Mech-3000
Single-Stage Gearbox Project
Fall 2020
Mr. Anthony Duva
Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Wentworth Institute of Technology
550 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02115
Professor Duva,
Enclosed is our report regarding the “Single-Stage Gearbox” with specifications for team
3. The report documents our process of calculating the necessary parameters for selection of
components necessary to construct a gearbox that will meet the given design requirements. We
have completed our excel calculator and used the data it generated to research parts across
various manufacturers to be used for the design.
Our team assumed that gears would be symmetrical with a pitch angle of 20 degrees and
would require hubs. We also began the project assuming that the gears’ baseline bore would be
required to fit our calculated minimum diameter based on our static analysis. This led to the
formulation of a gearbox with an unnecessarily large but nonetheless functional shaft.
The FEA tests of the shaft with the keyseat recommended by Boston Gear indicate that
the shaft’s critical speed far exceeds the maximum speeds it will endure under the design
conditions. All other selected components exceed the required loading and fatigue requirements
and therefore will conduct the intended procedures without failure.
We look forward to your review of the report.
Sincerely,
Nicolas Deguglielmo, Collin Killiany, Ricky Amin
Reduction Gear Box
Design of Machine Elements Final Project
Professor Anthony Duva– Fall 2020
Prepared by
Nicolas DeGuglielmo, Colin Killiany, Ricky Amin
Abstract:
Through the completion of the MECH3000 Major Design project, a single stage gearbox
was developed to the following specifications: an input speed of 1800 rpm, three horsepower, a
gear ratio of 7.2. and the gearbox must be designed to withstand torque fluctuations of up to 5%.
Based on the calculated minimum gear teeth to prevent interference and the recommendation of
Boston Gear’s catalog, a twenty teeth pinion with a diametral pitch of twelve teeth per inch were
selected. A driven gear with 144 teeth with the same diametral pitch and pressure angle was
chosen to supplement the pinion gear. Using the calculated pitch radii of these gears and the
required input speed and power, we designed input and output shafts out of AISI 1020 CR steel
to withstand the forces generated by the gears. With the shaft diameter selected, a set of bearings
could be selected based on their inner diameter and loading parameters. A key could also be
selected, allowing the team to conduct FEA analysis on its key seat.
Contents:
Abstract: .............................................................................................................................................
Contents: ............................................................................................................................................
Introduction: ....................................................................................................................................1
Design Specifications: .....................................................................................................................1
Design and Analysis ........................................................................................................................2
Phase 1: Gears ............................................................................................................................. 2
Phase 2: Bearings .............................................................................................................................7
Phase 3: Shaft Design ....................................................................................................................10
Phase 4: Key Frequency ................................................................................................................15
Drawings for Components and Assemblies ...................................................................................21
Case Design & Bolt Selection .......................................................................................................25
Discussion and conclusions ...........................................................................................................26
References: ....................................................................................................................................29
Introduction:
Our team was assigned the set of specifications for which we must design a gearbox.
From these specs, preliminary parameters must be calculated to be used in research and selection
of parts sold by manufacturers. Most of the governing equations used to calculate these
parameters are taken from Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design textbook. These equations
will be programed into an excel calculator to allow dimensional changes in this iterative design
process. The calculations begin with the equation for the minimum pinion gear count required to
prevent interference [1]. When the closest combination of whole-number teeth above the
calculated minimum values is found, component research began in manufacturing catalogs to
determine the required diametral pitch and face width of the gear and pinion. Boston Gear’s
catalog tabulates the maximum power and torque that can be experienced by a gear of a given
tooth count and speed [2]. The material strength of these gears must exceed a safe stress in order
to prevent tooth breakage. This stress can be calculated by solving the Lewis equation for safe
stress. So long as the gears sold by the manufacturer are made of a material of greater shear
strength than the safe stress, the gear will not fail.
