CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical Framework

Given all the detailed specifications of the problem, the output shaft can then be
designed using this approach:

Solving for Power and Torque Iterations

Requirements

Gear Specifications

Shaft layout

Load Analysis

Stress Analysis

Material Properties

Design Equation

Solution

Deflection Analysis

Catalog Specifications
 Computer Aided Drawing

2.2 Reverted Gear Train

When the axes of the first gear (i.e. first driver) and the last gear (i.e. last driven
or follower) are co-axial, then the gear train is known as reverted gear train as shown in
Fig. 3.
Since the distance between the centers of the shafts of gears 1 and 2 as well as
gears 3 and 4 is same, therefore

Figure 1: Reverted Gear Train

 r 1 +r 2=r 3+ r 4

T 1+T 2=T 3 +T 4

product of thenumber of teeth on the follower

Speed ratio=
product of the number of teeth on the driver

N 1 T 2 ×T 4
=
N 4 T 1 ×T 3

In some cases, such as automobile transmissions, it is desirable or even

necessary to have the output shaft concentric with the input shaft. This is referred to as
"reverting the train" or "bringing it back onto itself." The design of a reverted compound
train is more complicated because of the additional constraint that the center distances
of the stages must be equal. Referring to Figure, this constraint can be expressed in
terms of their pitch radii, pitch diameters, or numbers of teeth (provided that all gears
have the same diametral pitch). [1] Gear Trains, Technical Institute of Kufa

Figure 2: Output shaft of a Reverted Gear Train

2.3 Distortion Energy Theory

The distortion energy theory says that failure occurs due to the distortion of a
part, not due to volumetric changes in the part (distortion causes shearing, but
volumetric changes do not).

As examples: Rocks below the Earth's surface. Pressure exerted on them is

essentially uniform and well beyond their compressive ultimate strengths, yet they are
able to withstand the pressure without fracture. The explanation for their survival is that
because their shape is not distorted, there is no shearing, therefore no failure.

Failure will occur if:

σ =√ σ 12 +σ 22 +σ 32−σ 1 σ 2−σ 2 σ 3−σ 1 σ 3 ≥ S y

'
σ =√ ¿ ¿ ¿
'
σ is called the von Mises effective stress

Figure 3: Distortion energy theory line

For the case of pure shear, i.e., σ 1=τ= (−σ 3 ) . σ 2=0

 2 2 2 2 2
S y =σ 1 −σ 1 σ 3 + σ 3 =3 σ 1 =3 τ max

Sy
σ 1= =0.577 S y =τ max
√3
Shear yield strength, S sy=0.577 S y

The Distortion Energy Theory, also known as the Von Mises Criterion, plays a
crucial role in this study as it provides a more accurate and realistic basis for
determining shaft failure under combined loading conditions. Since the shaft is
subjected to both torsional and bending stresses due to gear forces and torque
transmission, the use of this theory allows for the calculation of an equivalent stress that
reflects the true stress state of the material. This is especially important for ductile
materials like AISI 1020 Cold Drawn steel, where failure typically results from distortion
rather than simple tension or shear. By applying the Distortion Energy Theory, the study
ensures that the shaft design meets strength and fatigue requirements under real-world
operating conditions, thereby enhancing the reliability and safety of the mechanical
system. [1] Distortion Energy Theory, Iowa State University
2.4 Fluctuating Stress

Fluctuating stresses in machinery often take the form of a sinusoidal pattern

because of the nature of some rotating machinery. However, other patterns, some quite
irregular, do occur. It has been found that in periodic patterns exhibiting a single
maximum and a single minimum of force, the shape of the wave is not important, but
the peaks on both the high side (maximum) and the low side (minimum) are important.
Thus Fmax and Fmin in a cycle of force can be used to characterize the force pattern. It is
also true that ranging above and below some baseline can be equally effective in
characterizing the force pattern. If the largest force is Fmax and the smallest force is
Fmin, then a steady component and an alternating component can be constructed as
follows:

Some stress-time relations: (a) fluctuating stress with high- frequency ripple; (b
and c) non-sinusoidal fluctuating stress; (d) sinusoidal fluctuating stress; (e) repeated
stress; (f) completely reversed sinusoidal stress

Figure (2) illustrates some of the various stress-time traces that occur. The
components of stress, some of which are shown in Fig. (2), are

σmin = minimum stress σr = range of stress

σm = midrange component σa = amplitude component

σmax =maximum stress σs = static or steady stress

 T h e s t e a d y , o r

may have any value

Figure 4: Types of Fluctuating stresses
between σmin and σmax.
The steady stress exists because of a fixed load or preload applied to the part, and it
is usually independent of the varying portion of the load. A helical compression
spring, for example, is always loaded into a space shorter than the free length of the
spring. The stress created by this initial compression is called the steady, or static,
component of the stress. It is not the same as the midrange stress. We shall have
occasion to apply the subscripts of these components to shear stresses as well as
normal stresses.

