ef
Table 7.1 summarizes the above analysis results on compound planetary gear
parametric instability boundaries with dierent modal and phasing conditions.
195
Table 7.1: Compound planetary gear parametric instability boundaries for dierent modal and phasing conditions.
Individual excitations: 1i = e + f
DistinctDistinctDistinctDegeneratedistinct
distinct
degenerate degenerate
(combina(single
(combination)
mode)
tion)
exist
in exist
in always
always
general
general
vanish
vanish
(equation
(equation
(7.30))
(7.30))
k = 0
k = 0
always vanish
k
=
0, k = 0
k =
0
k =
k =
k = 0
7.5
0,
0,
always
vanish
equation
(7.20)
equation
(7.22)
Degeneratedegenerate
(single mode)
exist
in
general
(equations
(7.34)
and
(7.35))
equation
(7.23)
Mutual excitations: 1i = 2i = e + f
DistinctDistinctDistinctDegenerate Degeneratedistinct
distinct
degenerate degenerate degenerate
(combina(single
(combina (single mode)
tion)
mode)
tion)
exist
in exist
in always
always
exist
in
general
general
vanish
vanish
general
(equation
(equation
(equation
(7.24))
(7.24))
(7.26))
always vanish always
equation
equation
equation
vanish
(7.24)
(7.25)
(7.26))
exist
in equation
equation
equation
equations
general
(7.24)
(7.24)
(7.25)
(7.26)
(equation
(7.39))
Conclusions
197
8.1
Introduction
Backside contact in a gear mesh contact refers to the contact at the back side of
gear teeth. Recent studies on gear dynamics [34,39,54,84] show that it is possible for
tooth wedging (or tight mesh), the simultaneous driveside and backside contacts,
to happen in real applications, such as wind turbine gearboxes. Tooth wedging is
the combined eect of gravity and bearing clearance nonlinearity, and it is a major
source of gearbox failures, especially the bearing fails. For better understanding of
the impact of tooth wedging on gearbox failures, it is important to develop a model
that includes the accurate description of the backside contact mesh stiness.
Besides tooth wedging, the antibacklash gear is another case for backside contact
to occur. To minimize the undesirable characteristics which are caused by backlash,
antibacklash gears typically eliminate the backlash by using certain preloaded springs
to force the xed part of the driving gear to be in contact with the drive side of the
driven gear teeth and simultaneously the free part of the driving gear to be in contact
with the back side of the driven gear teeth [18]. Analytical studies on antibacklash
gear dynamics are necessary to prevent excessive vibration and noise in antibacklash
198
gears and optimize the design for such systems. The accurate modeling of backside
contact mesh stiness is important to support such analytical studies.
Mesh stiness variation and its impact on gear dynamics were extensively investigated in previous studies. Parametric excitation caused by mesh stiness variation
along with clearance nonlinearity for a single mesh gear was studied in [49]. Lin and
Parker systematically analyzed the mesh stiness variation instabilities in twostage
gear systems [60], as well as in simple planetary gear systems [61]. Their studies
showed that the parametric excitation from the timevarying mesh stiness causes
instability and severe vibration under certain operating conditions. They applied a
perturbation method to analytically determine the instability conditions. Wu and
Parker [98] extended the study on parametric instability to planetary gears with elastic continuum ring Gears. Sun and Hu [90] investigated the mesh stiness parametric
excitation and clearance nonlinearity for simple planetary gears. Bahk and Parker [9]
derived closedform solutions for the dynamic response of planetary gears with timevarying mesh stiness and tooth separation nonlinearity based on a purely torsional
planetary gear model. Guo and Parker [34] modeled and analyzed a simple planetary
gear with timevarying mesh stiness, tooth wedging, and bearing clearance nonlinearity. Although the backside contact is included in their model, the average value
of the periodic mesh stiness on the driveside is used to approximate the backside
mesh stiness which is not an accurate description of the backside mesh stiness.
Despite the abundance of the literature on mesh stiness variation and gear dynamics, no studies have tried to derive the backside mesh stiness in their analytical
model. One possible reason is that the symmetry of gear tooth ensures that the contact ratios, mesh periods, and average mesh stinesses over the mesh period are the
199
Back_side
line of action
Driving direction
Line of action
Figure 8.1: Driveside gear contact model (solid line) and backside gear contact
model (dashed line)
same for both the drive and backside contacts. This may mislead some researchers
to assume that the backside mesh stiness is the same as the driveside one. The
backside mesh stiness, however, is not equivalent to the driveside one, because
the backside contact is along the backside line of action (the dashed line in Figure
8.1) and the number of gear teeth in contact along the backside line of action is not
always equal to that along the line of action (the solid line in Figure 8.1). Figure
8.2 (the simulation results from Calyx [96], a multibody nite element program with
precise gear mesh contact) illustrates one such case. There are two pairs of gear teeth
in contact along the backside line of action, while only one pair of teeth in contact
along the line of action. Therefore, the backside mesh stiness diers from the driveside mesh stiness at this moment. If the variation of the backside mesh stiness
is not modeled correctly, the results from the model is questionable. Therefore, it is
important to have a clear understanding of backside mesh stiness. In addition, how
the backlash impacts the phase lag of the backside mesh stiness is not studied in
previous literature and it is investigated in this work as well.
200
Driving
Driven
Gear
Gear
Figure 8.2: Numerical simulation of Calyx on an ideal gear pair with both driveside
and backside gear contacts. One pair of teeth (marked by a circle) is in contact along
the driveside line of action, and two pairs of teeth (marked by two rectangles) are in
contact along the backside line of action.
8.2
The driveside mesh stiness refers to the stiness that reects the compliance of
the nominally contacting teeth at a mesh. It varies as the number of teeth in contact
uctuates during the rotation of the gear system. The stiness acts along the line of
action and its variation functions period is known for a given rotation speed. Mesh
stiness variation functions are often approximated by Fourier series in analytically
studies and they can also be accurately calculated by Finite Element Method (FEM)
software. The driveside mesh stiness function is critical to the analytical studies on
gear dynamics [6, 7, 9, 76, 78].
Similar to the driveside mesh stiness, the backside mesh stiness in this study
is the stiness that reects the change of the incontact gear tooth number along the
201
T
),
4
2rdn
Zdn
2rdr
,
Zdr
(rdr and rdn are the pitch radii). After one fourth of the
the driving gear tooth moves one fourth of its circular pitch.
