Page |1

Aero-Engine Speed Reducer Gearbox

Mechanical Design B
Group 30

Group Members Student ID

Amirul Haziq bin Zaidi 1959760
Musa Ejaz 1700724
Muhammad Moiz 1677274
Jun Tat Wong 1960955
Date: 29/03/2019
 Page |2

1. Product Design Specification

Performance  To transmit energy from engine to propeller

 To reduce speed from 45hp @ 6500 rpm to 2000 rpm.
 Should withstand high work force during flights
Economy  The product needs to sustain a long life and has to have the ability to
withstand high work rate which means the materials used are not
going to be cheap.
Service life  The planned lifespan for the speed reducer is 2000 hours with
addition of 200 hours on maximum speed. Total of 2200 hours.
Environment  The input will be connected to an engine which produces power and
the output will be connected to a propeller.
Size  The whole of the gearbox (including the casing) should be small and
compact.
Maintenance  Scheduled maintenance should be regular
 Gearbox should be properly sealed and lubricated
Lifespan  The lifespan of the gearbox should last up to 2200 hours. (2000 hours
in maximum cruise and another 200 hours in maximum power)
Material  Gears
-The material chosen was any high-grade steel. EN39 S:CH for pinion
and EN32 mild for wheel.
-Should not corrode due to being lubricated
 Casing
-Thin and light but also strong to withstand high work rate and heat
 Shaft
-High stiffness to avoid high deflection
-Shafts should be designed for infinite fatigue life
 Bearings
-Should operate in high speed and can withstand high loads
Appearance & Ergonomics  Gears should be safe to handle for easy handling
 Surface of the gears are smooth
 Ease of assembly
Design time  This project was handed out at the start of the second term and
expected to be completed within 9 weeks.
Production  200 units produced per year
 Production would not be cheap, but quality will be assured.
Table 1 Product design specification.
 Page |3

2. Gear Specification
Design of the speed reducer was determined by using GP100 software. Spur gear selected was based
on the gear ratio produced using the required speeds and power specified in the product design
specification. Equation 1 was used to calculate the gear ratio of the gearbox.

𝑃𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 6500 Eq.1

𝑮𝒆𝒂𝒓 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐 = = = 3.25
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 2000

Figure 1 Design results generated by GP100.

Figure 2 Design details generated by GP100.

The pinion gear rotates approximately 3 times more than the wheel as shown by equation 1. This was
taken into consideration during selection of material. Selected material for the pinion was harden
steel EN39 and for the wheel mild steel EN32.
 Page |4

3. Shaft Design
Shear Force and Bending Moments
Parameter Pinion (Input) Wheel (Output)
Tangential force, 𝐹𝑥 -2347 N 2347 N
Radial force, 𝐹𝑦 -1008 N 1008 N
Torque, T -49.28 N.m 157.24 N.m
Table 2 Parameter calculated from GP100.

The axial load on wheel shaft due to propeller thrust was calculated using the equation 2.
𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 37285 Eq.2
𝑭𝒂𝒙𝒊𝒂𝒍 = 𝐹𝑧 = = = 883.5 𝑁
𝑉𝑎𝑖𝑟 42.2

Where: 𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = Maximum engine power, 𝑉𝑎𝑖𝑟 = Air speed

Tangential and radial force from GP100 in table 2 were used to calculate total force on pinion shaft.
The axial load calculated from equation 2 was also added to calculate the total force on wheel shaft.
For simplification, the weight of the gear was neglected in all calculations. Gear was assumed to be in
the middle of the shaft to enable maximum shear force and moment to be calculated. Resultant force
given in table 3 was calculated by summation of all forces in all directions given by equation 3.
Eq.3
𝑭𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 = √(𝐹𝑥 )2 + (𝐹𝑦 )2 + (𝐹𝑧 )2
Pinion Shaft Wheel Shaft
Axial load,𝐹𝑧 = 0 N Axial load,𝐹𝑧 = 883.5 N
𝑭𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 = √(𝐹𝑥 )2 + (𝐹𝑦 )2 = 2554.30 𝑁 𝑭𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 = √(𝐹𝑥 )2 + (𝐹𝑦 )2 + (𝐹𝑧 )2 = 2702.8 𝑁
Table 3 Resultant forces acting on both shafts.

Resultant force and Torque from table 2 were used in calculation of reaction forces, shear forces and
bending moment acting on the shafts. Free body, shear force and bending moment diagrams were
produced for both shafts due to different loading.

