2005-01-2525

Coupled Vibration Analysis of Tire and Wheel for Road Noise

Improvement
Ichiro Kido and Sagiri Ueyama
TOYOTA COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS CO., LTD.

Copyright © 2004 SAE International

ABSTRACT and wheel is presented to improve the road noise

Tire is a key to a good performance of road induced
noise (road noise). Development of the performance
would be more effective by deep consideration with
suspension and wheel.
Coupled vibration analysis between suspension and
tire/wheel has given suggestions to understand and to
improve their vibration. Next, it is applied to tire and
wheel for a rumble noise around 160Hz in this paper.
Successful and practical technique is developed for this
analysis. It is a modal transformation of analytical
degree of freedom (DOF) at their conjunction points.
The DOF is reduced from seven hundreds to some tens
and finally to two by transfer path analysis (TPA).
By referencing results of numerical study, a set of
modified tire and wheel is prepared. Its experimental
results show the improvement of road noise and verify
that this approach is useful practically.
around 160Hz.
ROAD NOISE AND ITS SUBSTITUTE QUANTITY
Figure 1 shows acoustic pressure at driver’s ear
position and suspension vibration measured on a roller
covered by rough road replica.
The peak of sound pressure level (SPL) around 160Hz
frequency range on the upper spectra is a primary
factor of harsh and uncomfortable noise, and this peak
should be our target to improve. Frequency response
characteristics of lateral vibration(y) at the top of
damper and the bushing point of lower arm are
corresponding to that of SPL peak more than that of
vertical vibration (z) at lower arm ball joint (B/J) around
160Hz. This fact and acoustic sensitivities of average
front engine front drive car body let us choose the
lateral force transmitted to body at the top of damper as
being an index of vibration for simulation to be improved
[4].
10dB

INTRODUCTION 1/3oct.
SPL dB(A)

To shorten a period of development time, it seems

effective to develop each component with the assigned
targets at the same time. We have proposed an
approach to derive guidelines for setting their targets by
clarifying the relationship between whole system
properties and each component properties [1], [2]. 0 100 200 300
Frequency Hz
In the process of vehicle development, road noise tends
to remain as an important issue. The improvement of
10dB

Damper (y) Lower

noise around 100-200Hz induced by rough road was
Acceleration dB

arm (y)
discussed on whole suspension vibration system in our Lower
previous paper, because that is occurred mainly B/J (z)
through vibration transmission on car structure. Except
the coupled vibration analysis as mention above, the
contribution of tire to interior noise was clarified by
characterizing vibro-acoustic properties of vehicle and
by studying combination of tire and wheel [3]. This led 0 100 200 300
Frequency Hz
reasonable results of the combination. It seems more
useful for the road noise improvement that quantitative Fig.1 SPL at driver’s ear and suspension vibrations
discussion on vibration properties of tire and wheel is driving on a rough surface roller at 60Km/h
made an addition. In this paper, each property of tire
COUPLED VIBRAION ANALYSIS ESTIMATION OF COUPLED NATURAL FREQUENCY

