Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
net/publication/274317030
Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part K Journal of Multi-body Dynamics · January 2008
CITATIONS READS
0 51
1 author:
Ettore Pennestri
University of Rome Tor Vergata
129 PUBLICATIONS 1,143 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Ettore Pennestri on 25 October 2015.
pennestri@mec.uniroma2.it valentini@ing.uniroma2.it
October 1, 2010
Keywords
Abstract
1
of the most important requirement in industrial applications. The Myard’s
theorem gives the geometrical conditions which ensure the satisfaction of
such requirement. In this paper two different original proofs of this theorem
are offered.
An algorithm for the optimal kinematic synthesis of the pilot-lever mech-
anism is then proposed. The pilot lever mechanism is designed to minimize
the maximum angle between the transmission and the homokinetic plane.
1 NOMENCLATURE
2
• rout : outer shaft groove meridian curve radius;
• θ: Angle between the normal to the transmission plane and the a2 axis;
The Rzeppa joint type usage began in 1936 in front-wheel drive passenger
3
a) b)
In this paper, the so called pilot lever Rzeppa joint will be studied. The
joint connects two shafts B and D with intersection axes. In the following
the main components of the joint are briefly described.
4
named A in the drawing. This spherical member has a series of meridian
groove ball races whose circular axes are centered on the rectilinear axis
of shaft B.
purpose is to keep the plane containing the centers of the spheres (trans-
mission plane) as close as possible to the plane midway between the
plane of rotation of shafts B and D (homokinetic plane).
ensure, for all relative angular positions of the input-output shafts, that
the all the centers of the spheres are contained in the homokinetic plane.
However, it will be possible to execute the kinematic synthesis of the pilot
lever mechanism in order to fulfill as close as possible the above geometric
condition.
In the pilot lever mechanism there is a force closure kinematic pair. In
fact, the axial spring, embedded in the axis B, maintains the contact between
5
kinematic elements.
In 1934 B.K. Stuber [3] devised a solution which avoided the use of the
pilot lever linkage. A.H. Rzeppa patented in 1939 an improvement of such
are kept always in the homokinetic plane. In fact, with reference to the ge-
ometry of Figure 2, points A and B are centers of spherical surfaces. Let
C be point of intersection of the shaft axes. This point maintains constant
and equal distances from A and B. Between the inner and outer spherical
surfaces there are two annular floating members. These bear upon opposite
sides of the balls which are in meridian grooves and transfer the torque from
one shaft to the other.
The radii of the spherical surfaces are such that, within the range of
feasible shafts angle, the distances of A and B from C are equal and constant.
6
Outer frame
Inner frame
r2 r2 B
r1 r1
A C B A C
The Myard’s theorem [9] states the condition required to obtain constant
7
Figure 3, let the coupling transmit the motion between the shafts with axes
a1 and a2 . The axes of revolute pairs r1 and r2 always intersect in K. Since
C1 K = C1 C2 + C2 K (1)
d h1
tan θ2 = + tan θ1 . (2)
h2 h2
ω2 h1 1
τ= = " 2 # . (3)
ω1 h2 cos2 θ1
d + h1 tan θ1
1+
h2
Since the main elements of the coupling are spherically embodied, the first
requirement is matched by the Rzeppa pilot-lever joint. The purpose of the
8
K
A2
d
θ1 A1
D1
a2
r1 θ2
r2
a1 B1
C2 h2
h1
C1
αd = |2θ − α| . (4)
9
α
θ
a2
π−α
2 π
a1 2
Homokinetic
Transmission plane
plane
Figure 4: Nomenclature
conclude that
π−α α
h1 = A1 C1 · sin − αd = A1 C1 · cos αd + , (5)
2 2
π−α α
h2 = A1 C1 · sin + αd = A1 C1 · cos αd − . (6)
2 2
h1
Thus, the ratio h2
, which appears in (3) can be expressed as a function of αd
10
and α, is expressed by
cos αd + α2
h1
= . (7)
h2 cos αd − α2
Substituting d = 0 and (7) into (3), one obtains a transmission ratio fully
consistent with the one deduced by I.S. Fischer et al. [10, 11], but through
a different procedure.
y1 ≡ y3
1
2 S12
α
x1
z1
S13 d
3
θ
z3 S23
11
connected to body 3 with cylindrical pairs, two body connected right hand
Cartesian references frames x1 y1 z1 and x3 y3 z3 are introduced. The axes z1
and z3 are directed along the axes of the cylindrical joints, whereas the co-
noted with S13 (motion of body 1 with respect to body 3), S23 and S12 .