Figure 3 Free body diagram of the shaft with gear in middle from the bearings.

The shaft section between the bearings (0.064 m) was modelled with point loads of 2554.3 N and
2702.8 N in the middle (0.032 m) shown in figure 3. Using moments about (a) and static equilibrium
conditions, the reaction forces on 𝑅𝑏 were calculated as given below.

Pinion Shaft 2554.3 × 0.032 = 𝑅𝑏 × 0.064 ; 𝑅𝑏 = 1277.2 𝑁 = 𝑅𝑎

Wheel Shaft 2702.8 × 0.032 = 𝑅𝑏 × 0.064 ; 𝑅𝑏 = 1351.4 𝑁 = 𝑅𝑎

Both reactions were at 0.032 m (middle) from gear. Hence𝑅𝑎 = 𝑅𝑏 . Moment given by equation 4.

𝑴 = 𝑓𝑑 Eq.4
Where: 𝑓=Reaction Force (N) and 𝑑= distance from bearing to gear (m)
𝑴𝒑𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 1277.2 × 0.032 = 40.86 𝑁. 𝑚 𝑴𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒆𝒍 = 1351.4 × 0.032 = 43.24 𝑁. 𝑚

Both shear force and maximum bending moment seemed reasonable for the given assumptions and
length of the shaft chosen. Shear force and maximum moment for the shafts shown in figure 4 and 5.
 Page |5

Figure 4 Pinion shaft shear force (left) and maximum bending moment (right).

Figure 5 Wheel shaft shear force (left) and maximum bending moment (right).

Shaft Material Selection

CES Edu pack was used to select the material required for shaft. The selected material was Low alloy
steel AISI 51B60, tempered at 425°C and oil quenched. Commonly used in high tensile applications
and suitable for cyclic loading. Properties of the selected material given in table 4.
Property Value
Yield strength, 𝑆𝑦 1.34 GPa
Young’s modulus, 𝐸 201GPa
Ultimate tensile strength 1.47 GPa
Shear modulus 83 GPa
Fatigue (10^cycles) 0.559 GPa
Table 4 properties of shaft material selected: Low alloy steel AISI 51B60, tempered at 425°C and oil quenched.

Minimum Shaft Diameter

The Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSST) was used to calculate the minimum required diameter of
step-down shafts in table 5. The factor of safety was assumed to be 3 with the assumption of steady
loading action. Torque generated by pinion and the wheel from GP100, and moment calculated above
were used to calculate the minimum shaft diameter calculation given by equation 5.
1 Eq.5
32𝑓𝑠 2 2
3
𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏 = ( √𝑀 + 𝑇 )
𝜋𝑆𝑦
Where; 𝑓𝑠 =factor of safety, 𝑆𝑦 = Yield strength of material, M= Max bending moment, T= Torque
Pinion shaft Wheel shaft
1 1
32 × 3 3 32 × 3 3
𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏 =( √40.872 + 49.282 ) 𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏 =( √43.242 + 157.242 )
𝜋(1.34 × 109 ) 9
𝜋(1.34 × 10 )
= 11.34 𝑚𝑚 = 15.49 𝑚𝑚
Table 5 Minimum diameter of Pinion and Wheel shaft.

The minimum shaft diameter was chosen to be 22 mm for both shafts after consideration of
limitations and assumptions that shaft is simple with constant diameter. This was proved to be
sufficient in fatigue section [8].
 Page |6

Linear and Torsional Deflection

Theoretical calculation of the maximum linear and torsional deflection were critical in verifying the
suitable chosen diameter under the expected loading conditions. Shafts were assumed to be in steady
static state to determine the following. The material and distance between bearings were identical
for the shaft calculations. Maximum linear deflection in table 6 was calculated by equation 6.
𝑃𝐿3 Eq.6
𝜹𝒎𝒂𝒙 =
48𝐸𝐼
𝜋𝑑 4
Where; P= Resultant load (N), L= Distance between bearings (m), E=Young’s modulus,𝐼 = ‘d’ is
64
selected diameter.
Pinion shaft Wheel shaft
2554.30 × 0.0643 2702.8 × 0.0643
𝜹𝒎𝒂𝒙 = 𝜹 𝒎𝒂𝒙 =
𝜋0.0224 𝜋0.0224
48(201 × 109 )( 64 ) 48(201 × 109 )( 64 )
= 6.04 × 10−6 𝑚 = 6.39 × 10−6 𝑚
Table 6 Maximum deflection of both shafts.

