ULTRALIGHT MINI BAJA TRANSMISSION WITH PARTIAL SLIP

DIFFEERENTIAL SENIOR DESIGN II REPORT

MAY 2015

GROUP MEMBERS
JAKE BUNAGAN, PEDRO LONGORIA, RAFAEL LOPEZ

FACULTY ADVISORS
DR. FUENTES & DR. VASQUEZ

Abstract

The University of Texas Pan- American SAE Mini Baja Team has elected to redesign the existing
transmission in order to achieve better performance and better competition results. The goal of the
project is to design a lighter, more durable transmission for the team to assist in the improvement of
competition success. This will be achieved through conducting extensive analysis on materials with
higher strength to weight ratios than what is currently used as well as determining where material can be
removed from the gear bodies, while still allowing for the successful operation of the transmission under
the harshest of conditions.. This was accomplished by utilizing the tools of Finite Element Analysis
software to develop a spoke pattern in the gear which effectively reduced a large amount of rotational
inertia. After a successful reduction of five pounds on the previous transmission design the proposed
design was able to outperform the previous best acceleration times of the vehicle.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
Introduction

1.0 Problem Formulation

1.1 Problem Statement 3

1.2 Background Research

1.3 Competitive Products

1.4 Customer Needs and Wants

1.5 Project Goals and Objectives

1.6 Quality Function Deployment

1.7 Gantt Chart

12

2.0 Concept Generation

13

2.1 Methodology 13
2.2 Functional Decomposition 14
2.3 Conceptual Design 23
2.4 3-D Model

24

3.0 Design Embodiment

24

3.1 Identification of Core Engineering Topics and Related Equations

3.2 Nomenclature

24

25

3.3 Engineering Analysis

26

3.4 Finite Element Analysis

35

3.5 Manufacturing Process

37

3.6 Bill of Materials

38

3.7 Prototype Cost

39

3.8 Production Cost

39

4.0 Design Validation

41

4.1 Test Protocols41

4.2 Data

42

4.3 DFMEA 42
Summary

44

List of Figures
Figure 1..6
Figure 2..6
Figure 3..6
Figure 4..6
Figure 5..8
Figure 6...9
Figure 7..10
Figure 8..11
Figure 9..12
Figure 10..24
Figure 11..26
Figure 12..27
Figure 13..29
Figure 14..30
Figure 15..32
Figure 16..33
Figure 17 ..35
Figure 18..36
Figure 19..42.

List of Tables
1

Table 1...5
Table 215
Table 316
Table 417
Table 518
Table 619
Table 720
Table 821
Table 921
Table 1022
Table 1123
Table 1232
Table 1334
Table 1438
Table 1542

Introduction
The project we have elected to work on is the Ultra-Light Mini Baja Transmission with Partial Slip
Differential. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has three sanctioned Mini Baja competitions
held in the United States, in which approximately 110 universities from around the world compete. Each
university has to design manufacture and test a small off road vehicle in which each are given a stock
Briggs and Stratton 10 hp engine. Due to the strict rules imposed by SAE each university can optimize
all components except the engine. The main goal of this project is to reduce the overall weight and
rotational inertia of the transmission and include a partial slip differential. The partial slip differential
will be beneficial to the design in the aspect that it prevents excessive power from being allocated to one
wheel without adequate traction to the ground.
In order to begin the design process, the new design cannot exceed the weight and dimensions of the
previous transmission. Currently the transmission has a weight of twenty-seven pounds and has a
volume of three hundred fifty cubic inches. The dry weight of the gears totals to fifteen pounds, which is
fifty six percent of the total weight of the transmission. Strategic weight reduction in these components
will also reduce the rotational inertia, which allows for better energy transfer in the overall system. The
two components that have the most weight, the gears and transmission casing, are the two areas where
the most reduction can occur. Focusing on the gears would allow for the greatest amount of weight
3

reduction to occur. Finite Element Analysis will be used to determine where the highest concentration of
stresses are throughout the structure and give crucial insight as to where each component must be
strengthened to prevent system failure. Depending on the loads experienced in the system will affect the
material selected as well as whether or not a surface finish or heat treatment will be implemented into
the product. The simplest way to reduce overall weight in the transmission would be through the use of
lighter materials that have high tensile strength and high endurance to withstand the loads, such as
aluminum, steel(alloyed and non-alloyed), composite materials. Three dimensional computer aided
design (CAD) software will be used to run simulations of the proposed design.
The proposed design will have a significant impact in the success of the mini baja team in the
international competition. The reduced weight and partial slip differential will allow for greater
acceleration and better traction in the various terrains of the course. This new design has an impact in the
auto industry, more specifically, in the off road and All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) portion of the industry.
The expected market for all terrain vehicles is to be a multi-billion-dollar industry; currently industry
has felt pressured to increase fuel efficiency due to the increasing numbers in government agencies who
are regulating environmental impacts from vehicles, along with consumers looking for the highest power
to weight ratio available. The lighter transmission would entail lower energy losses in the system
making it more efficient and will increase the overall power to weight ratio that the consumer is
searching for.
1.0

Problem Formulation

Each year the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) hosts sanctioned Mini Baja competitions held
throughout the United States. The University of Texas Pan-American Baja team has always looked for
success at these competitions. Through careful testing and considerations, the team has elected to
redesign the transmission system to assist in better performance of the vehicle. The transmission was
selected partly due to the fact that the engine itself is provided to the team and the team is required to
2

design the vehicle around this engine. The provided engine is a Briggs and Stratton 10 hp engine, with
an output torque of 14.5 ft lb . The transmission design must be robust enough to handle the various
types of loading induced by the various aspects of the competition ranging from the maneuverability test
all the way to the grueling endurance race. This in turn means that the vehicle must be light weight,
maneuverable, and have an optimal amount of torque to accelerate the vehicle.
1.1

Problem Statement

The current Mini Baja transmission has been in service for four years of competition. The purpose of
this project is to improve on the current design. This will be done by designing a more efficient and
lightweight transmission that will provide the torque requested by the team. This can be achieved
through the use of better materials, materials that have higher surface durability values and strength
values.
1.2

Background Research

In its current stat the transmission weighs 27.25 lbs. and provides an output torque of 517 ft lb . The
new transmission design will be focused on decreasing the weight significantly in such a way that
removes the amount of rotational inertia provided by the gears. This rotational inertia, does not allow
the transmission to be at an optimal efficiency in the sense that not all the power transmitted from the
engine goes into driving the vehicle forward when there is a large amount of rotational inertia. By
reducing the amount of rotational inertia the efficiency of the power transmission as well as the
acceleration provided would increase significantly. Another point of interest for the design process was
to increase the gear reliability by improving the surface fatigue capacity of the system. By improving
this aspect, the transmission would have a longer life and would decrease the likelihood of surface
imperfections such as chipping or cracks that may occur within the system due to use.
3

1.3 Competitive Products

Part of the design process, was to research and analyze products that are currently available on the
market for consumers to purchase. This is a tool that can assist in the design because it gives the group
an insight as to how some of the top companies in the industry are able to provide the top notch
products that they develop for these type of applications. The All-Terrain Vehicle market is an estimated
five billion dollar industry. From this total market size, the top five competitors in this market were
selected for product analysis. These companies were, Arctic Cat, Honda, Kawasaki, Polaris, and
Yamaha. Through extensive research Table 1 was created as a comparison of some of the key features
provided by these companies.

