Original Article

J Strain Analysis
1–11
Ó IMechE 2021
A modified damping model of vector Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
form intrinsic finite element method DOI: 10.1177/03093247211018820
journals.sagepub.com/home/sdj

for high-speed spiral bevel gear

dynamic characteristics analysis

Xiangying Hou1,2 , Yuzhe Zhang1,2, Hong Zhang1,2, Jian Zhang1,2,

Zhengminqing Li1,2 and Rupeng Zhu1,2

Abstract
The vector form intrinsic finite element (VFIFE) method is springing up as a new numerical method in strong non-linear
structural analysis for its good convergence, but has been constricted in static or transient analysis. To overwhelm its
disadvantages, a new damping model was proposed: the value of damping force is proportional to relative velocity
instead of absolute velocity, which could avoid inaccuracy in high-speed dynamic analysis. The accuracy and efficiency of
the proposed method proved under low speed; dynamic characteristics and vibration rules have been verified under high
speed. Simulation results showed that the modified VFIFE method could obtain numerical solutions with good efficiency
and accuracy. Based on this modified method, high-speed vibration rules of spiral bevel gear pair under different loads
have been concluded. The proposed method also provides a new way to solve high-speed rotor system dynamic
problems.

Keywords
Spiral bevel gear pair, vector form intrinsic finite element method, modified dynamic damping model, convergence and
accuracy, gear high-speed vibration

Date received: 21 January 2021; accepted: 20 April 2021

Introduction numbers of researchers focus their attention on trans-

mission system dynamics and dynamic simulation
To meet people’s requirements with modern life, high- method improvement. Up to now, finite element
speed, light weight, low vibration, and low noise are method (FEM), lumped-mass method (LMM), or the
becoming the predictable development orientation for combinations of the two methods (as well as their
mechanical equipment. Gear transmission system, that improvements) are the most widely used methods to
is wildly used in vehicles, aerospace, and other fields, is deal with gear transmission system dynamics.
also facing harsh design restrictions. Thus, it is becom- Taking a panoramic view of recently published lit-
ing increasingly important to simulate and predict high- eratures, we could find that researchers and experts are
speed responses of transmission system precisely as well
as other rotor systems.
Spiral bevel gear (SBG), one of the most complex 1
College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of
gears, is usually used as the first stage in transmission Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China
2
National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Helicopter
system due to its stability, capacity, and space-saving
Transmission, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
specialty. Due to its complex spatial curved profile, Nanjing, China
dynamic contact force, dynamic transmission error,
and other dynamic mechanical indexes are rather more Corresponding author:
difficult to predict precisely. Heavy-duty, high-speed, Hou Xiangying, College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering/National
Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on Helicopter Transmission,
and lightweight condition makes the dynamical beha- Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 29 Yudao Street,
vior simulation of SBG (as well as other complex rotor Nanjing 210016, China.
systems) face severe challenges. Therefore, increasing Email: [email protected]
2 Journal of Strain Analysis 00(0)

establishing new models or methods to describe system calculate centrifugal deformations and centrifugal stres-
dynamics more precisely. Taking flexibilities of shafts ses of the thin-walled gear by a cantilever model at
and bearings into consideration and coupling shafts speed range 5000 to 40,000 rpm. Guilbert et al.22 ana-
finite element models and gear LMM non-linear lyzed the effect of centrifugal effects on high-speed
dynamic models, Yavuz et al.1 analyzed transmission (28,650 rpm) thin-rimmed gears by an original hybrid
system (spur, helical, and spiral bevel gears) dynamics. gear model which combines lumped parameter ele-
Peng built an integrated drivetrain coupling analysis ments, finite elements, and condensed substructures
model considering significant time-varying non-torque along with a mortar-based mesh interface. Lin et al.23
loads based on an aeroelastic loose coupling approach proposed a new type of curve-face gear pair for high
and assembly of the finite element method.2 Wang speed transmission and discussed the dynamic impacts.
et al.3 presented a general system-structure coupling According to the existing literature review, it is not
dynamic analysis procedure to analyze the dynamic difficult to conclude that lightweight structure, strong
performance of planetary gears where the influences of non-linear vibration, fracture, and high-speed dynamics
system parameters and structure dimensions are con- are becoming research hotspots. Current researches
sidered at the same time. Hu and Fang4 combined developed some new models and methods to realize
curved beam model with loaded tooth contact analysis structure mechanical behavior simulation and have
to build gear system dynamic model. Zhu et al.5 used made some progress, especially in non-linear dynamic
substructure method to extract the dynamic parameters excitations, tooth profile design, and dynamic behavior
from the gearbox’s finite element model and build control. However, high-speed flexible-structure
spiral bevel gear-shaft-bearing-gearbox coupling sys- dynamics are neglected or over-simplified because of
tem. Liu et al.6,7 introduces an improved model gener- the limitations of current simulation methods24: (1)
ated by hybrid user-defined element method (HUELM) FEM is used more for static and transient analysis than
for dynamic analysis of a double-helical gear pair to high-speed system dynamics because of its convergence
balance computing time and accuracy. It is obvious and computing amount; (2) lumped-mass method sim-
that increasing numbers of researchers focus on the plifies the system as spring-damper-mass model to
structural flexibility of the transmission system.8–10 reduce computing complexity, which would decrease
Accurate excitation analysis is also a way to improve calculation accuracy and lose structural vibration char-
dynamic analysis precision. Neubauer et al.11 proposed acteristics; (3) the combination of the two method try
the design of inequidistant gears and a method to cal- to combine the merits of FEM and LMM, but inevita-
culate the gear mesh stiffness and mesh forces to guar- bly demerits are gathered together.
antee dynamics simulation accuracy, which is also Being widely used for non-linear structural
compared with experiments. Chen12 proposed a new mechanics in civil engineering, vector form intrinsic
dynamic model of a helical gear pair system, consider- finite element (VFIFE) method is showing its advan-
ing three-dimensional motion due to bearing deforma- tages in non-linear and high-speed problems. But lim-
tion to provide more accurate dynamic responses than ited by damping model, element model and control
those previous models which are considered as con- equation, this method application is usually restricted
stant. Meng et al.13 established a dynamic gear model to civil structural static analysis.25–28 The author has
considering fault characteristics analysis of gear based already simplified the hexahedral element and accom-
on time-varying mesh stiffness to approximate gear plishes SBG static analysis in the former study.24 Based
failures. Nonlinear oil-film force and stiffness are on former research, this paper proposed a damping
added into gear dynamic equations by researchers to model and a control equation to simulate high-speed
improve simulating accuracy14,15; similarly, coupling SBG dynamics with whole-mesh model balancing com-
effects between surface wear and dynamics of gear sys- puting time and simulating accuracy, which would
tems were also studied.16,17 Huangfu et al.18 considered offer a new method to solve high-speed dynamic prob-
the thin rim structure and gear tooth modifications and lems in future rotor system analysis.
built a three-dimensional dynamic model and wear pre- The paper is organized as follows: The basic theory
diction model. Chen et al.19 proposed a comprehensive of modified VFIFE method and dynamic damping
and general analytical gear mesh model to improve model are established in Section 2. Spiral bevel gear
dynamic analysis precision by considering all the defor- meshing theory, mesh model, and tooth contact analy-
mations including the teeth and the gear body sis (TCA) are conducted in Section 3. In Section 4, the
structure. dynamic results of SBG with low rotational speed
When it comes to high-speed transmission system, (500 rpm) are simulated by modified VFIFE method,
experimental studies and LMM simulation become whose results are also compared to that of FEM to ver-
major approaches while structural vibrations are usu- ify the computing accuracy and efficiency of proposed
ally disregarded. Liu et al.20 considered the flexibility method. Section 5 discusses vibration characteristics of
of the ring and carrier, proposed a hybrid model for the SBG system with high rotational speed (15,000 rpm)
the helical planetary gear set that operates at high and using modified VFIFE method, whose results are com-
variable speed conditions, but the rotational speed was pared to that of LMM to demonstrate the accuracy and
less than 10,000 rpm. Li21 developed FEM software to rationality of the proposed method. Eventually, in
Hou et al. 3

Figure 1. Solution procedure of pure nodal deformation.

Section 6, we draw the conclusions to summarize char- Modified VFIFE method

acteristics of the proposed method. Due to computing complexity and spatial structural
features, the author proposed a simplified 3-D hexahe-
Basic theory of modified VFIFE method dral element theory to diminish computing amount,
and dynamic damping model of SBG which has been proved by comparison with FEM.24
The solving process of pure nodal deformation can
For traditional VFIFE method, the model is discretized be illustrated by Figure 1, in which three steps are
into mass points and massless elements with dynamic needed to calculate pure nodal deformation: (1) point
equation: coincidence; (2) line coincidence; and (3) face coinci-
dence. As shown in Figure 1, black hexahedron and
x = P + f + fd
m€ ð1Þ
red hexahedron represents the element before and after
deformation respectively with superscript 0 and n.
m, x€, P, f is the mass, acceleration, external, and Choose one node as the reference point as well as the
internal force respectively. fd =  zmx_ is virtual damp- origin of a local coordinate system (we deformation a
ing force with virtual damping coefficient z . 0. as the reference point in this paper). The first step
The control equation (1) is proposed for static analy- ‘‘point coincidence’’ (Figure 1(a) and (b)) means to
sis, which means the value of damping force (depends make two reference points coincident by translating,
on damping coefficient and absolute velocity) has little which could be expressed by:
influence on convergence results. When it comes to
high-speed dynamic analysis, the control equation and Du = una  u0a ð2Þ
damping model become inapplicable. Thus, this Section
introduces a simplified 3-D hexahedral element theory
and a control equation with a new damping model, In which, u is the position vector of nodes while
which would lay the foundation of the SBG dynamic superscript n means the final position with deforma-
simulation. tionthe initial position 0 means initial position without
4 Journal of Strain Analysis 00(0)

deformation. Subscript a represents the point number cost to unacceptable levels; (2) using the larger damping
in the element. After the first step of translation, new coefficient to accelerate the the convergent process
position of element with superscript # is shown in would result in distortion of computational solution
Figure 1(b). due to over-large damping forces.
The second step ‘‘side coincidence’’ (Figure 1(b) and Inspired by meshing damping model used in
(c)) means to superpose side ab and a#b# by rotating lumped-mass method, we decided to use relative velo-
the deformed element (the red element), while rotation city of meshing surfaces instead of absolute velocity to
angle u1 is between side ab and a#b# and the rotation describe the damping force. Section 2.2 would intro-
axis vec1 can be calculated by vector ab and a#b#: duce: (1) basic contact model and (2) how to define
relative velocity and damping force. More detailed
ab3ab0 information is available in reference.24
vec1 = ð3Þ
jab3ab0 j

Contact model. It is easy to find the specialty of gear

The third step ‘‘surface coincidence’’ (Figure 1(c) meshing and surface contact: (1) contact surface is cer-
and (d)) means to superpose surface abd and a#b#d# by tain and simple repeating (tooth profile); (2) contact
rotating the deformed element (the red element). deformation is regarded as elastic deformation; (3)
Similarly, the rotation angle u1 is calculated by normal small contact deformation reduces the difficulty of non-
vectors (nabd and nabd00 ) of surface abd and a#b#d# and linear computational convergence as well as contact
the rotation axis vec2 is also obtained: search. From these characteristics, we determine to
8 apply master-slave algorithm and inside-outside algo-
> ab3ad
>
> nabd = rithm for global search and local search respectively.
>
> j ab3ad j
>
> The master-slave algorithm was firstly proposed to
< 00
ab3ad solve the contact behavior of contact-impact problem
nabd00 = ð4Þ
>
> jab3ad00 j and widely used in finite element software.29 In this
>
>
>
> nabd 3nabd00 method, two contact surfaces are defined as master face
>
: vec2 =  
nabd 3n 00 abd
and slave face, on which nodes are master nodes and
slave nodes. The core idea of inside-outside local search
algorithm is judging the master node located in or out
For any rotational axis vec with rotational angle u, the effective region of the element using vectors, as
the rotational matrix R could be written as: detailed in reference.30
R(  u) = ½1  cos(  u)V2 + sin(  u)V ð5Þ
Relative velocity and damping model. As discussed in the
2 3 preceding Section, damping force defined by is
0  vecz vecy
fd =  zmx_ not suitable for high-speed rotor dynamics.
where V = 4 vecz 0  vecx 5 and
vecy vecx 0 Therefore, a relative velocity damping force model is
proposed in this paper.
vec = ½vecx vecy vecz T . Rotational matrix R1 or R2 It is not difficult to find that velocity x_ used in static
corresponding to vec1 or vec2 could be calculated by analysis is a simplified equation of a complete expres-
equation (5). sion, which means x_ is the velocity difference between
Finally, the pure nodal deformation of the element is transient state and static state, or more precisely, velo-
obtained (as shown in Figure 1(d)): city difference between transient state and steady state.
Damping model could be redefined by fd =  jDx_ in
qi = u0i  u000 i (i = a, b, c, :::g, h) ð6Þ this way. j is damping ratio and Dx_ = x_ t  x_ t steady rep-
resents velocity difference. Since x_ t steady is a fluctuating
000
in which ui represents deformation coordinates of value for dynamics, theoretical velocity x_ theo could be
node i. used to replace x_ t steady and Dx_ could be written as
Dx_ = x_ t  x_ theo . For node i, the relative velocity is
obtained:
Establishing of dynamic damping model of gear
dynamics Dx_ = x_ t  x_ i theo = x_ t  vtheo 3ri ð7Þ
The traditional damping model defined in equation (1),
which is proportional to the magnitude of velocity with in which, ri is rotation radius of node i, vtheo is
opposite directions, is not applicable for dynamics anal- theoretical angular velocity at time t, for gear
ysis because: (1) damping coefficient is usually less than vtheo = vgt , for pinion vtheo = vpt . Angular velocity
0.1 and low damping coefficient could reduce the rate norm vgt and vpt at time t could be calculated by nodes
of convergence greatly which multiply the computing on gear body:
Hou et al. 5

Figure 2. Contact patterns and transmission errors obtained by TCA: (a) contact patterns of gear, (b) contact patterns of pinion,
and (c) transmission errors.

Table 1. Basic parameters. Table 2. Machine-tool settings.

Items Pinion Gear Items Pinion Gear

Tooth number 27 79 Concave Convex

Modulus (mm) 3.15 3.15
Pressure angle (°) 20 20 Profile angle (°) 20 20 20
Mean spiral angle (°) 30 30 Point radius (mm) 94.01 96.18 94.26
Face width (mm) 30 30 Cutter diameter (mm) 152.4 190.5
Shaft angle (°) 90 90 Cradle angle (°) 250.44 248.81 50.16
Mean cone distance 116.49 116.49 Radial distance 104.53 108.77 107.42
Hand of spiral Right Left Blank offset 1.41 20.62 0
Pitch angle (°) 18.87 71.13 Machine center to back 21.16 20.13 0
Root angle 17.9 72.1 Sliding base 0.41 0.10 20.50
Addendum (mm) 3.34 1.32 Machine root angle 17.90 69.44
Dedendum (mm) 1.91 3.94

P
m P
n Tooth contact analysis (TCA)
ngk npj
k=1 j=1 In this part, we build a series of mesh models that are
vgt = , vpt = ð8Þ meshing in different meshing positions divided from
rgk  m rpj  n
the entrance meshing position to the exit meshing posi-
tion. Meshing equation was established and the solving
where m and n represent the number of body nodes
results are shown in Figure 2 based on the parameters
(represented by k and j) on gear and pinion, vgk and vpj
in Tables 1 and 2.
are velocity magnitudes, rgk and rpj are radius of rota-
The contact ellipse major axis is considered when the
tion axis.
gears are under a small load, and the elastic deforma-
Therefore, we could define damping force as:
tion is 0.00635 mm. The contact path is calculated and
fdi =  j  Dx_ i =  j(x_ t  vtheo 3ri ) ð9Þ the relative transmission error curve is calculated with-
out elastic deformation. The transmission error unit is
Then the damping model was established. arc-second and unit of rotational angle is degree.
Plug equation (9) into equation (1) and the control
equation could be written as:
Models and settings
x = P + f  j  Dx_
m€ ð10Þ
According to TCA results and modeling method, the
mesh model of spiral bevel gear pair could be obtained
Basic model of SBG and tooth contact meeting assembly conditions, as shown in Figure 3.
analysis After installation, the gear and pinion both take the
right meshing position. Nodes inside body have been
Basic parameters and machine-tool settings imposed restrictions (as highlighted in Figure 5): both
Based on the design method of spiral bevel gears,31–33 pinion and gear release the rotational DOF of rota-
basic parameters and machine-tool settings and were tional axis while rotational speed and load torque are
designed and list in Tables 1 and 2. applied on pinion and gear respectively.
6 Journal of Strain Analysis 00(0)

Figure 3. Mesh model and constraint conditions.

Table 3. Element number and node number.

VFIFE FEM dynamic FEM static

model model model

Element number 133 660 1176

(one tooth surface) Figure 4. Contact force curves.
Node number 160 720 1250
(one tooth surface)
refined mesh would ensure simulating accuracy for sta-
tic finite element analysis, whose result should be used
These models are calculated with the following mate- as a reference. As discussed in former study that
rial properties: elastic modulus E = 2:063105 MPa, VFIFE is much less sensitive in mesh density than
Poisson’s ratio m = 0:29, and applied torques on gear FEM,24 sparse meshes is applied in VFIFE model.
are 1500 Nm. Since these analyses are carried out under Different mesh densities are used in different methods
static condition, the friction between teeth surfaces had to balance computing efficiency and accuracy.
a less effect and was ignored.
Results comparisons among VFIFE (dynamic), FEM
Verification of the proposed method with (dynamic), and FEM (static)
low-speed condition Contact force. Contact forces of dynamic model simu-
After installation, nodes inside body have been imposed lated by VFIFE method and FEM were shown in
restrictions (as highlighted in Figure 3): both pinion Figure 4, compared to static simulation result. The
and gear release the rotational DOF of rotational axis abscissa has been nondimensionalized to intercept the
while rotational speed and load torque are applied on same meshing period ensuring the comparability of
pinion and gear respectively. Pinion rotational speed is numeral data.
500 r/min for low-speed dynamic analysis. Figure 4 illustrates that the contact force obtained
SBG shows different dynamic characteristic under by modified VFIFE method and static analysis is basi-
different working conditions. Since it is difficult to con- cally the same, but dynamic contact force is about
duct high-speed simulation for FEM, this paper pre- 0.33% larger than static contact force (average value),
sented two different working conditions to verify the which is reasonable. The contact force curve fluctuation
accuracy and efficiency of proposed method: low-speed simulated by VFIFE is caused by different algorithms
and high-speed conditions with the same load torque. and time-varying dynamic excitations. By contrast,
For low-speed condition, dynamic responses are consis- dynamic contact force obtained by FEM is rather
tent with static analysis, thus static analysis results are coarse: there are 1.2% and 2.9% relative errors for
compared with results of VFIFE method and finite ele- amplitude value and average value between dynamic
ment method to validate accuracy and efficiency of the and static analysis even though the finite element
proposed method. method remains the same. It could be deduced from the
data that VFIFE method would achieve better accuracy
under the same mesh condition.
Finite element model and boundary conditions
To balance computing efficiency and accuracy, an Contact stress. Contact stress could be also calculated
appropriate element number and node number is deter- according to contact force which is presented by contact
mined, as shown in Table 3. For dynamic analysis, force curve in Figure 5. Contact stress curves simulated
coarse mesh would contribute to computing efficiency; by three methods represent contact stress changing
Hou et al. 7

Figure 6. Contact stress patterns: (a) FEM static analysis and

(b) VFIFE dynamic analysis.

Figure 5. Contact stress curves.

errors 10.5% compared to static FEM results with an
average value 260.51. For VFIFE simulation results,
process for one tooth from entering into meshing to
the average value is 264.28 arc-second with relative
seceding from meshing. The figure illustrates that con-
errors about 6.22%. Fluctuation amplitude shows a
tact stresses obtained by the three methods have the
rather significant error which may be caused by con-
same trend, and the curve of the modified VFIFE
straint boundaries, computing algorithms, and model
method is very similar to the results of static analysis
differences.
and FEM dynamics with errors 20% and 4.5% (for
Transmission error represents deformation which
peak values). Dynamic contact stress of dynamic analy-
should have the same trend with contact force (Figure
sis is about 15% higher than that of static analysis,
4). This trend validates reasonability of simulation
which agrees well with general experience.
results indirectly. The fluctuation value of VFIFE
method might be influenced by computing algorithms
Contact stress pattern. Taking one tooth profile as the and constraint conditions. Nevertheless, the calculation
research object, there is a contact stress value for each result of the modified VFIFE method is reliable.
element facet in each calculating step. Then contact In this section, modified VFIFE method, static
stress pattern is obtained based on the maximum value FEM, and dynamic FEM are used to simulate gear
of each node to illustrate the maximum contact stress meshing responses, such as contact force, bending stress
distribution during the whole meshing process. It could and transmission error, etc. It is found that the relative
be easy to conclude that contact stress patterns error between modified VFIFE method and static
obtained by VFIFE method and static finite element FEM does not exceed 10% under low speed conditions,
method have similar distributions, change trends, and which verifies the good accuracy of this method. The
stress values. Furthermore, the pattern obtained by above analysis provides a basis for applying the modi-
modified VFIFE method is much smoother, which fied VFIFE method to high-speed conditions for
means less sudden changes and higher stability. Figure numerical solutions. It should be pointed out that
6(a) and (b) shares the same scale. VFIFE method has poor computing speed in low-speed
simulation problems, which takes about 20 h to finish
the simulation.
Bending stress. Bending stresses calculated by three
methods are shown in Figure 7(a) and (b) respectively.
The figure shows that bending stress curves have simi- High-speed simulation results
lar trends and values for three different methods for
Since it is difficult for FEM to deal with high-speed
either pinion or gear. For bending stress of pinion,
rotational analysis (supercomputing center maybe
VFIFE and FEM (dynamic) have 3.72% and 3.67%
needed), this paper compared simulation results
error compared to static FEM; while the relative errors
between VFIFE and LMM to verify accuracy and sta-
are 8.7% and 12.7% for gear bending stresses. The
bility of the proposed method under 15,000 r/min rota-
error of the proposed method is proved acceptable.
tional speed.

Transmission error. Transmission error curves calculated

by three methods under low speed conditions are dis- Simulation model and boundary conditions
played in Figure 8. For FEM dynamic analysis, the To ensure comparability between different methods
average value is about 254.13 arc-second with relative and models, LMM model is defined as purely torsional
8 Journal of Strain Analysis 00(0)

Figure 7. Bending stress curves: (a) pinion and (b) gear.

Figure 8. Transmission errors.

Figure 9. Dynamics model of lumped mass method.

concentrated parameter model, as shown in Figure 9.
Input excitations of LMM are obtained by static FEM
analysis, including transmission error, meshing stiff- has the same changing trend, which shows the same
ness, and contact force etc. Because of a large number meshing impact process and fluctuations. The relative
of literature studied on spiral bevel gear dynamics based error of the modified VFIFE method compared with
on LMM,34–36 dynamic equations are not detailed in LMM is about 3.8% and 2.8% for peak and average
this article. value. But the curve of LMM is smoother than that of
Due to ignorance of structural feature, LMM could VFIFE because of different solving process.
not derive stress data or contact pattern. Therefore,
contact force, displacement and acceleration are sum-
marized to illustrate dynamic simulation results. Vibration displacement along meshing line. The calculation
curves of vibration displacement along meshing line are
shown in Figure 11. For LMM, displacement along
Analysis of dynamic responses meshing line could be calculated directly while it should
be conducted by rotational angles approximately for
Contact force. Contact force curves are shown in Figure VFIFE method.
10, which shows that the contact force obtained by the The average values of VFIFE and FEM are
two methods of modified VFIFE method and LMM 3:143105 and 3:333105 with relative error 6.05%.
Hou et al. 9

Figure 12. Vibration displacement along meshing line.

Figure 10. Dynamic contact force curves.

The contact force, vibration displacement, and
vibration acceleration are calculated by modified
VFIFE method and LMM under high speed condi-
tions. It can be seen that the calculation error of the
modified VFIFE method is around 20% compared to
the lumped mass method. Error sources are: (1) differ-
ent calculation methods and algorithms; (2) constraints
on the gear body limit deformation in VFIFE method;
(3) oversimplified model in LMM introduced errors
inevitably. Nevertheless, modified VFIFE method
could solve high-speed non-linear problems with good
convergence, accuracy, and efficiency.
Furthermore, VFIFE method takes only 10 h to
complete a dynamic simulation while static analysis
takes 20 h, which means the proposed method would
be more efficient when dealing with a large-scale high-
speed problem, because the proposed method is condi-
tionally convergent. Computing speed is restricted by
mesh size under low-speed conditions, but only limited
by time step in the high-speed analysis, which is totally
Figure 11. Vibration displacement along meshing line. different from the traditional finite element method
and would be more suitable for large-scale high-speed
problems.
But fluctuation error is obvious which may be caused
by model and constraints: constraints on gear body, to
a great extent, limit deformation of gear body. If the Conclusion
constraints were applied on web structure, the fluctua-
This paper proposed a modified VFIFE method to
tion of vibration displacements would be much larger.
simulate spiral bevel gear dynamic responses.
Besides, high frequency oscillation occurred in VFIFE
Simplified VFIFE method for solid structure was pro-
analysis is due to contact and constraint algorithm,
posed, as well as corresponding contact algorithms and
which do not exist in LMM.
inner force equations. Besides, a new method to
describe dynamic damping force was proposed in order
Vibration acceleration along meshing line. Vibration accel- to avoid computing distortion in high-speed problems.
eration along meshing line could be also calculated The accuracy of the proposed method under low-speed
referring to the calculation process of displacement. condition was verified by comparing with FEM static
Figure 12 shows that vibration acceleration obtained analysis and FEM dynamic simulation. Furthermore,
by the two methods has the same changing trend. The spiral bevel gear dynamic responses were discussed by
average values are 9:73103 and with relative error proposed VFIFE method and LMM, in which comput-
25.97%. ing efficiency and accuracy of the proposed method
10 Journal of Strain Analysis 00(0)

was validated and error sources were discussed. 9. Shi W, Park Y, Park H, et al. Dynamic analysis of the
Simulation results show that proposed method in this wind turbine drivetrain considering shaft bending effect.
paper has good convergence and would be more effi- J Mech Sci Technol 2018; 32: 3065–3072.
cient in large-scale high-speed simulations. Therefore, 10. Cho S, Choi J, Choi JH, et al. Numerical estimation of
this paper provides a new method to conduct high- dynamic transmission error of gear by using quasi-flex-
ible-body modeling method. J Mech Sci Technol 2015; 29:
speed structural analysis.
2713–2719.
11. Neubauer P, Bös J and Melz T. Evaluation of the gear
Declaration of conflicting interests noise reduction potential of geometrically uneven inequi-
distant gears. J Sound Vibr 2020; 473: 115234.
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest
12. Chen YC. Time-varying dynamic analysis for a helical
with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publi- gear pair system with three-dimensional motion due to
cation of this article. bearing deformation. Adv Mech Eng 2020; 12: 13.
13. Meng Z, Shi GX and Wang FL. Vibration response and
Funding fault characteristics analysis of gear based on time-
varying mesh stiffness. Mech Mach Theory 2020; 148: 15.
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following finan- 14. Chen WT, Chen SY, Hu ZH, et al. Dynamic analysis of a
cial support for the research, authorship, and/or pub- bevel gear system equipped with finite length squeeze film
lication of this article: This work was supported by dampers for passive vibration control. Mech Mach The-
the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant ory 2020; 147: 18.
No. 2019YFB2004700), Natural Science Foundation 15. Yin MH, Cui YH, Meng XJ, et al. Dynamic analysis of
of Jiangsu Province (Grant No. BK20200428), the double-helical gear system considering effect of oil film
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central among meshing teeth. Adv Mech Eng 2020; 12: 14.
Universities (Grant No. NS2020031), and National 16. Liu XZ, Yang YH and Zhang J. Investigation on cou-
pling effects between surface wear and dynamics in a spur
Defense Basic Scientific Research Program (Grant
gear system. Tribol Int 2016; 101: 383–394.
No. JCKY2019605D003)
17. Cao W, Pu W and Wang JX. Tribo-dynamic model and
fatigue life analysis of spiral bevel gears. Eur J Mech
ORCID iD Solids 2019; 74: 124–138.
Xiangying Hou https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1503-9138 18. Huangfu YF, Zhao ZF, Ma H, et al. Effects of tooth modi-
fications on the dynamic characteristics of thin-rimmed
gears under surface wear. Mech Mach Theory 2020; 150: 13.
References
19. Chen ZG, Zhou ZW, Zhai WM, et al. Improved analytical
1. Yavuz SD, Saribay ZB and Cigeroglu E. Nonlinear calculation model of spur gear mesh excitations with tooth
dynamic analysis of a drivetrain composed of spur, heli- profile deviations. Mech Mach Theory 2020; 149: 17.
cal and spiral bevel gears. Nonlinear Dyn 2020; 100: 20. Liu CZ, Yin XS, Liao YH, et al. Hybrid dynamic model-
3145–3170. ing and analysis of the electric vehicle planetary gear sys-
2. Li ZW, Wen BR, Peng ZK, et al. Dynamic modeling and tem. Mech Mach Theory 2020; 150: 25.
analysis of wind turbine drivetrain considering the effects 21. Li ST. Effects of centrifugal load on tooth contact stres-
of non-torque loads. Appl Math Model 2020; 83: ses and bending stresses of thin-rimmed spur gears with
146–168. inclined webs. Mech Mach Theory 2013; 59: 34–47.
3. Wang HW, Zhang T, Liu G, et al. System-structure cou- 22. Guilbert B, Velex P and Cutuli P. Quasi-static and
pling dynamic analysis of planetary gears. Math Probl dynamic analyses of thin-webbed high-speed gears: cen-
Eng 2015; 2015: 10. trifugal effect influence. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechan-
4. Hu SY and Fang ZD. The analysis and modeling of the ical Engineering Science 2019; 233: 7282–7291.
synthetical meshing stiffness of inner gearing considering 23. Lin C, Yu YQ and Hu YA. Analysis of composite motion
the flexible inner ring gear. Shock Vibr. Epub ahead of law and force of high speed curve-face gear. J Adv Mech
print 23 April 2019. DOI: 10.1155/2019/2324546. Des Syst Manuf 2017; 11: 14.
5. Zhu HM, Chen WF, Zhu RP, et al. Modelling and 24. Hou XY, Fang ZD, Zhang XJ, et al. Static contact anal-
dynamic analysis of the spiral bevel gear-shaft-bearing- ysis of spiral bevel gear based on modified VFIFE (vector
gearbox coupling system. Math Probl Eng. Epub ahead form intrinsic finite element) method. Appl Math Model
of print 8 September 2019. DOI: 10.1155/2019/9065215. 2018; 60: 192–207.
6. Liu C, Fang ZD and Wang F. An improved model for 25. Duan YF, Wang SM and Yau JD. Vector form intrinsic
dynamic analysis of a double-helical gear reduction unit by finite element method for analysis of train-bridge interac-
hybrid user-defined elements: experimental and numerical tion problems considering the coach-coupler effect. Int J
validation. Mech Mach Theory 2018; 127: 96–111. Struct Stab Dyn 2019; 19: 29.
7. Liu C, Fang ZD, Liu X, et al. Multibody dynamic analy- 26. Li XM, Guo XL and Guo HY. Vector form intrinsic
sis of a gear transmission system in electric vehicle using finite element method for nonlinear analysis of three-
hybrid user-defined elements. Proc IMechE, Part K: J dimensional marine risers. Ocean Eng 2018; 161: 257–267.
Multi-Body Dynamics 2019; 233: 30–42. 27. Duan YF, Tao JJ, Zhang HM, et al. Real-time hybrid simu-
8. Xu XY, Tao YC, Liao CR, et al. Dynamic simulation of lation based on vector form intrinsic finite element and field
wind turbine planetary gear systems with gearbox body programmable gate array. Struct Control Health Monit
flexibility. Stroj Vestn J Mech Eng 2016; 62: 678–684. 2019; 26: 21.
Hou et al. 11

28. Chen JL, Yang RC and Zhao Y. Application of vector 33. Litvin FL, Fuentes A and Hayasaka K. Design, manufac-
form intrinsic finite element on integrated simulation of ture, stress analysis, and experimental tests of low-noise
wind turbine. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 2017; 26: 11. high endurance spiral bevel gears. Mech Mach Theory
29. Hallquist JO, Goudreau GL and Benson DJ. Sliding 2006; 41: 83–118.
interfaces with contact-impact in large-scale Lagrangian 34. Zhiheng F and Chaosheng S. Effects of geometry design
computations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1985; 51: parameters on the static strength and dynamics for spiral
107–137. bevel gear. Int J Rotating Mach. Epub ahead of print 31
30. Ping WS and Nakamachi E. The inside-outside contact July 2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/6842938.
search algorithm for finite element analysis. Int J Numer 35. Cao W, Pu W and Wang J. Tribo-dynamic model and
Methods Eng 1997; 40: 3665–3685. fatigue life analysis of spiral bevel gears. Eur J Mech A
31. Litvin FL and Fuentes A. Gear geometry and applied the- Solids 2019; 74: 124–138.
ory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 36. Zhu H, Chen W, Zhu R, et al. Modelling and dynamic
32. Jinzhan S, Zongde F and Xiangwei C. Design and analy- analysis of the spiral bevel gear-shaft-bearing-gearbox
sis of spiral bevel gears with seventh-order function of coupling system. Math Probl Eng. Epub ahead of print 8
transmission error. Chin J Aeronaut 2013; 26: 1310–1316. September 2019. DOI: 10.1155/2019/9065215.