Because there is no backlash along the pitch circle, the circular tooth thickness of the
driving gear qdr is equal to
1
qdr = pdr
2
(8.1)
The movement of the driving gear is equivalent to half of its circular tooth thickness 12 qdr . Thus, at t =
T
4
the center line passes through the middle of the tooth tip
of the driving gear (Figure 8.3b). At this moment both gears are symmetric about
the center line and the number of gear teeth in contact along the driveside line of
202
(b) t =T/4
(a) t =0, T
(c) t =T/2
(d) t =3T/4
Figure 8.3: The gear mesh contacts for an arbitrary external ideal gear pair. The
dashed line in the middle of each subgure is the center line. The driving gear is at
the right hand side of each subplot and the driving direction is counterclockwise.
action equals that along the backside line of action. The backside and driveside
mesh stinesses are equal at this moment.
At t =
T
,
2
the driving gear tooth moves qdr which is equal to its circular tooth
thickness, and the center line passes right through the pitch point at the backside
of the driving gear tooth (Figure 8.3c). At t =
3T
,
4
the driven gear moves 32 qdn (qdn is the circular tooth thickness of the driven gear).
At this moment, the center line passes through the middle point of the tooth tip of
the driven gear, and both gears are symmetric about the center line. Therefore, the
backside and driveside mesh stinesses are equal at t =
203
3T
.
4
The varying driveside mesh stiness is k I (t), and the matching backside mesh
stiness is kbI (t). Without losing generality, at t = 0 the pitch point at the drive
side of the driving gear is in mesh. g I ( ) = k I (t T4 ) is a phaseshifted function of
k I (t), and at its origin = 0 or t =
T
4
driveside mesh stinesses are equal. hI ( ) is dened as the backside mesh stiness
function that matches with g I ( ). Due to the symmetry of the gear pair at = 0,
the drivingside mesh stiness at the moment of is equivalent to the backside mesh
stiness at the moment of . Thus, hI ( ) and g I ( ) have the relation
hI ( ) = g I ( )
(8.2)
T
)
4
(8.3)
Similar to the relation between g I ( ) and the driveside mesh stiness k I (t), hI ( ) is
a phaseshifted function of the backside mesh stiness kbI (t), and it is
hI ( ) = kbI (t
T
)
4
(8.4)
T
)
4
T
)
2
(8.5)
Equation (8.5) reveals that kbI (t) is uniquely determined once the driveside mesh
stiness function k I (t) is known, and it is the symmetrical function of k I (t) with
T
2
phase shift. According to equation (8.5), the number of gear teeth in contact at the
back side at t = 0 equals the number of gear teeth in contact at the drive side at
204
t=
T
.
2
It is conrmed by the simulation results in Figure 8.3. There are two pairs
of teeth in contact at the back side in Figure 8.3a (t = 0), and there are exactly two
pairs of teeth in contact at the drive side in Figure 8.3c (t = T2 ).
Summarizing the above discussion, the backside mesh stiness varying function
for an ideal gear pair is the symmetrical function of the driveside mesh stiness
function with a phase shift of half of the mesh period.
8.2.1
Radial direction
Matching ideal gear pair
Tooth of the driven gear
Backside line of action
Line of action
2b
Pitch circle
Base circle
Figure 8.4: The driveside and backside gear mesh contacts for a gear pair with 2b
backlash and its matching ideal gear pair.
gives kbI (t) the backside mesh stiness varying function for the matching ideal gear
pair (the thin dashed line in Figure 8.4) who have the same center distance and pitch
circle as the original gear pair in Figure 8.4 but dierent tooth thicknesses. To ensure
zero backlash, the tooth thickness of the matching ideal gear pair is equal to b plus
the thickness of the original gear pair in Figure 8.4.
If the matching ideal gear pair moves b along the pitch circle in the reverse driving
direction in Figure 8.4, the backside contact of the ideal gear mesh in the thin dashed
line will coincide with the actual backside contact in the thick dashed line. The phase
lag between the backside mesh stiness functions of the matching ideal gear pair and
the original gear pair for the above process is pb T . In other words, the actual backside mesh stiness varying function kb (t) of a gear pair is the backside mesh stiness
varying function for the matching ideal gear kbI (t) with pb T phase lag, that is,
b
kb (t) = kbI (t T )
p
206
(8.6)
Insertion of kbI (t) = k I (t T2 ) (from equation (8.5)) into equation (8.6) and application of the condition that the driveside mesh stiness function of the matching ideal
gear pair is equivalent to that of the original gear pair (Figure 8.4) yields
kb (t) = k(t
8.2.2
b
T
+ T)
2
p
(8.7)
In real applications, the actual operating center distance of a gear pair always
diers from the nominal one due to manufacturing errors of the axes, axes deections
under load, and axial misalignments during installation. In addition, vibration of the
gears in the relative radial direction changes the actual center distance [34]. Figure
8.5a shows the change of center distance c (the positive sign of c indicates the
reduction of center distance) causes the actual backlash to be reduced by the amount
of 2c tan , where is the pressure angle. Figures 8.5b and 8.5c explain this relation
geometrically. When the driving gear moves c toward the driven gear (i.e., c
change in center distance), the gaps between the two gears along drive and backside
of lines of action are to be reduced by c sin (Figure 8.5b), respectively. Because
the driving gear is pressed against the driven gear along the line of action and there is
no room for the driving gear to move toward the driven gear along the line of action,
the total gap reduction along the backside line of action becomes 2c sin . The gap
change along the pitch circle is approximated by the associated cord length shown in
Figure 8.5c. By applying the trigonometric relations in the triangle shown in Figure
8.5c, the length of the cord that approximates the gap change along the pitch circle is
calculated as:
2c sin
cos
207
b
tan
Radial direction
(a)
Line of action
2Ftan=2b
Backside line of action
2Fsin
Pitch circle
Line of action
Fsin
2Ftan
(c)
Pitch circle
2Fsin
Figure 8.5: Backside tooth contact for the case of tooth wedging when 2c tan =
2b. b is half of the backlash along the pitch circle, c is the change of the central
distance, and is the pressure angle.
(2b is the nominal backlash), the back side of the driving gear (the dashed line in
Figure 8.5a) is in contact with the back side of the driven gear and the tooth wedging
happens.
When c <
b
,
tan
the actual backlash of the gear pair 2b is 2(b c tan ). This
case is equivalent to the case in Figure 8.4 with the exception that the backlash is 2b
instead of the nominal value 2b. Replacing b with b in (8.7) gives
b
T
+ T)
2
p
T
b c tan
= k(t +
T)
2
p
kb (t) = k(t
208
(8.8)
Equation (8.8) is the backside mesh stiness for a general external gear pair with 2b
nominal backlash and c center distance change.
