Key Technology and Experimental Study of Unequal Pitches Meshing between Metal Worm and Plastic Helical Gears

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper discussed the development of gear design theory. An unequal pitch design theory was proposed to provide adequate solution. The collaboration of FE analysis and laboratory experiments gave a solid methodology to observe the engineering phenomenon. Nevertheless, I found parts of the current manuscript have to be revised and completed to present better readability and fidelity. Several comments are listed below:

1. Make sure to comply with the journal template. Missing information in authorship is spotted.
2. The first section should be an introduction where the authors explain generally significance of the work.
3. The second section will be more suitable to be renamed as Literature Review.
4. There too many greek letter and mathematical symbol in equations. Nomenclature is a mandatory.
5. Figures 1-5 are in low resolution. It must be fixed. Make sure to edit the style of figure title to be match with the given template.
6. The writing style of degree celcius needs to be fixed on entrire manuscript.
7. The FEA configuration is lack of detail information. There is 3 fundamental parts, i.e., geometry, material and boundary condition/scenario. Explain more regarding these parts.
8. As for geometry, put engineering drawing in the revised manuscript so that readers can take this manuscript as a reliable reference.
9. Notes in Figure 12 is too small. It does not give any clear information.
10. Describe the test machine in Figure 13, including parts of the machine.
11. Explain more of the test method. Testing procedure, including photo when the test was conducted needs to be attached.
12. It is stated that "experimental verification", but I do not see any comparison with the FEA result. What is the purpose of the verification?
13. Related to no.12, present %error to conclude validity of the work.
14. Many tables were separated in different page. This has to be fixed.
15. Test instruments and specimens need to be mentioned one by one in methodology, including flow of your work. An individual section to address this issue needs to be arranged in the revised manuscript.
16. Regarding no.15, make sure to present research flow.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper discussed the development of gear design theory. An unequal pitch design theory was proposed to provide adequate solution. The collaboration of FE analysis and laboratory experiments gave a solid methodology to observe the engineering phenomenon. Nevertheless, I found parts of the current manuscript have to be revised and completed to present better readability and fidelity. Several comments are listed below:

1. Make sure to comply with the journal template. Missing information in authorship is spotted.

A: You are right, there are not email address for author and not telephone for correspondence. I already change it. Line 9~11.

1. The first section should be an introduction where the authors explain generally significance of the work.

A: I add significance of the work at the end of first section. (The load-displacement between the meshing teeth is not good, where the meshing teeth may carry half of, the load. Based on the current design, we attempted to change the worm profile to achieve better load displacement and higher load capacity. We did not change gearbox size and gear material, and we can increase bearing capacity for this gearbox. It can widely use the transmission of metal worm meshing plastic helical gear.) Line 50~55.

1. The second section will be more suitable to be renamed as Literature Review.

A: already change the name of second section as literature review. Line 56

1. There too many greek letter and mathematical symbol in equations. Nomenclature is a mandatory.

A: already delete some greek letters and equations. Topic 3.

1. Figures 1-5 are in low resolution. It must be fixed. Make sure to edit the style of figure title to be match with the given template.

A: I already changed all pictures. Fig 1~20.

1. The writing style of degree celcius needs to be fixed on entrire manuscript.

A: I modified the structure of manuscript. Unified writing style.

1. The FEA configuration is lack of detail information. There is 3 fundamental parts, i.e., geometry, material and boundary condition/scenario. Explain more regarding these parts.

A: I add a table and boundary condition. Line 288~293.

1. As for geometry, put engineering drawing in the revised manuscript so that readers can take this manuscript as a reliable reference.

A: I have inserted two main engineering drawings and show main gear parameter on manuscript. Line 341~346.

1. Notes in Figure 12 is too small. It does not give any clear information.

A: I changed picture for figure 14. and it is clear now. Line 334~336.

