1999-01-1766

Gear Noise Reduction through Transmission Error Control and Gear Blank Dynamic Tuning
Chih-Hung (Jerry) Chung, Glen Steyer
MTS Systems Corp., Noise and Vibration Division

Takeshi Abe, Mark Clapper, Chandra Shah

Ford Motor Co.
Copyright 1998 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT Gear whine can be reduced through a combination of gear parameter selection and manufacturing process design directed at reducing the effective transmission error. The process of gear selection and profile modification design is greatly facilitated through the use of simulation tools to evaluate the details of the tooth contact analysis through the roll angle, including the effect of gear tooth, gear blank and shaft deflections under load. The simulation of transmission error for a range of gear designs under consideration was shown to provide a 3-5 dB range in transmission error. Use of these tools enables the designer to achieve these lower noise limits. An equally important concern is the dynamic mesh stiffness and transmissibility of force from the mesh to the bearings. Design parameters which affect these issues will determine the sensitivity of a transmission to a given level of transmission error. These dynamics are studied through the use of detailed finite element models of the transmission internals. A systematic approach to gear element design will be presented to optimize the gear blank design from the perspective of the influence both the transmission error and system dynamics on operating noise. The correlation of model predictions with measured operating data on prototype transmissions will be presented. The model results will be used to illustrate how the use of proper tuning of gear blank resonances can be used to further reduce noise levels by 5 10 dB. INTRODUCTION Gear noise control measures can be categorized into the classical areas of source path receiver measures.

Source treatments include all design and manufacturing measures to minimize the transmission error. Transmission error is the fundamental source of gear whine and any reduction will result in lower perceived levels. Tooth contact analysis incorporating mesh kinematics, assembly tolerance analysis and load deflections of the teeth, gear blank, and shafting enables the engineer to minimize gear noise at the source. The path of the gear noise in this instance is understood to be the physical processes and system dynamics translating the input transmission error into radiated noise. Experience has shown that certain transmissions are highly sensitive to transmission error, and that proper control of the gear and shafting dynamics, as well as case radiation characteristics can have a dramatic effect on reducing the transmitted noise. The system dynamics can be properly tuned through an engineering understanding of the underlying physical concerns and proper design direction. This is facilitated through the use of a detailed finite element model simulation. Finally the receiver aspect is understood in the context of how the free-field radiated noise from the transmission translates into noise inside the vehicle passenger compartment. This includes the aspects of sound field directivity, engine compartment reverberation, and body panel transmission loss. The vehicle sound package is designed to control this aspect of gear noise. The use of engine compartment acoustic absorption and dash panel mass damping layers is the primary design methods at our disposal. This paper will demonstrate how all three of the aspects of gear whine were engineered to meet targets for a new automatic transaxle.

Measured TE (20*LOG10(TE/Ref))

20. 00 R 2 = 92% 10. 00

MAIN SECTION The results presented in this paper were generated from a combined experimental and analytical study of gear noise in a newly developed transaxle. Overall NVH performance was given high priority for the target vehicle. One of the NVH goals was to minimize or completely eliminate transmission gear whine tonal detectability under normal driving conditions. This goal was achieved with no slippage in program timing through the use of vehicle level targets driven down to operating measurements on a transmission dynamometer. Thus, allowing for early detection of target exceedance and resolution prior to production release. The use of simulation technology for system dynamic response and gear transmission error estimation analysis was essential to clearly define the controlling design parameters and provide direction for design solutions. The effectiveness of design recommendations from these simulations were confirmed through transmission dynamometer testing. Final testing in a pre-production release vehicle confirmed that the target was in fact achieved after resolving minor vehicle noise path issues. GEAR TRANSMISSION ERROR STUDY One of the most significant contributors to gear whine is gear transmission error. Transmission error is defined as any deviation in output gear speed when the input gear is rolled through the tooth mesh engagement with constant angular velocity. This error can be expressed in terms of an angular motion, or in terms of a relative dynamic displacement along the gears line of action. This displacement error causes radiated noise as a result from dynamic forces at the gear tooth mesh which are transmitted through the shafts to the transmission housing. Perfectly rigid gears with a perfect involute tooth profile will theoretically have zero transmission error. In practice, a finite level of transmission error is introduced from a combination of gear tooth manufacturing errors, assembly misalignments, load deflections and tooth deformations. Some of the critical design measures for quiet gearing is the proper selection of the gear form, refinement of the manufacturing process, and design of the shafting and supports to minimize the resulting transmission error. Figure 1 shows the relative importance of gear transmission error versus generated sound levels of fully assembled transmissions for multiple gear sets. The plot shows a 92% R2 correlation coefficient of measured gear transmission error versus measured transmission operating sound levels.

0. 00

10. 00

20. 00 20 10 0 Tr ansm i ssi on Nor m al i zed SPL ( dB) 10

Figure 1:

Measured gear transmission error versus measured transmission hemi-anechoic normalized sound pressure levels

The transmission error was experimentally measured with a single flank gear test rig capable of evaluating the gear pairs under various operating loads and speeds. The sound levels shown were experimental results from a hemi-anechoic dynamometer test system capable of testing transmissions under load and through an operating speed range. The normalized sound levels shown in the plot are the de-trended average difference over the operating frequency range relative to an average transmission response. The two experimental tools presented here were important in the product development phase and were used to prove-out analytical tools and manufacturing development. Thus, they greatly improved the efficiency and timing for the NVH development of the transmission program. Two key areas of the gear design were considered during the development stage of the transmission. The first consideration was the tooth macrogeometry. This included decisions of the fundamental gear design parameters such as module, number of teeth, pressure angle, helix angle, etc. where careful consideration of manufacturing, durability, and noise need to be considered. The second phase of development was to optimize the gear tooth microgeometry which includes involute, lead, and bias modifications to the tooth surface for low transmission error, optimal load distribution and optimal contact patterns for the gear pair under operating loads and speed. Transmission error minimization was one of the highest weighted factors in the gear design process for the gear set under study. Analytical modeling techniques and design optimization were utilized to achieve the target design criteria. Gear tooth contact analysis techniques were some of the fundamental tools which allowed the gear engineer to optimize gear design and study gear

stress, mesh stiffness, transmission error, load distribution and contact patterns for differing conditions. In order to determine the optimum tooth design a gear design optimization software package GODA [1] (Gear Optimization Design Analysis) establishes the basic gear design parameters with considerations of design and manufacturing limits. Further detail analysis is then performed using LDP [2] (Load Distribution Program) and CAPP [3] (Contact Analysis Program Package). CAPP is a general gear analysis tool which is capable of solving gear tooth contact problems by combining the strength of finite element techniques with boundary elements and surface integral techniques. LDP is also a contact analysis prediction tool, but uses simplified classical representations of the tooth and gear bodies, allowing faster detailed studies of tooth design specifications and tooth surface topographies. Both software techniques can determine relative transmission error performance, mesh stiffness, stress, and tooth and gear body load deflection. If the detailed analysis is unsatisfactory, the design process begins again with GODA.
10

average number of gear teeth in contact during tooth meshing. It is generally considered that smoother tooth meshing action will occur for higher gear contact ratios. In this design range, transmission sound levels and transmission error decrease at approximately 10 dB per 1.0 increase in contact ratio. In this case, gear design [C] was eventually chosen for production because it was deemed adequate for noise performance and was acceptable for manufacturing.

