B Derivation of Wheel Relationship Formulas

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving formulas for the relationships between two wheels, whether teethed or non-teethed, in three configurations: same axle, intersected in parallel, and connected by a belt. For wheels on the same axle, they share the same angular acceleration, while intersected wheels rotate in opposite directions with equal linear velocities at their intersection. When connected by a belt, the relationship mirrors that of intersected wheels. The conversation also delves into the relationship between angular velocity, radius, and the number of teeth for gears, concluding that angular acceleration is inversely related to the number of teeth. The thread emphasizes the importance of ensuring that the number of teeth per unit length is consistent for proper meshing of gears.
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 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 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 bagasme
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Back
Top