,<BR> I am having all the details for Bevel Gear , Can u help me to model
a<BR>bevel gear in Pro E</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<DIV>Try these people. They publish a magazine called Gear Technology.</DIV>
href="http://www.geartechnology.com/index.htm ">http://www.geartechnology.com/index.htm </A></DIV>
<DIV>One article, 6-7 years ago, was devoted to this question, with a tutorial
on gear design with Pro/e. The article was titled "Modelling Gears with
Pro/ENGINEER". I didn't find it online but they might be able to send you
<DIV>Also try AGMA. This page has a lot of related links and publications:</DIV>
href="http://www.agma.org/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutAGMA/RelatedSites/default.htm ">http://www.agma.org/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutAGMA/RelatedSites/default.htm </A></DIV>
<DIV>In general, the modeling strategy is this:</DIV>
<LI>Bevel gears are designed in sets, a pinion and driven gear, mounted
normally at right angles, so you are dealing with cones whose points meet (the
ones through the pitch circle, at any rate). As long as you know the DP and
ratio, you should be able to figure out the pitch, face and root angles.</LI>
<LI>In Pro/e, cones means revolves, which one depending on whether you
prefer additive method (base cone at root angle, build tooth on top) or
subtractive method (base cone at face angle, cut between teeth).</LI>
<LI>When one tooth or cut is created, pattern around axis of revolution (axis
<LI>Heal and toe of gear tooth are normal to pitch angle; a plane on the
tooth heal forms the sketch plane for the involute profile.</LI>
<LI>The taper of the tooth can be generated by a variable section
<DIV>The article I mentioned has a lot of helpful stuff, including how to
generate the involute profile in Pro/e. Hopefully, you are not a novice in Pro/e
because this is a serious modeling challenge. And, if you are doing this for
mechanisms and don't need the tooth geometry, there are much simpler ways of
This topic has been discussed before on this page. Check the archives on googlegroups. It has also
appeared on a couple Pro/e magazines in the past with some detailed directions. And if you Google
creo bevel gear, a lot of current references, including youtube videos, are listed.
i'm curious why you'd want to do this. Perhaps as a modeling exercise? It does require some fairly
advanced techniques. At least one of the tutorials I've seen used surfacing and equation driven
curves to generate the tooth form. If you're expecting more out of it than this, I think you'll be
disappointed. In other words, I think the effort is about as practically useful and economical as
devoting resources to modeling screw threads. And not just to see how the helical sweep feature
works, but to implement it in a business engineering environment where someone will want to know
what they're getting for their money, where is the added value, what good is it, what use!?!
I was interested in the answer to this question respecting screw threads, but 10 X more with respect
to realistic, accurate bevel gear geometry. For years, before I discovered the wonders of solid
modeling, I ran a bevel gear department, set up and operated a dozen Gleason bevel gear machine
tools which produced generated, crowned tooth bevel gear sets. And I tested them, under load, at the
proper mounting distances.
I was certainly interested in simulating all of this: assemble them in gear trains, test them under
load, calculate load dynamically at each point and see overload conditions. And, in my fevered
imagination, even envisioned simulating gear wear and failure modes. Well, in the first place, Pro/e
wasn't an adequate tool to capture even the smallest detail of gear tooth verisimilitude, e.g. tooth
crowning. And then, even if you can capture material properties, how to capture heat treating, case
hardening? And then gear deflection in a gear train? and its contribution to uneven tooth wear? How
about dynamic loading in the gear train!?! To top it off, I already knew that gear making didn't
need these model nor did gear design and the models, themselves, were inadequate for analysis. Then
I found out that Pro/e's own mechanical simulation software, Mechanica Motion, didn't need it
either. Force and torque loads were calculated based on gear ratios, diametral pitch, pitch angle,
etc and didn't require accurately modeled gear geometry. Pro/e and most other generic modeling
packages have not caught up to the science and engineering that goes into the average gear train.
Modeling them is just not worth the effort, except as a conceit - hey, look at me and the cool thing
I made. Go for it, if that's what you need, but from an engineering standpoint, Pro/e models of
gears are worthless, just as are cool, but worthless, models of screw threads.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.