A Frequency Domain Technique

C.
Gavin McGee
Research Assistant
e-mail: gavinmcgee@hotmail.com
Muhammad Haroon
Research Assistant
e-mail: mharoon@purdue.edu
Douglas E. Adams1
Assistant Professor,
e-mail: deadams@purdue.edu
Purdue University,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Ray W. Herrick Laboratories,
140 S. Intramural Drive,
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2031
Yiu Wah Luk

Senior Development Engineer,
e-mail: ywluk@goodyear.com
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company,
Goodyear Vehicle Systems,
Technical Center D/480C, P.O. Box 3531,
Akron, OH 44309-3531
A Frequency Domain Technique

for Characterizing Nonlinearities
in a Tire-Vehicle Suspension
System
Characterization of tire and suspension system nonlinearities in measured data is the first
step in developing input-output quarter car models; however, system identification procedures, which require a priori knowledge of all nonlinearities within a system, often receive
more attention in the research community. Furthermore, relatively few investigations have
focused on nonlinear characterization and identification in the absence of input measurements. A new method for characterizing nonlinearities, in the absence of an input measurement, using transmissibility functions and ordinary coherence functions between response measurement degrees of freedom is discussed here. It is shown that the nonlinear
nature of a vehicle system provides information about the nominal linear system when the
input is unknown. Nonlinear frequency permutations, which create drops in the ordinary
coherence function, serve to characterize the associated nonlinearities. In the absence of
input measurements, coherence functions of the response transmissibility between the
vehicle spindle and body allow the nonlinearities in the suspension system, but not the
tires, to be characterized. Simulation results are discussed and the method is applied to
experimental laboratory and operating data to validate the approach.
DOI: 10.1115/1.1855931
1 Introduction
The dynamic characteristics of tire-suspension systems have
many implications on the overall performance of passenger vehicles from safety to comfort. Much work has been done in the
area of vehicle system identification to support ride and handling
studies. Kim and Ro 1 demonstrated the validity of the two mass
quarter car model. Sharp and Hassan 2 used a linear quarter car
model to study passenger discomfort, suspension working space,
and tire loading characteristics for different combinations of
spring stiffness and damping levels, again showing the utility of
the quarter car model. Lin and Kortum 3 presented a timedomain direct identification method for estimating vehicle system
mass, damping, and stiffness matrices, in addition to coefficients
for nonlinear restoring forces that are linear in the parameters
Roberts et al. 4 presented a spectral identification method for
estimating the parameters associated with a nonlinear oscillator
that requires only a stochastic model of the excitation. Yi and
Hedrick 5 studied a technique for identifying nonlinear system
parameters based on a sliding observer and a least-squares
method. Nazaruddin and Yamakita 6 presented an approach
for identifying vehicle suspension models using a neurofuzzy
algorithm.
Most of this prior research recognizes that nonlinearities must
be identified and then included in subsequent analyses for the
results to be applicable for ride studies over a range of operating
conditions. Popular characterization techniques include frequency
deconvolution Siebert 7, Hilbert transforms Bracewell 8 and
Thrane 9, and wavelet transforms Chui 10. In addition, Leontaritis and Billings 11 have used correlation functions in time
to characterize nonlinear systems. Storer and Tomlinson 12 used
higher-order frequency response functions to characterize nonlinear structural dynamic systems. Cafferty et al. 13 used the re1
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Contributed by the Technical Committee on Vibration and Sound for publication
in the JOURNAL OF VIBRATION AND ACOUSTICS. Manuscript received January 16,
2003; final revision, December 23, 2003. Review conducted by D. Quinn.
Journal of Vibration and Acoustics
storing force method to characterize the dynamic properties of

automotive dampers and Audenino and Belingardi 14 also recognized the merit of this method.
This abbreviated literature survey only accounts for a small
subset of past research on nonlinear characterization and identification. All of these methods require a measurement of the displacement input at the tire patch, that is, characterization and identification procedures in the absence of an input measurement have
not been investigated in detail. When operating data on vehicles is
taken in the field, the data must be characterized without any input
measurement.
In this paper, a relatively simple but effective technique is presented for characterizing nonlinearities, in the absence of an input
measurement, in a tire-vehicle suspension quarter car system.
Frequency response, transmissibility, and ordinary coherence
functions are utilized for this purpose. It is shown that the nonlinear nature of such a system yields information about the nominal
linear system when the input is unknown. This result is in contrast
to most work in nonlinear systems for which the nominal linear
model is used as a starting point to extract nonlinear characteristics. The nonlinearities introduce byproducts of the harmonics and
combination frequencies of the underlying linear resonances in the
coherence functions. By exploiting these features and by knowing
what to look for in the transmissibility and coherence function
plots, the nonlinearity in the model can be fully characterized. The
advantage of this method is that transmissibility and coherence
functions are well known and relatively easy to determine.
The next section begins by establishing a conceptual and analytical framework for the proposed approach. The characterization
technique is then discussed via examples and is then applied to
actual laboratory shaker forced response and vehicle road data.
2 Framework
2.1 The Model. A two degree of freedom DOF sprung/
unsprung mass quarter car model is used to introduce the technique proposed in this paper Fig. 1. This model is popular in
vehicle ride analysis because it is of low order two DOFs, fourth
Copyright 2005 by ASME
FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 61
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
M1
M2
C 1 C 2
x 1
x 2
C 2
K 1 K 2
K 2
K 2
K 2 K 3
C 2
C2

x 1
x 2
x1
x2
3 x 32 3 3 x 21 x 2 3 3 x 1 x 22 3 x 31
C 1 x b K 1 x b
.
0
3 x 31 3 3 x 1 x 22 3 3 x 21 x 2 3 x 32
(3)
Note that for this case, the nonlinearities are combinations of the
wheel unsprung and body sprung responses, x 1 and x 2 , and
not x b . To reiterate, this case occurs when the nonlinearity in the
quarter car model is in the suspension and not the tire.
By applying the Laplace transform, Eq. 3 may be subsequently manipulated more easily in the complex frequency
domain:
Fig. 1 Nominally linear two degree of freedom quarter car

model with nonlinear elements and additional stiffness K 3
M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2
C 2 sK 2
C 2 sK 2
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
order. A modification has been made to the model in the present

