Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Direct analytical solution of a modied

form of the meshing equations in two dimensions
for non-conjugate gear contact
C. Spitas
a

a,*
,

V. Spitas

Technical University of Crete, Department of Production Engineering and Management, 58 Filolaou Str., GR-11633 Athens, Greece
b
Technical University of Crete, Laboratory of Applied Mechanics, Greece
Received 1 April 2006; received in revised form 1 June 2007; accepted 4 July 2007
Available online 19 July 2007

Abstract
The current technological state-of-the-art utilises modied gear proles, which are in part non-conjugate and therefore
cannot be analysed using standard conjugate contact theory. Existing non-conjugate mathematical models require the
solution of a system of implicit equations, typically with signicant computational eort and need for careful monitoring
of solution stability, convergence and selection of initial values. This paper derives a modied form for the fundamental
gear meshing equations, which are reduced analytically to a single scalar equation, resulting in improved solution speed
and stability. The solution is veried in benchmark tests using real gear geometries.
2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Gear mesh analysis; Non-conjugate contact; Direct analytical solution

1. Introduction
According to the conventional gear theory [1] the necessary and sucient condition for uniform transmission of motion is that at any contact point between two mating gear tooth proles the common normal vector must pass through a xed point on the analysis plane called the pitch point. This is known as the law
of conjugate tooth action, or, more commonly, the law of gearing and it ensures that the mating gear proles neither lose contact or interfere with each other while rotating at constant angular velocity over time.
The law of gearing can be used successfully to predict the path of contact and the respective positions of the
mating gear teeth, assuming that the gear proles involved are in fact conjugate and therefore satisfy this
law.
Practical gear applications often deviate from the theoretical conjugate forms however either due to manufacturing errors, or to deliberate prole modications [2]. As a result conventional gear theory cannot be
*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 697 30 38 267; fax: +30 210 62 52 770.
E-mail address: cspitas@dpem.tuc.gr (C. Spitas).

0307-904X/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apm.2007.07.007

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

2163

Nomenclature
hi
hs
i12
I12
ri
fi
a12
R
^i
x

angular position of a tooth of gear i (additional subscripts: n, ref dened in the text)
slip angle
transmission ratio
directional index (equal to 1 for external gears, 1 for internal gears)
position vector of a contact point in relation to centre of gear i
vector function of tooth prole of gear i
centre distance vector
generic rotary translation matrix
unitary vector along the xi direction, where i = 1, 2, 3 (in Cartesian coordinates)

used. Mesh analysis of these non-conjugate gears is even more important than that of conjugate gears, because
in addition to the modied path of contact, the transmission errors must be determined to account for the
resulting non-uniformity in motion transmission. Such transmission errors are usually expressed as the deviation from the nominal angular gear position and their knowledge is vital for many applications, such as the
dynamical simulation of gears.
The need to analyse non-conjugate meshing has led to the development of a number of dierent analysis
techniques [37], ranging from applied mathematical to heuristic point-to-point simulation. The most wellknown and established solution is that proposed by Litvin [3]. This solution is based on a basic set of the
generalised equations for prole tangency and is presented briey in the Appendix for easy reference. In
the two-dimensional problem, these comprise a system of four implicit equations (two of which are interdependent) with three unknowns. To assure non-trivial solution hence a non-zero value of the Jacobian determinant only one of the interdependent equations must be chosen for the computation. In order to avoid an
arbitrary choice of the third independent equation and eliminate any accuracy concerns, Litvin et al. [4] later
proposed a modied version of the meshing equations, resulting in a system of three independent implicit
equations with three unknowns. However, it was observed [3] that a careful selection of initial values, or
guess values, were needed in their implementation, or the solution algorithm would not converge, terminating far from the actual solution. A way to overcome this problem was proposed [3] which was only valid in
special cases when the tooth form had been derived by a process termed local synthesis, prior to conducting
the mesh analysis. It must therefore be considered that the convergence of the solution relies completely on a
well-educated guess of the solution itself. In the case of gear forms not derived by local synthesis, i.e. real
gear forms derived from measurements or theoretical gear forms derived under dierent disciplines, Litvin
et al. [8] have proposed conducting parametric sweeps of the tooth prole, thereby locating appropriate initial values in an iterative trial and error fashion, potentially involving many calculations depending on the
parametric grid density.
Other mathematical models such as by Vogel et al. [7], Wang [5] and Koichi and Norio [6] also require the
solution of multi-equation systems and must thus be treated similar in this context.
This paper presents a new form for the equations of non-conjugate meshing, derived from a modied set of
the generalised equations for prole tangency. These new equations are treated analytically and the solution
process manages to reduce the system of three implicit equations with three unknowns to a single implicit
equation with one unknown. The other two unknowns are then calculated explicitly. Eectively, the denition
eld considered by the numerical solution is thus reduced from R3 to R. In comparison to the existing solutions this new solution can be considered explicit.
The incentive behind developing this theory was to streamline gear mesh analysis by eliminating the initial value uncertainties and potential convergence problems of solving black-box multi-equation systems
numerically, as required by previous solutions. A signicant percent increase in solution speed is also
obtained by the denition eld reduction from R3 to R for the numerical solution. This is conrmed here
in comparative mesh analysis tests on modied involute gears using the solution by Litvin et al. [4] as a
benchmark.

