Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
Numerical Methods to Calculate Gear
Transmission Noise
Copyright 1997 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
ABSTRACT
This report shows the methods, which AVL
uses for the calculation of gear box noise.
The analysis of the gear box structure
(housing) is done using finite element method (FEM),
thereby the natural frequencies are calculated as well
as forced vibrations.
As input for the FE calculation of the forced
vibrations, the dynamic bearing forces of the shafts in
the gear box or the dynamic tooth mesh are used.
These forces are determined using the MBS (multi
body system) software GTDYN, considering the
torsional vibrations as well as axial and bending
vibrations.
Several examples of calculation results for the
investigation of the gear dynamics are shown within
the scope of this report.
INTRODUCTION
With increasing demands on silent running of
motor-vehicles, we have to pay increasing attention to
the noise generated by transmission units.
With transmission units two principal kinds of
noise - gear rattle and gear whine - can be
distinguished.
Gear rattle [I] is mainly caused by the
changes of contact in the tooth meshes, while they do
not transmit torques. The most important influencing
parameters for the gear rattle are the speed irregularity
at the input side of the transmission unit, the backlash
in the tooth meshes and the friction and damping
forces acting at the gear transmission components.
W. Hellinger, H. Ch. Raffel, and G. Ph. Rainer
AVL List GmbH
The gear whine is caused by the tooth
meshes between the load transmitting gears (active
speed, differential). The frequency of this noise is
determined by the meshing frequencies of the
corresponding tooth meshes.
The intensity of the noise detected in the
vehicle is strongly influenced by the way of transfer of
the vibrations caused by the meshing forces via the
shafts and supports (bearings) into the gear box
structure.
To improve the support of the engineers
working at the test beds, when clarifying noise
phenomena of transmission units at the one hand and
to enable reliable assessment of various variants
during gear unit design at the other hand, according
methods and tools for the numerical investigation [2, 3,
4, 51 of gear transmission dynamics are required.
This report presents the numerical methods
for the investigation and reduction of gear transmission
noise used at AVL.
CALCULATION PROCEDURE
The procedure for numerical investigations of
gear transmission noise is devided essentially into two
parts.
The dynamic behaviour of the gear box
structure is analysed with the help of the finite element
method (FEM). The excitation forces acting at the
structure are determined by using software for the
calculation of the dynamic behaviour of multi body
systems (MBS).
The sequence of the single tasks and the
interfaces between the two calculation parts - FE and
MBS calculations - are shown in figure 1.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018

Finite Element
Modelling
- FE Calculation of
Natural Modes
and Frequencies
)
Calculation of
,Forced Vibrations
I
I
I

v
Operating
Points for Assessment of
Calculation
Calculations Results
A A
I
I
I

-.
I

- -
I
I
I- ------
Multibody System
MBS Calculation
(MBS) Modelling . m

Figure 1: Sequence and data flow for the calculation of gear transmission noise

FE and MBS modelling can be performed in clutch, if gear rattle is to be investigated. For gear
parallel. The most interesting operating points for the whine the operating points are chosen by comparison
simulation of the dynamics of the MBS are determined of the natural modes and frequencies of the gear box
with respect to the rotational speed irregularity at the structure with the meshing frequencies of the single

primary
shaft

secondary
shaft

differential

Figure 2: Model of a fivespeed passenger car transmission unit (fourth gear

operating)
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
gear meshes.
On the one hand the excitation forces
calculated by the MBS software can be used directly
for the comparison of different design variants, on the
other hand they can be used as excitation forces for
subsequent calculations of forced vibrations using FE
codes or using special software for nonlinear dynamics
as for example the software EXCITE [6].
The next sections shall describe the two
main tasks for the calculation of gear transmission
noise more detailed.
CALCULATION OF EXCITATION FORCES
For the calculation of excitation forces acting
on the transmission unit, the MBS software GTDYN [7]
is used. This software contains predefined elements
for shafts, gears (including the gear meshes), roller
and slider bearings.
The calculations consider torsional degrees of
freedom as well as all degrees of freedom for bending
and translation (radial and longitudinal) motion of
shafts and gears. Thus the influence of the bending
deformation of shafts on actual backlashes in the tooth
meshes is included in the simulation calculations.
Additionally periodically varying meshing
stiffnesses are considered if required. As for example
variations of the pitch in a tooth mesh have
consequences for the actual tooth mesh stiffness, this
influence on the dynamic behaviour of the system and
the thereby caused dynamic forces must be
considered in simulation calculations.
MBS MODEL: The measured or calculated
speed irregularity is prescribed at the clutch position.
The model of the primary shaft as shown in figure 2
consists of 16 shaft elements and five gear wheels (for
first, second, third, fourth and reverse speed), which
are fixed to the shaft.
The gear wheel for the fifth speed is designed
as a free running gear. The clearances between the
free running gear and the primary shaft are considered
in the calculations for axial direction as well as for
radial motions.
The primary shaft is supported by two tapered
roller bearings, which in the dynamic calculation are
represented by their clearance, stiffness and damping
values.
At the secondary shaft the gear wheels for fifth
speed and differential are fixed. The gears for the
remaining speeds are modelled as free running
wheels. In the model the pawls, which connect the free
running gears with the shaft when the according gears
are operating, are fixed at the shaft.
In the results presented in this paper the
calculation has been performed for the operation of 753
fourth gear. The according free running gear is
supported at the appropriate shaft element in radial
and axial direction. The torque is transmitted from the
free wheel via a rotational stiffness and damping to the
pawl and to the secondary shaft. The secondary shaft
is supported by one ball bearing and one roller
bearing.
The differential is represented in the
calculation model as a short shaft, which is supported
by two tapered roller bearings. At the differential the
(constant) output torque is applied.
RESULTS OF THE MBS CALCULATIONS:
The possibilities, which arise due to the use of the
herein presented calculation of excitation forces, are
described using the results obtained for several gear
unit variants.
The already shown model of the transmission
unit was used as baseline for the calculations of
variants. The chosen operating point was fourth gear,
engine speed 1700 rpm. In practical use of the gear
unit in a passenger car, gear whine was detected at
the mentioned operating conditions.
Several variants of the model were used to
investigate the influence of several parameters on the
dynamic loads in the system. The rotational excitation
at the clutch and the applied output torque at the
differential remained unchanged for all calculated
variants.
As the rotational meed irreaularity at the
clutch was known neither by measurement nor by
calculation, a sinusoidal waveform was used to
prescribe the speed irregularity. The frequency for the
speed fluctuation was set to the second order of the
engine speed, the maximum amplitude was assumed
to be 3 radls.
A constant o u t ~ u ttoraue of 390 Nm was
applied at the differential in all investigated variants.
Meshina data: The module used for the gears
was between 1.5 and 2.5 mm, the helix angles were
around 30 degree.
For the calculations the following variants were
considered:
Variant A: Entire model as shown in figure 2
assuming constant meshing stiffnesses and without
consideration of radial and axial clearances in the
supports of the free running gears.
The constant mesh stiffness was calculated
from the theoretical meshing data corresponding to
DIN standards. The stiffness value used for the tooth
mesh of the fourth speed was about 320 kNImm, for
the gear mesh between secondary shaft and
differential it was about 515 kN1mm.
Variant B: Entire model as shown in figure 2
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
elm [s]
Figure 3: Contact forces in the tooth mesh for the
-
first gear comparison between the variants A
(top) and C (bottom)
with variable meshing stiffnesses in the perfect (no
deviations from the theoretical meshing geometry)
tooth meshes without consideration of radial and
axial clearances in the supports of the free running
gears.
The fluctuations of the mesh stiffness were
estimated. The stiffness fluctuations used in the
calculation varied between 310 and 325 kN/mm
(fourth gear) and between 495 and 520 kN/mm
(differential). This fluctuation was used to represent
the change of the mesh stiffness due to the change
of tooth pairs in contact.
Variant C: Same as variant B but with
maximum radial and axial clearances in the supports
of the free running gears.
Variant D: Same as variant C, but with an
uniform deviation from the theoretical tooth geometry
for all teeth.
As no information was available about the
actual manufactoring errors, this influence was
considered by just increasing the variation of the
meshing stiffness. The stiffness used in this
calculation variant for the gear mesh between
secondary shaft and differential changed between
475 and 520 kN/mm.
For each of the specified variants three engine
cycles have been calculated. In the following diagrams
the calculated results for the third cycle are shown.
GEAR RATTLE: The gear rattle noise is
mainly caused by the changes of flank contacts in the
tooth meshes between the gears, which currently do
not transmit power between the shafts. The main
influencing parameters for gear rattle are represented '54
by the moments of inertia of the (free running) gears,
the speed irregularity at the clutch, the backlash in the
tooth meshes and the clearances in the supports of
the free running wheels.
Figure 3 shows the influence of the radial and
axial clearances between the shafts and the free
running wheels on the changes of contact and the
magnitude of the thereby caused meshing forces.
The results indicate an increase of the
maximum tooth forces up to 20 percent, if the
clearances in the supports of the free running gear
wheels are considered. Additionally a comparison of
the two variants shows that the times of contacts in
variant C show a significant time shift compared to
variant A, due to the passing through the radial and
axial clearances. Caused by the increased relative
velocity between the tooth flanks and the thereby
increased energy contents when the impact occurs,
variant C shows also higher and shorter peak forces.
This leads - due to the transmission of the forces by
shafts and bearings - to a significant increase of
vibration excitation for the gear box structure.
In our example the calculated contact forces
are relatively small. Gear rattle is no problem for the
examined gear unit at the considered operating point.
GEAR WHINE: In practical operation gear
whine is detected at the examined gear transmission
unit at engine speeds of about 1700 rpm with fourth
gear operating. As already mentioned, this type of
noise usually appears, if natural frequencies of the
gear housing coincide with single meshing
frequencies. In the example shown (figure 2, fourth
gear operating) the meshing frequencies for the
chosen operating point are at 1160 Hz in the gear
mesh for the fourth gear and at 510 Hz in the tooth
mesh between secondary shaft and differential.
As the gear whine was hardly reproducible
with the calculation models used up to now (as they
use constant meshing stiffnesses and consider only
the torsional degree of freedom), the calculations for
the presented variants have been performed to
investigate, if the mentioned effects can be simulated
better by consideration of additional degrees of
freedom and by consideration of variable meshing
stiffnesses.
The calculated results for the bearing forces
have been subject to fast fourier transmission (FFT),
to have easier comparisons between the single
variants. The simulation results have been compared
using these frequency spectra.
The FFT of the bearing force of the tapered
roller bearing at the free end of the primary shaft is
shown in figure 4. The bearing force is mainly
influenced by the meshing forces of the fourth gear,
which is next to this bearing. The shaded area marked
in figure 4 indicates the frequencies between 1110 and
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018

Variant A:
constant tooth
mesh stiffness

Variant B:
variable tooth
mesh stiffness

Variant C:
variable stiffness,
with clearances of
gear supports

frequency [Hz]
Figure 4: Support at the free end of the primary shaft, FFT of the calculated bearing forces for the
calculation variants A, B and C
1210 Hz. This range is equivalent to the meshing Due to the dynamic changes of contact in the
frequency of the fourth gear (1160 Hz) +/- 50 Hz. clearances additional 'intermediate' frequencies are
excited. Viewing the wrapping curves of the frequency
When looking at the frequency contents, the shapes in figure 4 shows that significant differences
consideration of angle-dependent variable meshing between variant C and the remaining variants appear
stiffness (variant B) shows no significant differences in the frequency range between 1110 and 1210 Hz
compared to the calculation with constant meshing only.
stiffness (variant A). As soon as the clearances
between the free running gear wheels and the As several teeth are assumed to be in contact
secondary shaft are considered in the calculations in the tooth mesh at the same time, the changes in the
(variant C), clear changes in the frequency spectrum meshing stiffness are relatively small. For that reason,
of the calculated bearing force are detected. the influence of the varying meshing stiffness on the
watched bearing force is small, too. Only if stiffness
-
---
-- Variant A:
-- constant tooth
-- mesh stiffness
- CV7~ in
- I
I 1
I I
I I
1
- Variant C:
QI -
2 -
0
r -
0- variable stiffness,
P - -- with clearances of
m-

