Gear Reducer Lubrication Criteria
Originally Posted by Roland Heilmann
- application: conveyor drive unit (~ 400 kW) on stockyard machine, rather hot marine (coast) environment (5 .. 45 °C), inclinations +12° / -12° for boom together with conveyor drive unit, drive unit "on the fly" mounted on pulley shaft
- challenge: client specifies NO fan on gearbox input shaft and NO forced lubrication and NO external oil cooling and MAX 90° C max. gearbox temperature
- result: very big and heavy gearbox, special execution / oversize and -mass
However, in order to arrive at a technically sensible (gear lubrication) and feasible (mass, size) solution, I'd propose to use cooling and forced lubrication.
Now, this needs to be "argued", and i would appreciate any support, additions, criticism and input from the seasoned members of the conveying community, as per following:
A) Pro: fan on input shaft of gearbox
Con (client): issues with dust and dirt agglomerating and finally disabling the fan
--> counterargument to-date: fan is housed as usual, same principle as TEFC E-motor, gearbox size and pulley shaft = bearing size (point generally valid elsewhere)
B) Pro: forced lubrication (my preference)
Con (client): sees issues with reliability of this additional equipment, splash lube is simple & preferred
--> counterargument to-date: big range of inclination, danger of suboptimal lubrication in general and specifically once oil level is not as per spec, high oil fill means high losses and temp. rise
C) Pro: oil cooling (my preference)
Con (client): sees issues with reliability of this additional equipment
--> counterargument to-date: controlled state of lubricant --> temperature limit, most positive influence on adequate size of gearbox, state of the art equipment with good reliability available
Thank you in advance, &
Kind Regards
R.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland:
No data on:
1. Ambient Conditions & Operating Range
2. Lubricant Specifications
3. Fan Design, Metal or Plastic, and location of fans, over size features - will redundant fans do it? Look to item 4.
4. Environmental conditions - dust laden properties and moisture
Are we here to do your design work? Many contributors have experience with fan cooling vs. pressure lube and reducer housing designs. I am sure many have special understanding of fan applications and the standard argument not to use them. Both have merits.
Redundant pressure lube and cooling are also a part of the argument. Special housing designs are part of the argument - and so on. It can be a bid deal to know what a gear box is capable of cooling, special castings et al. Usually, this starts with client selecting a competent consultant to know these routes. ■
The Point Of Argument
Hello Mr. Nordell,
thank you for your contribution, i can take already some direction from that.
No, no one shall do the design work to be done by myself, what i request is support in order to find a good way to put my point in a convincing wording. As, to begin with, there's very little design space to move for a designer.
So i add or restate as per below and do hope on still some more interest / input from conveyor drive specialists.
Thank you again,
Regards
R.
Originally Posted by nordellRoland:
No data on:
1. Ambient Conditions & Operating Range --> hot marine (coast) environment (5 .. 45 °C) as below
2. Lubricant Specifications --> MAX 90° C max. gearbox temperature as below --> is characteristically mineral oil
3. Fan Design, Metal or Plastic, and location of fans, over size features - will redundant fans do it? Look to item 4. --> fan on gearbox input shaft + add: no more input yet on design or redundancy of fans
4. Environmental conditions - dust laden properties and moisture --> marine (coast) environment as below + add outdoor, not dust laden
Are we here to do your design work? Many contributors have experience with fan cooling vs. pressure lube and reducer housing designs. I am sure many have special understanding of fan applications and the standard argument not to use them. Both have merits.
Redundant pressure lube and cooling are also a part of the argument. Special housing designs are part of the argument - and so on. It can be a bid deal to know what a gear box is capable of cooling, special castings et al. Usually, this starts with client selecting a competent consultant to know these routes.
■
Fan Vs No Fan
Advise the client of the price difference of fan vs no fan. If he/she is ok with the additional cost then you install the tank and he never has to worry about the cost again. Client is advised of the cost in writing and when project overruns are reviewed at the end you are covered. ■
Conveyor Drive Gearbox: To Fan or not to Fan
Dear conveyor drive specialists,
- application: conveyor drive unit (~ 400 kW) on stockyard machine, rather hot marine (coast) environment (5 .. 45 °C), inclinations +12° / -12° for boom together with conveyor drive unit, drive unit "on the fly" mounted on pulley shaft
- challenge: client specifies NO fan on gearbox input shaft and NO forced lubrication and NO external oil cooling and MAX 90° C max. gearbox temperature
- result: very big and heavy gearbox, special execution / oversize and -mass
However, in order to arrive at a technically sensible (gear lubrication) and feasible (mass, size) solution, I'd propose to use cooling and forced lubrication.
Now, this needs to be "argued", and i would appreciate any support, additions, criticism and input from the seasoned members of the conveying community, as per following:
A) Pro: fan on input shaft of gearbox
Con (client): issues with dust and dirt agglomerating and finally disabling the fan
--> counterargument to-date: fan is housed as usual, same principle as TEFC E-motor, gearbox size and pulley shaft = bearing size (point generally valid elsewhere)
B) Pro: forced lubrication (my preference)
Con (client): sees issues with reliability of this additional equipment, splash lube is simple & preferred
--> counterargument to-date: big range of inclination, danger of suboptimal lubrication in general and specifically once oil level is not as per spec, high oil fill means high losses and temp. rise
C) Pro: oil cooling (my preference)
Con (client): sees issues with reliability of this additional equipment
--> counterargument to-date: controlled state of lubricant --> temperature limit, most positive influence on adequate size of gearbox, state of the art equipment with good reliability available
Thank you in advance, &
Kind Regards
R. ■