Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Saturday, July 28, 2018
2018-01-1546 Published 13 Jun 2018
NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components
in Full Vehicle
Henrique Agreli, Jean-Yves DISSON, and Benjamin Robin ACOEM Group
Matthieu Amblard ArcelorMittal
Citation: Agreli, H., DISSON, J.-Y., Robin, B., and Amblard, M., “NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components in Full Vehicle,”
SAE Technical Paper 2018-01-1546, 2018, doi:10.4271/2018-01-1546.
Abstract
W
ith tighter environmental regulations, as well as
political and public opinion pressure, the reduction
of automotive polluting gas emissions is subject to
intense debates and interests. Before a potential transition to
full electrical vehicles as the long term solution, the reduction
of mass remains of prime importance to permit direct reduc-
tion of emissions in internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.
In addition to the challenges of structural integrity and safety
issues, the acoustical and vibration performance of vehicles
can be  greatly influenced by mass reduction. This article
Introduction
R
oad transport alone contributes to about 20% of the
EU total emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). Cars and
vans (light-duty vehicles) account for ¾ of these emis-
sions. Transport is the only major sector in the EU where
greenhouse gas emissions are still rising [1]. Up to 30% of the
fuel consumption and combustion gas emissions of a vehicle
are directly related to its mass [2]. Hence, the reduction of
mass is without a question a key step in reduction of green-
house gas (GHG) emissions in the years to come, along with
other measures such as alternative propulsion systems
(electric, hydrogen, compressed air), efficient aerodynamic
design and reduced rolling resistance. One way to measure
the importance of the mass in the gas emissions and fuel
consumption of ICEs is to use the fuel reduction value (FRV).
In the usage phase, i.e. excluding the impact in the manufac-
turing and decommissioning phases of the vehicle, fuel
savings caused by a 100 kg reduction in the total mass of the
vehicle can reach up to 0,477 l/100 km [1].
Despite the benefits, the reduction of mass in vehicles
© SAE International
does not come without several challenges. Customers demand
new vehicles that outperform their predecessors in terms of
security, comfort and onboard accessories while maintaining
affordable costs; answering to such expectations while
reducing the overall mass of a vehicle requires the use of inno-
vative materials and technologies. With this respect, High
Strength Steels appear as a good compromise.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
presents a case study of lightweight design of an automotive
door with a high strength steel thin gauge outer panel. An
experimental comparison between a reference and a light-
weight door was conducted in a complete vehicle, allowing
assessing the potential effect of the mass reduction on the
acoustic and vibrational performances. Several conditions were
assessed: rolling on different surfaces, transient events such as
heavy vehicle crossing and door closing events. The comparison
method included the determination of main transfer paths on
the full vehicle. The study indicated that the different acoustic
and vibration performances of the vehicle were preserved.
In the presented work, lightweight door outer panels
made of 0.5 mm thick high strength steel replaced the standard
0.7 mm steel. The typical 220BH steel grade was replaced by
FF280DP. It is an exposed quality Dual Phase grade dedicated
to high quality automotive outer panels. Table 1 summarises
the mechanical properties of the reference Steel 220BH used
in 0.7 mm on the reference door and of the FF280DP used in
0.5 mm on the lightweight door. Intermediate thicknesses
might be used by OEMs and in the present study an extreme
thin gauge has been used.
It is noteworthy that real scale stamping tools were built
to obtain industrially representative demonstrators. The
stamped parts have allowed experimental validations from a
mechanical point of view (dent resistance, stiffness, etc.). Main
risks of industrialization were also analysed (aspect quality,
hemming, read thru effects, etc.) [3]. In terms of mass
TABLE 1  Steel grade mechanical characteristics of Steels used
in the reference and lightweight doors.
YS (MPa) YS (MPa)
Steel grade UTS (MPa)* on coil* El (%)* on door**
220BH 340-400 220-270 > 32 > 290
FF280DP > 490 300-380 > 25 > 370
*
ISO 20 x 80 samples from coils in transverse direction. UTS: Ultimate
Tensile Strength, YS: Yield Strength, El%: Total Elongation
**
: Typically after 2% deformation and bake hardening.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Saturday, July 28, 2018

2 NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components in Full Vehicle

reduction, the average weight savings is 5 kg per vehicle on  FIGURE 1   Door closing setup using a binaural mannequin
the 4 doors. The potential impacts on the acoustical and vibra- for measuring the sound pressure levels.
tion comfort of a C-Segment SUV vehicle equipped with thin
gauge lightweight doors were investigated further.