Honda

Polaris

Kawasaki

Yamaha

Arctic Cat

2 Speed

Direct Drive

2 Speed

2 Speed

2 Speed

Spur

Spur Gears &

Spur Gears

Spur Gears

Feature
#1
Feature
#2

Gear

Spur Gears

Chain

Rear
Feature

AWD ( All

2 Wheel Drive & 4

Wheel Drive)

Wheel Drive Selection

Wheel
#3

Double
4 Wheel Drive
Clutch

Drive

Table 1 displays a summary of the competitive products currently available on the

market for consumers.

As seen above in Table 1, the competitive products on the market provide similar features. Starting with
the first row, which lists the drive mechanism, all of the products have a two speed variation on their
transmissions, with the exception of Polaris, which provides a Direct Drive. The second feature provided
by the competitive market is the type of gears used within the transmission. The products featured on the
market have spur gears within the transmission, with Polaris having a combination of spur gears and a
chain and sprocket system for their transmission. Lastly the final feature that was compared to the
proposed design was the drivetrain used. In the drivetrain area, there was a large variance ranging from,
all-wheel drive, rear wheel drive, two wheel drive, four wheel drive and double clutch. The proposed
transmission will provide a partial slip differential to assist in maneuverability of the vehicle, which is
not seen in any of the competitors on the listed market. A more detailed description of the competitive
products will be covered in the Quality Function Deployment section of the report.

Figure 1-Honda's transmission for similar all-terrain vehicles.

terrain vehicles.

Figure 2-Yamaha's transmission for similar all-

Figure 3-Polaris transmission for similar all-terrain vehicles.

all-terrain vehicles.

Figure 4-Arctic Cat's transmission for similar

1.4 Customer Needs and Wants

The customer in the case of this project was the UTPA Mini-Baja Team. The team determined that the
area of improvement needed for the transmission was the decrease the overall weight. The current
transmission was used as a benchmark for the improved design. The customers needs were for a
lightweight design, less than the existing weight of 27.25 lbs. The transmission also needed to have the
11.11:1 overall gear ratio reduction in order to maintain the current output torque of the transmission.
3
The transmission will also need to be less than 330 and be within the allotted budget provided by

the Senior Design course. The team also expressed additional modifications they wanted to the
transmission, which they felt would assist in the overall performance of the transmission. The first
modification requested by the team was for the transmission to be serviceable. The second was for the
transmission to be efficient, allowing for more of the power from the engine to be supplied to directly
into driving the vehicle forward as opposed to being dissipated as a rotational inertia..
1.5 Project Goals and Objectives
The objective of this product is to design a lightweight transmission that maintains the current torque
output of 517 ft lb . This will provide a transmission with a total weight of 22lbs and allow the same
target output torque, improving the power to weight ratio from 18.9:1 to 25.9:1. The goals of this
project are to increase the efficiency of the transmission to ensure that the maximum amount of power
6

possible is used to drive the vehicle forward, allowing for better acceleration and in some cases
maneuverability of the vehicle. The next is to have the transmission designed in such a matter that it
can be easily serviced by the team, whenever and wherever it is required. The final goal of the project is
to ensure that the proposed design will withstand race conditions.
1.6

Quality Function Deployment

The Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is given to help planners focus on characteristics of a new or
existing product or service from the viewpoints of market segments, company, or technologydevelopment needs. It is an essential tool in transforming customer needs into engineering
characteristics for a product or service, prioritizing each product or service characteristic while
simultaneously setting development targets for product or service.

Figure 5 depicts a comparison between the proposed design and the designs
currently available for consumers on the market.
From Figure 5, the customers needs, shown in orange and wants, shown in green are compared
between the proposed design and the available products. As shown above, there is a significant need for

it the transmission to be lightweight as well as reliable. The products are rated on a scale from one to
five. Five meaning the product is excellent in the analyzed area and one meaning the product is not
suited for the selected parameter that is being analyzed. The proposed design was rated five in
serviceability, durability and lightweight, because these are the wants of the customer.

Figure 6 shows a comparison of various criteria that have been determined to be

essential for the design and implementation of the proposed product.
From Figure 6, the Functional Requirements of the product are listed in columns listed from left to right
and the Technical Competitive Assessment is shown listed from top to bottom. This portion of the QFD
allows for the assessment of the product being designed when compared to products already in
existence. As seen in the first column, the proposed design had a significantly higher torque output value
than those from products already in existence. The closest torque output was approximately 90 ft lb
smaller and the corresponding product had a weight of 10 lb greater than that of the proposed design.
From the second column, it can be seen that the proposed design is the lightest option. One of the
greatest factors in the team designing their own transmission as opposed to purchasing on of the
8

available market products is the available gear ratios. As seen from the fifth column, the current products
do not offer similar gear ratios to the proposed design. The final important comparison from the figure
above is the type of gears used within the system. As previously mentioned, the competitive products all
featured a purely spur gear transmission with exception of the Polaris transmission system which
involved the combination of spur gears with chain and sprocket. The proposed design will have a
combination of helical and spur gears due to the high revolutions induced from the motor. Helical gears
are the optimal type of gears as they operate more efficiently under high rotational speeds due to the
reduced energy dissipation from impact that occurs within the system.

Figure 7 displays the customer's wants and needs and how the design parameters
correlate to the needs and wants.
Figure 7 displays the customers needs and wants in comparison to the design parameters that were
taken into consideration when looking at improving the transmission system. The figure shows that there
is a strong relationship between the lightweight need and the design parameter size. The design
parameter Material Strength had a strong relationship with the needs of durability and lightweight. The
higher the material strength the more durable the material as long as the material is not being pushed
beyond what it is capable. For example, exceeding the surface fatigue strength of the material or bending
strength capabilities.
9

Figure 8 displays the correlations between the design parameters and how they
relate to each other.
From Figure 8, it can be seen that there is a positive correlation between weight and size. As the size
increases the weight will also increase. The same can be said of the inverse of the previously mentioned
relationship, as the size decreases, weight decreases. There are positive relationships between the gear
ratio and the torque output, weight, as well as size of the transmission. The gear ratio governs all of
these parameters as it directly affects the torque output, the size of gears determined by the gear ratio
will affect the size which will in turn affect the overall weight. The last factor taken into consideration
was cost. Cost governed the previously analyzed parameters and was considered an important factor to
consider due to the budget constraint.

10

1.7

Gantt Chart

Figure 9 Displays the Gantt chart for the team and assists in tracking completion
progress.
The Gantt chart illustrates the schedule of our project and where we are at the moment in time
throughout the semester. The Gantt chart itself is liable to change depending on the situation, as a team,
major or minor changes to the schedule itself can be made at any given point in time. The purpose of the
Gantt chart is to maintain an organized schedule of project progress and ensure that the project will be
completed on time.
2.0

Concept Generation and Selection

Through high considerations of the costumers needs and wants along with heavy consideration of the
project goals and objectives, preliminary designs were generated for the transmission. The most critical
of these factors being the size of the gears required for the second stage of the transmission. The second
stage has significantly higher torque being transmitted between the mating pairs of gears. The tooth most
likely to fail within the system is the smaller gear of the second reduction stage. When searching for

11

gears the helical gears that were found to have sufficient torque capacity values weighed more than the
existing gears.
2.1

Methodology

The market research compiled within the first weeks of the course was essential in developing a proper
understanding of what aspects of the project were needed to be considered in order to build a
competitive product capable of meeting the needs of the customers and remaining within the provided
constraints. By identifying the customers needs and wants, while setting concise goals and objectives,
the transmission as a whole was broken down into two essential components in the Functional
Decomposition section to ensure that the best possible product is designed and manufactured.
2.2

Functional Decomposition

Functional decomposition of the Mini-Baja transmission with partial slip differential is broken down
into what the group felt were the two most important components of the transmission and would ensure
the most robust design achievable by the available products. The first sub function is the gears, as they
transmit the power from the engine to the drivetrain to accelerate the vehicle forward. The second sub
function is the transmission housing. The housing must not only be able to withstand the forces created
internally, such as the meshing of gears and the shafts within the gears, but be able to withstand any
external elements such as vibration transmission from the frame through the bolts. For the first sub
function, the selection of the gears was determined by the overall score in each of the categories that
were deemed critical to the overall design. Each of the categories will be calculated using a summation
of six. For example, the category with the largest importance will be given a score closer to the value of
six while the category with the least importance will be given the remainder of the score adding up to a
total of six.

