Inverted tooth chains 10 have long been used to transmit power and motion between shafts in automotive applications and as shown in
Although both inside flank engagement and outside flank engagement meshing styles have been used for automotive engine timing drives, inside flank engagement is more common. Referring still to
Chain-sprocket impact at the onset of meshing is a dominant noise source in chain drive systems and it occurs as a chain link row exits the span and impacts with a sprocket tooth at engagement. The complex dynamic behavior of the meshing phenomenon is well known in the art and the magnitude of the chain-sprocket meshing impact is influenced by various factors, of which polygonal effect (referred to as “chordal action” or “chordal motion”) is known to induce a transverse vibration in the “free” or unsupported span located upstream from the sprocket as the chain approaches the sprocket along a tangent line. Chordal motion occurs as the chain engages a sprocket tooth during meshing and it will cause chain motion in a direction perpendicular to the chain travel and in the same plane as the chain and sprockets. This undesirable oscillatory chain motion results in a velocity difference between the meshing chain link row and a sprocket tooth at the point of initial contact, thereby contributing to the severity of the chain-sprocket meshing impacts and the related chain engagement noise levels.
CR=rp−rc=rp[1−cos(180°/N)]
and where rc is the chordal radius or the distance from the sprocket center to a sprocket pitch chord of length P, which is also equal to the chain pitch length; rp is the theoretical pitch radius of the sprocket, i.e., one-half of the pitch diameter PD; N is the number of sprocket teeth; and α is equal to the sprocket tooth angle or 360°/N.
One attempt to reduce undesired chordal motion of the chain is described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,533,691 to Horie et al. Horie et al. disclose an inverted tooth chain wherein the inside flanks of each link plate are defined with a compound radius profile intended to smooth the movement of the inside flanks from initial sprocket tooth meshing contact to the fully meshed (chordal) position. Initial meshing contact for the Horie et al link plate form occurs at a convexly arcuate portion of the inside flank at the link toe tip and proceeds smoothly and continuously to a second arcuate portion of the inside flank before transitioning to outside flank full meshing contact of a preceding link.
Chordal motion is also reduced in the system disclosed in published U.S. patent application No. 2006/0068959 by Young et al, where the prominence of the inside flanks of the chain relative to the respective outside flanks of adjacent link plates is defined as a function of the chain pitch P, and the maximum projection of the inside flank Lamda (λ) relative to the related outside flank is defined to fall in the range of 0.010×P≦λ≦0.020×P. Young et al disclose a link plate that also incorporates inside flank initial meshing contact to limit chordal motion, but its inside flank meshing contact begins and ends on the same convexly arcuate portion of the link plate before the meshing contact transitions to outside flank full meshing contact of a preceding link to complete the meshing cycle.
In U.S. Pat. No. 6,244,983, Matsuda discloses a link plate having inside flank meshing contact with the sprocket tooth for the full meshing cycle. Although the outside flanks of the Matsuda link plate do not contact the sprocket teeth, its inside flank meshing geometry serves to restrict chordal motion during engagement.
The above mentioned prior art inverted tooth chains all have features to beneficially limit chordal motion during meshing. However, another important factor to have an adverse influence on chain drive noise levels was not sufficiently considered in the link plate design for these chains—as well as for other prior art inverted tooth chains—and that factor is the meshing impact geometry during the chain-sprocket engagement process.
As shown in
The link row 30c is shown at the instant of initial meshing contact with a corresponding sprocket tooth 60c, i.e., at the instant of initial contact between the leading inside flank 36 of the chain link plate and the engaging flank 62c of the sprocket tooth 60c at an initial contact location IC on the engaging flank 62c. An initial contact angle Theta (θ) is defined between a first radial reference line L1 originating at the axis of rotation of the sprocket and extending normal to the tangent line TL and a second radial reference line TC originating at the axis of rotation of the sprocket and extending through the tooth center of the subject sprocket tooth 60c. At the instant of initial meshing impact IC for link row 30c, the preceding link row 30b exits the chain span and enters a “suspended state”, i.e., the link plates 30 of row 30b are not in direct contact with the sprocket 50 and are suspended between the meshing row 30c and a preceding row 30a that is in full meshing contact with a preceding sprocket tooth 60b. Link row 30b will remain in this suspended state as row 30c articulates through its sliding contact with the engaging flank 62c of sprocket tooth 60c from its initial meshing contact location IC to a final inside flank meshing contact location IF, at which time row 30b completes its meshing cycle and transitions into a position where its trailing outside flanks 37 make full meshing contact at location OF with sprocket tooth 60c (contact locations IF and OF are shown in
It should be noted that prior to the instant of initial meshing impact for link row 30c (referring again to
Chain-sprocket meshing impact results from a velocity difference between the meshing link row 30c and a sprocket tooth 60c at the initial contact location IC, and the related impact energy E generated as the sprocket tooth collects the meshing link row 30c from the chain span at the instant of initial meshing impact is defined by the equation:
E=C×m×L2×ω2×cos2(90−β)
where C is a constant, m is equal to the mass of the single meshing link row 30c, L is the length from the controlling pin center C1 to the initial contact location IC, ω is the angular velocity of the sprocket, and β is the link plate meshing entrance angle. The meshing impacts along with the associated noise levels can be reduced by decreasing the velocity difference, which can be accomplished by reducing the meshing entrance angle β.