The following relations are evident from Fig. (2):

σ max + σ min
σ m=
2

|
σ a=
σ max −σ min
2 |
 In addition to the previous equation, the stress ratio is

σ min
R=
σ max

σa
A= =amplitude ratio
σm

and the amplitude ratio is also defined and used in connection with fluctuating
stresses.

Equations (3–14) utilize symbols σa and σm as the stress components at the

location under scrutiny. This means, in the absence of a notch, σ a and σm are equal
to the nominal stresses σao and σmo induced by loads Fa and Fm, respectively; in the
presence of a notch, they are (K f σao) and (Kf σmo), respectively, as long as the
material remains without plastic strain. In other words, the fatigue stress
concentration factor Kf is applied to both components. [1] Characterizing Fluctuating
Stresses, University of Anbar

2.4.A. Fatigue Failure Criteria for Fluctuating Stress

Five criteria of failure are diagrammed in Fig. (3): the Soderberg, the modified
Goodman, the Gerber, the ASME-elliptic, and yielding. The diagram shows that only
the Soderberg criterion guards against any yielding, but is biased low. Considering
the modified Goodman line as a criterion, point A represents a limiting point with an
alternating strength Sa and midrange strength Sm. The slope of the load line shown is
defined as r = Sa/Sm.
 Figure 5: Criteria of failure diagram

Fatigue diagram showing various criteria of failure. For each criterion, points
on or “above” the respective line indicate failure. Some point A on the Goodman line,
for example, gives the strength S m as the limiting value of σ m corresponding to the
strength Sa, which, paired with σ m, is the limiting value of σ a. [1] Characterizing
Fluctuating Stresses, University of Anbar

2.4.B. DE-Goodman Criterion

The Modified Goodman Theory is integral to this study as it addresses the

effects of fatigue failure in rotating shafts subjected to fluctuating stresses. Since the
shaft in this design experiences cyclic bending stresses due to gear loads, combined
with steady torsional stresses from torque transmission, fatigue becomes a primary
concern. The Goodman diagram provides a method to evaluate whether the shaft
will endure these repeated stresses over time without failure. By relating the
alternating and mean stress components to the material's endurance limit and yield
strength, the Modified Goodman approach ensures that the design remains within
safe limits throughout the shaft’s operating life. This is particularly important when
features such as keyways and stress concentrations are present, as they
significantly reduce fatigue strength. Incorporating the Goodman theory thus
enhances the accuracy and safety of the fatigue life prediction in the shaft design. [1]
Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses, University of Anbar
 Figure 6: Goodman Diagram and Equations for finite and infinite life

Figure 7: DE-Goodman criterion equation

2.5 American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) Theory

After considering the gear tooth as a cantilever beam, Lewis derived the following
equation.
 Figure 8: Derivation of Lewis Equation

The form factor in the Lewis equation is the unit less factor based on the
geometry of the gear tooth. This form factor basically takes into account of the
effective strength of the tooth at the root fillet. He published the Values of Y for
gears of different tooth and pressure angles.

Lewis equation is now no longer used in its original form, but it is still the base
of the modern version of the AGMA bending stress equation. AGMA stands for
American Gear Manufacturers Association. The principle of the Lewis equation is still
valid but there are some more factors included to account for gear tooth failure
mechanisms studied by other researchers at a later stage. Now Lewis form factor
has been replaced by the new Geometry factor J, which takes care of the stress
concentration factor at the root fillet. An interesting fact is, stress concentration
theory did not exist at the time of Lewis! [1] Gear Design by AGMA Theory: Online
Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025

Figure 9: AGMA Contact Stress Equation

2.5.A. Bending Strength Geometry Factor, J

AGMA 908-B89 has the method for calculation of this factor, this method is a
complicated algorithm. J factor account of various aspects related to tooth geometry
such as stress concentration at tooth root fillet. The below table mentions the J factor
for full depth 20 Degrees pressure angle assuming the load is coming at tooth tip.
Although 20 degrees is the most common pressure angle used worldwide for other
pressure angles such as 25 and 14.5 please refer AGMA standard. J value will also
change if the correction factor is applied on the gear tooth. [1] Gear Design by
AGMA Theory: Online Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025

2.5.B. Dynamic Table 1: AGMA Bending Geometry Factor Factor,

Kv

Dynamic factor (Kv) accounts for the internally generated vibration loads
(additional loads) from tooth-to-tooth impact due to non-conjugate meshing of gear
teeth.