study. The sprung mass is considered to be restrained on one side
and is modeled as being attached to a fixed support through a
spring K 3 . The logic behind this model is that when a tire undergoes motion and pushes into the suspension, only a portion of the
body moves in response to the tire motion. The remainder of the
body inertia reacts against this motion and can be treated as a
fixed support. Later, a three DOF model formed by the addition of
tire patch mass to the two DOF model is discussed because it
provides insight into the case when the system input is a force
rather than a displacement. The two DOF model was constructed
in Simulink. The full nonlinear model is assumed to possess a
nominally linear model with linear stiffness and viscous damping
coefficients. The nonlinearities discussed here are listed in Table
1.
2.2 Two Degree of Freedom System Forced Response. The
two equations of motion for the model in Fig. 1 are:
M 1 x 1 K 1 x b x 1 C 1 x b x 1 2 x b x 1 2 3 x b x 1 3
K 2 x 1 x 2 C 2 x 1 x 2 3 x 1 x 2 3 4 sgn x 1
x 2
(1)
M 2 x 2 K 2 x 1 x 2 K 3 x 2 C 2 x 1 x 2 3 x 1 x 2 3
4 sgn x 1 x 2
(2)
To simplify the discussion here, assume that only the cubic stiffness nonlinearity in the suspension ( 2 3 4 0, 3 0) is
present. In this special case, Eqs. 1 and 2 in matrix-vector form
reduce to:
Table 1 Nonlinear forces and their sources in the Simulink

quarter car model
Quadratic stiffness
Cubic stiffness
Coulomb friction
Tire
Suspension
F 2 (x b x 1 ) 2
F 3 (x b x 1 ) 3
N/A
N/A
F 3 (x 2 x 1 ) 3
F 4 f susp1 sgn(x2x1)
62 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005
X 1 s
C 1 sK 1
X b s Fnl s
X 2 s
0
(4)
or B(s)X(s)D(s)X b (s)Fnl(s) where
B s
M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2
C 2 sK 2
C 2 sK 2
M 2 s C 2 sK 2 K 3
2
(5)
D s
C 1 sK 1
0
(6)
Although Eqs. 46 are expressed in the complex frequency

domain, note that data will actually be processed in the Fourier
frequency domain in which the procedure for transforming time
data into frequency data is accomplished using the Fourier transform. Also note that Fnl(s) is the Laplace transformed vector of
the nonlinear terms in the equations of motion. Although the
Laplace transform of the nonlinearity may not be available in
analytical form, it is routine to compute the discrete Fourier transform coefficients, i.e., fast Fourier transform command in
MATLAB , using time data. It should be noted that the Laplace

transforms of nonlinear time domain functions only exist if these
functions are piecewise continuous, and then only exist as infinite
power series. It is important to note that the initial conditions on
the input and response variables are taken to be zero upon transforming the equations from the time domain into the frequency
domain in Eq. 4. Because nonlinear systems can respond differently in the steady state to different sets of initial conditions on the
displacements and velocities of x 1 and x 2 , the equations given
above cannot be used to predict what the responses will be for a
given input for arbitrary initial conditions, but rather the equation
can be used to discuss the case of zero initial conditions. Another
important consideration is that the input needs to be suitably broad
in frequency, i.e., with enough frequency content, to excite all the
linear modes in the model under study and to excite the nonlinear
behavior of the system in some consistent way across the frequency range of interest.
Equation 4 can be rearranged as follows:
Transactions of the ASME
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
C 2 sK 2
C 2 sK 2
M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2
det B
X 1 s
X 2 s
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
C 2 sK 2
C 1 sK 1
X b s
0
M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2
Fnl s ,
det B
C 2 sK 2
(7)
where Fnl(s) F nl1 (s) F nl2 (s) T . Equation 7 shows that the nonlinearities act as additional internal inputs to the two DOF system.
If the input is known or can be measured, then the transfer functions may be calculated from above as follows:
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
C 2 sK 2
F nl2 s
C 1 sK 1 X b s F nl1 s
X 1 s
det B
det B
X b s
X b s
X b s
F nl1 s
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
C 2 sK 2 F nl2 s
C 1 sK 1
det B
X b s
det B
X b s
F nl1 s
X 2 s C 2 sK 2
M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2 F nl2 s
C 1 sK 1
X b s
det B
X b s
det B
X b s
(8)
(9)
However, if the excitation is unknown, as is often the case in vehicle studies involving road test data, then only the transmissibility
between X 2 (s) and X 1 (s) may be determined:
2
X 2 s C 2 sK 2 C 1 sK 1 X b s F nl 1 s M 1 s C 1 C 2 s K 1 K 2 F nl2 s
X 1 s
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3 C 1 sK 1 X b s F nl 1 s C 2 sK 2 F nl2 s
(10)
For Fnl(s) 0 0 T , the system is fully linear and the transmissibility function reduces to:
X 2 s H 21 s
C 2 sK 2
X 1 s H 11 s M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
(11)
The result in Eq. 10 changes significantly when the only nonlinearity is in the tire. Consider the equations of motion for the quarter
car model when the tire contains a cubic stiffness ( 3 0) as well as a linear stiffness ( 3 0, 4 0, 2 0):
M1
M2
C 1 C 2
x 1
x 2 C 2
C 2
C2
K 1 K 2
x 1
x 2 K 2
K 2
K 2 K 3
C 1 x b K 1 x b
3 x 3b 3 3 x b x 21 3 3 x 2b x 1 3 x 31
0
0

x1
x2
(12)
When the Laplace transform of this nonlinear forcing vector is taken, F nl2 (s) is equal to zero. Cancellation in Eq. 10 occurs in this
case and the transmissibility function is identical to that for the fully linear case, Eq. 11; consequently, if the nonlinearity is in the tire,
it will not be detectable using only the transmissibility computation between the sprung and unsprung mass. This result is intuitively
obvious and will be demonstrated later using nonlinear simulations. The implication of this result is that, in order to characterize
nonlinearities in tire, a test must be conducted where the input is known or can be measured.
The frequency response function FRF formulation for the transfer function relationship presented in Eq. 10 is given below by
substituting s j , where is the Fourier frequency, into the complex frequency relationships:
X2 j H 21 j b j C 1 K 1 Xb j F nl1 j c H 22F nl2 j
X1 j H 11 j j C 1 K 1 Xb j F nl1 j H 12F nl2 j
j C 2 K 2 j C 1 K 1 Xb j F nl1 j M 1 2 j C 1 C 2 K 1 K 2 F nl2 j
M 2 2 j C 2 K 2 K 3 j C 1 K 1 Xb j F nl1 j j C 2 K 2 F nl2 j
(13)
Table 2 Linear model parameters of the Simulink quarter car