Maximum deflection in the middle of beam for the chosen diameter was negligible as shown above.
The maximum torsional deflection calculation assumed that the shaft had uniform circular cross
section with homogeneous material and torsion applied was constant throughout the length.
Maximum Torsional deflection in table 7 was calculated using equation 7.

𝑇𝐿 Eq.7
𝜽𝒎𝒂𝒙 =
𝐺𝐽
𝜋𝑑 4
Where; G=Shear modulus, 𝐽 =
32

Pinion shaft Wheel shaft

49.28 × 0.064 157.24 × 0.064
𝜽𝒎𝒂𝒙 = = 0.00178𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝜽𝒎𝒂𝒙 = = 0.00527𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑠
𝜋0.0224 𝜋0.0224
(83 × 109 )( 32 ) (83 × 109 )( 32 )

Table 7 Maximum torsional defection of both shafts.

The twists caused by the pinion on the shaft w 1.04° and 2.91 ° by the wheel per metre. In both cases
the twist on the shaft did not exceed by 3° per metre, hence the chosen diameter of the shaft was
acceptable for the use at initial loading conditions [8].
Critical Shaft speed
The critical shaft speed (𝜂𝑐 ) in table 8 was calculated using the Rayleigh-Ritz method given by equation
8.Only the mass of the shaft and total resultant force acting on both shafts were used.
30 𝑔 Eq.8
𝜼𝒄 = √
𝜋 𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥
Where; 𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 = linear deflection of the shaft of pinion and wheel shafts.

Pinion shaft Wheel shaft

30 𝑔 30 𝑔
𝜼𝒄 = √ = 12174 𝑟𝑝𝑚 𝜼𝒄 = √ = 11835 𝑟𝑝𝑚
𝜋 6.04 × 10−6 𝑚 𝜋 6.39 × 10−6 𝑚
Table 8 Critical speed for both shafts.

According to Ritz, the maximum operational speed of the shaft must remain under 75% of the
theoretical critical speed. The maximum operational speed of pinion shaft ‘6500 rpm’ and the wheel
shaft ‘2037 rpm’ were 53.4% and 17.2 % of the critical speed. Both were under 75% limit hence no
change was made to diameter. To save manufacturing costs, both shafts had identical diameters [10].
 Page |7

Shaft Fatigue Analysis

A more accurate fatigue analysis was performed by using the working endurance strength (𝑆𝑒, ) relative
to endurance strength (𝑆𝑒 ) [7] to analyse the shaft fatigue by equation 9 with parameters shown in
table 9.
𝑺,𝒆 = 𝑘𝑎 𝑘𝑏 𝑘𝑐 𝑘𝑑 𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚 𝑆𝑒 Eq.9

Assuming the notch sensitivity q=1 for worst case to ensure a safer design; hence𝑘𝑓 = 𝑘𝑡 ,
𝑘𝑡𝑠 = 𝑘𝑓𝑠 𝑘𝑡 = bending concentration factor, 𝑘𝑡𝑠 = shear stress concentration factor.

𝐷 𝑟
= 1.27 and = 0.0625
𝑑 𝑑

Where: 𝐷= shaft diameter at gear, 𝑟= the shoulder fillet radius, 𝑑= minimum shaft diameter Shigley’s
handbook was used to obtain the value of 𝑘𝑡 and𝑘𝑡𝑠 .