In most applications, the backlash and the change of center distance of a gear pair
is much smaller than the circular pitch p. Therefore, the phase lag term
bc tan
T
p
in
equation (8.8) is small and equation (8.5) may be sucient to estimate the backside
mesh stiness of a gear pair with small backlash and center distance change.
8.2.3
For an antibacklash gear pair, the driveside mesh stiness is not only determined
by the number of teeth in contact, but also by other design parameters, such as the
face width in contact and the the modulus of elasticity. To exclude the impacts
from the parameters other than the incontact number of teeth at the drive and
back sides, the incontact tooth number variation functions of the drive (n(t)) and
back (nb (t)) sides are used to investigate the backside mesh stiness of antibacklash
gears. Because the derivation of equations (8.58.8) relies only on the incontact tooth
number variations and the phase relations between the drive and back sides, replacing
the mesh stiness functions k(t) and kb (t) with the incontact tooth number variation
functions n(t) and nb (t) and application of the same analytical process in the above
three subsections yield
nb (t) = n(t
b c tan
T
+
T)
2
p
(8.9)
Equation (8.9) is the backside tooth number variation function for an arbitrary antibacklash gear or a general external gear pair with 2b nominal backlash and c center
distance change.
209
Figure 8.6: Calyx FEM model of the example ideal gear pair.
8.3
The driveside and backside mesh stiness relation in (8.5) is the key to the
general backside mesh stiness in (8.8) or backside tooth variation function in (8.9).
Therefore, equation (8.5) is veried rst. The verication is achieved with a Calyx [96]
nite element model of an ideal external gear pair (Figure 8.6). Calyx has very precise
tracking of tooth contact for precise tooth geometry. In the simulations that follow
Calyx tracks the contact for specied gear kinematics under unloaded conditions.
The gear parameters are listed in Table 1.
Figure 8.7 shows the incontact tooth number variations at the drive and back
sides by tracking the numbers of gear teeth along the drive and backside lines of
action using the above Calyx model. At t = 0, the pitch point at the drive side of the
driving gear is in contact. O and O are the points on the drive (O) and backside
210
3
2.5
t
2
1.5
O''
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 T/2
 0.2
 T/4
T/4
0
 0.1
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
3
2.5
O'
1.5
1
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 T/2
 0.2
 0.1
 T/4
T/4
0
Time: t (s)
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
Figure 8.7: The drive and backside gear tooth number variation functions for the
example ideal gear pair in Figure 6. x indicates the time that the pitch point of
the drive side of the driving gear is in contact, A indicates the time that the middle
point of the drive gear tooth tip is aligned with the center line, + indicates the time
that the pitch point of a driven gear tooth is in contact, and * indicates the time
that the middle point of a driven gear tooth tip is aligned with the center line.
T
.
4
number variation function before point A and the backside tooth number variation
function after point A are shown in Figure 8.8. They are symmetrical about the
solid vertical line (that is, = 0, where = t T4 ). This matches the expression
in equation (8.2). O in Figure 8.7 and Figure 8.9 is the point on the driveside
211
3
2.5

$
2
1.5
1
0.5
 5T/4
T
 3T/4
 T/2
 T/4
=
T/4
T/2
3T/4
T/2
3T/4
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
 5T/4
T
 3T/4
 T/2
 T/4
=
T/4
0
Time: =tT/4 (s)
Figure 8.8: The driveside gear tooth number variation function before point A and
the backside gear tooth number variation function after point A .
T
.
2
tooth number variation function before point O is symmetrical to the backside gear
tooth number variation function after point O . This provides numerical validation
of equation (8.5).
The next step is to verify the backside mesh stiness varying function for the gear
pairs with 2b nominal backlash in equation (8.7). To do so, the tooth thickness of the
gear pair in Figure 8.6 is reduced by 10% such that
b
p
the driveside and backside tooth number variations from Calyx are shown in Figure
in Figure 8.10 is the point on the driveside gear tooth number variation
8.10. O
function at t = T2 + pb T . The driveside gear tooth number variation function before
212
3
2.5
t
O''
1.5
1
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 0.2
 T/2
 T/4
T/4
0
 0.1
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
3
2.5
2
O'
1.5
1
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 0.2
 T/2
 0.1
 T/4
T/4
0
Time: t (s)
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
Figure 8.9: The driveside gear tooth number variation function before point O and
the backside gear tooth number variation function after point O .
c tan
p
0.025. The tracking results for the driveside and backside tooth number variation
in Figure 8.11 is the point on the driveside
functions are shown in Figure 8.11. O
gear tooth number variation function at t = T2 +
bc tan
T.
p
213
3
2.5
t
O
2
1.5
T/2+bT/p
1
0.5
 3T/4
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 T/4
 T/2
 0.2
T/4
0
 0.1
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
3
2.5
2
O'
1.5
1
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 0.2
 T/2
 0.1
 T/4
T/4
0
Time: t (s)
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
Figure 8.10: Backside and driveside gear tooth number variation functions the example gear pairs with zero center distance change and 2b nominal backlash (b satises
b
= 0.05).
q
by 0.025T . This phase lag reduction is caused by the reduction of the center distance
and this result matches equation (8.9).
8.4
Conclusion
This study investigates the driveside mesh stiness for arbitrary gear pairs and
antibacklash gear pairs. The results reveal the inherent relation between the backside and driveside mesh stinesses or gear tooth variation functions. The impact
of backlash on the phase lag in the backside mesh stiness variation function is
also quantied in this study. The resultant formulae are important for the correct
214
3
2.5
t
a
O
1.5
1
T/2+(b c tan)T/p
0.5
0
 0.4
T
 0.3
T/2+b/p
 3T/4
 0.2  T/2
 T/4
T/4
0
 0.1
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
3
2.5
2
O'
1.5
1
0.5
T
0
 0.4
 0.3
 3T/4
 0.2
 T/2
 0.1
 T/4
T/4
0
Time: t (s)
T/2
0.1
3T/4
0.2
Figure 8.11: Backside and driveside gear tooth number variation functions the example gear pairs with 2b nominal backlash (b satises qb = 0.05) and c change in
= 0.025).
the center distance ( c tan
p
modeling and further dynamic analysis on the gear systems that involve backside
gear tooth contacts, such as antibacklash gears.
215
Table 8.1: Gear parameters for the example system shown in Figure 8.6.
