Total machine system efficiency

  • Context: Automotive 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Pinon1977
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Efficiency Mechanical
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on determining the overall efficiency of a system of gearboxes, exploring how to calculate this efficiency given individual gearbox efficiencies. Participants consider different methods of calculation and the impact of gearbox types on efficiency.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that to find the overall efficiency of a series of gearboxes, one should multiply the efficiencies rather than averaging them.
  • Another participant provides an example with 16 gearboxes, each at 90% efficiency, arguing that the actual efficiency is significantly lower due to cumulative losses.
  • There is a question about whether the type of gearbox affects efficiency, with a participant noting that different types (planetary, worm, helical) have varying efficiencies.
  • One participant mentions that a two-step reduction box is generally less efficient than a one-step reduction, despite the latter being heavier for the same power ratio.
  • Discussion includes the impact of bearings on efficiency, particularly under side forces, and how planetary gears can mitigate these forces.
  • Another participant raises the inefficiency of worm gears when driven backwards, suggesting that gearbox design influences overall performance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how to calculate overall efficiency, with some advocating for multiplication of efficiencies and others suggesting averaging. There is also no consensus on the impact of gearbox type on efficiency, as various factors are discussed without agreement.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention assumptions about gearbox types and their efficiencies, but do not provide a unified definition or framework for these calculations. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of efficiency metrics.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in mechanical engineering, particularly those focused on gearbox design and efficiency calculations, may find this discussion relevant.

Pinon1977
Messages
126
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
Trying to determine the total efficiency of a system of gearboxes within a larger machine system
Please see the attached sketch. Basically I have a system of three gear boxes, each with their own respective efficiencies. I'm trying to determine, at the end of this string of gearboxes, what the overall efficiency is. How might one go about determining this? Do you just take the average? 70 + 80 + 90 / 3?
IMG_20230622_190057704_HDR.jpg
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I'm no expert on gearboxes, but for most systems you would multiply the efficiencies of the series systems to get the overall efficiency. So 0.7 x 0.8 x 0.9 = ?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pinon1977, Baluncore, Bystander and 1 other person
Consider a line of 16 gearboxes, each with an efficiency of 90%. The average efficiency would be 90%. But energy must pass through each gearbox in turn to reach the next, with a loss at each step.
In reality, the efficiency would be;
0.9016 = 0.1853 = 18.5%.
 
Baluncore said:
Consider a line of 16 gearboxes, each with an efficiency of 90%. The average efficiency would be 90%. But energy must pass through each gearbox in turn to reach the next, with a loss at each step.
In reality, the efficiency would be;
0.9016 = 0.1853 = 18.5%.

Wow!!!! That's not the explanation I was expecting, but it make sense to a certain degree.

Does it matter what kind of gearbox it is? Planetary vs worm gear vs helical, etc? I was loosely presuming that there would be some sort of gearbox constant or multiplier (depending upon the type of gearbox being used).
 
Pinon1977 said:
Does it matter what kind of gearbox it is? Planetary vs worm gear vs helical, etc?
Different types of gearboxes have different energy efficiencies.

Generally, a two-step reduction box is less efficient than a one-step reduction, but the one-step reduction weighs more for the same ratio and power.

The bearings used inside the gearbox make a big difference as they are subjected to significant side forces on the shafts.

Planetary gears can cancel side forces on the shafts, so are often more efficient.

The ease of driving a gearbox backwards has efficiency implications. A worm gear is very inefficient when driven backwards.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
58
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K