t - gear supports
2 0- I 1 I I I

frequency [Hz]
Figure 5: Support of the differential gear (support position below the engine-side
bearing of the secondary shaft), FFT of the calculated bearing forces for the calculation
variants A and C 755
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
frequency
Figure 6: Ball bearing of the secondary shaft (between the gears IV and V), FFT of
the calculated axial force for the calculation variants A, C and D
variations interfere with clearances in the supports of
the free running gears, the components of the bearing
forces around the meshing frequency rise.
As described later on, one natural frequency of
the outer wall and the bearing walls of the gear box
was found at about 1180 Hz. As the MBS calculations
for the mentioned operation conditions resulted in
relatively high forces, clear gear whine must be
' and 1600 Hz. The only exception is the frequency
expected in this frequency range.
Figure 5 shows the frequency spectra for the
axial force in one of the tapered roller bearings of the
differential. The shaded area (460 to 560 Hz) indicates
the meshing frequency for the tooth mesh between
secondary shaft and differential gear (510 +I-50 Hz).
The consideration of variable meshing
stiffness and additional clearances (variant C) leads to
calculated forces with three times the force amplitudes
as they have been calculated for variant A (constant
meshing stiffness and no consideration of clearances
in the supports of the free running gears).
Especially in the range between 500 and 750
Hz variant C shows a significant increase of the
dynamic force amplitudes compared to variant A. If
parts of the gear box structure next to the watched
bearing have natural frequencies in the mentioned
frequency range, increased noise (gear whine) must
be expected due to the increased excitation forces.
Another calculation variant has been
investigated to show the influence of a faulty tooth
mesh on the dynamic forces in the system. In this
example, an uniform fault in the tooth mesh between
secondary shaft and differential gear was assumed. In
the calculation this case was described by a short-time
decrease in the meshing stiffness (variant D).
Variant A:
constant tooth
mesh stiffness
Variant C:
variable stiffness,
with clearances of
gear supports
Variant D:
variable stiffness,
faulty meshing,
support clearances
[Hz]
The effects of these erratic changes of contact
stiffness are represented in figure 6 by showing the
FFT of the axial forces in the ball bearing of the
secondary shaft.
The comparison of the bearing force
components for the variants A and C shows an
increase of the force amplitudes between about 200
range around 510 Hz (meshing frequency secondary
shaft - differential gear).
Due to the consideration of the axial
clearances between the free running gears and the
secondary shaft, the pronounced peak between 500
and 550 Hz seen in the FFT for variant A is spread to
the wider frequency range between about 300 to 700
Hz with smaller maximum values in variant C.
The consideration of the faulty tooth mesh
results in a significant increase of the bearing forces.
Strongly increased force amplitudes are located at
about 400 to 600 Hz, at 800 Hz and at about 1600 Hz
(fig. 6, variant D).
To give a brief summary, we can state that in
our case variant C is convenient to describe the real
behaviour of the gear unit. Although we do not have
any measurement values of dynamic bearing forces,
the increased excitation forces at frequencies between
1100 and 1200 Hz and a natural mode of the gear box
structure at 1180 Hz (as shown in the next chapter)
indicate that gear whine noise is to be expected at this
operating point.
ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
The determination of the dynamic behaviour of
the gear box structure is performed using the Finite
756
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
Element Method (FEM) and can be divided into the
following tasks:
Modelling of the structure
Analysis of the natural frequencies
Calculation of forced vibrations
MODELLING OF THE GEAR BOX
STRUCTURE: The FE model consists of the gear box
with simple models of primary shaft, secondary shaft
and differential and of a rough model of the engine
structure.
Gear box and engine are represented mainly
by shell elements. In regions with mass accumulations
(e.g. support positions, ...) solid elements are used.
Shafts and bearings are represented by beam
elements, gears consist of shell and lumped mass
elements. The gear wheels for the fourth gear located
in the path of torque transmission and the gears
between secondary shaft and differential are
connected in the line of action (perpendicular to the
tooth flanks) by beam elements. Figure 7 shows the
FE model of the entire driving unit.
As a first numerical check of the calculation
model an analysis of the static deformation is
performed. For this test a torque is applied at the input
of the transmission unit (primary shaft). This
calculation gives a first overview about the general
distribution of stiffness and the flow of torque in the
transmission unit. At the differential the output torque
appears according to the transmission ratio of the gear
unit. The output torque is also used as a check if the
model supplies reasonable results.
DETERMINATION OF NATURAL
FREQUENCIES: The calculation of the natural
frequencies is the first step during the optimization of
the dynamic behaviour of gear boxes. All significant
structural modes are determined and ranges where
Figure 7: FE model of a driving unit consisting of