Driving Gear Driven Gear
Number of Teeth
Diametral Pitch
Pressure Angle (deg)
Outer Diameter (in)
Root Diameter (in)
Mesh Period (sec)
41
10.34
25
4.12
3.54
0.293
216
32
10.34
25
3.33
2.87
0.293
9.1
9.1.1
Conclusions
Compound Planetary Gear Models and Associated Modal
Properties
217
9.1.2
Sensitivity of General Compound Planetary Gear Natural Frequencies and Vibration Modes to Model Parameters
218
and its associated modes retain the welldened planet mode properties; the other
frequency is distinct and its associated mode loses the planet mode properties.
The results of this study provide important information for tuning resonances
away from operating speeds and minimizing dynamic response for general compound
planetary gears.
9.1.3
9.1.4
This investigation systematically denes and calculates all the mesh phases for
general compound planetary gears. Grouping compound planetary gear mesh phases
into a hierarchical structure of systemlevel, stagelevel, and trainlevel mesh phases
to simplify the analysis, this study derives a complete procedure to determine all
219
the necessary relative phases. The specic relationships between trainlevel relative
phases that are critical for any analytical study on the suppression of compound
planetary gear dynamic response through mesh phasing are derived by applying the
assembly conditions of compound planetary gears. All derived results are veried
through an example, where the numerical benchmark is geometrically exact and the
only error is a quantiable mesh cycle discretization error.
9.1.5
This chapter analytically investigates the general rules to suppress certain dynamic
responses and resonances of general compound planetary gears through planet mesh
phasing for both the purely rotational and rotationaltranslational models.
For meshedplanet stages, the excitation or suppression of various modal responses
at th harmonic of mesh frequency is solely determined by the phasing quantity
k . The resultant rules suggest that the planetplanet gear meshes have no impact
on the mesh phasing rules for meshedplanet stages due to the specic trainlevel
relative phase relations. For stepped stages, due to the existence of two generally
dierent mesh frequencies, two dierent phasing quantities, k and k , are required
to determine the excitation or suppression of various modal responses at th harmonic
of one mesh frequency and th harmonic of the other one. For multistage systems,
the mesh phasing rules are the sum of the rules from each of the individual stages,
where these may be meshedplanet or steppedplanet stages. The mesh phasing rules
are numerically veried.
220
9.1.6
Parametric Instabilities of General Compound Planetary Gear Caused by Mesh Stiness Variations
9.1.7
Driven by the needs of advanced planetary gear modeling and antibacklash gear
modeling, the contact at the back side of a gear mesh is examined and the inherent
relationships between the backside and driveside mesh stinesses or gear tooth variation functions are discovered. The impact of backlash on backside mesh stiness
variations is also quantied. The resultant formulae are important for planetary gear
vibration models that consider tooth wedging or antibacklash gears.
221
9.2
Future Work
This research addressed a series of key issues in compound planetary gear dynamic
and it builds solid foundations for further analyses. The future work is recommended
for the following areas.
9.2.1
Backlash presents in most involute gear applications to allow lubrication, manufacturing errors, deection under load, and thermal expansion. It is typically created
by slightly increasing the center distance of the gear pair or reducing the circular
tooth thickness. To minimize the undesirable characteristics which are caused by
backlash, antibacklash gears (or scissors gears) are used. The most common way for
antibacklash gears to eliminate backlash is to use certain preloaded springs to force
the driving gear to be in continuous contact with the driven gear (Figure 9.1). In spite
of the abundant studies on singlemesh, multimesh, and planetary gear dynamics,
the investigation on antibacklash gear dynamics is very few and limited to the nite
element approach [18]. No literature ever analytically addressed the antibacklash
gear dynamics. To understand the dynamic behavior of antibacklash gears and to
optimize the design of such systems, it is necessary to conduct a series of analytical
investigations.
Figure 9.1 shows a lumped parameter model for antibacklash gears. The antibacklash assembly consists of two parts: xed and free parts. The xed part is xed
to the input shaft and its contact with the driven gear is the driveside contact. The
free part can rotate freely relative to the input shaft and its contact with the driven
gear is on the back side. The xed and free parts are connected by a preloaded
222
(a)
k0
I1
I2
Fixed
Part
Free
Part
Fixed
Part
Input shaft
Antibacklash
Gear Assembly
Free
Part
Springs
Fixed
Part
Driven
Gear
Backside
contact
Driveside
contact
kd
kb
Driven Gear
output shaft
Free
Part
I3
Driven
Gear
Figure 9.1: A lumped parameter model for antibacklash gears: (a) front view of the
whole system (b) side view of the antibacklash assembly.
(9.1)
I3 3 + kd (t)(1 r1 + 3 r3 ) kb (t)(2 + 3 ) = 0
where (I1 , 1 , r1 ), (I2 , 2 , r2 ), and (I3 , 3 , r3 ) are the moments of inertia, rotations,
and base radii for the xed part, free part, and the driven gear, respectively. k0 is
the torsional shaft stiness of the input shaft. kc is the torsional coupling stiness
between the xed and free parts of the antibacklash assembly and 0 is the preload
torque for this coupling stiness. kd (t) is the timevarying mesh stiness between the
xed part and the driven gear and the associated contact happens at the driveside
of the driven gear tooth. kb (t) is the mesh stiness between the free part and the
223
driven gear and the contact is at the backside of the driven gear. Let H be the mesh
stiness per unit face width. If 1 and 2 are the eective face widthes for the driveand backside meshes, kd (t) and kb (t) can be simplied as
kd (t) = H1 nd (t)
(9.2)
kb (t) = H2 nb (t)
where nd (t) and nb (t) are tooth number variation functions for the drive and back
sides, respectively. Insertion of (9.2) into (8.9) yield the relation between kd (t) and
kb (t) as
kb (t) =
b
2
T
kd (t + + T )
1
2
p
(9.3)
where p is the circular pitch of the mesh between the xed part and the driven gear
and T is the mesh period.
With the model in Figure 9.1 and the specic relation between kd (t) and kb (t) in
(9.3), the recommended investigations are
1. to understand the free vibration problem of antibacklash gears, such as the
modal properties,
2. to evaluate the eigensensitivities in order to understand the impacts of key
parameters on natural frequencies and vibration modes,
3. to investigate the parametric instabilities caused by the variations of kd (t) and
kb (t),
4. to inspect the nonlinear behaviors of antibacklash gears.
9.2.2
In real transmission applications, helical compound planetary gears are more popular than spur compound planetary gears due to the advantage of lower uctuation
224
in static transmission error ( [23]). In order to understand the eects of design parameters on dynamic behaviors of helical compound planetary gears and optimize
the system parameters during the design stage, it is desirable to extend the 2D
rotationaltranslational model to a 3D one. The elaborate investigations on compound planetary gears in this study, together with Eritenel and Parkers studies on
3D simple helical planetary gear [25, 26], provide necessary foundations for the inspection on 3D helical compound planetary gears. The suggested investigations are
1. to develop an lumpedparameter 3D helical compound planetary gear model,
2. to examine the modal properties of 3D helical compound planetary gears,
3. to evaluate the impacts of system parameters on natural frequencies and vibration modes,
4. to inspect the existence of mesh phasing rules for helical compound planetary
gears.