2164

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

2. Modelling of gear meshing geometry

2.1. Non-dimensional modelling
Given that the module is a characteristic constant in any gear pair that both gears share, it makes sense to
non-dimensionalise the geometrical analysis, so that all lengths are expressed as non-dimensional multiples of
the gear module. Non-dimensional gear mesh analysis results can therefore be used to describe a family of
geometrically similar gear pairs, instead of just a single gear pair, lending an insightful generality to the
calculations.
2.2. Formulation of the meshing equations
Let us assume a pair of gears 1, 2 and their respective teeth (correspondingly marked by indices 1, 2) in
contact as shown in Fig. 1. Assuming a non-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system the gear proles are
considered to lie on the x1x2-plane and their axes of revolution are parallel to x3-axis. The orientation of axes
x1 and x2 as well as the coordinate system origin may be chosen arbitrarily.
If gear 1 is regarded as the reference gear and conjugate gear action is assumed, then tooth 2 should occupy
a nominal angular position h2n, such that:
h1  h1ref I 12 i12 h2n  h2ref ;

where h1ref and h2ref are tooth reference positions, which can be set arbitrarily.
In fact, no conjugate requirement will be made in this analysis, so the actual position h2 of tooth 2 will deviate from the nominal h2n by an angle hs, which expresses the relative slip of the operating pitch circles of both
gears (slip angle).
h2  h2n hs :

2
1

The working part of each tooth prole is assumed to be a C continuous curve, so any contact point A should
simultaneously satisfy the following two equations:

gear 2

pitch
diameter

2 = 0

O1

r1
C

r2

2
s

2n

2 ref

1ref

1 = 0
gear 1

x1-x2 plane

pitch
diameter

Fig. 1. Gear contact geometry denitions for the derivation of the meshing equations.

O2

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

r1  r2 a12 ;
or1 or2

0;
or1 or2
!

2165

3
4
!

where r1 O1 A and r2 O2 A in the global coordinate system. Eq. (3) ensures that point A belongs to both
or1
or2
tooth proles, while Eq. (4) demands that vectors or
and or
, which are the respective prole tangents at the
1
2
contact point, are collinear, hence that the tooth proles are tangent. Therefore, Eqs. (3),(4) pose only the minimum geometric requirements for tooth contact, while allowing the relative slipping of proles in order to alor1
or2
low modelling of non-conjugate tooth action. Noticing that vectors or
and or
lie on the same plane x1x2, which
1
2
is normal to the axis of revolution x3, Eq. (4) is equivalent to


or1 or2
^3 0:

5
x
or1 or2
Eqs. (3) and (5) form the basic set of the meshing equations that will be used in this solution. At this point
the generic rotary translation matrix about axis x3 (axis of revolution) is introduced:
2
3
cos hj  sin hj 0
6
7
cos hj 0 5;
Rj 4 sin hj
0
0
1
where hj is any arbitrary rotation angle about the axis of revolution of the gear. If the prole of a tooth of gear
1 at an arbitrary reference position h1 = 0 is described by a parametric vector function f1, then the following
equations are true:
r1 f 1 ;

r1 kf 1 k;

where r1 serves as the prole function parameter and the operator k k denotes the Euclidian norm. The same
tooth prole at any other rotation angle can be expressed as:
r1 R 1 f 1 :

Similar denitions apply to the teeth of gear 2. In this case r2 is the prole function parameter so that in
general:
r2 R 2 f 2 :

Finally, substituting Eqs. (8) and (9) into Eqs. (3) and (5), it is possible to arrive at a more convenient form
of the equations of meshing as follows:
R1 f 1  R2 f 2 a12 ;




of 1
of 2
df 1
df 2
^ 3 0 ! R1
^3 0:
 R2
 R2
R1
x
x
or1
or2
dr1
dr2

10
11

These are the general equations that relate the positions of teeth 1, 2 to their shapes. Obviously, if the tooth
shapes are known in the form of functions f1 and f2, then the path of contact and the TE, if any, can be
uniquely calculated.
2.3. Solution of the meshing equations
Eq. (10) is solved in terms of R2f2 yielding:
R2 f 2 R1 f 1  a12 :

