Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cummins Pfleuger Paper
Cummins Pfleuger Paper
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper outlines the steps taken for the preliminary crankshaft and bearing design
analysis at Cummins. Major crankshaft dimensions must be chosen early in the engine design
process because they affect overall engine dimensions. Proper selection of the crank dimensions
requires multiple design iterations to avoid design alterations during the development stage when
any change is very costly. Therefore, the crankshaft and bearing analysis should be not only
quick, but also accurate and robust because some of the parameters may not yet be well defined
at this preliminary stage.
A number of considerations need to be addressed in the preliminary crankshaft and
bearing design analysis. Among these considerations are crank stress, bearing performance,
integrity of the crankshaft joints, and the impact of the crank on the block stress and deformation.
Though each consideration may require a detailed and complicated analysis, simplified
approaches have been developed over the years by the industry and successfully applied at
Cummins.
This paper describes a two-stage process adopted by Cummins for crankshaft analysis.
The first stage is a simplified analysis, which combines a “quasi-static” crankshaft model and a
rigid hydrodynamic bearing model to address crankshaft fillet bending stress and bearing
performance characteristics. The torsional vibration effects are accounted for independently
based on a simple one-dimensional dynamic mass-elastic model. At the second stage, the
crankshaft bending loads are combined with the torsional loads to simulate stress at any location
in the crankshaft finite element (FE) model. Stresses at various locations in the crank are
calculated by using sets of unit load cases applied to a single throw FE model. The appropriate
unit load cases are scaled according to the load, and combined to calculate the stresses in the
crank. The process is repeated in an efficient manner to simulate multiple engine conditions for
rapid crankshaft and bearing preliminary design.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2: Main Bearing Reactions calculated with (a) dynamic and (b) quasi-static models at
1000 rpm
(a) (b)
Figure 3: (a) Static vs. Dynamic Torque. (b) Calibrated vs. uncalibrated cranknose torsional
displacement
THROW 3 THROW 5
Lightening
pockets
Figure 5: Two different single-throw sections of crankshaft from CAD model for FE analysis
Mb
Mb
F1p F1n
T T Mb
F2p F2p Mb
T T
2.7 2.8
T T T
Ttv
Soft layer
Journal
Stiff layer
Combined Stress
Figure 11: Flow chart of new crank analysis process
Oil
hole
Main
fillet
Pin
fillet
Lightening
pockets
4. CONCLUSIONS
• A new procedure for combined stress analysis has been developed. In its current state it
utilizes load factors obtained through crankshaft quasi-static bending analysis and dynamic
torsional analysis, but it could be adapted to accept loads obtained through full crankshaft
dynamic analysis (ADAMS).
• Application of this technique has shown that although the crankshaft fillet stress is
predominantly due to bending, torsional load can add up to 20% to the fillet bending stress,
while the oil hole stress is mostly due to torsion. This validates the traditional analysis at the
preliminary stage of crankshaft design.
5. REFERENCES
1. Selim, M. “Main Bearing Loads Calculated with the Crankshaft Carried on Flexible Supports
having non-linear spring Characteristics”, Rapp Inst. Farbrannigmot, NTH, Univ.
Trondheim, No 8, 1972, pp. 1-73.
2. Booker, J. F. “Dynamically loaded Journal Bearings: Mobility Method of Solution”, Trans.
ASME, Journal of Basic Engineering, Series D, Vol.87, No 3, September 1965, pp.537-546.
3. Booker, J. F. “Dynamically loaded Journal Bearings: Numerical application of the Mobility
Method”, Trans. ASME, Journal of Lubrication Technology, Series F, Vol.93, No 1, January
1971, pp. 168-176.
4. Goenka, P. K. “Analytical Curve Fits for Solution Parameters of Dynamically Loaded
Journal Bearings”, Trans. ASME, Journal of Tribology, Vol.106, October 1984, pp. 421-428.
5. Welsh, W. A. and Booker, J. F. “Dynamic Analysis of Engine Bearing System”, 1983 SAE
International Congress, Detroit, MI, 1983, Paper No 830065.
6. Rebbert, M., Lach, R. and Kley, P. “Dynamic Crankshaft Stress Calculation Using a
Combination of MSS and FEA”. FEV.
7. Raub, J. H., Jones, J., Kley, P. and Rebbert, M. “Analytical Investigation of Crankshaft
Dynamics as a Virtual Engine Module”. Proceedings SAE Noise and Vibrations Conference
and Exposition. May 1999.
8. Du, I. “Stress Recovery in Engine and Powertrain Applications Using DADS. LMS 2001
Conference for Physical and Virtual Prototyping. Troy, MI. September 2001.
9. Zwaanenburg, K. “Integration of Physical and Virtual Prototypes”. SAE 2002-01-1290.
10. Rasser, M.W., Resch, T. and Priebsch, H.H. “Enhanced Crankshaft Stress Calculation
Method”. AVL.