See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271101481

Vibro-Acoustic Analysis of a Heavy Duty Truck Cabin

Conference Paper · June 2014

DOI: 10.1115/ESDA2014-20559

CITATION READS
1 2,037

4 authors, including:

Hakan Yenerer Ipek Basdogan

Daimler Koc University
4 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    89 PUBLICATIONS   696 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Polat Sendur
Özyeğin University
51 PUBLICATIONS   168 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Piezoelectric Plate-type Energy Harvesting View project

Piezoelectric shunt damping View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hakan Yenerer on 20 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 th
Proceedings of the 12 Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis
VIBRO-ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS OF A HEAVY DUTY TRUCK CABIN
Hakan Yenerer
Department of Mechanical
Engineering
Koc University
Istanbul, Turkey, 34450
hyenerer@ku.edu.tr
Polat Sendur
Vehicle Engineering
Ford Otosan
Izmit, Turkey, 41650
psendur@ford.com
ABSTRACT
Automotive manufacturers invest a lot of effort and money to
enhance the vibro-acoustic performance of their products. In a
complex dynamic system such as a truck cabin, the
enhancement effort may be very difficult and time-consuming
if only the ‘trial and error’ method is used without prior
knowledge about the noise contributors.
The purpose of this paper is to identify the most influential
noise radiating panel in a passenger cabin compartment of a
heavy duty truck. The noise inside the vehicle cabin originates
from various sources and travels through many pathways. The
first step of sound quality refinement is to find the pathways
and corresponding operational internal forces. Operational
acceleration responses and frequency response functions
(FRFs) are measured on a prototype truck to determine the
excitation forces while engine is running in operational
conditions. Once these internal forces are identified using the
experimental force identification (FI) technique, they are
utilized to predict the total sound pressure level inside the cabin
and also perform the panel acoustic contribution analysis
(PACA) to determine the most problematic panel of the cabin.
A coupled vibro-acoustic finite element model (FEM) is used to
predict the sound pressure level inside the cabin. Sound
pressure levels at the driver’s and passenger’s right and left ears
are determined numerically for excitation coming from the
cabin mounts ranging between 20-200 Hz. When the most noise
ESDA14
June 25-27, 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark
ESDA2014-20559
Andrei Cristian Stan
Department of Mechanical
Engineering
Koc University
Istanbul, Turkey, 34450
cstan@ku.edu.tr
Ipek Basdogan
Department of Mechanical
Engineering
Koc University
Istanbul, Turkey, 34450
ibasdogan@ku.edu.tr
radiating panel is identified, it can be redesigned to improve the
sound pressure level inside the cabin.
INTRODUCTION
The transportation industry is forced to produce more
comfortable and quieter vehicles because of high competition
in the market. Comfort, safety and performance are the three
major customer’s selection criteria that make significant
differences in the sales performance of heavy duty trucks. Due
to these requirements, noise, vibration and harshness (NVH)
has been an important topic for vehicle manufacturers in the
last decade (e.g. [1-8]).
Many sources may cause an increase in the sound pressure
level affecting comfort inside the passenger cabin. These
sources are classified as structure-borne and airborne [9]. In
this study, we investigate the structure-borne noise, which is
mainly caused by the vibrating panels enclosing the vehicle.
The primary noise inside the passenger cabin is a function of
the vehicle’s engine rpm. The excitation coming from the
engine causes these panels to vibrate, and further, causes an
increase in the noise level. The increase in the sound pressure
level generally leads to an undesirable booming noise, which is
usually felt in the low frequency range of 50-200 Hz inside the
passenger cabin. In order to reduce the interior noise, it is
critical to understand the dynamics of the vehicle, and more
importantly, how the cabin interacts with the air inside. The
1 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
objective of the present study is to demonstrate a methodology
that can be used to identify the key contributors to structure-
borne vibration induced interior noise in a heavy duty vehicle.
During the design phase of heavy duty trucks, addressing the
noise and vibration problems is very difficult, time consuming,
and costly due to the complexity of the problem. In those cases,
computer-based models and simulations become an integral
part of the development process to test and verify the system
level vibro-acoustic performance. The low-frequency range
vibro-acoustic character (20-200Hz) of the truck cabin was
analyzed with the help of finite element method (FEM). The
engine load disturbances in operational conditions for cabin
suspension points were calculated by matrix-inversion method
with experimental force identification (FI) technique, and then
used in the finite element analysis.
The most noise radiating panels of the truck passenger cabin
were identified by conducting the panel acoustic contribution
analysis (PACA) [10]. The aim of the panel acoustic
contribution analysis is to quantify the partial contributions of
each panel to the SPL at the target points. The characteristics of
the cabin panels are identified in terms of amplitude and phase.
The analysis indicates that the experimental FI and numerical
PACA with accurate FE model enables the designers to
improve the vibro-acoustic performance of their product during
early stages of the design process.
We propose a design methodology that employs high fidelity
computational models together with experimental methods to
predict the vibro-acoustic performance of the cabin. The
analysis tools and the methodology presented in this paper
provide a systematic and quantitative way to investigate the
end-to-end vibro-acoustic performance of such systems,
perform panel contribution analysis, and identify the critical
components of the system that degrade the performance.
Although some of the standard commercial tools and well
established techniques are utilized in this study, the integration
of the results of such analysis tools and experimental findings is
unique and the methods that we propose provides a lot of
insight to the design engineers.
THEORY
In vibro-acoustic systems, vibration energy is transmitted via a
number of discrete connection points between source and
receiver structure, as shown in Figure 1. A given number of
target responses, inside the receiver structure, are defined where
the sound pressure level (SPL) is the point of interest. The main
assumptions of our study for the complex truck cabin are the
following; the vibration source behaves as a single source (i.e,
the whole chassis), only structure-borne noise contributors are
taken into account (no air-borne radiated noise). Only the
energy transmitted through the translational degrees of freedom
is investigated, the energy transmitted through rotational
degrees of freedom are neglected.
The truck cabin is decomposed into two sub-systems: (i)
receiver structure and (ii) source structure as described in
Figure 1. The sub-systems are connected with cabin
connections.
Figure 1: Coupled source and receiver structure via suspension
connections for a typical heavy duty truck. Note that the lower
part of the truck is used as the source since it includes not only
the engine disturbances but also the disturbances coming from
the road through the wheels and suspension system.
THEORY: FORCE IDENTIFICATION
Identification of the operational loads during in-operation tests
involves direct experimental measurements on the prototype
truck or, alternatively, can be calculated using multi-body
simulation software during the early stages of the design steps
[11]. The force identification steps include (i) operational
acceleration measurements on the cabin mounts (e.g. run-up,
run-down) on the road or on a chassis dyno and (ii) estimation
of the FRF’s from excitation tests (e.g, hammer impact tests,
shaker tests). The procedure is similar for both structural and
acoustical loading cases [12, 13], but acoustical loading is
neglected during this study.
The force identification method includes calculation of the
vector of m operational forces Fm1   from m acceleration
responses am1   at the passive side, by multiplying these
with the direct-inverse of the measured force-acceleration FRF
matrix, H mm   , between all the force inputs and responses.
The equations in vector notation are shown as follows:
Fi    H ( ) 1 { i  }
..
(1)
 FRF11   FRFm1   
where, H        

(2)
 FRF1m    FRFmm  
1
 m 3 
F ki     H ki ( )  X i  
..
so, (3)
 k 1 i 1 
(k  1,2,..., m)
2 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
The force identification is performed frequency by frequency. They are independent of the loading conditions, implying that
The number of responses (m) must be equal to the number of they are especially well-suited for design studies that require
forces (m), to perform the square matrix inversion. The main experimentation with multiple configurations [15]. Figure 2
drawback of this method is the need to perform a large number shows the input-output locations of the ATVs.
of FRF measurements to build the full H mm   matrix. The
symmetry of the H matrix has to be checked after taking the
measurements. The procedure is time consuming but the
outcomes are very useful in the early stages of the product
design.

THEORY: SPL PREDICTION USING ATV ANALYSIS

The LMS Virtual Lab uses the ATV Response Analysis tool to
calculate the sound pressure level as a function of frequency.
The ATV method is based on Acoustic Transfer Vectors
(ATVs) that combine the input of the structural velocity of the
radiating surface and the sound pressure level at the desired
target output point [10, 14]. The sound pressure is calculated at
the user defined response points using the following equation Figure 2: Schematic overview of the point velocities and point
[10] ATVs of the panel surfaces involved in the SPL calculations
caused by cabin mount forces (adapted from [11]).
p   ATV   vn  
T
(4)
Figure 3 shows the steps involved in PACA process. The
process started with the calculation of the structural modes and
where p  is the sound pressure level at the driver’s ear frequencies. Then, Forced Response Vibration Analysis was
position, vn   represents the nodal velocities of the panels
performed using the engine forces to calculate the nodal
velocities on the structure. Cavity mesh was created using the
surrounding the cavity, and ATV   shows the acoustic LMS Virtual Lab. Panels were created on the cavity mesh (see
transfer vector between the input (i.e. point velocities) and the Figure 4 for the panels). Modes of the acoustic cavity are
output (i.e. the driver or passenger ear). The ATVs from the calculated. Acoustic Transfer Vectors (ATVs) are calculated by
radiating surface to specified field points are evaluated in the using the modes of the cavity. The coupling of the structural
first step across the frequency range of interest at fixed model with the acoustic cavity is handled by the mesh mapping
frequency intervals. In the second step, the acoustic response in technique (envelope). Finally, ATV response analysis was
the field points is calculated for all loading conditions by performed to predict the contribution of each panel at the driver
combining the ATV with the normal structural velocity and passenger ear. Then, results of the PACA are evaluated to
boundary condition vector at the frequency range defined by determine the most contributing panel. Red colored regions
the user. This technique has the important advantage that the represent the highest contributions to the sound pressure level
frequency dependent ATVs are used for panel contribution at the driver’s ear.
analysis, only taking into account the normal velocity boundary
conditions on the specified radiating surface. The partial
contribution of each panel to the total sound pressure level is
written as follows;


pc     ATV e    v  
Np
T e
n (5)
e1

where the superscript c denotes the contribution of an element

(i.e. panel). This way, the contribution of groups of elements,
corresponding to distinct panels of the structure is calculated.
This process is called Panel Contribution Analysis (PACA),
and is used to identify the panels that contribute to the sound
pressure level the most. ATVs in Equations (4) and (5) are
dependent only on the geometry characteristics of the acoustic
domain, the frequency, and location of the target output points. Figure 3: PACA process flow diagram.

3 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

SIMULATION OF VIBRO-ACOUSTIC MODEL
As illustrated in Figure 4, the truck chassis with engine is
assigned as the source structure. The cabin compartment is
assigned as the receiver structure. A FEM model is built to
compute the Forced Response Case and ATV Analysis Case
from each of the cabin mount positions to the driver and
passenger ears inside the vehicle. The model captures both the
structural vibrations of the vehicle as well as the acoustical
properties of the air inside the cabin (see Figure 4). The vibro-
acoustic panel contribution analysis is performed up to 200 Hz.
The analysis model only includes the hull structure of the
vehicle and the cabin mounts are simply connected to the main
chassis. The main structure of the vehicle is modeled using
shell elements with different thicknesses. Lumped masses are
used to represent the welding of the engine mounts to the main
structure. A global 3% structural and 7% acoustical damping
are used. The cavity mesh is linked to the structural model with
a process called mesh mapping such that the velocities
calculated at the structural nodes is used for the acoustical
analysis. The structural model of the truck cabin has over 1
million nodes and over 6 million degree of freedom. Almost
700 structural modes and 12 acoustic modes are found between
0-200 Hz range which shows the complexity of the system.
Figure 4: Vibro-acoustic model of the coupled receiver and the
source.
The different cabin panels can be identified from the distinct
colors in Figure 4. In order to perform PACA, the FE model of
the cabin is divided into groups of elements known as panels
including the back panel, roof, front panel, left-door, right-door,
seat and the remaining elements of the cabin model.
MODEL VALIDATION EXPERIMENTS
Model validation experiments of the truck cabin were
conducted in a semi-anechoic room. The purpose of this
experiment is to validate the accuracy of the FE model used in
the PACA. The cabin is placed on rigid support structure from
the cabin mounts which simulate the chassis of the truck. The
receiver structure, as seen in Figure 5, is excited from three
principal directions separately by using an impact hammer from
the cabin suspension mounts. During the experiments, NTFs
from cabin mounts to the driver and passenger ears and FRFs
between cabin mounts and the points on the cabin panels. The
accelerometer locations are carefully determined by
considering the nodal points on the FE model. The sensors are
placed evenly on the main panels of the cabin.
Figure 5: Model validation experiments of vibro-acoustic heavy
duty truck cabin in semi-anechoic room.
The structural FRF measurements were collected from 125
points normal to the panel surfaces and 4 points on the cabin
mounts in principal directions. In the same way, the acoustic
measurements (NTFs) were recorded between cabin mounts
and driver and passenger ears from 4 microphones between 0-
200 Hz. Sampling rate of the measurement set to 1024 Hz to
avoid signal overlap problems. Figure 6 shows the validation of
the simulation model and experimental measured data
comparison.
Note that in Figure 6, both NTF and FRF results are very
similar when compared. The individual peaks may differ
slightly in amplitude and frequency since the boundary
conditions of the acoustic FE model has a high effect on the
reflection characteristics of the vibro-acoustic model which
may lead the low frequency shifts in resonances when
compared as discussed in [17].
4 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Figure 6: The structural and acoustical transfer functions of the passenger cabin when excited from the cabin mounts (in dB scale).
The upper three graphs include NTF comparison. The lower three include FRF comparison (Solid lines represent simulation. Dashed
lines represent experiment). The y-axis of the figures are not displayed due to non-disclosure agreement between Koc University and
Ford Otosan.
OPERATIONAL EXPERIMENTS
To perform the required calculations on the truck, the transfer
function measurements ( H mm   ) specified in the previous
sections, accelerations ( am1   ) at the cabin mounts and
acoustic noise measurements are conducted under operational
conditions. The measured sound pressure level is then used to
compare the simulation and experimental results during
operational conditions. Figure 7 shows the truck and the
measurement locations behind the cabin compartment. The
operational tests on the truck are conducted on a smooth track
path. The background noise is measured during the tests to
cancel the unwanted measurements effects during the analysis.
The identification of the operational loads during in-operation
tests is crucial for the reliability of the PACA results.
Figure 7: The truck used in operational experiments and
measurement points on the cabin suspension mounts for
frequency response functions (FRF) and operational
accelerations of the cabin mounts.
PACA RESULTS
The analyses conducted for this study consist of two steps: (i)
The Operational forces, which are calculated by matrix-
inversion method, are imported to the LMS Virtual Lab. to
perform the Forced Response and ATV Response Analysis case.
The main problematic panels can be identified during this step.
(ii) The main panels are divided into smaller sub-panels, and
then the locations of problematic regions are investigated
precisely.
Figure 8 shows the SPL level at driver’s right ear and the main
panel acoustic contributions due to operational cabin mount
excitations during high gear WOT. The driver ear SPL has
peaky frequency bands around 35-40 Hz and 70-95 Hz. In the
PACA results, bright colored regions represent high
contribution, and dark colored regions represent low
contribution to the overall sound pressure level. Since the
model density is high enough, it is hard to identify the
problematic panel regions just by looking at the structural
modes. PACA results in Figure 8 shows that most of the
frequency bands that are bright in color, except 35-40 Hz, are
dominated by the acoustic resonances of the cavity. The most
critical acoustic mode for the high sound pressure levels at the
driver’s right ear is found to be the first acoustic mode at 83
Hz.
The acoustic contributions of the main panels between these
frequency bands have to be investigated further with smaller
sub-panel regions in order to understand the complex response
characteristics of the cabin. Depending on the size of the main
panel, each panel is divided into 5-by-5 or 3-by-3 sub-panels.
5 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Figure 8: SPL at driver’s right ear (experimental vs. simulation) and corresponding main panel contributions of the cabin under high
gear WOT engine excitation. (Panel Order: left door right door, front panel, top panel, back panel, floor). The y-axis of the figures are
not displayed due to non-disclosure agreement between Koc University and Ford Otosan.

Figure 9: The highest acoustic contributions of the sub-panel regions of to the SPL at the driver right ear during high gear WOT engine
run up between specific frequency bands. Panels are divided into 5-by-5 or 3-by-3 sub-panels.

The hotspots of the cabin sub-panels can be extracted clearly corresponding ATVs of the vibrating points can be investigated
from the figures shown in Figure 9. The Figure explicitly shows separately.
that sub-panels around the left door have the highest
contributions on most of the frequency bands that are defined
as critical. CONCLUSION

The origin of the problem can be identified by investigating the
modal characteristics of the cabin structure and acoustic cavity
separately. Information on whether the identified problem is
structural or acoustic transfer dominated can be reached from
the operational PACA study since the panel vibrations and
Understanding the excitation sources, the transfer paths and
system response for a vehicle structure in detail, guides the
NVH engineers to resolve noise and vibration problems
effectively. In this study, first operational forces for a heavy
duty truck are identified experimentally then these forces are

6 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

used in the vibro-acoustic model of the truck cabin to determine
the most problematic panels that radiates and contributes to the
sound pressure level. Further analysis on the sub-panels
revealed the critical regions on the panels that might be
considered for design modification.
The present work proves the applicability of the experimental
FI and numerical PACA approach for very large, stiff and
complex structures. The preliminary results show that the
design tool that we develop can provide a lot of insight for
vehicle engineers to improve the noise level inside the
passenger cabin of heavy duty trucks.
ABBREVIATIONS
FEM: Finite Element Method
PACA: Panel Acoustic Contribution Analysis
NVH: Noise Vibration Harshness
SPL: Sound Pressure Level
FI: Force Identification
WOT: Wide Open Throttle
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work is supported by the Republic of Turkey Ministry of
Science, Industry and Technology and Ford Otosan. The
authors would like to thank Ford Otosan Vehicle NVH and
Interior Quietness teams for their support on test plans, vehicle
instrumentation and data collection.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Vecchio, H. Van der Auweraer, P. Kindt, T. Houthoofdt,
P. Sas, “Experimental Transfer Path Analysis of a Hybrid”,
Proceedings of the SAE2005 – Noise and Vibration Conference
and Exhibition, Michigan, USA, May 2005.
[2] C. Bohn, A. Cortabarria, V. Härtel, K. Kowalczyk, Active
control of engine-induced vibrations in automotive vehicles
using disturbance observer gain scheduling, Control
Engineering Practice, 12 (2004) 1029-1039.
[3] M. Kozek, C. Benatzky, A. Schirrer, A. Stribersky, Vibration
damping of a flexible car body structure using piezo-stack
actuators, Control Engineering Practice, 19 (2011) 298-310.
[4] L.P.R. de Oliveira, M.M. da Silva, P. Sas, H. Van Brussel,
W. Desmet, Concurrent mechatronic design approach for active
control of cavity noise, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 314
(2008) 507-525.
[5] L.P.R. de Oliveira, K. Janssens, P. Gajdatsy, H. Van der
Auweraer, P.S. Varoto, P. Sas, W. Desmet, Active sound quality
control of engine induced cavity noise, Mechanical Systems
and Signal Processing, 23 (2009) 476-488.
View publication stats
[6] B.-H. Lee, C.-W. Lee, Model based feed-forward control of
electromagnetic type active control engine-mount system,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 323 (2009) 574-593.
[7] R. Guclu, K. Gulez, Neural network control of seat
vibrations of a non-linear full vehicle model using PMSM,
Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 47 (2008) 1356-1371.
[9] N. Lalor, H. H. Priebsch, The prediction of low- and mid-
frequency internal road vehicle noise: a literature survey,
Journal of Automobile Engineering, 221, 245-269, 2007.
[10] M. Tournour, ATV Concept and ATV based applications,
LMS Numerical Acoustics Theoretical Manual, 127-139.
[11] R. Visser, “Virtual Transfer Path Analysis at Daimler
Trucks”, SAE International, USA, 2009.
[12] K. Janssens, P. Mas, P. Gajdatsy, L. Gielen, H. Van der
Auweraer, “A novel path contribution analysis method for test-
based NVH troubleshooting”, Proceedings of the ISMA2008 –
International Noise and Vibration Engineering Conference,
Leuven, Belgium, Sept. 2008.
[13] K. Janssens, P. Gajdatsy, H. Van der
Auweraer, “Operational Path Analysis: a critical review”,
Proceedings of the ISMA2008 – International Noise and
Vibration Engineering Conference, Leuven, Belgium, Sept.
2008.
[14] W. Desmet, Boundary Element Modeling for Acoustics,
LMS Numerical Acoustics Theoretical Manual, 86-126.
[15] E. Yuksel, G. Kamci, I. Basdogan, “Vibro-Acoustic
Analysis of a Commercial Vehicle Integrated with Design of
Experiments Methodology”, Proceedings of 20th International
Congress on Acoustics, Sydney, Australia, August, 2010.
[16] P.C. Hansen. Rank-Deficient and Discrete Ill-Posed
Problems. SIAM, Philadelphia, 2nd edition, 1998.
[17] A. Sestieri. “Vibroacoustic: The Challenges of a Mission
Impossible”, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 34
(2013) 1-18, 2012.
7 Copyright © 2014 by ASME