12

Making use of a fundamental property of the translation matrix we obtain:

kR2 f 2 k kf 2 k r2

13

2166

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

thereby extracting from Eq. (12) the following calculation of r2:

r2 kR1 f 1  a12 k U 1 h1 ; r1 :

14

It can be observed in Fig. 2 that vectors f2 and R2 f2 form by default an angle equal to h2, therefore




f 2  R2 f 2
1
1
1
f 2  R2 f 2 kR2 f 2 kkf 2 k cos h2 ! h2  cos
:
! h2  cos
r22 f 2  R2 f 2
kR2 f 2 kkf 2 k

15

An automatic solution process must be capable of selecting the correct sign for Eq. (15). This can be solved by
observing that


f 2  R2 f 2
^3 1;
16
x
kf 2  R 2 f 2 k
^3 is the unitary vector along the x3-axis (axis of revolution), so that Eq. (15) can be rewritten as:
where x




f 2  R2 f 2
1 1
^3 cos
f 2  R2 f 2
17
h2
x
r22
kf 2  R2 f 2 k

f 2 R 2f 2
f 2 R 2f 2

x 3

gear 2
2

R 2f 2
x 1

f2

x 2
R 2f 2
pitch
diameter

2 = 0

pitch
diameter
gear 1

Fig. 2. Proof of Eqs. (15) and (16).

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

2167

R2 is a function of h2, thereby rendering Eq. (17) implicit in terms of h2. An explicit calculation of h2 can be
made by substituting R2f2 as per Eq. (12), thereby obtaining the following expression:




f 2  R1 f 1  a12
1 1
^3 cos
f 2  R1 f 1  a12 U 2 h1 ; r1 ; r2
18
h2
x
r22
kf 2  R1 f 1  a12 k
Finally, Eq. (11) is written in scalar form:


df 1
df 2
^3 U 3 h1 ; r1 ; r2 ; h2 0:
R1
 R2
x
dr1
dr2

19

Substituting Eqs. (14) and (18) into Eq. (19) we obtain a scalar equation involving r1 only, with h1 being the
independent parameter. The solution of the meshing equations is rewritten as follows:
U 3 h1 ; r1 ; U 1 h1 ; r1 ; U 2 h1 ; r1 ; U 1 h1 ; r1 0;
r2 U 1 h1 ; r1 ;

20:1
20:2

h2 U 2 h1 ; r1 ; r2 :

20:3

Thus Eq. (20.1) can be solved in terms of r1 and subsequently Eqs. (20.2),(20.3) can be solved explicitly in
terms of r2 and h2 respectively, forming a direct parametric solution to the tooth meshing problem, with the
reference gear position h1 as the independent parameter.
The slip angle hs (transmission error) can then be calculated from h1 and h2 using Eq. (2).
2.4. Implementation of prole modications
Considering the above analysis, it is possible to obtain the function of hs for modied proles or proles
with errors. Implementing prole modications requires the input of the modied prole functions f1 and f2.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Theoretical remarks
Eq. (5) presents the condition of prole tangency in a dierent way than the standard Eq. (A2), or the modied Eq. (A5) of the Appendix. The incentive for this new formulation was to avoid the selection ambiguity of
Eq. (A2), as recognised recently by Litvin et al. [4]. It can be observed that Eqs. (5), (A5) are essentially equivalent and oer the same utility, but Eq. (5) is of simpler form.
However, the signicant contribution of the present solution is that by means of analytical manipulations it
reduces the initial system of three equations to a single equation, Eq. (20.1), eectively reducing the unknown
denition eld from R3 to R. This is translated into a direct advantage both in terms of solution speed and of
solution stability as is shown in the following benchmark test (see Table 1).
3.2. Benchmark test
A modied involute gear pair was analysed to calculate the path of contact and the function of transmission
errors using (a) the solution presented in this paper and (b) an implementation of the solution by Litvin et al.
Table 1
Dierent formulations of the prole tangency condition
Present solution, Eq. (5)


or1
or2
^
or1  or2  x3 0

Solution by Litvin [3], Eq. (A2)

or1
x3
or1 ^

or2
x3
or2 ^


 

or1   or2  0
or1 ^x3  or2 ^x3 

Improved solution by Litvin et al. [4], Eq. (A5)


 or1 ^x3
or2
or1  0
^
or2  x3  or

or11 ^x3 

2168

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

Table 2
Denition of test cases
Gear description

17-tooth pinion
51-tooth gear

Modication scheme
No modication

Maximum modication Dt = 0.10a

17n
51n

17c10
51c10

Linear thickness modication distribution assumed starting at the pitch diameter.

a
Measured as tooth half-thickness reduction along the x2-direction.

