Line of action — where it appears
Named by 15 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
What happens in a mesh
Contact between two gear teeth happens only along one straight line, and only over part of it. How much of that line lies between the two tip circles, divided by the base pitch, is the contact ratio — and if it drops below one the drive periodically stops being driven.
The tool is the definition
There is no curve anywhere on the cutter that makes an involute gear. It is a straight edge, dragged past a turning blank, and the involute is what the motion leaves behind — along with a fillet that is a corner's path, a contact locus that comes out a straight line, and a base circle that is measured rather than drawn.
The shape that does not mind where the shafts are
Two tooth forms, both exactly conjugate, both in use for centuries. Move the shafts five hundredths of a millimetre apart and one of them wants a different shape and the other does not — and that single measurement is close to the whole reason every gear cut since about 1900 is an involute.
The cutter takes back the tooth
Undercutting is usually explained as a shape: a tooth with a waist in it. It is better understood as an event — the corner that leaves the fillet comes back through flank the straight edge has already generated — and seen that way the threshold at seventeen teeth is a comparison of two measured points that passes through zero.
Two flanks, one law
At a gear mesh the two tooth flanks are conjugate profiles, the pitch point is the pole of their relative motion, and their radii of curvature are tied to each other rather than free. Each flank's radius varies fourfold across the mesh and the sum of the two does not vary at all.
Where two shapes stop touching
A conjugate pair is exact at every instant it has a contact. It does not have one for ever: a profile is an arc rather than a curve, and both ends of that arc are somebody's decision — which is why the useful question about a pair of shapes is not whether they mesh but for how long.
A tooth flank is an unwound strand
Unwind a taut string from a circle and its free end traces the involute, to 1.5·10⁻¹⁴ mm of the curve the gears field draws. That is not a curiosity: the line of action of an involute pair is a crossed strand on the two base circles, so the property the involute is chosen for — a ratio that does not care where the shafts are — is a belt's property rather than a curve's.
The angle the standard left free
Involute geometry fixes the tooth curve and leaves one number open. Raising it buys smaller pinions and spends contact ratio, monotonically and in opposite directions, so there is no angle that is best at both — and the familiar twenty degrees is a choice with a date on it rather than an optimum.
The mesh with one curvature reversed
Turn an annulus's teeth inward and the same involute law produces a different machine: a centre distance that is a difference, two base tangencies on one side of the line of action, more contact than an external pair carries, and three separate floors on the tooth counts, all of them the same statement about where an involute stops existing.
Contact that runs along the tooth
A straight tooth engages along its whole face at once, so the amount of contact at a mesh is a square wave. Slant the tooth and a second contact ratio appears that has no tooth count in it and no pressure angle — bought with face width and helix angle alone, and able to reach a value at which the total length of contact stops varying at all.
The shift that evens the wear
A pinion's flank slides hardest at its root, and on a small pinion much harder than anything on its wheel: a 17-tooth pinion on a 51-tooth wheel reads 11.1 at its root against the wheel's 1.38. Moving the pinion's cutter out and the wheel's in by the same amount leaves the centre distance alone and slides the contact path along the line of action, and at a shift of 0.357 the two roots slide equally, at 1.96. That shift is not the undercut cure — the same pinion needs 0.006 for that — and it grows with the ratio, so a pinion that needs no shift at all to be cut cleanly still needs a third of a module to wear evenly with its wheel.
Four knobs for the root
A shift of the cutter can balance the sliding at a gear pair's two roots, but on a 17-tooth pinion driving a 51-tooth wheel both then slide at 1.96. Free both shifts and both addenda, let the centre distance go where zero backlash puts it, and keep a contact ratio of 1.2, tips a quarter of a module thick and a tenth of a module of clearance: the worse root comes down to 0.83 with shifts no larger than a module, and 0.75 without that limit — two and a half times less. Every optimum has its two roots exactly equal, runs at an operating pressure angle of 24° to 29°, and sits on its contact-ratio floor, which is what the gain is paid with.
A helix pays for the root with face width
A spur pair's least worst-root sliding, 0.834 on a 17-tooth pinion driving a 51-tooth wheel, was bought by spending contact ratio down to the floor of 1.2 that continuity needs. A helical pair gets its continuity from the overlap along the face, so its transverse contact ratio can fall below that floor, and the root's sliding falls with it, nearly in proportion: 0.209 at a third of the contact and 0.102 at a sixth, on the pitch point's law π εα (1/z₁ + 1/z₂) / tan αw. The helix angle itself buys under a tenth. What pays is the face: the mean length of line in contact is the transverse ratio times the face, so carrying the spur pair's load on as much line at a third of the contact takes a face 2.65 times as wide.
The face carries the least line
A helical pair that gives up transverse contact to cut its root's sliding was priced by the face it needs to carry the spur optimum's mean length of contact line: 2.65 times as wide, at a third of the contact on a 30° helix. But the length in contact swings through every base pitch and the peak load stands on its least value. That least has a closed form in the fractional parts of the two contact ratios, exact against the swept field to 10⁻¹³. The spur optimum's own least is its face, a sixth below its mean, so least against least the factor is 2.21 when the overlap ratio is a whole number. Real faces land between whole numbers and need 2.21 to 2.87 times the spur's, 2.39 on a spur face of ten modules, and above 2.65 only on faces under ten. And a steeper helix is not always more line: at a fixed face, raising the overlap ratio from 1 to 1.5 takes a third of the least line away.
The least line carries the root
A helical pair's length of contact line swings through every base pitch, and the peak load stands on its least value. The roots, where the sliding is worst, sit at the two ends of the path of contact. The share of the load carried there swings too, and in the limit of a thin root band it reaches its peak while the line in contact is least: half as much again as an even share at overlap ratios just above one, a quarter above two, a sixth above three. A whole-number overlap ratio removes both swings at once. So the overlap that makes the least line largest is also the one that spreads the root's load evenly, and a face sized on the least line alone understates the root's worst moment by the root's own swing.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
InvoluteContact ratioBase circleUndercuttingDesign rulePressure angleProfile shiftCentre distanceEnvelopeOverlap ratioPitchBacklash