Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

t .. \ F'- ' '■

* V ' •*;'•

810101

A Consideration of
Vehicle's Door
Shutting Performance

Y. Nagayama
i * i
and R, Fujihara
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.

International Congress and Exposition

Cobo Hall, Detroit, Michigan
February 23-27,1981

INC.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

The appearance of the code at the bottom of the first page of this paper indicates
SAE's consent that copies of the paper may be made for personal or internet use, or
for the personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the con-
difionj however, that the copier pay the stated per article copy fee through the
Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., Operations Center, P.O. Box 765, Schenectady,
N.Y. 12301, for copying beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or 108 of the U.S.
Copyright Law. this consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes; for
creating new collective works, or for resale: ,

'Papers published prior to 1978 may also be copied at a per paper fee of $2.50
under the above stated conditions.
SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of
publication. Direct your orders to SAE Order Department.
To obtain quantity reprint rates, permission to reprint a technical paper or per­
mission to use copyrighted SAE publications in other works, contact the SAE
Publications Division.

ISSN 0148 7191

Copyright © 1981 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
A VEHICLE'S AIRTIGHT INTEGRITY, which is,a
factor that greatly affects its habitability ,
has been the subject of improvements in the
past. It has been improved more and more in
recent years, from the standpoint of both air-
conditioning amplification and better sound-
insulation.
On the other hand, improvements in the
airtight integrity of a vehicle have increased
the reactive force of air, which is present in
the passenger compartment, whenever the vehi­
cle's door is shut. This has adversely affected
the ability of the door to be easily closed,
which is, of course, one of the primary require­
ments of a door. It also places an unpleasant
amount of pressure upon the eardrums of the
occupants.
This paper discusses the experimental re­
sults of various tests that were devised to
consider human response to a vehicle's airtight,
ABSTRACT
Many papers have mentioned, in passing,
a phenomena that is known as "airtightness",
which is one factor that hinders automobile
doors from closing. It also causes the ear­
drums of any passengers in the vehicle to be
temporarily pressurized when the door is
closed.
However, few documents have considered
this phenomena in detail.
0148-7191/81/0223-0101$02.50
Copyright ©1981 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
810101
A Consideration of
Vehicle's Door
Shutting Performance
Y. Nagayama
and R. Fujihara
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.
integrity and the latter's influence upon door
shutting performance. It also details the
placement of air vent-holes that are required
to reduce the aforementioned problems.
When a door is closed, the pressure in
the passenger compartment increases due to the
vehicle's airtight integrity. Fig. 1 demon­
strates how the pressure that is momentarily
felt by the occupant changes with the passage
of time. The pressure is gradually increased
approximately 0.2 seconds before the door is
completely closed, and then rapidly reaches
its peak. The values on these curves, except
for the peak ones, are almost identical, re­
gardless of the speed at which the door was
shut. Therefore, the peak values that changed
in a comparatively short period of time were
used as typical values.
For purposes of this study, the process
of changing pressure in the passenger compart­
ment can be approximately divided into three
In this paper, we investigate the,magni­
tude of "airtightness". as it affects' ear
pressure and examine its relationship to such
factors as the volume of the passenger com­
partment, door's opening area and its inertial
moment.
Finally, we utilized estimation methods
to predict its influence on the force required
to close the door and the amount of the result­
ant air draft.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

2 ■ 810101

stages. Fig. 2 shows the flow of air in the door Is shut, the door's area, the passenger
passenger compartntent as observed by watching compartment's capacity and by the air vent-
a two-dimensional model in a water tank. Ob­ hole's area.
servations were conducted in the following Therefore, the pressure increase in the
three stages;: ■ ■ . ; ' ■ passenger compartment can be expressed by the
First stage: The door is still largely following function.
open, and any air that is being pushed by the
door does not yet' enter the passenger compart­ P = f(Vc, S D , v, S) (1)
ment. Consequently, there is not an increase Where P: Pressure increase in passenger
in -pressure.,, compartment
'Second stage: Approximately 0.2 seconds Vc: Capacity of passenger compartment
before the door is completely closed, air is
pushed into the passenger compartment. The v: Speed at which door is shut
pressure then begins to rise and some of it be­ (door periphery speed)
gins to simultaneously flow out of the vent-hole, S: Area of air vent-hole
Third stage*. After the door is completely
closed, the pressure in the passenger compart­ It is, of course, desirable for the speed
ment gradually decreases due to the flow of air at which the door is shut by an average in­
out the vent-hole. dividual be such that the resultant increase
These conditions reveal that the pressure in pressure is not unpleasant to the vehicle's
increase in the passenger compartment is influ­ occupants. If Ps stands for that pressure
enced and determined by the speed at which the that will cause such unpleasant feelings, its

FULLY-OPEN POSITION

VC/SD = 4.05
F = 4 0 kg
1 = 7 7 , 1 kg,cm. S 2

-0.2 - 0 1 • 0 0.1 0.2 .0.3

■ — r - r t (sec)

Fig. 1 - Change in passenger compartment

pressure overtime

FIRST STAGE SECOND STAGE THIRD STAGE

'NEAR FULLY-OPEN /JUST BEFORE FULLY- (FULLY - O P E N )
^POSITION \ 0 P E N POSITION

F i g . 2 - Air flow
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
810101 3

relation to P^, which will represent the rise occur when a door is closed, have been described
in pressure that ordinarily occurs, must be as "very unpleasant," "unpleasant," and "dis­
expressed in the following terms: turbing but tolerable." We have looked into
P^, < Ps ., (2) the characteristics of each. An occupant's'
response varies when he knows that the door is
In order for the door to close at the going to shut beforehand, and he .does not know
locking stage, it is necessary that its kinetic ahead of time. In this regard, Fig. 4 is a
energy be greater than the energy that hinders comparison of the results that were obtained
it from shutting, as expressed by the following when the occupant himself shut the door and
equation: those that were derived when another person
shut the door. The experimental method is
Ec(I, v) £ E R (P,F). (3) shown in Fig. 3.
Where Ec: Door's kinetic energy
ER: Energy hindering door from This comparison reveals the following
shutting facts:'
(1) In the "very unpleasant" class, there
Door's moment of inertia was little difference noted' whether occupant
shut the door himself or another person did,
F: Weatherstrip, bumper rubber, although the response does vary from individual
and lock interlocking re­ to individual. In the field of aeronautic
sistance (called, "shutting medicine, it is reported that the maximum
force" hereinafter) tolerable pressure on the eardrum due to a rise
When E c = Ep l n equation (3), the speed in pressure is 85 to 105 mm Aq. In the exami­
at which the door shuts is called the minimum nation results shown that are in Fig. 4, the
shutting speed, v]_. It is used as a standard value of 50% is approximately 80 mm Aq, which
to evaluate-the door shutting condition. is nearly identical to the aeronautic medicine
reports.
RESPONSE TO PRESSURE CHANGE (2) In the "unpleasant" class, there was
some difference in the two cases; the average
The feelings that an occupant experiences value is approximately 12 mm Aq lower when
in response to the changes in pressure that another person shut the door.

ANOTHER PERSON
vroi ™ " SHUTS DOOR ---SHUTS DOOR
40
X =778 X = 79.2
20—
- G = 1 8.2 0" = 2 0 . 6
VERY
UNPLEASANT

V/oV
40 —
X = 48.0 X =60.1
a = i i.t a = i 5.4
20 ^ J ^ ^ ^ J " * "*^^%s'""i*> "*^

UNPLEASANT

40 X = 32.5 X =47.4
a= 7.4 f \ 0" = 14. 9
20-
DISTURBING
1 X ^ < ! >^ > - 4 ~ 1 1 1 1 1
20 40 60 80 100
PASSENGER COMPARTMENT PRESSURE P ( mm Aq)

Fig- 4 — Response c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
4 810101
(3) In the "disturbing but tolerable"
class, a significant difference between the
two cases is noted. The average value is
approximately 15 mm Aq lower when another
person shut the door. Generally speaking,
when the occupant himself shut the door, a
considerably higher pressure was tolerated.
Consequently, when another person shuts
the door, the pressure increase must be suf­
ficiently low enough that it does not disturb
the occupant; in other words, the pressure
increase should not exceed a value of 32 mm Aq,.
which was disturbing to 50% of the occupants.
FACTORS AFFECTING AIRTIGHT INTEGRITY
The factors shown in equations (1) and
(3) will be examined by using a vehicle with
the specifications indicated in Table 1. In
this examination, the factor Sp will be
regarded as fixed, and Vc/Sp will be considered
as one.
Passenger compartment pressure that
changes with the speed at which the door is
shut is shown in Fig. 5. The relationship
between the speed at which the door is shut
and passenger compartment pressure is linear.
If factor (Vc/Sp) is changed in Fig. 5, the.
relationship between both will also be linear.
Pressure in the passenger compartment is ex­
pressed by the following equation:
av (4)
Where a: Rate at which pressure increases
... (The rate at which the pressure
increases in relation to each
factor is discussed in the
following paragraphs.)
Fig. 6 represents the relationship between
the area of the opening (S) and the rate at
which the pressure increases.. The rate varies
COUNTER
AMPLIFIER
Fig. 3 - Outline of measuring method
greatly depending on the area of the opening;
when the area is larger than 500 cm^, the
factor (Vc/Sp) affects very little, but as the
area becomes smaller, the rate at which the
pressure Increases undergoes a rapid change.
Therefore, the area of air vent hole should be
made as large as possible.
The relationship between factor (Vc/Sp)
and rate at which the pressure increases is
shown in Fig. 7. The smaller the value of
(Vc/Sp), the greater the rate; the extent is
influenced greatly by the area of the opening.
When the ratio of the passenger compartment
capacity to the opening area is extremely small
(as in the case of trucks, etc.), the rate at
which the pressure increases rises very high.
Consequently, a sufficient opening area is
required. The (Vc/Sp) value for ordinary
passenger cars is in the 2.5 to 4.5 range, or
so. Any change within this range, even though
linear, is not considered significant.
The force with which the door is shut and
its moment of inertia do not affect the rate
at which the pressure increases, as shown in
Figs. 8 and 9.
The various influences of the respective
factors, summarized in the specifications
shown in Table 1, are indicated in Fig. 10.
From this figure, the degree of Influences
for each factor can be expressed as follows:
Vc/SD » S » I = F = 0 (5)
FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE MINIMUM SPEED NEEDED
TO SHUT THE DOOR
The relationship betwen factor (Vc/Sp)
and the minimum speed required to shut the
door is shown in Fig. 1L. The smaller the
value of (Vc/Sp), the greater the minimum
speed. In the (Vc/Sp) range of ordinary pas­
senger cars, the difference in minimum speeds
Table 1 - Specifications of Tested Vehicle
(At Present)
CAPACITY OF PASSENGER APPROX
COMPARTMENT 3 , 0 m3
APPROX
DOOR AREA.
0. 7 4 m'
■DOOR W E I G H T 2 4 kg
MOMENT OF INERTIA 7 7. T kg. cm, s8
LEAKAGE AREA 2 0.0 cm2
SHUTTING FORCE 4 0 . 0 kg
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
810101
Vc/So
<
E
E
80
tr
uJ 6 0
a
F = 4 0 kg
40
a: 1 = 771 kg.cm.S2
S = 2 0 cm2
o
o
20
ID
Z
Ld
CO
< 200
2.5
SHUTTING SPEED v(m/s)
Fig. 5 - Passenger compartment pressure
compared to door shutting speed
is approximately 0.1 m/s, which is considered
insignificant.
The change in the minimum speed needed to
shut the door, according to the area of the
opening unit (S) is shown in Fig. 12. The
smaller the area of the opening unit, the
greater the change in minimum speed, as re­
vealed in this graph. Where the opening area
is large, the change in minimum speed is in­
significant. In other words, even if the
airtight integrity affects very little, the
minimum speed required to shut the door will
not go below a certain value because the force
needed to shut the door has some resisting
energy. Consequently, it,is necessary to con­
sider improved door shutting in terms of other
factors.:
Fig. 13 shows the relationship between the
force (F) heeded to shut the .door and the
minimum speed required to close it. The lines
that show the relationship are all linear and
have slightly different gradients. The change
per 10.kg is approximately 0.2. m/s, which is
equivalent to an opening area of. 100 cm^; that
is, the force used to shut the door is one of
the factors that greatly affecfdoor shutting
performance. .
Fig. 14 shows the relationship between
the moment of inertia (I) and the minimum
speed required to shut the door. From this
graph, we can see that the moment of Inertia
also greatly affects door shutting performance,
just as the door shutting force does. We also
note some gradient difference depending upon
the area of the opening unit. This is because,
when the moment of inertia is small, door
shutting performance is subject to the influ­
5
400 600 800 !000
OPENING UNIT AREA S (cm^)
Fig. 6 - Pressure rising rate compared to
opening unit area
ence of the airtight integrity, as shown in
Fig. 15. That is, if the moment of inertia
is smaller than that which we have examined
here, the changes shown in Figs, 11 and 12
will become greater, even though the other
conditions remain unchanged. Fig. 15 also
reveals that when the moment of inertia is
greater than 100 kg.cm.sec^, .door shutting
performance is not affected by factor (VC/SJJ) .
Fig. 16 is a summary of the influences of
the respective factors. From this figure, the
degree of influence of the respective factors .
can be expressed as follows::
I>F» S > (Vc/SD) .. (6)
This indicates, that the moment of inertia
and the force needed to shut the door, which
had little effect on the rate at which the
pressure increased, have a great effect.
From equations (1) and (2), the relation­
ship between the force required to shut the
door and pressure in the passenger compartment
is expressed as follows:
V! = g (P, I, F) . (7)
Where P varies with the.other factors.
The relationships of V]_ and P with S in
equation (7) are shown in Fig. 17. . In this
graph, the intersection of AA' with each line
denotes the minimum speed needed to shut the
door, the range of minimum speed usually used
is from 1.5 to 1.6 m/s.
If a target minimum speed of 1.1 m/s is
set in this figure, the following conclusions
may be drawn:
(1) If the force needed to shut the door
is 40 kg, the opening area is required to be
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

6 810101

40,-
I =77.1 kg.cm.S*'
F = 4 0 kg

\
30-
VC/SD = 4.05
UJ I = 7 7. I kg. cm. S8
<
UJ
to
5 20 \
v,.
UJ
tr
ID
to 320
to
UJ ■x.

Q- 10 '520

200 400 600 800 1000

OPENING UNIT AREA S (cm 2 )
2 3
VC/SD '.""

Fig. 7 Pressure rising rate compared, to

Vc/S D Fig. 8 - Pressure rising rate compared to S

approximately 150 cm2, and - -8 W

S =
+ /g 2 _ 4f h
S (9)
(2) If the force needed to shut the door 2f
is 30 kg, the opening.area at the intersection;.
(Sa). of the F=30 kg line .with. the v=l.l iti/&:-<
. ■■■ Where. f={-0.29 2x(V.c/SD\+2.. 461x10-^
line-is required to be approximately 40 cm2.
g={3;01x(Vc/SDJ-25.7}xlO-2'
■ In order to bring the. passenger compart-..
ment pressure down-to a non-disturbing limit; :.h={-8.01x(Vc/SD)+81.78-(P)}.
value (30 mm A q ) , the opening area must be
approximately 190 cm2. With this opening (In this case, P = 30)
area, even a 40 kg shutting force hits the ...Furthermore, suppose AQ represents the
minimum speed' target. Put another way, in quantity of excessive air entrapped in the
order to satisfy both door shutting performance passenger compartment by shutting the door;
and airtight integrity requirements, the .. then the .pressure in the passenger.compartment
vehicle will require an.'opening■;area of.190 can be expressed,-by. the following equation:

r
■The minimum'speed required to shut the: 0
,,p. ^ ' : ( q 0 ; + A Q ) ...'...:........... cioy
door for a vehicle with the specifications -QO
used in our experiment, and an opening area
Where'P: Pressure in passenger compart­
required to bring the passenger compartment
ment '
pressure down to 30 mm Aq (when the door'shut­
ting speed is 1.6'm/s),- can be obtained by P Q : Atmospheric pressure
regression analysis and'approximated with.the Q Q : Capacity of passenger compart-
following equations:' ■■ '
" '; ' me'nt '
a.(.SD/Vc) - b.log(S) .+ c(F). - ...AQ: Quantity of entrapped air.
■d(I) ■+ e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
' Herein, AQ is the difference between Aq]_
Where a = 0.437 (the quantity of air,entrapped by the door)
b = 0 .248 and Aq2 (the quantity, of air exiting, the
c = ^.0185 opening).: During the.minute.time.At, ■ these .
d = J.0131 elements. can be expressed. approximately,. as
■e =' 1.82 - follows: ■.
- ' . , . ■
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
810101

40

40-
VC/SD = 4.05
F = 40kg
30
UJ
i-
< , 30

1 (kg. cm. S 2 )
20 o 77.
UJ
A 94. I
or a 105.8 Vc/So
r>
to UJ
CO
LJ
cr I/)
a 10 in
UJ
CE
a- 10
11
_L _L J_ FACTOR MULTIPLE
200 400 600 800 1000
OPENING UNIT AREA S (cm2)

Fig. 9 - Pressure rising rate compared to S Fig. 10 - Factor influences

1.8
E 1.5

1,6 o
UJ
UJ UJ
Q_ Q.
to I -
<J>

z 14

X
z>
I VC/SD = 4.05
F = 40kg V)
£ 1.2 0.5 F = 4 0 kg
I =77.1 kg,cm S2 2
S = 20 cm2 13 I = 771 kg,cm. S2
z
i I

T_ 0
0 2 3 0 200 400 600 800 1000
VC/SD 2
OPENING UNIT AREA S (cm )

Fig. 11 - Minimum shutting speed compared

Fig. 12 - Minimum shutting speed compared to
to Vc/S D
opening unit area

Q_ =" &qi - Aq 2 ■ (11) v: ■ Speed at which door is shut.

a: Air exit coefficient
qx = J Sfl'vAt ...... (12)
S^:
Area of all opening portions
u:
Speed of air exiting opening
q'2 = a.S-|_.u.At (13) unit
p: ■■ Air density
As shown in Fig. 18, calculations obtained
u = p'(P - ?Q) '•'-•-' ••. •• <14> with this approximating equation tend to agree
well with test results, and are sufficient for
Where S n : Area of door rough estimations.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

8 810101

£ .1.5 E 1.5
>
o
UJ
i±j
Q_
to
to
43

/ S D * 4.05 z
.I = 77.1 kg.cm.S2 I-
I-
=5
i I 520
CO Q5
0.5

2
z _L _L _L JL
_l_
5 70 80.. 90 100 110
X _L
30 40 50 MOMENT OF INERTIA I (kg.cm.S2)
STATIC RESISTANCE F (kg )

Fig. 13 - Minimum shutting speed compared to Fig. 14 - Minimum shutting speed compared to
resistance moment of inertia

E 1.5 F = 4 0 kg ■s.
S ' 2 0 cm 2

Q
>
UJ O
UJ Ul
Ul
CL 1.5
to

-8>.;. Vc/So
z
!-
x Vc/So Z>
to X
0.5 x !2.03
o .2.70 2
• 4.05 3

0.5
-L X X
70 80 90 100 I.I 0 _L
2 3
MOMENT OF INERTIA 1 (kg.cm.S*)
FACTOR MULTIPLE

Fig. 15 - Minimum shutting speed compared to

moment of inertia Fig. 16 - Factor influences

SUMMARY fixed in accordance with the size of the

vehicle (large, medium, or small). Where the
The above material is summarized below: doors can be of different size,.the largest
(1) Considering the human response door should be used to satisfy the pressure
characteristics, s. problem does not occur if increase requirement. The (VC/SJJ) factor is
the value of the pressure increase is below 30 smaller' in trucks and hatchback cars, which
mm Aq, for altho igh this level.is disturbing are now coming into ;.'ider use. Consequently,
to 50% of the o o ipant, it is not unpleasant during the design stage, sufficient considera­
to 95% of them; even if another person shuts tion of this factor is required.
the door. If the occupant himself shuts the (3) From the viewpoints of airtight
door, no unpleasantness at-all is: noted. integrity and door shutting performance, the
(2) Regarding the (Vc/Sn) factor, the larger the opening area, the better; from the
passenger compartment capacity is usually perspective of the entire vehicle, the area
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018
810101 9;.

VC/SD = 4.05
S(cmz) Vfc/So =4.05
I =77.1 kg.cm.S'
20 S 60 /=77.1kg*cm
E a :0.5
E
70 Q.
LU 50
CC
D
120
ft
DC
0_ 40
170 H
220
zLU
30

o
o 20
cc
LU

CO 10 TEST
I SIMULATION

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

I.O 1.5 2.0
SHUTTING SPEED ( m / s ) SHUTTING SPEED (m/s)

Fig. 17 - Shutting speed and passenger

compartment pressure Fig. 18 - Outline of simulation results

of opening must be carefully examined and the
efficiency of the air conditioning system and
protection from noise, dust and rain must be
considered.
(4) The moment of inertia has little
effect on the pressure increase, but it greatly
affects the door's shutting performance.
That is, the larger the moment of inertia,
the better the door shutting performance. In
the case of light-weight, low-fuel-consumption
vehicles, however, the moment of inertia tends
to be smaller. Therefore, some other factor
must be used to improve door shutting perform­
ance.
(5) The force needed to shut the door
greatly influences its shutting performance.
This is one of the most important factors be­
cause it can be adjusted by the reaction force
of the weatherstrip, bumper rubber or by the
resistance of the lock's interlocking.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors wish to express their great
appreciation for the guidance of Mr. Masaru
Asakai in the development of this paper.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Birmingham, Monday, August 20, 2018

This paper is subject to revision. Statements and For permission "to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the
opinions advanced in papers or discussion are-the SAE Publications Division.
author's and are his responsibility, not the Society's; Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation
however, the paper has been edited by SAE for uni- or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
form styling and format. Discussion will be printed word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering
with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions. Activity Board, SAE.
Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. 12 page booklet. Printed in U.S.A.
4 0 0 C O M M O N W E A L T H OR BCNO*LE- PA