model
Unsprung mass
Sprung mass
Mass
Damping
Stiffness
M 1 40 kg
M 2 240 kg
C 1 49 kN s/m
C 2 7 kN s/m
K 1 140 kN/m
K 2 20 kN/m
where H ab ( j ) is the FRF between the input a and output

b, F nlk( j ) (k1,2) is the Fourier transform of the nonlinear
forces, and X k ( j ) is the Fourier transform of the time histories
x k (t)(k1,2,b).
2.3 Nominally Linear Quarter Car Model Parameters. The
linear parameters of the Simulink quarter car model used in this
work are listed in Table 2. These parameters were selected based
on those used by Ahmed et al. in their study of linear and nonlinear quarter car response 15. The parameters used in this research
have been tailored to yield natural frequencies for the sprung and
unsprung masses of approximately 1.5 Hz and 10 Hz, respectively, as these are typical of a midsized automobile. Damping
was set to be low approximatley 3% critical damping so that the
resonances could be easily seen in the data. Higher amounts of
damping do not significantly affect the results.
2.4 Linear Frequency Response and Transmissibility. The
frequency response and transmissibility functions of the linear
system are presented in Fig. 2. The sprung and unsprung mass
resonances at approximately 1.5 Hz and 10 Hz are visible in the
FRFs, H x1,xb ( j ) and H x2,xb ( j ). The phase of the transmissibility functions show that the sprung and unsprung masses are in
phase at the sprung resonance 1.5 Hz and 180 out of phase at
the unsprung resonance 10 Hz; however, in the transmissibility
function, T x2,x1 ( j ), there is only one peak. This peak occurs
near the sprung mass resonance, but it is not a natural mode of the
system because the transmissibility only indicates how the sprung
mass is responding relative to the unsprung mass the inverse
shows the opposite relation. This distinction between the frequency response and the transmissibility is important because
only transmissibility can be computed in the absence of input
data.
2.5 Additional Frequency Response Components Due to

Nonlinear Interactions. Two of the nonlinearities considered in
this paper, cubic, and quadratic stiffness, result in polynomial
functions of the input and response variables in the equations of
motion see Eq. 12 for a cubic nonlinearity. A well-known effect that polynomial nonlinearities like x 2 (t) and x 3 (t) have on
the responses of systems is the presence of response components
at additional frequencies other than the excitation frequency Adams 16. These additional frequency response components,
which are often referred to as harmonic distortion, arise because
of frequency combinations within the polynomial nonlinearities.
Furthermore, nonlinearities polynomial and nonpolynomial in
multiple DOF systems cause the modal responses to interact
thereby resulting in response components at nonmodal frequencies as well Nayfeh and Balachandran 17, Nayfeh and Mook
18.
For example, consider the effects of a quadratic stiffness component on the quarter car model frequency response characteristics. When a quadratic nonlinearity is present in the model, then
terms like x 21 and x 1 x 2 appear in the equations of motion. If one of
the response variables, x i , is assumed to contain two frequency
components, 1 and 2 , where x i (t)cos 1tcos 2t, then by
squaring the response variable, the following expression is
obtained:
x i2 t cos 1 t cos 2 t 2 cos2 1 t 2 cos 1 t cos 2 t
cos2 2 t
(14)
By using trigonometric identities, Eq. 14 can be simplified to:

x i2 t 1
cos 2 1 t cos 2 2 t
cos 1 2 t
2
2
cos 1 2 t
(15)
Due to the quadratic nonlinearity, additional response components will be generated at 0 rad/s, 2 1 , 2 2 , 1 2 , and
1 2 when the x i2 nonlinear input term is filtered by the nominally linear FRF characteristics in Eq. 10. If the frequency response components at 1 and 2 were assumed to be the responses at the modes of the sprung and unsprung mass,
Fig. 2 Frequency response and transmissibility functions for linear quarter car model. Hx2xb ,
, H x 1 xb , - - -, T x 2 x 1 , , Peaks occur in the frequency response functions at 1.5 and 10 Hz.
Table 3 Double frequency permutations for polynomial nonlinearities when x t cos 1 t cos 2 t Adams and Allemang 19
Polynomial
x
x2
x3
x4
Frequency permutations
1 , 2
0, 2 1 , 2 2 , 1 2 , 1 2
1 , 2 , 3 1 , 3 2 , 1 2 2 , 2 2 1 , 1 2 2 , 2
2 1
0, 2 1 , 2 2 , 4 1 , 4 2 , 1 2 , 2 1 , 2 1 2 2 ,
2 1 2 2 ,
3 1 2 , 3 2 1 , 3 1 2 , 3 2 1
respectively, as would be the case if the quarter car model were

excited uniformly across its operating frequency range, then the
frequency combinations above would involve the linear natural
frequencies. Response frequencies due to these frequency combinations could be used to determine that the system contains a
quadratic nonlinearity. In fact, this idea forms the basis of the
nonlinear system characterization approach proposed in this research. It should also be noted that complex nonlinearities, such as
Coulomb friction, e.g., can be approximated by polynomials.
Table 3 uses the trigonometric identities above to generate a list
of frequency permutations for three different polynomial nonlinearities. The generalized version of this table to other polynomial
nonlinearities provides a means for interpreting the responses of
quarter car models to determine if response components are
present at these frequency permutations. The presence of these
components indicates that there is a polynomial nonlinearity of
the corresponding polynomial order in the system.
3 Characterizing Nonlinearities in the Two Degree of

Freedom Quarter Car Simulink Model
The nonlinearities that were studied include quadratic stiffness
in the tire and suspension, cubic stiffness in the tire and suspension, clearance gaps in the suspension, Coulomb friction damping
in the suspension, shock absorber damping piecewise linear, and
shock absorber backlash due to play in the component. The nonlinearities discussed here are quadratic stiffness in the tire, cubic
stiffness in the suspension, and Coulomb friction damping in the
suspension.
3.1 Systems With One Nonlinearity. The model and signal
processing parameters used in the Simulink quarter car model
simulations are listed in Table 4. To study the effects of a nonlinearity, its associated parameter was assigned the value in the table
and all other nonlinear parameters were set to zero. The nonlinear
parameters were not chosen to be realistic values, but rather to
achieve a 10% nonlinear-to-total force ratio with the nominal input of x b 0.06* randn(Nt,1). The MATLAB function randn(Nt,1)
used in the generation of the input computes a normally distrib-
uted vector of length Nt, containing random numbers with zero

