INVESTIGATION OF POWERTRAIN RIGID BODY MODES

Basem Alzahabi
Associate Professor
Dept. Mechanical Engineering
Kettering University
1700 West Third Avenue
Flint, Michigan, 48504, USA

Arnaldo Mazzei
Assistant Professor
Dept. Mechanical Engineering
Kettering University
1700 West Third Avenue
Flint, Michigan, 48504, USA

Abstract

Nomenclature

Powertrain mounting systems serve a number of functions

for the overall vehicle. First and foremost, the mounting
system maintains the position of the powertrain in the vehicle
as it is subjected to inertia and torque reaction loads. In
addition, the mounting system controls the overall motion of
the powertrain, preventing the engine, transmission, and
accessories from contacting other components of the
vehicle, thereby avoiding damage to any vehicle systems
from the potential impact.

J xx

The mounting system also plays a role in vehicle ride and

handling due to the significant mass of the powertrain that
can be approximately 15 to 20% of the total mass of a large
car. Finally, the mounting system isolates the rest of the
vehicle and its occupants from the powertrain as a vibration
source. Therefore, investigating the powertrain rigid body
modes for a particular mounting system is very critical in
determining initial mount locations and spring rates for a new
powertrain or vehicle architecture.
This paper investigates the design of a powertrain mounting
system of a front wheel drive vehicle with a transversely
mounted V8 engine and transaxle mounted on an isolated
front sub-frame. A torque strut is attached to the top of the
engine and to the body structure with elastomeric bushings
with torque reaction as its primary function. The locations of
the powertrain mounts and torque strut cannot be modified
significantly because this would require changes to the front
sub-frame and other components.
A finite element model and an optimization scheme are
discussed for the response of this passenger vehicle
powertrain / powertrain mounting system. The vibration of
the standard powertrain configuration is analyzed through its
rigid body mode shapes and an optimization scheme is
suggested. The scheme aims to improve the performance of
the mounting system in order to produce better powertrain
overall NVH performance.

J yy
J zz

Logesh Kumar Natarajan

Graduate Research Assistant
Dept. Mechanical Engineering
Kettering University
1700 West Third Avenue
Flint, Michigan, 48504, USA

mass moment of inertia of powertrain with respect

to X-axis of powertain inertia co-ordinate system.
mass moment of inertia of powertrain with respect
to Y-axis of powertain inertia co-ordinate system.
mass moment of inertia of powertrain with respect
to Z-axis of powertain inertia co-ordinate system.

Introduction
Powertrain mounting systems are required to maintain the
position of the vehicles powertrain with respect to its body
and components as the vehicle is subject to several loads.
These loads (to name a few) are due to road input, vehicle
acceleration, braking and cornering. Within tolerances, the
position of the powertrain is controlled by its mounting
system, so the powertrain does not interfere with the
vehicles structure. Also, the mounting system is responsible
for isolating engine vibration from the vehicle and from its
passengers. The amount of isolation and NVH performance
of the mounting system will depend on the vehicle design
constraints. For instance, if the engine compartment does
not allow for enough room for powertrain motion, vibration
isolation may not be best due to high stiffnesses required for
the mounts in order to prevent contact between engine and
vehicles body. Therefore the design of powertrain mounting
systems is governed by specific vehicle requirements.
Engine mounting for a heavy duty vehicle has been studied
by Iwahara and Sakai [1]. The best mounting layout to
produce vibration isolation and to support engine dynamic
torque was investigated by using an eigen-analysis and FEM
simulation. The rigid body modes, frequency response and
transient response were obtained and several mounting
layouts were discussed. It was found that it is possible to
attain a mounting layout that will give best performance for
idling engine vibration and shock due to engine torque.
In reference [2], Li-Rong et al. presented a finite element
model of a lumped parameter model for a hydraulic damped

engine mount. The FEM model can be used in ADAMS

simulations to determine mounting effect on vehicle ride.
Sakai et al. discussed mounting system optimization for
vibration isolation and interference avoidance in reference
[3]. An optimization method was presented which allowed for
the inclusion of engine packaging as part of the design
objectives. This inclusion aimed to reduce the issue of
increased stiffness at certain vehicle travel conditions. (Good
vibration isolation at low engine amplitudes and poor
isolation at high engine loads.)
In the present work, a powertrain mounting system for a
large passenger automobile is investigated and an
optimization scheme for better performance is derived.
Powertrain and Powertrain Mount Specification
The rigid body mode shapes for the powertrain are obtained
through an FEM simulation approach [4]. The resulting
frequencies and modes shapes can then be analyzed and
changes can be applied to the stiffnesses of the mounts, as
well as their locations, in order to obtain better performance.
The vehicle utilized for this study is a front wheel drive with a
transversely mounted V8 engine. The engine is mounted on
an isolated sub-frame that is attached to the vehicles body
via six elastomeric bushings. The engine is attached to the
front sub-frame via three mounts. A torque strut is attached
to the engine and to the body of the vehicle also through
elastomeric bushings. Table 1 summarizes the powertrain
mass and inertia properties in the powertrain inertia
coordinate system (Table 2).

CENTER OF MASS (MM)

Mass (Kg)

X=1544.9; Y=22.2; Z=603.4

360

J xx (Kg mm2)

1.74 x 107

J yy (Kg mm2)

2.48 x 107

J zz (Kg mm2)

3.10 x 107

Table 1 Powertrain properties

PART
Front mount
Rear mount
Transmission mount
TS bushing engine
TS bushing body

X (MM)
1238.6
1829.8
1614.7
1360.1
1620.2

Y (MM)
67.0
282.2
-442.6
499.4
499.4

Z (MM)
487.2
416.4
412.6
942.7
892.2

Table 3 Baseline powertrain mount locations

PART
Front mount
Rear mount
Transmission mount
TS bushing engine
TS bushing body

X (N/mm)
205
112
160
80
250

Y N/(mm)
365
456
320
16
250

Z (N/mm)
469
456
480
80
25

Table 4 Baseline powertrain mount stiffnesses

Figure 1 shows a sketch of the sub-frame and powertrain
mounting system.

Figure 1 Sub-frame and powertrain system

Mounting System FEM Model

POWERTRAIN INERTIA CO-ORDINATE SYSTEM (MM)

Origin
X=1544.9; Y=22.2; Z=603.4
X-Axis
X=1544.514; Y=23.045; Z=603.751
Z-Axis
X=1544.612; Y=22.398; Z=602.498
Table 2 Powertrain location
Table 3 gives the locations for the powertrain mounts and
Table 4 shows the mount stiffnesses of the baseline design.

The powertrain with its mounting system is modeled using

MSC NASTRAN finite elements software package. In the
finite element model, the powertrain mass and inertia
properties are included via a concentrated mass element
CONM2 at the grid point for the center of mass co-ordinate.
The mounts are modeled using scalar spring elements
CELAS2, and the mounts are connected to the grid point of
the center of mass using rigid elements RBAR or RBE. A
schematic representation for the FEM of the overall
powertrain system is shown in Figure 2.

Design Objectives
The modal characteristics of the powertrain system show the
six rigid body modes and their corresponding natural
frequencies [6]. Identifying these rigid body modes of the
powertrain is one of the main factors in determining
powertrain suspension design. Automotive powertrain
suspension design is a compromise between isolation of
powertrain rigid body modes from vehicle rigid body mode
targets and packaging constraints. So, it is very important to
decouple the rigid body modes and design the mounting
system for frequencies that could prevent amplification.
Amplification is caused when a powertrain vibration
frequency matches a vibration frequency of some other
vehicle assembly. The main design criteria for optimizing the
mounting system are [7]:

Figure 2 Powertrain FEM (top view)

Analysis of Baseline Design
The modal characteristics of the powertrain system of the
baseline design were obtained using MSC NASTRAN. The
natural frequencies of the rigid body modes are listed in
Table 5 and the distribution of the modal kinetic energy [5] is
shown in Table 6.
FREQUENCY (HZ)
5.21
7.37
9.63
10.12
11.40
14.60

