QUARTERLY

Volume 7, Number 12003

Increasing the
Performance of

GEARS

Plus...
Composite Airfield Matting
Hydraulic Fluid
Contamination
YBCO
Superconductors
and more!

AMPTIAC is a DOD Information Analysis Center Administered by the Defense Information Systems Agency, Defense Technical Information Center and Operated by IIT Research Institute

You may have noticed that we are encouraging scratch that

demanding that our readers verify their addresses in order
to continue receiving this publication. We have asked this
only once before in our six year history, and I promise you
we will not do it again anytime soon.
You all are familiar with the publications that swear this
is the last issue you will ever get, unless you send in this
card, or call this number. Well, I can tell you we arent like
that. This summer we are dropping anyone off our mailing
list who does not specifically tell us they want to stay on it.
This is not a passive event on your part, you must tell us
that you want to stay on our list or you will be removed
unceremoniously.

Editorial:
I Dont Want to Cut You... But I Will
There are many publications out there that promise technical content, yet show up on your desk with advertisements,
press releases, and other drivel not worth your valuable time.
I certainly hope you do not include the AMPTIAC Quarterly
in that category. We strive to bring you the exciting technology and developments of the Defense materials and processing community, and we do it in a neat and tidy package four
times a year. You may have noticed also our switch to full
color presentation last year, and our emphasis on larger, special issues devoted to specific areas of DOD technology. I can
assure you we have a few more surprises up our sleeves but
more on that in a minute.

There are more than 23,000 Defense community professionals on our mailing list, and each one is mailed a free copy
of every issue we print. Last year we distributed more than
100,000 copies of the Quarterly. As you can imagine, the cost
of printing and distributing those issues is staggering, and we
do not want any of those issues to wind up in the trash until
after someone has read it. Maintaining a mailing list like ours
is not easy, and frankly we need a little help from you. All we
are asking is that you visit our website (the link is provided
below) to verify that your current contact information is
correct. You then click either Yes or No to whether you
wish to continue receiving the Quarterly. We certainly hope
you click Yes.
And how about those surprises I mentioned? Well, for
starters we are working with the Navy on a large issue for this
summer on the materials and structures which are increasing
Navy warship performance and capabilities. And we are in
talks with the Air Force to present the latest in materials for
space and propulsion applications this winter. But I dont
want to let all of our secrets out of the bag, so if you want to
see more of what we have in store you better verify your
address and tell us to keep sending you the AMPTIAC
Quarterly!
All of us here at AMPTIAC certainly want to keep sending you the Quarterly, but you have to tell us that you want
it. Please visit the web site below and click Yes.
P.S. And as a reminder, we never share our mailing list with anyone. (Besides being just plain wrong, we are contractually
required by the Government to protect our subscribers privacy.)
http://amptiac.alionscience.com/certify/
Wade Babcock
Editor in Chief

About the cover: From gears to superconductor-levitated trains, this issue of the
AMPTIAC Quarterly highlights some exciting advances in processing techniques and
materials development. (Photography of gear manufacturing courtesy of Arrow
Gear Company, Downers Grove, IL, www.arrowgear.com)

Editor-in-Chief
Wade G. Babcock
Creative Director
Cynthia Long
Information Processing
Judy E. Tallarino
Patricia McQuinn
Inquiry Services
David J. Brumbaugh
Product Sales
Gina Nash
Training Coordinator
Christian E. Grethlein, P.E.

The AMPTIAC Quarterly is published by the Advanced Materials and Processes Technology Information
Analysis Center (AMPTIAC). AMPTIAC is a DOD sponsored Information Analysis Center, operated
by IIT Research Institute and administratively managed by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA),
Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). The AMPTIAC Quarterly is distributed to more
than 25,000 materials professionals around the world.
Inquiries about AMPTIAC capabilities, products and services may be addressed to
David H. Rose
Director, AMPTIAC
315-339-7023
EMAIL:
URL:

amptiac@alionscience.com

h t t p :/ / a m p t i a c . a l i o n s c i e n c e . c o m

We welcome your input! To submit your related articles, photos, notices, or ideas for future issues, please contact:
AMPTIAC
ATTN: WADE G. BABCOCK
201 Mill Street
Rome, New York 13440
PHONE: 315.339.7008
FA X : 3 1 5 . 3 3 9 . 7 1 0 7
EMAIL:

amptiac_news@alionscience.com

Paul Niskanen, PTSM Program Manager

and
Ali Manesh
AMPTIAC Technical Staff
Chicago, IL
and
Raymond Morgan
US Army Aviation and Missile Command
Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL

INTRODUCTION
Friction and wear between two sliding surfaces are in large
part dependent upon the finish of the surface. In particular
the roughness of the surface has a strong influence on the coefficient of friction. Overcoming friction, especially in high
performance applications, involves stringent lubrication
requirements. Examples of applications requiring exceptional
surface finish include gears and bearings. A new surface finishing technology, known as Superfinish, has proven to be effective at reducing gear wear while at the same time reducing
lubrication requirements. This revolutionary technology was
developed as part of the Power Transfer Systems Manufacturing
(PTSM) program, sponsored by the US Army Aviation and
Missile Command (AMCOM) at Redstone Arsenal.[1] While
the initial research focused upon gears, it has the potential to be
applied to other high performance machinery components that
are subjected to frictional forces.
PTSM is managed under contract by Alion Science and
Technology. The goals of the PTSM program are to reduce the
DODs operating and support costs, thus making weapon
systems and military vehicles more affordable. PTSMs investigation of superfinished gears was conducted to determine
whether this technology would enable improvements to helicopter drivetrain operation and reliability. Recent efforts by
the PTSM program have focused on improving the performance of helicopter transmissions. The high performance
demands of aerospace gears dictate the stringent requirements
placed upon the metallurgical quality, geometry, and surface
finish of these components. To meet these requirements, gears
are often continuously operated near the upper bounds of
their design envelope.
IMPROVING GEAR LIFE: THE ROAD SO FAR
One of the seven basic machines of antiquity[2], gears are
essential components in most mechanical devices classical
or contemporary. Most modern mechanical power transfer
systems utilize intermeshed gears as their mode of transfer (see

sidebar Gears Basics on page 8 to learn more about gears).

Military vehicles and equipment are no exception to this rule,
as they are also driven by similar powertrains. Gear-driven
systems are used in a wide variety of hardware; including fixedwing and rotary-wing aircraft, ground support equipment,
missile guidance and launch systems, artillery, and land vehicles. In high-performance applications friction and bending
resulting from the contact of opposing gear faces cause wear,
which in turn reduces driveline efficiency.
Metal gears are manufactured to their rough dimensions by
some combination of metallurgical and machining steps. They
are then heat treated to anneal the metal. The annealing process
alters the gears dimensions slightly, which is why standard
industry practice calls for finishing operations to follow the
heat treatment. Finally, gears are precision-ground after heat
treating to obtain the necessary final tolerances required to provide higher power density levels without increasing component
size or weight.
However, the grinding processes used to finish gears leave
microscopic surface features that influence gear life. Therefore,
additional processes are needed to eliminate these features
while preserving the required geometric accuracy and surface
finish. Recent experimental results indicate that improved part
surface finish can reduce pitting fatigue in gears, as well as
enhance the bending fatigue life of their teeth. Such improvements reduce the amount of frictional losses inherent in any
power transfer system.
Through PTSMs predecessor, the Instrumented Factory for
Gears (INFAC) program (also Army-sponsored), Alion[3], in
partnership with Army helicopter manufacturers, designed
experiments and conducted tests to evaluate the effect of various surface treatments and thin film solid coatings (also
referred to as vapor deposition coatings or VDC) on the pitting
fatigue life and load bearing capability of precision gears.[4]
The surface treatment processes used for the INFAC experiments included two superfinishing methods, hard shot
peening, and ausforming[5]. The technical feasibility of the