9.2.3
The analytical study in chapter 7 can be extended to the rened rotationaltranslational model in [53]. The analytical process and the general formulae for
distinctdistinct, distinctdegenerate, and degeneratedegenerate instabilities in (7.15)(7.27) apply to the rotationaltranslational model if the free vibration equation of
compound planetary gear in (7.7) is replaced by the one associated with the rotationaltranslational model in (2.38) and the stiness matrix in (7.5) is replaced by the one
for the rotationaltranslational model in the appendix of [53].
225
9.2.4
Nonlinearities in gear systems, mainly the gear mesh contact loss, have great impacts on dynamic responses, load sharing among planets, bearing loads, tooth fatigue,
and gear noise [50, 88, 90]. The nonlinear dynamics for singlemesh [50, 78, 91] and
multimesh gears [1,2,63] are already extensively studied. The eects of nonlinearities
on simple planetary gears also receive some attention in recent years. Ambarisha and
Parker [6] calculated the nonlinear response of planetary gears by using both lumpedparameter and nite element models. Mesh phasing rules are conrmed except for
chaotic and perioddoubling regions. In addition, Bahk and Parker [9] studied the
nonlinear dynamics for a purely rotational simple planetary gear model. Perturbation, harmonic balance/arclength continuation, and numerical integration methods
were used in their study and the frequencyresponse functions were presented in
closedform expressions. Guo and Parker [34] investigates a simple planetary gear
226
model with not only contact loss nonlinearity, but also tooth wedging and bearing
clearance nonlinearity. No studies, however, ever addressed the nonlinear dynamics
for compound planetary gears. To provide improved design guidance for compound
planetary gears based on dynamic responses with dierent nonlinearities considered,
the recommended studies on compound planetary gear nonlinear dynamics are
1. to improve the rotationaltranslational compound planetary gear model to make
it incorporate with dierent nonlinearities, such as contact loss and bearing
clearance,
2. to add the backside gear mesh contacts to the model by applying the results
from chapter 8 in this work,
3. to investigate the nonlinear eects caused by these nonlinearities by using different methods to nd the solutions for the nonlinear problems analytically or
numerically, such as the method of multiple scales, harmonic, balance method,
and arclength continuation method,
4. to evaluate the impacts of the nonlinearities on the validation of the mesh
phasing rules in chapter 6 of this study.
227
(A.1)
11
kc . . . kc1a
. . ..
Kc = ...
. .
kca1 kcaa
b
a
b
ci
di
2 jilm
ij
in
+
kcc,
+
kcg,
rgj kgp
ih
kc =
j=1 l=1 m=1
j=1
n=1,n=i
k ih
i = h
cc,
Kc,g
11
...
kc,g
..
..
= .
.
a1
kc,g
(A.2)
i=h
1b
kc,g
ci
di
j 2 jilm ij
ij
..
rg kgp kcg,
; kc,g =
.
ab
l=1 m=1
kc,g
228
(A.3)
k1c,ps
0
T
..
i
i1
ici
=
k
,
k
;
k
.
c,ps
c,pt
c,pt
a T
kc,ps
T
...
..
.
Kc,ps = ...
0
T
b
il1
ildi
ilm
jilm j ilm
kilc,pt = kc,p
, , kc,pt
; kc,p
=
j kgp
rg rp
j=1
kg11 . . .
..
Kg = ...
.
b1
kg
kgjn
kg1b
..
.
kgbb
(A.4)
a
b
a
ci
di
2 jilm
jh
ij
rgj kgp
+
kgg,
+ kcg,
=
i=1 l=1 m=1
i
h=1,h=j
k jn
j
=
n
gg,
.
Kg,ps = ..
kjil
g,pt
kb1
g,ps
T
T
T
. . . k1a
g,ps
T
ji1
jici
ji
. . ..
. .
; kg,ps = kg,pt , , kg,pt
ba T
kg,ps
T
j jil1 j il1
j jildi j ildi
= kgp rg rp , , kgp rg rp
Kps
k11
g,ps
j=n
K1ps . . .
..
= ...
.
0
0
..
.
(
)
i
i1
ici
; Kps = diag Kpt , , Kpt
(A.5)
Kaps
i
kpil11 . . . kpil1d
. . ..
Kilpt = ...
. .
ildi 1
ildi di
kp
kp
kpilmn
b
di
ilm 2
ilm 2
ilmq
jilm
ilmq
rp
kgp rp
+
+kpp,
kpp
m=n
=
j=1
q=1,q=m
229
(A.6)
B.1
i
i
c,v
c,u
u
=
v
i
kcb,
u v
v=1,v=u
(B.1)
i
i
2(xic,v xic,u + yc,v
yc,u
)2
2 u
=
2
kcb
u v
v=1,v=u
(B.2)
j
j
g,v
g,u
u
=
v
j
u v
kgb,
v=1,v=u
(B.3)
j
j
2(xjg,v xjg,u + yg,v
yg,u
)2
2 u
=
2
kgb
u v
v=1,v=u
(B.4)
i
j
i
j
(c,v
g,v
)(c,u
g,u
)
u
=
v
ij
u v
kcg, v=1,v=u
(B.5)
230
i
j
i
j
2[(c,v
g,v
)(c,u
g,u
)]2
2 u
=
ij
u v
(kcg,
)2 v=1,v=u
(B.6)
i
h
i
h
(c,v
c,v
)(c,u
c,u
)
u
=
v
ih
u v
kcc,
v=1,v=u
(B.7)
i
h
i
h
2[(c,v
c,v
)(c,u
c,u
)]2
2 u
=
ih
u v
(kcc,
)2 v=1,v=u
(B.8)
j
n
j
n
(g,v
g,v
)(g,u
g,u
)
u
=
v
jn
u v
kgg,
v=1,v=u
(B.9)
j
n
j
n
2[(g,v
g,v
)(g,u
g,u
)]2
2 u
=
jn
u v
(kgg,
)2 v=1,v=u
(B.10)
c
ilm
ilm
ilm
ilm
(,v
)(,u