The shaft will require a length that supports the gear’s face width as well as their
opposing hubs. The gearbox will be symmetric, in which the gears will be aligned at the center
of the shaft. As shown in figures 15-16, the hubs will interface with the walls of the housing
while shaft steps hold the gear’s opposite face. When the necessary shaft length is found, the
bending moment must be calculated for the purpose of finding the minimum shaft diameter. The
shaft diameter is calculated first through static analysis followed by fatigue analysis. The design
specifications present the goal to conserve material; therefore, the distortion energy theory must
be employed to calculate the fatigue shaft diameter. With a minimum shaft diameter obtained,
various accessories to the shaft can be researched and selected.
Bearings on either end of each shaft will be used to allow free rotation of the shaft. They
must be able to withstand the static and dynamic loading under the operating conditions and
support an inner diameter large enough to fit the final diameter of the shaft. Lastly, a key to bind
the gear to the shaft will be selected based on the shaft diameter. The shaft along with the
appropriate key seat will be modeled in SolidWorks for FEA analysis to verify that the shaft will
not fail under the design rotation speed.
Design Specifications:
The gearbox must be designed for a light-shock input power of 3 hp at 1800 RPM, a load
factor of 1.5, and a gear ratio of 7.2 within 1% variation. The torque is expected to fluctuate by
5%. The gearbox will operate for 4000 hrs with a factor of safety of 2 and a fatigue factor of 2.5.
Fatigue calculations must be done with the objective of conserving material; therefore, distortion
energy theory must be used in this application.
Design and Analysis
Phase 1: Gears
The process began with the calculation of the minimum teeth on the pinion required for the
gearbox to operate without interference. A typical pressure angle of 20 degrees and gear factor of
1 was used for this gear.
Equation 1- Pinion teeth
The rotational speed of the gear can be found by dividing the speed of the pinion by the gear
ratio
Equation 2- Output speed
Boston Gear’s catalogs feature gears of 12 diametral pitch and the desired tooth count that
can withstand the design power
The circular pitch of the pinion and gear can then be calculated.
Equation 3- Circular pitch pinion
Equation 4- Circular pitch gear
The nearest whole number pinion available is:
This would theoretically require a gear of the following tooth count:
To propose whole number quantities of gear teeth, the pinion’s tooth count was increased to 20
teeth resulting in a gear tooth count of 144 teeth. Boston Gear offers cast iron gears of 144 teeth
for our diametral pitch of 12. Since the gear ratio was left unchanged, the variation remains at
zero percent.
% variation: 0%
A pinion of the updated tooth count was selected from a catalog in Boston gears
which recommended a face width of 1”
Figure 1(Diametral Pitch Chart)
Diametral Pitch: 12
Face Width: 1”
Addendum: a=1/12”
This information allowed us to calculate the pitch and outer diameters of the pinion and gear.
Pinion:
• Pitch diameter:
• Pitch radius:
• Outside diameter
Gear:
• Pitch diameter:
• Pitch radius:
• Outside diameter
• Nominal center distance
Transmitted torque on both shafts (to be used in shaft design calculations):
• Input shaft
RPM = 1800
63025
𝑇𝑝 = 4.5 ∗ = 157.5625 𝑖𝑛 − 𝑙𝑏
1800
• Output shaft
RPM = 250
63025
𝑇𝑔 = 4.5 ∗ = 1134.45 𝑖𝑛 − 𝑙𝑏
250
The synonymous tangential force of the gears can be found by dividing the maximum torque of
the pinion by its radius.
𝑇𝑝 159
𝐹𝑡 = = = 190.8𝑁
𝑟𝑝 . 833
The tangential force is horizontal component of the resultant load on either shaft separated by the
pitch angle, therefore:
𝐹𝑡 190.8
𝐹𝑟 = = = 203𝑁
cos(ϕ) cos(20)
The Lewis bending equation is included in Boston Gear’s Catalog
Figure 2 (Lewis Equation)
The pitch line velocity as described in Figure 2:
𝑓𝑡
𝑉 = .262 ∗ 𝐷 ∗ 𝑅𝑃𝑀 = .262 ∗ 1.666 𝑖𝑛 ∗ 1800 𝑟𝑝𝑚 = 786
𝑚𝑖𝑛
From the included table we find the tooth form factor of .32 in
Figure 3: Tooth form factor chart
The Lewis equation can then be solved for the safe stress of the gears:
The Boston Gear recommended materials of the gears exceed this safe stress in strength.