12

Table 1 shows the Functional Decomposition for the Gear subcomponent of the
transmission.

As seen in Table 2 above, the three factors that are to be taken into consideration for selection of the
gears is the weight, cost, and torque capacity of the gears. The respected factors cannot be compared to
one another, resulting in a X value for the comparison. When comparing the importance of weight and
cost, weight was determined to be far more important as the core goal of the project is the reduction of
weight within the system. Comparing torque capacity to weight resulted in an equal score being given
to both factors as they are both critical to the overall design of the transmission. Finally, when
comparing the cost to the torque capacity the torque capacity was deemed of higher importance as it
ensures the transmission will not fail under the loadings. As seen from the table above, the lightweight
and torque capacity factors both carried an equal total score of 38.9% each, providing a combined total
of 77.8% of the overall score.

13

Table 2 displays the lightweight comparison between three different gear types.
Table 3 shows a comparison of different types of gears with regards to the lightweight factor of the
system. The models of gears that were used for the comparison are Ground Spur Gears (MSGA), Steel
Spur Gears (KSS), and Stainless Steel Spur Gears (SUS). As previously mentioned the products were
compared against one another on a summation of six. It can be seen from above that the Steel Spur
Gears were the lightest of the three gears when compared with the other two types of gears. These gears
held 44.4% of the overall score in terms of how lightweight the product is. It is important to note that the
Ground Spur Gears and the Stainless Steel Spur Gears did not have the same product weight; the scores
merely reflect their score based solely on comparison to one another.

14

Table 3 displays the cost comparison between the three types of gears.
Table 4 contains the functional decomposition comparison for cost amongst the three types of gears. As
seen above, the Steel Spur Gears were the most cost effective when compared to the other two products,
followed by the Ground Spur Gears and lastly the Stainless Steel Spur Gears. As seen from the table the
Steel Spur Gears had a score of 44.4% of the overall total score and were determined to be the most cost
effective gears of the group.

15

Table 4 displays the torque capacity comparison between the three types of gears.
Table 5 contains the information used to compare the torque capacity of the various gear types and how
they scored when compared to one another. As seen from above the Steel Spur Gears had a significantly
higher torque capacity than the two products it was being compared to. This was mainly credited to the
material type of the various gears. Once again the Steel Spur Gears made up more than forty percent of
the overall score coming in at 50%.

16

Table 5 displays the overall results of the gear comparison with respect to the
design parameters selected.
The scores from the previous sections were taken and totaled above in Table 6. The results show that the
best product from the three compared product, when compared by the three parameters of lightweight,
cost, and torque capacity are the Steel Spur Gears. The Steel Spur Gears accounted for 46.6% of the total
overall score followed by the Ground Spur Gears (29%) and lastly the Stainless Steel Spur Gears
(24.4%). From this functional decomposition analysis, the Steel Spur Gears were selected as the gears to
be used within the second stage of the transmission as they have the qualities that are required to have a
successful project.

17

Table 6 displays the Functional Decomposition for the transmission housing.

Table 7 above, shows the functional decomposition of the transmission housing. The housing was
considered to be the second most important sub function of the transmission as it is what holds the
transmission together. The housing was sought out to be made low in weight, cost effective, and highly
durable since it will be experiencing heavy use from the competition. As seen above for the housing the
most important factor was the aspect of weight which carried 44.4% of the score followed by durability
of the transmission carrying 38.9% of the score. Once again cost was not of high importance in
comparison to weight and durability simply because of the emphasis that has been placed on decreasing
weight and increasing efficiency within the transmission.

18

Table 7 shows the lightweight comparison between the three types of materials
that have been taken into consideration.
Table 8 above displays the comparison of 6061 Aluminum, 1080 Steel, and 1040 Steel in regards to the
lightweight aspect. The table clearly shows that the Aluminum 6061, had the best lightweight
characteristics when compared to the two types of steels. This was expected as the steel has a higher
density than the aluminum which would result in slightly higher weights. The aluminum accounted for
55.6% of the lightweight score while the two steels accounted for 22.2% each respectively.

Table 8 displays the cost analysis between the three types of materials.

19

Table 9 above displays the comparison of the three materials with regards to cost. As with the gears the
prices of each of the materials was taken into account when comparing materials to one another. It was
found that the aluminum was cheaper in comparison to the other two materials and accounted for 44.4%
of the overall score once again.

Table 9 displays the durability comparison of the three materials.

Table 10 displays the durability comparison between the three materials. The durability consideration
was one of the most important factors in determining which material would be selected for the
transmission housing. The housing is an essential part and the characteristics sought out were, high
corrosion resistance, which in turn provides high surface durability. This is an important factor as the
inside of the transmission will contain transmission fluid and the outside of the transmission will be
exposed to the elements, such as dirt and water and other external occurrences that come about during
the duration of the competition. As seen above the 6061 Aluminum had the best material properties with
regards to the previously mentioned characteristics.

20

Table 10 shows the total results of the housing sub function.

As seen above in Table 11 the material that was deemed the best for the transmission housing was the
6061 Aluminum. The aluminum accounted for 53.7% of the total overall score and each of the steels
accounted for 23.1%, making the aluminum the clear winner in comparison with the other two materials.
2.3

Conceptual Design

The combination of helical and spur gears design was chosen as it provides the ability to withstand the high
input angular velocities as well as the high torque output provided by the system. The higher efficiency
from the helical gears at the input means that a larger quantity of the power will be properly transmitted
through the system and not be dissipated by impact that occurs in the spur gears. The use of spur gears in
low angular velocity settings will allow for the power out of the system to be transmitted and will not
interfere with the transmission with the generation of thrust loads. These loads may essentially reduce the
ability of the transmission to efficiently propel the vehicle forward.

21

2.4

3-D Model

Figure 10 shows a 3-D rendering of the proposed design.

The proposed design above has an overall length of 17.83 inches, a width of 2.83 inches and a height of
7.32 inches overall. The model in its current state weighs approximately 21.5 lbs. This is an
approximated value as the value has been provided by the program and the necessary finite element
analysis is needed to ensure that the removed material on the gears can handle the loadings that will be
encountered.
3.0
3.1

Design Embodiment
Identification of Core Engineering Topics and Related Equations

The project as a whole, calls upon knowledge from a variety of engineering courses. The four core and
essential courses that corresponded to the completion of the engineering analysis of this project are as
follows, Engineering Materials, Machine Elements, Kinematics and Dynamics of Machines, and lastly
Dynamics. The Engineering Materials course was essential for basic materials knowledge when
conducting analysis on the transmission. Skills such as material selection, surface treatments, material
22

strength, and heat treatment processes were all essential to the analysis of the project. The largest portion
of the analysis came from the Machine Elements course. This course was relevant to determining tooth
forces, tooth bending strength, surface strength of the gears, forces on shafts and bearing selections.
Kinematics & Dynamics of Machines knowledge was used to determine angular velocities through the
stages of reductions as well as determine the overall size of the transmission through kinematic
considerations.
3.2

Nomenclature
W = Power (hp)

Fr = Tangential Force (lbs)

Fr = Radial Force (lbs)

Fa = Axial Force (lbs)

Fb = Normal Force of Gear Teeth (lbs)

V = Gear Pitch line velocity

d = diameter (in.)

n = rotations per minute

= pressure angle

= helix angle

B = gear thickness (in.)