An approach is described to obtain dynamic properties Determination of coupled natural frequency fc is one of
of subsystems for a coupled natural frequency and the the key points in this coupled vibration analysis,
inner forces between subsystems. because Fy and N have the maximum value at fc .
Therefore for the reduction of Fy , fc should be moved
TRANSFER PATH ANALYSIS
into the frequency range where Tyb#S and Thg#TW are
Vibration properties of subsystems in a whole smaller. fc is estimated by the condition that
suspension system are analyzed by transfer function determinant of kernel compliance matrix Gker is equal to
synthesis method [5], [6], [7]. Prior to the analysis, the zero based on Equation 6.
whole suspension system is divided into two adj(Gker )
-1
subsystems, that are suspension subsystem (#S) and N = Kker δh = Gker δh = δ (6)
tire/wheel subsystem (#TW), as shown in Figure 2. det(Gker ) h
Suspension Tire/wheel N includes vibration properties of both subsystems and
Suspension subsystem
subsystem #S subsystem #T W frequency response functions of N have a peak at fc .
Damper
db Tire
REDUCTION OF ANALYTICAL DOF
Knuckle Axle Axle
bearing Axle
hub
hub
l cb ＋ ＋ Wheel Estimation of fc requires to consider a lot of things in
z hwt
the compliance matrices Gbb#S , Ghh # TW −1
and K bh to satisfy
Lower arm gg
・ y det(Gker ) = 0 . If the vibrating system is strongly coupled,
x
Fig.2 Subsystems of suspension it is not easy to estimate fc , because many off-diagonal
elements of the matrices are non-zero and not
Assuming that a trimmed body of car does not affect independent of diagonal elements. Furthermore if the
force vector Fy transmitted to body, Fy is expressed as matrix size of Gker is large, it is impossible to evaluate its
shown in Equation 1. properties by observing data. To overcome this difficulty,
Fy ≡ Tyb# S K kerThg# T W δ g (1) an approximation method and a suitable technique are
introduced.
where δg is road-induced motion vector, Tyb#S is force
transmissibility matrix of suspension subsystem, Thg#TW is Reduction of kernel dynamic stiffness matrix size
motion transmissibility matrix of tire/wheel subsystem
TPA suggests some principal paths among all paths at
and Kker is interface dynamic stiffness matrix at axle
the conjunction. This may allow us to reduce the size
bearing. Tyb#S and Thg#TW are independently characterized of Gker to two. Namely the conjunction could be treated
by their subsystem. As Kker plays an important role as a by two DOFs; i=1 and 2. The condition det(Gker ) = 0 will
kernel on coupled vibration analysis, we named it
be simply expressed according to this approximation.
“kernel dynamic stiffness matrix”. Kker consists of 3
matrices as Equation 2. Gker ,11 Gker ,12
−1 −1 det (Gker ) =
#S # TW −1 Gker ,21 Gker ,22 (7)
K ker ≡ Gker ≡ (Gbb + K bh + Ghh ) (2)
# TW
where Gbb#S and Ghh are compliance matrices of = Gker ,11Gker ,22 − Gker ,12Gker ,21 = 0
suspension subsystem and tire/wheel subsystem By assumption Gker ,12 = Gker ,21 , this equation satisfies
respectively and K bh is bearing stiffness matrix.
Gker ,11 Gker ,12 = Gker ,12 Gker ,22 at coupled natural frequency fc .
To analyze the whole system by transfer path analysis On semi log graph as shown in Figure 3, this schematic
(TPA), Fy is alternatively expressed as Equation 3. presentation helps us easily to estimate fc by searching
Fy = Tyb#S N (3) the frequency where distance between Gker ,11 and Gker ,12 is
where N is axle force which is force vector transmitted equal to distance between Gker ,22 and Gker ,12 .
to suspension subsystem from tire/wheel subsystem. 10-4
N is obtained by an axle hub displacement vector δ h Gker ,11
Compliance m/N

10-5
which is determined by tire/wheel and road roughness. Gker ,12
N = KkerThg#TW δ g ≡ Kker δ h (4) 10-6
Main transfer paths in suspension subsystem are 10-7
examined by contribution factors which are obtained by 10-8 Gker ,22
multiplying elements of Tyb#S by elements of N . i is fc
-9
10
direction; 5 components except rotation’s around axle. 100 120 140 160 180
5 Frequency Hz
Fy = ∑ Tyb#S,i N i (5) Fig.3 Estimation of coupled natural frequency
i
Modal transformation of the conjunction DOF Damper
1342 nodes
Tire
Tire is fit into wheel at the tire rim and its inner forces 3960 nodes
are transmitted there. In FE model, there are some two Knuckle Front
hundreds conjunction points at the tire rim. Matrix size 1099 nodes

of Gker is too large to reduce on physical DOF ordinarily. Rim/wheel z

6219 nodes
We adopt a translation to resolve this situation. Figure 4 Lower arm
× x FF 0.5F
2980 nodes y 0.5F
shows that the transformation replaces the physical
DOF with a smaller number of modal DOF. Fig.5 Finite element model and force input to tire

tire xr# T = xr# W The whole model consists of FE models of knuckle,

wheel lower arm, damper, coil spring, brake caliper/rotor,
bushing and cushion. FE models except bushing and
γ r# T = γ r# W
cushion are expressed by elastic elements as beam,
xr# T xr#W shell and solid. Tire inputs by roughness of road surface
Modal are modeled as shown in the right of Figure 5 [8], [9].
DOF Unit sinusoidal force and a half of that are loaded at two
points on tire tread. Figure 6 shows that the frequency
Fig.4 Conjunction DOF at rim response function of the whole suspension obtained by
FE analysis is in good agreement with that by
xr#W  Φ r#W 0 0  γ r#W  xr# T  Φ r#W 0 0  γ r# T  measurement. This model seems to be sufficient to
 #W         
x h  =  0 E 0  xh#W  , x g# T = 0 E 0  xg# T  analyze and to improve road noise in 160Hz.
x # W   0 0 E  xw#W   x #T   0 0 E  xt# T 
 w      t    

10dB
(8)

Inertance dB
Analysis
We choose modal matrix Φr#W on the rim DOFs xr#W of
wheel subsystem (#W) for modal transformation as
shown in Equation 8. The compatibility condition is set
as γr#T = γr#W by modal DOF on assembling tire and Experiment
wheel. E in Equation 8 expresses identity matrix. 0 100 200 300
Frequency Hz
REDUCTION OF INNER FORCES Fig.6 Validation of whole suspension model

In the case of two conjunction DOFs, an approach to COUPLED VIBRATION ANALYSIS BETWEEN
reduce inner forces is shown as follows. Equation 9 SUSPENSION AND TIRE/WHEEL
shows that inner force vector N at fc is proportional to
the value of kernel dynamic stiffness κ . Vibration of the whole suspension is numerically
1  Gker ,22 −Gker ,12  δ1  analyzed to obtain the relationship with its dynamic
−1
N (fc ) =Gker δh =    properties and the force transmitted to body which
det(Gker ) −Gker ,12 Gker ,11  δ2  causes road noise in 160Hz frequency range. Primary
T axle forces are examined to derive the requisite and
κ φ 1 φ 1  δ1 
≈ lim      (9) minimum DOFs. And the kernel compliance matrix at
σ→11− σ φ 2 φ 2  δ 2 
the axle Gker is investigated to understand the
where relationship between the dynamic properties which
1 1 G ker ,11 G ker ,22 determines axle forces and the coupled natural
κ≡ + , σ≡ ,
G ker ,11 G ker ,22 G ker ,12 G ker ,12 frequency.
 φ1  1  G ker ,12 
 ≡   PRIMARY AXLE FORCES
φ 2  2
( G ker ,11 + G ker ,12 )
2
 −G ker ,11 
Figure 7 shows that there are three peak regions of the
It is primarily required to reduce N that sum of
force Fy transmitted to body at the top of damper in the
reciprocal of the kernel compliance Gker ,11 and G ker ,22 is
frequency range of 140-180Hz. On the largest peak of
minimized at fc . Detailed explanation of this equation is the 170Hz range, there are two close forced vibration
shown in Appendix. modes as shown by blue and red arrows in Figure 7.
Figure 8 shows that their mode shapes are similar at
FE MODEL FOR ROAD NOISE SIMULATION the point of deformation phase among damper, lower
arm and wheel, but different at the point of tire’s
A reliable FE model was prepared for macpherson strut deformation. Other peaks are in 135Hz and 191Hz as
type suspension to analyze the road noise as shown in shown by red arrows in Figure 7. In their modes, tire
the left of Figure 5 [4]. mainly vibrates in similar manner to the tire mode in
Figure 8. Figure 9 shows the contribution of axle
forces N to the force Fy transmitted to body, where N θ These frequencies in Figure 11 are almost same as the
and N y express moment around fore-aft axis and frequency of peaks in Figure 10. This proves that the
lateral force respectively. N θ is dominant and in phase DOFs of the conjunction are able to be reduced to two.
with sum of all contributions to Fy in 140-180Hz. N y is
180

Phase
deg
the next to N θ and out of phase with that. This phase 0
-180
relationship gives a possibility of canceling out their 10

Axle force
contribution each other. The other axle forces seldom
contribute to Fy and are possible to be neglected. From 0

Amplitude
Ny
above contribution analysis, requisite of two primary

dB
-10
axle forces is derived and we conclude that the DOFs of
the conjunction may be reduced to two. -20
Nθ
0 -30
Transmitted force to body

150 160 170 180 190 200

Frequency Hz
-10
Fig.10 Axle forces N θ and N y
-20
dB

-4
10 Gker ,θθ
-30

Compliance
-6
-40 10 Gker ,yθ
100 120 140 160 180 200
Frequency Hz -8
10
Fig.7 Transmitted force to body Fy
Gker ,yy
-10
10
150 160 170 180 190 200
Frequency Hz
Fig.11 Compliances at axle bearing
165Hz 170Hz -4
10 #TW
Ghh
Compliance rad/Nm