Fig. 3. Calculated tooth proles in non-dimensional coordinates for dierent tooth numbers and modication schemes.

[4]. The pair consisted of a 17-tooth 20 involute pinion and a 51-tooth 20 involute mating gear, with a transmission ratio of 3. Both unmodied (conjugate) and modied (non-conjugate) variations were analysed, as per
Table 2. The actual tooth proles are plotted in Fig. 3. The intersection points of the tooth proles to the pitch
diameters of the gears are considered to lie on the x1-axis.
Both solutions used a non-dimensional convergence tolerance of 105. Solution (a) employed a simple
Newton method as per the following equation:

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

k1
r1

k
r1


d
k
k

U 3 r1 U 3 r1 ;
dr1

2169

k 1; 2; . . . ;

21

where for each iteration the derivative was calculated numerically.

Solution (b) employed the same method as suggested by Litvin et al. [4]. The solution is as follows:
nk1 nk  J1 nk gnk ;
where
2

3
r1
6 7
n 4 r 2 5;
h2

o
or1

g1 n

6 o
J6
4 or1 g2 n
o
or1

g3 n

k 1; 2; . . . ;

o
or2

g1 n

o
oh2

o
or2

g2 n

o
oh2

g3 n

o
oh2

o
or2

g1 n

22
3

7
g2 n 7
5;

gn

g3 n

as per Eqs: A3:1; A3:2; A5 of the Appendix:

For each iteration the Jacobian matrix was calculated numerically.
Both solutions gave identical results. Fig. 4 shows the mesh analysis results obtained for unmodied gears
(case 17n/51n) and modied gears (case 17c10/51c10). The path of contact was a straight line in the case of
unmodied gears, as expected. Interestingly, the local polynomial approximation of the tooth tip singularity
allowed the prediction of corner contact, as suggested by Munro et al. [9]. As expected, an extended region of

Fig. 4. Solution of meshing equations for unmodied involute (left) and modied (right) gears as per Table 2. Path of contact, slip angle
for the modied gears and several instances of meshing pairs are shown. Angles in radians.

2170

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

Table 3
Solution requirements, non-dimensional convergence tolerance of 105

(a)
(b)
a
b

Solution description

# of scalar function
evaluations per
iteration

Average # of
iterations until
convergencea

Average # of scalar
function evaluations
until convergence

Total program run time

for a complete
mesh cycle (s)

Proposed explicit solution

Benchmark: implicit
solution by Litvin et al.

2
10

6.2
17.6

12.4
176

0.3
107.1b

Depends on tooth form and initial value estimate, calculated on the basis of 10 dierent runs excluding failures.
Including failed convergence attempts and parametric sweep for initial values.

corner contact appears around the pitch point in the case of the modied gears because of the C1 discontinuity
at the respective gear pitch circles. The path of contact is almost at in this region. The slip angle (transmission
error) prediction for the modied gear set is also shown for the modied gears. The unmodied gears yield a
prediction of zero transmission error, as expected.
Both solutions were implemented in C++ code and run on an Intel Celeron 1.5 GHz computer. The pertinent comparison data for the two solutions are shown in Table 3.
As expected, solution (a) was considerably faster. By selecting dierent initial values throughout several
trials it was established that the convergence rate, or maximum number of iterations needed, of solution
(a) was almost insensitive to the initial value input, whereas the successful convergence of solution (b)
was found to depend signicantly on the careful selection of the initial values. This conrmed the ndings
of Litvin et al. [4]. Eventually a parametric sweep method as per Litvin et al. [8] was adopted for solution
(b) to obtain suitable initial values in a heuristic manner and allow automatic and eective handling of convergence failure.
It is recognised that dierent numerical implementations of the two solutions may give dierent results. The
proposed solution (a) can be i.e. implemented using the much simpler bisecant method to solve Eq. (20.1), but
this cannot be implemented in solution (b), as the bisecant algorithm cannot negotiate systems of equations.
Interior-point methods based on the Newton method [10,11] and higher-order methods [12] can be expected to
give quicker convergence for both solutions. Litvin [3] has also recommended MINPACK-1 [13] for his implicit solution. The same algorithm can of course be applied to Eq. (20.1), but it is questionable whether the solution of a single scalar equation warrants such complexity, when its speed and convergence are already assured
by simpler means. Generally, the direct solution consumes signicantly fewer resources and can be expected to
be more stable than the implicit methods, under any numerical implementation.
4. Conclusion
A modied form for the fundamental gear meshing equations was derived, which allowed the analytical
reduction of the mathematical problem to the solution of a single scalar equation, in an eort to obtain
improved solution speed and stability. Benchmark runs conducted on real gear geometries showed that
achieved calculation times were lower than those of existing implicit solutions by an average factor of over
300. More importantly, solution was found to be stable regardless of the initial value estimates, eliminating
the need to carefully select initial values, conduct tedious parametric sweeps of the denition eld or monitor
the numerical solution algorithm itself.
Appendix
Standard tooth mesh analysis equations and solution. Adapted from Litvin [3] for current notation.
The equations of tooth contact are
r1  r2 a12 ;