mean and unity variance. For the Coulomb friction case, the parameter f susp was set to be a fraction of the sprung mass weight,
M 2 g , and the input was varied to achieve different nonlinear
levels. Because certain criteria were enforced in the simulations to
achieve visually evident nonlinear effects, the forces, suspension
deflections and velocities, and tire deflections and velocities in the
following charts may not always be realistic. It is the trends in the
following discussions that are most noteworthy.
3.1.1 Quadratic Stiffness in Tire. Figure 3 shows the magnitude of the FRF and the ordinary coherence function for the quarter car model with quadratic stiffness nonlinearity in the tire. Notice that the magnitude of the FRF for the nonlinear system is not
very different from that of the linear system. However, indications
of uncorrelated inputs, i.e., nonlinearity, can clearly be seen in the
coherence function plot. The dips in the coherence at the sprung
and unsprung mass resonances are the result of leakage in the
signal processing. Upon examining Table 3, one would expect to
see additional response components at 0, 2 f 1 , 2 f 2 , f 1 f 2 , and
f 1 f 2 , where f 1 1.5 Hz and f 2 10 Hz due to the quadratic
stiffness. The resonant frequencies of the nominally linear system
can be seen in both the FRF and the coherence function if these
values were not known.
If f 1 1.5 Hz and f 2 10 Hz, the additional responses due to
the nonlinear interactions appear at 0, 3, 20, 11.5, and 8.5 Hz,
respectively. Upon examining Fig. 3, the dips in the coherence
function are seen to be at 0, 11.5, 8.5, and 20 Hz where they were
predicted to be. The component at 3 Hz is subtle but visible for
this level of nonlinearity. The reason that this component is barely
visible is that the relative motion between the tire patch and the
unsprung mass is small for low frequencies, hence, the nonlinearity in the tire is not significantly active. The coherence function
has provided confirmation of both the presence and the nature of
the nonlinearity, even though the FRF appears to be linear. The
system has not been fully characterized yet because it remains to
be determined if the quadratic nonlinearity is in the tire or the
suspension.
Consider the same analysis when the input is not known, as is
often the case with vehicle road data. Without the input, the FRF
cannot be computed between x b and x 2 . Instead, one can compute
the transmissibility function between x 1 and x 2 , as well as the
ordinary coherence function. Notice in Fig. 4 that the transmissibility magnitude plot only exhibits the peak close to the sprung
mass resonant frequency, near 1.5 Hz. Also, the coherence function looks very different from the coherence computed previously
with the FRF. There is no indication of nonlinearity as was predicted in the transfer function analysis. Because the nonlinearity is
in the tire between x 1 and x b ), the transmissibility is perfectly
linear and contains no information about the nonlinearity. The
results in Fig. 4 clearly indicate that the nonlinearity is not in the
Table 4 Nonlinear model and signal processing parameters in the Simulink quarter car
model simulations
Nonlinearity
in simulation
Quadratic
tire stiffness
Cubic
suspension
stiffness
Coulomb
friction in
suspension
Input m
x b 0.06* randn(Nt,1)
x b 0.06* randn(Nt,1)
x b * randn(Nt,1)
25%: 0.6
50%: 0.2
75%: 0.07
100%: 0.01
Nonlinear
parameters
Fs
Hz
N avg
BS
Nt
2 5.5104
N/m2
3 1.05104
N/m3
128
64
2048
2 16
128
64
2048
2 16
128
64
2048
2 16
4 1
f susp0.1M 2 g
N
Fig. 3 Frequency response function and coherence function between sprung mass response, x 2 t , and base input, x b t . Quarter car model with quadratic tire stiffness, input
known.
suspension. If the input were not known, as in this computation,

other data with knowledge of the input would have to be considered to determine the characteristics of the tire nonlinearity.
3.1.2 Cubic Nonlinearity in Suspension. Consider the case for
which the nonlinearity in the quarter car model is a cubic stiffness
in parallel with the linear stiffness in the suspension. Figures 5
and 6 contain the FRF, transmissibility, and coherence functions.

Upon examining the coherence function between the sprung mass
and the input in Fig. 5, the nonlinear spectral content can be
clearly identified when compared to the example with quadratic
tire stiffness. The additional responses at 4.5 (3 f 1 ), 7 ( f 2
2 f 1 ), 13 ( f 2 2 f 1 ), 18.5 (2 f 2 f 1 ), 21.5 (2 f 2 f 1 ), and 30
Fig. 4 Transmissibility function and coherence function between sprung mass response,
x 2 t , and unsprung mass response, x 1 t . Quarter car model with quadratic tire stiffness,
input unknown.
Fig. 5 Frequency response function and coherence function between sprung mass response, x 2 t , and base input, x b t . Quarter car model with cubic suspension stiffness, input
known.
Hz (3 f 2 ) are all clearly visible. The transmissibility function Fig.

6 displays the same type of coherence function as the one computed using the input. Because the nonlinearity is visible in the
transmissibility, the nonlinearity is in the suspension. The nature
of the nonlinearity cubic has thus been confirmed through the
presence and location of the additional response components.
3.1.3 Coulomb Friction Damping in Suspension. Figure 7

shows the transmissibility and coherence functions for the model
with Coulomb friction damping in the suspension included in the
model. The approximate ratio of nonlinear force frictional to
total force linear damping force plus nonlinear force is unity.
Note that in the transmissibility in Fig. 7, the effects of the
x 2 t , and unsprung mass response, x 1 t . Quarter car model with cubic suspension stiffness, input unknown.
x 2 t , and unsprung mass response, x 1 t . Quarter car model with Coulomb friction in suspension, input unknown, 100% nonlinearity.
nonlinearity on the response are much more pronounced. The coherence function also exhibits signs of nonlinearity. A broad dip in
the coherence function can be seen near 30 Hz. Because the restoring force curve for the frictional force can be approximated
with an odd function i.e., x 3 , x 5 , etc., there is an additional
response component at 3 f 2 . The drop in the coherence function at
30 Hz is the result of this kind of permutation. The coherence
functions have degraded downward on both sides of the unsprung
mass resonance at 10 Hz. The trend downward from a coherence
of one to near zero in the region of 30 Hz appears to be almost
linear. This behavior of the coherence function can be used to
determine the unsprung mass resonant frequency when the input
is unknown. The coherence reaches one near the unsprung mass
resonance because, at that frequency, the unsprung mass is moving with relatively large amplitude, which results in a relatively
large velocity thereby making the Coulomb damping force less
noticeable in relation to the linear damping force. The rise in
coherence occurs at slightly less than 10 Hz because the large
frictional force causes the damped natural frequency ( 1 2 n )
to decrease, where n is the undamped natural frequency of the
system. The large frictional force causes an increase in the damping ratio thus causing a decrease in the undamped frequency.
The increased frictional damping can be observed in the damped

resonance responses of the transmissibility function.
4 Three Degree of Freedom Quarter Car Model With

Tire Patch Mass
When the quarter car model is used to analyze data where the
system input is a force excitation, the mass loading at the tire
patch becomes significant and the two DOF quarter car model
must be modified. The dynamics associated with this additional
mass can have a significant effect on the overall frequency response of the vehicle corner even if the mass is relatively small
e.g., 510% compared to the unsprung and sprung masses. In
order to account for these effects, the quarter car model with a tire
patch mass was developed.
The complex frequency domain equations of motion for this
three DOF model are given below where the variables for the
spindle and body motions, X 1 (s) and X 2 (s), are the same as for
the two DOF model and X b (s) denotes the Laplace transform of
the tire patch displacement, x b (t). Note that x b (t) is not equivalent to the base motion in the two DOF quarter car model in Fig.
1 due to the mass loading, M T P . The three-by-three system impedance matrix is denoted by B(s) :
M T P s 2 C 1 sK 1
C 1 sK 1
C 1 sK 1
M 1 s C 1 C 2 sK 1 K 2
C 2 sK 2
C 2 sK 2
M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
X b s
F b s
X 1 s
0
Fnl s
X 2 s
0
(18)
X b s
F b s
0
Fnl s
B s X 1 s
0
X 2 s
Fig. 8 Analytically generated frequency response functions FRFs and transmissibility function for three degree of freedom quarter car model with input force excitation, f b t , for M TP
0.05 M 1 " H x 1 xb ,
, H x 2 xb , - - -, T x 2 x 1 , , H xbxb , " - " -. Peaks occur in the FRFs at 0.66,
3.78, and 43.1 Hz.
Note that no damping or stiffness has been included to represent the tire patch itself; C 1 and K 1 correspond to the damping
and stiffness in the tire, not the tire patch. When the vector-matrix
equation above is solved, the three DOF transfer function matrix,
H(s) , is found by inverting the system impedance matrix,
B(s) . The functions of interest in this model include the FRF
between the tire patch excitation force, f b (t), and the motions of
the unsprung and sprung masses, as well as the transmissibility
functions between the unsprung and sprung mass motions. The
expressions for the purely linear case are:
X 2 s C 1 sK 1 C 2 sK 2
F b s
s
(19)
X 1 s M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3 C 1 sK 1
F b s
s
(20)
X 2 s
C 2 sK 2
X 1 s M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3
(21)
where (s), the characteristic polynomial, is the determinant of

the impedance matrix. It is of sixth order; therefore, there are
three peaks in the FRF. However, the transmissibility computed
between the sprung and unsprung mass responses is identical to
the transmissibility between the masses for the two DOF model.
The linear transmissibility between the sprung mass and the tire
patch mass for the three DOF system can be computed as follows:
X 2 s
C 1 sK 1 C 2 sK 2
X b s M 1 s 2 C 1 C 2 sK 1 K 2 M 2 s 2 C 2 sK 2 K 3 C 2 sK 2 2
Note that the denominator of the transmissibility expression in Eq.

22 is identical to the determinant of the impedance matrix for
the two DOF model that was given in Eq. 5. Equation 22 is the
same expression for the transmissibility between the sprung mass
and the base as for the two DOF model a linear version of Eq.
9. These results indicate that the three DOF model will produce
the same responses as the two DOF model for transmissibility
between the masses and the same transmissibility between the
masses and the base if the base motion is known.
The same set of model parameters from the nominally linear
two DOF quarter car model, with the addition of the tire patch
(22)
mass, were used to analytically generate the FRFs and transmissibility functions for the three DOF model. The FRF magnitudes
and phases and the transmissibility function magnitude generated
by inverting the impedance matrix in Eq. 18 are plotted in Fig.
8.
The three peaks in the FRFs occur at 0.66, 3.78, and 43.1 Hz. It
is clear from the phase plots that at the first mode 0.66 Hz, all
three masses are moving in phase. At the second mode 3.78 Hz,
the tire-patch mass and sprung mass are moving in phase and the
unsprung mass is out of phase with them. At the third mode 43.1
Hz, the tire-patch and unsprung mass are moving in phase and
Fig. 9 Experimental setup for electrohydraulic shaker test with acceleration measurements at the tire patch, spindle, and the top of the strut at the body
the sprung mass is out of phase with them. The forced response of
the three DOF model indicates that the sprung and unsprung
masses are oscillating out of phase at the lowest-frequency synchronous mode at 3.78 Hz. In the two DOF model, the two masses
oscillate in phase at the lowest-frequency mode at 1.36 Hz. Despite the differences between the responses of the 2 DOF and 3
DOF models, the peak at 1.45 Hz in the magnitude curve of the
transmissibility between the sprung and unsprung masses,
X 2 ( j )/X 1 ( j ), is identical for both models.
5 Experimental Verification
The characterization procedure presented in the previous section is applied to laboratory shaker and vehicle road data in this
section.
5.1 Laboratory Shaker Data. The laboratory data was taken
on the left corner of a midsize vehicle using a 1000 lbf. electrohydraulic shaker apparatus. An illustration of the experimental
setup is given in Fig. 9. Normally distributed broad band forces at
three different levels 5.5, 11.7, and 20.9 lbf root-mean square
were used and the corresponding excitation time history, f b (t), in
the positive vertical direction at the patch was measured using a
load cell with a 1000 lbf/mV sensitivity. The spindle acceleration,
x 1 (t), and the upper strut body connection point acceleration,
x 2 (t), in the positive vertical direction were also measured using
accelerometers with sensitivities of 102.5 and 97.3 mV/g, respectively. The other three tires of the vehicle were supported on uncoupled rigid platforms and it is assumed in this work that the
motions of the tires and suspension elements at these other corners
are negligible.
5.1.2 Frequency Response of Vehicle Corner. The measured
time histories from the test were filtered and then sampled at 5000
Hz to produce a total of 410,000 time points. The FRFs and transmissibility functions between f b (t), x 1 (t), and x 2 (t) were calculated using the signal processing parameters in Table 5.
Table 5 Signal processing parameters used in frequency response function FRF estimation of vehicle corner
t
s
f
Hz
BS
Navg
Overlap
Window
type
FRF estimator
1/5000
0.1356
36,864
20
47%
Hanning
H1
Figures 10 and 11 show the FRF and transmissibility functions