,θθ

-6
10

K bh−1,θθ
-8
Fig.8 Mode shapes around 160Hz range 10
Gbb#S,θθ Gker ,θθ
-10
180 10
Phase
deg

0 150 160 170 180 190 200

Transmitted force to body

-180 Frequency Hz
0 5
Tyb#S,θ Nθ Fig.12 Contribution analysis of G ker ,θθ
∑T
i
#S
yb ,i Ni Tyb#S,y N y
-10
Amplitude

-4
10
dB

-20
Compliance 1/N

Gker ,yθ
-6
10
-30
others
-8
-40 10
100 120 140 160 180 200 #TW Gbb#S, yθ
Ghh , yθ
Frequency Hz -10
10
Fig.9 Contribution of axle force N to Fy 150 160 170 180 190 200
Frequency Hz

DYNAMIC PROPERTIES RELATED WITH COUPLED Fig.13 Contribution analysis of G ker ,y θ

NATURAL FREQUENCY
-4
10 #TW
Ghh ,yy
Gbb#S, yy
Compliance m/N

Figure 10 shows that axle forces have three peak

-6
regions whose coupled natural frequencies are same as 10
those of the forces transmitted to body in Figure 7.
-8
Figure 11 shows that elements of kernel compliance 10
matrix satisfy Gker ,yy /Gker ,y θ = Gker ,y θ /Gker ,θθ at the frequency
-10
K bh−1,yy Gker ,yy
ranges of 167Hz and 191Hz(as red dotted lines), where 10
subscripts 1 and 2 are replaced with y and θ . Figure 11 150 160 170 180 190 200
Frequency Hz
also shows that the conjunction can be approximated by
Fig.14 Contribution analysis of G ker ,yy
only θ at 173Hz, because it indicates Gker ,θθ = 0, Gker ,yθ = 0
(as blue dotted line).
The coupled natural frequencies at 167Hz and 191Hz 180

Phase
deg
are near the sharp peaks of compliance as Figure 11. 0
-180

Reaction force R
Figure 12-14 show that these sharp peaks are caused 0 Physical connecting Rθ
by compliance peaks of tire/wheel subsystem whose Physical connecting Ry
natural frequencies are 167Hz and 191Hz. Tire/wheel -10

Amplitude
subsystem is dominant in compliance at the frequency

dB
ranges and determines the coupled natural frequencies. -20
On the other hand, compliance level at 173Hz region is
-30
low because this frequency is near anti-resonance Modal connecting Ry
frequency. This is a result from the fact that Modal connecting Rθ
−1
-40
compliances of tire/wheel Ghh#TW ,θθ and bearing K bh ,θθ are 100 120 140 160 180 200
G
dominant and cancel each other on ker ,θθ as Figure 12. Frequency Hz
Suspension’s compliance Gbb#S,yθ on G ker ,y θ is dominant as Fig.15 Comparison of two models
Figure 13. And Figure 14 shows that compliances of -4
tire/wheel Ghh#TW ,yy and suspension Gbb#S,yy are dominant 10 #TW
Ghh ,θθ
on Gker ,yy . It seems that they have properties of inertia #W
Ghh

Compliance
-6 ,θθ
moment or inertia mass as the tire/wheel’s compliances 10 #W
Ghh ,yy
on Gker ,θθ andG ker ,yy become small as frequency is large.
-8
10
COUPLED VIBRATION ANALYSIS BETWEEN #TW
#TW
Ghh Ghh
TIRE AND WHEEL -10 ,yθ
,yy

10
100 120 140 160 180 200
Each contribution of tire and wheel in tire/wheel Frequency Hz
subsystem should be clarified to obtain guidelines for Fig.16 Compliances of tire/wheel and wheel
setting targets of them. It becomes possible to analyze at axle bearing
compliances at conjunction points on wheel rim
-3
between tire and wheel by introduction of a developed 10
Gker ,yy Gker ,θθ
technique reducing analytical DOF. -4
10
Compliance

