Downhill Mountain Bike

Gearbox
Josh Filgate, Jesse Kuhn, Morgan Misek
Jay Seiter, Michael Witonis

Problem Statement
Problem Statement:

When subjected to the abusive environment of

downhill mountain biking, current drive train
designs perform unreliably, require constant
maintenance, and are easily damaged by a
wide variety of external factors.

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Proposed Solution
Proposed Solution:
To remedy these problems, it is our intention to design and
construct an internal gearbox transmission.

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Goals
The final design will take into account:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Max rider input of 115 N-m at 90 RPMs

Existing gear ratios of current drive trains (2.1-3.3)
High impacts resulting from crashing
G-CON 2.0 mounting standards
Sealing against mud, snow, and dust
Industry standard shifters, cranks, and bottom brackets
Targeting racers accustomed to spending between $4000
and $7000 for a complete bike

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Gearbox vs. Current Drive System

UPDATE ME

Gearboxes offer:

Ingress Protection

Separate sensitive surfaces from exposure to

elements
Contain lubrication within a controlled
environment

Impact Protection

Encloses potentially fragile components

within a protective case

December 4th,

Low Maintenance

Less frequent lubrication and tuning required

Less repairs due to impacts

Improved Center of Gravity

Design Team: Joshua

Mass of shifting mechanisms (chain guide, derailleur,

and cassette) moved to a lower and more central point
in the frame
Improved handling

What is Downhill Mountain Biking?

Downhill Races Involve:

High Speeds:

Up to 50+ mph

Natural Obstacles:

rock gardens

boulders

roots

steep terrain

Stunts:

drop-offs over 10 vertical ft

gap jumps of over 35 feet

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Downhill Mountain Biking

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Downhill Mountain Biking

HIGH SPEEDS

TRAIL DEBRIS

ROOTS & VEGETATION

December 4th,

LARGE OBSTACLES

Design Team: Joshua

Examples of Harsh Environments

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Current Drive Train is Fragile

IRREPAIRABLE
FRAME AND
COMPONENT
DAMAGE

EXPOSED DRIVE TRAIN

COMPONENT FAILURE

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

State of the Industry: Market Research

Online Study: How many Derailleurs did you

break in 2007?

192 responses via forums on www.bustedspoke.com and

www.ridemonkey.com
47% of riders broke at least one derailleur in 2007
2 Pro riders broke more than 10 derailleurs

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

State of the Industry: Early Prototypes

First internal tranmission mountain bike prototypes introduced in

the late 1990s
First bikes used existing technologies modified into centralized
locations

Multi-speed hubs

December 4th,

Derailleur-in-a-box

Design Team: Joshua

State of the Industry: Future Growth

Creation of G-CON 2.0 standard

Growing number of frame manufacturers
designing gearbox compatible frames
Interfacing between gearboxes and
frames becoming more standardized

Crank
Input

Frame weldment

Three current prototype designs

that conform to the G-CON
standards

Bolt pattern
G-CON 2.0 Gearbox Interface

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Process
Brainstorming and Initial
Concept Modeling

Design Criteria Decision

Matrix

Concept Chosen for

Design
Phase 1: Shifting Mechanism
Phase 2: Gear Assembly
Phase 3: Case and Interfacing

Proof of Concept Prototype

Detailed System Design

Iterative Analytical
Design
Step 1: Geometric Driven Modeling
Step 2: Calculations performed on
simplified geometries
Step 3: Detailed Modeling
Step 4: FEA with COSMOSWorks

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Decision Matrix
Conventional
Sequential

Criteria

Criteria
Factor

Weight

Packaging

Sequential
Sprockets

Rating

Score

Rating

Score

10

15

20

20

20

20

15

25

15

10

Durability

25

20

25

15

10

Efficiency

15

15

Interfacing

16

12

12

20

Shifting feel

20

12

12

16

92

87

High Score

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

103

Rating

Derailleur in a
box

Score

Total
Score:

