Derivation of Wheel Relationship Formulas

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This thread discusses the derivation of formulas relating to the interactions between two wheels, both teethed (gears) and non-teethed. The focus is on three specific cases: wheels on the same axle, wheels intersected in parallel, and wheels connected by a belt. Participants explore the relationships between angular velocity, radius, and the number of teeth in the context of these cases.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines the relationships for wheels on the same axle, noting that they share the same angular acceleration and provides equations for linear velocity.
  • Another participant points out that assuming equal radius for two geared wheels leads to trivial conclusions, suggesting that the number of teeth per unit length must be the same for proper meshing.
  • A participant corrects a previous statement regarding angular acceleration, indicating that angular velocity was intended instead.
  • Further clarification is provided on the cancellation of terms in equations, with emphasis on the implications of the number of teeth in the derivation of relationships.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the derivation process, suggesting that the equations presented do not adequately address the relationships when the number of teeth is not equal.
  • Another participant reiterates the importance of the number of teeth per unit length for the gears to mesh correctly, urging a reconsideration of the derivation approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the assumptions made in the derivations, particularly regarding the equality of radii and the implications of the number of teeth. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the correct approach to the derivation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding the equality of radii and the implications of the number of teeth, which have not been fully resolved in the discussion.

bagasme
Messages
79
Reaction score
9
Hello,

Here in this thread I will derive formulas for relation between two wheels, either teethed (e.g. gears) or non-teethed.

In wheel relationship, we have three cases:
  1. Two wheels at the same axle
  2. Two wheels intersected in parallel (meshed)
  3. Two wheels connected by a belt
We will examine each cases above on smooth (non-teethed) wheels first.

1. At the same axle

1582613635901.png


Figure 1 (source: fisikabc.com) shows two wheels connected to the same axle. Since both ##A## and ##B## are on same center, they have same angular accelleration:

$$\begin{align}
\omega_A & = \omega_B \nonumber \\
\frac {v_A} {r_A} & = \frac {v_B} {r_B} ~ (1)\nonumber
\end{align}$$

2. Intersected in Parallel

1582615070140.png


Figure 2 (source: fisikabc.com) show two wheels intersected each other in parallel. When wheel ##A## rotated counter-clockwise, wheel ##B## rotated clockwise, and vice versa. At the intersection point between two wheels, linear velocity of both wheels directed at the same direction, so:

$$\begin{align}
v_A & = v_B \nonumber \\
\omega_A \cdot r_A &= \omega_B \cdot r_B ~ (2)\nonumber
\end{align}$$

3. Connected by Belt

1582615692073.png


Figure 3 (source: fisikabc.com) shows two wheels connected by a belt. As wheel ##B## rotated, the belt rotated wheel ##A## at the same linear velocity direction as wheel ##B##. Thus the formula is same as when both wheels intersected directly (2).

Relationship Involving Teethed Wheels (e.g. Gears)

We will now deriving equations that relate between angular velocity, radius, and number of teeth. ##N_A## and ##N_B## are number of teeth of wheel A and B, respectively.

From equation (2):

$$\begin{align}
\omega_A \cdot r_A & = \omega_B \cdot r_B \nonumber \\
\frac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_A} {t} & = \frac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_B} {t} \nonumber \\
r_A &= r_B \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {n_A} &= \frac {r_B} {n_B} \nonumber \\
r_A \cdot N_B &= r_B \cdot N_A \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {r_B} &= \frac {N_A} {N_B} ~ (3) \nonumber
\end{align}$$

Combining equation (2) and (3):

$$\begin{align}
\omega_A \cdot r_A & = \omega_B \cdot r_B \nonumber \\
\frac {\omega_A} {\omega_B} &= \frac {r_B} {r_A} \nonumber \\
\frac {\omega_A} {\omega_B} &= \frac {N_B} {N_A} \nonumber \\
\end{align}$$

We can conclude that angular accelleration is related to radius, but inverse related to number of teeth.

I hope that this thread will be useful. Please let me know any flaws and suggestions.

Cheers, Bagas
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you say ##\dfrac{2\pi r_A}{t}=\dfrac{2\pi r_B}{t}##, you are assuming that the two geared wheels have the same radius. This means that ##N_A=N_B## and ##\omega_A=\omega_B##. Not an interesting case. What you want to say is that the number of teeth per unit length in A must be the same as in B otherwise the teeth will not mesh.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
bagasme said:
... Figure 1 (source: fisikabc.com) shows two wheels connected to the same axle. Since both ##A## and ##B## are on same center, they have same angular acceleration velocity:

...

We can conclude that angular accelleration velocity is related to radius, but inverse related to number of teeth.

I hope that this thread will be useful. Please let me know any flaws and suggestions.
Thank you, Bagas.
I believe you meant angular velocity in both cases.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bagasme
kuruman said:
When you say ##\dfrac{2\pi r_A}{t}=\dfrac{2\pi r_B}{t}##, you are assuming that the two geared wheels have the same radius. This means that ##N_A=N_B## and ##\omega_A=\omega_B##. Not an interesting case. What you want to say is that the number of teeth per unit length in A must be the same as in B otherwise the teeth will not mesh.

What I mean was cancelling ##\frac {2\pi} {t}## from both sides, so ##r_A## is not necessarily same as ##r_B##.
 
Since I can't edit my first post here, let me update derivation of (3).

From equation (2), we divide each sides by number of teeth of each wheels:

$$\begin{align}
\omega_A \cdot r_A &= \omega_B \cdot r_B \nonumber \\
\frac {\omega_A \cdot r_A} {N_A} &= \frac {\omega_B \cdot r_B} {N_B} \nonumber \\
\dfrac {\dfrac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_A} {t}} {N_A} &= \dfrac {\dfrac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_B} {t}} {N_B} \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {N_A} &= \frac {r_B} {n_B} ~(\text {cancel} ~ \dfrac {2 \cdot \pi} {t} ~ \text {on both sides}) \nonumber \\
r_A \cdot N_B &= r_B \cdot N_A \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {r_B} &= \frac {N_A} {N_B} ~ (3) \nonumber \\
\end{align}$$
 
bagasme said:
Since I can't edit my first post here, let me update derivation of (3).

From equation (2), we divide each sides by number of teeth of each wheels:

$$\begin{align}
\omega_A \cdot r_A &= \omega_B \cdot r_B \nonumber \\
\frac {\omega_A \cdot r_A} {N_A} &= \frac {\omega_B \cdot r_B} {N_B} \nonumber \\
\dfrac {\dfrac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_A} {t}} {N_A} &= \dfrac {\dfrac {2 \cdot \pi \cdot r_B} {t}} {N_B} \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {N_A} &= \frac {r_B} {n_B} ~(\text {cancel} ~ \dfrac {2 \cdot \pi} {t} ~ \text {on both sides}) \nonumber \\
r_A \cdot N_B &= r_B \cdot N_A \nonumber \\
\frac {r_A} {r_B} &= \frac {N_A} {N_B} ~ (3) \nonumber \\
\end{align}$$
Not better. Look at the second equation. You get it from the first by dividing the left side by ##N_A## and the right side by ##N_B##. That's OK as long as ##N_A=N_B## which means that equation (3) says ##\dfrac{r_A}{r_B}=1##. You have all the pieces but you are not sure how to put them together and you are going around in circles. You did not pay attention to what I suggested in post #2: What you want to say is that the number of teeth per unit length in A must be the same as in B otherwise the teeth will not mesh. Start from there.
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: bagasme

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
67
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K