O bser ved C ont actPat t er n

Dr i ve G ear Ti p

Dr i ve G ear SAP

Pr edi ct ed C ont actPat t er n

Dr i ve G ear Ti p

Normalized SPL (dB)

Driv e F la nk [A ] 0 [B ] [D ] Tre nd Li ne -1 0 [C ] [ E] Coast la Fnk

Figure 3:

Dr i ve G ear SAP

LDP predicted versus observed gear tooth contact pattern

-2 0 3.5 4. 5 Tota l G ear C onta ct R atio 5.5

Figure 2:

Normalized transmission sound pressure level (hemianechoic chamber) for gear designs A-E of differing contact ratios

Figure 2 shows five different candidate gear designs that were considered for the transmission design. Analytically, each of the designs had differing appeals and compromises. With the aid of a gear tooth form grinder all of the candidates could be prototyped at a relatively low cost and quick timing. Each design could be easily tested in the hemi-anechoic chamber or transmission error test stand. This allowed determination of their relative NVH performance with nominal tooth surface modifications, and also allowed comparison against their analytical predictions (Figure 3). Figure 2 clearly shows the classical trend of transmission error decreasing with increased gear tooth contact ratio. Gear tooth contact ratio is the theoretical

Figure 4:

CAPP FEM model of studied gear pair

Figure 5:

CAPP predicted load distribution along the gear tooth lines of contact

Final verification of the tooth macrogeometry was performed using CAPP. This analysis verified tooth strength and rim deflections under load so that gear and assembly deflections could be considered in the final design stages. Figures 4 and 5 show examples of CAPP simulations. Experimental verification of the analytical tools used allow the design robustness to be further evaluated for noise performance without producing prototype hardware. After the primary gear design parameters were established, tooth microgeometry was then optimized for the operating speeds and load deflections induced by the transmission. Microgeometry is the refined tooth surface topography of the gear tooth flank. Typically, topography definition includes modifications of lead, involute profile, and tooth bias modifications. To determine the most robust tooth surface specifications, optimization techniques incorporating LDP [4] were used where manufacturing tolerances, assembly and operating variances were considered. Table 1 shows Taguchi allocation for five critical gear parameters: lead, profile and bias specifications a-e, alignment and torque. This statistical technique attempts to minimize the transmission error over the design space considered using historical manufacturing capability to define the tolerance range for each parameter. This attempts to insure that the tooth surface specification is robust enough for transmission error over the design space. Figure 6 shows sample order tracks of transmission noise performance through a speed range under load both before and after optimizing the tooth surfaces.
Table 1: Allocation to Taguchi study

analytical analysis supported by experimental techniques can find optimum noise performance while considering design and manufacturing criteria. Although gear design and manufacturing alterations can significantly improve gear whine performance, factors such as gear blank and transmission dynamics must also be considered in order to achieve total system robustness.
Order Fu nct io n 1 00.0 0

90.0 0

80.0 0

70.0 0

60.0 0

50.0 0

40.0 0

2000

4000 Fr equency ( H z)

6000

8 000

Figure 6:

Overlay of transmission sound level performance before and after tooth profile microgeometry optimization (Solid Optimized Profile, Dashed Initial Profile)

GEAR BLANK DYNAMICS STUDY Unfortunately there are limits to the degree to which transmission error can be reduced. It has been found that certain transmission designs have a relatively high sensitivity to transmission error. In this instance even the best gear profile design and manufacturing controls result in unacceptable levels of gear whine. Minimizing the noise sensitivity to transmission error is an important aspect of transmission design The design sensitivity of a transmission can be understood in terms of the system dynamics. The excitation is the transmission error at the gear mesh. This acts as a specified dynamic displacement forcing the mating gear teeth apart. The gearing design must accommodate this transmission error, absorbing the input motion while minimizing the vibrations transmitted to the outer casing. Experience with previous transmission design had shown that proper tuning of the gear and shafting dynamics may provide on up to a 10 dB effect on radiated noise levels. However proper tuning of the rotating elements requires an understanding of the component dynamics and interactions. This reqires the use of a detailed finite element model to perform the design studies.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

a + + + + 0

b + + + + 0

c + + + + 0

d + + + + 0

e + + + + 0

Align. Torq + + + + + + + + 0 0

TE f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7 f8 fc

1 )?SI Eqn. 1:fun cti on o tm in +( F = ? fc imize SI= 1 n 2 fi Eqn. 2:sen si tivi t y in de x n i=1

( n = 8) = 0. 5 :w ei ghting fac tor fc -M es h exc itin g fo rce fo rnomin al TE

This section clearly demonstrates that gear mesh performance and transmission error are critical factors for gear whine. Additionally, it shows how proper

The mesh frequency for the transfer gear set in this transmission covered the frequency range of 1500 5000 Hz under normal operating conditions. It was necessary to use a solid element based finite element model since the mesh frequency extended to such high frequencies and it was anticipated that the results could be sensitive to the fine details of the gear blank design. Figure 7 shows the gearing finite element model. During the course of the study a number of design iterations were performed on the gears in order to optimize the noise performance while not sacrificing manufacturability nor durability. The finite element model was created using an automatically generated mesh based off the IDEAS solid model. Figure 8 shows the dimensioned wireframe used as a basis for the secondary gear model. This modeling approach allowed for the various wireframe dimensions to be modified, the model quickly updated and the noise performance predicted.

Model correlation tests were performed to ensure accuracy of the predictions. Correlation was performed using component artificial excitation data as well as full system operating measurements. Experimental impact frequency response functions of acceleration over force were compared to the model for unrestained components such as the individual gears and shafts. Figure 9 shows a typical result from a gear blank test. The system models were also used to predict the operating vibration during controlled speed sweeps. This was accomplished by predicting the response per unit transmission error over the frequency range of interest, then multiplying the result by the predicted level of transmission error from the tooth contact analysis. Figures 10 and 11 show overlays of analysis results with experimental order track plots for the gear blank vibration as measured through slip rings as well as transmission housing bearing vibration. These figures show excellent correlation at the problem frequency range of 4200 Hz. Elsewhere the correlation was of acceptable level for the purpose of this study. The comparison of model predictions and test results shown in Figures 10 and 11 provided a high level of confidence that the model was accurately accounting for the relevant physical phenomena. The model was then used to perform numerical design studies to identify an optimal design.

10 000.0

10 00. 00

10 0.0 0

10 .00

Figure 7:

Geometry plot of gearing finite element model.

1. 000

0.1 000

500

1000

Freq uency (Hz)

1 0000

1 5000

Figure 9:

Overlay of an acceleration over force frequency response function for a axial driving point on the rim of the secondary gear. (solid test data, dashed model)

" R evol ve3" C S1_{ Gl obal }

Figure 8:

Wireframe geometry basis for secondary gear blank cross section.

Model Correlation

1000 .00

principle has been presented and demonstrated in previous papers [1,2]. The fundamental design parameters which control the dynamic mesh stiffness are gear inertias, bearing stiffnesses and shaft bending and torsional stiffnesses. In the higher frequency ranges we find that the gear blank out-of-plane bending modes as well as the gear mesh compliances have a significant influence. The transmissibility of the mesh forces to the bearings are controlled by such parameters as the mass of the gears, the bearing stiffnesses and the shaft bending stiffness. Past experience of applying this simulation technology and design optimization approach to automotive transmissions has shown that the primary impact of design modifications is in the control of the dynamic mesh force. It is a common misconception in gearing design that a low noise gear design would be comprised of very massive and rigid gears and shafts. In fact the opposite is often true. Quiet gearing is best embodied in light weight gears with sufficient compliance to absorb the transmission error without generating undue dynamic force. The parameters which control the dynamic mesh force can best be understood with the aid of Figure 12. The transmission error will be absorbed through the sum of motion of the primary and secondary gear along the line of action. The developed mesh force is an equal and opposite force reaction on both gears at the pitch contact point and oriented along the mesh line of action. Thus the mesh compliance (or motion per unit dynamic mesh force) is the sum of the compliance of the primary gear and the secondary gear. The reciprocal of this mesh compliance is then the dynamic mesh stiffness, or the force developed at the mesh per unit transmission error. The presence of resonances in the individual gears is beneficial in that they reduce the mesh force. Unfortunately these resonances may also cause peaks in the transmissibility of forces to the bearings. The secret to the design of quiet gearing is to design in compliances (often through modal resonances) that reduce the mesh dynamic stiffness but do not adversly affect the force transmissibility from mesh zone to bearings.

100.00

10. 00

1. 000

2000

Frequenc y (Hz )

4000

6000

Figure 10:

Overlay of model prediction with experimental data for the order track function of secondary gear axial vibration at the gear rim. The primary frequency of concern was 4200 Hz.

40 .00

30 .00

20 .00

10 .00

0 .00

2 000

Freq uency (Hz)

400 0

600 0

Figure 11:

Overlay of model prediction with experimental data for the order track function transmission housing bearing vibration.

Design Optimization In order to identify an optimal design it is necessary to develop detailed insight into the physical processes and understand the design issues. In the case of gear noise, the optimal design is arrived at through a relatively fine balance of the dynamic characteristics of a number of components. An approach of blindly changing numerous design parameters and evaluating the effect until the magical combination of design changes is arrived at results in a very inefficient process. However, if the baseline model is used to perform a detailed investigation of the controlling dynamics then it becomes possible to home in on a near optimal design in relatively short order. The following discussion presents a quick summary of the theory of quiet gearing design. The dynamics of the gearing can be best understood as a two part process of the development of dynamic force at the mesh for a unit transmission error, followed by the transmissibility of this mesh force to the casing. This

1.0 0E06

X/ F

Primary N=1 N=2

Mesh dynamics controlled by gear blank modes (n nodal diameters) Secondary N=2

1. 00E06

1. 00E07

1.0 0E07

1. 00E08

Primary N=3

1. 00E09

2000

40 00 Fr equency(Hz)

6000

80 00

1.0 0E08

Secondary N=0

Shaft Rigid Body on Brgs

1.0 0E09 2 00 1000 Fre quenc y( Hz) 8000

x
F= 1

fsecondary x fprimary
Figure 13: Gear LOA compliances and dynamic mesh force for the baseline gear sets. Notice the irregular spacing of the modes and the wide frequency range about 4200 Hz with a total lack of component modes. This corresponds to a high level peak in the mesh force.

fsecondary

fprimary

+ m esh an ce _ compli

Figure 12:

Illustration of how the mesh dynamic stiffness is the result of the individual gear line of action (LOA) dynamic compliances. The upper part of the figure shows the dynamic LOA compliances for the primary and secondary gears for the baseline design.

A bounce mode of the gear on the bearing compliances would result in such a transmissibility peak. However a purely torsional mode of a shaft will result in a reduction in the mesh force with no effect on the transmissibility of the force from the mesh to the bearings. Similarly a two nodal diameter mode of an axi-symmetric gear blank (the potato chipping mode) will reduce the mesh force but will result in no net shaking force transmitted to the bearings. The system finite element models can be used to accurately predict the system dynamic compliances taking into account the gear rigid body motions and bending compliances as well as shaft rigid body and bending motions. These functions can be used to understand the dynamic mesh stiffness as well as the transmissibility of forces from the mesh to the bearings. This process was used to study the baseline transmission design. Figure 13 shows the dynamic compliances and the resulting mesh dynamic stiffness. Notice the prominent peak in the predicted mesh force at the 4200 Hz problem frequency. This peak in the mesh force was understood to be the result of a lack of appropriate component modes in the neighboring frequency range. It was determined that if certain of the component modes could be retuned into this frequency range then the mesh force could be smoothed out.

Figure 14 shows one of the gear blank modes which was a controlling factor in the mesh compliance. This mode is a two nodal diameter mode which occurred at 3200 Hz. A design objective was set to modify the secondary gear web in such a manner as to force this mode into the 3800 Hz range and to drop the primary gear n=3 mode from 5300 Hz down to 4400 Hz. This would result in a more uniform spacing of the modes and help to reduce the mesh force peaks in the 3000 to 5000 Hz range. Figure 15 shows the predicted effect on the mesh compliance and the resulting mesh force. The actual change to the gear web wireframe was easily developed through the use of geometric optimization algorithm applied separately to the primary and secondary gears. The underlying dimensions on the wireframe were used as the design variables and the objective functions were defined as the new target frequencies.

Figure 14:

Deformed geometry plot of the 2nd nodal diameter mode of the secondary gear which was tuned to the 4000 Hz

frequency range and smooth the mesh dynamic stiffness as a function of frequency.

(dark dash) and the modified design with tuned gear blanks (light dotted).

1 00
X/F 1. 00E06

9 0

1. 00E07

8 0
1. 00E08

7 0
1. 00E09

2000

4000 Fr equenc y H (z)

60 00

8 000

6 0

C
5 0

4 0

7 00

2000

4 000 Fr equency H ( z)

6 000

8 000

Figure 17:

Experimental results: Overlay of mesh order track plots of operating noise for the baseline design (dark dash) and the modified design with tuned gear blanks (light dotted).

Figure 15:

Gear LOA compliances and dynamic mesh force for the modified gear sets. Notice the uniform spacing of the modes and the alternate spacing of primary gear resonances with secondary gear resonances. The mesh force is seen to uniformly increase with frequency.

Prototype gears were fabricated and installed in the transmission and operating noise measurements made on a tranmission dynamometer. The sound pressure order track functions were measured for four microphones located at the front of dash locations. A composite function was computed as the power average of these four functions. Figure 16 shows the predicted effect of the modified design on the mesh dynamic force per unit micrometer. Figure 17 shows the corresponding measured averaged front of dash noise levels for the baseline and modified designs. This figure shows data for the fundamental gear mesh frequency as well as the second harmonic (scaled up by a factor of 2 in order to overlay on the fundamental).
70

The results of Figures 16 and 17 show a remarkable degree of aggreement in the differences between the baseline and modified design. These both show the modified design to be over 10 dB quieter at the previous problem frequency of 4200 Hz, with a corresponding increase in levels at the new resonance frequency of 3500 Hz. Also, both figures show the 3500 Hz peak to be on the order of 8 dB lower than the original peak at 4200 Hz. This reduction corresponded to a full subjective rating point increase when installed in the vehicle. Further design modifications were studied and implemented which affected the transmissibility of the mesh force to the bearings. The model was additionally used to study detail design modifications to the transmission housing and identify stiffening structure which resulted in 1 2 dB of additional noise reduction. VEHICLE PATH CONSIDERATIONS One of the difficult aspects of automotive NVH development is the fact that numerous engineering activities are simultaneously occuring. The subjective NVH performance of the transmission is determined not only by the acoustic strength of the transmission, but is equally influenced by the acoustic integrity of the body, the presence of mechanical short circuits, and by the ambient masking from wind and road noise. All of these features are ever changing during the vehicle development and do not allow for a valid subjective evaluation of the transmission in the vehicle until the final production release vehicle is available. Unfortunately at this stage it is too late to affect any major reduction in the gear noise. It is essential that a vehicle system NVH target development and allocation process be used. This enables the transmission development to proceed and

60

50

40

30

20

10 700

2000

4000 Fr equency (H z)

6 000

8 000

Figure 16:

Analytical results: Overlay of predicted dynamic mesh force per unit transmission error for the baseline design

allows for rational decisions about the various design and cost trade-offs required to have confidence in the final product. The dominant noise path for this transmission was anticipated to be airborne due to the high frequencies associated with the transfer gear. Transmission tonal target levels were determined through a process of applying tonal masking theory. The vehicle office had determined targets for wind and road noise on a competitive basis. This allows the generation of a frequency and road speed dependent target surface for the gear tonal noise levels at the drivers ear. The gear whine will be undetectable for all levels below this surface. The drivers ear target surface is driven down to a front of dash target surface with the use of an acoustic transmission loss model for the dash panel. The vehicle office again had target information for this based on competitive analysis. The acoustic package was being driven to meet this target. This engine compartment front of dash noise level was then driven down to a target level for an equivalent front of dash plane measured on a transmission dynamometer in a hemi-anechoic chamber. The gear development activities identified the gear blank tuning which enabled the design to meet this noise target. All of the transmission noise development work was accomplished without the benefit of full vehicle testing. Operating road tests were performed as soon as a production release vehicle was available. These tests had identified a gear whine problem in the 45 mph speed range. Subsequent testing on a chassis dynamometer quickly determined that the noise was a result of a mechanical path through the transmission shift cable. Figure 18 shows an order track plot for three baseline configuration runs and three runs with the shift cable disconnected. The addition of mechanical isolation in the shift cable resolved this noise problem. The gear whine passed the subjective targets in the final vehicle tests,
6 0

Figure 18:

Passengers ear Sound Pressure order track data from vehicle tests with and without the shift cable disconnected.

Based on the data in Figure 18 a design modification to the shift cable was implemented. Subsequent vehicle drives showed the transmission noise to meet or exceed the subjective evaluation targets. In each vehicle development program it is essential to perform an engineering process assessment in order to validate and refine the methods. Further vehicle testing was conducted to evaluate the assumptions in the system NVH model. The vehicle was instrumented with four microphones in the engine compartment on the front of the dash. The average of the order track data from these microphones were compared to the four dashplane microphone data from the transmission dynamometer. This data confirmed the model used to project the free-field sound pressure data to the engine compartment data. The apparent transmission loss was evaluated by dividing the average front of dash microphone data by the interior microphone data. Only the order track data at the transfer and final drive gear mesh orders were used. This data was compared to the anticipated body transmission loss. These results were very close and validated the system noise model. CONCLUSION The results reported in this paper demonstrate very clearly the potential impact that simulation technology can have on reducing transmission gear noise through gear profile modifications for transmission error reduction as well as gear blank tuning for reducing the tranmission sensitivity to transmission error. The use of tooth load deflection analysis had identified gearing changes which resulted in a 5 dBA reduction, while proper gear blank tuning reduced the peak noise levels by approximately 10 dBA. The success on this transmission has demonstrated the value of incorporating these technologies into the early design process. These tools will aid in optimal selection of transmission skeletal designs and provide the ability to develop even quieter designs before the problem has been overly constrained. Incorporation of these simulation technologies early in the design process require that appropriate design targets are developed. This begins with determination of the target levels for vehicle interior noise based on tonal detectability theory. These targets are then rolled down to transmission nearfield noise levels as well as mount vibrations. Finally, these targets can be translated into simulation targets such as bearing reaction forces and dynamic mesh force.

5 0

4 0

3 0

2 0

1 0

Cabl e D is conn ne ct
2000 3000 40 00 quenc y Fre 5 000 6000 7000

0 1 000

A fully integrated approach of target roll downs coupled with simulation technologies enables the transmission design team to select more optimal design from an NVH perpestive at a point in the process where there exists greater design freedom. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the support and contributions of numerous colleagues at both Ford Motor Co. and MTS Systems Corp. without whom this effort would not have been possible. Among these are Mr. Jeff Nolff Mr. John Hiatt and Mr. Brian Wilson. The authors are also very grateful for the solid support of management throughout the effort and their commitment of the necessary resources to successfully apply these technologies.

1. D. Hughson (1990), GODA5 Gear Optimization and 2.

Analysis 5), SAE Gear Design, Manufacturing, and Inspection Manual, Chap. 12, pp 175-186. Houser, D.R. (1990), Gear Noise Sources and their Prediction Using Mathematical Models, SAE Gear Design, Manufacturing, and Inspection Manual, Chap. 16, pp 213-223. S. Vijayakar, A Combined Surface Integral and Finite Element Solution for a Three Dimensional Contact Problem, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 31, 525-546 (1991). S. Sundaresan, K. Ishii, D. Houser, Design of Helical Gears with Minimum Transmission Error Under Manufacturing and Operating Variances, JSME international Conference on Motion and Powertransmissions, Nov. 1991. G.C. Steyer, Influence of Gear Train Dynamics on Gear Noise, Proceedings of the National Conference on Noise Control Engineering, pp 53-58, 1987 G.C.Steyer and T.C.Lim, System Dynamics in Quiet Gear Design, Proceedings of the 9 th International Modal Analsysis Conference, pp 999-1005, 1991

3.

4.

5. 6.

REFERENCES