The calculation of bending strength for spiral bevel gears is complex, making accurate evaluation extremely challenging. Focusing on the two distinct calculation methods, B1 and B2, as outlined in the ISO 10300 standard, this study begins with the computational principles of both approaches. It compares the selection methods and numerical application principles for parameters involved in calculating root bending stress and allowable bending stress under both methods. The influence of parameter values on root bending stress calculations is analyzed for each method. Through computations on multiple design samples, the root bending stress values derived from both methods are compared. Finite element analysis is employed to validate the computational results. The findings indicate that due to differences in the types and values of correction coefficients used, there are certain discrepancies in the bending strength evaluation results obtained by the two methods. Method B1 yields a more conservative evaluation of root bending strength, with root bending stress approximately 5% lower than that calculated by Method B2. Although the ISO calculation standard accounts for load sharing among multiple teeth, it overlooks the combined effects on root bending stress, leading to deviations from finite element analysis results.Method B1 shows closer agreement with finite element results, with an error margin of about 6%.
| 科 Family | 属数 Number of genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) | 属 Genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae | 2 | 11 | 5.26 | 鹅膏菌属 Amanita | 10 | 4.78 |
| 小菇科 Mycenaceae | 2 | 12 | 5.74 | 丝盖伞属 Inocybe | 5 | 2.39 |
| 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae | 8 | 14 | 6.70 | 蜡蘑属 Laccaria | 5 | 2.39 |
| 红菇科 Russulaceae | 3 | 23 | 11.00 | 小皮伞属 Marasmius | 6 | 2.87 |
| 小菇属 Mycena | 11 | 5.26 | ||||
| 光柄菇属 Pluteus | 5 | 2.39 | ||||
| 红菇属 Russula | 17 | 8.13 | ||||
| 栓菌属 Trametes | 5 | 2.39 |