2013 NVH Strborneworkshopweb 55b0b92e37e3b

SAE 2013 NVH Conference
Structure Borne NVH Workshop
Alan Duncan Altair Engineering @ Honda

NVH Specialist
Contact Email: aeduncan@autoanalytics.com
Greg Goetchius Tesla Motors

NVH Specialist
Jianmin Guan Altair Engineering

NVH Manager
Slide 1
2013 SAE NVC Structure Borne Noise Workshop
2013 Automotive Analytics LLC A.E.Duncan
Workshop Objectives -
1. Review Basic Concepts of Automotive Structure Borne Noise.
2. Propose Generic Targets.
3. Present New Technology Example.
Intended Audience –
• New NVH Engineers.
• “Acoustics” Engineers seeking new perspective.
• “Seasoned Veterans” seeking to brush up skills.
Slide 2
• Introduction
• Low Frequency Basics
• Mid Frequency Basics
• Live Noise Attenuation Demo
• New Technology
Uncertainty and NVH Scatter
• Closing Remarks
Slide 3
• Introduction
• New Technology
• Closing Remarks
Slide 4
Competing Vehicle Design Disciplines
Ride Impact
and CrashWorthiness
Handling
NVH Durability
Slide 5
Automotive Engineering Objectives are Timeless
Slide 6
• Introduction
Alan Duncan
• New Technology
• Closing Remarks
Slide 7
Structure Borne Noise and Vibration
Vibrating
Source
Frequency Range: up to 1000 Hz

System Characterization
• Source of Excitation
• Transmission through Structural Paths
• “Felt” as Vibration
• “Heard” as Noise
Slide 8
Automotive NVH Frequency Range
Structure Borne Noise

Airborne Noise
Response
Absorption
+
Mass
+
Local Stiffness Sealing
+ +
Global Stiffness Damping Damping
“Low” “Mid” “High”
~ 150 Hz ~ 1000 Hz ~ 10,000 Hz
Log Frequency Slide 9

Low Frequency Basics
• Source-Path-Receiver Concept
• Single DOF System Vibration
• NVH Source Considerations
• Receiver Considerations
• Vibration Attenuation Strategies
Provide Improved Isolation
Mode Management
Nodal Point Mounting
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 10
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 11
Structure Borne NVH Basics
RECEIVER
PATH
SOURCE
Slide 12
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 13
Single Degree of Freedom Vibration
APPLIED FORCE
F = FO sin 2 π f t
1 + (2ζ f fn ) 2
TR = FT / F =
(1 − f fn ) + (2ζ f fn )
2 2 2 2
m
Transmitted
Force
k c FT ζ = fraction of critical damping
fn = natural frequency k m
f = operating frequency
Slide 14
Vibration Isolation Principle
4
0.1
APPLIED FORCE
Transmissibility Ratio
0.15
F = FO sin 2 π f t
3
m TR = FT / F
0.25
2 k c FT Transmitted
0.375 Force
0.5
1.0
1
Isolation
Isolation Region
Region
0
0 1 1.414 2 3 4 5
Frequency Ratio (f / fn) Slide 15
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 16
NVH Source Considerations
Suspension
Powertrain
Two Main Sources

Slide 17
Typical NVH Pathways to the Passenger
PATHS
FOR
STRUCTURE
BORNE
NVH
Slide 18
Structure Borne NVH Sources
Slide 19
Structure Borne NVH Sources
Primary Consideration:
Reduce the Source first as much as

possible because whatever enters the
structure is transmitted through multiple
paths to the receiver.
Transmission through multiple paths is

more subject to variability.
Slide 20
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 21
Receiver Considerations
Subjective to Objective Conversions
Subjective NVH Ratings are typically based on a
10 Point Scale resulting from Ride Testing
Receiver Sensitivity is a Key Consideration
A 2 ≈ 1/2 A 1
Represents 1.0 Rating Change
TACTILE: 50% reduction in motion
SOUND : 6.dB reduction in sound pressure level

( long standing rule of thumb ) Slide 22
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 23
Symbolic Model of Unibody Passenger Car
8 Degrees of Freedom
2 4
8
1 3 5
6 7
Total 2178.2 Kg (4800LBS) Tires 350.3 N/mm

