Hubbry Logo
Pressure anglePressure angleMain
Open search
Pressure angle
Community hub
Pressure angle
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Pressure angle
Pressure angle
Pressure angle
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Pressure angles

Pressure angle in relation to gear teeth, also known as the angle of obliquity,[1] is the angle between the tooth face and the gear wheel tangent. It is more precisely the angle at a pitch point between the line of pressure (which is normal to the tooth surface) and the plane tangent to the pitch surface. The pressure angle gives the direction normal to the tooth profile. The pressure angle is equal to the profile angle at the standard pitch circle and can be termed the "standard" pressure angle at that point. Standard values are 14.5 and 20 degrees.[2] Earlier gears with pressure angle 14.5 were commonly used because the cosine is larger for a smaller angle, providing more power transmission and less pressure on the bearing; however, teeth with smaller pressure angles are weaker. To run gears together properly their pressure angles must be matched.[3]

The pressure angle is also the angle of the sides of the trapezoidal teeth on the corresponding rack. The force transmitted during the mating of gear teeth acts along the normal. This force has components along the pitch line and the other along the line perpendicular to the pitch line. The force along the pitch line which is responsible for power transmission is proportional to the cosine of pressure angle. The one which exerts thrust (perpendicular to the pitch line) is proportional to the sine of pressure angle. So it is advised to keep the pressure angle low.

Just as there are three types of profile angle, there are three types of corresponding pressure angle: the transverse pressure angle, the normal pressure angle, and the axial pressure angle.[4]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Pressure angle

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The pressure angle is a key geometric parameter in the design of involute gears, defined as the acute angle between the —which is normal to the tooth surface at the point of contact—and the common to the pitch circles at the pitch point. This angle determines the direction and magnitude of the force transmitted between meshing gear teeth during operation. In gear systems, the pressure angle significantly influences strength, contact stresses, and overall performance; higher angles, such as 25° or 35°, produce stronger teeth by increasing the root thickness relative to the pitch circle, thereby enhancing bending resistance and reducing sliding between surfaces. Conversely, lower angles like 14.5° minimize variations in backlash due to tolerances or distance errors, though they may increase sensitivity to misalignment. Standard pressure angles for spur gears are typically 14.5° or 20°, as established by organizations like the American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) to ensure compatibility and optimal load distribution. The choice of pressure angle also affects the contact ratio—the average number of teeth in simultaneous contact—and the length of the , with larger angles generally reducing these values but improving efficiency in high-speed applications by lowering sliding velocities. In practice, it is selected based on factors such as operating speed, load, noise requirements, and gear material, balancing trade-offs between durability and smoothness of .

Fundamentals

Definition

The pressure angle in gears is defined as the angle between the —which is the common normal to the tooth profiles at the point of contact—and the to the pitch circles at the pitch point where the circles are tangent to each other. This angle, also known as the angle of obliquity, determines the direction in which the normal force acts between meshing gear teeth during operation. Key terms central to this concept include the pitch circle, an imaginary reference circle along which the gears are considered to roll without slipping to achieve smooth meshing and a constant velocity ratio; the pitch point, the specific location of tangency between the pitch circles of two mating gears; and the , the instantaneous path along which the contact force is transmitted between the teeth, always perpendicular to the tooth surfaces at the point of contact. These elements ensure that the pressure angle remains a fixed geometric property for a given gear pair, independent of the contact position along the tooth profile. In gears, the most common type, the pressure angle defines the obliquity of the involute tooth curve relative to the radial direction, which is essential for maintaining a ratio between the driving and driven gears regardless of load variations. Conceptually, this angle influences the resolution of the transmitted force into its tangential and radial components: the tangential component provides the for , while the radial component acts to separate the gears and impose loads on the shafts and bearings, with the pressure angle dictating the balance between these forces for efficient .