REDUCTION OF CONJUNCTION DOF -5

10
We use the modes of wheel supported free-free for 10
-6

modal transformation matrix Φr#W . By this transformation, Gker ,yθ

-7
seven hundred analytical DOFs at rim are reduced to 10
thirty modal DOFs including flexible modes, finally to six 100 120 140 160 180 200
rigid modes. Figure 15 shows this can be confirmed by Frequency Hz
comparing two cases. One is a model which is fully Fig.17 Compliances at rim by modal DOF
connected each other at physical DOFs. The other is -3
10
connected at six modal DOFs. This modal connecting Grr#T,θθ Gker ,θθ
model is coincident with the full physical connecting 10
-4
Compliance

model. The reason is understood that the natural

-5
frequencies of flexible modes of the aluminum alloy 10
wheel used in this simulation are too high to affect the -6
vibration of tire in 140-180Hz frequency range. 10
-7 Grr#W,θθ
10
CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS OF TIRE AND WHEEL 100 120 140 160 180 200
Frequency Hz
In Figure 16, compliance of wheelGhh#W is compared with Fig.18 Contribution analysis of G ker , θθ by modal DOF
that of tire/wheelGhh#TW at axle bearing. This comparison
tells us that the compliance of wheel is dominant in the -3
10
Gker,yy
compliance of tire/wheel subsystem except some peaks.
-4
From the fact that Ghh#TW #TW
,θθ and Ghh ,yy become small as 10
Compliance

frequency is large, these can be determined by wheel -5

inertia. The compliances in Figure 17 suggest that 10
Grr#T, yy
tire/wheel subsystem has coupled natural frequencies 10
-6

at 131Hz, 167Hz and 191Hz on its peaks which satisfy Grr#W, yy

-7
the condition of Equation 7. The kernel compliance 10
G ker ,θθ and G ker ,yy explain it complementarily by the fact 100 120 140 160 180 200
that compliance of tire Grr#T in those frequencies is much Frequency Hz
larger than that of wheelGrr#W in Figure 18 and 19. Fig.19 Contribution analysis of G ker ,yy by modal DOF
ROAD NOISE IMPROVEMENT axle displacement becomes low as the order of tire
vibration mode is high.
According to the above analysis, tire and wheel are tried

Force transmissibility of suspension

180

Phase
to modify in order to improve road noise at 160Hz range.

deg
0
-180
SETTING OF COUPLED NATURAL FREQUENCY 10
Tyb#S,θ

For reducing force Fy transmitted to body, it is best way 0

Amplitude
that coupled natural frequency fc is set at frequency

dB
-10
Tyb#S,y
where both suspension force transmissibility Tyb#S and
axle displacement δ h are the smallest. Figure 20 shows -20
that Tyb#S,θ and Tyb#S,y generally become small as frequency -30
is large though they have peaks caused by vibration of 150 160 170 180 190 200
coil spring at 182Hz. On the other hand, Figure 21 Frequency Hz
shows that δ h ,θ and δ h ,y have peaks at 167Hz and 191Hz Fig.20 Force transmissibility of suspensionTyb#S
and a minimum between two adjoining peaks. The 180

Phase
deg
above examination of properties of two subsystems 0

Axle displacement
gives two suggestions as follows. One is that a target of -180
30
fc for road noise reduction may be set at the
frequencies of the minimum axle displacement δ h , 20 δ h,y

Amplitude
because there is no frequency where both

dB
Tyb#S,θ and Tyb#S,y are the smallest. The other is to shift fc to 10
change level and phase relationship of axle forces by 0
considering their contribution analysis to Fy in Figure 9. δ h,θ
This is achieved by reducing kernel stiffness κ . As κ is -10
150 160 170 180 190 200
determined by Equation 9 and is affected strongly by the
Frequency Hz
smallest component among kernel compliance, κ is
reduced as the smallest component G ker ,yy is large. Fig.21 Axle displacement δ h
-4
10 Gker ,θθ
MODIFICATION PLANS ON TIRE AND WHEEL
Compliance

-6
From the results mentioned above, three cases for 10
setting fc are listed to reduce Fy , in which required
-8
properties of tire and wheel are proposed respectively. 10
In Case A, inertia moment of wheel is reduced to shift
Gker ,yy Gker ,yθ
fc higher towards 185Hz where δ h is in the minimum. -10 (B) (A)
10
Symbol A in Figure 22 shows that larger G ker , θθ makes 150 160 170 180 190 200
fc shift higher in frequency range 160Hz-180Hz. In Frequency Hz
Case B, inertia moment of wheel is made larger as Fig.22 Relationship of compliance and fc
opposed to Case A, in order to shift fc to the minimum
of δ h lower than 167Hz. Symbol B in Figure 22 shows ESTIMATION OF EFFECT BY MODIFICATION
that decreasing G ker ,θθ makes fc lower. Case A and
Case B are also expected to cancel out the contribution The combination of Case A and Case C was chosen to
of axle forces. In Case C, the frequency of the minimum verify the proposed approach. Prior to the experiment
δ h is shifted to fc by increasing weight of tire and/or by actual objects, the effect of modification was
softening the stiffness of tire. estimated by simulation using FE model. Inertia
moment of wheel was reduced by 13% in order to
We assess them as follows in order to choose the shift fc from 173Hz to 194Hz. And 1.0kg mass was
modification of tire and wheel for reduction of Fy . We added to tire without changing tire structure in order to
think it is better to combine the three cases for move the natural frequencies of tire/wheel subsystem
realization. The combination of Case B and Case C from 191Hz to 182Hz. Figure 23 shows that these
seems to give stable effect and to be easy modification modifications achieve our required relationship
to product. However, this will require additional weight of between fc (blue dotted line) and natural frequency of
wheel and tire generally. The combination of Case A tire/wheel subsystem (red dotted line). Figure 24 and 25
and Case C is enhancement of Case A and requires show the results. Both axle force N and force Fy
adjustment of each property because fc is needed to transmitted to body are recognized to be successfully
shift to the target frequency exactly. On the other hand, reduced.
it seems to be robust for tire input because a peak of
 -4
10 EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF EFFECT
Gker ,θθ
Compliance

-6 A set of modified tire and wheel was prepared to

10
confirm the effect of improvement of road noise. A
wheel was selected which was similar to the FE model
-8
10 on reduction of inertia moment. The tire was added
mass on inner side. The total weight of tire and wheel
Gker ,yy Gker ,yθ
-10 was lightened by 0.5kg. Figure 26 and 27 show
10
150 160 170 180 190 200 experimental results. Suspension vibration level is
250 Frequency Hz reduced about 7dB on the lateral vibration at the top of
Fig.23 Shifted compliances by modification damper around 160Hz. Acoustic pressure level is
improved about 10dB at driver’s ear position. These
10 verify that the proposed approach is practically useful.
Initial N y Modified N y
Axle force dB

0 CONCLUSION
Initial
Nθ
-10 To improve road noise which occurs in 160Hz range on
driving rough road, coupled vibration analysis was
-20
applied by two steps. First step is an application to
Modified N θ suspension and tire/wheel whose suspension type is
-30
100 120 140 160 180 200 macpherson strut, and second step is that to tire and
Frequency Hz wheel.
Fig.24 Effect on axle force N by modification
On the analysis, transfer functions calculated by FE
0 model of suspension, wheel and tire were investigated
Transmitted force to body

Initial by the proposed approach. Modal transformation

dB

-10 technique was proposed to reduce analytical DOF at rim

Amplitude

conjunction. This made it possible to analyze

-20 compliances by the coupled vibration analysis.
dB

-30 As primary axle forces, moment around fore-aft axis

Modified and lateral force were obtained by TPA of suspension
-40 subsystem. This let us reduce the analytical DOFs to
100 120 140 160 180 200
Frequency Hz two which were θ and y .
Fig.25 Effect on transmitted force to body Fy
by modification For coupled natural frequencies of the whole system,
suggestions were obtained by the analysis of Gker .
Important dynamic properties of tire/wheel for the
10dB

Initial determination of fc are (1) Inertia moment and inertia

Acceleration dB

mass of wheel (2) Natural frequency of tire.

Guideline for improvement of road noise was proposed

that fc was shifting to avoid tire/wheel subsystem’s
Modified natural frequencies. And this was achieved by reducing
of wheel moment of inertia and by adding mass to tire.
100 120 140 160 180 200
Frequency Hz A set of modified tire and wheel was prepared to
Fig.26 Improvement effect of lateral vibration confirm the effect of improvement of road noise. The
at the top of damper experimental results proved the results of simulation
and verified the proposed approach practically useful.
10dB

1/3oct.
Term:
SPL dB(A)

Modified 1/3oct.
Fy force vector transmitted to body at the top of
damper
N inner force vector at axle
δ displacement vector
Modified F tire force by road roughness
0 100 200 300 K dynamic stiffness matrix
Frequency Hz κ kernel dynamic stiffness
Fig.27 Improvement effect of road noise G, G compliance matrix and compliance value
T, T transmissibility matrix and transmissibility 9. Yamada H., “Simulation of Tire Spindle Force Caused
fc coupled natural frequency by Road Roughness”, Proc. of the 32nd International
γ modal degree of freedom Congress and Exposition on Noise Control
x physical degree of freedom Engineering (2003), 866-871.
#S, #TW superscript related to suspension and
tire/wheel
#T, #W superscript related to tire and wheel APPENDIX
ker subscript related to kernel
y, z subscript of DOF of lateral and vertical of Here is presented with the derivation of Equation 9.
vehicle
θ subscript of rotational DOF around fore-aft, By singular value decomposition, kernel compliance
d, l, b subscript of points on suspension subsystem matrix Gker is expressed by Equation A1.
h, r, g subscript of points on tire and wheel subsystem
i subscript of directions G ker = ∑ λ iΦ iΦ iΤ (A1)
Φ r# W modal transformation matrix i

λ i and Φ i are eigenvalue and eigenvector of i th

mode
REFERENCES of Gker . λ i is defined by Φi and Gker as Equation A2.

1. Kido I., Nakamura A., Komada M., Asai M., “Vibration λ i ≡ Φ iΤ GkerΦ i (A2)
coupling analysis of tire/wheel and suspension”, Proc. Using Equation A1, kernel dynamic stiffness matrix
of 3rd Darmstadter Reifenkolloquium 2000, VDI
K ker is expressed as follows
Reihe12 Nr.437(2000), 41-50.
2. Kido I., Nakamura A., Sueoka A., “Coupling vibration
−1 1
analysis of tire/wheel and suspension“, Proc. of the Kker = Gker = ∑ ΦiΦiΤ (A3)
λi i
10th Asia-Pacific Vibration Conference (2003), 265-
271. Here we assume there is no damping for simplicity.
3. Constant M., Leyssens J., Penne F., Freymann R., At the closest frequency of fc, determinant of Gker and
“Tire and Car Contribution and Interaction to Low λ 1 will be zero. Φ 1 is obtained by Equation A4.
Frequency Interior Noise”, Proc. of the Noise and
Vibration Conference (2001), SAE 2001-01-1528. G G  φ  0
GkerΦ 1 =  ker,11 ker,12   1  =   (A4)
Gker,21 Gker,22  φ2  0
4. Kido I., Nakamura A., Hayashi T., Asai M.,
“Suspension Vibration Analysis for Road Noise Using
FE Model“, Proc. of the Noise and Vibration After solving Equation A4, Φ 1 is normalized as follows.
Conference, SAE Paper 1999-01-1788 (1999), 1053-
Gker ,12 Gker ,11
1060. φ1 ≡ , φ2 ≡ − (A5)
2 2 2 2
5. van der Linden, P.J.G., Wyckaert, K., “Modular ( Gker ,11 + Gker ,12 ) ( Gker ,11 + Gker ,12 )
Vehicle Noise and Vibration Development”, SAE
Paper 1999-01-1689(1999), 342-353. Here we define κ and σ as follows.
6. Otte,D., Leuridan,J., Grangier,H., Aquilina,R., G ker ,11 G ker , 22
“Coupling of Structures Using Measured FRF’s by κ ≡ λ1−1 ( 1 − σ ) , σ ≡ (A6)
G ker ,12 G ker ,12
Means of SVD-based Data Reduction Techniques“, As the frequency is closing to fc, σ will be 1.
Proc. of 8th IMAC (1990), 213-220.
Therefore κ means magnitude of kernel dynamic
7. Lin,W., Ewins,D.J., “Substructure Synthesis via Elastic
stiffness matrix K ker at fc.
Media Part 2: Coupling Analysis”, Proc. of 18th IMAC
(2000),1160-1166.
8. Yamada H., Isiyama S., Namaizawa J., Ogawa H.,
“Development of road noise prediction method”, Proc.
of JSAE No.65-00 (2000), No.20005007.