The space dual of the Aronhold-Kennedy theorem in plane motion states
that:
Under homokinetic condition the relative angular velocities ω13 and ω23 of
body 1 and 2 with respect to body 3 (frame), are the same and the following
equalities must hold
ω13 = ω23 = ω .
sin θ z1
x1 = z1 = , (8)
1 − cos θ tan θ2
cos θ − 1
y1 = d . (9)
2 (1 + cos θ)
12
Since the transmission plane contains the common perpendicular to z1 and
z2 and S23 , the first equation clearly demonstrates that under homokinetic
conditions such a plane bisects the angle θ.
Other proofs of the Myard’s theorem, but substantially different from the
present one, are due to E. Metzner (1967) and M. Orain (1976) [6].
AGE
The actual kinematics of the pilot-lever Rzeppa joint is complex due to the
presence of multiple independent spatial closure loops. The kinematics is
further complicated because of tolerances and compliances.
For the purpose of kinematic analysis, in this investigation the Rzeppa
joint is simplified to one ball rolling inside two different toroidal grooves and
connected to a spherical cage.
The pilot-lever mechanism governing the angular position of the spherical
cage is composed of three spherical and two slider kinematic pairs.
In the plane of the two axes a1 and a2 , the pilot-lever linkage can be
interpreted as a planar six-bar function generator linkage [11] (see Figure
6a). In particular, assumed α as input variable, the output variable is θ.
13
The structural error of this linkage is αd as defined by equation (4).
a)
r2
r1
r3
α
θ β
r4
b)
From the geometry of Figure 6b) the following relationships can be es-
tablished:
sin β sin θ
= , (10)
r4 r3
sin (α + β) sin (α − θ)
= , (11)
r4 r23
where r23 = r2 − r3 . Substituting the first relationship into the second and
14
considering that s 2
r4
cos β = 1− sin θ , (12)
r3
where
" 2 2 # 2
2 r 4 r4 r4 r4
p = tan α − − + , (14)
r23 r3 r23 r3
" #
2
r4 r42
q = tan α + , (15)
r23 r3 r23
" 2 #
r4
r = tan2 α 1 − . (16)
r26
p
−q + q 2 + r(p + r)
tan θ = (17)
(p + r)
15
4.2 Kinematic synthesis
The kinematic synthesis problem can be stated as follows: Compute the link
length ratios
r4
h= , (18)
r2
r3
k= , (19)
r2
such that the structural error αd is minimized within the feasible range of α.
In order to readily use (17), the following equalities are useful:
r4 h r4 1−k
= , = . (20)
r3 k r23 h
Table 2: Values of h∗ and k ∗ for αmin = 0◦ , αmax = 45◦ and maximum values
of the structural error.
h∗ k∗ αd max
16
The feasible ranges of h and k are, respectively,
whereas 0 ≤ α ≤ αmax .
end
end
end
Algorithm 1: Kinematic synthesis of the pilot-lever linkage
By means of the synthesis procedure outlined in the Algorithm 1, different
optimal values of h∗ and k ∗ can be obtained (see Table 2). The Figure 4.2
shows the plot of αd .vs. α for h = 0.7500 k = 0.7085.
17
0.04
0.035
0.03
αd (rad)
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
α (rad)
Figure 7: Value of αd for h = 0.7500 k = 0.7085.
JOINT
frame, two shafts, the cage, the pilot lever and six balls (see Figure 8). A
critical step of the modeling phase has been the simulation of the contact
between balls and the grooves of the two shafts. The implementation of
spatial contact between solid parts is computationally demanding. This is
18
Figure 8: The multibody model of the Rzeppa pilot lever joint
shafts which leads to excessive time for computation and discontinuous con-
tact forces. The analysis of this joint assuming only one ball in contact is
appropriate for an investigation limited to kinematics. The presence of n
balls will produce n − 1 dependent closure loops. In practice this redundancy
19
Figure 9: Steps in building the virtual model
the interaction between balls and grooves has been simulated using force
elements instead of kinematic constrains. The balls have been rigidly con-
nected to the cage by means of spherical joints (see Figure 9a). Then, two
series of meridian curves have been sketched in the grooves (six curves on
the inner shaft and six curves on the outer shaft (see Figure 9b). Each pair
of curves intersects at a point which is contained in the transmission plane.
Two series of massless points have been created and constrained to these
curves (one for each curve). The point-on-a-curve constraint suppresses two
degrees-of-freedom. Finally, each ball has been connected with two spring-
damper elements to the corresponding points on the meridian curves (see
20
Ball 1 and 4 contact force with inner shaft
8.46
8.44
8.42
Force (N)
8.40
8.38
8.36
8.34
8.32
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Figure 9c).
The purpose of such elements is:
This modelling approach does not take into account friction forces.
21
Test case No. α (deg) αd (deg) Model properties
0 20◦ 0.00◦ ω1 =2π rad/s
1 15◦ 1.75◦ Tout =2Nm
2 20◦ 2.07◦ rin = rout =40 mm
3 25◦ 2.10◦ mball =5 g
spherical ends of pilot lever are set coincident to the shaft axes (Figure 6a).
An input constant velocity (ω1 =60 r.p.m ) has been applied to the revolute
joint degree-of-freedom at the inner shaft and a resisting torque Tout = 2 Nm
has been applied to the outer shaft. Other inertial and geometrical param-
eters are reported in Table 5. The main purpose of the model is to assess
the contact forces between the balls and the grooves. Several scenarios have
been simulated by changing the relative angle between the two shafts and
they are herein discussed.
the angular spacing between the corresponding balls. The dynamic actions
on the grooves of inner and outer shafts are essentially the same.
Let us now discuss the simulation of the first optimal solution in Table 2
22
(h∗ = 0.7500; k ∗ = 0.7085), performed for the three configurations (test case
No. 0, 1 and 2) and summarized in Table 5.
1.012
1.008
Transmission ratio
1.004
1.000
0.996
0.992
0.988
0.984
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
ferent test case analyzed, are reported. The plots agree with those obtained
from equation (3) when d = 0 and condition (7) is applied. Obviously the
transmission irregularities amplify when the structural error αd is increased.
They show a periodic pattern with a frequency which is twice the one of the
23
Test Case 1 - Ball 1 and 4 contact forces with inner shaft
8.52
8.50
8.48
8.46
8.44
Force (N)
8.42
8.40
8.38
8.36
8.34
8.32
8.30
8.28
8.26
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Figure 12: Contact forces on inner shaft grooves for the test cases listed in
Table 3
6 CONCLUSIONS
The paper discussed several technical issues associated with the dynamic
24
procedure for the design of the pilot-lever six bar linkage was suggested. The
design objective was the minimization of the angle αd between the plane
containing the ball centers (transmission plane) and the bisector plane of the
25
- an increase with the structural error αd of the internal forces not di-
rectly contributing to torque transmission; (i.e. those acting on the
cage and on the pilot lever).
References
[5] Wagner, E.R., Universal Joint and Driveshaft Design Manual, The So-
ciety of Automotive Engineers, 1991
[6] Schmelz, F., Seherr-Thoss, H., Aucktor, E., Universal Joints and Drive-
shafts, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1991
26
[8] Bongiovanni, G., Roccati, G., Giunti Articolati, Levrotto e Bella, Torino,
Italy, 1984
[14] Cheli, F., Pennestrı̀, E., eds., Cinematica e Dinamica dei Sistemi Multi-
List of Figures
27
2 Scheme of the homokinetic joint patented by A.H. Rzeppa in
1939 and relative positions of the centers A and B of spherical
surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
28