In addition, the impact energy E equation considers only the mass of the meshing link row 30c, and it does not take into account chain tension TC and this chain tension will add to the resultant meshing impact energy E and the associated overall noise levels. The chain tension TC will act on the sprocket tooth 60c at the onset of meshing and the tooth impact reaction force FS, equal and opposite to a link impact force FL, will vary with the magnitude of the meshing impact angle σ, where:
and where FH will be equal to TC in order to satisfy the summation of horizontal forces being equal to zero. These relationships are shown in
As described above,
The intensity of the secondary meshing impact and the related noise level as link row 30b transitions to full chordal meshing contact at location OF with sprocket tooth 60c is a smaller value as compared to the above-described initial meshing impact at location IC and its resulting meshing noise level. Firstly, the transition impact angle σ′ will always be a smaller value than the initial meshing impact angle σ. Secondly, the outside flank contact at location OF occurs as the link row 30b transitions from the suspended state to the fully meshed state, which is believed to be less significant in terms of impact force as compared to the initial contact between the chain 10 and sprocket 50, in which a link row is collected from the chain span to impact with a sprocket tooth 60 at the onset of meshing. In addition, noise and vibration testing has shown the transition meshing impact of the outside flank 37 at location OF to contribute less to the overall meshing noise levels than the initial meshing impact of the inside flank 36 at location IC.
The sprocket 50 is conventional and the teeth 60 (i.e., 60a, 60b, 60c, etc.) are each symmetrically defined about a radial tooth center TC to have an engaging flank 62 (i.e., 62a,62b,62c, etc.) that makes initial contact with the chain 10 during meshing and a matching disengaging flank 64 (i.e., 64a,64b,64c, etc.). The tooth centers TC bisect each tooth 60 and are evenly spaced in degrees (°) at a tooth angle α=360°/N. The involute form of the engaging tooth flanks 62 (and disengaging flanks 64) is generated from a base circle and the base circle is defined as:
Base Circle=PD×COS(PA), where
In accordance with one aspect of the present development, a chain and sprocket drive system include a sprocket comprising a plurality of teeth, wherein each tooth comprises an engaging flank and a disengaging flank. An inverted tooth chain is meshed with the sprocket and includes a plurality of rows of links that each articulate relative to a preceding link row about a leading pin center and that each articulate relative to a following link row about a trailing pin center, wherein said leading and trailing pin centers are spaced from each other at a chain pitch P, each of said rows comprising leading inside flanks and trailing outside flanks. The leading inside flanks of each row project outwardly relative to a contact or working portion of the trailing outside flanks of a preceding row and comprise an inside flank radius R. The chain approaches the sprocket along a tangent line and the engaging flank of each sprocket tooth makes initial meshing contact with the chain at an initial contact location on the leading inside flanks of a meshing row of the chain at an instant of initial meshing contact. At the instant of initial meshing contact, a chain row immediately preceding the meshing row includes a leading pin center that is located on the pitch diameter so as to be a controlling pin center. For each row of the chain that is fully meshed with the sprocket, its leading and trailing pin centers are located on the pitch diameter PD and its trailing outside flanks are in contact with one of the engaging flanks. A meshing contact angle Tau (τ) is defined between the tangent line TL and an initial contact reference line that passes through both the controlling pin center and the initial contact location. A link plate entrance angle Beta (β) is defined between the initial contact reference line and an inside flank reference line that passes through an arc center of the inside flank radius and the initial contact location. A meshing impact angle Sigma (σ) is defined between the tangent line and the inside flank reference line such that σ=τ+β, and σ is less than or equal to 34°.