Shaft D(mm) d(mm) r(mm) 𝑴𝒂 (𝑵𝒎) 𝑻𝒂 (𝑵𝒎) 𝑲𝒇 𝑲𝒇𝒔

Pinion 28 22 1 40.87 49.28 1.60 1.32
Wheel 28 22 1 43.24 157.24 1.60 1.32

Variable Value Source

Surface finish,𝐾𝑎 0.9 Surface factor/Tensile strength plot
Size factor,𝐾𝑏 0.903 Size factor/specimen diameter plot
Reliability factor,𝐾𝑐 0.814 Reliability factor table at 99%
Temperature factor, 𝐾𝑑 1.02 Elevated temperature range
Stress concentration modifying factor, 𝐾𝑒 0.63 Notch sensitivity/Notch radius plot
Miscellaneous effect factor, 𝐾𝑚 1 None as 𝐾𝑓 =1
Endurance strength, 𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑒 = 0.5𝑆𝑢 Where 𝑆𝑒 ≤ 1400 𝑀𝑃𝑎
Ultimate tensile strength, 𝑆𝑢 1.47 GPa Low alloy steel AISI 51B60
Pinion shaft 𝑆𝑒, = 0.9 × 0.903 × 0.814 × 1.02 × 0.63 × 1 × 735 = 312.5 𝑀𝑃𝑎
Wheel shaft 𝑆𝑒, = 0.9 × 0.903 × 0.814 × 1.02 × 0.63 × 1 × 735 = 312.5 𝑀𝑃𝑎
Table 9 Working endurance strength parameters and calculated values.

The fatigue failure of the shaft was analysed using the Soderberg failure criteria to calculate minimum
factor of safety shaft at previously selected diameter given by the equation 10.

1 16 1 2 2 1/2 1 2 2 1/2 Eq.10

= 3 { [4(𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑎 ) + 3(𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑎 ) ] + [4(𝐾𝑓 𝑀𝑚 ) + 3(𝐾𝑓𝑠 𝑇𝑚 ) ] }
𝒏 𝜋𝑑 𝑆′𝑒 𝑆𝑦

Where: n= fatigue factor of safety, d= diameter of the shaft at gear,𝑘𝑓 fatigue-stress concentration
factor, 𝑘𝑓𝑠 =fatigue shear stress-concentration factor.
Assuming no bending and torsion for rotating shaft hence 𝑀𝑚 and 𝑇𝑎 = 0.

−1
Pinion 16 1 2 ]1/2
1 2 ]1/2
( { [4(1.6 × 40.87) + [3(1.32 × 49.3) }) = 4.16
𝜋(0.022)3 312.5 × 106 1.34 × 109
−1
Wheel 16 1 2 ]1/2
1 2 ]1/2
( { [4(1.6 × 43.24) + [3(1.32 × 157) }) = 3.31
𝜋(0.022)3 312.5 × 106 1.34 × 109
Table 10 Factor of safety for both shaft from Soderberg criteria.

From table 10, the values were greater than the selected factor of safety 3, hence no changes were
required as no fatigue failure would occur during the life cycle, and shafts were safe to use with the
selected diameter and material [9].
 Page |8

4. Bearing Specification
Basic Life Rating
The basic life rating in table 11 calculated by equation 11 enabled the total operational life in hours to
be calculated which supported the selection for the bearing.

𝐿10ℎ × 60 × 𝑁 Eq.11
𝐿10 =
106
Where: 𝐿10 = basic life rating at 90% reliability (revolution in millions),
𝐿10ℎ = life rating in hours,
𝑁= required speed (rpm)

Pinion Shaft Wheel Shaft

2200 × 60 × 6500 2200 × 60 × 2037
= = 858 𝑀 𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑠 = = 269 𝑀 𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑠
106 106
Table 11 Life rating of bearings for both shafts.

Equivalent Dynamic Bearing Load

The “equivalent bearing load”, P for both shafts was used in the rating life formula, needs to be
calculated first. The equation 12 and 13 shows how to calculate P for both shafts.

𝑃𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑋𝐹𝑟 = 1.3 × 1351.4 = 1.76 𝑘𝑁 Eq.12

𝑃𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙 = 𝑋𝐹𝑟 + 𝑌𝐹𝑎 = 1.3 × 1351.4 + 0.56 × 883.5 = 2.25 𝑘𝑁 Eq.13

Where: X for ball bearing = radial load factor = 1.3, Y = axial load factor = 0.56 [7]
𝐹𝑟 = radial force = 1351.4 N, 𝐹𝑎 = axial force = 883.5 N
Dynamic Load Rating
After calculating P from the above equation, the respective numbers were put in Bearing Life Equation
to find C and after that bearing was chosen. Equation 14 was used to calculate the dynamic load rating
‘C’ which is used in bearing selection given in table 12.
𝑝
106 𝑪 Eq.14
𝐿10ℎ = ( )
60 𝑥 𝑛 𝑃
Where: L10h = Bearing life rating, hours
N = rotational speed, rpm
P = equivalent dynamic bearing load or Static Load, N
10
𝑝 = exponent for the life equation, 3 for ball bearings, 3
for roller bearings
C = Dynamic Load Rating, N

Pinion Shaft Wheel Shaft

6 3 3
10 𝐶 106 𝐶
2200 = ( ) 2200 = ( )
60 𝑥 6500 1756 60 𝑥 2037 2250
𝑪𝒑𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 16.7 𝑘𝑁 𝑪𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒆𝒍 = 14.5 𝑘𝑁
Table 12 Dynamic load rating of bearings for both shafts.