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

a) R/SCF Test Rig

Load Roller Speed

(5 Diameter)

b) R/SCF Test Specimens

56 Tooth Gear

Upper Shaft

Load Roller Speed = 1330 x 16/56 = 380 RPM

(Surface Velocity = 497 FPM;
1.43 x Surface Velocity of Specimen)

Lower Shaft (Motor End)

Lower Shaft with

16 Tooth Gear

Specimen
(1 Diameter)

Specimen Speed 1330 RPM

(Surface Velocity 348 FPM)

c) Schematic of the R/SCF Test (GRI)

Figure 1. Rolling/Sliding Contact Fatigue (R/SCF) Test. (Photos
and Schematic Courtesy of the Gear Research Institute (GRI))

thin film solid coating processes selected for this study had
already been demonstrated in the tooling and automotive parts
industries. The coatings selected included:
Amorphous boron carbide (B4C) deposited by physical
vapor deposition (PVD) at Bodycotes Diamond Black facility in Conover, NC. This coating is known to have a high
hardness (93-95 Rockwell C Scale, HRC), and good lubricity (a coefficient of friction, COF, equal to 0.2). It is also
unreactive to lubricating oils. The coating is deposited at low
temperatures (~250F) at a thickness range of 1 to 4 microns.
Diamond-like carbon (DLC) deposited using the RF plasma
process; by the Diamonex Division of Morgan Advanced
Ceramics Inc., Allentown, PA. This coating is a mixture of
sp3- (diamond-type) and sp2- (graphite-type) bonded carbon
with no long-range crystal order. The coating can be deposited to a mirror smooth finish, has high hardness (>93 HRC),
and good lubricity (COF = 0.1). Coating thickness is also
held between 1 to 4 microns.
A new coating made of amorphous carbon with tungsten carbide inclusions (referred to as WC/C coating). This coating
was applied by Balzers Tool Coating Inc, North Tonawanda,
NY, using a reactive sputtering process. Like the others the
coating thickness was held between 1 to 4 microns. Hardness
is around 1000 HV50 (Vickers Hardness Scale, 50 gm load)
and the COF is between 0.1 and 0.2.
IMPROVING GEAR DURABILITY:
COMPETING SURFACE TREATMENTS ARE EVALUATED
Preliminary tests were conducted on sample coupons using the
Rolling/Sliding Contact Fatigue (R/SCF) test technique
(Figure 1). R/SCF is a coupon screening test; designed to deter-

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

mine contact fatigue resistance while simulating contact stresses experienced by gear teeth under load. This method allows
evaluation of test coupons at significantly lower costs than actual gear testing. In order to draw a clear conclusion, all surface
treated samples were tested, and the results were compared to
those from samples fabricated using conventional processing
methods (baseline). The results of the R/SCF tests indicated
the statistical lifespan for the VDC specimens exceeded that of
the baseline (conventionally processed unpolished/uncoated)
specimens by an average of 22%. The best test specimen outperformed the best baseline specimen by a factor of three. The
uncoated superfinished specimens were virtually indestructible
in this test. These specimens exhibited a statistical lifespan that
exceeded the baseline by an average of 950%. They also
demonstrated the capability of carrying 28% higher contact
stresses for at least three times the life of the baseline specimens.
Subsequent testing on actual VDC gear samples also gave
excellent results. The unpolished VDC-processed specimens
out performed the baseline specimens by exhibiting an
improvement in average lifetime in excess of 500%, while
also demonstrating the ability to withstand at least 8% higher
contact loads.
Although R/SCF testing is often used as a screening test to
evaluate how materials would perform in a gear application,
flight safety requirements dictate rigorous component testing.
Consequently, the very encouraging R/SCF results led the
PTSM evaluation team to down-select the superfinish process
for testing on actual aerospace-quality gears, and to compare
results to those obtained on conventionally processed gears.
SUPERFINISHING BECOMES THE PROCESS OF CHOICE
Two superfinishing methods, both employing vibratory polishing techniques, were evaluated. The first method used
aluminum oxide particles as an abrasive. The particles were
mixed with small zinc cylinders (chopped wires), water, and
detergents. The process provided the desired surface finish, but
required a longer processing time than the second method.
Additionally, the samples did not perform as well as the other
superfinished specimens.
The second polishing method is a process known as
Chemically-Accelerated Vibratory Surface Finishing (subsequently referred to as Isotropic Superfinishing, or Superfinish). The
process uses ceramic media, along with reagents that chemically convert the metallic surface being polished. The process was
developed and patented by REM Chemicals, Brenham, TX.
How Does Superfinish Work?
Gear surfaces are processed to provide a very hard surface layer
this is sometimes called case hardening. For the gears used in
this program, this was done through a heat treat process known
as carburizing. This treatment results in a hard, but less ductile
surface that penetrates to a depth of about 0.040 inches. The
hard surface provides the needed wear resistance for the gear
teeth, while leaving the core of the gear with the needed ductility and fracture toughness. While this surface hardness is
desired for gear performance, it would hinder conventional
finishing operations.