In accordance with another aspect of the present development, an inverted tooth chain includes a plurality of rows of links that each articulate relative to a preceding row about a leading pin center and that each articulate relative to a following link row about a trailing pin center, wherein the leading and trailing pin centers are spaced from each other at a chain pitch P, each of the rows comprising leading inside flanks and trailing outside flanks, wherein the leading inside flanks of each row project outwardly relative to a working portion of the trailing outside flanks of a preceding row by a maximum projection amount Lamda (λ) such that 0.007×P≦λ≦0.017×P. The leading inside flanks of each row of the chain are defined by an inside flank radius R, wherein P≦R<2×P. The outside flank comprises a non-working portion comprising a chamfer located between the working portion and a toe tip for each of the links of the chain, wherein the leading inside flanks of an adjacent row of the chain project outwardly relative to the chamfer by a projection amount that is greater than the projection amount Lamda (λ) when the inverted tooth chain is pulled straight.
In accordance with another aspect of the present development, a sprocket adapted to mesh with an inverted tooth chain includes a plurality of teeth, wherein each tooth comprises an engaging flank and a disengaging flank. The engaging flank of each tooth is defined by a pressure angle PA that varies in magnitude based upon a tooth count N that defines a total number of the teeth included on the sprocket such that:
N=19 to 25, 28°≦PA≦29°
N=26 to 50, 27°≦PA<28°
In accordance with another aspect of the present development, an inverted tooth chain includes a plurality of rows of links that each articulate relative to a preceding row about a leading pin center and that each articulate relative to a following link row about a trailing pin center, wherein the leading and trailing pin centers are spaced from each other at a chain pitch P, each of the rows comprising leading inside flanks and trailing outside flanks, wherein:
the leading inside flanks of each row project outwardly relative to a straight working portion of the trailing outside flanks of a preceding row by a maximum projection amount Lamda (λ) such that 0.007×P≦λ≦0.017×P when the chain is pulled straight;
the leading inside flanks of each row are defined by an inside flank radius R, wherein P≦R<2×P;
the outside flanks of each row comprises a non-working portion comprising a chamfer located between the working portion and a toe tip, wherein the leading inside flanks of an adjacent row of the chain project outwardly relative to the chamfer by a projection amount that is greater than the projection amount Lamda (λ) when said chain is pulled straight; and,
the outside flanks define an outer flank angle ψ≦30.5°, the outer flank angle ψ defined between: (i) a first reference line that includes the trailing pin center and that lies perpendicular a pin center reference line that connects the leading and trailing pin centers; (ii) a second reference line that is coincident with the straight working portion of said trailing outside flank.
The invention comprises various components and arrangements of components, preferred embodiments of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings wherein:
The chain 110 comprises ranks or rows 130a,130b,130c, etc. of interleaved inside links or link plates 130 each with a pair of teeth 134 having outside flanks 137, and inside flanks 136, with the inside flanks 136 of the teeth 134 defining a crotch 135 therebetween. The teeth 134 have respective toes or tips 139. Each link plate 130 comprises two apertures 132 that are aligned across a link row to receive connecting pins 140 (e.g., round pins, rocker joints, etc.) to join the rows pivotally and to provide articulation of the chain about pin centers C as it drivingly engages the sprocket teeth at the inside flanks 136 (“inside flank engagement”) at the onset of meshing with a sprocket such as the conventional sprocket 50. The pin centers C are spaced from each other at a chain pitch length or link pitch P. The term “pin centers C” as used herein is intended to encompass the axis of rotation of successive link rows 130a,130b,130c relative to each other, regardless of whether the pins 140 comprise round pins, rocker joints or another suitable joint. First and second guide plates 120 (
Each link plate 130 is identical to the others and is symmetrical about a vertical plane arranged perpendicular to the link plate 130 midway between the pin centers C. The outside flanks 137 are straight-sided (but could be curved) and for this first embodiment, the outer or outside flank angle Psi (ψ) is defined by 30°<ψ≦30.5°, where ψ is defined between a first reference line W1 that is perpendicular to a reference line PR connecting the pin centers C and a second reference line W2 coincident with the outside flank 137. The inside flanks 136 have a convexly arcuate form and the inside flanks will preferably project outwardly relative to the outside flanks of adjacent link rows by a projection amount Lamda (λ) to satisfy the relationship 0.007×P≦λ≦0.017×P where P is equal to the chain pitch length. The inside flank 136 is preferably formed to satisfy the inequality:
P≈R≦2P
where R is the radius of curvature of the inside flank 136 and P is the chain pitch length. Each inside flank 136 is defined by a radial arc segment defined by the radius R centered at an arc center 179 (
The chain 110 will mesh with a conventional sprocket 50 as shown in
In
To design a link plate 130 in accordance with the present development, the inside flank 136 of link plate 130c is determined as a function of the desired initial contact location IC with a sprocket tooth 60c, and this is preferably established with a sprocket size (number of teeth) at or near the smallest tooth count for the family (range of tooth counts) of sprockets to be used with the chain 110. The outside flank 137 is already determined prior to this, however, since the trailing outside flank 137 of the closest fully meshed link row (in this case link row 130a) serves to position the meshing link rows 130b,130c, and the profile for the inside flank 136 of the link plate 130 can then established at its initial meshing impact (initial contact) IC rotational position.