engine and gear box structure
757
500 1500 2000 2500
Frequency [ Hz J
Figure 8: Table of natural frequencies
resonancies are possible (superpositions of vibrations
of the shafts in the gear box and the gear box
structure) are detected.
Figure 8 shows the table of natural
frequencies for primary and secondary shaft, outer
walls and bearing walls of the gear box in the
frequency range between 500 and 2500 Hz
Bending vibrations of first and second order for
the secondary shaft appear in the frequency ranges
790 to 915 Hz and 2100 to 2340 Hz and for the
primary shaft between 1030 and 1340 Hz. Local
modes of the outer walls of the gear housing have
been detected at 1180 Hz, 1340 to 1440 Hz and in the
frequency range above 1600 Hz. The bearing walls
participate in the frequencies between 860 and 1710
Hz in the global oscillation behaviour.
Possible resonance areas are located at 860
Hz (secondary shaft and bearing walls), at 1180 Hz
(gear housing and bearing walls), 1650 Hz (gear
housing and bearing walls) and at frequencies of 2075
and 2340 Hz (secondary shaft and gear housing).
The comparison of the resonance areas
calculated by FEM with the frequency contents of the
calculated bearing forces (MBS) confirms the critical
frequency ranges 1160 1 1180 Hz and 1600 to 1650
Hz.
FORCED VIBRATIONS: The target of the
calculation of the forced vibrations is the determination
of possible excitations of the gear box structure by the
gear meshes, which actually transmit the torque.
Principally the way of calculation is structured
as follows:
In a first step the actually operating gears are
loaded with impact excitations. This calculation is done
for each gear separately. Due to this method it is
possible, to have a clear relation between excitations
and the corresponding structural response. In the
second step the dynamic bearing or meshing forces
(MBS calculation) are considered as excitation forces.
This describes the entire excitation in real operation.
The fig. 9 to 11 show as example the transfer
mobilities calculated for an impact excitation at the
secondary shaft (fourth gear) for the basic and one
modified gear housing.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018
Figure 9 shows significant raise of the integral
level at the gear box external structure near the
secondary shaft and at the differential housing.
Afterwards design modifications as local
increase of wall thicknesses at the outer walls of the
gear box and introduction of additional ribs at the gear
box and differential housing have been considered, to
shift the natural frequencies of the significant gear
housing modes. The goal for the modifications was, to
avoid the resonances and to reduce the characteristic
raise of integral level. An analysis of natural modes
and a calculation of forced vibrations was performed
also for the modified structure.
Figure 9: Transfer mobility, basic variant, 4th gear,
integral level 0 to 5000 Hz
Figure 10 shows the improvement of the
structural response at the gear housing and at the
differential housing obtained by the described
modifications of the structure.
Figure 10: Transfer mobility, modified variant, 4th
gear, integral level 0 to 5000 Hz
In figure 11 the transfer mobilities of basic and
modified structure are represented. The peaks at
frequencies of 1180 Hz, 2075 Hz, 2750 Hz and 3750
Hz are reduced significantly due to the design
modifications.
frequency [Hz]
basic variant
modified variant
Figure 11: Transfer mobility, 4th gear, comparison
-
basic variant modified variant
CONCLUSIONS
With the calculation of gear transmission noise
both, the structural dynamics as well as the excitation
forces have to be considered.
For the calculation of the excitation forces
MBS methods are suitable. The described
investigations show that for the excitation forces radial
and axial clearances especially in the supports of the
free running gears must be considered besides the
torsional vibrations, as they have significant influence
on the dynamic forces in the system.
Additionally, consideration of variable
meshing stiffnesses in the tooth meshes is desirable,
as it has decisive influence on level and frequency
contents of the dynamic excitation forces.
Structural dynamics is investigated using
FEM. Thereby natural frequency analysis as well as
calculation of transfer mobilities are used to assess
various design variants.
The combination of both mentioned
calculation methods (MBS and FEM) and their results
bring a valuable support for the designer as well as for
the test bed engineer.
REFERENCES
'11 Rust, A.; Brandl, F.K.; Thien, G.E.
"Investigations into Gear Rattle Phenomena -
Key Parameters and their Influence on Gearbox
Noise"
First International Conference on Gearbox Noise
and Vibration, Cambridge, 1990
[2] Priebsch, H.H.; Hellinger, W.; Loibnegger, B.;
Rainer, G.Ph.
758 "Application of Computer Simulation for the
 Downloaded from SAE International by Imperial College London, Thursday, August 09, 2018

Prediction of Vibration and Noise in Engines"

ATA 3rd Int. Conference, Firenze, 1992

[3] Priebsch, H.H.; Affenzeller, J.; Kuipers, G

"Structure Borne Noise Prediction Techniques"
SAE-Paper 900019, 1990.

[4] Rainer, G.Ph.; Loibnegger, B.

"Design Supporting Analysis for Po wertrain
Noise and Vibratiod'
liM-Conference, Vienna, 1995.

[5] Hellinger W.; Priebsch, H.H.; Rainer, G.Ph.;

Tzivanopoulos, G.
"Auslegung von Ventiltrieben fur
Hochleistungsmotoren - Rechnerische und
Experimentelle Verfahrerl'
16. Internationales Wiener Motorensymposium,
Wien, 1995.

[6] EXCITE User Manual, Graz, 1996.

[7] GTDYN User Manual, Graz, 1995.