Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:58:20.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Approach on the Allocation of Wear Allowances - A Case Study

Part of: Robust Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Dominik Schubert ,
Andreas Rohrmoser ,
Sebastian Hertle ,
Sandro Wartzack ,
Hinnerk Hagenah ,
Marion Merklein  and
Dietmar Drummer
Dominik Schubert*
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Polymer Technology;
Andreas Rohrmoser
Affiliation:
Friedrich- Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Manufacturing Technology;
Sebastian Hertle
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Polymer Technology;
Sandro Wartzack
Affiliation:
Friedrich- Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Engineering Design
Hinnerk Hagenah
Affiliation:
Friedrich- Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Manufacturing Technology;
Marion Merklein
Affiliation:
Friedrich- Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Manufacturing Technology;
Dietmar Drummer
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Polymer Technology;
*
Contact: Schubert, Dominik, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Institute of Polymer Technology, Germany, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

To maintain functional tolerances of gear sets over their lifetime, especially in polymer-seel gear sets, the wear behaviour must be considered. The state of the art in wear modelling does not take the run-in behaviour of polymer-metal contacts into account. This results in oversizing of wear allowances in the stationary wear phase and undersizing in the run-in phase. Therefore, a modified wear model is presented in this paper. With this method the issues of over- and undersizing can be eliminated.

The method is then applied in a case study to show two things. Firstly, using the presented method the calculated necessary wear allowances were reduced by 30%. Secondly, the effect of surface structures on the wear behaviour was investigated. It is shown that the run-in process is not dependent on roughness in sliding direction, but on overall contact area. Thus, the state of the art, i.e. tolerating only the roughness in sliding direction, is insufficient. Considering the process-induced surface topology during design of gear sets can decrease run-in wear. Together with the optimised wear model, this allows wider manufacturing tolerances and thus lower costs during production.

Keywords

Surface structureWearDesign practiceTolerance representation and managementOptimisation
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 3511 - 3520
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Bausch, T. (2011), Innovative Zahnradfertigung: Verfahren, Maschinen und Werkzeuge zur kostengünstigen Herstellung von Stirnrädern mit hoher Qualität, expert Verlag, Renningen.Google Scholar
Briscoe, B. (1981), “Wear of polymers: an essay on fundamental aspects”, Tribology international, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 231–243.Google Scholar
Czichos, H. (2018), “Tribological Systems”, Measurement, Testing and Sensor Technology, Springer, Cham, pp. 185–196.Google Scholar
Czichos, H. and Habig, K.-H. (2010), Tribologie-Handbuch: Tribometrie, Tribomaterialien, Tribotechnik, Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
De Baets, P., Glavatskih, S., Ost, W. and Sukumaran, J. (2014), “Polymers in tribology: Challenges and opportunities”, International Conference on Polymer Tribology, Bled, 11.-12.09.2014, University of Ljubljana, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
DIN ISO 7148-2 (2014), Plain bearings - Testing of the tribological behaviour of bearing materials - Part 2: Testing of polymer-based plain bearing materials, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Faatz, P. (2002), Tribologische Eigenschaften von Kunststoffen im Modell und Bauteilversuch, Ph.D. Thesis, University Erlangen-Nuremberg.Google Scholar
Feulner, R. (2008), Verschleiß trocken laufender Kunststoffgetriebe - Kennwertermittlung und Auslegung, Ph.D. Thesis, University Erlangen-Nuremberg.Google Scholar
Fischer, C. et al. (2014), “The Influence of Proccessing Temperature on Morphological and Tribological Properties of Injection-Moulded Microparts”, Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 2014, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Friedrich, K., Lu, Z. and Häger, A. (1993), “Overview on polymer composites for friction and wear application”, Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 1, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Kawasaki, Y. (2007), “High Precision (DIN 8 class) Forged Helical Gear - Manual Transaxle for Passenger Car”, ICFG workshop Quality and Properties of Cold Forged Products and JSTP Forging Committee, Nagoya University.Google Scholar
Künkel, R. and Ehrenstein, G. (2003), “Effects of morphology on the tribological behavior of thermoplastics in sliding contact”, Proceedings of the 61st Annual Technical Conference, Nashville, Tenn, USA, pp. 1706–1710.Google Scholar
Lorenz, R., Hagenah, H. and Merklein, M. (2018), “Experimental evaluation of cold forging lubricants using double cup extrusion tests”, Materials Science Forum, Vol. 918, pp. 65–70.Google Scholar
Sathishkumar, T.P., Satheeshkumar, S. and Naveen, J. (2014), “Glass fiber-reinforced polymer composites–a review”, Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, Vol. 13, pp. 1258–1275.Google Scholar
Schlecht, B. (2010), Maschinenelemente 2, Pearson Studium, München.Google Scholar
Schleich, B., Wärmefjord, K., Söderberg, R. and Wartzack, S. (2018), “Geometrical Variations Management 4.0: towards next Generation Geometry Assurance”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 75, pp. 3–10.Google Scholar
Schleich, B. and Wartzack, S. (2013), “Process-oriented tolerancing - A discrete geometry framework”, International conference on engineering design, 19.-22.08.2013, Seoul, pp. 61–70.Google Scholar
Schubert, D. et al. (2019), “Einfluss der fertigungsbedingten Gestalt und Struktur auf das Einlaufverhalten von Stahl-Kunststoff-Getriebepaarungen”, In: Wartzack, S. (Ed.), Industriekolloquium der Forschungsgruppe FOR 2271, Ernst Vögel, Stamsried, pp. 74–84.Google Scholar
Sorrentino, A. (2018), “Tribology of Self-Lubricating Polymer Nanocomposites”, Self-Lubricating Composites, Springer, Berlin, pp. 105–131.Google Scholar
VDI 2736 (2016), Thermoplastische Zahnräder, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Wartzack, S. et al. (2011), “Lebenszyklusorientierte Toleranzsimulation zur funktionalen und ästhetischen Produktabsicherung”, Konstruktion, Vol. 6, pp. 63–74.Google Scholar
Yao, J. et al. (2003), “The influences of lubricant and material on polymer/CoCr sliding friction”, Wear, Vol. 255 No. 1-6, pp. 780–784.Google Scholar
Ye, J. et al. (2018), “The Competing Effects of Counterface Peaks and Valleys on the Wear and Transfer of Ultra-Low Wear Alumina–PTFE”, Tribology Letters, Vol. 66 No. 12, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y. and Daniel Fang, X. (1999), “Target allocation for maximizing wear allowance of running fits based on process capability”, Quality Engineering, Vol. 2, pp. 169–176.Google Scholar