- Does it provide adequate misalignment protection?
- Can it transmit the load torque?
- Can it sustain the required speed of rotation?
- Will it fit within the available space envelope?
- Can it operate at the designated ambient temperature?
- Does it provide the required torsional stiffness?
- Does it provide electrical isolation between shafts?
- Will it have the required life expectancy?
- Will it meet my cost expectations?
These properties differentiate a flexible
coupler from a solid sleeve type. The nature of the enabling
mechanism (i.e., bellows, membrane, Oldham, etc.) determines
almost every other performance characteristic of the coupler,
including its tolerance of misalignment and/or axial motion.
Oldham and universal/lateral types can tolerate
misalignments but their backlash-free life may reduce as a result;
bellows types can absorb significant axial motion but their misalignment
capacity may suffer accordingly; membrane couplers are irrevocably
damaged if axial motion exceeds the catalogue specification,
but can accommodate large misalignments with no reduction in
life expectancy if the distance between membrane centers is increased,
typically by linking a pair of single-stage couplers with an
intermediate shaft.
Incidental misalignment is caused by manufacturing
tolerances, thermal expansion, wear, fitting difficulties and
structural settlement. The resultant errors are small, generally
in the range 0° - 1/2° angular and 0-0.008" parallel,
and are difficult to predict. Be aware that a 0.008" parallel
error can grow substantially due to adverse interaction with
the angular component.
When misalignment is incidental, it is more
realistic to consider the effective radial error,
being the radial distance between shaft center lines measured
midway along the length of the coupler. In effect, this is the
composite error and is what matters when determining a value
for maximum misalignment. Only a radial-value need be specified.
Axial motion can result from axial clearances
in the shaft bearings, or from shaft growth due to thermal expansion.
It is usually beneficial to absorb this with a suitable coupler.
In some cases, however, it may be preferable to resist the axial
motion of an unrestricted shaft, particularly if this has a positioning
function, and anchor it to a stable motor shaft. Couplers such
as the universal/lateral can be useful in these cases.
|
The reason we use flexible couplers is to
protect the shaft support bearings from destructive radial and
thrust loads due to misalignment and axial motion, it follows
that those with least resistance can better protect the bearings.
Fig. 1 compares the radial bearing loads of a number of popular
couplers. Excluding the 1.125"Ø jaw coupler, all
results were obtained with couplers of nominal outside 1"Ø.
Applications in which couplers are used for
driving so-called frictional loads, for example pumps, shutter
doors, textile machinery, and so on, are not generally sensitive
to coupler torsional stiffness because angular synchronization
of the shafts is not an issue. When resonance is a problem, it
is possible to reduce the coupler's torsional stiffness and thus
avoid conflict with the natural resonant frequency of the machine
which is most likely operating at constant speed.
This is not a solution when the loads are
inertial, typified by position and velocity control systems,
where registration of input and output shafts is critical throughout
the operating cycle.
In these systems, motor, coupler and load
form a resonant system. Its resonant frequency depends on the
load inertia and on the coupler's torsional stiffness. Increasing
the load inertia, or decreasing the coupler's torsional stiffness,
lowers the resonant frequency.
To control a resonant system you have to be
working well below its resonant frequency. Imagine you are holding
an elastic band with a weight suspended from it. You can control
the vertical movement of the weight provided you move your hand
slowly. Speed up the movement and the weight barely moves.
To improve response, you need a less "elastic"
elastic band, or you need to reduce the weight at the end of
it. Substitute a coupler for the elastic band, and an inertial
load for the weight, and you have a good analogy for an inertial
system.
When the focus is on performance, a stiffer
coupler reduces setting times, improves positional accuracy,
and raises the upper limit of dynamic performance.
Fig. 2 compares torsional deflection tests
(the inverse of torsional stiffness) for a number of popular
couplers. Excluding the 1.125"Ø jaw coupler, all
results were obtained with couplers of nominal outside 1"Ø.
|