Deep groove ball bearing was used because they can operate at high speeds and can carry high radial
load. Deep groove ball bearings “4303 ATN9” in figure 6 and “62/28” in figure 7 were selected from
SKF’s catalogue as the selected bearings can carry dynamic load ratings of 19.5 kN and 16.8 KN which
were more than 16.7 kN and 14.5 kN. As pinion and wheel shafts are step down shafts, the “4303
 Page |9

ATN9” bearing would be fitted on the smaller diameter ends of both shafts. And “62/28” bearing
would be fitted on the bigger diameter ends of both shafts.

Figure 6: Bearing specifications for 4303 ATN9Error! Reference source not found. [1].

Figure 7: Bearing specifications for 28 mm diameter shaft [2].

 P a g e | 10

5. Torque Transmission Coupling

Method
For the torque to be transmitted from the shaft to the gear with minimal loss, a spline was preferred
to a key coupling as it can accommodate high torque transmission with lower stresses on the gear and
provide a better fit. Initially straight tooth spline with 6 spline tooth was selected to match the number
of splines specified in the brief. The process of selecting the tooth type and diameter is iterative and
dependant on the torque transmission requirement of the shaft [7].
Sizing (Spline Geometry)
For high torque transmission spline geometry was selected to couple the gears on to the pinion and
wheel shaft with same major diameter (D) = 22mm using figure 7.

Figure 7 Straight sided spline ISO 14-1982 [3].

Stress rating
The minimum spline length required to couple the gears on to the pinion and the wheel shaft was
required to withstand both the shear and compression failure. This was calculated given by table 13.

Minimum length against Shear failure Minimum length against compression failure
The equation below must be satisfied to avoid The equation below must be satisfied to avoid
failure due to shear failure due to compression
0.5𝑆𝑦 2𝑇 𝑆𝑦 2𝑇
𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 ≤ , 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 = 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 ≤ , 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 =
𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷𝑊𝐿 𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷ℎ𝐿
0.5𝑆𝑦 2𝑇 𝑆𝑦 4𝑇
= =
𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷𝑊𝐿 𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷ℎ𝐿
Rearrange for L Rearrange for L
2𝑇𝑓𝑠 4𝑇𝑓𝑠
𝑳= 𝑳=
𝑁 × 𝐷 × 𝑊 × 0.5𝑆𝑦 𝑁 × 𝐷 × ℎ × 𝑆𝑦

Pinion Shaft Pinion Shaft

T=49.28 N.m T=49.28 N.m
2×49.28×3 4×49.28×3
= 6×0.022×0.006×0.5×1.34×109=0.56 mm = 6×0.022×0.002×1.34×109=1.67 mm

Wheel Shaft Wheel Shaft

T=157.24 N.m T=157.24 N.m

2×157.24×3 4×157.24×3
= 6×0.022×0.006×0.5×1.34×106=1.78 mm = 6×0.022×0.002×1.34×109=5.54 mm

Table 13 Minimum spline length for the pinion and wheel shaft.
 P a g e | 11

The effect of compression failure was greater than the effect of the shear failure. The calculated
minimum length seemed low due to high yield strength of the selected material. The length of the
spline for pinion and the wheel shaft was selected to be (37 mm) to account for the combined length
of gear face width (26 mm) and spacer width (11 mm) above to ensure safety.

Sizing (Spline Geometry)

For high torque transmission to be more efficient between the input engine shaft and output pinion
shaft, a female spline sleeve coupler was selected to match engine shaft specification shown in table
14.

Parameter Input Engine Shaft Output Pinion Female Sleeve

(given) Shaft Coupler
Outside diameter (D) 40 mm 40 mm 40 mm
Inside diameter (d) 36 mm 36 mm 36 mm
Width (w) 10 mm 10 mm 10 mm
Height (h) 2 mm 2 mm 2 mm
Table 14 Maximum dimension of spline on the output shaft.