Geometry

The curve, which forms the basis of the profile in standard gears, is generated geometrically from the base using the analogy of a taut unwinding from the 's . As the unwraps, a point fixed on the traces the path, ensuring that the curve is to the base at every point of generation. This construction maintains a constant pressure angle throughout meshing, as the normal to the surface always aligns with the direction of the unwound , which is to the base . In the geometric arrangement of meshing , the pressure angle is defined as the angle between the common normal to the tooth surfaces at the point of contact—known as the —and the common tangent to the pitch circles at the pitch point. The pitch circle represents the theoretical path of contact where the gears behave as friction wheels, while the base circle lies inside the pitch circle and is tangent to the . At the pitch point, the pressure angle forms between the radial line from the gear center to this point (along the line of centers) and the , with the base circle's tangency ensuring the involute profile's compatibility across meshing teeth. This setup positions the base circle such that its radius is the pitch radius multiplied by the cosine of the pressure angle, establishing the pressure angle as the complement to the angle subtended by the unwound string length relative to the base circle in the development. The pressure angle directly governs the direction of the normal transmitted between meshing teeth, which acts along the tangent to both base circles. This can be resolved into tangential and radial components relative to the pitch circle: the tangential component, equal to the normal times the cosine of the pressure angle, provides the for , while the radial component, equal to the normal times the sine of the pressure angle, acts to separate the along the line of centers. By fixing the orientation of this vector, the pressure angle ensures smooth without sliding friction variations, as the maintains constant velocity ratios during contact.

Historical Development

Origins in Involute Gears

The concept of the pressure angle originated in the theoretical foundations of design, introduced by Leonhard Euler in the . In his 1760 paper De aptissima figura rotarum dentibus tribuenda, Euler proposed the involute curve—derived from the path traced by a point on a taut unwinding from a —as the optimal tooth profile for gears to ensure transmission between meshing elements. This design inherently incorporated the pressure angle as the fixed angle between the common normal to the tooth surfaces at the point of contact (the ) and the common tangent to the pitch circles at the pitch point, promoting conjugate motion and uniform force transmission without sliding velocity variations along the . Euler's work marked a shift from earlier empirical profiles, establishing the mathematical basis for pressure angle as a key in achieving efficient, wear-resistant gearing. During the , the pressure angle gained practical significance as gears were adopted in early machine tools, clocks, and industrial mechanisms, supplanting cycloidal tooth forms that had dominated since the . Cycloidal profiles, while offering extended contact, featured a variable pressure angle throughout meshing, resulting in fluctuating forces and accelerated wear under load; in contrast, the 's constant pressure angle facilitated smoother engagement, reduced sliding friction, and better load distribution, making it preferable for precision applications. This transition accelerated with the Industrial Revolution's demand for reliable , as gears proved more tolerant of manufacturing variations and center distance errors while maintaining velocity ratios. Advancements in gear-cutting technology further formalized the pressure angle's role, notably through William Sellers' innovations in the 1860s. Sellers developed milling machines capable of generating profiles with controlled , enabling repeatable production of where the pressure angle directly influenced cutting tool angles and strength. An early standard of 14.5° emerged around this period for low-speed applications, derived from empirical forms that allowed simple rack-based construction and approximated trigonometric simplifications, such as sin(14.5°) ≈ 0.25, to ease manual calculations in diametral pitch systems. This value balanced contact ratio and bending strength, supporting the widespread adoption of in American manufacturing by the late .

Standardization

In the early , gear design practices shifted from the predominant 14.5° pressure angle, which had been universally adopted as the standard by 1913, to 20° as a preferred option by the , driven by the American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) to achieve a better balance between strength and operational smoothness. This transition reflected growing recognition that the 20° angle offered improved capabilities while maintaining compatibility with existing manufacturing tools. The 14.5° angle, originating from late 19th-century developments, remained in use for legacy systems but was gradually phased out for new designs. Key engineering standards formalized these changes, with AGMA 1003-H07 specifying 20° as the standard profile angle for fine-pitch and helical , and its metric equivalent ANSI/AGMA 1103-H07 aligning with international practices. Similarly, ISO 1328 provides a tolerance classification system for cylindrical gear flanks that assumes a 20° pressure angle for alignment in global manufacturing and assessment. Older DIN standards, such as aspects of DIN 3990, retained options for 14.5° in certain legacy or specialized contexts, though 20° became the norm for modern cylindrical . The shift to 20° was substantiated by its ability to reduce undercutting in finer pitches—allowing with as few as 15 teeth without interference, compared to 26 for 14.5°—and to enhance load capacity through stronger tooth profiles and better film retention. In the mid-20th century, 25° emerged for high-torque applications requiring maximum strength, as it further increased bending resistance and pitting safety factors despite higher noise levels. Global variations persisted regionally; for instance, British standards under BS 436 initially favored 20° post-World War II to align with emerging international norms for spur and helical gears, promoting consistency in diametral pitch series and accuracy grades.

