Winston, thanks for the scan, and Terry, thanks for the input. Understanding the 'factors' is exactly why I started the equation comparison.
The funny part is the discrepancy between NDH and Timken regarding the tangential load on the gear. For the Timken equations to match the Gleason...
Terry, I used that equation but it comes out way off and the spiral angles (which are known) are different for each... otherwise it'd be a plain ol' spiral bevel.
Winston, I'd love to see a scan of the NDH equations if it's not too much trouble... Thanks!
To make the Timken equations =...
Thanks for you help, Terry. That makes a lot of sense... especially after I simplified my thought process and considered plain ol' spur gears.
If you're up for more, now I'm fighting myself with the tangential load on the gear.
Im trying to compare the values from those Timken equations to...
Hey Folks,
There seems to be lots of scattered information about hypoid gearsets and I'm trying to grasp some basic understanding. I'm using equations from the Timken website (attached) to resolve gear forces back to bearing support loads.
They don't relate the tangential forces to the...
Thanks for you input, it's been quite helpful.
That FAQ on how to calculate membrane stress got me thinking it might only be applicable for pressure vessels, and prompted the question.
Perhaps I should have done this earlier, but some simple hand calcs compared to FEA with simple geometry...
Hey folks,
I'm curious what a membrane stress is, and if it's pertinent to tubular beam sections analyzed by shells.
It's not something I remember from and classes and seems like its more relevant to pressure vessels.
May case involves a swing arm constructed from bent and welded sheet...
Hey Folks,
I realize similar topics have been posted but I could not find something specifically helpful... I appreciate your patience.
Similar to others, I would like to bring in configuration specific data to BOMs for toolbox hardware. I can (tediously) set up the database to apply a Part...
Yeah- Thats really the issue. To tolerance those holes to use as a datum is overkill. they are all just clearance.
As for detail A, the pattern is basic dimensioned to each other, with one of the holes basic dimensioned to the datum intersection.
I know its fundamentally wrong, but it does...
Im somewhat new to GD&T implementation, and im not sure the GD&T on this drawing is valid either... but im working with what it says. Maybe its because i know what the part is for, that it makes more sense, but here it is. Ill put up a link- most of the other dimensions are removed for clarity...
We just designed a part with a patterned hole pattern. Basically, a small hole pattern of 4 holes in a square is patterned 3 times around a circle for 3 linear bearings.
the center point of the pattern of 3 has a vertical centerline called out as Datum B and the horizontal centerline called...
I just rotated the part so the slot is orthogonal- that should have been the first thing I did.
drawon- I'm not sure how to put a position tolerance on the slot- If I use the width as datum C, does that call my centerline as the datum feature? I can specifically call out the center of the...
Eng-tips must not support .jpeg. Or i am not qualified to use the attachment tool... Probably the latter.
This one seems to work.
Thankshttp://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=9f61fa8f-eaa1-4f8f-9ab4-d8c18bedef19&file=pic.JPG
Thanks for all your tips. Ive attached the pics- one is the keyslot, and the other is a hex on the end of a shaft. The hex is dimensioned how its been done in the past- sometimes with the centerline dimension i mentioned before. I agree that this isnt very appropriate, but its also fairly easy...
Hey Guys,
I came across an interesting issue. Angles that appear 90 degrees are assumed right angles unless otherwise marked- are centerlines assumed to designate symmetry across a a feature with flat sides? IE, a keyway or hex pattern for wrench.
I have a shaft with a keyway at 22.5 degrees...