As noted above, the meshing impact angle σ, as illustrated in FIGS. 6,6A, is defined by the following equation:
σ=τ+β
where τ is the link plate meshing contact angle and β is the link plate entrance angle at the onset of meshing impact. In that tooth impact reaction force FS will vary with the magnitude of the meshing impact angle σ for a constant chain tension TC, there is a benefit for the meshing impact angle σ to be as small as practical when establishing the form of the inside flank 136.
Referring still to
As shown in
σ=(τ+β)≦34° at initial meshing impact IC where
β≦9°
A system in which σ=(τ+β)≦34° and β≦9° at initial meshing impact IC will result in a reduction of the link impact force FL and the resultant impact energy E as compared to prior systems (as defined in the background above).
Referring back to
It should be noted that Lamda (λ) is measured relative to the straight “contact” or “working” portion of the outside flank 137 when the chain is pulled straight. First and second rows of the chain are deemed to be pulled straight when all pin centers C thereof located on a single line. The working portion of an outside flank 137 is the region thereof where the outside flank contact location OF is located, for all sprocket tooth counts intended to be meshed with the chain 110. The chamfer 138 is referred to as a “non-contact” or “non-working” portion of the outside flank 137 because it will not contact the sprocket teeth for all sprocket tooth counts intended to be meshed with the chain 110. The chamfer 138, which need not be flat, is included to ensure that at least the portion of the leading inside flanks 136 of the adjacent link row required to make initial contact IC with the sprocket 50 will always project outwardly a sufficient distance relative to the adjacent row for all manufacturing tolerance conditions.
The ability to minimize the meshing impact angle σ and transition impact angle σ′ is limited when the chain 110 must mesh with a conventional sprocket such as the sprocket 50 having teeth defined with conventional pressure angles as defined in Table 1. According to an alternative embodiment of the present invention, a chain 210 as shown in
Those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the tooth counts shown in Table 2 will increase or decrease as chain pitch P increases or decreases from the present example of P=7.7 mm. In particular, the tooth count ranges will shift up as chain pitch P decreases and will shift down as chain pitch P increases.
With reference also to
σ=(τ+β)≦31° (for inside flank initial meshing contact IC)
where β≦7°. In such case, the outside flank angle ψ must also be reduced such that:
ψ≦27°
in order for the chain 210 to mesh properly with the sprocket 250. This will lead to a reduced transition impact angle σ′=(τ′+β′)≦26° (for transition to outside flank full meshing contact OF) and where β′≦8°.
Except as otherwise shown and described herein, the chain 210 shown in
P≦R<2P
where R is the radius of curvature of the inside flank 236 and P is the chain pitch length. Each inside flank 236 is defined by a radial arc segment defined by a radius R centered at an arc center 279 (
Table 3 that follows provides additional data for the resulting meshing impact angle Sigma (σ) and link plate entrance angle Beta (β):
Referring back to
Table 4 below illustrates one example of a system 215 in which the sprocket tooth count N vanes from 19 to 50, chain pitch P=7.7 mm, λ=0.075, and that satisfies the above-noted requirements for Beta (β) and Sigma (σ):
Those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the ability to alter the sprocket pressure angle PA in an IT chain system 215 enables Beta (β) and Sigma (σ) to be optimized (β≦7°; σ≦31°) for reduced impact energy E as described above while placing the initial contact location IC at a preferred location (defined by distance ICD) on the inside flank 236.
The invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments. Modifications and alterations will occur to those of ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains, and it is intended that the invention be construed as encompassing all such modifications and alterations.