PREDOMINANT MODE TYPE

Fore / Aft
Lateral
Vertical
Yaw
Pitch
Roll

Table 5 Baseline mode shapes and frequencies

Natural

%Kinetic energy distribution

Frequency Fore/aft Lateral Vertical

Roll

Pitch

Yaw

<1%

5.8%

1.5%
1.7%

92.3%

<1%

7.37

<1%

73.6%

5.0%

17.8% 1.4%

9.63

2.4%

6.0%

60.3%

1.9%

6.4% 22.9%

10.12

1.4%

4.8%

24.8%

<1%

<1%

11.40

3.3%

4.0%

7.2%

3.3% 76.3% 6.0%

14.60

<1%

11.5%

2.5%

76.8% 9.5%

5.21

<1%

68.4%
<1%

Table 6 Baseline modal kinetic energy distribution

Decoupled vertical mode with a frequency between 8 to

9 Hz together with at least 90% of the kinetic energy in
the vertical direction. These requirements keep the
vertical mode below the suspension wheel hop
frequency and avoid amplification.
Decoupled pitch mode frequency between 10.5 to 11.5
Hz with 80% of the kinetic energy in the pitch direction.
This requirement is mainly to avoid pitch-fore/aft
coupling and to prevent the frequency range from falling
between the cold and warm idle engine speeds, so that
vibration from any first order engine imbalance is not
amplified.
The remaining rigid body modes, i.e. fore-aft, lateral,
roll, and yaw should have around 75% kinetic energy in
their primary direction.
Roll and yaw frequency should lie between 7 to 15 Hz.
This requirement is to ensure that the lower end of the
range is above human sensitivity, while the high end of
the range is below any body structure flexible body
mode.

Design Optimization
The baseline design does not satisfy all design objectives for
the powertrain rigid body mode requirements in terms of
frequencies and decoupling.
In order to satisfy the powertrain rigid body mode
requirements the mount stiffnesses and mounting locations
are optimized based upon the design criteria. Achieving the
desired vertical mode frequency requirement can be
obtained by changing the stiffness of the powertrain mounts.
For the baseline model, MSC NASTRAN design optimization
analysis SOL 200 is used to find the optimum value of the
stiffness in the Z-direction for the three powertrain mounts on
the sub-frame. Table 7 shows the optimized values of the Zdirection stiffness for the three mounts. The natural
frequencies and the distribution of the modal kinetic energy
for the modified mount configuration are shown in Table 8.
PART
Front mount
Rear mount
Transmission mount

X (N/MM)
205
112
160

Y N/(MM)
365
456
320

Z (N/MM)
496
327
369

Table 7 Modified mount stiffnesses

Fore/Aft

Lateral

Pitch

Roll

Vertical

Yaw

%Kinetic energy distribution

RBM

Fore/aft Lateral Vertical

Roll

Pitch

100%

Yaw

95%

5.16

91.5%

<1%

6.97

<1%

<1%

<1%

6.8%

1.4%

68.2%

5.4%

25.2%

<1%

<1%

<1%

4.0%

1.6%

9.4% 84.1%

9.00

<1%

5.8%

88.0%

9.93

4.4%

<1%

<1%

2.0%

11.00

3.3%

7.6%

2.8%

3.6% 70.2% 12.5%

13.45

<1%

18.4%

3.5%

69.0% 9.2%

<1%

Kinetic Energy (%)

Frequency

90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%

Table 8 Distribution of Modal Kinetic Energy

60%
220

Design Sensitivity of Mount Location

250

260

270

282.15

290

300

Rear Mount Y co-ordinate

In the modified design, the lateral, roll, and pitch modes do

not satisfy the decoupling requirement. Therefore, an
investigation of the effect of changes in mount location is
carried out. Design sensitivity analysis using MSC
NASTRAN SOL 200 is used for this location optimization
[8]. The objective of the analysis is to improve rigid body
mode decoupling in the system without affecting the vertical
and pitch frequencies too much. The design parameters for
this design sensitivity analysis are: moving front mount within
100 mm along Y-axis, moving rear mount within 100 mm
along Y-axis and moving transmission mount within
100 mm along X-axis.
Fore/Aft

Lateral

Vert ical

Yaw

Pit ch

Roll

100%
95%

Kinetic Energy %

240

90%

Figure 4 - Kinetic energy distribution of the RBM for

varying rear mount position
Design sensitivity analysis for the location of the front mount
shows that the vertical and pitch frequencies remain almost
unchanged from the modified system.
Figure 3 shows the kinetic energy distribution of the rigid
body modes (RBM) for varying front mount position. It is
seen that decoupling occurs as the front mount moves away
from the center of mass. The decoupling of the pitch mode
increases when the mount moves from 67.00 mm to 162.50
mm after which decoupling decreases (see Figure 3). Thus,
moving the front mount to the new y-coordinate 162.50 mm
is desirable in order to decouple the pitch mode in the pitch
direction.
Design sensitivity analysis for the location of the rear mount
shows that the vertical and pitch frequencies remain almost
unchanged from the modified system.

85%
80%

Figure 4 shows the kinetic energy distribution of the RBM for

varying rear mount position. Although decoupling can be
achieved through rear mount displacement, due to
packaging requirements for this case, it is desirable to retain
the original mount location for the rear mount.

75%
70%
65%
60%
40

67

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Front Mount Y co-ordinate

Figure 3 Kinetic energy distribution of the RBM for

varying front mount position

Figure 5 shows the kinetic energy distribution of the RBM for

varying transmission mount position.
Design sensitivity analysis for the location of the
transmission mount shows that mode decoupling of all the
modes are accompanied by a change in the vertical and
pitch frequencies. So it is not desirable to shift the
transmission mount position.

310

Fore/Aft

Lateral

Pitch

Roll

Vertical

Yaw

PART
Front mount
Rear mount
Transmission mount
TS bushing engine
TS bushing body

100%
95%

Kinetic Energy %

90%

X (MM)
1238.6
1829.8
1614.7
1360.1
1620.2

Y (MM)
162.5
282.2
-442.6
499.4
499.4

Z (MM)
487.2
416.4
412.6
942.7
892.2

85%

Table 10 Powertrain mount locations

80%
75%

Conclusions

70%
65%
60%
55%
1560

1580

1600

1620

1640

1660

1680

1700

1720

Transmission Mount X co-ordinate

An improved powertrain mounting system configuration

satisfying the rigid body frequencies and decoupling
requirements can be achieved through a two-step process.
The two steps are: (i) optimization of the mount stiffnesses in
the vertical direction and (ii) change in mount location based
on design sensitivity. It should be noted that packaging
constraints are very critical in the determination of the final
mount locations, while changes in mount stiffnesses must be
verified for static and durability requirements.
References

Figure 5 - Kinetic energy distribution of the RBM for

varying transmission mount position

[1]
[2]

Final Design
Considering the packaging constraints and the design
sensitivity results, the final design is obtained by modifying
the location of the front mount in the Y-direction. This should
improve the decoupling of the mount rigid body modes as
shown in Table 9. The new design satisfies the design
criteria stated above for improved mounting system. Table
10 shows the final locations for the mounting system.

[3]
[4]
[5]

[6]
%Kinetic energy distribution
RBM

Fore/aft Lateral Vertical

Roll

Pitch

Yaw

[7]

Frequency

5.21
7.26
9.03
10.02
11.23
13.36

<1% <1% 6.9%

92.3% <1%
<1% 76.9% <1% 21.0% <1%
1.1% <1% 92.9% <1% 5.1%
1.9% <1% 1.1% 1.4% 9.6%
4.3% <1% 4.9% <1% 78.2%
<1%

21.5%

<1%
1.1%
<1%
85.6%
12.8%

<1% 78.0% <1%

Table 9 Distribution of modal kinetic energy

<1%

[8]

M. Iwahara and T. Sakai, The Optimum Layout of

Engine Mounting by Dynamic Analysis, SAE
Technical Papers, 1999.
W. Li-Rong et al., Characteristics of Hydraulically
Damped Rubber Mount of Car Engine, SAE
Technical Papers, 2001.
T. Sakai, M. Iwahara, Y. Shirai, and I. Hagiwara,
Optimum Engine Mounting Layout by Genetic
Algorithm, SAE Technical Papers, 2001.
J. Bretl, Optimization of Engine Mounting Systems
to Minimize Vibration, SAE Technical Papers, 1993.
M. Wamsler and T. Rose, Advanced Mode Shape
Identification via Modal Kinetic Energy Plots
Assisted by Numerous Printed Outputs, MSC
Americas User's Conference Proceedings, 1998.
T. Sakai, Y. Takano, and M. Iwahara, The
Optimum Design of Engine Mounting, SAE
Technical Papers, 1998.
L. Piancastelli, P. Barnard, and N. Powell,
ADAMS Custom Interface for Powertrain Mounting
System Design, ADAMS User Conference
Proceedings, 2000.
G. J. Moore, MSC/NASTRAN Design Sensitivity
and Optimization, vol. 67: The Macneal Schwendler Corporation, 1992.