Rating

Planetary
Barrel

Planetary

Score

93

Rating

Score

83

Design Process
Brainstorming and Initial
Concept Modeling

Design Criteria Decision

Matrix

Concept Chosen for

Design
Phase 1: Shifting Mechanism
Phase 2: Gear Assembly
Phase 3: Case and Interfacing

Proof of Concept Prototype

Detailed System Design

Iterative Analytical
Design
Step 1: Geometric Driven Modeling
Step 2: Calculations performed on
simplified geometries
Step 3: Detailed Modeling
Step 4: FEA with COSMOSWorks

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase I: Shifting Mechanism

PAWLS

SHIFT BULB
RETURN SPRING
SHIFTING BULB

PAWL RETURN
SPRINGS
SHIFT PULL CABLE

Model of Current Shifting System Configuration

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase I: Shifting Mechanism

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase I: Shifting Mechanism

Governing Equations:
= Tc
J
Assumptions:

Cosmos FEA of Shaft and Pawl:

F = ma = 0

Max Stress: 370 MPa

2:1 Torque reduction from

cranks to gearbox input
Torque distributed evenly over
the three pawls
F.O.S. = 2

Simplified Geometry Calculations:

Max stress calculated at outside
diameter of shaft:

21.7 MPa

Materials Selected:
Shaft: 4130 Steel Q&T
Pawl: 4130 Steel Normalized

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Max Stress: 261 MPa

Design Phase II: Gear Assembly

Planetary Barrel

Support Plate
Barrel Bearing

Hollow
Drive Shaft

Sun
Bearing

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Output Gear

Design Phase II: Gear Assembly

Three types of gear analysis performed

AGMA bending stress

Buckingham gear wear
Fatigue

AGMA
Bending
Stress

Givens

Max rider input: 115 N-m at 90 RPMS

2:1 Gear reduction from cranks to gearbox input

Product lifetime of 3 years

Independent Variables

Governing Equations:

Tooth width
Module
Pitch diameter
Material

1.0 K s K m
Ft K 0 K v
bm J

Buckingham
Wear Load

Fw = K Q b Dp

Assumptions:
K0

= 1.25

Kv

=1

Ks

=1

Km

= 1.2

J
F.O.S.

= 0.35
= 1.25

Available Gear Materials:

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

303 Stainless Steel

l7-4 PH Stainless Steel

416 Stainless Steel

2024 T4 Aluminum

Design Phase II: Gear Assembly

Sun Gear

Ring Gear

Material Selected: 416 Stainless Steel

Material Selected: 2024 T4 Aluminum

Module: 1 Gear width: 5.6 mm

Module: 1 Gear width: 5.6 mm

Endurance Limit: 277 Mpa

Fatigue Stress Limit: 324 MPa

Yield Strength: 277 MPa

Yield Strength: 325 Mpa

AGMA Stress x F.O.S: 266 MPa

AGMA Stress x F.O.S: 266 MPa

Wear Stress: 22.5 MPa

Wear Stress: 19.9 MPa

Planet Gear
Material Selected: 416 Stainless Steel
Module: 1 Gear width: 5.6 mm
Endurance Limit: 277 MPa
Yield Strength: 277 MPa
AGMA Stress x F.O.S: 266 MPa
Wear Stress: 31.8 MPa

Example of Gear Analysis: Gear Set 4

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase II: Gear Assembly

2024 Aluminum
AGMA
Planet
N
Sun
N
Ring
N
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Planet
Y
Sun
Y
Ring
Y
Output
Y

Fatigue
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y

303 Stainless Steel

AGMA
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N

Fatigue
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N

416 Stainless Steel

AGMA
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Fatigue
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N

17-4 PH Stainless Steel

AGMA
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Fatigue
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Selected Material
17-4 PH Stainless Steel
17-4 PH Stainless Steel
17-4 PH Stainless Steel
17-4 PH Stainless Steel
17-4 PH Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
416 Stainless Steel
416 Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
416 Stainless Steel
416 Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
416 Stainless Steel
303 Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
303 Stainless Steel
303 Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
303 Stainless Steel
303 Stainless Steel
2024 Aluminum
2024 Aluminum