Mass Sprung 1996.7 Kg KF 43.8 N/mm
Unsprung 181.5 Kg (8.33% of Total) KR 63.1 N /mm
Powertrain 181.5 Kg Beam mass lumped on
grids like a beam
M2,3,4 =2 * M1,5
From Reference 6
Slide 24
8 Degree of Freedom Vehicle NVH Model
Engine Mass
8
Engine Flexible Beam for Body
Isolator
1 2 3 4 5
Suspension
Springs
6 7
Wheels
Tires
Slide 25
Force Applied to Powertrain Assembly
Feng
8
1 2 3 4 5
6 7
Forces at Powertrain could represent a First Order

Rotating Imbalance
Slide 26
Engine Isolation Example
Response at M id Car
1.0000
Constant Force Load; F~A 15.9 Hz

8.5 Hz
0.1000
Velocity (mm/sec)
7.0 Hz
0.0100
0.0010
2 4
8
1 3 5
6 7
700 Min. RPM First Order Unbalance

0.0001 Operation Range of Interest
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Frequency Hz
Slide 27
Engine Isolation Example 15.9 Hz
Response at M id Car
1.0000
Constant Force Load; F~A
0.1000 8.5 Hz
Velocity (mm/sec)
Engine Idle Speed

0.0100
Operating Shapes
at 700 RPM 0.0010
8
2 4
1 3 5
700 Min. RPM First7.0 Hz Unbalance

6 7
Order
0.0001 Operation Range of Interest
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Frequency Hz
Slide 28
Lowest Body Movement
Concepts for Increased Isolation
“Double” isolation is the typical strategy for
further improving isolation of a given vehicle
design.
Second Level of
Isolation is at Subframe
to Body Mount
Subframe is
Intermediate Structure
Suspension Bushing is first level
Slide 29
Removed Double Isolation Effect
1 2 3 4 5
Wheel
6 Mass 7
Removed
Slide 30
Double Isolation Example
Vertical Response at DOF3
6.0E+00
Base Model
5.0E+00
Without Double_ISO
(mm/sec)
4.0E+00
2 4
8
1 3 5
6 7
3.0E+00
Velocity
1.414*fn
2.0E+00
1.0E+00
0.0E+00
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Frequency Hz
Slide 31
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 32
Mode Management Chart
EXCITATION SOURCES
Inherent Excitations (General Road Spectrum, Reciprocating Unbalance, Gas Torque, etc.)
Process Variation Excitations (Engine, Driveline, Accessory, Wheel/Tire Unbalances)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
First Order Wheel/Tire Unbalance Hz
V8 Idle
Hot - Cold
CHASSIS/POWERTRAIN MODES
Suspension Hop and Tramp Modes
Ride Modes Suspension Longitudinal Modes
Powertrain Modes Exhaust Modes
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Hz
BODY/ACOUSTIC MODES
Body First Torsion Steering Column First Vertical Bending
Body First Bending First Acoustic Mode
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Hz
(See Ref. 1) Slide 33
Bending Mode Frequency Separation
1 2 3 4 5
Beam Stiffness was

adjusted to align Bending
Frequency with Suspension
6 7
Modes and then
progressively separated
back to Baseline.
Slide 34
8 DOF Mode Separation Example
Response at Mid Car 18.2 Hz Bending
13.Hz Bending
100.00
10.6 Bending
2 4
8
5
10.6 Hz
1 3
Velocity (mm/sec)
6 7
10.00
13.0 Hz
18.2 Hz
1.00
0.10
5 10 15 20
Frequency Hz
Slide 35
8 DOF Mode Separation Example
Response at Mid Car 18.2 Hz Bending
13.Hz Bending
100.00
10.6 Bending
2 4
8
1 3 5 Highest Body Bending
Velocity (mm/sec)
6 7
10.00
All Operating 1.00
Shapes at 10.6 Hz
0.10
5 10 15 20
Frequency Hz
Slide 36
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 37
Mount at Nodal Point
First Bending: Nodal Point Mounting Example
Front input forces Rear input forces
Locate wheel centers at node points of the first bending modeshape