1. Original Surface

2. Conversion Coating Formation

3. Coating Removal by Media

4. Coating Re-forms

5. Process Continues

6. Burnish Removes Coating

Figure 2. Superfinish Equipment Cell

Installed at the PTSM Facility, Chicago,
IL. (Equipment Courtesy of REM
Chemicals)

Figure 3. Isotropic
Superfinish Process
Schematic. (Courtesy
of REM Chemicals)

This is what sets the Superfinish method apart from other

approaches - The REM process results in a very shallow softening of the hard case, allowing the ceramic media to gradually
remove the now-softened peaks on the surface. This soft layer
is referred to as a conversion coating (converted from hard to
soft). The ceramic media will not abrade the hard surface of the
metal, but it will rub off the soft layer. When the soft layer is
removed, exposing the harder metal surface below, the conversion process starts again (thus it is self-restoring). In this way,
the Superfinish process keeps removing the peaks, until it
reaches the valleys. Knowing the material removal rate of the
alloy and process used, as well as the starting surface finish
parameters, one can calculate how long to run the process.
When the process has resulted in the desired surface finish, the
conversion process is terminated by the addition of other
chemicals (soap), and the parts are allowed to burnish until
bright surfaces are achieved.
The Superfinish Process
The Superfinish process utilizes conventional vibratory
finishing equipment, as seen in Figure 2. This equipment, in
combination with high density finishing media, can produce
isotropic[6] surface finishes with an Arithmetical Mean
Roughness (Ra)[7] value as low as 1.0 in[8]. The Superfinish
process is illustrated in Figure 3. At the start of the process
(Step 1), the original metal surface reacts a first time with the
chemical polishing mixture, forming the first conversion coating (Step 2). The vibratory machine and polishing media
produce an effective rubbing motion on the surface of the
metal part(s) (Step 3), exposing the peaks of the metal surfaces
to a second reaction (Step 4) and re-forming the complete
conversion coating. The process of conversion coating reformation and removal (Step 5) is continued through many

successive cycles. The whole process is continued until the metal

parts are smoothed to the required surface finish quality. At this
point, the chemical mixture used during the smoothing stage is
drained away, and a neutral, burnishing soap is introduced into
the vibratory machine. The burnish removes all remaining
conversion coating (Step 6) from the surface of the part(s),
producing a mirror-like appearance and imparting a mild rust
preventive to the surface. The part(s) are then ready for unloading and the Superfinish process is complete. A photograph of a
gear before and after superfinishing is shown in Figure 4.
Initially selecting the proper polishing media (in terms of
shape, size, and mixture) is critical to successfully superfinishing gears. Since gears are polished in a viscous slurry of ceramic particles and chemicals subjected to high frequency vibration
(with no direct mechanical rubbing applied to the individual
abrasive particles), the particle sizes and shapes remain stable
over time. As a result, the polishing media has a low attrition
rate, and can be used repeatedly with the same results.
An example of the expected change in surface finish resulting
from Superfinish processing is as follows:
Starting Ra = 8 to 16 in
Typical Final Ra = ~ 2 in
Starting Rz = 90 to 120 in[9] Typical Final Rz = ~ 30 in
For aerospace gears, the Superfinish process typically removes
70 to 100 in. of stock per hour. Thus, if parts have a starting
Rz of 120 in the required processing time will be about 1.5
hours.
SUPERFINISH IS INTRODUCED TO PRODUCTION GEARS
With a goal of ultimately implementing the technology, a
project technical advisory
team composed of experts
from the helicopter industry was formed to determine what component
testing was required.
Based on the advisory
teams recommendations,
the testing included:
Evaluation of the effects
of superfinish processing
on both gear geometry Figure 4. Spiral Bevel Gears Before
and contact profiles. and After (right) Superfinish
This was accomplished Processing.
by comparing gear surface features using a coordinate measuring machine (CMM)
on both superfinished and conventionally processed spiral
bevel gears.