with coherence functions between f b (t) and x 2 (t), and x 1 (t) and
x 2 (t). The shifts in the FRF estimates for different excitation levels indicate the presence of nonlinearities. The presence of additional peaks implies that the quarter car model used in this research is not of high enough order. The three DOF model accounts
for the prominent peak in the 30 40 Hz range because the lowfrequency behavior matches that of the three DOF model. The
extra peaks are due to cross-axis coupling. As in the analytical
case, the peaks in the FRF with the base response do not coincide
with the peaks in the transmissibility between the spindle and the
body mass. Even though the peaks in the analytical forced and
base motion excited FRFs are at 3.78 and 1.36 Hz, respectively,
the peak in the unsprung-to-sprung transmissibility curve is at
1.45 Hz in both cases. This result can be used to infer the location
of the sprung mass resonance in the data, even though it is not
readily apparent from examining the FRF. Just as the synchronous
body mode frequency in the analytically determined transmissibility between the body mass and the base for the three DOF system
was slightly lower 1.36 Hz than the lowest peak in the transmissibility between the body and the spindle 1.45 Hz, it can be
concluded that the true body mode must be slightly lower than the
peak observed in the experimental transmissibility, e.g., slightly
less than 2.25 Hz for the 30.9 lbf. excitation level. This conclusion
can be made because of the relation between the transmissibility
peak to the sprung mass resonance observed in the three DOF
model.
5.1.3 Characterizing the Nonlinearities. Before characterizing
the nonlinearities, it should be noted that the drops in the coherence function can also be due to nonlinearity in the stiffness K 3 .
But the suspension nonlinearities are dominant at frequencies
where the relative deflection across the suspension is relatively
large sprung mass and unsprung mass resonance, and permutations of these frequencies are used in the nonlinear characterization procedure presented here.
The coherence functions are very low toward the bottom end of
the frequency range, drop again in the frequency ranges near 4,
slightly below 6 Hz, 10 Hz, and 15 Hz, are consistently low again
from 25 to 35 Hz, and then drop again sharply in the 37 to 40 Hz
range depending on the input level.
First, consider the very low coherence in both figures near 0
Hz. There are three sources of this low coherence. One source is
the poor dc response of the accelerometer, the second is the lack
of any static nonzero mean shaker input force, and the third
Fig. 10 Experimentally obtained frequency response function FRF data for input force,
f b t , at the tire patch and output motion, x 2 t , at the body connection point. Three different
FRFs are shown for three excitation levels.
source of the drop toward 0 Hz appears to be a quadratic stiffness

nonlinearity in the suspension system because of the tendency of a
quadratic nonlinearity to shift frequency content at to content at
0 and 2 rad/s. The coherence plots in the bottom portions of
Figs. 10 and 11 both show the drops at 0 and 3.6 Hz. Hence, the
drop in coherence at 0 Hz is due to the presence of a quadratic

nonlinearity in addition to the other two sources. Furthermore, the
reason that the quadratic nonlinearity can be assumed to exist in
the suspension and not the tire is because the suspension moves
with a larger deflection relative to the spindle at 1.8 Hz, as is
Fig. 11 Experimentally obtained transmissibility function data between response acceleration, x 2 t , of the body and acceleration, x 1 t , at spindle in the vertical direction. Three
different functions are shown for three excitation levels.
Table 6 Signal processing parameters used in frequency response function FRF estimation of vehicle corner
t
s
f
Hz
BS
Navg
Overlap
Window
type
FRF estimator
1/1024
0.1111
9216
40
0%
Hanning
H1
evident in Fig. 11, i.e., the suspension nonlinearity is being excited at this frequency whereas tire nonlinearities are not.
Next, consider the drop in coherence near 5.4 Hz. This drop can
be attributed to a cubic stiffness nonlinearity in the suspension
system that produces a mapping from 1.8 Hz to 1.8 and 5.4 Hz
cubic maps into and 3. Note that the coherence in both
plots is low at 1.8 and 5.4 Hz. Thus, it can be concluded that the
suspension has both a quadratic nonlinearity and a softening cubic
stiffness nonlinearity, softening because the lowest peak in Fig. 11
decreases in frequency as the amplitude of the excitation level
increases.
The consistent drops in coherence in the neighborhood of 10
and 30 Hz, and the drop near 5 Hz for that matter, can also be
attributed to nonlinear cubic stiffness in the suspension by considering the relative motion across the strut. In general, whenever the
relative motion between the body and the spindle is large, the
suspension nonlinearities will be excited and the coherence will
tend to drop at those frequencies in addition to three times those
frequencies. More specifically, Fig. 11 shows that the spindle is
responding with much larger relative deflections than the body at
5, 10, 20, and 38 Hz, so it is expected that the cubic nonlinearity
within the suspension will create drops in coherence near 5, 10,
and 20 Hz and 15, 30, and 60 Hz. All of these drops in coherence
can be easily seen in Fig. 10 except for the 20 Hz case, which is
subtle but present nonetheless, and the 60 Hz case, which is beyond the range of the excitation spectrum 0.5 to 45 Hz.
The presence of Coulomb friction in the suspension is confirmed by the tendencies of the coherence functions in Figs. 10
and 11. Note the coherence function is worst for the lowest level
input but improves with increasing excitation level. Also, the coherence function dips slightly before 30 Hz. In the simulation
portion of the research, the friction characteristic first appeared in
the coherence function at 30 Hz, or three times the unsprung mass