This factor depends on the Gear Quality Index (Q v) and the Pitch line velocity.
Let’s understand about Gear Quality Index. It is the AGMA quality number and
represents the quality of gear in terms of the geometric accuracy of the teeth. In the
ANSI/AGMA 2000 A88 Gear Classification and Inspection Handbook, quality
numbers from lowest quality Q3 to Highest quality Q16 represent the accuracy of the
tooth geometry; the higher the quality number, the smaller the tolerance. The four
main parameters that accounted for the quality index are Tooth lead or tooth
alignment, involute profile variation, pitch or spacing variation, and radial runout.

The tooth lead or tooth alignment criterion applies to spur and helical-type
gearing and measures the variation between the specified lead (or helix angle) and
the lead of the produced gear.

Involute profile variation is the difference between the specified profile and the
measured profile of the tooth.
 Pitch variation or spacing variation is the difference between the specified
tooth location and the actual tooth location around the circumference of the gear.

Radial runout refers to the disparity in radial position of teeth on a gear – the
variation in tooth distances from the center of rotation.

Geometry inspections are usually made with modern equipment that

measures and records all of the critical variations and can automatically determine
the AGMA gear quality level. Most measuring machines have a stylus that follows
the tooth form as the part is rotated. The details are charted at high magnification for
intensive visual evaluation.

Gears with a high-quality index mean high accuracy in the tooth, which
means, driven gear’s angular velocity will be steady, smooth, and hence no
acceleration or jerk loads on the system of gears and associated components. This
leads to a quiet (very low noise) gear drive without any additional shock and impact
load on the gear teeth. On the other hand, if the quality index is low, then gear teeth
have an additional dynamic load (shock & impact) along with bending load due to
torque transmission. Not only this, shock & impact load gets propagated to the shaft
and bearings, and ultimately into the housing, which then vibrates at all gear mesh
frequencies, exciting the structure and the surrounding air to create noise.

If the actual dynamic loading to transmission error, such as shaft

misalignment, bearing misalignment, stiffness of the structure supporting the
bearing, can be taken into account by increasing the tangential load W t, then Kv can
be set to 1. [1] Gear Design by AGMA Theory: Online Calculator. The Engineering
Blog, 2025
2.5.C. Load Distribution Factor, Km

Any Axial misalignment or axial deviation in the tooth form will cause the
tangential load Wt to be unevenly distributed to the face width. This problem is
enhanced with bigger face-width gears. So, as a thumb rule face width to module
ratio should be 8 to 16. (Face width/ Module = 8 to 16) [1] Gear Design by AGMA
Theory: Online Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025

Figure 10: Dynamic Factor, Kv, Graph

Table 2: Load Distribution Factors, Km

2.5.D. Application Factor, Ka

This factor considers any kind of fluctuating load coming on the tooth. For
example, if a gearbox is driving a stone crusher, then shock loads will come on the
gear tooth due to crushing loads. For smooth applications where there is no
fluctuating load, this factor can be taken as 1. [1] Gear Design by AGMA Theory:
Online Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025
2.5.E. Size Factor, Ks

The size factor considers the fact that test samples used to establish the
fatigue strength data by experiment for testing may be smaller in size than the actual
part. Ks allows the modification of tooth stress to account for such a situation. AGMA
has not specified any value or formula for this. So, choosing this factor depends on
the designer’s experience.
Table 3: Application Factor, Ka
Generally, this factor is taken care
of by limiting the maximum allowed stress limit, so K s can be taken as 1. For a
conservative approach, Ks 1.25 to 1.5 can be taken. [1] Gear Design by AGMA
Theory: Online Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025

2.5.F. Rim Thickness, Kb

This factor accounts for the situation of very large gears that are made on
rims and spokes rather than on a solid disk and have thick rim compared to tooth
depth. AGMA defines backup ratio mB as follows. Backup ratio less than 0.5 is not
recommended, gears on a solid disk will have Kb=1 [1] Gear Design by AGMA
Theory: Online Calculator. The Engineering Blog, 2025
 Figure 11: Rim thickness, Kb , equations

2.5.G. AGMA Allowable Contact Stress, σ c all

The allowable stress numbers for gear materials vary with items such as
material composition, cleanliness, residual stress, microstructure, quality, heat
treatment, and processing practices. For materials other than steel, a range is
shown, and the lower values should be used for general design purposes.

Allowable stress numbers shown in the table below are determined or

estimated from laboratory tests and accumulated field experiences. They are based
on unity overload factor, 10 million stress cycles, unidirectional loading and 99
percent reliability.

The grade cleanliness requirements apply only to those portions of the gear
material where the teeth will be located, to a distance below the finished tip diameter
of at least two times the tooth depth. On external gears this portion of the gear blank
normally will be less than 25 percent of the radius. [1] ANSI/AGMA American
National Standards Institute. American Gear Manufacturer’s Association
Specification AGMA 201-DO4
Table 4: Allowable Contact Stresses for different materials