Methodology
An experimental comparison of a reference and a lightweight
door was chosen. Two aftermarket standard doors were
bought. Door’s components were removed and outer panels
de-assembled. A reference outer panel (0.70 mm) and a thin
outer panel (0.5 mm) were mounted back to the “reference

© SAE International
door” and “lightweight door” respectively, and then door’s
components were installed back. Thus, both reference and
lightweight doors followed the same prototyping operations.
Performed tests were selected to identify potential Noise,
Vibration and Harshness (NVH) degradations.
Well-known ICE vehicle airborne & structure borne
sources were taken into account, especially in the range from
 FIGURE 2   Insulation test setup: an artificial noise source is
200 to 700 Hz. It is indeed one of the major frequency ranges
placed inside the vehicle while the sound intensity levels are
where the presence of engine harmonics can coincide with
calculated at the exterior.
subparts and components resonances (including air cavities).
A Diesel engine vehicle was chosen for the study.
The insulation to exterior noises (such as when crossing
a vehicle) was also analyzed. In fact, doors account for an
important surface area of the vehicle, thus contributing to the
overall vehicle insulation performance.
A psychoacoustic analysis was employed to qualify the
perception of the sound quality when closing the door.
Finally a comparison in the vibroacoustic transfer func-
tions obtained by a reciprocal method was intended to allow
the identification of possible degradations in main transfer
paths of the complete vehicle.
The comparison test of rolling noise was performed under

2 different types of asphalt regarding its roughness. Asphalt
composed of larger grains (rougher) allows greater amplitude
of excitations in the vehicles axles, especially in lower frequen-
cies. Noise levels at the interior of the vehicle (i.e. driver’s
position) were measured when vehicle was driven at a constant
speed of 50 km/h and 80 km/h.
The noise emitted during a door closing event is an
important indicator of the apparent quality of the vehicle. In
accordance with [4] the ideal closing door noise expected by
the customer is normally of low intensity but should allow
confirmation by mean of the noise signature that the door is
correctly closed. The noise should be “clean”, mainly low noise
and without “coda” or temporal annexes. The required kinetic
energy for closing the door should be relatively low. The thin
gauge lightweight design can modify the noise generated
during the closing action of the door, the vibration levels on
the door metal panels as well as the required kinetic energy
for its proper closing.
The objective of analyzing the sound of closing doors was
to compare the sound quality in both cases of a reference and
a lightweight door. In order to minimize the dispersion caused
by variation on the velocity of the closing door, the door
velocity was estimated by mean of a photovoltaic sensor
(Figure 1). The analysis of sound quality was performed in
© SAE International
collaboration with the laboratory of sound and vibration of
(LVA INSA) [4].
The analysis of the insulation levels to exterior noise was
performed with the aid of acoustic near-field holography
(NAH). An artificial noise source was placed inside the
vehicle. The sound intensity levels transmitted through the
door were measured at the exterior by means of a microphone
NAH antenna (Figure 2).
The analysis of transfer paths was focused on the main
noise and vibration sources such as the engine, the tires and
aerodynamic excitations as well as paths where the vehicles
doors are a directly involved, such as the door hinges and
door lock. In this phase during which the vehicle is not
rolling, an acoustic volumetric source is introduced in the
vehicle at driver’s ear position (Figure 3). Acceleration levels
γi are recorded at engine supports, vehicles axles, on the
studied outer panel and the door hinges. Transfer functions
are assessed and compared between both doors.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Saturday, July 28, 2018

NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components in Full Vehicle 3

 FIGURE 3   Determination of transfer functions between TABLE 2  Comparison of the overall sound pressure levels
main vibration sources and driver’s position. (LP) and speech interference level (SIL4) for both reference
and lightweight doors at 50 km/h and 80 km/h.
Type of door Velocity km/h Asphalt LP (dBA) SIL4
Reference 50 Regular 60.7 39.8
Lightweight 50 Regular 60.6 39.9
Reference 50 Rough 66.9 43.7
Lightweight 50 Rough 66.6 43.9

© SAE International
Reference 80 Regular 63.8 46.8
Lightweight 80 Regular 63.7 46.5
Reference 80 Rough 71.1 50.6
Lightweight 80 Rough 71.3 51.1
© SAE International

 FIGURE 4   1/3 octave band sound pressure levels measured

for standard and lightweight vehicles at 80 km/h constant
velocity in both regular and rough asphalt.