P = circular pitch

Pa = axial pitch

N = number of teeth

= bending strength

J = geometry factor

Kv = velocity/dynamic factor

Ko = overload factor

Km = mounting factor

Sn = surface durability

Sn = R.R. Moore endurance limit

Cl = loading factor

Cg = gradient factor

Cs = surface factor

kr = reliability factor

kt = temperature factor

kms = mean stress factor

23

3.3

Engineering Analysis

The next section that will be covered is the engineering analysis portion of the report. Specific
equations and calculated results from the equations will be covered and explained in full detail.

Figure 11 shows a kinematic schematic of the transmission and how power is

transmitted.
Figure 8 above shows a schematic of the transmission and how power is transmitted from the engine
through the transmission and out to the drivetrain of the system. The Briggs and Stratton engine supplies
ten horsepower and 13.75 ft lb of torque to the system. Using the equation below, the engine input

angular velocity (

) was determined to be 3820 RPM. Where T is the torque and

is the

angular velocity.

hp=

T
5252

Equation 1

The calculations were all completed with the worst case scenario assumption being made in each
calculation. With respect to the Constant Variable Transmission (CVT), the worst case scenario is when
24

the CVT is set at a 3.38:1 RPM ratio. This ratio supplies the smallest RPM values, which from the
equation above means that the torque through the system will be at a maximum. The rest of the angular
velocities through the system were calculated using the following relationship.
1 N 1
=
2 N 2

Equation 2

The resulting values for the schematic above were determined to be,

1 =1130 RPM

2 =339.1 RPM

3 =101.7 RPM

e=3820 RPM

. The output torque was then determined

through a manipulation of the previously mentioned equation and resulted in an output torque of
517 ft lb .

Figure 12 shows a free body diagram of the forces acting on a helical gear.

25

Next, the helical gear analysis was completed using the following relationships and the free body
diagram shown above in Figure 9.

Ft =

33000W
V
Equation 3
dn
12

Equation 4

Fr =F t tan ( )

Equation 5

Fa =Ft tan ( )

Equation 6

V=

Fb =

Ft
cos ( )
Equation 7

n=tan1 (tan cos)

Equation 8

The individual variables and their names can be found in the Nomenclature portion of the report.
The calculations for the helical gears were all done on the small helical gear in order to determine a
worst case scenario calculation. The small gear is more likely to fail within the first reduction stage and
will be analyzed in depth. In order to calculate the tangential force acting on the gear the pitch line
velocity first had to be calculated. This was determined using Equation 4. The known values for this
analysis was a 10 horsepower power, assuming 100% efficiency through the transmission, an angular
velocity of 1130 RPM, a gear diameter of 1.77 inches, a pressure angle of 20 degrees and a helix angle
26

of twenty one degrees. The results of Equation 4 was a pitch line velocity of 524.1

ft
min

which

resulted in a tangential force of 629.5 lbs. The normal pressure angle was then calculated using
Equation 8 and Figure 10 below.

Figure 13 shows a more in depth free body diagram of the helical gear being
analyzed.
As seen above in Figure 10 the normal pressure angle is used to determine the resultant force acting on
the gear tooth. The axial force is the force that acts along the horizontal axis of the gear and the biaxial
force is the force that acts perpendicular to the helix angle of the helical gear. The normal pressure angle
was determined to be 18.76 degrees which resulted in a radial force of 229.1 lbs. using Equation 5.
Equation 6 and Equation 7 were then used to determine the axial and the biaxial forces acting on the
tooth. The values were 241.6 lbs. and 674.3 lbs. respectively. Lastly the resultant force was determined
to be 721.1 lbs. This was determined by taking the square root of the squares of the radial and biaxial

27

forces previously calculated. The minimum gear thickness was then calculated using the following
relationships.
b=1.15 p a

pa=

Equation 9

p
tan ( )

Equation 10
p=

d
N

Equation 11

First the pitch of the gear was determined using Equation 11 and resulted in a value of .3707 teeth per
inch. The axial pitch was then calculated using Equation 10 and was determined to be .965 inches.
Equation 9 was used to determine the tooth thickness and resulted in a value of 1.11 inches. The small
spur gear was then analyzed using two more equations and the free body diagram found in Figure 11
below.

Figure 14 displays the free body diagram of the spur gear when in motion.

28

Figure 11 shows that there are only two forces acting on the gear due to the gears meshing. The
tangential force and the radial force which create a resultant force that acts along the tooth face.
Fr =F t tan ( )

Equation 12

F= F 2t +Fr 2

Equation 13

Equation 4 and Equation 3 were used to determine the pitch line velocity, which resulted in a
tangential force of 1748 lbs. From here Equation 12was used to determine the radial force acting on the
gear, this was determined to be 636.5 lbs. Lastly Equation 13 was used to calculate a resultant force of
1861 lbs. The gear thickness was calculated to be 1.06 inches using the relationship
9
P

b=

Equation 14
The bending stress and surface durability of the gears were then calculated by using the following
equations
=

Ft P
k k k
bJ v o m

S n=S ' n C L C G C S k r k t k ms

Equation 15

Equation 16

A conservative approach is to take both of the above equations and set them equal to each other, solving

for

S 'n

which is 80% of the required ultimate tensile strength of the material. This approach allows

for both equations to be satisfied simultaneously as opposed to determining the required strength for
each and then determining a material that will be sufficient for both values. The individual variables

29

were determined using various tables and figures from the Fundamentals of Machine Component
Design, 5th edition book and are shown below for referencing purposes.

Figure 15 displays the graph used to determine the geometry factor J for the
bending stress equation.

30

Table 11 displays the tables used to determine the overload correction factor and
the mounting correction factor for the bending stress equation.

31

Figure 16 displays the graph used to determine the surface factor in the surface
durability equation.

Table 12 displays the information corresponding to the load factor, gradient factor,
surface factor, and temperature factor and cycle strength of materials.

Figure 12 displays the graph used for determining the geometry factor J for the bending strength
equation. Since worst case scenario is assumed the line that corresponds to no tooth sharing was used for
determining the factor. From Table 5 it can be seen how the overload correction factor and mounting

32

correction factors were determined. For the overload correction factor, it was assumed that the driving
mechanism experienced uniform shock while the driven mechanism experienced moderate shock giving
a factor of 1.5. The mounting factor was assumed that the mountings were accurate and precise as well
as the thickness of the tooth being less than two inches providing a factor of 1.3. From Table 7 the load
factor was given a factor of one due to bending loads. The gradient factor was also given a factor of one
due to bending loads. The surface factor was determined using Figure 16 and following the curve for
ground gears, giving a value of 0.7. The temperature factor remained at 1, following the assumption that
the transmission will remain under eight hundred and forty degrees Fahrenheit during use. The reliability
factor was determined to be .753, as the gears are to be designed for 99.9% reliability. Lastly the cycle
strength was determined to have a value of .9 as the gears are experiencing bending loads. When
setting the above equations equal, the required material strength was determined to be 147 ksi when a
factor of safety of 1.5 was applied to the calculated value.

33

3.4 Finite Element Analysis

Preliminary Finite Element Analysis was conducted on the gears to observe which design was the most
optimal in removing material from the gear body, allowing for the lowest possible weight. As well as
which design provided the least amount of stresses in the gears that could lead to potential failures that
would harm the transmission.