Design Considerations

Standard Values

In gear design, the most common pressure angles for involute spur and helical gears are 14.5°, 20°, and 25°. The 14.5° angle, a legacy standard, is typically used for low-speed, fine-pitch gears in applications requiring smooth operation and minimal noise, such as precision instruments or low-power mechanisms. The 20° angle is the most widespread, serving as the preferred AGMA and ISO standard for general-purpose gears due to its balance of strength, efficiency, and manufacturability. Meanwhile, the 25° angle is employed in high-load, coarse-pitch applications where enhanced tooth strength is prioritized, such as heavy industrial drives. Selection of the pressure angle depends on factors including module or pitch size, operating speed, and load capacity. For instance, finer pitches and higher speeds favor 14.5° or 20° to maintain higher contact ratios and reduce undercutting risks, while coarser pitches under heavy loads benefit from 25° for its wider base and improved load distribution. The 20° angle often provides an optimal compromise, supporting higher power transmission without excessive undercutting in pinions with fewer . Meshing gears must have identical pressure angles to ensure proper contact and avoid interference; mismatched angles, such as 14.5° with 20°, will not function correctly. Non-standard angles like 22.5° are occasionally used in specialized custom designs, particularly for internal gears or unique load requirements, but they require precise matching and may increase manufacturing complexity.
Pressure AngleKey CharacteristicsTypical Applications
14.5°Legacy; higher contact ratio, quieter operationLow-power mechanisms, fine-pitch instruments, legacy industrial equipment
20°Standard (AGMA/ISO); balanced strength and smoothnessAutomotive transmissions, general industrial machinery
25°High-load capacity; wider tooth baseHeavy-duty industrial gears, high-torque axles

Effects on Performance

The pressure angle significantly influences load distribution in by altering the components of the transmitted . A higher pressure angle, such as 25°, increases the radial load component proportional to the tangent of the angle, which can impose greater demands on bearings and shafts, while simultaneously reducing the path of contact and thereby lowering sliding velocities along the profile to enhance contact strength. In contrast, a lower pressure angle like 14.5° promotes smoother load sharing due to a higher contact ratio but heightens the risk of undercutting in pinions with fewer , potentially leading to uneven stress distribution and reduced overall load capacity. Regarding efficiency and noise, a pressure angle of 20° is widely regarded as optimal for balancing power transmission with minimal friction losses, particularly in high-speed applications where it minimizes energy dissipation through reduced sliding and contact stresses. Deviations from this value can degrade performance; for instance, higher angles like 25° may slightly improve mesh efficiency in asymmetric configurations by enhancing load-bearing but often increase noise levels due to greater impact during tooth meshing. Wear and fatigue are critically affected by the pressure angle through its impact on Hertzian contact stress and bending strength. Hertzian contact stress generally increases with higher pressure angles—lowest at 14.5° due to the elevated contact ratio and highest at 25°—accelerating surface and pitting in prolonged operations. For bending fatigue, the Lewis form factor YY, which depends on the pressure angle, plays a key role; higher angles yield a larger YY, reducing root stresses as per the bending strength equation: σ=WtKbmY\sigma = \frac{W_t K}{b m Y} where σ\sigma is the bending stress, WtW_t is the tangential load, KK is a geometry factor, bb is the face width, mm is the module, and YY increases with pressure angle to improve fatigue life, though excessive angles like 35° can elevate principal stresses in helical gears per finite element analysis. Lower angles, such as 15°, further mitigate bending stress (e.g., 145.6 N/mm² vs. 236.6 N/mm² at 20°), extending fatigue endurance but at the cost of higher contact stresses. These effects highlight key trade-offs in pressure angle selection. A 25° angle excels in heavy-duty scenarios by boosting load capacity and bending strength, yet it amplifies radial loads and sensitivity to misalignment, potentially shortening bearing life and increasing noise in precision applications. Conversely, 14.5° or 20° angles prioritize smoothness and fatigue resistance for high-speed or low-noise needs, though they limit maximum transmissible power and invite undercutting risks in small pinions, necessitating profile modifications for balanced durability. Overall, the 20° standard mitigates these compromises for most general-purpose transmissions.

