Author: Site Editor Publish Time: 10-09-2025 Origin: Site
The difference in efficiency between cylindrical gear reducers and planetary gear reducers is mainly reflected in three aspects: transmission structure, power loss, and application scenarios. The specific comparisons are as follows:
Cylindrical gear reducer
Efficiency range : Single-stage transmission efficiency can reach 98%-99% (straight-tooth cylindrical gears are minimal due to line contact friction), and the multi-stage transmission efficiency is gradually reduced (such as the double-stage efficiency is about 94%-96%)
Source of loss : Mainly due to gear meshing friction and bearing resistance, the helical gear efficiency is slightly lower than that of spur gears (97%-98%)
Planetary gear reducer
Efficiency range : usually 85%-95% , due to the multi-gear meshing shunt power, the energy loss is large
Source of loss : complex meshing between planetary wheels and sun gears/rings, bearing friction and lubrication resistance
Structural Complexity
The cylindrical gear reducer has a simple structure, a direct single-stage transmission path, and low friction loss
Planetary gear reducers need multiple gears to work together, and power shunts lead to energy dispersion loss
Processing Accuracy Requirements
Planetary gears require high-precision grinding teeth (meshing accuracy ≤0.005mm) to reduce vibration losses, but the processing cost is high
Cylindrical gears have relatively low accuracy requirements, and ordinary gear hobbing can meet the needs
Preferential cylindrical gear reducer
Scenarios where are required and space allowshigh efficiency (such as conveyors, mixers)
Single-stage transmission ratio 3-5, multi-stage can reach more than 100 (but the volume is increased)
Preferential planetary gear reducer
Requires compact structure (30%-50% small size) or high torque density (such as robot joints, wind power equipment)
Sacrifice part of the efficiency for space and carrying capacity advantages
Lugraining impact : Both efficiency is affected by lubrication conditions. It is recommended to use L-CKD 320 lubricating oil to reduce friction loss.
Noise comparison : Planetary gears are usually loaded with multiple wheels, and the noise is usually lower than 65dB, which is better than cylindrical gears (75-85dB)
What are the differences in efficiency between cylindrical gear reducers and planetary gear reducers
What accessories need to be replaced during maintenance of WPS60-60-B worm gear reducer
How to check the wear of the tooth surface of the WPS80-50-A worm gear reducer
What is the lubrication principle of KAZ87-17.42-18.5KW gear reducer in high temperature environment
What factors are related to the efficiency of SWL10T-2A-M-40-Z worm gear screw lift
How to repair and maintain the FF47-146-0.75KW reducer chassis vibrates
Application field of WHC150-54-II arc cylindrical worm gear reducer
How to ensure the firmness of the installation foundation of the NGW73-224 planetary gear reducer
Which industries or application scenarios are more suitable for using B2SV05-5-B high-power gear box
How to optimize the box structure of B3SV7-L2-G1-43.52 industrial gearbox to improve performance
Let me introduce the working principle of the NGW-L82-20-55KW planetary gear reducer
What are the key points for choosing a model of WPDS155-20-A-5.5KW worm gear reducer
How to perform stress tests to detect performance of R107D160M4-11KW reducer seal
How to determine whether the P2KB11-112 high-power planetary reducer needs maintenance
What is the working principle of the WHC160-40-3 arc cylindrical worm gear reducer
What is the installation method of WHC180-60-III arc cylindrical worm gear reducer
What are the performance advantages of MBY560-7.1 Hard-tooth surface gear reducer
Some methods to improve the versatility of the spline shaft of the ZLYJ146 hard-tooth gear reducer