1. Describe the test machine in Figure 13, including parts of the machine.

A: I add to describe test machine in Fig 15. Line 335~337

1. Explain more of the test method. Testing procedure, including photo when the test was conducted needs to be attached.

A: I add test method and test procedure, picture as Fig 16. Line339~340

1. It is stated that "experimental verification", but I do not see any comparison with the FEA result. What is the purpose of the verification?

A: I already add some experimental data, now it can correspond with FEA result.

1. Related to no.12, present %error to conclude validity of the work.

A: I add some experimental data, and re-calculate it.  Line 366; Line 392.

1. Many tables were separated in different page. This has to be fixed.

A: I had checked it and change it.

1. Test instruments and specimens need to be mentioned one by one in methodology, including flow of your work. An individual section to address this issue needs to be arranged in the revised manuscript.

A: I had added section 4 research method, had introduce samples and test machine, and added research flow on section 4. Line 169~179.

1. Regarding no.15, make sure to present research flow.

A: I already added research flow on section 4. Line 166~176.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

- this manuscript is interesting but should be more assertive in its message.

 

Typing errors detected:

- Legend of the Fig. 2 must be corrected;

- Topic 3 “Meshing theory of steel worm with plastic helical gear”:

               # nomenclature should be reviewed and corrected

               # the unit vector of the Oz direction must always be in lowercase

               # new variables appear without being given their physical meaning

- Table 5:

               # correct the units of the “Max breakage force”

               # at the end of 2^nd part of the table the “Average” value should appear as the 1^st part.

- Table 6:

               # at the end of 2^nd part of the table the “Average” value should appear as the 1^st part.

- in lines 362 and 374 the value 11.16% should be 10.30%.

 

Comments and suggestions:

- the images of figures 4, 5 and 7 should be improved;

- the paragraph starting on line 218 must be clarified, “The tooth “2” carries more than fifty-eight percent of the load.” if in Fig. 8 it is indicated that the tooth 2 has the smaller stress;

- on the topic 3 the “Meshing theory of steel worm with plastic helical gear” was presented, but it must be clarified what its utility is for the next topics and where it was applied;

- some explanation should take place related with the “unequal pitches meshing between metal worm and plastic helical gears” in a continuous working situation, meaning won’t the conditions change in a continuous rotation of both elements if unequal pitches are present?

 

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

- this manuscript is interesting but should be more assertive in its message.

 

Typing errors detected:

- Legend of the Fig. 2 must be corrected;

A: I already changed it. Line 100~103

- Topic 3 “Meshing theory of steel worm with plastic helical gear”:

               # nomenclature should be reviewed and corrected

A: already changed some nomenclatures and delete some equation.

               # the unit vector of the Oz direction must always be in lowercase

A: already changed it.

               # new variables appear without being given their physical meaning

A: add some explains which new variables.

- Table 5:

               # correct the units of the “Max breakage force”

A: I already change the unit from kg to kgf. Line 365.

               # at the end of 2nd part of the table the “Average” value should appear as the 1st part.

A: I added average value on 1^st part. Line 366.

- Table 6:

               # at the end of 2nd part of the table the “Average” value should appear as the 1st part.

A: I added average value on 1^st part. Line 392

- in lines 362 and 374 the value 11.16% should be 10.30%.

A: yes, you are right. I add some experimental data and re-calculate average value.

 

Comments and suggestions:

- the images of figures 4, 5 and 7 should be improved;

A: I already change all picture. Fig1~20.

- the paragraph starting on line 218 must be clarified, “The tooth “2” carries more than fifty-eight percent of the load.” if in Fig. 8 it is indicated that the tooth 2 has the smaller stress;

A: I had change another picture, now it is corresponding. Line 231~233

- on the topic 3 the “Meshing theory of steel worm with plastic helical gear” was presented, but it must be clarified what its utility is for the next topics and where it was applied;

A: I add topic 4 and explain the application for meshing theory. According meshing theory, we need make worm samples and building 3 model. Line 166~170.