Applications and Variations

In Spur and Helical Gears

In , the pressure angle is directly applied in the , as there is no to differentiate between normal and transverse orientations. The standard 20° pressure angle provides a balance between tooth strength and contact ratio but can lead to higher levels compared to lower angles like 14.5°, due to increased tooth separation forces and dynamic loads during meshing. To mitigate and vibration in operating at 20° pressure angle, profile shifting—also known as addendum modification—is commonly employed, which adjusts the tooth position to optimize load distribution and reduce transmission error without altering the basic profile. In helical gears, the pressure angle is defined in two planes: the normal pressure angle (φ_n), measured perpendicular to the tooth surface, and the transverse pressure angle (φ_t), measured in the . These are related by the tan φ_t = tan φ_n / cos ψ, where ψ is the ; this relation ensures the profile remains consistent across the helical tooth geometry. The standard normal pressure angle of 20° is widely adopted for helical gears, as it aligns with standards while accommodating the helix, resulting in a transverse pressure angle greater than 20° (e.g., approximately 22.8° for a 30° ). In helical gear design, mating pairs with opposite helix hands (left- and right-hand) generate equal and opposing axial forces, minimizing net on the shafts and bearings. This configuration is prevalent in automotive transmissions, such as those in passenger vehicles where helical gears with 20° normal pressure angle and helix angles of 20°–45° enable smooth power transfer across multiple speeds while controlling axial loads. The pressure angle in helical gears contributes to reduced pulsation during operation by influencing the and contact ratio, which promotes gradual tooth engagement along the . This leads to smoother load sharing compared to spur gears, with lower and levels, particularly beneficial in high-speed applications where the transverse pressure angle enhances overlap without excessive sliding.

In Bevel and Worm Gears

In bevel gears, which operate with intersecting axes typically at a 90° shaft angle, the pressure angle is defined in the transverse plane and varies along the tooth face width due to the conical geometry. For straight bevel gears, the standard pressure angle is 20°, which is the most commonly used value in North American designs, though 14.5° is also employed in some legacy systems. This angle is measured at the outer end of the tooth, but a mean pressure angle is calculated along the face width to account for the tapering effect, ensuring accurate force and stress analysis. The mean transverse pressure angle αs\alpha_s is given by αs=tan⁡−1(tan⁡αncos⁡βm)\alpha_s = \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\tan \alpha_n}{\cos \beta_m} \right), where αn\alpha_n is the normal pressure angle (typically 20°) and βm\beta_m is the mean spiral angle (zero for straight bevels). For spiral bevel gears, the pressure angle incorporates the helix angle for smoother operation and reduced noise, with the effective mean pressure angle adjusted as ϕm=tan⁡−1(tan⁡ϕcos⁡βm)\phi_m = \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\tan \phi}{\cos \beta_m} \right), where ϕ\phi is the base pressure angle and βm\beta_m is the mean spiral angle. This adjustment compensates for the spiral tooth curvature, maintaining consistent meshing along the face width and influencing contact patterns in high-speed applications like automotive differentials. Spiral bevel gears commonly use a 20° normal pressure angle, with variations up to 25° for enhanced load capacity. In these configurations, the pressure angle directly affects backlash, as higher values permit tighter tolerances to minimize play while avoiding binding under load. Worm gears, featuring crossed non-parallel axes at angles like 90°, define the pressure angle in the axial plane of the worm thread, typically ranging from 14.5° to 25° to balance strength and efficiency. A 20° pressure angle is standard in many metric designs, while higher angles (up to 30°) are selected to reduce sliding friction in the helical mesh, thereby improving power transmission efficiency in speed reduction applications. This axial pressure angle governs the worm's lead angle interaction, where elevated values decrease axial thrust and enhance self-locking tendencies in low-speed reducers. In worm gear sets, the pressure angle influences backlash by altering tooth thickness; for instance, a 25° angle allows for reduced clearance to achieve quieter operation without excessive wear. Hypoid gears, a variant with offset non-intersecting axes, require variable pressure angles along the tooth profile to ensure smooth meshing and uniform load distribution, often ranging from 20° to 25° nominally but modified on drive and coast flanks. This variability accommodates the offset, preventing interference and optimizing contact in applications such as differentials, where it minimizes and compared to fixed-angle bevels. The limit pressure angle adjustment is critical for hypoid designs to balance meshing on both flanks, directly impacting backlash control under varying loads.

