0
Technical Briefs

Influence of Planet Pin Stiffness on Load Sharing in Planetary Gear Drives

[+] Author and Article Information
Alfred N. Montestruc

 Friede & Goldman, Ltd., Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 10375 Richmond Avenue, Suite 1600, Houston, TX 77042montestruc@gmail.com

J. Mech. Des 133(1), 014501 (Dec 29, 2010) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002971 History: Received November 05, 2009; Revised November 03, 2010; Published December 29, 2010; Online December 29, 2010

Others have done significant work on the subject of load sharing among the planets of planetary gear drives; a brief review of that work is presented. Little work has been done, however, to evaluate the utility of the Hicks type flexible planet pins in improvement of load sharing in a planetary gear stage. This work shows the potential value of the three variations of the Hicks type flexible planet pin used on cantilever carriers, and a new design of a low spring constant planet pin that can be used on straddle type carriers. This is done by the calculation of the spring constants of gear meshes, bearings, and various designs of planet pins using the finite element method for a specific design of a planetary gear stage with spur gears and eight planets. The result showed significant differences. Low spring constant flexible pins are shown to have significantly superior load sharing characteristics.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Solid and flexible pin geometries

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Specific cantilever flexible pin geometries modeled

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Maximum principal stress of Hicks design flexible pin planet mount

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Typical layout of an asymmetric flexible pin design straddle carrier using eight planets

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Deflection of elements of an asymmetric pin design

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Plot of load fraction versus α (nondimensional torque) for both fixed (fix) and floating (flo) eight planet systems

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Plot of worst load fraction versus carrier torque floating 0.0359 mm error for all designs (AGMA accuracy gr. 4)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Plot of worst load fraction versus carrier torque floating 0.0718 mm error for all designs (AGMA accuracy gr. 6)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In