Transfer functions are the type γi/Q’ where Q’is the time

derivative of volumetric flux of the artificial source. Based on
the reciprocity principle, the individual transfer functions
can be estimated:
Pv g
= - i (1)
Fi Q¢i
Where Pv is the acoustic pressure at the ear driver position
and Fi is the force due to the source I  (engine, tires
or aerodynamics).
The adopted methodology is based on the empirical
approach, instrumentation and test procedures commonly
adopted by many of the OEM.
The chosen vehicle for the analysis represents one of the
most sold vehicles in its category in the European market
(C-segment SUV).

Results and Discussion

In this section a summary of the results is presented. It
© SAE International

contains the results for the rolling and engine noise & vibra-
tion, insulation exterior noise, analysis of the sound quality
on closing door and the comparison of the Transfer functions.
The Table 2 summarizes the comparative results obtained
when assessing the rolling noise in both regular and rough
asphalts for both reference and lightweight doors at 50 km/h
and 80 km/h. The comparison was based on the overall sound the results at 80  km/h on rough and regular roads are
pressure levels (dBA) and the speech interference level (SIL4). presented for simplification purposes, since the conclusions
obtained with both speed are similar. It can be seen that the
differences (showed in blue) in the sound pressure levels are
less than the 95% confidence interval estimated with basis on
Rolling and Engine Noise 3 set of measurements.
The results of sound pressure levels and speech interference
show no significant difference between the two doors. It indi-
cates that despite the reduction in the mass of the door outer
Acoustical Transparency
panel, the noise levels in the driver’s position have not been The objective of this measurement is to quantify the acoustical
degraded. A comparison of the sound pressure levels in 1/3 power transmitted through the door and to identify potential
octave band in dB (ref. 20 μPa) is provided in Figure 4, only effects due to a lower mass. The near field acoustical
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Saturday, July 28, 2018

4 NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components in Full Vehicle

 FIGURE 5   Sound intensity map of the thin gauge  FIGURE 6   Sound intensity map of the reference door
lightweight door obtained by mean of an artificial noise source obtained by mean of an artificial noise source and NAH.
and NAH.

© SAE International
© SAE International
 FIGURE 7   Frequency Response Function (FRF) of the
holography method was chosen. An internal artificial source vibratory response of wheel hub caused by acoustic excitation
was placed inside the vehicle and the pressure levels measured at the driver’s ear Q’.
at the exterior. By mean of the reciprocity principle, the trans-
mission of exterior noise to the interior of the vehicle can
be assumed to be the same.
As noticed by the resulting image of the sound intensity
levels, the major source of sound transmission is through the
window glasses. So the impact caused by the reduction of door
mass is negligible. It can be seen as well, without any surprise
that the sealing joints responsible for the noise and water
insulation of the door are very important in preventing noise
leakages especially at high frequencies.

© SAE International
Transfer Functions
The analysis of the transfer functions is based on the reciprocal
method with a volumetric acoustic source. Table 3 summa-
rizes the results for the main sources: engine, rolling noise &
vibration and aerodynamics. Acceleration levels γi were TABLE 3  Synthesis of the Frequency Response Function
measured respectively at the engine supports, the wheel hubs (FRF) comparison between the reference and
and on the door panels. lightweight doors.
Typical frequency responses γi/Q’ are presented in
Low Medium High
Figure 6, and summarized in Table 3. Comparison of both Source Frequency Frequency Frequency
doors is done at low, medium and high frequencies.
Engine Similar FRF Similar FRF Slightly
In the low frequency domain, no differences have been improved
© SAE International

