Modeling and Analysis of Powertrain NVH with Focus on Growl Noise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Superior NVH performance is a key focus in the development of new powertrains. In recent years, computer simulations have gained an increasing role in the design, development, and optimization of powertrain NVH at component and system levels. This paper presents the results of a study carried out on a 4-cylinder in-line spark-ignition engine with focus on growl noise. Growl is a low frequency noise (300-700 Hz) which is primarily perceived at moderate engine speeds (2000-3000 rpm) and light to moderate throttle tip-ins. For this purpose, a coupled and fully flexible multi-body dynamics model of the powertrain was developed. Structural components were reduced using component mode synthesis and used to determine dynamics loads at various engine speeds and loading conditions. A comparative NVH assessment of various crankshaft designs, engine configurations, and in- cylinder gas pressures was carried out. The main results include the crankshaft front-end and rear-end vibrations, bearing caps accelerations spectrum, and structure surface velocity levels in octave and 3rd octave bands. The correlation with experimental data was used to validate the analytical model. The analysis shows that a stiffer crankshaft results in a reduction of forced excitation transmitted to the bottom-end structure. The bearing beam stiffener also reduces bearing cap accelerations significantly. Both structural enhancements result in dramatically reduced growl noise.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".