to prevent excitation coming from suspension input motion.
Slide 38
Mount at Nodal Point
First Torsion: Nodal Point Mounting Examples
Side View
Rear View
Passenger sits at Engine
node point for
First Torsion.
Transmission Mount of a
3 Mount N-S P/T is near
the Torsion Node. Slide 39
Powertrain Bending Mode Nodal Mounting
1 2 3 4 5
6 7
Mount system is placed to support Powertrain at the Nodal Locations of

the First order Bending Mode.
Best compromise with Plan View nodes should also be considered.
Slide 40
Bending Node Alignment with Wheel Centers
Redistribute Beam Masses
8 to move Node Points to
Align with points 2 and 4
1 2 3 4 5
6 7
Slide 41
First Bending Nodal Point Alignment
Response at Mid-Car
4.0E+00
Node Shifted
2 4
Base Model 8
(m m/sec)
1 3 5
6 7
3.0E+00
2.0E+00
Velocity
1.0E+00
0.0E+00
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Frequency Hz
Slide 42
First Bending Nodal Point Alignment
Operating
Response at Mid-Car
4.0E+00
Shapes at
18.2 Hz
Node Shifted
2 4
Base Model 8
(m m/sec)
1 3 5
6 7
3.0E+00
2.0E+00
Velocity
Node Shifted Model

1.0E+00
0.0E+00
5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Frequency Hz
No Residual Body Bending
Slide 43
Diagnosis: Increase at 10.2 Hz
Body Bends up at Downward Position of Cycle
Slide 44
Diagnosis: Increase at 10.2 Hz
Up Position
Motion Experienced when Motion Experienced when

Bending is Present Bending is Removed
Center - Undeformed Position
CONCLUSION:
Response Increases when a
Beneficial mode is Removed.
Down Position Slide 45

Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 46
Dynamic Absorber Concept
Auxiliary Spring-Mass-Damper
m = M / 10
x x
SDOF 2DOF
M M
YO YO
Slide 47
Powertrain Example of Dynamic Absorber
Anti-Node Identified
at end of Powerplant
k c
m
Absorber attached at anti-node acting in
the Vertical and Lateral plane.
Tuning Frequency = √ k/m

Slide 48
[Figure Courtesy of DaimlerChrysler Corporation]
Baseline
BaselineSound
SoundLevel
Level
63
63Hz
HzDynamic
DynamicAbsorber
Absorber
63
63++110
110Hz
HzAbsorbers
Absorbers
10
dB
Slide 49
[Figure Courtesy of DaimlerChrysler Corporation]
Low Frequency Basics - Review
Mode Management
Dynamic Absorbers
Slide 50
• Introduction
• Mid Frequency Basics Jianmin Guan
• New Technology
• Closing Remarks
Slide 51
Mid Frequency NVH Fundamentals
This looks familiar!

Frequency Range of Interest has changed to
150 Hz to 1000 Hz Slide 52
Typical NVH Pathways to the Passenger
PATHS
FOR
STRUCTURE
NoisePaths
Pathsare
arethe
the
BORNE
Noise
sameas
same asLow
Low NVH
FrequencyRegion
Frequency Region Slide 53
Mid-Frequency Analysis Character
Structure Borne Noise
Airborne Noise
•• Mode
Mode separation
separation is
is less
less practical
practical in
in
High modal density
mid-
mid-frequency
mid-frequency
and coupling in
•• New
New Strategy
Strategy is
is Effective
Effective Isolation:
Isolation:
source, path and
receiver
Achieved
Achieved byby reducing
reducing energy
energy transfer
transfer
locally
locally between
between source
source and
and receiver
receiver at
at
key
key paths.
paths.
Response
Absorption
+
Local Stiffness Mass
+ +
Global Stiffness Damping Sealing
“Low” “Mid” “High”
~ 150 Hz ~ 1000 Hz
Log Frequency ~ 10,000 Hz
Slide 54
Control Measures for Mid Frequency Concerns
Effective Isolation
Attenuation along Key Noise Paths
Slide 55
Effective Isolation
Slide 56
Isolation Effectiveness
Classical SDOF: Rigid
Source and Receiver
“Real Structure”
Flexible (Mobile)
1.0 Source and
Receiver
Transmissibility Ratio
Isolation
Isolation Region
Region f/fn
1.0 1.414 10.0

Effectiveness deviates from the classical development as resonances
occur in the receiver structure and in the foundation of the source.
Slide 57
Mobility
• Mobility is the ratio of velocity response at the excitation point on structure
where point force is applied
Velocity
Mobility =
Force
• Mobility, related to Admittance, characterizes Dynamic Stiffness of

the structure at load application point
Frequency * Displacement
Mobility =
Force
Frequency
=
Dynamic Stiffness
Slide 58
Isolation
• The isolation effectiveness can be quantified by a theoretical model based on
analysis of mobilities of receiver, isolator and source
• Transmissibility ratio is used to objectively define measure of isolation

Force from source with isolator
TR =
Force from source without isolator
V Receiver Vr
V Receiver Vr
V Fr
Fr Fs =
Yi + Y r + Y s F ir
V ir
Fs
Vs Isolator V is
Source
F is
V
F s= Fs
Yr +Ys Vs
Source
Slide 59
Isolation
Force from source with an isolator Receiver Vm

TR =
Force from source without an isolator
Fm
TR =  ( Y r + Y s ) / ( Y i + Y r + Y s )  F im
V im
Isolator V if
Y r : Receiver mobility
F if
Y i : Isolator mobility
Y s : Source mobility Ff
Vf
Source
• For Effective Isolation (Low TR) the Isolator

Mobility must exceed the sum of the Source and
Receiver Mobilities.
Recall that Y ∝1
K Slide 60
Designing Noise Paths
1 1 1 1 1
TR =  ( + ) / ( + + )
K body K source K body K iso K source
K source
K body K iso
K iso 1.0 5.0 20.0
1.0 0.67 0.55 0.51
5.0 0.55 0.29 0.20
20.0 0.51 0.20 0.09
Generic targets:
body to bushing stiffness ratio of at least 5.0
source to bushing stiffness ratio of at least 20.0
Slide 61
Body-to-Bushing Stiffness Ratio
Relationship to Transmissibility
0.6
For a source ratio of 20
Transmissibility Ratio TR
0.5
0.4
Target Min. = 5
0.3 gives TR = .20
0.2
0.1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Stiffness Ratio; K body / K iso
Slide 62
Effective Isolation
Slide 63
Identifying Key NVH Paths
Key NVH paths are identified by Transfer Path Analysis (TPA)
Tactile
Tactile Acoustic
Acoustic
Transfer
Transfer Transfer
Transfer
Fi Break the system at the

points where the forces
enter the body (Receiver)
Operating loads Operating loads
Total Acoustic Response is summation of partial responses

over all noise paths
Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ (P/F) i * Fi ]

Slide 64
TPA Example: Contribution at One Transfer Path
Partial response from a particular path: Pi = (P/F) i * Fi
TFi Fi
91 Hz
P/T Load
Crank torque
Slide 65
TPA Example: Sum of Key Transfer Paths at One Peak
Total Response: Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ (P/F) i * Fi ]
P/T Load P/T Load

Crank torque Crank torque
Slide 66
Attenuating Key NVH Paths
TPA Example: Identifying Root Cause of Dominant Paths
P/T Load
Crank torque
TFi
Fi PMi
Slide 67
Attenuating Key NVH Paths
TPA Example: Dominant Paths over Frequencies
P/T Load
Crank torque
TFi
Fi PMi
Slide 68
TPA Example: Cascading Vehicle Targets to Subsystems
Once the dominant noise paths and
root cause have been identified, the
task is reduced to solving problems of:
1. High Force
2. High Transfer Function
3. High Point Mobility
Limit TF to a 55 dB target
See changes in response
P/T Load
Crank torque
TFi
Slide 69
Acoustic
AcousticTransfer
Transfer(P/F)
(P/F)i i
P/V
V/F P/F
(Kbody)
F F F F
F F Fi F
Operating loads create
Forces (Fi) into body at
All noise paths
Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ Fi * (P/F) i ]

= Σ paths [ Fi * (P/V) i * (V/F)i]
Measurement Parameters Generic Targets
P/F Acoustic Sensitivity 50 - 60 dBL/N
V/F Structural Point Mobility 0.2 to 0.3