- some explanation should take place related with the “unequal pitches meshing between metal worm and plastic helical gears” in a continuous working situation, meaning won’t the conditions change in a continuous rotation of both elements if unequal pitches are present

A: add equation as below. Line 252~263.

but we need pay attention to it can work continuously. So the pitch variation, contact ration and backlash had apply with relationship.

P_nx=πm_n

P_nw=πm_n^’

ΔP=π(m_n-m_n’)

In order to woke continuously for worm and gear, it must meet below equation.

ΔP *ε≦j_n

where

P_nx------the pitch for equal worm

P_nw-----the pith for unequal worm

ε-------contact ration

j_n-------the backlash for worm and helical gear

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I have the following comments on the submitted manuscript:

1. General introduction weakly describing the presented issues in the works of other authors.
2. Insufficient quality of figures number 3, 4 and 5.
3. Several typos in the manuscript.
4. References do not contain works by international authors.
5. Insufficient number of performed measurements, from which the authors draw conclusions:
   1. Breakage test on the fixture, Unequal pitch worm & helical gear only five measured values.
      
   2. Breakage test on the motor, Standard motor using equal pitch worm & plastic helical gear only two measured values.
      
   3. Breakage test on the motor, New motor using unequal pitch worm & plastic helical gear only four measured values.
   4. I recommend adding the number of measurements to the appropriate value sufficient for statistical processing of measured values.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have the following comments on the submitted manuscript:

1.General introduction weakly describing the presented issues in the works of other authors.

A: I add some research work of other authors. (reference 3.4.5)

2. Insufficient quality of figures number 3, 4 and 5.

A:  I already change all of pictures. (Fig 1~20)

3. Several typos in the manuscript.

A: I already modify it.

4. References do not contain works by international authors.

A: I add 4 articles of international authors. (reference 3, 4, 23)

5.Insufficient number of performed measurements, from which the authors draw conclusions:

(1) Breakage test on the fixture, Unequal pitch worm & helical gear only five measured values.

A: I add ten five motor to test. Now I have ten pieces samples to test. Line 365~366

• Breakage test on the motor, Standard motor using equal pitch worm & plastic helical gear only two measured values.

A: I add eight pieces motor to test. Now I have ten pieces samples to test. Line 391~392

• Breakage test on the motor, New motor using unequal pitch worm & plastic helical gear only four measured values.

A: I add six pieces motor to test. Now I have ten pieces samples to test. Line 391~392

• I recommend adding the number of measurements to the appropriate value sufficient for statistical processing of measured values.

A: yes, you are right. I get more data from test samples. Line 368~369, Line 391~392

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

A major improvement has been well conducted.

Fixed these parts as they are not uniform or match to the template:

1. Title of figure
2. Title of table
3. Several texts are not in justify format (distributed evenly between the margin)
4. Make sure all engineering symbol is in italic style (e.g. lines 254-263 should be fixed)
5. Avoid very short paragraph (e.g. Lines 179-196). Unite them into one fine paragraph (10-15 lines)
6. The unit should not in italic style
7. A sentence in line 338 is too short. You can consider to attached in the previous paragraph.
8. Between number and unit, space should be applied (e.g. lines 355-356 should be fixed).
9. Fig. 13: note should be Applied Torque not Apply Torque

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

Fixed these parts as they are not uniform or match to the template:

1. Title of figure
2. Title of table
3. Several texts are not in justify format (distributed evenly between the margin)
4. Make sure all engineering symbol is in italic style (e.g. lines 254-263 should be fixed)
5. Avoid very short paragraph (e.g. Lines 179-196). Unite them into one fine paragraph (10-15 lines)
6. The unit should not in italic style
7. A sentence in line 338 is too short. You can consider to attached in the previous paragraph.
8. Between number and unit, space should be applied (e.g. lines 355-356 should be fixed).
9. Fig. 13: note should be Applied Torque not Apply Torque

 

Response: Thanks for your comments. Correction has been made in the revised manuscript.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors incorporated all the comments.

Author Response

The authors incorporated all the comments.

Response: Thanks for your positive comment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf