Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mourelatos 2001
Mourelatos 2001
www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruc
Abstract
A system model for analyzing the dynamic behavior of an internal combustion engine crankshaft is described. The
model couples the crankshaft structural dynamics, the main bearing hydrodynamic lubrication and the engine block
stiness using a system approach. A two-level dynamic substructuring technique is used to predict the crankshaft
dynamic response based on the ®nite-element method. The dynamic substructuring uses a set of load-dependent Ritz
vectors. The main bearing lubrication analysis is based on the solution of the Reynold's equation. Comparison with
experimental results demonstrates the accuracy of the model. Numerical results also show the capabilities and signi-
®cance of the model in engine crankshaft design. Ó 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Crankshaft±block dynamic interaction; Dynamic substructuring; Journal bearing lubrication; Engine noise, vibration and
harshness; Crankshaft design
0045-7949/01/$ - see front matter Ó 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 4 5 - 7 9 4 9 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 1 1 9 - 5
2010 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
piston±connecting rod inertia. The cylinder pressure This paper describes a crankshaft±block interaction
applied on the piston crown is transmitted to the crank- methodology called CRANKSYM (Crankshaft System
pin through the piston±connecting rod assembly. The Model). Section 2 gives an overview of the proposed
inertia of the piston±connecting rod provides a load on crankshaft system model where all the features and as-
the crankpin as well. The crankpin loads deform the sumptions are described in detail. Subsequent sections
crankshaft and are transmitted to the engine block at describe the crankshaft structural dynamic analysis and
the main bearing locations through the main bearing the engine block representation, the developed main
hydrodynamics. Both the deformation of the crankshaft bearing hydrodynamic analysis, and the coupled crank-
and the engine block aect the main bearing ®lm thick- shaft±engine block model. The accuracy and eciency
ness and therefore, the bearing hydrodynamics. For this of the crankshaft structural dynamic analysis is dem-
reason, the mathematical model of the engine system onstrated in Ref. [23]. Comparison with experimental
requires three individual models which are coupled to- results shows the good accuracy of the proposed meth-
gether; a structural model of the crankshaft, a structural odology. Finally, the capabilities and signi®cance of the
model of the engine block and a lubrication model of the proposed crankshaft±engine block system model in en-
main bearings. gine design are illustrated using a V-shape six-cylinder
The large number of studies reported in the literature engine.
on the crankshaft±block interaction problem indicates
its signi®cance to the industry. A representative sample
is given in Refs. [2,10±17]. Due to the complexity of the 2. Overview of the crankshaft system model (CRANK-
problem, many simplifying assumptions have been used. SYM)
The ®rst attempt to solve the problem is reported in
Refs. [9,18] where a calculation of bearing performance CRANKSYM is a system model for analyzing an
in statically indeterminate crankshaft systems is de- internal combustion engine crankshaft. In its most
scribed. A static (not dynamic) crankshaft analysis is general form, it couples the crankshaft structural dy-
used and the block elasticity is represented by linear namics, the main bearing hydrodynamic lubrication and
springs. The mobility method [19] describes the oil- the engine block stiness using a system approach.
®lm hydrodynamics neglecting, therefore, the important A ®nite-element mesh for the entire crankshaft is
eects of journal misalignment and bearing design at- needed in order to calculate its structural dynamic re-
tributes as oil grooves and oil holes. The oil-®lm hy- sponse. The main bearing lubrication analysis is per-
drodynamics have been almost exclusively represented formed by solving the 2-D Reynold's equation for
by either the mobility method [10,12±14] or simple each main bearing using the ®nite-element method. The
spring±damper combinations [15±17]. In some cases ¯exibility of the engine block is represented by its sti-
the oil-®lm is completely neglected [11]. ness at each main bearing location. The main output
The signi®cance of the crankshaft±block interaction from CRANKSYM is the crankshaft dynamic response
problem in internal combustion engine design is due to a in terms of displacements, velocities and accelerations at
variety of reasons. First, the engine crankshaft is a ®nely user speci®ed grid points, natural frequencies and mode
optimized component with signi®cant resonances (both shapes, and crankshaft dynamic stresses throughout the
torsional and bending) within its normal operating engine cycle. The main bearing loads (forces and mo-
range. These resonances aect, among others, the dy- ments) and bearing performance parameters such as
namic stress distribution on crankshafts, bearing caps eccentricities, minimum ®lm thickness and maximum
and engine bulkheads [2,4] and the noise of the engine ®lm pressure are calculated and output for each bearing.
lower end [3,7,10]. The accurate prediction of dynamic The oil-®lm thickness and pressure distributions are also
stress levels is important for durability, low weight and calculated at each crankangle throughout the whole
high fatigue life [2]. The crankshaft dynamic response engine cycle.
is also needed for optimizing crankshaft accessories as A two-level dynamic substructuring is performed for
pulleys [16,17] and ¯ywheels [4]. Also the consideration the structural dynamic analysis of the crankshaft based
of the oil-®lm hydrodynamics in the crankshaft±block on load-dependent Ritz vectors which are generated by a
interaction problem provides an enhanced bearing load subspace algorithm. After the two dynamic reductions,
prediction [4]. This allows for the design of more durable the initial ®nite-element model size is signi®cantly re-
bearings with less friction and therefore, better fuel duced to very few generalized degrees of freedom which
economy [20,21]. Furthermore, the motion of each are eciently integrated in time. The rotating crankshaft
journal within the bearing clearance is needed for pre- is properly coupled with the ®xed compliant engine
dicting the magnitude and duration of bearing impacts block. The block compliance is represented by a dis-
which normally occur during bearing load reversals. tributed linear elastic foundation at each main bearing
Such a prediction is essential for reducing the emitted location both in the vertical and horizontal planes. This
noise from the engine lower end [10,22]. representation accounts not only for the translational
Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027 2011
block stiness but for the rotational block stiness as duction. It has been demonstrated that use of or-
well, in both planes. As a result, the bearing loads thonormal Ritz vectors instead of the same number of
consist of reaction forces and reaction moments. The eigenvectors, can result in better accuracy in dynamic
reaction moments introduce bearing journal misalign- analysis of complex structures [23±27]. The reason is
ment which is normally neglected in ``traditional'' lu- that the Ritz vectors consider the spatial distribution of
brication analysis. The stiness of the elastic foundation the applied loading, whereas the eigenvectors neglect
can vary around the circumference of each main bearing that important information. The ®rst Ritz vector is the
considering therefore, the anisotropy of the engine block static solution to the applied loading. The subsequent
compliance with respect to the crankshaft rotation. Ritz vectors are generated by multiplying the mass
The hydrodynamic analysis of the main bearings is matrix by the previous Ritz vector and use the result as
performed by solving the Reynold's equation using the a load vector for a new static solution [23,24].
®nite-element method. Four journal degrees of freedom
are used in the analysis. These are the vertical and lateral 3.1. First level of dynamic substructuring analysis
translations and rotations of the journal at the middle-
bearing location. The rotational degrees of freedom The dynamic equilibrium equations of the crankshaft
capture the journal misalignment within each main modeled using the ®nite-element method, are written as
bearing. The robustness of the crankshaft system model g CfU_ g KfU g fF
s; tg
MfU
1
is greatly improved with the introduction of a contact
algorithm which handles possible touching of a journal where [M], [C], [K] and fF g are the mass matrix, dam-
with its bearing shell. When the rotational stiness of the ping matrix, stiness matrix and load vector, respec-
block is considered, the crankshaft may touch the block tively. The load and displacement (or response) vectors
during part of the engine cycle. This may be due to ex- are a function of space (s) and time (t). Eq. (1) can be
cessive loading of a bearing, larger than its load carrying solved for the displacement vector fU g.
capacity. The crankshaft is divided into a number of sub-
structures by splitting it at the middle of each main
bearing location. The initial displacement vector fU g of
3. Crankshaft structural dynamic analysis Eq. (1) is partitioned into internal displacements {Ui }
and retained displacements {Ur }. The vector {Ur } con-
The crankshaft structural analysis predicts the crank- sists of all the displacements of the common interfaces of
shaft dynamic response based on the ®nite-element the substructures plus the displacements of points on the
method. A two-level dynamic substructuring with spe- crankshaft centerline at the two ends of each main
cial Ritz vectors is performed. Initially, a given three- bearing (Fig. 1). The latter points are used to determine
dimensional ®nite-element model of the crankshaft is the slope of each main bearing journal. {Ui } includes all
divided into substructures. Each crankshaft bay and the other displacements in fU g. Based on this partitioning,
crankshaft nose and tail (¯ywheel end) constitute sepa- the initial displacement vector fU g and the mass matrix
rate substructures. Each substructure is dynamically in Eq. (1) are rewritten as follows:
reduced using a set of load-dependent Ritz vectors. T
Subsequently, all the substructures are assembled and a fU g f Ui1 Ui2 jUr g
2
second dynamic reduction is performed using a new set 2 3
of Ritz vectors. A subspace algorithm is used to generate Mi1 0 Mir1
the load-dependent Ritz vectors. 6 0 Mi2 Mir2 7
6 7
The calculation of eigenvectors for a large structure is 6 7
6 .. 7
computationally expensive. Besides, the participation of M 6 ... ..
.
..
. . 7
3
6 7
a particular eigenvector in the ®nal solution depends on 6 1T T 7
4 Mir Mir2 Mr 5
the applied dynamic loading. If the loading frequency
is close to a natural frequency of the structure, then the
corresponding eigenvector participates signi®cantly in Similar expressions hold for the [C] and [K] matrices and
the solution. Furthermore, eigenvectors which are or- the load vector fF g. In Eq. (3), the zeros represent null
thogonal to the applied loading do not participate in the matrices of the appropriate dimensions. Subscripts i and
solution even if their frequency (corresponding eigen- r denote internal and retained degrees of freedom, re-
value) is contained in the loading. For the above rea- spectively, and superscripts denote the substructure num-
sons, the eigenvectors may not be the most ecient basis ber or the transpose of a matrix.
for a dynamic reduction of a complex structure sub- The internal displacement vector fUi` g for the `th
jected to certain external loading. In this work, special substructure is expressed as
Ritz vectors are used instead of eigenvectors to form the
transformation basis for the crankshaft dynamic re- fUi` g X ` fu` g T ` fUr g
4
2012 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
Table 1
A subspace algorithm to calculate load-dependent Ritz vectors
1. Given input matrices
M: mass matrix
n n
K: stiffness matrix
n n
F : block of k independent spatial load vectors
n k
2. Triangularize stiness matrix
K LT DL
3. Solve for initial static block [X1 ]
a. Solve for block x x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; xk
Kx F
b. Get block X x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; xk by M-normalization of vectors fxj g, j 1; 2; . . . ; k
fxj gT Mfxj g a
fxj g a 1=2 fxj g
c. Get block X^ ^ x1 ; x^2 ; . . . ; x^k by M-orthogonalization of vectors in X .
Repeat for j 2; 3; . . . ; k:
Cj x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; xj 1 T Mfxj g
f^ xj g fxj g x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; xj 1 Cj
d. M-normalize block X^
X^ T MX^ K
X1 X^ K 1=2
4. Solve for subsequent blocks [ Xi ], i 2; 3; . . . ; p
a. Solve for block Xi
KXi MXi 1
b. Get block Xbi by M-orthogonalization of Xi against all previous blocks
C X1 ; . . . ; Xi 1 T MXi
Xbi Xi X1 ; . . . ; Xi 1 C
c. Get block Xi by M-orthogonalization of Xbi against all previous blocks according to Step 4b.
d. Get block Xi by M-orthogonalization of block Xi according to Steps 3c and 3d.
3.2. Second level of dynamic substructuring analysis process described in the previous paragraph is repeated.
A new Ritz transformation matrix [X ] is calculated using
The reduced displacement vector f ug in Eq. (5) again the algorithm of Table 1, and a new reduced sys-
contains the retained displacement vector fUr g which tem, similar to that of Eq. (6), is formed.
can be of a fairly large size. For this reason, a second It has been found through extensive applications
level of substructuring is performed which further re- of the proposed method to a variety of automotive
duces the number of retained degrees of freedom. crankshafts, that 20 Ritz vectors are enough for both
The vector fUr g is partitioned as levels of substructuring. Although the number of Ritz
vectors is arbitrary, 15±20 Ritz vectors are usually en-
f1 Ur g f 2 Ui 2 Ur gT
9 ough to obtain good accuracy in calculating the dy-
where the left subscript indicates the level of substruc- namic response of a crankshaft. A larger number can
turing analysis. f2 Ur g contains the displacements of be also tried until there is no improvement in the cal-
three points at the left end, middle and right end of each culated dynamic response.
main bearing on the crankshaft centerline. f2 Ui g in- After the two reductions, the reduced model consists
cludes all the other displacements of the substructure of approximately 50±100 degrees of freedom only. This
interfaces which were retained in the ®rst level of sub- translates to substantial computational savings in per-
structuring. Due to the partitioning of Eq. (9), the re- forming a crankshaft dynamic analysis. The computa-
duced displacement vector f ug becomes tional savings become even more important when the
crankshaft dynamic analysis is coupled with the main
f1 ug f 2 ui 2 Ur gT
10a bearing hydrodynamics to ®nd the combined system
response.
where The two-level dynamic substructuring analysis and
f2 ui g f 1 u1 `
gT
10b the algorithm to ®nd the Ritz vectors (Table 1) have
1u 2 Ui
been implemented in the general purpose program M S C /
The reduced matrices M, C and K and the load N A S T R A N [28] using D M A P A L T E R S [29]. Due to the
vector fF g from the ®rst level of substructuring are excellent data management capabilities and ecient
partitioned according to Eqs. (10a) and (10b), and the matrix operations of M S C /N A S T R A N , the potentially
2014 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
very large stiness and mass matrices as well as a variety the crankshaft rotation axis and x the crankshaft rota-
of other auxiliary large matrices are handled very e- tional velocity. This load is commonly known as ``WR
ciently. Initially, M S C /N A S T R A N calculates the mass and segment'' loading. The coriolis forces are neglected.
stiness matrices of the model. Then two separate D M A P
A L T E R S , instruct M S C /N A S T R A N to implement the Ritz 3.4. Structural damping
vector algorithm of Table 1 for the two levels of sub-
structuring. In the process, the D M A P A L T E R S perform Rayleigh damping is used to represent the crankshaft
a number of data manipulation tasks such as partition structural damping. The damping matrix C in Eq. (6) is
and multiplication of large matrices, assembling of data taken as
from dierent substructures, solution of linear systems
of equations, etc. This not only solves the problem of C aK bM
11
managing very large matrices but also reduces the overall
where a and b are two constants to be determined from
computational eort since M S C /N A S T R A N performs the
two speci®ed damping ratios which correspond to two
bulk of the computations very eciently.
unequal natural frequencies of the system. It has been
shown [30] that if the system eigenvectors are [C]-
3.3. Crankshaft loading
orthogonal, the following equation holds
The crankshaft is mainly loaded by the engine op- b ax2i 21i xi
12
erating load which comes from the cylinder combustion.
This load is transmitted through the piston and con- where xi is the ith natural frequency of the system and fi
necting rod to the crankpin of the crankshaft. The piston is the damping ratio for the ith mode. Given the natural
and the connecting rod are treated as rigid bodies and frequencies and damping ratios of two dierent modes,
their inertia loads are calculated and combined with the the coecients a and b can be determined by solving Eq.
combustion load. The combined load is applied on the (12). Subsequently, Eq. (12) can be used to calculate fi at
crankpin in the rotating coordinate system. The belt any frequency xi . The Rayleigh damping is a compu-
loads are also applied on the crankshaft. tationally convenient way to approximate the actual
Since the analysis is performed in the rotating coor- structural damping.
dinate system, the crankshaft inertia load due to cen-
trifugal forces is also applied on the crankshaft. For a 3.5. Crankshaft bent and engine block misboring
particular ®nite-element model of the crankshaft, this
inertia load is equal to mrx2 , where m is the mass of the Crankshaft ``bent'' (Fig. 2a) and engine block mis-
®nite element, r the distance of its center of gravity from boring (Fig. 2b) represent manufacturing imperfections.
Fig. 2. (a) Schematic of crankshaft ``bent''. (b) Schematic of engine block misboring.
Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027 2015
The forging, heat treating and machining operations three linear springs are used along the bearing length
necessary to produce a crankshaft, sometimes produce a (one spring at each bearing end and one spring at the
slightly bent crankshaft. Since this eect is expected, the mid-bearing location) to represent the distributed engine
crankshaft is subsequently straightened so that it con- block ¯exibility in both the vertical and horizontal
forms to certain ®nished tolerances. However, it is very planes (Fig. 3b). This representation accounts for the
dicult to perfectly straighten the crankshaft. Similarly, translational and rotational engine block stiness. As a
the main bearing bores in the block structure may lie on result, the bearing loads consist of reaction forces and
dierent centerlines due to slight misboring. Since the reaction moments. If the translational bearing stiness is
crankshaft bent and the engine block misboring can k, the three springs have stinesses k=6, 2k=3 and k=6
induce signi®cant loading on the main bearings, they are (Fig. 3b). These stinesses have been calculated so that
both included in the formulation of the crankshaft± the translational and the rotational bearing stinesses
engine block system model. with respect to the mid-bearing location are the same
between the distributed block stiness and the equiva-
lent distributed block stiness models.
4. Representation of engine block At each time step during the dynamic simulation of
the crankshaft motion, the reaction of each main bear-
The crankshaft is supported by the engine block at the ing depends on the local engine block stiness which, in
main bearing locations. In this work the engine block is turn, depends on the circumferential location of the re-
represented by its static stiness neglecting therefore the sultant main bearing reaction. Therefore, a nonlinear
engine block dynamic behavior. The engine block sti- solver must iterate between assumed local engine block
ness can be represented by a vertical and horizontal stinesses for each bearing and the resulting main
value for each main bearing. In practice, the vertical and bearing reactions until it calculates the latter with rea-
horizontal stinesses are always dierent and they both sonable accuracy. For computational eciency, the main
vary around the circumference of each main bearing. bearing reaction from the previous time step is used in
The engine block support can be modeled by a con- this work to estimate the local engine block stiness
centrated stiness at mid-bearing position or by a dis- needed at the current time step. This feature constitutes
tributed stiness along the bearing length. In the former a unique engine block stiness representation which
case, the bearing loads consist of reaction forces only. If fully accounts for the anisotropy of the engine block
these loads are used in a traditional main bearing lu- ¯exibility as seen by a rotating crankshaft. The cou-
brication analysis, there will be no journal misalignment. pling stiness between the vertical and horizontal planes
However, dynamic misalignment can have a signi®cant of the same bearing has been neglected. The coupling
in¯uence on the main bearing performance. The issue stiness among dierent bearings has also been ne-
of dynamic misalignment can be of concern with the glected.
increasing number of four-cylinder long stroke engines
and V6 con®gurations where adequate main bearing
performance remains a design challenge.
The journal misalignment can be calculated by 5. Main bearing hydrodynamic analysis
modeling the engine block ¯exibility with a distributed
stiness along the bearing length (Fig. 3a). In this study, The crankshaft structure is supported by the oil-®lm
hydrodynamic pressure of the main bearings. The oil-
®lm pressure distribution is described by the Reynolds
equation which is derived from the Navier±Stokes
equations and the continuity equation under simplifying
assumptions [31]. For a Newtonian ¯uid, the Reynolds
equation is written as
o op 1 o op oh oh
h3 2 h3 6lx 12l
13
oz oz R oh oh oh ot
used in Ref. [36] to calculate the dynamic coecients of All the boundary terms from the integration by parts are
a journal bearing. zero since the pressure is speci®ed on the boundaries
At a particular time t, the following assumption is according to Eq. (14).
made
5.3. Discretization of oil-®lm domain using a bilinear
h
z; h; t h0 Dh; and
15 rectangular element
p
z; h; t p0 Dp
The discretization of the two-dimensional oil-®lm
where h0 h
z; h; t Dt and p0 p
z; h; t Dt. Sub-
domain is commonly done using linear triangular ele-
stitution of Eq. (15) into Eq. (13), retention of only the
ments [37,38]. In this work however, a bilinear rectan-
®rst order terms and separation of variables yields the
gular element with ``hourglass control'' is adopted due
following two equations
to its superior computational eciency without loss of
o op0 1 o op0 accuracy.
h30 2 h30 The ``hourglass control'' technique was ®rst intro-
oz oz R oh oh
oh0 oh0 duced in Ref. [39]. It is a reduced integration technique
6lx 12l
16a used to form element stiness matrices with a small
oh ot
computational eort without great loss of accuracy in
the ®nite-element approximations. Reduced integration
o oDp 1 o oDp
h30 2 h30 techniques, using lower quadrature rules, are known to
oz oz R oh oh
be computationally ecient. However, they result in a
o op0 1 o op0 singular global stiness matrix for certain boundary
3h20 Dh 3h2
0 Dh
oz oz R2 oh oh conditions due to the existence of hourglass (zero en-
oDh oDh ergy) modes. To avoid the singularity, one can use either
6lx 12l
16b a higher quadrature rule in at least one element, or pro-
oh ot
vide external restraints. The hourglass control method
Both Eqs. (16a) and (16b) will be solved using the ®nite- with a higher quadrature rule can be utilized to eliminate
element method. The weak (or variational) formulation the singularity [39,40]. The method was ®rst applied to
and the discretization of the oil-®lm domain using a lubrication problems in Ref. [41].
bilinear rectangular element are described in the fol- The complete derivation of the bilinear rectangular
lowing sections. oil-®lm element with hourglass control is presented in
Ref. [42]. The element ¯uidity matrix and the load vector
5.2. Weak formulation are derived for an oil-®lm element. The two-dimensional
oil-®lm domain is discretized using a uniform grid of
The Galerkin method or weighted residuals method rectangular elements. Each rectangular element has di-
is used to obtain the variational, or weak, form of Eqs. mensions
Dz; Dh. After the calculation of the integrals
(16a) and (16b). Eq. (16a) is multiplied by a virtual in the weak formulations, the element equations for the
nominal pressure p0 and Eq. (16b) is multiplied by a nominal and perturbation pressure respectively are as
virtual perturbation pressure D p. Subsequently both follows [42]:
equations are integrated over the oil-®lm domain X. bK e cfp0 ge ff0e g
18a
Integration by parts yields the following weak forms for
Eqs. (16a) and (16b), respectively bK e cfDpge ff1e g
18b
Z Z
op0 o
p0 1 op0 op0
h30 dX 2 h30 dX where the element ¯uidity matrix K e and the element
X oz oz R X oh oh load vectors ff0e g and ff1e g are
Z Z
op oh0 2 3
6lxh0 0 dX 12l p dX
17a 4 2 2 4
X oh X ot 0
6 7
he 3 Dz 1 6 2 4 4 27
Z Z K e 02 6 7
oDp oD p 1 oDp oDp R 4 Dh 3 6 4 2 4 4 2 7 5
h30 dX 2 h30 dX
X oz oz R X oh oh
Z Z 4 2 2 4
op0 oDp 1 op0 2 3
3h20 Dh dX 3h2 Dh 4 4 2 2
X oz oz R2 X 0 oh
Z Z 6 7
oD p oD p oDh Dh 16 4 4 2 27
dX 6lx Dh dX 12l D
p dX
he0 3 6 7
19
4Dz 6
34 2 7
oh X oh X ot 2 4 45
17b 2 2 4 4
2018 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
8 9 8 9
>
> 1>> >
> 1> analysis with minimal loss of accuracy. The accuracy
< =
oh0
e < > =
e e 1 1 and eciency of the lubrication model is demonstrated
ff0 g 3lxh0 Dz 3l Dh Dz
> 1 >
>
: >
;
ot >1>
>
: >
;
in Ref. [42].
1 1
20a
6. Coupled crankshaft±engine block model
8 9
> 1> The reduced crankshaft model is described in the
" # >
> >
3
he0 2 op0 < 1> =
e e Dz rotating coordinate system by
ff1 g 6lx Dh
R2 oh > 1 >
2 > >
>
: >
; M c f
uc g C c fu_ c g K c fuc g fF c g
22
1
8 9 8 9 The vector fuc g is partitioned as
> 1> > 1>
>
> >
> >
> >
< 1 = <1> =
e 2 op 0 e Dh o
Dh e
fuc g fuci jjUrc gT
23
3
h0 Dh 3l Dh Dz
oz 2 >
> 1 > > ot >
> 1>>
>
: >
; : >
> ; where fuci g is the generalized displacement vector after
1 1
the second level of substructuring, fUrc g is the crank-
20b shaft retained (subscript r) displacement vector, and
fF c g is the vector of applied forces on the crankshaft.
Notice that the ¯uidity matrix for each element can
The superscript c, in the above quantities, denotes the
be calculated by simply multiplying two constant ma-
crankshaft.
trices which are common for all elements, by the cubic
The engine block model is described in the rotating
power of an average element ®lm thickness
he0 3 . Simi-
coordinate system by
larly the load vectors for each element (Eqs. (20a) and
(20b)) are calculated by multiplying constant vectors, C b fU_ rb g K b fUrb g fF b g
24
again common among all elements, by the average ele-
ment ®lm thickness or the average element squeeze ®lm where fUrb g is the block retained (subscript r) displace-
rate. The calculation and assembly time for the global ment vector, and fF b g is the vector of applied forces on
¯uidity matrix is, therefore, greatly shortened. The re- the block. The superscript b in the above quantities,
sulting computational savings compared to the tradi- denotes the block.
tional linear triangular element used in Ref. [38] is about The mass inertia eect is neglected for the block
40% [41]. In addition, due to the linear perturbation model. The block stiness matrix K b is given in the
approach, the ¯uidity matrix [K e ] is common in Eqs. rotating coordinate system as follows
(18a) and (18b). Thus it has to be calculated only once at k 0 kx kxy
each time step resulting in substantial computational K b T T X T
25
0 kY kyx ky
savings. Finally, the element equations (18a) and (18b)
are assembled over all elements of the oil domain to get where
the corresponding global equations:
cos h sin h
T
26
Kfp0 g ff0 g
21a sin h cos h
and and
KfDpg ff1 g
21b kx kX cos2 h kY sin2 h
27a
UTc , UTb are the total (subscript T) displacements of the and horizontal directions at each bulkhead location.
crankshaft and block respectively, relative to a straight Substitution of Eq. (33) in Eq. (29) gives:
reference line at the mains (Fig. 2), including elastic " #( ) " #( )
Miic Mirc uci
Ciic Circ u_ ci
deformation.
Uoc , Uob are the crankshaft ``bent'' and engine block
cT
Mir Mrr c r
U c c T c
Cir Crr C b U_ rc
misboring, respectively. They are known deviations or " #
Kiic Kirc uci Fic
osets (subscript o) from the same reference line. T c
34a
Urc , Urb are the crankshaft and block retained dis-
c c
Kir Krr K b Ur F
placement vectors, respectively. They represent the
where
elastic deformation of the crankshaft and block from
their undeformed position. _ fU_ ob g K b
feg fUob g
fF g C b
feg fUoc g
All the above vectors include the crankshaft and
34b
block displacements at the left end, middle position and
right end of each main bearing. The reference line nee- If the bearing hydrodynamics are neglected, feg 0.
ded to de®ne the vectors is arbitrarily taken as a straight However even in this case, the crankshaft bent and block
line passing through the middles of the ®rst (fan end) misboring produce equivalent forces according to Eq.
and the last (¯ywheel) bearings. The osets of the ®rst (34b), which are applied on the crankshaft. All quanti-
and last bearings are arbitrarily set to zero. The ``run- ties in Eqs. (34a) and (34b) must be expressed in the
out'' of the other bearings, or the amount each bearing rotating coordinate system.
deviates from that straight line in the rotating crankshaft Before Eq. (34a) are integrated in time to ®nd the
coordinate system, is then entered as oset. The engine response of the reduced system, a torsional boundary
block misboring is speci®ed in a similar way but in the condition is applied at the ¯ywheel end of the crankshaft
®xed coordinate system. to eliminate the rotational free-body motion. For ma-
Based on the partitioning of Eq. (23), Eq. (22) can be nual transmission applications or dynamometer tests,
written as the torsional boundary condition consists of a torsional
" #( ) " #( ) spring representing the propshaft torsional stiness. For
Miic Mirc uci Ciic Circ u_ ci automatic transmission applications, a torsional damper
T
Mirc Mrrc U rc T
Circ Crrc U_ rc boundary condition is used in order to capture the slip-
" # ping of the torque converter.
Kiic Kirc uci Fic
29 Eqs. (34a) and (34b) are nonlinear since the nonlinear
cT c Ur c
Frc
Kir Krr bearing hydrodynamics are implicitly involved through
the bearing eccentricity vector feg. A modi®ed New-
The bearing eccentricity is de®ned as the dierence of mark method [43] with a Newton±Raphson based it-
the total displacements of the crankshaft and block eration at each time step, is employed for the time
at the bearing locations; i.e. integration of Eqs. (34a) and (34b). At each time step,
feg fUTc g fUTb g
30 the following iteration loop is considered:
Step 1: Assume the bearing eccentricity vector feg.
or due to Eqs. (28a) and (28b) Step 2: Calculate the bearing reaction forces and
moments fF b gHYDRO from the bearing hydrodynamics
fUrb g fUoc g fUob g fUrc g feg
31 algorithm, using the assumed vector feg from Step 1.
Step 3: Calculate the crankshaft retained displace-
Also due to action and reaction, ment vector fUrc g from Eqs. (34a) and (34b), based on
fFrc g fF b g
32 the assumed feg.
Step 4: Calculate the block retained displacement
Combining Eqs. (24), (31) and (32) yields vector fUrb g from Eq. (31).
Step 5: Calculate the bearing reaction forces and
_ fU_ ob g
fFrc g C b
feg fU_ oc g K b
feg moments fF b g from Eq. (24), based on the calculated
fUob g fUoc g C b fU_ rc g K b fUrc g
33 fUrb g from Step 4.
Step 6: If the absolute dierence between fF b g and
Since the crankshaft ``bent'' fUoc g is a vector of con- b
fF gHYDRO is greater than a small tolerance, update feg
stants in the rotating coordinate system, fU_ oc g is always and repeat the process from Step 1. Otherwise, proceed
equal to zero. However, since the block misboring fUob g to the next time step.
is given in the ®xed coordinate system, it must be The solution of Eqs. (34a) and (34b) gives the dy-
transformed to the rotating coordinate system using Eq. namic displacements of the reduced crankshaft±engine
(26). Due to that transformation, fU_ ob g is not zero unless block system model. The displacements of the original
the block misboring has the same value in the vertical crankshaft model can be obtained by two backwards
2020 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
transformations (one for each level of substructuring). degrees is plotted for dierent engine orders and engine
The displacements of the original model can be subse- speeds. Note that the measured and simulated vibration
quently processed to calculate the crankshaft operating amplitudes are peak-to-peak and single amplitude (half
dynamic stresses. of peak-to-peak), respectively. There is a very good
correlation between the simulated with CRANKSYM
and the measured vibrations at all engine speeds except
7. Selected results around 6200 rpm at 2.5 engine order where CRANK-
SYM's prediction is about 20% higher than the mea-
7.1. Dynamic analysis of an in-line ®ve-cylinder engine surement. The dierence is mainly due to two reasons.
First, the inherent nonlinearity of the tuned torsional
In order to experimentally validate the accuracy of vibration absorber's elastomer and second the coupling
the proposed methodology, the dynamic analysis of a between the absorber's inertia ring and the accessory
®ve-cylinder in-line (L5) engine crankshaft was per- drive components.
formed using the ®nite-element based analytical tool The behavior of the nonlinear tuned absorber is such
CRANKSYM which implements the methodology pre- that higher vibration amplitudes would decrease the
sented in this paper. The response of the L5 crankshaft stiness and increase the damping of the elastomer. This
under wide-open-throttle (WOT) operating conditions change in the elastomer material properties with defor-
was simulated and correlated with measurements. mation results in a decrease of the crankshaft resonance
Figs. 5 and 6 show the measured and computed an- frequency and an increase of the crankshaft dam-
gular vibrations of the L5 crankshaft, respectively in ping. The conducted simulations did not consider the
``waterfall'' format. The torsional vibration amplitude in nonlinear eects of the tuned absorber elastomer and
Fig. 5. Measured vibration for an in-line, ®ve-cylinder engine. Fig. 7. Measured vibration for an in-line, ®ve-cylinder engine
with locked absorber's ring.
Fig. 9. The ®nite-element mesh for the pulley±crankshaft±¯explate system of the PV6 engine.
therefore, such small dierences between simulated and the resonances are more pronounced since the ab-
measured vibrations were expected. sorber's damping is eliminated.
The accessory drive components were found to
interact with the tuned absorber's inertia ring since the 7.2. Dynamic analysis of a V6 (six-cylinder) engine
latter is used as a pulley. This interaction seems to
manifest itself as a decrease in the inertia of the ring The V6 engine crankshaft, shown in Fig. 9, is used to
which eectively increases the tuning frequency of the demonstrate the capabilities of the proposed methodol-
absorber. This inertia reduction eect was calculated ogy and the importance of various design parameters in
and included in the simulations by decreasing the ring's a crankshaft±block interaction study. Both the crank-
inertia and increasing the tuning frequency of the ab- shaft pulley and the ¯explate are included in the model.
sorber appropriately. The eect of the accessory drive The ®nite-element mesh consists of 6814 solid elements
components on the eective inertia of the absorber's ring and 8962 grids (26,886 degrees of freedom). The analysis
can be signi®cant and depends on which accessory com- was performed at 4500 rpm. Twenty Ritz vectors were
ponents are present and whether A/C is engaged. used for both the ®rst and the second substructuring.
In order to eliminate the inherent nonlinearity of the Both the combustion load and the inertia load due to
tuned torsional vibration absorber's elastomer, the ab- reciprocating and rotating masses of the crank±con-
sorber's ring was pinned to the hub (locked ring) deac- necting rod±piston assembly were considered in the
tivating therefore, the eect of the elastomer's damping. calculation of the crankpin loads.
Furthermore, the coupling between the absorber's iner- The eect of calculating bearing loads using a dy-
tia ring with the accessory drive components was elimi- namic analysis as opposed to a static analysis is shown in
nated by disconnecting the accessory drives from the Fig. 10. The vertical and horizontal loads as well as the
crank pulley in a control dynamometer test. Figs. 7 and vertical and horizontal bending moments are compared
8 show the measured and computed angular vibrations for the ®rst bearing from the pulley end. A constant
of the L5 crankshaft, respectively in this case. The block stiness of 100,000 N/mm in both the vertical
agreement now is excellent. Note also that the peaks of and horizontal planes is used. As shown, the maximum
Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027 2023
Fig. 12. Eect of circumferential block stiness distribution on bearing loads and moments.
dynamic load is considerably higher than the maximum varying circumferentially) block stiness of 100,000 N/
static load in both the vertical and horizontal planes. mm. For the dashed lines, the block stiness varies lin-
Substantial dierences also exist in the vertical and early between the values of 150,000 and 50,000 N/mm at
horizontal bending moments. A large bending moment the top (bulkhead) and bottom (bearing cap) locations
may generate a large journal misalignment which in of the bearing bore, respectively. The average of these
turn, may alter the bearing hydrodynamic performance two values is 100,000 N/mm which is representative of
substantially. iron blocks. As shown in the ®gure, the circumferentially
Fig. 11 illustrates the eect of the block stiness on varying stiness results in a maximum vertical load
bearing loads. The rigid, ¯exible and soft cases are reduction of approximately 3000 N and a maximum
compared for the second bearing. A 100,000 N/mm horizontal moment reduction of approximately 4000
block stiness is used for the ¯exible case which is rep- N mm.
resentative of iron blocks. The block stiness for the Fig. 13 shows the eect of block misboring on the
rigid and soft cases are 600,000 and 25,000 N/mm which loads and moments of the fourth bearing. The misboring
are arti®cially large and small for the two respective at each bearing location is arbitrarily de®ned by moving
cases. All stinesses were assumed circumferentially the third bearing upwards by 0.1 mm. All the other
uniform for all bearings. The dierence in both loads bearings are assumed to lie on a straight line. A constant
and moments, between the rigid and soft cases are block stiness of 100,000 N/mm is used for all the
substantial. This indicates the importance of the block bearings. The misboring distribution does not practi-
stiness in crankshaft dynamic analysis and clearly cally change the vertical and horizontal bearing loads.
suggests the importance of the block dynamic behavior However, it drastically changes the bending moments.
(not studied here). This suggests that the location of the bearing resultant
The in¯uence of engine block stiness distribution loads is substantially moved along the bearing length.
around the bearing bore on the vertical and horizontal As a result, bearing end loading can occur with severe
loads and moments is shown in Fig. 12 for the second lubrication consequences and possible bearing fail-
bearing. The solid lines correspond to a uniform (not ure. For this reason, any bearing misboring due to
2024 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
manufacturing imperfections should always be consid- presented here, it has been found having a similar to the
ered. Although results for the crankshaft bent are not block misboring eect.
Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027 2025
Fig. 15. Calculated journal misalignment in the vertical plane under dynamic loading.
Fig. 16. Calculated bearing minimum ®lm thickness under dynamic loading.
2026 Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027
The eect of bearing hydrodynamics on the loads and the cylinder block and crankshaft. SAE paper no. 830346,
moments of the second bearing is shown in Fig. 14. A 1983.
25 lm clearance is used for all bearings. A constant [6] Ide S, Uchida T, Ozawa K, Izawa K. Improvement of
block stiness of 100,000 N/mm is assumed. As shown in engine sound quality through a new ¯ywheel system
¯exibly mounted to the crankshaft. SAE paper no.
the ®gure, the inclusion of the bearing hydrodynamics
900391, 1990.
in the analysis increased the maximum vertical load and [7] Ochini K, Nakano M. Relation between crankshaft
the maximum horizontal moment considerably. Fig. 15 torsional vibration and engine noise. SAE paper no.
shows the vertical eccentricity for all four bearings at the 790365, 1979.
left and right ends of the bearing. The dierence between [8] Dejong R. Using vibration transmission analyses in the
the left and right eccentricity indicates the amount of design of quiet engines. In: Hickling R, Kamal M, editors.
misalignment within each bearing. During most of the Engine noise, excitation, vibration and radiation. New
engine cycle, the bearing misalignment is considerable York: Plenum Press; 1982. p. 123±46.
for all bearings. Since the misalignment can in¯uence the [9] Welsh WA. Dynamic analysis of engine bearing systems.
hydrodynamic behavior of the bearing, it should be MS Thesis, Cornell University, 1982.
[10] Katano H, Iwamoto A, Saitoh T. Dynamic behaviour
always considered when the bearing performance is as-
analysis of internal combustion engine crankshafts under
sessed. Finally, Fig. 16 shows the minimum ®lm thick- operating conditions. Institute of Mechanical Engineers,
ness for all bearings. The minimum ®lm thickness is Paper no. C430/049, 1991. p. 205±16.
around 5 lm for all bearings except the ®rst bearing for [11] Nefske DJ, Sung SH. Coupled vibration response of the
which it is around 2 lm. This indicates that the bearings engine crank±block system. ASME 1989;DE-18-4:379±85.
are not heavily loaded for this operating condition. For [12] Mayer LS, Zeischka J, Scherens M, Maessen F. Analysis of
heavily loaded bearings, the minimum ®lm thickness can ¯exible rotating crankshaft with ¯exible engine block using
be below 0:5 lm. M S C /N A S T R A N and D A D S . 1995 MSC World Users'
Conference, 1995.
[13] Martin IT, Law B. Prediction of crankshaft and ¯ywheel
dynamics. Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Paper no.
Acknowledgements C382/046, 1989.
[14] Law B, Haddock AK. Prediction of main bearing and
The author wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. crankshaft loading in reciprocating engines. 15th CIMAC
Turgay Bengisu from the Synthesis and Analysis De- Congress, Paris, 1983.
partment of the General Motors Powertrain Division for [15] Okamura H, Shinno A, Yamanaka T, Suzuki A, Sogabe
providing access to the experimental results presented in K. A dynamic stiness matrix approach to the analysis
this paper. Furthermore, his eorts in productionizing of three-dimensional vibrations of automobile engine
and institutionalizing CRANKSYM within General crankshafts. Part I: background and application to free
vibrations. ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Dallas, TX,
Motors are greatly appreciated. His knowledge and ex-
1990.
perience on engine crankshaft vibrations and on vibra-
[16] Morita T, Okamura H. A dynamic stiness matrix
tions in general have been invaluable in developing and approach to the analysis of three-dimensional vibrations
improving CRANKSYM over the past few years. of automobile engine crankshafts. Part 2: application to
®ring conditions. ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Dallas,
TX, 1990.
References [17] Okamura H, Morita T. In¯uence of crankshaft±pulley
dimensions on crankshaft vibrations and engine-structure
[1] Henry JP, Toplosky J, Abramczuk M. Crankshaft dura- noise and vibrations. SAE International Proceedings of the
bility prediction ± a new 3-D approach. SAE paper no. 1993 Noise and Vibration Conference. SAE paper no.
920087, 1992. 931303, 1993. p. 329±38.
[2] Heath AR, McNamara PM. Crankshaft stress analysis ± [18] Stickler AC. Calculation of bearing performance in inde-
the combination of ®nite element and classical techniques. terminate systems. PhD Thesis, Cornell University, 1974.
ASME ICE 1989;9. [19] Booker JF. Dynamically loaded journal bearings: numer-
[3] Kubota M, Kamichika R, Tanida K, Nakagawa E. ical application of the mobility method. Trans ASME,
Dynamic analysis of crankshaft using component mode J Lubricat Technol 1971;93(1).
synthesis. Part 1: ecient method of calculations utilizing [20] Paranjpe RS, Cusenza A. F L A R E : an integrated software
NASTRAN image superelements. Bull Marine Engng Soc package for friction and lubrication analysis of automotive
Jpn 1988;16(2). engines. Part II: experimental validation. SAE Publication
[4] Mourelatos ZP. An analytical investigation of the crank- SP-919 on Engine Tribology, SAE paper no. 920488, 1992.
shaft±¯ywheel bending vibrations for a V6 Engine. SAE p. 57±65.
International Proceedings of the 1995 Noise and Vibration [21] Goenka PK, Paranjpe RS. A review of engine bearing
Conference, vol. 1, SAE paper no. 951276, 1995. analysis methods at General Motors. SAE Publication SP-
[5] Kubozuka T, Hayashi Y, Hayakawa Y, Kikuchi K. 919 on Engine Tribology, SAE paper no. 920489, 1992.
Analytical study on engine noise caused by vibration of p. 67±75.
Z.P. Mourelatos / Computers and Structures 79 (2001) 2009±2027 2027
[22] Ishihama M, Hayashi Y, Kubozuka T. An analysis of the [34] Szeri AZ, editor. Tribology, friction, lubrication and wear.
movement of the crankshaft journals during engine ®ring. New York: Hemisphere; 1980.
SAE paper no. 810772, 1981. [35] Cameron A. The principles of lubrication. New York:
[23] Mourelatos ZP. An ecient crankshaft dynamic analysis Wiley; 1966.
using substructuring with Ritz vectors. J Sound Vib [36] Klit P, Lund JW. Calculation of the dynamic coecients of
2000;238(3):495±527. a journal bearing, using a variational approach. ASME
[24] Wilson EL, Yuan MW, Dickens JM. Dynamic analysis by Paper 85-Trib-7. ASME/ASLE Joint Lubrication Confer-
direct superposition of Ritz vectors. Earthquake Engng ence, Atlanta, GA, October 1985.
Struct Dynam 1982;10:813±21. [37] Goenka PK. Dynamically loaded journal bearings: ®nite-
[25] Arnold RR, Citerley RL, Chagrin M, Galant D. Applica- element method analysis. Trans ASME, J Tribolo Series F
tion of Ritz vectors for dynamic analysis of large 1984:429±39.
structures. Comput Struct 1985;21:461±7. [38] Mourelatos ZP, Parsons MG. Finite-element analysis of
[26] Wilson EL, Bayo EP. Use of special Ritz vectors in elastohydrodynamic stern bearings. SNAME Trans 1985;
dynamic substructure analysis. J Struct Engng 1986;112(8): 93:225±59.
1944±54. [39] Belytschko T, Liu WK, Kennedy JM. Hourglass control in
[27] Leger P, Wilson EL. Generation of load dependent Ritz linear and nonlinear problems. In: Alturi S, Perrone N,
transformation vectors in structural dynamics. Engng editors. Computer methods for nonlinear solids and
Comput 1987;4:309±18. structures, vol. 54, ASME/AMD. American Society of
[28] Gockel MA, editor, M S C / N A S T R A N : handbook for dy- Mechanical Engineers, New York, 1983. p. 37±63.
namic analysis. The MacNeal ± Schwendler Corp., 1983. [40] Kikuchi N. Finite element methods in mechanics. Depart-
[29] Reymond MA, editor, M S C / N A S T R A N : User's manual. The ment of Mechanical Engineering, The University of
MacNeal-Schwendler Corp., 1991. Michigan, 1985.
[30] Bathe KJ, Wilson EL. Numerical methods in ®nite element [41] Karni ZH, Parsons MG, Mourelatos ZP. Time-varying
analysis. Englewood Clis NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1976. behavior of a statically indeterminate shafting system in a
[31] Pinkus O, Sternlicht B. Theory of hydrodynamic lubrica- hydrodynamic journal bearing. ASME J Tribol 1987;
tion. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1961. 109(1).
[32] Brewe DE. Theoretical modeling of the vapor cavitation [42] Mourelatos ZP. An ecient oil ®lm lubrication analysis for
in dynamically loaded journal bearings. Trans ASME, engine crankshafts. Tribology Transactions 2001;44(3):
J Tribol 1986;108:628±38. 351±58.
[33] Paranjpe RS, Goenka PK. Analysis of crankshaft bearings [43] Newmark NM. A method of computation for structural
using a mass conserving algorithm. STLE Tribol Trans dynamics. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil
1990;33(3):333±44. Engineers, 1959.