Advances in Engineering Software 42 (2011) 644–648

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Advances in Engineering Software

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/advengsoft

Separation frequency analysis of interference fitted hollow shaft–hub connections

by finite element method
Volkan Kovan ⇑
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Akdeniz University, 07058 Antalya, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Studies of interference fitted connections show that the traditional design method based on thick-wall
Received 14 February 2011 cylinder theory has some limitations. Application of the finite element method for the elasto-plastic
Received in revised form 28 March 2011 stress analysis of interference fitted connections gives more complete and accurate results than the tra-
Accepted 1 May 2011
ditional method. In this study, stress and separation frequency analyses of interference fitted connections
Available online 12 June 2011
for all preferred diameter series and all preferred hole basis interference fits was carried out. The results
showed that the traditional design method was not usable for all thick-walled interference fitting and
Keywords:
diameter/interference ratio was decisive for accuracy of results obtained from traditional design meth-
Interference fits
Finite element method
ods. For smaller ratio than 750, the results obtained from traditional design method were not viable.
Shaft-hub connection The results also showed that designers should pay attention to separation frequencies and decreasing
Separation frequency pre-stresses using 100–500 mm of shaft diameters during interference fitting.
Tolerance design Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selective assembly

1. Introduction
An interference fit is a fastening between especially cylindrical
two parts which is achieved by friction. The friction that holds the
parts together is significantly increased by mounting of one part
against the other [1]. One of the typical examples of interference
fits is the thermal interference fitting of shafts into gear’s hub.
Shaft-gear interference fit connections have one very important
advantage: they are inexpensive. Other advantages of interference
fit connections are high accuracy of centring the gear relative to the
shaft, and the ability to transmit torque, bending moment, radial
force, and axial force without any additional parts. Despite these
advantages, the disadvantages of interference fit connections are
not less important. For interference fit connections, the gear’s
hub must be thick-walled in order to withstand the high pressure
between the shaft–gear interfaces. Such a thick-walled gear–shaft
assembly can operate safely in many situations [2]. However, there
are operating conditions under which the fastening stresses
become insufficient, for example, when spinning the assembly at
high rpm. By increasing rotational speed, interference stress
between shaft–hub connections become zero at a specific point.
At this specific point, connection cannot transmit torque anymore
and this point can be determined as separation frequency.
Up to now, many researchers investigated interference fitted
connections under different situations [3–5]. However, stress
analyses of interference fitted connections for all preferred
⇑ Tel.: +90 242 3106344; fax: +90 242 3106306.
E-mail address: kovan@akdeniz.edu.tr
diameter series and all preferred hole basis interference fits are
not available in the literature. Additionally, there is no study con-
cerning with separation frequency analysis of interference fitted
connections. The aim of this study is to determine the critical spin-
ning frequency at which gear and shaft separate. Furthermore, an-
other aim of this study is to compare results of the traditional
method based on Lame’s equation and finite element method.
There are in the literature several reports on the stress analysis
of interference fitted connections by finite element method. Zhang
et al. studied interference fit in ring gear-wheel connections and
reported that the traditional design method based on thick-wall
cylinder theory has some limitations. Their results showed that
an application of the finite element method for stress analysis of
interference fitted connections gives more complete and accurate
results than the traditional method [6]. Mucha’s study also sup-
ported the Zhang et al.’s results. Mucha calculated the stress in thin
rings and wheel interference-fit designs by using the conventional
Lame’s equations. He reported that the finite element method for
the stress analysis of interference-fitted joints give more complete
and accurate results than that of the traditional method [7]. Finite
element method used commonly for the stress analysis of interfer-
ence fitted connections by several studies [8–11].
2. Analysis of interference fitted shaft–hub connections
In machine design, preferred sizes are standard guidelines for
choosing product dimensions within a given set of constraints.
Designer must choose these preferred lengths, distances,
diameters, and other characteristic quantities. In this study; all

0965-9978/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2011.05.001
 V. Kovan / Advances in Engineering Software 42 (2011) 644–648 645

Table 1
Preferred sizes according to ANSI B4.2.

