They are all connected:

1. Bearing to hub shaft geometry -- moment into end disk & shaft

2. locking device from shaft to hub -- moment division between end disk and shaft interior between end disk hubs -- locking device selection depends on its stiffnes, its moment capacity in bending as well as its torsional capacity

3. hub to end disk -- strain from locking device into hub, its residue into end disk, and its residue into shell end

4. end disk flexure in combination with shell at their connection

5. shell flexure at end disk connection and its shear (stress concentration factor) and fatigue with the end disk to shell stress highly dependent on weld configuration or alternatively use of T-shape with no weld at end disk to shell

You cannot separate then and get meanifull results.

You must be aware of the discretization errors if you do a 3-D analysis. You have to set the model for a minimum of 5 degree interval around the pulley. We recommend 2 degrees. THe shell should be a minimum of 4 layers deep. The axial must have serios meshing around all fillets in shaft, locking device, hub, end disk and shell. We recommend at least 10 divisions around each major fillet. Take care not to select a quadralateral element with high aspect ratio.

You must be aware of how to load the shell forces using a high order Fourier series set of terms (>35) or write a code to load every node. ■

Meshing of locking device boundaries should be selected to differiate plastic and elastic zones. THe deformation of the locking device connection to the shaft and to the hub will likely show plastic deformation. The mesh should be sufficiently small that this deformation does not exceed a few millimeters. Otherwise the design should be rejected due to a stress concentration fatigue failure. ■