×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic
2

Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

(OP)
Hi all

I'm designing and epicyclic gearbox under tight space constraints.  In order to increase the load capacity, I'm thinking about increasing the number of planets from 3 to 4, 5 or 6.  I know that without flexible planet pins the load won't be taken up evenly by all 6 planets.  Does anyone know a good rule of thumb for the "effective number" of planets under these circumstances (ie, a 6 planet, precisely machined carrier might act as if it had 5.2 planets)?

Thanks in advance,
   Brendan

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

(OP)
A few more hours of googling, and I'm closer to answering myself.  The old AGMA standard 420.04 said "to compensate for unequal loading, the total power capacity of all pinions should be the calculated capacity of one pinion plus a maximum of 0.9 times the calculated capacity for each additional pinion"

This factor seems to be superseded by more conservative numbers in AGMAs newer standard A6123, but I don't have access to it.  Timken includes a plot in their flexpin paper: http://www.timken.com/en-us/solutions/windenergy/Documents/FlexpinBearingPaper.pdf

I would still like some independent confirmation though.  What factors do the gearbox designers here use for 4,5 and 6 planets?

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

NuclearNerd,

Whether you use 3, 4, 5, or 6 planets in your gearset depends first and foremost on what gear ratio you want to achieve. A single stage, simple planetary with 3 planets can get a ratio of about 12.5 max; 4 planets about 5.7 max; 5 planets about 4.1 max; and 6 planets about 3.4 max.   

Mounting the planet gears on carrier flexpins is also not the only method that will produce load sharing among the planet gears.

A 2 or 3 planet configuration will naturally always tend to load share.  But even 4, 5, or 6 planet configurations can be made to load share adequately by using flexure mounted ring gears and floating the sun gear. And if money is no object, close tolerance machining and select fit assembly will produce load sharing.

Finally, if your gears have a wide face, using spherical roller bearings for the planets will eliminate tooth edge loading due to torsional wind-up in the carrier structure.

Best of luck to you.
Terry

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

tbuelna - you probably mean stages or sets of pinions, not a number of pinions in a simple planetary; the ratio of a planetary is determined by numbers of teeth of sun gear and annulus (ring gear) only. It is possible to design the planetary as "heavy duty" using 6 planets, while "regular" planetary has just 3 (or 4) planets. Obviously the carriers are different and the numbers of teeth for sun and annulus are selected to enable such configurations.

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

Gearguru,

As the ratio of the number of teeth between ring and sun increases, so does the required diameter of the planet.

If the sun and ring are nearly the same size, then I can (theoretically) fit loads of tiny circles in the gap between. If the sun is nearly zero diameter, I can only fit 2 planets in.

M

--
Dr Michael F Platten

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

The following is an excerpt from ANSI-AGMA 6123-B06:

9 Load sharing
Design of epicyclic gear drives should address distribution of transmitted power between each of the parallel power paths if the configuration contains more than one planet gear in the system. Concerning multiple path transmissions, the total tangential load is not quite evenly distributed between the various load paths (irrespective of design, tangential velocity, or accuracy of manufacture). Allowance is made for this by means of the mesh load factor, Kγ.

Kγ = TBranch NCP
      ----------------
         TNom

where
TBranch is torque in branch with heaviest load;
TNom is total nominal torque.

If possible, Kγ should be determined by measurement. Alternatively, its value may be estimated from
table 8.

Kγ is equal to or greater than 1.0. Kγ equals 1.0 when all planets are assumed to equally share the load. Kγ is greater than 1.0 when it is assumed that one planet will carry more than its equal share of the total load.
(end excerpt)

Kγ varies from 1.0 to 1.61 in Table 8 depending on the application level, AGMA accuracy grade, and whether or not the mounts are flexible.  There are 4 application levels:

1       slow speed gears, mining mill drives, etc.
2       moderate quality, i.e., commercial marine, non--military
3 & 4 high quality, high speed, gas turbine/generator drives, military marine, wind turbines.

Section 9 also has more information on float, load share, and load imbalance.  I suggest you spend the $140 for this standard if you need to design an epicyclic gear drive system.

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

MikeyP,
I know that.  But just to have enough space to locate more planets does not mean, that I have to, especially if the carried torque is low. The ratio is determined by the numbers of teeth in sun and annulus. Loads and numbers of planets are different story.  

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

Apologies, gearguru (grandmothers, eggs, sucking etc.)

I was merely pointing out that tbuelna did not say anything about number of planets affecting ratios, only that the number of planets set a limit on the achieveable ratio.

M

 

--
Dr Michael F Platten

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

No problem. We talk about the same from different points of view. (by the way - aren't the planetaries amazing part of gearing? Surprisingly a lot of math hidden behind those few gears, it's worth to study it, one can learn a lot here).  

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

gearguru,

Sorry if my post wasn't clear.  I agree with you in that a planetary gear ratio is dependent upon the relative numbers of gear teeth and what elements are fixed or rotating.  But the maximum number of planets may be limited by the gear ratio you seek to achieve.  NuclearNerd has limited space avaiable, so one would naturally assume that he would choose to employ as many planets as possible, given his ratio requirements.  And thus his (valid) concerns regarding load sharing.

Best regards,
Terry

RE: Load Sharing and Effective Number of Planets in Epicyclic

If size constraints will allow, a plastic planetary gearbox system could produce the desired flexibilities to assure load sharing. You may end up with a metal output shaft based on stress calcs.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources