Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile

Engineering
http://pid.sagepub.com/

Robustness of powertrain mount system for noise, vibration and harshness at idle
M Qatu, M Sirafi and F Johns
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering 2002 216: 805
DOI: 10.1177/095440700221600103

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://pid.sagepub.com/content/216/10/805

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile
Engineering can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://pid.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://pid.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://pid.sagepub.com/content/216/10/805.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Oct 1, 2002

What is This?

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014

 805

Robustness of powertrain mount system for noise,

vibration and harshness at idle

M Qatu1*, M Sira
2 and F Johns1

1Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Michigan, USA
2MSX International, Dearborn, Michigan, USA

Abstract: Noise, vibration and harshness (NVH ) has become an increasingly important attribute
in vehicle engineering. At idle conditions, customer-perceived NVH is dominated by powertrain NVH.
Powertrain NVH can be radiated engine noise or noise (and vibration) transmitted through the
powertrain mounting system. This paper discusses the variability in the latter NVH as a function of
the variability of the mount sti
ness parameters. A simple six-degree-of-freedom model is used in the
analysis. A detailed design of experiment studies was conducted. It is concluded that better control
of mount sti
ness parameters would result in improved prediction and performance of idle NVH.

Keywords: robustness, mounts, NVH, powertrain

NOTATION 1 INTRODUCTION

CG centre of gravity Noise, vibration and harshness (NVH ) is an important

[E ] modal energy matrix de
ned as a vehicle attribute during overall customer satisfaction. In
percentage of the total energy fact, NVH comes among the top
ve attributes of most
F ,F ,F force summations from the mounts vehicles (as well as safety, reliability, fuel economy and
x y z
about the CG cost). NVH has a particular added importance in cars.
I inertia matrix parameters of the Among the various NVH characteristics of the vehicle
ij
whole powertrain are powertrain, road and wind NVH. Powertrain NVH
[K ] sti
ness matrix can be evaluated in various conditions. The most import-
m powertrain mass ant of these are idle conditions, partial throttle and wide
[M ] mass matrix open throttle. The idle condition is frequently encoun-
M ,M ,M moment summations from the mounts tered by customers who are jammed in trac or waiting
x y z
about the CG at a trac light. During the idle condition, other vehicle
[x] vector of degrees of freedom noises (road and wind ) do not exist, and powertrain
[x̄] mass-normalized target modes or NVH is the dominant noise detected by the customer.
desired set of modes Powertrain radiated noise and front end accessory
ẍ , ÿ , z̈ accelerations of CG in the x, y and drive radiated noises exist at idle. In addition to these,
c c c
z directions respectively vibration of the powertrain system can be transferred as
z components of x parallel to x̄ structurally borne noise (SBN ) to the customer touch
ij i j
points of steering wheel, seat, oor pan and others.
ä , b̈ , c̈ rotational accelerations about the x, Along the path, some of that energy may be transformed
c c c
y and z directions respectively into airborne noise (ABN ) and cause audible (and objec-
v natural frequency tionable) noise to the customer. Proper design of the
powertrain mounting system will help to minimize both
SBN and ABN.
In the program development process, it is dicult to
assess the customer-perceived NVH without actual hard-
The MS was received on 7 February 2002 and was accepted after revision ware. Current computer-aided engineering tools are
for publication on 22 July 2002.
* Corresponding author: Ford Motor Company, MD 1247, 20000 good in predicting improvement due to certain changes
Rotunda Road, Dearborn, MI 48124, USA. or troubling frequencies but are not as accurate when it
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
D01602 © IMechE 2002 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering
806 M QATU, M SIRAFI AND F JOHNS

comes to predicting actual in-vehicle levels of noise or
vibrations. Accurate simulation of the total vehicle
across a wide frequency range is still in the early stages
of development. Experience, however, shows that a strat-
egy can be developed to minimize the powertrain idle
NVH by proper selection of both the location and the
sti
ness parameters of powertrain mounting system,
without the need of a full vehicle prototype or model.
In that case, mass and inertia properties are needed for
the powertrain. A simple rigid body model with six
degrees of freedom (DOF ) can be used in the analysis.
Such an analysis will be performed to determine the rigid
body modes of the powertrain. An initial design and
optimization can then be carried out to
nd the best
location of mounts and their sti
ness values. The follow-
ing general criteria have been recognized to improve the
idle NVH performance [1–5].
1. The roll mode is the most dominant mode. This mode
needs to be minimized, because higher frequency
mode will result in higher NVH at the customer touch
points. In fact, a 1 Hz increase in this frequency will
result in an equivalent proportional 4–6 dB(A) noise
increase at the customer’s ears. The target for this
frequency is 11 Hz. If a 12 Hz value for the roll mode
is obtained, the frequency response function will be
basically moved to the right with a peak at 12 Hz
instead of 11. The idle third-order frequency for a V6
engine is between 30 and 35 Hz. A system with 12 Hz
roll mode frequency will result in 4–6 dB(A) higher
noise in the idle third-order range than the system
with 11 Hz.
2. The energy associated with each of these modes needs
to be decoupled from other modes. This will reduce
the possible coupling of the modes that cause higher
levels of NVH. There should be at least 1 Hz separa-
tion between all modes. The most notable are the roll
and yaw modes as well as the bounce and pitch
modes. In particular, the bounce mode needs to be
separated by 1 Hz from all other modes.
properties of the mounts. The variability of the mount
sti
ness parameters before installation can be due to the
following.
1. Material variation. This includes the variation in the
chemical compounds used in the rubber or the
compound distribution.
2. Geometric variation. This reects the variability of the
mount dimensions.
Another source of variation is assembly variation.
This variation may very well be the most important of
all variations. Once installed, small dimensional vari-
ation of the order of 1 mm at both the top and bottom
end of the mount may cause it to be pre-stressed and
the shape to be distorted. Both of these will result in a
di
erent e
ective sti
ness value.
There has been no known research to validate and
evaluate the contributions of the above variability to the
overall variability of the mount sti
ness. It should be
mentioned, however, that testing the mounts on test ben-
ches may be good enough in evaluating the above two
sources of variation but not assembly variation. In order
to measure the variation in the mount sti
ness due to
assembly, a test must be developed to measure such
sti
ness of the mount as installed. This task is not a
straightforward one.
The purpose of this paper is to show the e
ect of such
variability on the metrics described earlier and widely
accepted for powertrain mount design. A design of
experiment (DOE ) approach is adopted in the analysis.
2 ANALYSIS
A powertrain consisting of a typical 3.0 l east–west
engine and transmission con
guration is chosen to per-
form the analysis. Also an engine mounting strategy
of two engine mounts, one transmission mount and
one roll restrictor is selected in this study ( Fig. 1). This

The above metrics have been used successfully at early

phases of product development to determine a power-
train mount strategy ( location for package protection)
as well as rates.
Much of the earlier research in the area of engine
mounts covered topics such as developing general iso-
lation strategies [1–5]. Other research focused on the
accuracy of the modelling strategy (six versus higher
DOF ) [6–8]. Researchers also put considerable e
ort
into investigating optimization schemes for mount
locations and/or sti
ness values [9–13]. Some research
was also performed on non-classical hydraulic mounts
[14, 15]. Only recently has research appeared on the
sensitivity and robustness of the mounting system [16 ].
The rubber material used currently by mount suppliers Fig. 1 Powertrain model (EFM, engine front mount; ERM,
and the subsequent manufacturing processes of the engine rear mount; RR, upper roll restrictor; TLM,
mount yield a variability of 30 per cent in the sti
ness transmission left mount)
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering D01602 © IMechE 2002
 ROBUSTNESS OF POWERTRAIN MOUNT SYSTEM 807

strategy is referred to as a centre of gravity (CG ) strat- in the direction x̄ . The modal energy matrix [E ] is
j
egy. It o
ers excellent second-order engine isolation and de
ned as a percentage of the total energy, E # z2 ,
ij ij
good roll and fore/aft mode decoupling yielding better where E can be interpreted as the percentage modal
ij
shift quality when compared with the traditional torque energy of actual modes x parallel to target mode x̄ .
i j
roll axis strategy. It o
ers less third-order isolation
because of its relatively sti
roll mode.
2.2 Design of experiment

2.1 Six-degree-of-freedom model The system described earlier for the V6 engine attached
to a transmission in a front wheel drive vehicle is mod-
The powertrain is treated here as a rigid body that is elled and analysed. Proper inertia matrix and properties
supported by a system of springs. This rigid body has are obtained with an advanced
nite element program
six degrees of freedom: three translations and three or an inertia test. A four-mount system is used for the
rotations. The general equations of motion for both powertrain:
translation and rotation are
(a) engine front mount ( EFM );
mẍ =F , mÿ =F , mz̈ =F (b) engine rear mount ( ERM );
c x c y c z
(c) transmission left mount ( TLM );
I ä
I b̈
I c̈ =M
xx c xy c xz c x (d ) upper roll restrictor ( RR).
I ä
I b̈
I c̈ =M
xy c yy c yz c y The
rst three of these mounts have three sti
ness com-
I ä
I b̈
I c̈ =M ponents and the last has only an axial component. The
xz c yz c zz c z
where m is the powertrain mass, ẍ , ÿ and z̈ are acceler- mounts’ nominal locations and sti
ness values are listed
c c c in Table 1.
ations at the CG in the x, y and z directions respectively,
I are the inertia matrix parameters of the whole power- Table 2 shows the mass of a representative powertrain
ij as well as the coordinates of its CG. It also shows the
train and ä , b̈ and c̈ are the rotational acceleration
c c c inertia properties of the powertrain being considered.
values about the x, y and z directions respectively. The
terms F , F and F are force summations from the It should be mentioned here that the numbers chosen
x y z are generic and do not necessarily describe a particular
mounts about the CG, and M , M and M are moment
x y z powertrain. This system yielded the nominal frequencies
summations from the mounts about the CG.
and coupling energy described in Table 3. The modal
Substituting the proper force and moment parameters
energy associated with the dominant mode is tracked by
of the engine mounts and assuming harmonic motions
will yield a 6×6 matrix problem that can be written as percentage of the energy. The energy strategy here is to
decouple the modes by letting most of the energy (>85
([K ]
v2[M ]){X } ={0} per cent) associate with one mode.
where [K ] and [M ] are sti
ness and mass matrices Both the frequency and the modal energy are recorded
respectively, [x] is the vector of DOF and v is the natural in the analysis. A two-level, 16-run DOE ( Table 4) was
frequency. Setting the determinant of these equations to constructed to perform the analysis. Each sti
ness was
zero will yield the six natural modes (rigid body modes) assumed to vary independently by ±15 per cent. This
of the system. assumption may be revisited in future studies. This is
The matrix of the actual eigenvector [x] can be because manufacturing and assembly variations will
expressed using the target modes [x̄] as
Table 1 Location and sti
ness parameters used in all mounts
[z]=[x]T[M ][x̄]
Location Sti
ness
with elements
Mount x y z x y z
z =xT M x
ij im mn nj
EFM 1500.0 200.0 1100.0 150 150 300
[x̄] is the mass-normalized target modes or desired set ERM 1900.0 200.0 1150.0 150 150 300
of modes which actual modes are compared with. The TLM 1750.0
500.0 1050.0 100 100 300
translational modes in this matrix are aligned with Upper RR 1750.0
50.0 1600.0 60 1 1
vehicle coordinates. Rotational modes, however, are
aligned such that the roll mode lies along the torque roll
axis of the powerplant. Pitch and yaw modes are de
ned Table 2 Mass, CG and inertia terms of the
to be rotational about axes close to powertrain x and powertrain
z axes respectively, while remaining orthogonal to the Mass 270.0 kg Inertia (Mg mm2)
torque roll axis. CG x 1700.0 mm l 20 800.0 l
1600.0
xx xy
The elements in z are the components of x parallel CG y 0.0 mm l 10 500.0 l
650.0
yy xz
ij i CG z 1200.0 mm l
zz
19 500.0 l
yz
3800.0
to x̄ . z2 is the fraction of energy in the mode x acting
j ij i
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
D01602 © IMechE 2002 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering
808 M QATU, M SIRAFI AND F JOHNS

Table 3 Frequencies for rigid body modes and energy table

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5 Mode 6

Frequency (Hz) 6.50 5.97 9.00 10.51 7.69 11.42

Fore–aft 98.54 0.00 0.20 1.24 0.00 0.01
Lateral 0.00 97.06 0.40 0.00 0.85 1.69
Bounce 0.03 0.07 89.32 5.87 0.64 4.07
Roll 1.31 0.07 3.47 83.80 10.52 0.83
Pitch 0.00 2.08 4.86 0.42 0.09 92.55
Yaw 0.11 0.73 1.74 8.67 87.89 0.86

Table 4 A DOE matrix with 16 runs and two levels for 10 variables

A B C D E F G H I J
(N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm), (N/mm),
Run EFM K EFM K EFM K ERM K ERM K ERM K TLM K TLM K TLM K RR K
x y z x y z x y z x
1







+ +
2 +


+ + +



3
+

+ +
+


4 + +



+ + + +
5

+
+
+ +
+
6 +
+

+
+ +

7
+ +

+ +
+

8 + + +
+



+
9


+
+ + +
+
10 +

+ +

+ +

11
+
+ +
+
+

12 + +
+
+


+
13

+ + + +

+ +
14 +
+ +

+



15
+ + +


+


16 + + + + + + + + + +
+ 173 173 345 173 173 345 115 115 345 69

128 128 255 128 128 255 85 85 255 51
N 150 150 300 150 150 300 100 100 300 60

a
ect sti
ness parameters in all directions. The 16 runs
were conducted and the results are shown in Table 5.
The energy associated with the dominant mode is
tracked.
3 RESULTS
In the frequency portion of Table 5, the runs that
resulted in a roll mode higher than 11 Hz are highlighted
in bold characters. This is in violation of the rec-
ommended target. Also, when the frequency separation
violates 0.5 Hz, the frequencies for the speci
c runs are
written in italic. As can be seen, a 30 per cent variation
in the mounting sti
ness parameters will result in gross
violation of the generally accepted criteria for a proper
powertrain mounting strategy.
The energy portion of Table 5 shows a gross violation
of our modal energy strategy. In particular, runs 2, 3, 9
and 12 show less than 60 per cent of the energy associ-
ated with the particular mode, less than the 85 per cent
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering
target. This implies that, with certain combinations of
mounts, the modes will not be decoupled as planned.
Table 6 shows the e
ect of each of the variations of
the sti
ness parameters on each of the frequencies.
Table 7 shows the percentage variation of each frequency
as a result of sti
ness variations. The higher variations
in the frequencies are highlighted.
It is found that the variability of the vertical sti
ness
of the rear engine mount results in 4.8 per cent variation
in the bounce mode, 6.7 per cent in the roll mode and
close to 2.7 per cent in the yaw mode. The vertical sti
-
ness of the front engine mount is contributing to a 8.3
per cent variation in the bounce mode. The pitch mode
is mostly a
ected by variability in the vertical sti
ness
of the transmission left mount. The roller restrictor vari-
ation contributes about 3 per cent to the variability in
the roll mode.
It is important to state that the e
ect of the mount
sti
ness variation with reference to a particular mode of
vibration is due not only to the sti
ness variation itself
but also to the position of the mount. Hence, for
D01602 © IMechE 2002
 ROBUSTNESS OF POWERTRAIN MOUNT SYSTEM 809

Table 5 Results of the 16 runs in the DOE

For–aft Lateral Bounce Roll Yaw Pitch Dominant values (%)

(Hz), (Hz), (Hz), (Hz), (Hz), (Hz),
Run mode 1 mode 2 mode 3 mode 4 mode 5 mode 6 Energy 1 Energy 2 Energy 3 Energy 4 Energy 5 Energy 6

1 6.18 5.54 8.40 10.05 7.13 12.02 99.12 97.56 83.84 88.28 89.66 86.89
2 6.45 5.83 8.71 11.03 7.93 10.34 93.46 95.76 68.00 42.35 65.75 48.02
3 6.00 6.33 8.59 10.28 7.37 11.06 98.53 93.84 73.08 44.66 81.00 62.97
4 6.67 6.07 8.43 10.33 7.94 12.11 96.61 96.82 83.25 82.16 81.84 86.66
5 6.37 5.98 8.94 10.35 8.05 10.77 94.23 89.88 97.90 78.18 84.65 85.04
6 6.25 5.77 9.60 10.82 7.33 12.18 94.58 96.94 85.04 82.52 87.17 93.69
7 6.18 5.90 9.57 10.68 8.01 12.18 95.71 98.59 81.39 80.38 90.06 93.16
8 6.44 6.16 8.94 10.60 7.52 10.77 94.94 94.02 98.49 63.56 82.47 72.72
9 6.79 5.98 8.48 11.20 9.01 10.46 89.82 95.91 62.42 46.69 73.42 51.21
10 6.45 5.97 8.46 10.17 7.42 12.07 87.43 85.53 82.32 75.27 67.77 86.97
11 6.46 6.19 8.44 9.98 8.01 12.07 93.47 95.75 77.53 74.38 69.53 86.63
12 6.58 5.86 8.72 11.35 7.53 10.43 83.45 97.28 79.34 57.57 65.13 65.62
13 6.44 5.83 9.62 11.06 7.56 12.14 92.99 92.46 88.02 87.05 83.64 93.71
14 6.73 5.52 8.94 10.38 7.92 10.68 94.80 97.67 97.90 72.53 84.13 88.88
15 6.26 6.04 8.94 10.20 7.36 10.77 94.06 94.95 97.95 84.39 84.00 95.03
16 6.97 6.41 9.65 11.27 8.25 12.24 98.52 97.04 89.35 83.73 87.60 92.52
Nominal 6.50 5.97 9.00 10.51 7.69 11.42 98.54 97.06 89.32 83.80 87.89 92.55

Table 6 Average variation of natural frequencies based on change in mount sti
ness

EFM K EFM K EFM K ERM K ERM K ERM K TLM K TLM K TLM K RR K

x y z x y z x y z x
(Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz)

Mode 1—Avg+ 6.57 6.45 6.46 6.59 6.45 6.46 6.58 6.47 6.45 6.56
Mode 1—Avg
6.34 6.46 6.45 6.32 6.46 6.45 6.33 6.43 6.45 6.35
Mode 2—Avg+ 5.95 6.12 5.95 5.98 6.09 5.99 5.99 6.07 5.96 5.98
Mode 2—Avg
5.97 5.80 5.97 5.95 5.84 5.93 5.94 5.85 5.96 5.94
Mode 3—Avg+ 8.93 8.91 9.28 8.91 8.92 9.12 8.90 8.89 9.02 8.90
Mode 3—Avg
8.87 8.89 8.53 8.90 8.89 8.69 8.91 8.92 8.78 8.91
Mode 4—Avg+ 10.74 10.59 10.67 10.70 10.59 10.96 10.65 10.58 10.55 10.78
Mode 4—Avg
10.48 10.63 10.55 10.52 10.63 10.26 10.57 10.64 10.67 10.44
Mode 5—Avg+ 7.73 7.75 7.75 7.88 7.76 7.87 8.14 7.84 7.71 7.87
Mode 5—Avg
7.81 7.79 7.79 7.66 7.78 7.67 7.40 7.70 7.84 7.67
Mode 6—Avg+ 11.35 11.45 11.47 11.36 11.43 11.38 11.36 11.46 12.13 11.37
Mode 6—Avg
11.43 11.33 11.32 11.43 11.35 11.41 11.43 11.33 10.66 11.42

Table 7 Average percentage variability in each mode as a result of variation in sti
ness parameters

Mode EFM K EFM K EFM K ERM K ERM K ERM K TLM K TLM K TLM K RR K
x y z x y z x y z x
Mode 1—fore–aft 3.58
0.21 0.08 2.55
0.10 0.11 0.26 0.04 0.00 0.25
Mode 2—lateral
0.42 3.53
0.19 0.36 2.21 0.06 0.05 0.24 0.00 0.04
Mode 3—bounce 0.65 0.18 8.29 0.10 0.37 4.79
0.15
0.35 2.65
0.10
Mode 4—roll 2.56
0.44 1.15 1.75
0.32 6.70 0.82
0.61
1.23 3.18
Mode 5—yaw
1.07
0.59
0.55 2.89
0.20 2.67 9.59 1.82
1.69 2.67
Mode 6—pitch
0.71 1.06 1.28
0.62 0.69
0.25
0.65 1.13 12.84
0.45

example, the roll mode is mostly a
ected by variability
in the vertical sti
ness of the rear engine mount because
of the location of the mount with reference to the roll
axis of the engine. Similarly, the pitch mode is mostly
a
ected by the variability in the vertical sti
ness of the
transmission left mount because the location of the
mount in reference to the pitch axis of the powerplant
compared with other mounts.
4 CONCLUSION
This paper studies the e
ect of powertrain mount sti
-
ness variations on idle NVH of vehicles. It uses a simple
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
D01602 © IMechE 2002
6-DOF system to model the powertrain for rigid body
modes and general experience-based criteria for these
modes and the associated energy terms.
The main conclusion of this research is that the general
assumption of 30 per cent variation in rubber sti
ness
parameters will yield gross violations of the criteria used
for mount strategy for idle NVH and thus large vehicle-
to-vehicle variation at idle. The paper recommends
tighter control of the sti
ness parameters ‘as installed’
in the vehicle. This includes searching for better methods
to measure such sti
ness when the mounts are installed
in the vehicles pre-loaded with assembly variations. The
authors further recommend taking mount variability
into account when the mounting strategy is developed.
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering
810 M QATU, M SIRAFI AND F JOHNS
Targets should be set for a maximum (in a statistical or
6s sense) rather than a mean value. This will be the
subject of further studies by the authors. The authors
will conduct a future study on the e
ect of sti
ness
variations at the customer’s level of NVH.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Bob Rebandt of
Ford’s NAC and Scott Bergeon of Ford’s RVT for their
valuable input.
REFERENCES
1 Brack, R. M. Automotive powerplant isolation strategies.
SAE paper 971942, 1997, pp. 573–578.
2 Straw, R. L. The development of isolation mounts. SAE
paper 840781, 1984.
3 Rivin, E. I. Passive engine mounts— some directions for
future development. In International Congress and
Exposition, Detroit, Michigan, 1985, SAE paper 850481.
4 Ford, D. An analysis and application of a decoupled engine
mount system for idle isolation. In Surface Vehicle Noise
and Vibration Conference Proceedings, 1985, SAE paper
850976, pp. 133–142.
5 Muller, M. and Siebler, T. W. Methods for the reduction
of noise and vibration in vehicles using an appropriate
engine mount system. In Third Mobility Technology
Conference and Exhibit, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 1994, SAE
paper 942414.
6 Nataraj, C. and Asfra
uon, H. Dynamic analysis of engine
mount systems. J. Vibr. Acoust., 1992, 114, 79–83.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on November 15, 2014
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 216 Part D: J Automobile Engineering
7 Kim, J. H., Jho, S. G. and Yim, H. J. Inuence of chassis
exibility on dynamic behavior of engine mount system. In
International Truck and Bus Meeting and Exposition,
Seattle, Washington, November 1994, SAE paper 942269.
8 Yoshimori, K., Morimura, H., Yoshimura, Y. and
Tsuchiya, M. Dynamic shock absorber e
ect of engine
mounting system on the powertrain vibration. In
International Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Michigan,
1984, SAE paper 840255.
9 Johnson, S. R. and Subhedar, J. Computer optimization
of engine mounting systems. In Third International
Conference on Vehicle Structural Mechanics P-83, SAE
paper 790974, pp. 19–26.
10 Bretl, J. Optimization of engine mounting systems to
minimize vehicle vibration. In Proceedings of the Noise
and Vibration Conference, 1993, SAE paper 931322,
pp. 475–482.
11 Bernard, J. E. Engine mount optimization. In International
Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Michigan, 1983, SAE
paper 830257.
12 Hata, H. and Tanaka, H. Experimental methods to
optimize engine mount systems. In Noise and Vibration
Conference P-195, 1987, SAE paper 870961, pp. 121–130.
13 Wagh, N. J. and Deshmukh, R. V. Engine mounting
optimization to counter 0.5 order engine vibrations. SAE
paper 962492, 1992, pp. 233–237.
14 Muzechuck, R. A. Hydraulic mounts—improved engine
isolation. In Advances in Elastomeric Applications SP-575,
1984, SAE paper 840410, pp. 63–70.
15 Clark, M. Hydraulic engine mount isolation. In Passenger
Car Meeting, Dearborn, Michigan, 1985, SAE paper
851650.
16 Lee, D. H., Hwang, W. S. and Kim, C. M. Noise sensitivity
of an engine mount system using transfer function synthesis
method. SAE paper 2001-01-1532, 2001.
D01602 © IMechE 2002