(Receiver Side) mm/sec/N Slide 70
“Downstream” Effects: Body Panels
Recall for Acoustic Response Pt
Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ Fi * (P/V) i * (V/F)i]
(P/V)i ! “Downstream” (Body Panel) System Dynamics: Three Main Effects:
1. Panel Damping
Increased Damping
3. Panel Acoustic Contribution
2. Panel Stiffness
Increased Stiffness
Slide 71
Generic Noise Path Targets
Primary: Minimize the Source Force
< 1.0 N
K body K source
> 5.0 > 20.0
K iso K iso
Structural
Mobility < 0.2 to 0.3 mm/sec/N
Acoustic 50 - 60
<
Sensitivity dBL/N
Panel Damping Loss Factor

> .10
Slide 72
Final Remarks on Mid Frequency Analysis
• Effective isolation at dominant noise paths is critical
• Reduced mobilities at body & source and softened

bushing are key for effective isolation
• Mode Separation remains a valid strategy as modes
in the source structure start to participate
• Other means of dealing with high levels of response

(Tuned dampers, damping treatments, isolator
placement at nodal locations) are also effective
Slide 73
Structure Borne NVH: Concepts Summary
• Source-Path-Receiver as a system
1. Reduce Source
2. Rank and Manage Paths
3. Consider Subjective Response
• Effective Isolation
• Mode Management
• Nodal Point Placement
• Attachment Stiffness
• “Downstream” (Body Panel) Considerations
Slide 74
• Introduction
• New Technology Greg Goetchius
• Closing Remarks
Slide 75
Tool Box Demo Test Results
Toolbox Demo Noise Test Results
90
85
80
70 68
SPL (dBA)
63
61
60
55
50 47
40 39
30
1) Baseline: 2) Imbalance + 3) No Imbalance, 4) No Imbalance, 5) No Imbalance + 6) #5 + Absorption 7) #6 + Insulator
Imbalance, No Isolation No Isolation No Isolation + Isolation + Mat
Isolation Damping Damping

• Introduction
• New Technology
NVH Scatter and Uncertainty
Closing Remarks Alan Duncan
Slide 77
• Scatter 20 Years Ago
• New Technology to Address Scatter
Slide 78
Slide 79
Magnitude of 99 Structure Borne Noise Transfer Functions for
Rodeo’s at the Driver Microphone
Measurements from Kompella and Bernhard
( Ref. 8 ) 1993 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
Mag. of FRF
Frequency ( Hz )
Slide 80
Freymann, BMW NVH Scatter Results
Sound Pressure [ dB( lin )]

12 dB Variation
Frequency ( Hz )
Experimentally detected Scatter in low Acoustic Scatter from Simulation of the

frequency vibroacoustic behavior of vibroacoustic behavior of a vehicle due
production vehicles. to possible tolerances in the component
area and in the production process.
© 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Reproduced with permission from paper
by Freymann, et. Al. (Ref. 9) Slide 81
Scatter Implications for Test (or Simulation) NVH Development
Test Simulation
Variability observed from multiple tests of “identical” vehicles is

important in understanding the degree to which the Test (or
Simulation) of a Design is representative of the Mean response.
How many Tests (or Simulations) of a Design would be required
for the result to be considered statistically significant?
CONCLUSIONs: From K/B and BMW Studies
It is not highly probable:
1. that a Single Test will represent the Mean response
2. that a CAE Simulation will match a Single Test
Slide 82
Scatter
2013 Automotive Analytics LLC is the “Physics”
A.E.Duncan 2013 SAE NVC Structure Borne Noise Workshop
Slide 83
Reference Baseline Confidence Criterion
For Operating Response Simulations
Test Variation Band

10. dB; 50-150 Hz
20. dB; 150-500 Hz FUDGE
REF. 8 FACTORS
Sound FRF
Simulation Prediction
Confidence Criterion:
Simulation result must
Test Upper Bound fall within the band of
Test Band Average test variation.
Test Lower Bound
Frequency Hz
2003 Workshop Confidence Criterion Lecture with Voice Track
available at www.AutoAnalytics.com on DOWNLOAD page. Slide 84
FlashBack: 1995 Paper on Root Cause of Scatter
(Ref. 15)
Slide 85
Root Cause of Scatter : Conditions
Total Response
Slide 86
Slide 87
Non-Parametric Probabilistic Simulation; Soize, Durand, Gagliardini
Goal: Define a Modeling Methodology that:

1. Accounts for NVH Scatter
2. Quantifies Uncertainty with Statistical
Significance using a Stochastic Model
3. Accounts for the Combined Effect of Modeling
and Manufacturing Uncertainty
(Ref. 12) Slide 88

Tactile Responses
NTF @ DRIVER EAR
POWERTRAIN LOADS
(See Ref. 11 for Model Details)

Slide 89
Standard Eqn. for

Structural-Acoustic
Coupling Modal Model
Typical Derivation for

creating the randomized
Dynamic Matrix with
Gaussian Distribution.
Non-Parametric: Direct
Changes in Modal Matrices.
The scatter created is a

function of:
Dispersion Parameter: δ
Once determined, δ is a
constant controlling the
amplitude level of scatter.
7 Dispersion Constants
are needed:
3 for Structure: M, D, K
3 for Acoustics: M, D, K
1 for Coupling: Cn,m Slide 90

Proof of Process Convergence

CONCLUSIONS: Converged at 200 REALIZATIONS
and with Struct to 400 and Fluid to 350 Hz
Increasing No. of
Modes
Monte Carlo
Randomization
Converges at 200
Realizations of the
Random Matrices.
Slide 91
95% Upper Confidence Band

Structural Uncertainty Nominal / Original Model Response
50% Confidence Band (Mean Stochastic Model)
95% Lower Confidence Band
Acoustic Uncertainty
Coupling CONCLUSION:
Uncertainty • The Model shows 95%
Confidence Bands with
increasing Scatter at higher
frequency similar to K-B Study.
Slide 92
Main Paper - Development is Extensive

Includes Test Data Comparison
(Ref. 13) Slide 93

Full Vehicle System – Body and Chassis

Structural-Acoustic Model
Similar Detail Level as first paper
FIG. 10. Finite element mesh of the computational structural acoustic model.
(See Ref. 11 for Model Details)

Slide 94
95% UPR
Nominal
50% Mean
95% LWR
FIG. 16. Comparisons of the stochastic computational model results with the experiments. Graphs of the root
mean square of the acoustic pressures averaged in the cavity in dB scale: experiments for the 30 configurations
(gray lines); Mean computational model (dashed line); mean value of the random response (mid thin solid line);
95% confidence region: the upper and lower envelopes are the upper and lower thick solid lines.
NOTE: Acoustic Dispersion Parameters are determined here with Mean Structure held Invariant.
Slide 95
OBS # 6
P/T Load
2nd Order
95% UPR
Nominal
50% Mean
95% LWR
FIG. 19. Comparisons of the stochastic computational model results with the experiments for observation
Obs6. Graphs of the moduli of the FRFs in dB scale: experiments for the 20 cars (gray lines); Mean
computational model (dashed line); mean value of the random response (mid thin solid line); confidence
region: the upper and lower envelopes are the upper and lower thick solid lines.
NOTE: Structure Dispersion Parameters are determined here with Mean Acoustic held Invariant.
Slide 96
P/T Load
2nd Order
95% Upr
Nominal
50% Mean
95% Lwr
FIG. 20. Comparisons of the stochastic computational model results with the experiments for the booming
noise. Graphs of the moduli of the FRFs in dB(A) scale: experiments for the 20 cars (thin gray lines); mean
value of the experiments (thick gray line); Mean computational model (dashed line); Mean value of the
random response (mid thin solid line); 95% confidence region: the upper and lower envelopes are the upper
and lower thick solid lines.
Slide 97
P/T Load
2nd Order
95% Upr
Nominal
50% Mean
95% Lwr
FIG. 20. Comparisons of the stochastic computational model results with the experiments for the booming
CONCLUSIONS:
noise. Graphs of the moduli of the FRFs in dB(A) scale: experiments for the 20 cars (thin gray lines); mean
. value
The of 95% Confidence
the experiments Bands
(thick encapsulate
gray line); the Measured
Mean computational Scatter
model (dashed of 20value
line); Mean Vehicles.
of the
. random response (mid thin solid line); 95% confidence region: the upper and lower envelopes are the upper
Half-Bandwidth Scatter (between Mean and Upr 95%) is similar to K-B Half-Bands.
and lower thick solid lines.
NOTE: The Method has Quantified the Model and Manufacturing Combined Uncertainty.Slide 98
Non-Parametric Probabilistic Simulation; Jund, Guillaume, Gagliardini
(Ref. 14)
Slide 99
P/T Load
2nd Order
95% Upr
Nominal
50% Mean
95% Lwr
Test
Measurement
Author:
Focus of Correlation Effort
All Test Peaks in Band: Results imply a