Basic size (mm)

1st choice 2nd choice 1st choice 2nd choice 1st choice 2nd choice
1 10 100
1.1 11 110
1.2 12 120
1.4 14 140
1.6 16 160
1.8 18 180
2 20 200
2.2 22 220
2.5 25 250
2.8 28 280
3 30 300
3.5 35 350
4 40 400
4.5 45 450
5 50 500
5.5 55 550
6 60 600
7 70 700
8 80 800
9 90 900
1,000

Fig. 1. Illustration of considered hollow shaft–hub system (d = 2–500 mm).

sizes and fits were selected according to ANSI B4.2 standard

named ‘‘Preferred Metric Limits and Fits’’. All sizes in ANSI B4.2 be-
well explained calculation of stresses produced by interference fit
tween 2 and 500 mm were analyzed in this study as diameter (Ta-
[14]. After Timoshenko, several researchers used same method to
ble 1). These size series have been based on the Renard’s series of
calculate interference fit stresses [15–17]. In this study, interfer-
preferred numbers and the first choice sizes shown in Table 1 fol-
ence fit stresses calculated by Timoshenko’s method.
low approximately the preferred number series R10. The second
According to Timoshenko, if contact pressure is necessary
choice series shown are rounded off from the R20 series of pre-
between a hub and a shaft, it is usual practice to make the inner
ferred numbers [12].
radius of the hub smaller than the outer radius of the shaft and
According to ANSI B4.2, 13 tolerance zones are preferred as first
to assemble the structure after a preliminary heating of the hub.
choice for both of internal dimensions (for shafts, c11, d9, f7, g6,
After cooling, a contact pressure between the shaft and hub is pro-
h6, h7, h9, h11, k6, n6, p6, s6, and u6) and external dimensions
duced, which is called the interference fit pressure. The magnitude
(for hubs, C11, D9, F7, G6, H6, H7, H9, H11, K6, N6, P6, S6, and
of this pressure and the stresses produced by it can easily be calcu-
U6). Normally, the hole basis fit system is preferred, however,
lated with the equations of the thick-walled cylinder theory. For
when a common shaft mates with several holes, the shaft basis
example, the external radius of the shaft is larger than the internal
fit system should be used. In this study, H7 hole basis fit system
radius of the hub by the amount d:
was used. 0 2   1
ANSI B4.2 are defined three hole basis interference fits as first d  d 2 d 2 ! d di d 2
p þ o
p B 2 þ 2 C
choice: H7/p6 is named as locational interference and used for 2 2
do 2
2
d2 þ l þ 2 @    2  lA ¼ d
parts requiring rigidity and alignment with prime accuracy of loca- E  E d 2 di
2 2 2
 2
tion. H7/s6 is named as medium drive fit and used for ordinary
steel parts or shrink fits on light sections. H7/u6 is named as force from which;
fit and used for parts which can be highly stressed or for shrink fits   2   2 
 d 2
where the heavy pressing forces required are impractical. In this 2
 di
2
 d2o  ð2d Þ2
Ed
study, whole three interference fit system was investigated. p ¼ d   2 
2 do 2 di
In brief, three different types of interference fits for 25 different 2 22d 
2 2
diameters, totally 75 different diameter-fit combinations were
analyzed in this study. In the first stage of this analysis, an analyt- Timoshenko considered the stresses at the inner surface of the hub
ical study was carried out to determine the maximum stress for the as maximum. These stresses are:
interference fits. Subsequently, maximum stresses for the interfer-  2  2 
ence fits were validated by numerical methods. Finally, the study p 2d þ d2o
was completed by determining the separation frequency of the rt ¼  2  2
do
interference fits. 2
 2d
and
2.1. Computation of stresses based on Lame’s equation
rr ¼ p
Fig. 1 shows the interference-fitted assembly of hollow shaft The above discussion assumed that shaft and hub have the same
and hub. As can be seen in figure; investigated stress distributions length.
and separation frequencies were presented for values of d/di = 3, do/
d = 3 and l = d. 2.2. Computation of stresses and separation frequencies based on FEM
Traditional design methods for interference fits are based on
Lame and Clapeyron’s studies about equilibrium of homogeneous In the finite element part of this study, COMSOL Multiphysics
solids [13]. After the solution of Lame and Clapeyron, Timoshenko (version 3.5a) software was used. The software was used for all
646 V. Kovan / Advances in Engineering Software 42 (2011) 644–648
steps of numerical studies, including defining the geometries, spec-
ifying the physics, meshing, solving, and then post-processing the
results of the numerical studies.
Seventy-five hollow shaft–hub connections with different size
(2–500 mm) and tolerance (p6, s6 and u6) were investigated in
the numerical studies. In Fig. 2a, a model of the hollow shaft–
hub connection for 50 mm diameter can be seen. For computa-
tional efficiency, the analysis only includes a symmetric quarter
of the hollow shaft–hub connection. By setting the normal
displacements on the symmetry boundaries to zero, it is easy to
build the model. After preparing the models, the hollow shaft–
hub connections were meshed (Fig. 2b). In finite element analysis,
it is important to select an appropriate mesh size to minimize the
errors. In manually, it is not easy to minimize the error in a desired
Fig. 2. Finite element model: (a) and mesh, and (b) of hollow shaft–hub
connections.
quantity. In this study, COMSOL Multiphysics adaptive mesh gen-
eration was used. Adaptive mesh generation identified the regions
that require a high resolution and produced an appropriate mesh
size [18].
Young’s modulus (205000 MPa) and Poisson’s ratio (0.28) of AISI
4340 steel was based on the COMSOL Multiphysics materials
library. Yield stress (792 MPa) and isotropic tangent modulus
(21000 MPa) of AISI 4340 steel was based on the literature [19].
The model computations consist of two steps. In the first step,
the hub fastened to the hollow shaft by thermal interference: Ini-
tially, both hollow shaft and hub reside at room temperature. Then,
Fig. 3. Maximum stress values obtained from FEM and Lame’s equation for H7/p6
(a), H7/s6 (b) and H7/u6 (c).
 V. Kovan / Advances in Engineering Software 42 (2011) 644–648
the hub is heated to specific temperature, positioned on the hollow
shaft, and allowed to cool. The static elasto-plastic solver of the
COMSOL Multiphysics structural mechanics module was used to
analyze the interference stresses. Tangential, radial and von Misses
stress values were obtained from the solver as results of first part
numerical studies.
In the second step, hollow shaft–hub assembly was spun and
separation frequency was determined. When the assembly is spun,
the hub expands more quickly than the hollow shaft and reaches a
critical separation frequency. For determination this critical sepa-
ration frequency, parametric analysis over a range containing the
separation frequency was done. By sweeping a frequency as a
parameter within a range, COMSOL Multiphysics can calculate
deformation values of hub–shaft connections and determine
separation frequency. For all computations, plane stress conditions
were assumed and contact phenomena was neglected during
separation.
3. Results and discussion
The maximum rt and rr stress values obtained from FEM and
Timoshenko’s equations along all diameter series of interference
fit are given in Fig. 3. The maximum rt and rr stress values
Fig. 4. von Misses stress distribution and stress variation (c) for 50 H7/p6 assembly
after interference fitting (a) and at the separation frequency (b).
647
obtained from FEM and Timoshenko’s equations are approximately
equal in the elastic deformation region. The accuracy of models
was proved by these results. When the interference increased,
maximum equivalent von Misses stresses of the assembly exceeds
the yield value and reaches in the plastic deformation region and
difference between stress values obtained from FEM and Timo-
shenko’s equations increase to 169% (for Ø2 H7/u6). Several
researchers reported that Lame’s equation was suited for the de-
sign of thick-wall cylinder interference fits. However, results of this
study showed that interference/diameter ratio was as important as
wall thickness of hub.
Fig. 4 shows an example of the von Misses stress distributions
for the Ø50 H7/p6 hollow shaft–hub connection. Fig. 4a shows
Fig. 5. Separation frequency for diameter of 2–500 mm.
648 V. Kovan / Advances in Engineering Software 42 (2011) 644–648
the stress distribution after interference fitting whilst Fig. 4b
shows the stress distribution at the separation frequency. As
shown in Fig. 4a, the maximum von Misses stress after interference
fitting occurs at the inner edges of the hollow shaft and hub and
decrease properly with increasing radius. After interference fitting
the maximum von Misses stresses of the hollow shaft and the hub
are approximately equals. However at the critical separation fre-
quency, as shown in Fig. 4b, pre-stress values of the hollow shaft
decrease while pre-stress values of the hub increase. This variation
in stress can be seen in Fig. 4c and affect the fatigue strength of the
hollow shaft and hub connections.
Fig. 5a shows the separation frequencies of 2–10 mm, Fig. 5b
shows the separation frequencies of 10–100 mm and Fig. 5c shows
the separation frequencies of 100–500 mm diameter. It can be
seen, the separation frequencies of 2–10 mm are quite high. In
service, it cannot be found such a hollow shaft–hub assembly.
The separation frequencies of 10–100 mm diameter are transition
region from quite high frequencies to lower ones.
The separation frequencies of 100–500 mm are relatively low.
Designers should pay attention to separation frequencies and
decreasing pre-stresses during interference fitting of such big
diameters.
4. Conclusion
In this study, stress and separation frequency analysis of inter-
ference fitted hollow shaft–hub assembly were investigated for all
diameters and fits. According to analytical and numerical investi-
gations, the following conclusions may be drawn:
 Lame’s equations do not give good results for the interference
stresses of thick-walled assemblies in the plastic region. Thus,
the traditional method for designing interference fits based on
thick cylinder theory has some limitations.
 The results of FEM-based stress analyses of interference-fitted
connections are more complete and accurate than those
obtained from the traditional method.
 Diameter/interference ratio can determine accuracy of results
obtained from Lame’s equation’s. For the ratio smaller than
750, results obtained from Lame’s equation’s are not viable.
 Designers should pay attention to separation frequencies and
decreasing pre-stresses during interference fitting of 100–
500 mm shaft diameters.
The results of this work can provide a new approach for improv-
ing the design of interference fits. Furthermore, for concurrent de-
sign of machining processes of mating parts can be achieved the
required quality with lower manufacturing cost.
References
[1] White DJ, Humpherson J. Finite-element analysis of stresses in shafts due to
interference-fit hubs. J Strain Anal 1969;4:105–14.
[2] Klebanov BM, Barlam DM, Nystrom FE. Machine elements – life and
design. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2008.
[3] Yang GM, Coquille JC, Fontaine JF, Lambertin M. Influence of roughness on
characteristics of tight interference fit of a shaft and a hub. Int J Solids Struct
2001;38:7691–701.
[4] Chakherlou TN, Mirzajanzadeh M, Abazadeh B, Saeedi K. An investigation
about interference fit effect on improving fatigue life of a holed single plate in
joints. Eur J Mech – A/Solids 2010;29:675–82.
[5] Sen S, Aksakal B. Stress analysis of interference fitted shaft–hub system under
transient heat transfer conditions. Mater Des 2004;25:407–17.
[6] Zhang Y, McClain B, Fang XD. Design of interference fits via finite element
method. Int J Mech Sci 2000;42:1835–50.
[7] Mucha J. Finite element modeling and simulating of thermomechanic stress in
thermocompression bondings. Mater Des 2009;30:1174–82.
[8] Ozel A, Temiz S, Aydin MD, Sen S. Stress analysis of shrink-fitted joints for
various fit forms via finite element method. Mater Des 2005;26:281–9.
[9] Lanoue F, Vadean A, Sanschagrin B. Finite element analysis and contact
modelling considerations of interference fits for fretting fatigue strength
calculations. Simul Modell Pract Theory 2009;17:1587–602.
[10] Sniezek L, Zimmerman J, Zimmerman A. The carrying capacity of conical
interference-fit joints with laser reinforcement zones. J Mater Process Technol
2010;210:914–25.
[11] Eyercioglu O, Kutuk MA, Yilmaz NF. Shrink fit design for precision gear forging
dies. J Mater Process Technol 2009;209:2186–94.
[12] ANSI B4.2. Preferred metric limits and fits. New York: The American Society of
Mechanical Engineers; 1978.
[13] Lame G, Clapeyron B. Memoire sur l’equilibre interieur des corps solides
homogenes. J Reine Angew Math 1831;7:145–69.
[14] Timoshenko S. Strength of materials, part II – advanced theory and problems,
D. Lancaster: Van Nostrand Co.; 1947.
[15] Hall AS, Holowenko AR, Laughlin HG. Schaum’s outline of theory and problems
of machine design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1961.
[16] Brown TH. Marks calculations for machine design. New York: McGraw-Hill;
2005.
[17] Budynas R, Nisbett K. Shigley’s mechanical engineering design. New
York: McGraw-Hill; 2008.
[18] COMSOL Multiphysics user’s guide. COMSOL AB, Stockholm; 2008.
[19] Kurtaran H, Buyuk M, Eskandarian A. Ballistic impact simulation of GT
model vehicle door using finite element method. Theor Appl Fract Mech
2003;40:113–21.