) + (,v
)(,u
)
u
=
v
kpim v=1,v=u l=1
u v
(B.11)
ci
2
u
=
im
2
(kp )
u v
v=1,v=u
ilm
ilm
ilm
ilm
[(,v )(,u ) + (,v )(,u )]
c
ilmq ilmq
p,v
p,u
u
=
v
imq
u v
kpp
v=1,v=u l=1
(B.12)
2
u
imq 2 =
u v
(kpp )
v=1,v=u
2
ci
ilmq ilmq
p,v
p,u
(B.13)
(B.14)
l=1
c
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
(p,v
p,v
)(p,u
p,u
) + (p,v
p,v
)(p,u
p,u
)
u
=
v (B.15)
imq
kpp
u v
v=1,v=u l=1
i
231
2 u
imq 2 =
(kpp
)
ci
2
u v l=1
v=1,v=u
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
ilm
ilq
[(p,v
p,v
)(p,u
p,u
) + (p,v
p,v
)(p,u
p,u
)]
(B.16)
c
ilm
ilq
ilm ilm
ilq
(uilm
uilq
uilq
u
p,v /rp
p,v /rp )(up,u /rp
p,u /rp )
=
v
imq
kpp,
u v
v=1,v=u l=1
i
u
2
=
imq
2
u v
(kpp, )
v=1,v=u
(B.17)
ci
ilm
ilq
ilm ilm
ilq
(uilm
uilq
uilq
p,v /rp
p,v /rp )(up,u /rp
p,u /rp )
l=1
(B.18)
i
i
u (xic,v xic,u + yc,v
yc,u
)
u i 2
u
i
[(xc,u ) + (yc,u
=
v
)2 ]
i
mc v=1,v=u
u v
2
(B.19)
i
i
22u (xic,v xic,u + yc,v
yc,u
)2
2 u
i
=
+ 2u [(xic,u )2 + (yc,u
)2 ]2
i
2
(mc )
u v
(B.20)
v=1,v=u
i
i
u c,v
c,u
u i 2
u
( )
=
v
i
Ic
u v
2 c,u
v=1,v=u
(B.21)
i
i
22u (c,v
c,u
)2
2 u
i
=
+ 2u (c,u
)4
(Ici )2 v=1,v=u u v
(B.22)
j
j
u (xjg,v xic,u + yg,v
yg,u
)
u
u j 2
j
[(xg,u ) + (yg,u
=
v
)2 ]
j
u v
2
mg v=1,v=u
232
(B.23)
j
j
22u (g,v
g,u
)2
2 u
j
=
+ 2u (g,u
)4
(Igj )2 v=1,v=u u v
(B.24)
j
j
u g,v
g,u
u j 2
u
v
( )
j =
u v
2 g,u
Ig
v=1,v=u
(B.25)
j
j
22u (g,v
g,u
)2
2 u
j
+ 2u (g,u
)4
j 2 =
u v
(Ig )
v=1,v=u
(B.26)
c
c
ilm ilm
ilm ilm
u (p,v
p,u + p,v
p,u )
u
u ilm 2
ilm 2
=
v
[(p,u ) + (p,u
) ] (B.27)
mim
2
u
v
p
v=1,v=u l=1
l=1
i
u
=
2
(mim
p )
v=1,v=u
2
ci
ci
ilm ilm
ilm ilm 2
ilm 2
ilm 2
[
(p,v
p,u + p,v
p,u )] +2u
[(p,u
) + (p,u
)]
u v
22u
l=1
l=1
(B.28)
c
c
ilm
u uilm
u uilm
u
p,v up,u
p,u
=
( ilm )2
v
Ipim
(rpilm )2 (u v )
2
rp
i
v=1,v=u l=1
22u
(B.29)
l=1
c
ilm
uilm
p,v up,u
i
c
i
u
=
(
)2 + 2u
im
2
ilm
2
(Ip )
u v l=1 (rp )
v=1,v=u
l=1
&
uilm
p,u
ilm
rp
'2 2
(B.30)
j
i
ij
in
Translational bearing/shaft stinesses of central gears and carriers (kcb
, kgb
, kcg
, kcc
,
jh
) have no impact on any rotational mode or distinct planet mode.
kgg
B.2
three or more, respectively. The eigensensitivities for any natural frequency with
multiplicity w 1 (u = = u+w1 ) with its associated preferred set of planet
modes u , , u+w1 (a preferred set of planet modes diagonalizes D in (3.5) if
w 2) to a mistuned parameter are
u
kpilm
u+1
kpilm
u+t
kpilm
u
kpilm
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
2
ilm
ilm Upb,u
k
p
2
U ilm
kpilm pb,u+1
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(T)
(B.31)
0
(2P)
= 0, t = 2, , w 1 (3P)
ilm )( ilm )+( ilm )( ilm )
(,v
,v
,u
,u
u v
v +
u+w1
ilm )( ilm )+( ilm )( ilm )
(,z
,z
,u
,u
z
u z
z=u+1
(R/T/1P/2P)
!
u+w1
ilm )( ilm )+( ilm )( ilm )
ilm )( ilm )+( ilm )( ilm )
(
(
,v
,u
,z
,u
,v
,u
,z
,u
z
v +
u v
u z
u+1
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
z=u,z=u+1
=
kpilm
(T)
0
(2P)
u+s
can not be determined, where s = 0, , w 1.
(3P)
kpilm
(B.32)
2 u
(kpilm )2
2 u+1
(kpilm )2
2 u+t
(kpilm )2
v=1,v=u
2
ilm
ilm
[(,v
)(,u
)
u v
v=1,v=u+1
ilm
ilm 2
+ (,v
)(,u
)]
2
ilm
ilm
[(,v
)(,u+1
)
u+1 v
ilm
ilm
+ (,v
)(,u+1
)]2
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(T)
0
(2P)
= 0, t = 2, , w 1 (3P)
(B.33)
u
ilmq
kpp
u+t
ilmq
kpp
2
ilm,q
ilmq Upp,u
kpp
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1.
234
(T/2P/3P)
(B.34)
ilmq ilmq
p,u
p,v
v
u v
u
ilmq
kpp
u+1
ilmq
kpp
u+s
ilmq
kpp
=0
(T/2P)
(3P)
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
ilmq ilmq 2
p,v p,u
2 u
ilmq 2
(kpp
)
2 u+t
ilmq 2
(kpp
)
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1.
v=1,v=u
u
ilmq
kpp
u+1
ilmq
kpp
u+t
ilmq
kpp
u
ilmq
kpp
u+1
ilmq
kpp
u+t
ilmq
kpp
(R/T/1P/2P)
2
u v
ilmq
2
ilmq Upp,u
kpp
ilmq
2
ilmq Upp,u+1
kpp
(B.35)
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(B.36)
(T/2P/3P)
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(T)
(B.37)
0
(2P)
= 0, where t = 2, , w 1. (3P)
[v +
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
u+w1
ilm ilq )( ilm ilq )+( ilm ilq )( ilm ilq )
(p,z
p,z
p,u
p,z
p,u
p,u
p,z
p,u
z ]
(R/T/1P/2P)
u z
z=u+1
p,v
p,u
p,v
p,u
p,u
p,v
p,u
[v +
u v
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
u+w1
ilm ilq )( ilm ilq )+( ilm ilq )( ilm ilq )
(p,z
p,z
p,u
p,z
p,u
p,u
p,z
p,u
z ] (T)
u z
z=u,z=u+1
0
can not be determined, where t = 0, , w 1.