Gear
Material: Cast Iron; Bending strength: 40 kpsi
Pinion
Material: Steel; Bending strength: 50.8 kpsi
Preliminary Shaft diameter
Based on the recommended dimensions of Boston Gear’s catalog [2].
Pinion Bore = .75 in
Gear Boar = .875 in
Tolerance:
Boston gears lists a tolerance of .0005 in for all dimensions based on the hub limits.
Key style:
A square key will be used for the design
Phase 2: Bearings
Assuming the bearing loads are symmetrical, the static loading of the bearings are as
follows.
𝐹𝑟 203𝑙𝑏
𝑅1 = 𝑅2 = = = 101.5 𝑙𝑏
2 2
Pinion:
R1=101.5 lb R2=101.5 lb
Gear:
R1=101.5 lb R2=101.5 lb
Pinion Bearing:
The R12 ball bearings available on AST bearings match the bore of the selected
pinion and exceed the required static and dynamic load rating [3].
Gear Bearings:
National Precision Bearing offers R18 bearings of a suitable bore for the gear
shaft which meet our inner diameter and load requirements [4].
Figure 3 (National Precision Bearing Catalog Table for R Series Ball Bearings)
Pinion Bearings:
a. Static Load
1177 lb
b. Dynamic Load
2477 lb
c. Bore and tolerances
.75 -.0004 in
d. OD and tolerances
1.625-.0005 in
e. Width and tolerances
.2812 -.0047 in
Gear Bearings:
a. Static Load
1225 lb
b. Dynamic Load
1840 lb
c. Bore and tolerances
1.125 -.0004 in
d. OD and tolerances
2.125-.0005 in
e. Width and tolerances
.375 -.005 in
The Dynamic load factor for the given reliability can be found with the equation below.
Where 𝑎𝑓 is the load factor, 𝐹𝐷 is the load on the bearing, RD is the reliability factor, and
𝑎 = 3 for ball bearings. 𝜃, 𝑏, and 𝑥0 are the Weibull parameters recommended by the
manufacturer. 𝑥𝐷 is the product of the time life of the bearing (ℒ𝐷 ) and the rotational
speed of the shaft (𝑛𝑑 ) divided by 106 revolutions of the shaft.
Pinion:
𝑚𝑖𝑛
4000 ℎ𝑟 ∗ 1800 𝑅𝑃𝑀 ∗ 60
𝑥𝐷 = ℎ𝑟 = 432
106 𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠
432 1
𝐶10 = (1.5)(101.68)( 1 )^(3)= 1578.399 lb
.02+(4.459−.02)(1−.975)1.482
Gear:
𝑚𝑖𝑛
4000 ℎ𝑟 ∗ 250 𝑅𝑃𝑀 ∗ 60
𝑥𝐷 = ℎ𝑟 = 60
106 𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠
60 1
𝐶10 = (1.5)(101.68)( 1 )^( )= 817.40 lb
3
.02+(4.459−.02)(1−.975)1.482
Phase 3: Shaft Design
Assuming a symmetric shaft:
𝐹𝑟 203𝑙𝑏
𝑅1 = 𝑅2 = = = 101.5 𝑙𝑏
2 2
Pinion:
R1=101.5 lb R2=101.5 lb
Gear:
R1=101.5 lb R2=101.5 lb
The bearing-bearing shaft length can be estimated as the sum of the face width, total
width of the gear hub projection and a shaft step equal to the hub projection to ensure symmetry.
𝐿 = 1+1 ∗ 2 + .34 = 3.34𝑖𝑛
Bending moment diagrams for both pinion and gear shafts.
Assuming a mean moment of 0, the moment and torque parameters are:
𝐹𝑟 𝑙
𝑀𝑎 = ( )
2 2
Mm input= 0 Ma input = 169.7 lb-in
Mm output= 0 Ma output = 169.7 lb-in
Given that the torque will fluctuate at 5%:
𝑇𝑎 = 𝑇𝑚 ∗ .05
Tm input = 157.56 in-lb Ta input 7.878 in-lb
Tm output = 1134 in-lb Ta output 56.7 in-lb
The shaft concentrations can be found on table 7-1
Figure 4 (Stress Concentration Factor Table)
The stress concentration factors of an end-milled keyseat will be used. For the
preliminary shaft calculation, we must assume that the fatigue concentrations will be
synonymous with the stress concentration factors.