Calculation Methods

Basic Formulas

The pressure angle α\alpha in is fundamentally related to the of the base circle and the pitch circle, derived from the properties of the curve. The profile is generated by unwinding a string from the base circle, ensuring that the common normal at the point of contact between meshing teeth is to both base circles. This normal forms the , and the pressure angle is the angle between this line and the common to the pitch circles at the pitch point. Geometrically, consider the center of the gear OO, the pitch point PP on the pitch circle of radius rp=Dp/2r_p = D_p / 2, and the point of tangency TT on the base circle of radius rb=Db/2r_b = D_b / 2. The radius OPOP to the pitch point is perpendicular to the pitch circle , while the at TT is along the . The angle α\alpha between OPOP and OTOT satisfies the relation from the OPTOPT, where the projection along the direction yields cos⁡α=rb/rp\cos \alpha = r_b / r_p, or equivalently, Db=Dpcos⁡αD_b = D_p \cos \alpha. Rearranging this base circle relation provides the primary formula for determining the pressure angle: α=cos⁡−1(Db/Dp)\alpha = \cos^{-1} (D_b / D_p). This equation allows direct computation of α\alpha when the base and pitch diameters are known, stemming directly from the involute's defining that the radius to the contact point projected onto the equals the base radius. For design purposes, the inverse relation Db=Dpcos⁡αD_b = D_p \cos \alpha is often used to find the base diameter once α\alpha and DpD_p are specified, ensuring conjugate action in meshing . In helical gears, the pressure angle is specified in both normal and transverse planes, extending the basic spur gear relations. The normal pressure angle ϕn\phi_n (in the plane normal to the tooth helix) relates to the transverse pressure angle ϕt\phi_t (in the plane perpendicular to the gear axis) via tan⁡ϕn=tan⁡ϕt⋅cos⁡ψ\tan \phi_n = \tan \phi_t \cdot \cos \psi, where ψ\psi is the helix angle. This follows from the projection of the tooth profile onto the transverse plane, adjusting the effective obliquity due to the helical twist. Typically, ϕn\phi_n is the design parameter (e.g., 20°), from which ϕt\phi_t is derived for transverse calculations. As a numerical example, consider a with pitch Dp=50D_p = 50 mm and base Db=47D_b = 47 mm. Applying the primary yields α=cos⁡−1(47/50)≈19.94∘\alpha = \cos^{-1} (47 / 50) \approx 19.94^\circ, which rounds to the standard 20° for practical . This illustrates how small variations in DbD_b relative to DpD_p fine-tune α\alpha to achieve desired meshing characteristics.

Measurement Techniques

Geometric inspection of pressure angle in manufactured often employs gear vernier or similar tools to measure the base length over a specified number of , allowing verification by comparing the measured value against theoretical expectations for the nominal pressure angle. This method involves positioning the caliper jaws to the flanks at the base circle and calculating the angle from the resulting span, providing a practical, low-cost approach for initial quality checks on and helical . Advanced optical and (CMM) techniques enable precise 3D profiling of gear tooth flanks, from which the pressure angle is computed by fitting an curve to the scanned data. CMM systems, equipped with touch probes or non-contact sensors, capture flank across multiple teeth, evaluating deviations in the pressure angle through software that aligns the measured profile with the theoretical at the pitch point. Laser scanning methods, such as line-structured laser systems, further enhance this by acquiring high-resolution point clouds of the tooth surface in a single pass, enabling accurate computation of the angle from the flank geometry without physical contact. Standards from the American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA), such as AGMA 915-1-A02, outline methods using gear checkers to assess profile and tangential deviations, including indirect verification of pressure angle through like overpin spans that detect inconsistencies in thickness attributable to angle errors. Overpin involves placing precision pins in tooth spaces and gauging the total span with a micrometer, comparing it to nominal values derived from the design pressure angle to identify deviations. Tolerance specifications for pressure angle typically allow variations of ±0.5° according to ISO 1328-1, ensuring compatibility in meshing without excessive or . Common error sources include cutting inaccuracies from or shaping processes, such as hob misalignment or , which can alter the flank angle during manufacturing.