Countermeasure is needed.
FIG. 4: Computed booming noise inside a car vs. rpm, using only structure-borne excitation compared with the
measured value (brown bold). Thin dotted black: deterministic computation; green: median value; thin dotted
blue: lower bound with a 95% probability; dotted red: upper bound with a 95% probability.
Slide 100
A-B Design Decision using Deterministic Model - vs - Mean Stochastic Model
DETERMISTIC MODEL STOCHASTIC MODEL - Mean Level

Blue: New Design
Green: Base
. Amplitude Range = 15 dB
. Decision is Clearer that
both Designs are Equal
Performers
P/T Load
. Amplitude Range = 30 dB 2nd Order
. Need Tradeoff Judgment
FIG. 6: Booming noise inside a car vs rpm. FIG. 7: Booming noise inside a car vs rpm.
Deterministic models. Comparison of a baseline Stochastic modelling. Comparison of the median
configuration (green) with a modification set (blue value of a baseline configuration (green) with a
bold). modification set (blue bold)
Slide 101
Conclusions:
Observations about Scatter:
Kompella and Bernhard Test Observations are still relevant after 20 Years.
Scatter-like NVH Variation exists even in Best-in-Class vehicles.
Observations from Soize, Durand, Gagliardini, et. al. Papers

The Non-Parametric stochastic computational model with dispersion
parameters derived from a test database accounts for NVH Scatter due
to combined Modeling and Manufacturing Uncertainties.
The Upper, Lower, and Mean Confidence Probabilities lead to more

precise assessment of the effects of NVH scatter.
A database of dispersion parameters enables a virtual product

development process assuring robust NVH performance.
The model configuration lends itself to an automated computational

methodology driving a robust virtual product development process.
Slide 102
• Introduction
• New Technology
• Closing Remarks: Q & A
Alan-Greg-Jimi Slide 103
SAE 2013 NVH Conference
Thank You for Your Time!
Q&A
Slide 104
Structure Borne NVH References
Primary References (Workshop Basis: 4 Papers)
1. A. E. Duncan, et. al., “Understanding NVH Basics”, IBEC, 1996
2. A. E. Duncan, et. al., “MSC/NVH_Manager Helps Chrysler Make
Quieter Vibration-free Vehicles”, Chrysler PR Article, March 1998.
3. B. Dong, et. al., “Process to Achieve NVH Goals: Subsystem
Targets via ‘Digital Prototype’ Simulations”, SAE 1999-01-1692,
NVH Conference Proceedings, May 1999.
4. S. D. Gogate, et. al., “’Digital Prototype’ Simulations to Achieve
Vehicle Level NVH Targets in the Presence of Uncertainties’”,
SAE 2001-01-1529, NVH Conference Proceedings, May 2001
Structure Borne NVH Workshop - on Internet