𝐾𝑡 = 𝐾𝑓 = 2.14 𝐾𝑡𝑠 = 𝐾𝑓𝑠 = 3
Knowing that the shaft material, AISI 1020 steel has a yield strength of 50700 psi [5] and the
load factor is said to be 1.5, the minimum shaft diameter is:
1/3
16 ∗ (𝑛) 2 1/2
𝑑=( {4 ∗ [𝐾𝑓 (𝑀𝑚 + 𝑀𝑎 )] + 3[𝐾𝑓𝑠 (𝑇𝑚 + 𝑇𝑎 )]2 } )
𝜋𝑆𝑦
𝑑𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 0.609 𝑖𝑛 → 0.75 𝑖𝑛
𝑑𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 1.077 𝑖𝑛 → 1.08 𝑖𝑛
The endurance limit of the AISI 1020 CR steel used for the shaft can be calculated with the
following piecewise function.
𝑆𝑢𝑡 = 60.9𝑘𝑝𝑠𝑖 < 200 𝑘𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝑆𝑒 ′ = .5(60.9) = 30.45 𝑘𝑝𝑠𝑖
A series of factors must be calculated to determine the true endurance stress, beginning with the
surface factor:
Figure 5 (Parameters for Marin Surface Modification: Table 6-2)
𝑘𝑎 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = .91
𝑘𝑎 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = .91
The size factor for the preliminary diameter:
𝑘𝑏 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 0.1421
𝑘𝑏 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 0.13369
For bending stress, equation 6-26 indicates a loading factor of 1.
𝑘𝑐 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 1
𝑘𝑐 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 1
Assume the temperature of the gearbox will be under 250 C to avoid oil breakdown, kd=1;
From table 6-5 we find the reliability factor for 99% reliability
Figure 6 (Reliability Factor Table)
𝑘𝑒 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = .814
𝑘𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = .814
1. The modified endurance strength as a function of the diameter becomes:
Se=ka∙kb∙kc∙kd∙ke∙Se´
𝑆𝑒 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 3.2 𝑘𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝑆𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 3.01 𝑘𝑝𝑠𝑖
The notch sensitivity can be calculated by the following equation:
1
𝑞=
√𝑎
1+
√𝑟
For the bending stress:
3
√𝑎 = 0.246 − 3.08(10−3 )𝑆𝑢𝑡 + 1.51(10−5 )𝑆𝑢𝑡 2
− 2.67(10−8 )𝑆𝑢𝑡
Therefore,
𝑞 = .536
We can then calculate the design fatigue concentration factors.
𝐾𝑡 − 1
𝐾𝑓 = 1 + = 1.61
√𝑎
1+
√𝑟
𝐾𝑡𝑠 − 1
𝐾𝑓𝑠 = 1 + = 2.07
√𝑎
1+
√𝑟
Where Kt = 2.14 and Kts=3 for the end milled keyseat.
The equation for the fatigue factor of safety in terms of the stress concentrations is:
2 2 −1/2
𝜋𝑑 3 𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑎 2 𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑎 2 𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑚 𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑚
𝑛= [4 ( ) +3 ( ) + 4( ) + 3( ) ]
16 𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑦 𝑆𝑦
Reworking the equation, we can conclude that the design value of the diameter must be:
1/3
2 2 2 2 1/2
16𝑛 𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑎 𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑎 𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑚 𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑚
𝑑={ [4 ( ) + 3( ) + 4( ) + 3( ) ] }
𝜋 𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑦 𝑆𝑦
𝑑𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 1.3" 𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 1.4"
These hole diameters can be drilled into the 1.32” and 2.5” hubs of the pinion and gear
respectively. To satisfy the fatigue factor of safety of 2.5, the shaft of the pinion and gear must
be increased to these diameters. Fortunately, both design diameters fit within the limits of the
hub diameter, allowing us to drill the necessary holes without changing the pitch diameter of the
gears. This design change does however demand bearings with larger inner diameters. AST
offers R22 and R24 bearings with the necessary inner diameters for this updated shaft.
