Automotive Total machine system efficiency

Click For Summary
To determine the overall efficiency of a system with multiple gearboxes, one should multiply the efficiencies of each gearbox rather than averaging them. For example, three gearboxes with efficiencies of 70%, 80%, and 90% yield an overall efficiency of 0.7 x 0.8 x 0.9, resulting in a significantly lower efficiency than the average. The type of gearbox affects efficiency, with planetary gears generally being more efficient due to their ability to cancel side forces, while worm gears are less efficient, especially when driven in reverse. Additionally, the design and bearing quality within the gearbox can impact overall performance. Understanding these factors is crucial for accurately assessing system efficiency.
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 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.
 
My idea is that I want to use immerse Whitetail Antlers in a fishtank to measure their volumetric displacement (the Boone and Crockett system is the current record measurement standard to place in a juxtaposition with) I would use some sight glass plumbed into the side of the tank to get the change in height so that I can multiply by the tank cross-section. Simple Idea. But... Is there a simple mechanical way to amplify the height in the sight glass to increase measurement precision...

Similar threads

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