Torque losses through gears due to inertia

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating torque losses in a two-gear system due to the inertia of the second gear, G2. The user presents a method to determine effective inertia and torque using gear ratios and inertia values, demonstrating calculations for both gears. They seek a formula to directly calculate effective torque without relying on moment of inertia calculations. The conversation highlights that balancing torques and solving for angular acceleration or using effective moment of inertia are the primary approaches available. Overall, the user is looking for a more streamlined method to quantify torque loss in their gear system.
ZachGriffin
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to work out a formula to calculate the amount of torque lost in a two gear system due to the acceleration the second gear. I'm assuming there is nothing lost to friction etc

For example, If I have two gears, G1 and G2, with respective inertia's of 2 and 4. G1 has 10 teeth and G2 has 80 teeth for a ratio of 8.0 or 0.125 depending on which way you are going. When looking on the G1 side, the effective inertia of the geared system can be found as:

G1's inertia + (1/(GearRatio)2) * G2's inertia

which equates to 2 + (1/(8)2) * 4 = 2 + 0.015625 * 4

So the effective inertia is 2.0625, as the high gear ratio of 8 reduces the influence of G2's inertia.

Applying 100Nm of torque to the first gear, the acceleration now becomes 100/2.0625 = 48.48

On the other side the effective inertia is equal to 4 + (1/(0.125)2) * 2
= 4 + 64 * 2
= 132

As the torque is now multiplied by the gear ratio, we have 800Nm of torque so the acceleration now becomes 800/132 = 6.06, exactly 8 times less than G1's acceleration, so the formula is correct.

What I'd like to know is how to calculate the effective torque, so for example G1 has an inertia of 2, and accelerates at 48.48 which means the effective torque was 96.96Nm. The overall loss from accelerating G2's inertia was 100 - 96.96 = 3.04Nm. On the other side, G2 has an inertia of 4 and accelerates at 6.06 which means the effective torque was 24.24Nm. The overall loss from accelerating G1's inertia was 800 - 24.24 = 775.76Nm.

I've been trying to work out a way to calculate the effective torque using the gear ratio and inertia in a formula, rather than using the effective moment of inertia calcs as above. I'm hoping somebody here knows, fingers crossed. Any help is much appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You either have to balance torques and solve for angular acceleration, or use effective moment of inertia. There isn't really a third option.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top