Figure 8: Properties of larger bearings available on AST Bearings.
Both class 1 bearings fall within the same range that which AST bearings recommends the
following tolerances:
Figure 7(Tolerance Table for AST Bearings)
𝐵𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒: − 4.5 ∗ 10−4 𝑖𝑛
𝑊𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 𝑡𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒: − 48 ∗ 10−4 𝑖𝑛
Phase 4: Key Frequency
The required length of the square key used for each shaft can be calculated with the following
equation.
𝐹𝑘𝑒𝑦 𝑛
𝑆𝑦
𝐿𝑘𝑒𝑦 =
𝑊
Where 𝐹𝑘𝑒𝑦 is the tangential force enacted on the key, 𝑛 is the factor of safety, 𝑆𝑦 is the shear
yield strength of the material and 𝑊 is the key width. The force on the key is determined by the
torque divided by the radius of the fatigue shaft diameter.
Pinion:
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹𝑘𝑒𝑦 = = 240𝑙𝑏
𝑑/2
Gear:
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐹𝑘𝑒𝑦 = = 1623𝑙𝑏
𝑑/2
The key width can be estimated based on the recommendations of Boston Gear’s catalog.
Figure 8 (Boston Gear Recommended Key Dimensions)
Both the gear and pinion boars fall within the range for which a 5/16” key width is
recommended. Therefore:
Pinion:
(240𝑙𝑏)(2)
25100𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿𝑘𝑒𝑦 = = .06 𝑖𝑛
. 3125𝑖𝑛
Gear:
(1632𝑙𝑏)(2)
25100𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐿𝑘𝑒𝑦 = = .4 𝑖𝑛
. 3125𝑖𝑛
Both of these lengths fit within our hub lengths.
The final steps to complete the analysis on the input and output shafts that have been designed up
to this point is to complete a Finite Element Analysis, to confirm the calculations conducted
throughout the completion of the project, as well as to confirm that the shafts did not reach their
natural frequency through their rotation and fail.
The first two figures below indicate the mesh that was created to implement the Finite Element
Analysis, to allow the most accurate results.
Figure 9 (FEA Mesh for Input Shaft)
Figure 10 (FEA Mesh for Output Shaft)
Once the mesh for the shafts had been rendered individually, the Finite Element Analysis could
be run. From the Finite Element Analysis, it was crucial that we examined the deflection of the
shafts to ensure that they were not being pushed past their elastic limit in terms of strain. The
following deflection plots are visual representations of the deflection encountered throughout the
length of the beam.
Figure 11 FEA Deflection Plot for Input Shaft
Figure 12 FEA Deflection Plot for Output Shaft
Following the static loading Finite Element Analysis, a frequency Finite Element Analysis was
conducted to determine the Critical speeds at which the shaft would fail. This was done by
taking the frequency of the rotating shaft in Hz and converting that value in Hz to RPM to
determine if our design shaft speed would cause the shaft to spin at its natural frequency and fail.
The following two plot indicate the frequency of the shaft vs the mode number of the shaft.
Figure 13 (Plot of Input Shaft Key Frequency)
Frequency at node 1 = 7172.8 Hz
Critical speed:
7172.8 𝐻𝑧 = 45068.03152 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 = 430368.0 𝑅𝑃𝑀
Figure 14 (Plot of The Output Shaft Key Frequency)
Frequency at node 1 = 6916.85 Hz
Critical speed:
6916.85 𝐻𝑧 = 43459.85 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 = 415010.99 𝑅𝑃𝑀
Neither the input nor output speeds exceed the critical speeds estimated for them, therefore, the
shafts will not fail.
Drawings for Components and Assemblies
Below are the orthographic drawings for the shafts and their respective bearings, from AST. All
dimensions are up to date with the final calculated values, designed to withstand the
Figure 15 (Engineering Drawing of Input Shaft)
Figure 16 (Engineering Drawing of Output Shaft)
Figure 17 (Engineering Drawing of Final Input Bearing)
Figure 18 (Engineering Drawing of Final Output Bearing)
Case Design & Bolt Selection
Due to the nature of the project the design of the gear box case was of foremost importance,
however ensuring that the bolts selected would withstand the forces enacted by the shafts on the
case. To determine this we looked at the bearing reactionary loading to determine the force that
each bolt would be subjected to. It was determined that the selected bolt would be required to
withstand up to 500lbf of shear force. Using this information, the correct bolt could be selected
from a bolt load table. From the table it was determined that the bolts that would be selected
were a USS/SAE Grade 5 ¼-20 Hex-bolt.