Table 1. Baseline Hardness & Surface Roughness Measurements.

Pyrowear X53
AISI 9310 Spiral Bevel Gears
Spur Gears

Component
Hardness
Ra
Rmax[11]

Gear
50-61 HRC
7-12 in
63-150 in

Pinion (smaller gear)

57-62 HRC
6-9 in
55-130 in

Gear
59-62 HRC
8-13 in
65-119 in

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

Power Circulating Pitting (contact) Fatigue Testing

Eight sets of spiral bevel gears made from AISI 9310 steel, the
most common aerospace gear material, were selected to evaluate the effects of superfinishing. Power circulating (contact)
fatigue tests on these samples, conducted by ARL at NASA
Glenn, indicated that superfinished gears performed at least as
well as the baseline samples and that no deleterious effects were
observed. The availability of existing samples at ARL provided
a fast and economical look at the effects of superfinishing on
aerospace gear materials, and guided decisions on the remaining test plan. However, these samples were not considered useful for a statistical validation study. Gears fabricated from the
same lot of material had been previously tested on another ARL
program, and were considered suspect due to erratic results.
However, the advisory team determined that since a significant
database already exists for AISI 9310 ground gears they would
be suitable for initial comparison screening tests. The goal of
the initial testing at NASA was to save time and money, and yet

Table 2. Power Circulating (Contact) Fatigue Testing.

Gear Finishing Process
As Ground

9-12 in

2-3 in

Tests Ending with

Surface Fatigue

15 of 15

8 of 10

Average Time-on-Test

Load Pressure
Loading Vane
Slave Gear

Oil
Seal
Test-lubricant Outlet
Temperature Measurement
Location

Test
Gears

a) Cutaway View

Nonactuating
Slave Gear

Drive Shaft
Belt Pulley
Slave-gear
Torque
A

Loading Vane

Loading
Vane

Offset

Shaft
Seal

Actuating
Slave Gear

Load
Pressure

Shaft
Torque
View
A-A

b) Schematic View

Figure 5. NASA Glenn Research Center Gear Fatigue Test

Apparatus.

demonstrate that superfinished gears performed no worse than

the baseline.
ARL also conducted the same tests on Pyrowear X53 gears.
Fifteen sets of spur gears were made. Of these, eight sets were
tested as baseline (conventionally processed) samples and seven
sets were tested after superfinishing. The test setup allowed half
of the tooth surfaces on a single face to be engaged during the
test and as a result, up to four data points could be collected
from each gear set (two sides of both the front and back of each
tooth). Figure 5 illustrates the fatigue test apparatus. Fifteen
tests comprising 1.5 billion stress cycles were completed on the
conventionally processed (as-ground) Pyrowear X53 spur
gears, and all tests resulted in surface fatigue on one or more
teeth. For the superfinished spur gears, ten tests were complet-

1 @ 600 million cycles no failure

1 @ 333 million cycles no failure

100 million cycles

300 million cycles

(300% improvement)

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

Shaft Oil Seal

Test-lubricant
Inlet

Superfinished

Ra (Flank)