Figure 17 displays the non-keyway design of the gear.

Figure 17 above displays the results of the initial finite element analysis done on a gear without a
keyway. This was done in an effort to further prove that the keyway was the best option for mounting the
gears to the shafts. The boundary conditions used in the analysis were that the gears have been fixed in
place at the bore, simulating being welded to the shafts, and the load is only applied at one tooth at point
acting along the pitch circle of the gear. This force was amplified by a factor of three to simulate
possible impact from the system as the energy is being transferred from one gear to another. The

software determined that there was a maximum Von Misses stress of 38,400

lbf
2

which is well under

the 147 ksi material strength that is provided from the gear. It is important to note however, that the
34

maximum stress occurred at a point near the center of the gear where much of the material had been
removed.

Figure 18 shows the Finite Element Analysis conducted on a gear with a keyway.

Figure 18 displays the results of running finite element analysis on a gear that has a keyway. The same
boundary conditions previously mentioned apply to the gear. It is fixed at the bore and keyway, as well
as having the load only applied to one tooth. Through experimentation it was discovered that the worst
case scenario for the single load carrying tooth was when it was perpendicular to the keyway. The force

was also amplified by a factor of three. The results were a maximum Von Misses stress of 41,100

lbf
2

found in the gear. It is important to note that this force occurred at the edge of the keyway and is well
below the shear stress required to shear the keyway. It is also important to know that because the highest
stress concentration is located at this point, it can be predicted that the rest of the gear will be able to
withstand the loads it will experience during the competition. The finite element analysis is an ongoing
process and will be continually changed with multiple designs in order to determine the most effective at
removing material from the gear while maintaining gear strength. The results shown in the report were

35

to display the advantages of using the Finite Element Method when evaluating complex geometries such
as removal of gear material from a gear body.

3.5 Manufacturing Process

36

Before taking the gears to be dropped off at the shop some basic machining had to be completed in the
manufacturing process lab. The only gear that will need to be machined in the process lab before being
transported to Amidas is the large spur gear. Thanks to the previous senior design group the large helical
gear was already machined down to the required thickness. The large spur gear was machined using the
lathe. Initially the large spur gear was right around two and half inches thick and needed to be turned
down to of an inch to maximize the weight reduction along with allowing for better machinability for
the machine shop. The cutting tool used in the lathe was a carbide tip, that is s and the amount of
material being cut was very minimal to reduce the chance of either damage the part or over cut and even
possibly damaging the cutting tool. In addition, 20 thousandths of an inch was cut off the gear at a time
while running the lathe at about 110-160 RPM depending on what part of the gear was being cut.
Remembering back to manufacturing process lab the key is to get pieces that are breaking and somewhat
in a gold color and not to have any pieces that are continuous. Having pieces that are breaking and gold
in color means that the cut is clean and smooth. Each side of the gear had to be evenly cut to ensure
balance and allow for the inner part of the gear to be an even thickness on both sides to prevent the
spokes from the design to be too thin. After completing the thickness of the spur gear the next part that
needed to be modified was the hub diameter to be able to fit through the hole of the gearbox that is
connected to the CV shaft. The hub diameter had two different diameters kind of like a step from the
base of the center of the gear to the outer part of the hub diameter. The diagram below will show what
the thickness the gear had to be turned down to with respect to the final design. Using the same lathe and
the same cutting tool the hub was turned down to the two different diameters the larger one being 1.575
inches and the small diameter of 1.115 inches. The smaller diameter has a thickness of .549 inches
before reaching the larger diameter. The schematic below will be a better way of describing or showing
what parts are being modified before taken to the machine shop. The cut out of the spokes are the only

37

pieces being cut out by Amidas machine shop using a final design file from solid works.

38

Figure 19 The figure above or blueprint above was used to cut down the thickness of the spur gear to
the specified inches along with the two different diameters for the hub to fit through the gearbox.
The other part that was modified and cannot be seen due to the angle of the drawing is the gear hub. This
part needs to be cut inward towards the center of the hub in order to have the partial slip differential rest
on and through the hub and gear, so that it can be attached to the CV shaft of the vehicle. This part
proved to be difficult as using the mill with the right cutting tool could have cut the time spent reducing
the hub diameter. However, due to inexperience the lathe was inefficiently used to remove hub material.
The diameter had to be reduced to 3.152 inches; the exact diameter of the partial slip, with a diameter
and a depth of .170 inches to give clearance for the partial slip differential adapter to fit though the bore.
After this was completed the next step was to transport both large gears to the machine shop to be cut
out by high-pressure water jet system. After a long two weeks of waiting for the machine shop to
39

complete the cut out there was some minor modifications that needed to be completed. Two weeks from
dropping off the gears at the machine shop they were completed. Unfortunately, the gears werent the
job on the agenda for the machine shop since the service they provided was free there was no rush for
the shop to complete the service. After receiving the phone-call that the cut outs were completed there
was some missing modifications that needed to be done. For example, the large helical gear needed a
keyhole to be made to mount onto the small spur gear through a shaft. After consulting once again with
the shop they were more than happy to finish the keyhole and the rest of the minor modifications were
going to have to be completed in the lab. In addition, the assumption was that the water jet was going to
be able to complete the step in the hub, that was not possible due to the way the water jet system
functions. The modifications that needed to be done, aside from the keyhole that was going to be
completed by the machine shop, were to thread the spokes on the large spur gear along with finish
modification the two different hub diameters. Now using the lathe once again the hub diameters were
turned down to the specified measurement. The last part that was needed was completed was to thread
the spokes of the large spur gear that in the end has the partial slip differential case mounted on it. The
first part that needed to be completed is to use a chart to determine what kind of drill bit will be used to
make the threads that were required. Then, A 5/16 18 tab was used to thread the 10 spokes on the large
spur gear while mounted on a mill. Unfortunately, there were not any photographs taken to record the
technique used.
The next part was to ensure that the threaded holes aligned properly with the partial slipcase along with
making sure that the threaded holes actually function. Fortunately, there were once again some minor
modifications that needed to be done once the partial slip was mounted onto the spur gear. Everything fit
like a glove with an exception of the spline shaft of the partial slip would not fit through the inner bore
diameter. Moreover, the partial slip outer diameter was too large for the modifications that were
40

previously made so once again the lathe was used. The lathe was unable to allow the diameter to be
enlarged due to the orientation of the cutting tool mounted on the lathe. To ensure that the partial slip fit
snug a mill was used along with a cutting tool instead of using the lathe. Along with the help of
technicians both of the diameters that required to be modified and were completed using the mill.

Figure 20 Photo above shows the spur gear mounted on the lathe to be cut. This photo shows that thickness
was already turned down to thickness and the hub diameter was being modified at the time.

41

Figure 21 Photo above shows the modification of the large spur gear after the water jet cut outs, threading,
and the hub diameter modification. This at the time was modifying the inner diameter to allow the spline shaft
to fit through the bore.

The partial slipcase was a part on the list that was to supposed to be just part of a sub assembly and not
to be modified since it came directly from a manufacture. Luckily the modification on the partial
slipcase was very minimal only the outer diameter of the spline side had to be slightly turned down to be
able to fit through the gearbox hole that attaches to the CV shaft. This was once again turned down by
using the lathe with the same cutting tool used before just cutting a very minimal amount off the case.

42

Figure 22 In this photo above the partial slipcase is mounted on the lathe and is being turn down by the
cutting tool. Luckily it was the only piece that needed to be modified from the partial slip sub assembly.

Before the assembly process was taken place the strength of the two sets of different gears were
measured. The measurements were done using the Rockwell Wilson hardness tester to compare the
previous gears to the new and improved lighter gears. These tests were done to conclude which of the
gears were going to be used for the first stage of testing for the Mini Baja car. Unfortunately, the results
were not looking to benefit the gearbox. The first results started off not looking good for the large helical
gear the original hardness for the old gear was an average of 121 HRB and for the new helical gear the
average hardness was 77 HRB. Now for the large spur gear the results were looking great, the average
hardness for the previous gear used was at 73 HRB and for the new hardness the average was 84 HRB
mainly because the sides that were tested were both machined which slightly heat treated the gear
making it stronger.
At this time a decision was made by the customer to not include the helical gear into the first assembly
and testing process. The decision was made due to the change in factor of safety. At first the
43

understanding was that the helical gear was donated to the previous team was a specific model from the
QTC catalog that specified that the hardness was an average of 194 HRB and below. Unfortunately, at
the time of donation this was overlooked which faulted in not including the gear in the gearbox. The
assumption that was made that the average hardness was right around the 194 HRB that would allow a
higher factor of safety. Now the new factor of safety was brought down to about 1.2 this isnt very
reliable due to the fact that for the first test hit the baja car was going to be under heavy usage until
something were to break. Plus, the site where testing was conducted was way to far from the university
to travel back to for one broken tooth in the first few moments of starting her up.
For the gearbox assembly there were two times that the case was opened and closed. For the first
assembly the new pieces were the two small gears, the large spur gear, and the new partial slip
differential with case. The assembly begins with the partial slip differential along with its case. The
partial slip differential alone had multiple pieces within its self. The partial slip differential has many
components within its self, including 2 sprints that go in the center of the diff and two clutch packs that
follow right after. The only pieces that actually had to be assembled from this partial slip is to take apart
the clutch pack that came pre assembled and insert the two springs into place and re assemble the partial
slip along with add the gear fluid that came with the package. Below will be a figure that better shows
how these pieces look before assembly.

44

Figure 23 The figure above shows the partial slip differential that was purchased and dis assembled in the
figure. All of these parts all came pre-assembled from the manufacturer the two springs in the center were the
only pieces that needed to be inserted. In

45

Figure 24 the piece that is show above is the input shaft that is attached to the small helical gear that
transmits the torque onto the next helical gear. This was mounted using the key seen in the center of the

photograph.
Figure 25 the photo above shows the small spur gear that is mounted onto the large helical gear through a
connecting shaft and keyholes. This sub assembly was previously used in other years and was selected by the
customer to be used in first test hits.

46

Figure 26 above is the new spur gear that was used in the first test hit for the Baja team. This photo shows the
sub assembly of the partial slip differential along with all the bolts bolted onto the large spur gear.

The next parts of the assembly consist of mounting the small helical gear onto the shaft that is connected
directly to the CVT. This is mounted using a key made by measuring the shaft keyhole. The next part is
to mount the existing small spur gear that was used in previous years onto the previously used helical
gear. In previous years the small gear was mounted onto a shaft also using a keyhole and key and
mounted onto the helical gear. The next sub assembly is to mount the previous sub assembly of the
partial slip differential and case onto the large spur gear using the 10 bolts provided by the partial slip
case manufacturing. Now that there is several sub-assemblies completed one of the final assembly is
required to complete the gearbox. The final assembly is in a specific order is to mount all of the previous
sub-assemblies into the gearbox case. Starting with either the small helical gear assembly or the large
spur gear assembly, place on to the larger gearbox case with the indention for the partial slip differential.
Next carefully place the last sub assembly onto the hole where the bearing sits in between the two
47

previous sub-assemblies. The next important piece is to add small amount of gear fluid into the case and
apply silicone gasket maker around the rim of the case into the small indention made for the gaskets.

Figure 27 This photo above is showing the larger part of the gearbox case along with the two first subassemblies mounted onto the case in-between the two bearings.

48

Figure 28 this is another photo where the sub-assemblies are in their final position before applying silicone
gasket maker and sealing the gearbox case.

Figure 29 The photo above shows where the liquid silicone gasket maker is applied to the rim of the gearbox
case to prevent any leakage of fluid.

49

At first it was assumed that the gear that was previously donated was the stronger of two gears and it
was not. The initial data concluded was that the average hardness was right around 77 HRB and the old
helical gear was right around 120 HRB. The customer at this point did want to use this gear in not only
testing but also the competition. In addition, the customer stated if the gear was possible to increase its
hardness up to around 100 HRB then it will be safe enough to use in testing. So after researching some
practical heat treatments along with consulting with multiple parties the goal was to heat-treat only the
gear teeth. This can only be accomplished by either using a induction heater to warm up the teeth or
using a torch to get the teeth cherry red. Unfortunately, the university does not have a working induction
heater that can heat only the teeth of the gear and using a torch isnt very practical and can cause un even
treatment. The purpose of only heat-treating the teeth is to increase the strength but allow the flexibility
in the spokes created in the center of the gear when torque is applied. After some consulting with lab
technicians and using a mechanics handbook along with a book on Practical Heat Treatment a decision
was made. The final decision was to stick the whole gear into a furnace and heat treat it up to the
temperature recommended by both the book and the manual. The only part that was uncertain was the
time required to leave gear in furnace. After looking at a TTT diagram and consulting with the lab tech
the final decision was to leave gear in the furnace for one hour after the furnace has reached steady state
temperature then quench in oil. The gear was to be quenched in oil to have rapid cooling and not become
brittle as if it was quenched in water. The actual information that was used was that the gear was 1045
steel and our goal was to harden the material. That was to allow the material to reach the Austenite
phase. The gear was placed in the furnace at a temperature of 845 C for 1 hour, then quench in a tub of
oil. The results from the heat treatment were significant and got the gear to right around the hardness
that the customer required. The original hardness was a mean of 77 HRB and after the heat treatment the

50

increase of hardness went up to a mean hardness of about 109 HRB. With that data numbers were
plugged into the finite element analysis and a new factor of safety was outputted to 1.8.

Figure 30 The figure above is the TTT diagram for 1045 steel and was used to determine what heat treatment
practice would be best for the helical gear used.

There was a second and final assembly that was done to include all modified parts into the gearbox. This
was completed as soon as an inspection was done on the large spur gear that was included in the case.
The FEA analysis showed that all the stresses that the gear will experience are directly on the gear teeth.
After inspecting all of the teeth of the large spur gear it was immaculate and was approved by customer
to be placed in the gearbox once again. Adding in the large helical gear into the gearbox by following
the same assembly process as stated above completed the second and final assembly.

51

Figure 31 This photo is a close up of what the spur gear looked like after cyclic loads from the mini baja car.

Figure 32 This photo above probably the nicest looking photo taken to date of the project was showing the
final assembly before using the gasket maker to seal the gearbox case.