These bolts would be placed in the eight threaded fastener locations located on the sides of the
prototype gearbox housing as shown in the figure below.
Figure 19 (Proposed Case Design)
Discussion and conclusions
The parts selected from the manufacturers’ catalogs meet all of our loading and fatigue
requirements and have bores that will fit our minimum shaft diameter. While the bores listed for
the gear and pinion on Boston Gear’s catalog are too small for our shaft diameter, these bores
can be drilled to the proper diameter provided that the shaft does not exceed the diameter of the
hub. Upon further investigation of the calculated key length, the key required to hold the gear
without failure does not exceed the gear’s face width. This means that the hubs of the pinion and
gear were not necessarily required and could have been removed. This would have reduced the
minimum shaft diameter as it would be subjected to a lower bending moment. In addition, there
were combinations of gears with less collective teeth and a ratio that satisfies the 1% variation
limit. Teeth of lower tooth count and the same diametral pitch reduces the pitch radius, which
would then reduce the minimum shaft diameter by reducing the torque brought on by the
tangential force. Our large shaft diameter demands bearings and keys designed for large shafts
which exceed our loading and fatigue requirements. Therefore, despite not being the ideal
design, our gearbox will meet the design requirements without part failure.
References:
[1] Budynas, Richard G., J. Keith Nisbett, and Joseph Edward. Shigley. 2020. Shigley's
Mechanical Engineering Design. 11th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education
[2] Spur Gears. (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2020,
from https://www.bostongear.com/products/open-gearing/stock-gears/spur-gears/spur-
gears
[3] Bearings AST. R12 R Series Ball Bearing. R12 R Series Ball Bearing | AST Bearings.
https://www.astbearings.com/catalog/precision_r_series/R12. Accessed November 25, 2020.
[4] R SERIES Extra Light Inch Ball Bearings. National Precision Bearing.
https://www.nationalprecision.com/ball-bearings/extra_light_inch.php.
[5] Online Materials Information Resource. MatWeb. http://www.matweb.com/. Accessed
November 18, 2020.
List of Figures
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 1(Diametral Pitch Chart) ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2 (Lewis Equation) .............................................................................................................. 9
Figure 3: Tooth form factor chart ................................................................................................. 10
Figure 3 (National Precision Bearing Catalog Table for R Series Ball Bearings)........................ 12
Figure 4 (Stress Concentration Factor Table) ............................................................................... 15
Figure 5 (Parameters for Marin Surface Modification: Table 6-2)............................................... 16
Figure 6 (Reliability Factor Table) ............................................................................................... 17
Figure 8: Properties of larger bearings available on AST Bearings. ............................................ 18
Figure 7(Tolerance Table for AST Bearings) ............................................................................... 19
Figure 8 (Boston Gear Recommended Key Dimensions)............................................................. 20
Figure 9 (FEA Mesh for Input Shaft) ........................................................................................... 21
Figure 10 (FEA Mesh for Output Shaft) ....................................................................................... 22
Figure 11 FEA Deflection Plot for Input Shaft ............................................................................. 22
Figure 12 FEA Deflection Plot for Output Shaft .......................................................................... 23
Figure 13 (Plot of Input Shaft Key Frequency) ............................................................................ 24
Figure 14 (Plot of The Output Shaft Key Frequency) .................................................................. 25
Figure 15 (Engineering Drawing of Input Shaft) .......................................................................... 26
Figure 16 (Engineering Drawing of Output Shaft) ....................................................................... 27
Figure 17 (Engineering Drawing of Final Input Bearing) ............................................................ 28
Figure 18 (Engineering Drawing of Final Output Bearing).......................................................... 29
Figure 19 (Proposed Case Design) ............................................................................................... 30