(2P)
(3P)
(B.38)
2 u
ilmp 2
(kpp
)
v=1,v=u
2
u v
" ilm
#
ilp
ilm
ilp
ilm
ilp
ilm
ilp 2
(p,v p,v
)(p,u
p,u
) + (p,v
p,v
)(p,u
p,u
)
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
ilp
2
ilm
ilp
ilm
p,v
)(p,u+1
p,u+1
)+
(p,v
v
u+1
v=1,v=u+1
2
u+1
2
ilmp 2 =
ilp
ilm
ilp
ilm
(kpp
)
)(
)
(T)
(
p,u+1
p,v
p,v
p,u+1
0
(2P)
2 u+t
= 0, where t = 2, , w 1. (3P)
(k ilmp )2
pp
(B.39)
235
u
ilmq
kpp,
u+t
ilmq
kpp,
u
ilmq
kpp,
u+1
ilmq
kpp,
u+s
ilmq
kpp,
ilmq
2
Upp,,u
ilmq
kpp,
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(B.40)
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1. (T/2P/3P)
ilq
ilq
ilq
ilq
ilm
ilm ilm
(uilm
p,v /rp up,v /rp )(up,u /rp up,u /rp )
(v +
u v
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
u+w1
ilq
ilq
ilq
ilq
ilm
ilm ilm
(uilm
p,z /rp up,z /rp )(up,u /rp up,u /rp )
z )
u z
z=u+1
=0
(R/T/1P/2P) (B.41)
(T/2P)
2 u
ilmq
(kpp,
)2
v=1,v=u
2
u v
"
ilm
ilp
ilm ilm
ilp
(uilm
uilp
uilp
p,v /rp
p,v /rp )(up,u /rp
p,u /rp )
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
2 u+t
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1.
(k ilmq )2
#2
(T/2P/3P)
pp,
(B.42)
u
milm
p
u+1
milm
p
u+t
milm
p
u
milm
p
u+1
milm
p
u+s
milm
p
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
u [( ilm )2 +
2 p,u
2
= milm
T ilm
p p,u
2
ilm
Tp,u+1
milm
p
=
0
= 0, where t = 2,
(T)
u v +
u+w1
z=u+1
u v
(B.43)
(2P)
, w 1. (3P)
ilm 2
(p,u
)]
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
ilm 2
2u [(p,u
) +
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(R/T/1P/2P)
u+w1
u v +
z=u,z=u+1
!
ilm ilm + ilm ilm )
2u (p,z
p,u
p,z p,u
u z
ilm 2
(p,u
)]
(T)
0
(2P)
can not be determined, where s = 0, , w 1. (3P)
(B.44)
236
2 u
2
(milm
p )
v=1,v=u
22u
( ilm ilm
u v p,v p,u
ilm ilm 2
ilm 2
ilm 2 2
+ p,v
p,u ) + 2u [(p,u
) + (p,u
) ]
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
22u+1
ilm ilm
ilm ilm
ilm
ilm
(p,v
p,u+1 + p,v
p,u+1 )2 + 2u+1 [(p,u+1
)2 + (p,u+1
)2 ]2
u+1 v
2
v=1,v=u+1
u+1
2 =
(milm
p )
(T)
0
(2P)
2 u+t
2 = 0, where t = 2, , w 1. (3P)
(milm
p )
(B.45)
u
Ipilm
u+t
Ipilm
u
Ipilm
2
ilm
= I ilm
Tp,,u
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1. (T/2P/3P)
v=1,v=u, ,u+w1
u+1
=0
Ipilm
s
can not
Ipilm
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
ilm
u uilm
p,v up,u
ilm
2
(rp ) (u v ) v
ilm
u up,u 2
(
)
ilm
2 rp
(B.46)
(R/T/1P/2P)
(T/2P)
(B.47)
22u
u v
ilm 2
uilm
p,v up,u
(rpilm )2
2 u
(Ipilm )2
2 u+t
(Ipilm )2
= 0, where t = 1, , w 1.
v=1,v=u
+ 2u
237
uilm
p,u
rpilm
)2
(R/T/1P/2P/3P)
(T/2P/3P)
(B.48)
Bibliography
[10] M. Benton and A. Seireg. Normal mode uncoupling of systems with time varying
stiness. Journal of Mechanical Design, 102:379383, 1980.
[11] M. Benton and A. Seireg. Factors inuencing instability and resonances in geared
systems. Journal of Mechanical Design, 103(2):372378, April 1981.
[12] M. Benton and A. Seireg. Factors inuencing instability and resonances in geared
systems. Journal of Mechanical Design, 103:372378, 1981.
[13] J. G. Bollinger and R. J. Harker. Instability potential of high speed gearing.
Journal of the Industrial Mathematics, 17:3955, 1967.
[14] J.G. Bollinger and R.J. Harker. Instability potential of high speed gearing. Journal of the Industrial Mathematics,, 17:3955, 1967.
[15] M. Botman. Dynamic tooth loads in epicyclic gears. Journal of Engineering for
Industry, pages 811815, August 1976.
[16] M. Botman. Epicyclic gear vibations. Journal of Engineering for Industry,
97:811815, 1976.
[17] M. Botman. Vibration measurement on planetary gears of aircraft turbine engines. J. Aircraft, (5), May 1980.
[18] J. Brauer. Investigation of Transmission Error, Friction, and Wear in Antibacklash Gear Transmissions: A Finite Element Approach. PhD thesis, Royal
Institute of Technology, Sweden, 2003.
[19] F. Brown, M. Robuck, and M. Kozachyn. Design, fabrication, assembly and test
of a double helical planetary gear system for helicopter applications. Technical
report, The Boeing Company, 2008.
[20] P. Chen and J. H. Ginsberg. On the relationship between veering of eigenvalue
loci and parameter sensitivity of eigenfunctions. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 114:141148, 1992.