A1

n1  n2 0; kn1 k kn2 k 1;

A2

C. Spitas, V. Spitas / Applied Mathematical Modelling 32 (2008) 21622171

2171

where n1, n2 are the unit normals to the tooth proles at the contact point. They can be calculated from
or1
or2
^3
^3
x
x
or1
or2



:
;
n
n1 
2

or2

or1
^
^

x

x
or


3
3
or2
1

Because r1, n1 are functions of h1, r1 and r2, n2 are functions of h2, r2, respectively and considering that all
vector components along the x3-axis are zero, Eqs. (A1) and (A2) translate into a system of 4 implicit scalar
equations with three unknowns
^1 g1 h1 ; n 0;
r1  r2  a12  x
^2 g2 h1 ; n 0;
r1  r2  a12  x
^1 g3 h1 ; n 0; or n2  x
^2 g4 h1 ; n 0;
n1  n2  x
where

r1

A3:1
A3:2
A3:3

6 7
n 4 r2 5
h2
and h1 is the parameter used in the parametric solution. A solution exists if the Jacobian determinant for the
system is dierent than zero, i.e.


o g n o g n o g n

or1 1
or2 1
oh2 1

o
g2 n o g2 n o g2 n 6 0:
A4
or2
oh2

or1

o
o
o
or g3 n or g3 n oh g3 n
1

Building on the same theory, an improved formulation for Eq. (A3.3) has been proposed by Litvin et al. [4],
substituting Eq. (A3.3) with


or2
^3  n1 g3 h1 ; n 0:
x
A5
or2
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]

[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]

E. Buckingham, Analytical Mechanics of Gears, Dover Publications Inc., New York, 1988.
D.P. Townsend, Dudleys Gear Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992.
F.L. Litvin, Gear Geometry and Applied Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Clis, NJ, 1994.
F.L. Litvin, G.I. Sheveleva, D. Vecciato, I. Gonzalez-Perez, A. Fuentes, Modied approach for tooth contact analysis of gear drives
and automatic determination of guess values, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 194 (2005) 29272946.
X.C. Wang, Third order analysis and optimal synthesis of tooth surfaces, in: Proceedings of the Seventh World Congress on Theory
of Machines and Mechanisms, Sevilla, Spain, 1987, pp. 13591362.
T. Koichi, I. Norio, Third order surface application to determine the tooth contact pattern of hypoid gears, Mechanisms,
Transmissions and Automation Design, ASME Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions and Automation in Design 108 (1986) 263
269 (Special issue).
O. Vogel, A. Griewank, G. Bar, Direct gear tooth contact analysis for hypoid bevel gears, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineering 191 (2002) 39653982.
F.L. Litvin, D. Vecciato, A. Fuentes, I. Gonzalez-Perez, Automatic determination of guess values for simulation of meshing of gear
drives, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 193 (2004) 37453758.
R. Munro, L. Morrish, D. Palmer, Gear transmission error outside the normal path of contact due to corner and top contact, Journal
of Mechanical Engineering Science 213 (1999) 389400.
J.T. Ortega, W.C. Rheinboldt, Iterative Solution of Non-linear Equations in Several Variables, Academic Press, New York, 1970.
S.J. Wright, PrimalDual Interior-Point Methods, SIAM, Philadelphia, 1997.
J.P. Dussault, High-order Newton-penalty algorithms, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 182 (2005) 117133.
J.J. More, B.S. Garbow, K.E. Hilstorm, User guide for MINPACK-1, Report ANL-80-74, Argonne National Laboratory, Argone,
IL, 1980.