This application claims priority from and benefit of the filing date of U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 61/095,393 filed Sep. 9, 2008 (Sep. 9, 2008), and the entire disclosure of said prior provisional application Ser. No. 61/095,393 is hereby expressly incorporated by reference into the present specification.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1598906 | Dull | Sep 1926 | A |
1693431 | Behning | Nov 1928 | A |
3377875 | Sand | Apr 1968 | A |
3495468 | Griffel | Feb 1970 | A |
3535871 | Jeffrey | Oct 1970 | A |
3636788 | Jeffrey | Jan 1972 | A |
4168634 | Griffel | Sep 1979 | A |
4509323 | Ledvina et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4509937 | Ledvina et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4758209 | Ledvina | Jul 1988 | A |
4758210 | Ledvina | Jul 1988 | A |
4759740 | Cradduck | Jul 1988 | A |
4764158 | Honda et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4832668 | Ledvina et al. | May 1989 | A |
4906224 | Reber | Mar 1990 | A |
4915675 | Avramidis | Apr 1990 | A |
4915676 | Komeya | Apr 1990 | A |
5154674 | Avramidis et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5236400 | Tsuyama | Aug 1993 | A |
5267910 | Maruyama et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5419743 | Takeda et al. | May 1995 | A |
5453059 | Avramidis et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5464374 | Mott | Nov 1995 | A |
5628702 | Kotera | May 1997 | A |
5758484 | Ledvina et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5803854 | Tada et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
6077181 | Kanehira et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6112510 | Ichikawa et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6155944 | Matsuda | Dec 2000 | A |
6155945 | Matsuda | Dec 2000 | A |
6159122 | Kanehira et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6168543 | Matsuda | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6186920 | Reber | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6244983 | Matsuda | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6272835 | Horie et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6325735 | Kanehira et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6334828 | Suzuki | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6413180 | Kanehira et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6416436 | Kanehira et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6432011 | Kanehira et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6450910 | Matsumoto et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6461263 | Suzuki et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6533107 | Suzuki et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6533691 | Horie et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6663522 | Horie | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6733410 | Saito | May 2004 | B2 |
6796920 | Horie et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
20010007842 | Suzuki et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020045504 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020058561 | Kanehira et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020119853 | Horie | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020128101 | Baddaria | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030027675 | Suzuki et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030045388 | Kotera | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030064845 | Saito | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030119614 | Saitoh | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030125146 | Saitoh | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040097314 | Kotera | May 2004 | A1 |
20040110591 | Kotera | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040166978 | Matsuda et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20060058141 | Young | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060068959 | Young et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20070142150 | Vietoris | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070155564 | Ledvina et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080167151 | Yonehara et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080312017 | Young et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2651514 | Oct 2004 | CN |
2771564 | Apr 2006 | CN |
1 281 890 | Feb 2003 | EP |
1 293 704 | Mar 2003 | EP |
55-024203 | Feb 1980 | JP |
56-150655 | Nov 1981 | JP |
H1-119964 | Aug 1989 | JP |
2005-248969 | Sep 2005 | JP |
WO 2009111219 | Sep 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Preliminary Report on patentability mailed Mar. 24, 2011 for International application No. PCT/US2009/056364. |
Notification of Related U.S. Appl. No. 13/043,932, filed Mar. 9, 2011. |
International Search Report mailed Dec. 4, 2009 for International application No. PCT/US2009/056364. |
Written Opinion mailed Dec. 4, 2009 for International application No. PCT/US2009/056364. |
SAE Technical Paper Series, 2007-01-2297, Young, James D., “Inverted Tooth Chain Sprocket with Frequency-Modulated Meshing Features to Reduce Camshaft Drive Noise”, May 2007. |
SAE Technical Paper Series, 1999-01-1226, Wada, Masakazu et al., “Development of a Small Pitch Silent Chain for a Single-Stage Cam Drive System”, Mar. 1999. |
Huang, Chintien et al., “The Tooth Contact Analysis of Round Pin Jointed Silent Chains”, ASME 2005 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, DETC2005-84065, Sep. 2005. |
Bucknor, Norman Kenneth, “Kinematic and static force analysis of silent chain drives”, Columbia University, 1991. |
International Search Report mailed Dec. 16, 2010 for International application No. PCT/US2010/051609. |
Written Opinion mailed Dec. 16, 2010 for International application No. PCT/US2010/051609. |
Notification of Related U.S. Appl. No. 12/814,963, filed Jun. 14, 2010. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100069187 A1 | Mar 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61095393 | Sep 2008 | US |