[21] R. Courant and D. Hilbert. Methods of Mathematical Physics, volume 1. Interscience Publishers, six edition, May 1966.
[22] F. Cunlie, J. D. Smith, and D. B. Welbourn. Dynamic tooth loads in epicyclic
gears. Journal of Engineering for Industry, 5(95):578584, May 1974.
[23] T. Eritenel. ThreeDimensional Nonlinear Dynamics and Vibration Reduction of
Gear Pairs and Planetary Gears. PhD thesis, The Ohio State University, 2011.
239
[24] T. Eritenel and R. G. Parker. A static and dynamic model for threedimensional
multimesh gear systems. In International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Long Beach, CA, Sep. 2005. Proceedings of ASME.
[25] T. Eritenel and R. G. Parker. Modal properties of threedimensional helical
planetary gears. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 325:397420, 2009.
[26] T. Eritenel and R. G. Parker. Vibration suppression rules for 3d helical planetary
gears using mesh phasing. In preparation, 2011.
[27] R. L. Fox and M. P. Kapoor. Rates of change of eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
AIAA Journal, 6:24262429, 1968.
[28] J. Frater, R. August, and F. Oswald. Vibation in planetary gear systems with
unequal planet stiness. NASA, (TM83428), 1983.
[29] M. I. Friswell. The derivatives of repeated eigenvalues and their associated eigenvectors. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 188:390397, 1996.
[30] R. W. Greogory, S. L. Harris, and R. G. Munro. Dynamic behavior of spur gears.
Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers, 178:261266, 1963.
[31] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Sensitivity of tuned general compound planetary
gears natural frequencies and vibration modes to model parameters. In Proceedings of 2006 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition
(IMECE200614978), Chicago, IL, 2006.
[32] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Mesh phase relations of general compound planetary gears. In Proceedings of 10th International ASME Power Transmission and
Gearing Conference (IDETC200735799), Las Vegas, NV, 2007.
[33] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Sensitivity of general compound planetary gears natural frequencies and vibration modes to model parameters. In Proceedings of 10th
International ASME Power Transmission and Gearing Conference (IDETC200735802), Las Vegas, NV, 2007.
[34] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Dynamic modeling and analysis of a spur planetary
gear involving tooth wedging and bearing clearance nonlinearity. In European
Journal of Mechanics A/Solids [68], pages 10221033.
[35] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Purely rotational model and vibration modes of
compound planetary gears. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 45:365377, 2010.
[36] Y. Guo and R. G. Parker. Sensitivity of general compound planetary gears natural frequencies and vibration modes to model parameters. Journal of Vibration
and Acoustics, 132(1):113, 2010.
240
241
[50] A. Kahraman and R. Singh. Nonlinear dynamics of a spur gear pair. Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 142(1):4975, October 1990.
[51] A. Kahraman and R. Singh. Interactions between timevarying mesh stiness
and clearance nonlinearities in a geared system. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
146(1):135156, April 1991.
[52] M. Kim, J. Moon, and J. A. Wickert. Spatial modulation of repeated vibration
modes in rotationally periodic structures. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics,
122(1):6268, January 2000.
[53] D. R. Kiracofe and R. G. Parker. Structured vibration modes of general compound planetary gear systems. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 129(1):116,
February 2007.
[54] T.J. Larsen, K. Thomsen, and F. Rasmussen. Dynamics of a wind turbine planetary gear stage. Technical report risoei2112 (en), Risoe National Laboratory,
Denmark, 2003.
[55] A. W. Leissa. On a curve veering aberration. J. Appl. Math. Phys., 25:98111,
1974.
[56] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Analytical characterization of the unique properties of
planetary gear free vibration. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 121(3):319
321, July 1999.
[57] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Sensitivity of planetary gear natural frequencies and vibration modes to model parameters. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 228(1):109
128, November 1999.
[58] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Structured vibration characteristics of planetary gears
with unequally spaced planets. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 233(5):921928,
June 2000.
[59] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Natural frequency veering in planetary gears. Mechanics
of Structures and Machines, 29(4):411429, 2001.
[60] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Mesh stiness variation instabilities in twostage gear
systems. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 124(1):6876, January 2002.
[61] J. Lin and R. G. Parker. Planetary gear parametric instability caused by mesh
stiness variation. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 249(3):1, January 2002.
[62] G. Liu and R. G. Parker. Dynamic modeling and analysis of tooth prole modication of multimesh gears. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 130:121402
113, 2008.
242
[77] R. G. Parker and J. Lin. Mesh phasing relationships in planetary and epicyclic
gears. Journal of Mechanical Design, 126:365370, 2004.
[78] R. G. Parker, S. M. Vijayakar, and T. Imajo. Nonlinear dynamic response of a
spur gear pair: Modelling and experimental comparisons. Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 237(3):435455, October 2000.
[79] R. G. Parker and X. Wu. Vibration modes of planetary gears with unequally
spaced planets and an elastic ring gear. Journal of Sound and Vibration,
329:22652275, 2010.
[80] N. C. Perkins and Jr. Mote, C. D. Comments on curve veering in eigenvalue
problems. Journal of Sound Vibration, 106:451463, 1986.
[81] C. Pierre. Mode localization and eigenvalue loci veering phenomena in disordered
structures. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 126:485502, 1988.
[82] C. Pierre and R. H. Plaut. Curve veering and mode localization in a buckling
problem. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 40:758761, 1989.
[83] R. L. Platt and R. D. Leoplod. A study on helical gear planetary phasing eects
on transmission noise. VDIBer, pages 793807, 1996.
[84] F. Rasmussen, K. Thomsen, and T.J. Larsen. The gearbox problem revisited.
Risoe fact sheet aedrb17 (en), Risoe National Laboratory, Denmark.
[85] A. Saada and P. Velex. An extended model for the analysis of the dynamic
behavior of planetary trains. Journal of Mechanical Design, 117(2):241247,
June 1995.
[86] R. G. Schlegel and K. C. Mard. Transmission noise control approaches in helicopter design. In ASME Design Engineering Conference (67DE58), New York,
US, 1967.
[87] D. L. Seager. Conditions for the neutralization of excitation by the teeth in
epicyclic gearing. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 17(5):293298,
1975.
[88] R. Singh, D. R. Houser, and A. Kahraman. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of
geared systems. NASA Technical Report, Final Report, Part II, February 1990.
[89] N. G. Stephen. On veering of eigenvalue loci. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics,
131:054501054505, 2009.
[90] T. Sun and H. Hu. Nonlinear dynamics of a planetary gear system with multiple
clearances. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 38(12):13711390, December 2003.
244
245