References

  1. https://web1.eng.famu.fsu.edu/me/senior_design/2000/team05/form.html
  2. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rapidproto/mechanisms/chpt7.html
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4320157/
  4. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/36391/2-007Spring-2003/NR/rdonlyres/Mechanical-Engineering/2-007Design-and-Manufacturing-ISpring2003/C614411A-4AAA-4520-8D90-075B85403CF2/0/geartheorybg.pdf
  5. https://isl.charlotte.edu/gear-nomenclature/
  6. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20100015488/downloads/20100015488.pdf
  7. https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/mechanicaldesign/article/133/11/114501/429464/High-Pressure-Angle-Gears-Comparison-to-Typical
  8. https://khkgears.net/new/gear_knowledge/introduction_to_gears/pressure_angle.html
  9. https://www.wmberg.com/resources/blogs/gear-pressure-angle-calculation
  10. https://khkgears.net/new/gear_knowledge/gear-nomenclature/pitch-point.html
  11. https://khkgears.net/new/gear_knowledge/introduction_to_gears/involute_tooth_profile.html
  12. https://khkgears.net/new/gear_knowledge/gear_technical_reference/involute_gear_profile.html
  13. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/wdornfeld/ME312/Gears.pdf
  14. https://www.tec-science.com/mechanical-power-transmission/involute-gear/meshing-line-action-contact-pitch-circle-law/
  15. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/euler-works/249/
  16. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19860005142/downloads/19860005142.pdf
  17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44554623
  18. https://www.khkgears.us/media/1213/understand-the-choice-of-pressure-angle-in-the-design-of-spur-or-helical-gearing.pdf
  19. https://gearsolutions.com/departments/tooth-tips-william-crosher-78/
  20. https://members.agma.org/MyAGMA/MyAGMA/Store/Item_Detail.aspx?iProductCode=1003_H07&Category=STANDARDS
  21. https://www.iso.org/standard/45309.html
  22. https://gearsolutions.com/features/gear-tooth-strength-analysis-of-high-pressure-angle-cylindrical-gears/
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010448576900890
  24. https://www.cedengineering.com/userfiles/M04-033%20-%20Basic%20Gear%20Fundamentals%20-%20US.pdf
  25. https://sdp-si.com/resources/elements-of-metric-gear-technology/index.php
  26. https://gearsolutions.com/features/determination-of-the-agma-j-factor-for-internal-spur-gears/
  27. http://www.ijmerr.com/uploadfile/2016/0623/20160623112245694.pdf
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355361476_Investigation_of_the_effect_of_pressure_angle_on_gear_performance_in_asymmetric_gears
  29. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/wdornfeld/ME312/ToothLoads04.pdf
  30. http://uigearlab.com/wp-content/uploads/Dudleys-Gear-Handbook.pdf
  31. https://www.geartechnology.com/transmission-error-and-noise-emission-of-spur-gears
  32. https://www.engineersedge.com/gears/gear_terminology_and_equations_13806.htm
  33. https://www.ptsmake.com/the-practical-ultimate-guide-to-helical-gears-design/
  34. https://khkgears.net/new/gear_knowledge/gear_technical_reference/bending-strength-of-bevel-gears.html
  35. https://gearsolutions.com/departments/tooth-tips/tooth-tips-william-crosher-73/
  36. https://roymech.org/Useful_Tables/Drive/Bevel_Gears.html
  37. https://sdp-si.com/resources/elements-of-metric-gear-technology/page5.php
  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/hypoid-gear
  39. https://www.tec-science.com/mechanical-power-transmission/involute-gear/calculation-of-involute-gears/
  40. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/helix-angle
  41. https://roymech.org/Useful_Tables/Drive/Helical_Gears.html
  42. https://gearsolutions.com/features/a-procedure-to-determine-the-unknown-geometry-of-external-cylindrical-gears/
  43. https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/LAMDAMAP01/LAMDAMAP01030FU.pdf
  44. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6732/12/8/782
  45. https://members.agma.org/MyAGMA/MyAGMA/Store/Item_Detail.aspx?iProductCode=915-1-A02&Category=STANDARDS
  46. https://gearsolutions.com/departments/tooth-tips/determining-tooth-thickness-of-various-gear-types-part-iii/
  47. https://www.iso.org/standard/55303.html
  48. https://www.mechanics-industry.org/articles/meca/pdf/2022/01/mi210115.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.