resonance. This dip in the coherence of the experimental data also
suggests the presence of friction in the suspension. A general trend
for all excitation levels may also be observed that would indicate
a friction nonlinearity. Note that for most peaks in the FRF in Fig.
10, the coherence is better for higher level excitations. One would
expect this because Coulomb friction is accentuated for small amplitude motions.
5.2 Vehicle Road Data. The data analyzed here was acquired
for an intermediate size vehicle different from that in the shaker
experiment. The car was driven over different road conditions at
different speeds. Nine seconds of data was collected and recorded
and each test was repeated a multiple number of times for the
same conditions and speeds. Acceleration data was recorded at
various points of the driver/vehicle interface. The measured time
histories were sampled at 1024 Hz producing a total of 9216 time
points with 40 ensemble averages of response time histories at
two measurement DOFs representative of the sprung and unsprung masses. Transmissibility and coherence functions were
generated using the signal processing parameters in Table 6. Because ensemble averaging was used, no overlapping was done.
Figure 12 shows the transmissibility and coherence functions
between the sprung and unsprung mass for a vehicle speed of 40
mph on a rough road. It is clear from the figure that there are
many more peaks present than in the 2 DOF model. There are
lateral and longitudinal motions in addition to the vertical motion
and there is also cross coupling between them. Because these are
real data, there is measurement noise; therefore, great care must
be exercised when analyzing them. More specifically, a drop in
the coherence may be due to leakage from higher-energy peaks in
the operating spectra into frequency bins where the sprung and
unsprung mass lack energy. The coherence function and normalized autopower spectrum normalized by the maximum value of
the relative motion between the unsprung mass and sprung mass
maximum value 9.845 g2 are shown on the same axis in Fig. 13.
This plot helps to better identify the drops in coherence that are
actually due to nonlinearities. It is clear from Fig. 13 that because
the sprung mass motion is higher than that of the unsprung mass
near 1.5 Hz in the transmissibility plot, the vertical sprung mass
mode ( f 1 ) must be slightly lower than 1.5 Hz. This conclusion
Fig. 12 Transmissibility and coherence function between sprung mass response, x 2 t , and
unsprung mass response, x 1 t for a vehicle speed of 40 mph on rough road
Fig. 13 Coherence function between sprung mass response, x 2 t , unsprung mass response, x 1 t ,
, and normalized power spectrum of relative motion between the unsprung
mass and sprung mass, , for a vehicle speed of 40 mph on rough road. Two frequency
ranges; i 015 Hz and ii 1530 Hz.
can be made based on the relation of the transmissibility peak to

the sprung mass resonance as observed in the three DOF model.
The improved coherence in the neighborhood of 13 Hz indicates
that the vertical unsprung mass mode ( f 2 ) is near this frequency.
5.2.1 Nonlinear Characterization. Table 7 lists the drops in
coherence due to frequency permutations and the associated
nonlinearities.
Consider the drop at 10.3 Hz; it is due to cubic stiffness nonlinearity because it causes a frequency permutation at f 2 2 f 1 .
Figures 14 and 15 show the transmissibility and coherence function and the relative power spectrum maximum unsprung mass
power, 6.13 g2, and maximum sprung mass power, 0.054 g2 for a
vehicle speed of 60 mph on an urban highway and Figs. 16 and 17
show the same for a speed of 35 mph maximum power 13.496
g2. From Fig. 15, the sprung mass resonance seems to be just
below 1.45 Hz, which is close to the previous case. The good
coherence between 10.5 and 13.5 Hz indicates that the unsprung
resonance is in this region. The observed nonlinearities are listed
in Table 8.
From Fig. 17, the sprung resonance is determined to be below
1.4 Hz and the unsprung resonance is between 11.5 and 13.5 Hz.
The observed nonlinearities are listed in Table 9.
Table 7 Drops in coherence and the associated nonlinearities

for a vehicle speed of 40 mph on rough road
Frequency Hz
0
10.3
1750
Coherence at higher frequencies is worse for the speed of 60

mph compared to the speed of 35 mph, indicating that Coulomb
friction has more effect, which is to be expected because at high
speeds the frequency content of the input is higher and the ampli-

for a vehicle speed of 60 mph on an urban highway
Frequency Hz
Description
Nonlinearity
14.4
Frequency permutation,
f 1 f 2
f 2 2 f 1
2f2
2 f 2 f 1
Worsening trend in
coherence
Quadratic stiffness in
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
Coulomb friction in
suspension
16.5
25.5
27.5
24 50

for a vehicle speed of 35 mph on an urban highway
Frequency Hz
Description
Nonlinearity
14.2
f 1 f 2
f 2 2 f 1
2 f 2 f 1
2 f 2 f 1
Consistently worsening
trend in coherence
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
Coulomb friction in
suspension
Description
Nonlinearity
16.5
suspension
Cubic stiffness in
suspension
Coulomb friction in
suspension
22.5
f 2 2 f 1
Worsening trend in
coherence
27.5
2250
unsprung mass response, x 1 t for a vehicle speed of 60 mph on an urban highway
mass and sprung mass, , for a vehicle speed of 60 mph on an urban highway. Two frequency
unsprung mass response, x 1 t for a vehicle speed of 35 mph on an urban highway
mass and sprung mass, , for a vehicle speed of 35 mph on an urban highway. Two frequency
tude is lower as can be seen from the power spectra in Figs. 13,
15, and 17. It is apparent that for low speeds there is more energy
at low frequencies, and for high speeds the energy is distributed
over a larger-frequency range. Because Coulomb friction is more
significant at lower amplitudes, it is more apparent in this case.
It can be concluded from the above discussion that the suspension has both quadratic and cubic stiffness nonlinearities and Coulomb friction. As mentioned earlier, complex nonlinearities can be
approximated by polynomials. The types of complex nonlinearities generally observed in vehicle suspension systems are hysteretic stiffness with backlash dominant in low-frequency range,
Coulomb friction damping, and bilinear damping dominant in
high-frequency range. Hence, the drops in coherence attributed to
polynomial nonlinearities are possibly also due to the presence of
such complex nonlinearities. An important thing to note is that
information about the nonlinear system helps to identify the underlying nominally linear system. Good coherence around the unsprung mass resonance helps to identify it. Subsequently, drops in
coherence around this frequency help to identify the sprung mass
resonance. For example, a drop around 14 Hz can be attributed to
a frequency permutation f 1 f 2 . Knowing the approximate unsprung resonance, the sprung resonance can be identified.
Thus, measured transmissibility functions, which do not require
full knowledge or measurement of the force or motion excitation
at the tire patch, can be used to characterize nonlinearity in spite
of not knowing the exact underlying linear nature of the tirevehicle suspension system. This ability to characterize nonlinearity without all of the input-output information is a result of the
fact that the nonlinearity itself acts as an internal force that is
incoherent with the linear external applied excitation, thereby
causing drops in coherence.
6 Conclusions and Future Work

Transmissibility functions and ordinary coherence can be used
for characterizing nonlinearities in tire-vehicle suspension systems
in the absence of an input measurement. Frequency permutations
due to the presence of nonlinearities help in identifying them. The
frequency permutations lead to drops in the coherence functions at
specific frequencies that are signatures of a particular nonlinearity.
This procedure can be applied to data normally taken in the automotive industry. The three DOF model with tire patch mass can be
used for analysis of forced excitation input experimental data
and can also be used to determine the sprung and unsprung mass
resonances.
Future work should include the investigation of the problem of
system identification of the tire-vehicle suspension system using
the characterization procedure presented in this paper. The system
identification procedure and the results for various inputs will determine how well the system has been characterized. Another is-
sue that needs to be investigated is the coupling between the vertical, lateral, and longitudinal degrees of freedom in the suspension. The need for these measurements may require more instrumentation on the vehicle during road tests as well as other types of
testing.
Nomenclature
B(s)
Fnl(S)
f b (t)
H a,b ( j )
T a,b ( j )
X( j )
X(s)
x(t)
(s)
,
Impedance matrix
Laplace transform of vector of nonlinear terms
Excitation time history
Frequency response function between input b and
output a
Transmissibility between a and b
Fourier spectrum of the output time history
Laplace transform of the output time history
Measured output time history
Characteristic polynomial
Scalar nonlinear parameters for nonlinear elements
References
1 Kim, C., and Ro, P. I., 2000, Reduced-Order Modeling and Parameter Estimation for a Quarter-Car Suspension System, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 214D,
pp. 851 864.
2 Sharp, R. S., and Hassan, S. A., 1986, An Evaluation of Passive Automotive
Suspension Systems With Variable Stiffness and Damping Parameters, Veh.
Syst. Dyn., 15, pp. 335350.
3 Lin, Y., and Kortum, W., 1991, Identification of System Physical Parameters
for Vehicle Systems With Nonlinear Components, Veh. Syst. Dyn., 20, pp.
354 365.
4 Roberts, J. B., Dunne, J. F., and Debunos, A., 1995, A Spectral Method for
Estimation of Nonlinear System Parameters From Measured Response,
Probab. Eng. Mech., 10, pp. 199207.
5 Yi, K., and Hedrick, K., 1995, Observer-Based Identification of Nonlinear
System Parameters, J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 117, pp. 175182.
6 Nazaruddin, Y. Y., and Yamakita, M., 1999, Neuro-Fuzzy Based Modeling of
Vehicle Suspension System, Proc. of the 1999 IEEE International Conference
on Control Applications, New York, pp. 14901495.
7 Siebert, W. M., 1986, Signals and Systems, McGrawHill, New York.
8 Bracewell, R. N., 1986, The Fourier Transform and Its Applications, 2nd Ed.,
WCB/McGrawHill, Boston, Mass.
9 Thrane, N., 1984, The Hilbert Transform, Hewlett Packard Application Notes.
10 Chui, C. K., 1992, An Introduction to Wavelets, Academic, San Diego, CA.
11 Leontaritis, I., and Billings, S., 1985, Input-Output Parametric Models for
Nonlinear Systems. Part I: Deterministic Nonlinear Systems, Int. J. Control,
412, pp. 303328.
12 Storer, D. M., and Tomlinson, G. R., 1993, Recent Developments in the
Measurement and Interpretation of Higher-Order Transfer Functions From
Nonlinear Structures, Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 72, pp. 173189.
13 Cafferty, S., Worden, K., and Tomlinson, G., 1995, Characterization of Automotive Shock Absorbers Using Random Excitation, J. Autom. Eng. Part D,
209, pp. 239248.
14 Audenino, A. L., and Belingardi, G., 1995, Modeling the Dynamic Behavior
of a Motorcycle Damper, J. Automobile Eng.: Part D, 209, pp. 249262.
15 Ahmed, A. K. W., Rakheja, S., and Richard, M. J., 1993, Frequency Response Analysis of Symmetric and Asymmetric Nonlinear Vehicle Suspension, Trans. Can. Soc. Mech. Eng., 174B, pp. 837 850.
16 Adams, D. E., 2000, A Spatial Approach to Nonlinear Vibration Analysis,
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cincinnati, OH.
17 Nayfeh, A. H., and Balachandran, B., 1989, Modal Interactions in Dynamical
and Structural Systems, Appl. Mech. Rev., 4211, Part 2, pp. 175201.
18 Nayfeh, A. H., and Mook, D. T., 1979, Nonlinear Oscillations, Wiley, New
York.
19 Adams, D. E., and Allemang, R. J., 2001, Discrete Frequency Models: A
New Approach to Temporal Analysis, ASME J. Vibr. Acoust., 123, pp. 98
103.

A Frequency Domain Technique

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Frequency Domain Technique

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

C.

Yiu Wah Luk

A Frequency Domain Technique

Journal of Vibration and Acoustics

storing force method to characterize the dynamic properties of

Copyright 2005 by ASME

FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 61

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 1 Nominally linear two degree of freedom quarter car

order. A modification has been made to the model in the present

Table 1 Nonlinear forces and their sources in the Simulink

62 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

or B(s)X(s)D(s)X b (s)Fnl(s) where

Although Eqs. 46 are expressed in the complex frequency

MATLAB , using time data. It should be noted that the Laplace

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

X1 j H 11 j j C 1 K 1 Xb j F nl1 j H 12F nl2 j

Journal of Vibration and Acoustics

FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 63

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Table 2 Linear model parameters of the Simulink quarter car

where H ab ( j ) is the FRF between the input a and output

2.5 Additional Frequency Response Components Due to

By using trigonometric identities, Eq. 14 can be simplified to:

64 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

respectively, as would be the case if the quarter car model were

3 Characterizing Nonlinearities in the Two Degree of

uted vector of length Nt, containing random numbers with zero

Journal of Vibration and Acoustics

FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 65

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

suspension. If the input were not known, as in this computation,

and 6 contain the FRF, transmissibility, and coherence functions.

66 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Hz (3 f 2 ) are all clearly visible. The transmissibility function Fig.

3.1.3 Coulomb Friction Damping in Suspension. Figure 7

Journal of Vibration and Acoustics

FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 67

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

The increased frictional damping can be observed in the damped

4 Three Degree of Freedom Quarter Car Model With

68 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

where (s), the characteristic polynomial, is the determinant of

Note that the denominator of the transmissibility expression in Eq.

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

70 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

Figures 10 and 11 show the FRF and transmissibility functions

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

source of the drop toward 0 Hz appears to be a quadratic stiffness

drop in coherence at 0 Hz is due to the presence of a quadratic

Journal of Vibration and Acoustics

FEBRUARY 2005, Vol. 127 71

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

the coherence function at 30 Hz, or three times the unsprung mass

72 Vol. 127, FEBRUARY 2005

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 12/16/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

can be made based on the relation of the transmissibility peak to