At SAE www.sae.org/events/nvc/specialevents.htm
WS + Refs. at www.AutoAnalytics.com at download link Slide 105
Supplemental Reference Recommendations
5. T.D. Gillespie, Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics, SAE 1992
(Also see SAE Video Lectures Series, same topic and author)
6. D. E. Cole, Elementary Vehicle Dynamics, Dept. of Mechanical
Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Sept.
1972
7. J. Y. Wong, Theory of Ground Vehicles, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1978
8. N. Takata, et.al. (1986), “An Analysis of Ride Harshness” Int.
Journal of Vehicle Design, Special Issue on Vehicle Safety, pp.
291-303.
9. T. Ushijima, et.al. “Objective Harshness Evaluation” SAE Paper
No. 951374, (1995).
10. G. Goetchius; “The Seven Immutable Laws of CAE/Test
Correlation” Sound and Vibration Mag. Editorial June 2007, online
at SandV.com
Slide 106
New Technology References (2013 NVH Workshop)
11. Sol, A.; Van Herpe, F.; “Numerical Prediction of a Whole Car Vibro-Acoustic
Behavior at Low Frequencies”; SAE # 2001-01-1521
12. Durand, J.; Gagliardini, L.; Soize, C.; “Nonparametric Modeling of the
Variability of Vehicle Vibroacoustic Behavior”; SAE # 2005-01-2385; SAE 2005
Noise and Vibration Conference Proceedings.
13. Durand, J.; Gagliardini, L.; Soize, C.; “Structural-acoustic modeling of
automotive vehicles in presence of uncertainties and experimental identification
and validation”; Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 24, p 1513-1525
14. Jund, A.; Gagliardini, L.; et.al.; “AN INDUSTRIAL IMPLEMENTATION OF
NON-PARAMETRIC STOCHASTIC MODELLING OF VEHICLE
VIBROACOUSTIC RESPONSE” CONVEBONOV Workshop, University of
Sussex, Brighton, UK, March 27-28 2012
15. Gardhagen, B. and Plunt, J., “Variation of Vehicle NVH Properties due to
Component Eigenfrequency Shifting - Basic Limits of Predictability” SAE 951302
May 1995 NVH Conference Slide 107

2013 NVH Strborneworkshopweb 55b0b92e37e3b

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2013 NVH Strborneworkshopweb 55b0b92e37e3b

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SAE 2013 NVH Conference

Structure Borne NVH Workshop

Alan Duncan Altair Engineering @ Honda

Greg Goetchius Tesla Motors

Jianmin Guan Altair Engineering

Frequency Range: up to 1000 Hz

Structure Borne Noise

~ 150 Hz ~ 1000 Hz ~ 10,000 Hz

Log Frequency Slide 9

Two Main Sources

Reduce the Source first as much as

Transmission through multiple paths is

TACTILE: 50% reduction in motion

SOUND : 6.dB reduction in sound pressure level

Total 2178.2 Kg (4800LBS) Tires 350.3 N/mm

Forces at Powertrain could represent a First Order

Constant Force Load; F~A 15.9 Hz

700 Min. RPM First Order Unbalance

Constant Force Load; F~A

Engine Idle Speed

700 Min. RPM First7.0 Hz Unbalance

Suspension Bushing is first level

Beam Stiffness was

All Operating 1.00

Front input forces Rear input forces

Locate wheel centers at node points of the first bending modeshape

Mount system is placed to support Powertrain at the Nodal Locations of

5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Node Shifted Model

5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Body Bends up at Downward Position of Cycle

Motion Experienced when Motion Experienced when

Center - Undeformed Position

Down Position Slide 45

Tuning Frequency = √ k/m

This looks familiar!

Control Measures for Mid Frequency Concerns

Attenuation along Key Noise Paths

Control Measures for Mid Frequency Concerns

Attenuation along Key Noise Paths

1.0 1.414 10.0

• Mobility, related to Admittance, characterizes Dynamic Stiffness of

• Transmissibility ratio is used to objectively define measure of isolation

Force from source with an isolator Receiver Vm

• For Effective Isolation (Low TR) the Isolator

1.0 0.67 0.55 0.51

5.0 0.55 0.29 0.20

20.0 0.51 0.20 0.09

Stiffness Ratio; K body / K iso

Control Measures for Mid Frequency Concerns

Attenuation along Key Noise Paths

Fi Break the system at the

Operating loads Operating loads

Total Acoustic Response is summation of partial responses

Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ (P/F) i * Fi ]

Partial response from a particular path: Pi = (P/F) i * Fi

P/T Load P/T Load

See changes in response

Pt = Σ paths [Pi ] = Σ paths [ Fi * (P/F) i ]

V/F Structural Point Mobility 0.2 to 0.3

3. Panel Acoustic Contribution

Panel Damping Loss Factor

• Effective isolation at dominant noise paths is critical