Stress rating
To prevent failure in spline keys due to shear across the shaft/hub interface or due to compression
failure induced by the bearing action the sides of the keys, it was essential to select a spline length
that can withstand different types of stresses. The chosen material of female spline coupler was
identical to shaft material with yield strength (𝑆𝑦 = 1.34 GPa). This played critical role in determining
the minimum length of the splines. Minimum spline length to prevent shear and compression failure
given in table 15.

Minimum length against Shear failure Minimum length against compression failure
The equation below must be satisfied to avoid The equation below must be satisfied to avoid
failure due to shear failure due to compression
0.5𝑆𝑦 2𝑇 𝑆𝑦 2𝑇
𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 ≤ , 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 = 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 ≤ , 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 =
𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷𝑊𝐿 𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷ℎ𝐿
0.5𝑆𝑦 2𝑇 𝑆𝑦 4𝑇
= =
𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷𝑊𝐿 𝑓𝑠 𝑁𝐷ℎ𝐿
Rearrange for L Rearrange for L
Where Engine Torque ,T = 43.3 Where Engine Torque ,T = 43.3

2𝑇𝑓𝑠 4𝑇𝑓𝑠
𝑳= 𝑳=
𝑁 × 𝐷 × 𝑊 × 0.5𝑆𝑦 𝑁 × 𝐷 × ℎ × 𝑆𝑦

2×43.3×3 4×43.3×3
= 6×0.040×0.010×0.5×1.34×106=0.16 mm = 6×0.040×0.002×1.34×106=0.81 mm

Table 15 Minimum spline length for the output shaft.

Compression failure effect was greater than the shear failure. However, the minimum calculated
length of the spline seemed too low. This was due to high strength of the selected material. The length
of the spline on the female coupler sleeve was selected to be 35 mm suffice for input shaft from the
engine.
 P a g e | 12

6. Seal and Lubrication Specification

Lubrication Selection
Lubrication is used for the gears and bearings as they rotate and collide which generates heat and
friction. There are three types of lubrication methods which are dependent on the tangential speed
(pitch line velocity). Splash and forced oil lubrication methods can be used as the pitch line velocity is
14.29 m/s (from GP100, figure 2). Splash lubrication was chosen as forced oil lubrication involves
installing a pump which would cost more and consume more space. Open deep groove ball bearings
were used which means the gears and the bearings would be lubricated by the same lubricant. The oil
will be levelled at 1/3 of wheel tooth height, so the wheel can squirt the oil within the gearbox as it
rotates. Oil level could neither be more or less, it needs to be at correct amount for its maximum
effect. Therefore, oil level needs to be carefully examined. The following equation 15 was used to
calculate viscosity grade which was then used to select the lubricant.

7000 Eq.15
𝑉40 =
√𝑉1

V40 = Kinematic viscosity @ 40°c (cSt)

V1 = Pitch line velocity of the lowest speed gear, feet per minute (fpm)
= 0.262 x pinion speed (rpm) x pinion pitch circle diameter (inches) = 3240.8 fpm

7000
𝑉40 = = 123 𝑐𝑆𝑡
√3240.8
Lubricant with ISO grade 150 was chosen as this was more than calculated value for the gear given
by table 16.

Lubricant Type ISO V40 @ Density Pour Flash Operating

Grade 40°c (cSt) @ 15.6°c, Point, Point, Temperature
(g/ml) (°C) (°C) °C

Mobil SHC Synthetic 150 150 0.86 -45 233 -35 to 200
Gear 150 [11] gear oil
Table 16 Lubricant specification.

Seal Selection
There are 4 seals for the entire gearbox; 2 on the outside of shafts from where dust can enter [4, 6],
one for the casing and one for drainage plug [5]. Radial shaft seals were used for bearings. Static seal
was used for casing given in table 17.

Location Type Design Specification Material Supplier

Pinion shaft Radial shaft seal 36x52x7mm HMS5 V [4] Fluoro rubber SKF
Drainage O-ring 6x2mm FKM (Viton) 75 ShA Fluorocarbon Polymax
[5] rubber
Wheel shaft Radial shaft seal 42x53x7mm HMS5 V [6] Fluoro rubber SKF
Casing Static According to our design Nitrile rubber Designed
(Gasket)
Table 17 Sealing specification.
 P a g e | 13

7. Maintenance Schedules

For new or overhauled engines, the engines should be checked and maintained every 100 hours. The
first 25- and 50-hour check is recommended but not essential. All check-ups are for damage and wear
shown in table 18.

Component Task Solution Inspection

Gears Check for cracks, chipping, Replace with new gears if Yearly
deformation, broken teeth necessary

Shafts Check for cracks, wear or Proper lubrication or Yearly

deformation welding repair
Bearing Check for cracks, signs of wear Proper lubrication and 6 months
replace bearings if
needed
Oil Oil level inspected for grade and Use dipstick to check oil Check level every oil
viscosity quality and level. Drain change for oil
used oil and refill oil tank. consumption. 6
Brand speed reducers should be Oil should be changed months and yearly.
run idle for the first 15-20 right after the first 25- Should check during
minutes to let it settle hour use pre-departure
Fasteners Check bolts and nuts are Replace the damaged 4 months
damaged or loose ones with new parts
Seals Check for any oil/lubrication Replace seals if needed As needed
leakage when dismantling the
unit
Casing Inspect casing surface for Repairable cracks to be Yearly
cracks, dents or any welded. If not able,
deformation replace with new casing.
Lubrication Check bearings and shafts are Drain all the remaining oil As needed
greased enough in the gearbox and fill
with new oil as needed
Alignment Check gears are aligned with Fix alignment if not  During
the engine input and propeller aligned with engine and installation
output propeller  Weekly
Table 18 Maintenance schedule for the gear box.
 P a g e | 14

8. Feedback

Throughout the design process, flash feedback and design review feedback was constructively used
to make both major and minor changes to the design and drawings.

 Shaft loading and design: Initially the shaft calculations presumed no axial loading resulted in
significant variation in the requirement of the bearings. This was mitigated via use of propeller
loading to calculate the total force acting on the wheel shaft and the output parameters were
corrected as a result.
 Casing: Case thickness was not constant. Non-uniform thickness would cause irregular mass
distribution for the gearbox casing which would result in high stress concentration in specific
areas such as the edges and increase failure chance. This was considered for the final design
which had constant thickness and improved aesthetics.
 Ribs and waffles: Ribs were suggested to improve the overall strength of the casing by
reducing the need of the material required. This led to overall mass reduction as well as
stresses in unnecessary places are undirected. This is similar to the stress distribution of an (I-
beam) where deducted material stress does not occur. To assist, splash lubrication by guiding
of the flow of oil along the line of the gear waffle shaped geometry was recommended to hold
lubricant.
 Case alignment: For assembly purposes, it was essential to correctly align the cases when
mounting together with screws. The initial design was secured with threaded bolts, however
due to tolerances at threaded holes, misalignment could occur which would result in leakage
of lubricant. An overlap lip case interface was suggested and applied to prevent misalignment
and leakage with aid of gasket.
 Engine Mount: The engine casing was preferred to be manufactured by sand-casting to
eliminate the engine mount undercut design caused by die casting, and to achieve required
200 unit size.

9. References
[1]SKF,Online,https://www.skf.com/group/products/bearings-units-housings/ball-bearings/deep-
groove-ball-bearings/deep-groove-ball-bearings/index.html?designation=4303%20ATN9
[2]SKF,Online,https://www.skf.com/group/products/bearings-units-housings/ball-bearings/deep-
groove-ball-bearings/deep-groove-ball-bearings/index.html?designation=62/28
[3]Roymech,Online, http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Keyways/Spline.html.
[4]SKF,Online,https://www.skf.com/uk/products/seals/industrial-seals/power-transmission-
seals/radial-shaft-seals-pt/index.html?designation=36X52X7%20HMS5%20V&unit=metricUnit
[5]Online,https://www.polymax.co.uk/media/documents/Datasheet/fkm_viton_75sha_oring_polym
ax.pdf
[6]SKF,Online,https://www.skf.com/us/products/seals/industrial-seals/power-transmission-
seals/radial-shaft-seals-pt/index.html?designation=42x53x7%20HMS5%20V
[7] Budynas, R. (2019). Shigley Mechanical Engineering Design. 9th ed. McGraw-Hill Education, p.321.
https://eclass.teicrete.gr/modules/document/file.php/TM114/shigley-machine-design-.pdf
[8]Karl Dearn, 2019, Canvas, shaft design and associated technology.
[9]Karl Dearn, 2019, Canvas, shaft design against fatigue.
[10]Wikipedia, 2019, Critical Speed, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_speed
[11]Mobil, Online,https://www.mobil.com/en/industrial/Lubricants/Products/Mobil-SHC-Gear-150