observed. The frequency response functions of both the refer-

Rolling N&V Similar FRF Slightly Similar FRF
ence and lightweight doors were similar. For the high improved
frequency domain, a slight improvement, meaning a reduction
Aerodynamics Similar FRF Slightly Slightly
in the vibration response, was observed in the lightweight Degraded improved
door. In case of the medium frequencies, a degradation of
aerodynamic noise Frequency Response Function (FRF) was
observed. This result can be  interpreted that for a given The determination of the FRF of the 3 main types of noise
perpendicular operational force caused by the aerodynamic sources from the vehicle (engine, rolling and aerodynamics)
pressure, the resulting sound pressure levels at the driver’s ear allowed a comparison of the individual contribution of each
can be up to 2.6 dB higher in the case of lightweight door. It kind of source during operational conditions. It was noticed
is noteworthy that this effect should be compensated by the that at speed of 80 km/h the 3 types of sources contribute
use of stiffening patches that would be recommended at such almost equally to the overall noise levels for frequencies up to
low thicknesses [3]. In this study, patches were not installed 1000 Hz. At higher frequencies, aerodynamics becomes the
to be in the worst conditions. major noise source.
© 2018 SAE International. All Rights Reserved.
 Downloaded from SAE International by American Univ of Beirut, Saturday, July 28, 2018
NVH Analysis of Lightweight Steel Components in Full Vehicle 5
Closing Door Analysis
Closing door events were recorded with aid of a binaural
mannequin, 6 sounds were used, 3 for each type of door. The
sounds were combined into pars (total of 15 pairs) and
subjected to the evaluation of a jury composed of 13 women
and 25 men, where the participants were asked to score the
sounds in terms of their preference. The participants used a
slider on a continuous scale to score the sound of their prefer-
ence. A brief summary of the results are provided below in
the form of a demerit score- values of 0.5 indicate the sounds
of both doors are equally preferable, whereas values greater
than 0.5 indicates a preference for the lightweight door.
In the Figure 8, the demerit scores of the lightweight
doors (sounds 4, 5 and 6) are higher than the standard door.
Although being significant from the statistical point of view,
the differences are minor [4].
 FIGURE 8   Demerit scores calculated for the standard
(1, 2 and 3) and lightweight door (4, 5 and 6) [4].
© SAE International
 FIGURE 9   Beamforming sound pressure map of
closing door.
© SAE International
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holder.
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the
content of the paper.
ISSN 0148-7191
In addition to the psychoacoustic analysis of the closing
door, a beamforming antenna was employed in the analysis,
permitting the identification of the zones of most importance
where the transitory noise is generated. Sound pressure maps
were using a beamforming camera (Figure 9). The main noise
sources were located at the door lower extremity (seal), and
secondary source at the upper front door hinge location. A
third one is located at the hinge. It is noteworthy that these
phenomena are not directly linked to the steel outer panel.
Summary/Conclusions
The experimental comparative analysis indicated that the thin
gauge lightweight steel door achieved at least as good acoustic
and vibration performances as the reference door. In other
words, mass savings can be obtained by decreasing the door
outer panel thickness thanks to high strength steel while
maintaining good acoustic and vibration performance.
In parts, the performance of the vehicle was degraded
because the doors wasn’t a critical transfer path of engine or
external noises, that may not be the case for other parts of the
vehicles such as the firewall. The optimization of vehicle’s mass
using high strength steels while preserving the NVH charac-
teristics may require additional mitigation measures, such as
the utilization of additional lightweight acoustical materials,
therefore a study for each specific vehicle and motorization
may be required.
The employed experimental approach was proven to
be relatively simple to execute and could be extended to other
types of vehicle parts.
References
1. European Commission Climate Action, “Road Transport:
Reducing CO2 Emissions from Vehicles | Climate Action,”
[Online]. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/
transport/vehicles_en#tab-0-0, accessed November 14, 2017.
2. Del Pero, F., Delogu, M., and Pierini, M., “The Effect of
Lightweighting in Automotive LCA Perspective: Estimation
of Mass-Induced Fuel Consumption Reduction for Gasoline
Turbocharged Vehicles,” J. Clean. Prod., 2017.
3. Amblard, M., “Light Steel Door Outer Panels in DP490 -
Experimental Validations,” Automotive Closures Conference
2017, Novi, MI, USA, May 9, 2017.
4. Parizet, E., Guyader, E., and Nosulenko, V., “Analysis of Car
Door Closing Sound Quality,” LYON, 2016.