Gear material was selected by optimizing AGMA bending stress

and fatigue
December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase III: Case and Interfacing

Drive Shaft
Bearing
Support

G-CON 2.0 Mounting

Feature

Support
Flanges
Barrel Bearing
Support

Output Shaft
Bearing
Support
Threaded Bottom
Bracket Shell

.2*F

.2*F

Mounts to G-CON 2.0 standard

frames
Supports gears and shafts
Structural member of frame

Max Left
Leg
Loading

.2*F

.2*F

Fd

Free body diagram

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

.2*F

Max Right
Leg
Loading

Design Phase III

Loading Conditions:

COSMOS FEA of Case:

Rider transmits 100% of load

from vertical impact to
pedals via legs
0% absorption with bike
suspension
Maximum force riders legs can
transmit = 500 lb

Max Stress: 7 MPa

Material Selected:
6061 T6 Aluminum

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Design Phase III: Case and Interfacing

Industry Standard Component Compatibility:

Shifting cable scalar interfaces with indexed shifters

Case sized and threaded for integration with standards bottom brackets and cranks

Standard mountain bike sprockets used for input and output

Input Sprocket

Shifting Cable
Scalar
Output
Sprocket

Gasket

Industry
Standard
Bottom
Bracket and
Cranks
Impact
Resistant Bash
Guard

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Final Design

Weight: 7.5 lbs

Estimated Cost: $4000
Gear Ratios: 2.1, 2.3, 2.5, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1, 3.3
Materials: 416 Stainless Steel, 303 Stainless Steel, 17-4 PH Stainless Steel,
4130 Steel, 1045 Steel, 2024 Aluminum, 6061 Aluminum

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Proof of Concept Prototype

Weight: 8 lbs
Cost: $1500
Gear Range: 2.1, 2.5, 3.3
Materials: SLA, 303 Stainless Steel, 6061 Aluminum, 1045 Steel, Carbon
Steel, Nylon

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Concluding Thoughts

Proof of concept testing

Shifting mechanism functions

Gear configuration provides three distinct ratios
Case supports internal systems and interfaces with industry standard
components
Sub systems mechanically integrate

Further development

Build and test final design prototype

Reduce weight
Extend lifetime
Improve manufacturability

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Questions?

Special thanks to the following individuals for their technical and moral support:
Randy Moore, Brian Weinberg, Jim Forte

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Extra Slides

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Images

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Images

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

AGMA
1 .0 K s K m
Ft K 0 K v
bm J

all

St K L

KT K R

- Face Width

m - Module
K s - Size Factor = 1

St

- Material Yield Strength

K m - Mounting Factor = 1.3

KL

- Life Factor

K0

- Overload Factor = 1.5 (1 - 2.25)

KT

- Temperature Factor

- Velocity Factor (precision, pitch

velocity)

KR

- Reliability Factor

Kv

Ft

- Transmitted tangential load

- Geometry Factor: .45

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Different Suspensions with G-CON 2.0

ONLINE VIDEO OF MORE PIVOT DESIGNS

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Slide Graveyard

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Proof of Concept Prototype

Final Design Prototype

Proof of Concept Prototype

Weight: 7.5 lbs

Weight: 8 lbs

Cost: $4000

Cost: $1500

Gear Ratios: 2.1, 2.3, 2.5, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1, 3.3

Gear Range: 2.1, 2.5, 3.3

Materials: 416 Stainless Steel, 303 Stainless

Materials: SLA, 303 Stainless Steel, 6061

Steel, 17-4 PH Stainless Steel, 4130 Steel, 1045

Steel, 2024 Aluminum, 6061 Aluminum

Aluminum, 1045 Steel, Carbon Steel, Nylon

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua

Final Design
PLANETARY STACK
INPUT SPROCKET

SHIFTING CABLE
SCALER

OUTPUT
SPROCKET

STANDARD MOUNTAIN BIKE

CRANKSET, BOTTOM BRACKET. AND
BASHGUARD

December 4th,

Design Team: Joshua