THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND TRANSMISSION EFFICIENCY VERIFICATION OF HELICAL SPUR GEAR TRANSMISSION WITH A SINGLE GEAR PAIR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transmission efficiency of a gear reducer (ηT) can be expressed as ηT = ηm × ηb × ηs, where ηm is the meshing efficiency of gear pairs, ηb is the efficiency of bearings, and ηs is efficiency of oil seals. Based on the research of Hsieh, et al., the meshing efficiencies of a helical spur gear pair (4, 77) are between 96.13 and 99.20%. The purpose of this article is to analyze the theoretical transmission efficiencies of non-standard helical spur gear pair and verify the theorem. According to the gear data, the theoretical transmission efficiencies are calculated to be 90.13–97.85%. And its test values of transmission efficiencies are between 82.3 and 91.9% (acceptable values). There are only 5.39–14.14% errors between these two values. This manuscript verifies that a helical spur gear pair can have a high reduction ratio (20–30) and acceptable real transmission efficiencies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".