52

3.6 Bill of Materials

The bill of materials for the gearbox was not too extensive luckily most of the parts were donated with
an exception of the partial slip differential. At first the gears that were needed to complete this gear train
were going to be very expensive and way out of the budget. Staring with the gears, the prices were as
follows for the small helical gear having 15 teeth was going to be used the price was around 95 USD.
Next, would have been one of the most expensive parts to date for the gearbox which is the large helical
gear having 50 teeth was right around the 300 USD mark. For the last two gears from the gear train were
the spur gears were not as high priced as the helical gears due to their simplicity. The small spur gear
started at around 35 USD about a third of the price of the small helical gear with 18 teeth. For the last
gear the large spur gear price is about 190 USD. All of the prices came from one manufacture, Quality
Transmission Components. The grand total just in gears alone would have been 620 USD plus shipping
which would have been impossible due to the fact that the budget was only 300 USD, with that in mind
the best option was to try and get the gears donated. At first it seemed that the manufacturer wanted
nothing to do with donations to any organization after one attempt. The second attempt it seemed that
the company had already reached its maximum allowance of donations. So how were the gears donated?
Luckily for the sake of the project, the Baja team did a cleanup in the lab where resulted in finding 3 out
of the 4 gears that were needed to complete the gearbox. The gears that were found in the Baja lab were
the small helical gear, small spur gear, and the large spur gear. Unfortunately the one gear that was not
found was the most expensive the large helical gear. After talking to the baja team, they agreed to donate
them on one condition, completing the gear box before competition. Now for the last gear and the rest of
the parts needed the grand total was still past budget of 300 USD. The large helical gear if purchased
from QTC (Quality Transmission Components) alone meets our budget not to mention that a new partial
slip and partial slip case are needed as well. After a few phone calls, the large helical gear was found at
53

no cost, thanks to one of the Baja teams captains Mark Garza. He got a hold of the pervious senior
design group that was working on a transmission for senior design that had left the gear that was needed
for this project at a nearby shop. After contacting the shop the shop agreed that it was left from a
previous group and allowed someone to pick it up. After inspecting the gear and comparing it to the
previous gears it was an exact match for what was needed. At this point all of the gears were donated
and the total savings was over 700 USD. Now back in business the only parts that were needed to
complete the inventory were the partial slip differential, partial slip case, bearings, shafts, keys, and gear
fluid. The most expensive part from that list is the partial slip, which was around 380 USD not including
shipping. After getting an approval from Dr. Sarkar, Dr. Fuentes, and Dr. Freeman to exceed the budget
by 80 USD the partial slip was ordered from ATVOUTFITTERS.NET for a grand total of 393.31 USD.
The last major part that was needed was the differential case, since budget was surpassed by about 90
dollars the team decided to split the cost of the case between three team members. The total of the case
was right around 100 USD the rest of the small parts were also donated by the baja team such as, the
bearings, shafts, fluid, and the keys were homemade. The grand total of the working prototype was
about 500 USD, which did exceed the budget but was dramatically decreased from previous expectation
of the working prototype if the gears were purchased.
After receiving all of the parts, inventory and measurements were taken to see what parts are needed to
start any manufacturing. Starting with the spur gears the weight of the large spur gear was right around
10lbs and when compared to the previous group large spur gear weighed about 5lbs so right off the bat
the goal was to get the weight to below 5lbs. Below are photographs taken of the two spur gears next to
a ruler to get a relationship of size.

54

Figure 33 Photo above shows the unmodified large spur gear that was used in the gearbox.

Figure 34 The photo above shows one of the unmodified gears that were used in the gearbox.

55

Figure 35 The photo above shows the gearbox case from previous years along with the bearings that were
previously press fitted into place. All of which were agreed constraints from the customer (Baja Team).

56

Figure 36 This is one of the gears found in the baja lab that was later donated by the team.

57

Figure 37 The photo above is the gear that was left from a previous senior design group that had already been
machined down to thickness.

58

Figure 38 the photo above shows the gears that were donated from the baja racing team. These were the
parts on hand before actually receiving the partial slip differential along with the case.

Figure 39 the photo about shows the most expensive piece that was purchased for the gearbox, the partial slip
differential mounted inside the case along with the clutch pack that comes along with the partial slip
differential. This is the piece that mounts on the

59

Now after receiving all of the parts and having the finite element analysis completed it was time
to start manufacturing the gears. For the most part the parts that were going to need extensive
modification were going to be the large two gears. These two large gears had the potential to reduce
the most rotating weight than any of the other parts in the gearbox. The main goal for the
manufacturing was to do as little as possible due to the time constraint. For starters, the actual cut
outs of the gears were to be done by a professional machinist to ensure balance in the gears when
rotating. Luckily there is a machine shop down the street from UTPA that uses water jet cutting to
cut through metal and other materials. After consulting with the Baja Team, they advised that
Amidas Machine Shop sponsors UTPA Baja Racing. After contacting the shop and speaking with
the lead technician all that was needed was to give time to complete the modifications along with the
solid works files to complete the work along with no charge.

3.7 Prototype Cost

Through research of the products necessary to build the prototype of the project, it was determined that
the material cost would be approximately seven hundred dollars per unit built. Following the material
cost, the labor cost must be determined to calculate the overall prototype cost. It was determined that the
prototype would take approximately forty hours to machine, test and assemble. Providing a rate of forty
dollars per hour, the prototype was determined to have a total overall cost of $2300. This was
determined by adding the material cost plus the cost of forty hours of labor at a rate of forty dollars an
hour.
3.8 Production Cost

60

The production cost analyzed for this project was dependent upon a theoretical value of selling five
thousand units per year. The estimated labor cost begins with twelve workers working forty hour weeks
and making forty thousand dollars a year. This brings the total cost for the twelve workers to four
hundred eighty thousand dollars per year. Next it was estimated that there would be two engineers on
staff, acting as the supervisor each supervising six employees. The engineers would have an annual
salary of seventy thousand dollars bringing the total cost of the two engineers to one hundred forty
thousand dollars. By adding the total cost of the engineers and the twelve workers then dividing by the
number of units per year, the total labor cost per unit can be calculated. The calculated value was one
hundred and twenty four dollars, but was rounded up to one hundred and fifty dollars for the
convenience of calculations. The estimated material cost was approximately three hundred seventy five
dollars. This cost was determined by receiving quotes on purchasing products in bulk. With these values
calculated the total production cost was estimated to be five hundred twenty five dollars. This
production cost was then rounded down to five hundred dollars and the rest of the cost analysis was then
initiated. It was assumed that the distributor would care to make a forty percent profit on every unit sold
giving a distributor cost of seven hundred dollars. From the distributor it would be sent to retail stores
for the consumer to purchase and again a profit of forty percent was assumed for the retail, giving a
retail cost of one thousand dollars. This cost was relatively high in comparison with the competitive
products currently available. The original target cost of the project was five hundred dollars as the
competitors have similar products for four hundred and fifty dollars. However, the competitors as seen
through the quality functional deployment, do not provide the output torque of the proposed design nor
do they offer the power to weight ratio found in the proposed design. This means that either the
competitive assessment of the market was the wrong aspect of the market or that there has been a market
opportunity discovered from this project. Assuming that there has been a market opportunity discovered

61

it was determined that there is a $3.5 million dollar market opportunity from the creation of this product,
excluding the cost of labor from the twelve workers, two engineers and utilities. This number was
determined by multiplying the five thousand units sold per year by the distributor cost of seven hundred
dollars. If the labor is factored in along with a total utilities cost of one hundred thousand dollars per
year, the total market opportunity for the product then becomes $2.7 million dollars after these values
have been deducted from the overall original opportunity.
4.0
Design Validation
4.1 Test Protocols
In order to ensure the quality of the proposed design it is essential to test the product prior to installing
and running the product at full capacity during the competition. A series of test protocols have been
created to ensure that the product will in fact be able to operate under the extreme conditions of
competition. The first test protocol is testing the RPM values into and out of the system. What this test
will do is ensure that the gear ratio does in fact provide the reduction that is sought out and essential in
providing the desired output torque. With the RPM values checked, the power can also be calculated
and plotted to ensure that the engine is operating within the specified manufacturer operating
conditions.

62

Figure 40 displays the manufacturer specific operating conditions for the engine.
As seen above in Figure 19 the manufacturer has determined a recommended operating conditions plot
as well as the absolute maximum operating plot. By using this graph in comparison with the graph that
will be achieved from plotting the RPM values collected from test protocol number one. To make sure
that nothing else will be damaged the mini baja car will be mounted on a jack stand and turned on to see
if the gears spin and finally see if the gears turn the tires. For the first couple of test protocols only the
new spur gear and new partial slip differential are used while using everything else from the previous
gearbox. So at this point there was a total of 2.5 lbs less of rotational mass. This was done because our
customer decided it was not safe enough to put the new helical gear in as well to prevent further damage
from occurring. The hardness tester gave us the final determination as to why the large helical was not
used. The second test protocol would be to induce cyclic loading within the transmission by varying the
RPM values drastically within the system. This consisted of a similar run that will be conducted at the
competition and that is a run to determine acceleration from 0 to 100ft. Cones were set up to know the
63

start and ending points along with multiple stopwatches. The run was measured on mud terrain and at
the time it was very moist and would attach directly onto the tires. For the runs the average time from
the runs were right around the 4.5 second mark which plugging in to a final velocity equation translated
to a final velocity of 31.4 miles per hour. This was done multiple times to get average time in similar
conditions to the competition. The next test protocol that was done was to take on an uphill climb to
determine if there was enough torque output to climb up the hill. There was no time measured in the hill
climb just took on a direct 45 degree angle hill to see if it was possible to get to the top. After the first
attempt it was clear that this car could most definitely climb up a hill effortlessly with the new gear train.
During the final attempt of going up a similar hill the Baja car driver hit a boulder that caused him to flip
the car back over from the top of the hill. The final test protocol is to test the transmission against the
maximum power available from the engine. This will simulate the acceleration test of the competition as
well as simulate take off conditions that will be encountered. This test will provide assurance that the
product is capable of withstanding the maximum forces that will be encountered and ensure that the
product is in fact prepared for the competition.

4.2

Data

64

Some initial data that was collected before the gearbox assembly was the total weight reduction from the
gear train. Starting with the old helical gear, the original weight of the previous large helical gear was
about 4.5 lb and the new helical gear weight was 2 lb. Now for the large spur gear the previous gear
weighed 5.8lbs and the new modified gear weighed 3.3 lbs. adding the two reductions results in 5lb less
in rotational weight just in the gear train. Now for the overall weight of the previous gear train the total
weight of the gearbox is at 16.8 lbs. That weight consisted of a large helical gear, small helical gear,
large spur gear, small spur gear, a partial slip differential, and an idler shaft. The weights consist of a
large helical gear of 4.5 lb, the large helical gear of 5.8 lb, 3 lb for the partial slip, 1lb for the small
helical gear, and 1.5 lb for the small spur gear giving the total weight of 16.8 lb. The weight of the new
gear train is as follows the weight of the new helical gear is 2lb, large spur is 3.3 lb, the partial slip
differential is 3 lb, small helical gear 1 lb, small spur gear is 1.5 lb and the shaft is 1lb totaling to 11.8 lb.
When compared to the previous gearbox the total weight reduction was 5lb when compared to the other
gear train. The main purpose of this gearbox was to increase efficiency and improve on acceleration.
Our customer requested a better gearbox to improve on their performance in the SAE mini baja
competition. The best way to show if there was an improvement from previous years in competition is to
compare to the previous best. The best year that the Mini Baja team has competed in was back in 2013
in Tennessee. The results from 2013 for the acceleration competition the measurement that was recorded
was the time taken to go from rest to 100 feet. For the time run 1 the time was 4.281 seconds and for
time run 2 was 4.263 seconds. That gave an overall rank of 21 out of 80 cars and an overall rank of 20
out 80 cars which put the team in the top 20 percentile. Now for the results from this year it was very
important to improve on the acceleration on previous years but more importantly to improve on the
previous best ever from the Mini Baja team. This would help get a foot up on the overall competition
leaderboards. So the final results from the 2015 competition and now the current best time was for time

65

run 1 of 4.052 seconds and for time run 2 of 4.005 seconds. This gave a final rank of 18 out of 80 cars
that competed in that category. So this was not only a great victory for the mini baja team but also for
the senior design team seeing that there was a significant improvement even on the previous best from
the mini baja team. During the competition there were a number of parts that were broken. Through the
intense competition there was concern that the gears would fail and cause a loss of points in the
competition. Luckily that was not the case there were many other parts that failed before any damage
was done on the gears. There was a lot of skepticism that the gears would fail either during testing or
most importantly the competition. With that being said there was a long list of parts that were broken
and no broken teeth on the gears. First the CV shafts were damaged that caused damage onto the partial
slip due to the shaft slipping out of alignment and causing indirect forces onto the partial slip
differential. The partial slip differential did get damaged which resulted in damage of the large spur gear
because of the miss alignment of the CV shaft connection to the partial slip. The large spur gear was
damaged on the inner diameter of the gear that caused a wobble in the gearbox that caused a loss of
power transfer to the wheel due to the scraping of the gearbox. Now for the endurance race there was a
lot more broken pieces that cause multiple pauses in the race including, welds on a steering column, the
CVT Cover, a trailing arm, tie rods, and a bent upper A Arm. With that being said the gears proved to be
durable and proved to have an increase in acceleration when comparing to a previous best.

4.3

DFMEA

66

Table 13 displays the DFMEA for the transmission.

Table 15 displays the design failure modes engineering analysis. The purpose of this is to determine
where and how failures in the design are probable to occur and what the effect of the failure are. From
here it is determined how severe this would be to the system, how often this can occur within the
system, how detectable the failure is, which will result in a risk priority number. As seen from the table
the first and most likely mode of failure is the bending of the gear teeth. The potential causes of this
mode of failure is that the impact loads will exceed the torque capacity of the gears. The recommended
action to prevent such failures is to use helical gears for the first stage as they reduce the amount of
impact and are more efficient at operating under high RPM values. Surface fatigue was also a concern of
the gears, as surface imperfections lead to decreased part life, which can lead to the previous mode of
failure. The possible reason for this to occur is an insufficient surface durability. The solution to this
problem is to carburize the gears to increase the surface durability of the gears themselves. Lastly the
worst possible mode of failure is for the shafts to break due to torsional loadings. The torsional loadings
can be caused by the improper meshing of gears and can be reduced by installing keyways. The keyways
will prevent the shaft being damaged due to torsional forces and will allow for the rest of the system to
be kept intact.

67

68

Summary
It was discovered through the duration of this project that when designing a lighter, more efficient, and
robust transmission, aspects of the design must be sacrificed. In order to achieve the goal of a lighter
transmission, the cost of the transmission far exceeded the anticipated amount. Through this process it
was discovered that the helical and spur gear combination transmission was the best and most efficient
design for the transmission. It provides the efficiency and strength required to endure the competition
conditions. The proposed design has proven to satisfy the costumers needs and wants, as well as be
durable enough to withstand competition conditions as observed from the engineering analysis. As
previously mentioned there will be a continuation in researching the Finite Element Analysis to
improve the power to weight ratio that can be provided by the product.

69

Refrences
Fundamentals of Machine Component Design, 5th edition
http://www.topspeed.com/motorcycles/motorcycle-reviews/yamaha/2013-yamaha-grizzly-300ar131133/picture461000.html
http://www.topspeed.com/motorcycles/motorcycle-reviews/arctic-cat/2014-arctic-cat-wildcat4x-ar164001/picture556563.html
http://www.arcticcat.com/
http://powersports.honda.com/
http://strong.kawasaki.com/
http://www.polaris.com
http://m.yamahamotorsports.com/

70