Number of Tests
Suspended

Viewing Port
Test-gear Cover

Percent of Population Failed

Geometry and Profile Evaluation

For the gear geometry and profile evaluation, twelve spiral
bevel gear sets (AGMA Quality Q12[10]) were used. These
gears were untested remnants of another test program, and
were provided by Army Research Laboratory (ARL) personnel
assigned to NASAs Glenn Research Center. Alion personnel
conducted hardness and surface roughness testing on all parts,
both before and after superfinish processing. Table 1 displays
the results of the tests on the baseline specimens. Results from
the superfinished specimens will be reported later.
Parts were also inspected on a Zeiss/Hfler CMM by Arrow
Gear Company (Downers Grove, IL) to determine if the
superfinish process resulted in any appreciable changes in tooth
thickness, overall geometry, or contact profile. Results from the
CMM inspections determined the following:
Superfinishing removed an average of 0.00015 inches from
the tooth surface of both the pinion and gear, resulting in an
average tooth thickness change of 0.0003 inches. There was
also an average of 0.0001-inch change in tooth geometry.
Superfinished gears remained within the specified tolerances.
AGMA Quality Class was maintained.

Slave-system
Oil Inlet
Drive Shaft

Oil-seal Gas Flow

Power circulating pitting and bending fatigue tests conducted on baseline and superfinished AISI 9310 alloy spiral bevel
gears and spur gears made from Pyrowear X53 alloy.

99
95
90
50
20
10

Ground
Superfinished
Regressions
Suspended Test

5
2
1
6

8 10

20 30 40

60 80100

200 300 400 600

Cycles to Failure (Millions)

Figure 6. Plot of Surface Fatigue Data.

Figure 7. Typical Surface Fatigue Failures: left - as Ground,

center - Superfinished, right - Superfinished, Suspended Test.
(Photo Courtesy of the Army Research Laboratory)

ed comprising a total of 2.9 billion stress cycles, and eight of

the ten tests resulted in surface fatigue on one or more teeth.
Table 2 and Figure 6 display the results of these tests.
Analysis of the test results indicate that superfinishedprocessed gears run longer without incurring damage when
compared to as-ground gears. The as-ground gears also exhibit
a more pronounced run-in[12] as compared to the superfinished gears. It should be noted that data from this study, as is
consistent with most high-cycle fatigue data, have a large degree
of scatter, even though nominally identical specimens were tested using carefully controlled conditions. However, an analysis
of the data revealed the superfinished gears experience a 300%
improvement in life when compared to baseline. This improvement has been statistically calculated to the 90-percent confidence level.
Optical Inspection of Gear Teeth
Photographs of typical gear tooth conditions resulting from the
surface fatigue tests are shown in Figure 7. Inspection of these
photographs reveals that only one quarter of the tooth area
(when considering both the front and back of a tooth) experienced wear during any single test. The Army researchers who
conducted these tests determined that the
damaged contact areas for both the asground and superfinished gears were similar.
When comparing one specimen to another
the location and degree of damage varied
somewhat, but generally they appeared
Figure 8.
roughly the same. The important thing to
Power Circulating
note is not the actual damage but rather the
Fatigue Test Rig.
(Photo Courtesy
number of cycles required to damage the
of the Gear
specimen. The superfinished gears all experiResearch Institute)
enced significantly more stress cycles before
damage occurred and the test was stopped.
The photograph on the far right is an extreme example. This
test on a superfinished gear was suspended after 605 million
stress cycles, about three times as long as the longest surviving
as-ground specimen. Very little wear was noted on this gear.
Power Circulating Bending Fatigue Testing
The Gear Research Institute (GRI) at Penn State conducted
power circulating bending fatigue tests (see Figure 8) on spur
gears made from Pyrowear X53. For this test, 28 spur gears (14
sets) were made. These gears were specifically designed with special undercuts at the root of each gear tooth to assure failure in
bending rather than from contact stresses. Seven tests were conducted with specimens having as-ground root fillets. Seven additional tests were conducted with specimens having ground and

superfinished root fillets. To obtain reasonable S/N curves, these

gears were tested at various stress levels. As-ground gear sets were
tested at the following stress levels: one at 153 ksi, four at 158
ksi, one at 164 ksi, and one at 175 ksi. The number of cycles to
failure ranged from 0.1 to 11 million cycles. The superfinished
gear sets were tested at 186 ksi (one set) and 175 ksi (six sets),
and the number of cycles to failure ranged from 0.2 to 8 million. One sample was still running after 9 million cycles.
Testing at Penn State resulted in frequent premature failures
related to surface defects rather than bending loads. These failures were consistent with the presence of large non-metallic
inclusions. Therefore, the failures prevented rigorous statistical
analysis of the results. However, since all of the specimens were
made from the same bar of material, the tests did reflect an
improvement in bending performance that can be achieved via
superfinishing.
The surface finish of 14 of the bending fatigue samples was
inspected. In the as-ground condition, the average surface
roughness on flanks was 9-12 in, and was 12-16 in in the

Figure 9. Typical Bending Failure of

a Spur Gear as Observed at GRI
(Fractured Tooth is Missing).
(Photo Courtesy of the Gear
Research Institute)

root area. The original superfinishing cycle preferentially treated the tooth flanks, and had little affect in the root areas.
However, since the finish in the root area affects bending
fatigue performance, parts were reprocessed to improve finish
in the root. After the second processing, the surface roughness
in the root was 6-9 in.
Results reported by GRI, indicate that even small surface finish improvements in the root fillets result in reduction of stress
concentrations caused by machining marks. This reduction was
sufficient to eliminate these marks as fracture origin sites.
Although the data was insufficient for statistical validation,
results indicated that superfinishing increased bending fatigue
resistance by at least 10%. GRI also reported that Superfinishing virtually eliminated wear. A photograph of a typical
bending failure observed at GRI is shown in Figure 9.
CONCLUSIONS
Superfinishing has thus far demonstrated itself to be an exciting and promising material processing technology. When
brought to full maturity, this process has the potential to greatly enhance the performance of gears for use in the military and
beyond. It is a formidable part of a greater effort to lengthen
service life and reduce sustainment costs. While the focus of
this article has concerned gears, it should be noted that
Superfinishing may be beneficial for other applications that are
subjected to high degrees of wear due to contact with other
moving components.

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

Isotropic superfinishing is a repeatable and robust process.

It improves both surface and bending fatigue resistance of
aerospace-quality gears without affecting the AGMA gear
classification. Superfinishing is able to remove grinding marks
on finished gears and provide equal surface roughness values of
about 2 micro-inches, when measured in perpendicular directions. In gear tests, the Superfinish process demonstrated the
ability to improve surface fatigue resistance by 300 percent, and
it improved bending fatigue by at least 10 percent when compared to the baseline ground samples. The benefits of the
superfinish process will translate into lighter transmissions for
new designs (due to increased bending fatigue limits permitting
gear teeth with a reduced section modulus) and improved
system durability for both existing and new designs.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of US Army
Aviation Missile Command, and the contributions made to
this work by the following organizations and individuals: Mark
Michaud, REM Chemicals; Bob Handschuh & Tim Krantz,
ARL(NASA-Glenn); Douglas McPherson & Aaron Isaacson,
Gear Research Institute; Jim Corwin, James Corwin Associates.
REFERENCES & NOTES
[1] Power Transfer Systems Manufacturing Program, US Army
Aviation and Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Contract
No. DAAH23-00-C-R232
[2] The seven basic machines: Inclined Plane, Wedge, Screw,
Gear, Pulley, Wheel, and Lever. The earliest known treatment

Gear Basics
Gears are one of the most fundamental of all
machines. They may be manufactured in any
number of shapes, sizes, geometries, and configurations. Simply put, gears transfer power from one to
another by their direct mechanical interaction
(intermeshing). Not only do they transfer power,
but different configurations can also change the
direction of transfer, convert circular motion to
linear motion, or linear motion to circular
motion. While there are numerous
types of gear geometries, this
guide is limited to those relevant to our feature article spur gears and bevel gears.
Ou

Line of
Action

tsid

Dia

me

ter

(D

o)

Pressure
Angle ()
Root
(Tooth)
Filet
Line of
Centers
Ro
o

tD

iam

ete

o)

Top Land

Ou

tsid

eD

iam

ete

r (D

Circular
Pitch (D)

Spur Gears
Spur gears are wheels with mating teeth cut in their surfaces, such
that one turns the other without slippage. When the mating teeth are
cut so that they are parallel to the axis of rotation, the gears are called
straight spur gears. Figure 1 shows an example of intermeshed straight
spur gears and relevant gear anatomy.
When two gears of unequal size are meshed together, the smaller of
the two is called a pinion. Regardless of the size difference between a
gear and a pinion, the teeth of both must be the same size to mesh
properly. Straight spur gears are the most common type. Another type
of spur gear, the helical spur gear, is very common in military hardware and vehicles. In helical gears the teeth are cut slantwise across
the working face of the gear. Therefore, one end of
PINION
the tooth lies ahead of the other; with each having
a leading and trailing end (Figure 2).
For intermeshed straight spur gears, the entire
widths of mating teeth come in contact simultaneTooth
ously. However, with helical (also know as spiral)
Profile
gears, contact between two teeth starts first at the
leading end and moves progressively across the gear
faces until the trailing ends are in contact. This type
Whole Depth
Center
(ht)
of meshing action keeps the gears in constant
Distance
(C)
contact with one another. As such, there is more
efficient power transfer and smoother, quieter
action. One disadvantage of helical spur gears is the
tendency to thrust or push axially on its shaft (due
to the conversion of radial force to axial force
caused by the slant of the teeth). Typically, special
thrust bearings are installed at the end of the shaft
to counteract axial thrust.

Figure 1. Basic Gear Anatomy (Straight Spur).

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1

GEAR

of the subject is attributed to the Greek mathematician

Archimedes (who is sometimes credited with the development of
the modern versions of the gear and the screw)
[3] Then IIT Research Institute (IITRI). The bulk of IITRI
became Alion in December 2002
[4] Enhanced Surface Protection of Precision Gears, March 2001,
and Nose Gearbox Spiral Bevel Pinion and Gear Surface Enhancements, March 2001, US Army Aviation and Missile Command,
Redstone Arsenal, Contract No. DAAJO9-95-C-0546
[5] A low temperature thermomechanical process. More
information on the ausforming process can be found at
http://www.arl.psu.edu/areas/ausform/ausform.html
[6] Isotropic Surface topographical features are roughly the
same in all directions and along all axes

[7] Ra is the Arithmetical Mean Roughness (measured by DIN

4768)
[8] in = micro-inches (10-6 in.)
[9] Rz is the Mean Peak-to-Valley Height (measured by DIN
4762)
[10] American Gear Manufacturers Association Quality Q12
This is an industry standard that defines the quality level of the
gears tested
[11] Rmax is the difference between the highest peak and the
lowest valley
[12] Run-in: Similar to break-in. As a new gear is initially run in
mesh, slight wear occurs, resulting in a smoothing and polishing
of the contact areas of the gear teeth

Bevel Gears
Bevel gears are used to change the direction of transfer in a power transfer
system. The working face of a bevel gear is cut at angle. This type of gear
can connect shafts lying at any given angle because the gears have been
specifically beveled to manifest the needed angle. Like spur gears, the teeth
of bevel gears may be either straight or helical.
Figure 3 shows several examples of bevel gears. When the sweep angle of
the bevel gears equals 90, it is referred to as a miter gear. By visual inspection, it is obvious that the bevel angle for an individual gear is half of the
intended sweep angle. For example, the gear faces for a miter gear are
beveled at 45 angles. Helical bevel gears are also very common. They are
used for all the same reasons of efficient transfer, and noise and vibration
reduction as in helical spur gears.

Figure 2. Helical Spur Gear.

A. Miter Gear

(Photography of Gear
Manufacturing Courtesy of Arrow
Gear Company, Downers Grove, IL,
www.arrowgear.com)

B. Bevel Gear

C. Helical Bevel Gear

Figure 3. Straight and Helical Bevel Gears.

The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 1