See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263082846

Double Tube Shock Absorber Model for Noise and

Vibration Analysis

Article in SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars - Mechanical Systems · July 2013
DOI: 10.4271/2013-01-1912

CITATIONS READS

8 442

4 authors, including:

Marouane Benaziz S. Nacivet

Ecole Centrale de Lyon PSA Peugeot Citroen
2 PUBLICATIONS 10 CITATIONS 21 PUBLICATIONS 209 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Fabrice Thouverez
Ecole Centrale de Lyon
162 PUBLICATIONS 1,542 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

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

ANR_IRINA View project

All content following this page was uploaded by S. Nacivet on 13 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM

2013-01-1912
Published 05/13/2013
Copyright © 2013 SAE International
doi:10.4271/2013-01-1912
saepcmech.saejournals.org

Double Tube Shock Absorber Model for Noise and Vibration

Analysis
Marouane Benaziz
LTDS Ecole Centrale de Lyon - PSA

Samuel Nacivet and Jérémie Deak

PSA Peugeot Citroën

Fabrice Thouverez
LTDS Ecole Centrale de Lyon

ABSTRACT
The “structure-borne” noise of the shock absorber is often responsible for undesirable noise in the car interior cabin.
These vibrations are attributed to friction, opening/closing of the valves, fluid cavitation or other complex phenomena.
Early numerical prediction of the level of these vibrations in the car development process saves time and money. Most
of the shock absorber models existing in the literature are limited to analysis of vehicle ride and handling. For noise and
vibration analysis, the published works do not explicitly describe any model with its associated assumptions and a clear
correlation with the experiments for high frequencies. Moreover there is no interpretation of the physical meaning of the
high-frequency content of the response.
The objective of the present work is to build a double tube shock absorber model correlated up to 700 Hz. Experimental
testing results are presented in this paper in order to put in evidence the non-linear phenomena localized on the piston
shock absorber. The model includes the fluid compressible behavior, non-linear flow-rate pressure relationship and spring
valve dynamics. Unknown parameters like bulk modulus are identified with experimental data.
The numerical results are compared to the experiments, showing that the shock absorber model is able to reproduce
very well the local non-linear phenomena. This confirms our hypothesis and improves our knowledge of the potential noise
sources in the shock absorber.

CITATION: Benaziz, M., Nacivet, S., Deak, J. and Thouverez, F., "Double Tube Shock Absorber Model for Noise and
Vibration Analysis," SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. 6(2):2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-1912.
____________________________________

INTRODUCTION numerical simulation to study high-frequencies, but the

Structure-borne noise of the shock absorber occurs when
the shock absorber is excited with a low frequency (10-15
Hz) and with low amplitude (few millimeters). This type of
excitation leads to a shock absorber response with transient
high frequency content typically between 200 Hz and 700 Hz.
These high-frequency forces are transmitted to the car body
causing what we call the “rattle noise”. The structure-borne
noise of the shock absorber is often attributed to valve
opening/closing, friction and valve impacts on its seat.
Numerical prediction of the structure-borne noise early in
the car development process necessitates a correlated model
up to 700 Hz. Most of the shock absorber models found in the
literature are limited to analysis of vehicle ride and handling,
that is for frequencies [0 30 Hz] [1]. Lauwery's [1] uses
model is not detailed and the correlation between experiments
and simulation is not clearly presented. Sacramento in [2]
shows that his model is correlated up to 250 Hz. But the
choices of the model and equations are not clearly presented.
To our knowledge, in the literature, we found no shock
absorber model with correlation up to 700 Hz.
The objective of the present work is to present our
methodology to build a shock absorber model for temporal
simulation based on experimental results and which is
correlated up to 700 Hz with the experiments. The first part
of this paper aims at describing the experimental tests
conducted in order to identify the physical sources of the
noise and to identify the model parameters. The second part
is a description of the shock absorber model and its
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM
Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)
assumptions. Finally the third part gives the methodology of
parameters identification and the correlation results.
SHOCK ABSORBER TESTING
This paper is focused on an automotive double-tube rear
shock absorber. Figure 1 is a scheme of this type of shock
absorber. It has three chambers. The chamber above the
piston is the rebound chamber, the chamber below the piston
is the compression chamber and the third chamber is the
reserve chamber. The fluid flows between the rebound
chamber and compression chamber via the piston valves and
orifices, and between the compression chamber and the
reserve chamber via the base valves. The reserve chamber is
partially filled with gas to compensate the volume of the rod
when entering or exiting the rebound chamber. A lot of
technologies exist to obtain a non-linear force-velocity
characteristic. The Figure 2 shows the technology studied in
this paper, the piston is made of spring valves and the base
valve is made of discs stack for compression and a check
valve for rebound.
Figure 1. Double-tube shock absorber functioning.
Figure 2. Technologies studied in the present paper.
Experimental Configuration
The piston and the base valve of the shock absorber are
placed in a special device in order to be able to measure
pressure in the chambers. The experiments are done without
the shock absorber mounts for two reasons:
• Reminding that we are interested in the source of the
structure-borne noise of the shock absorber, the first reason is
that the mounts are involved in the transmission of the
vibrations to the car body and play no role as a source.
• The second reason is that the high frequency phenomena are
better observed when mounts are removed to prevent their
“masking” of high frequency content.
The excitation is imposed on the shock absorber body.
The rod is maintained fixed. The imposed signal is a 12 Hz -
2 mm sinusoidal displacement for the structure-borne noise
study and 1 Hz - 25 mm for parameters identification. The
sampling frequency is 23.4 kHz, enough to catch very well
oscillations until 1 kHz. Our sign convention on the body
displacement is positive axis oriented downward. The
recorded data are the rod force, the pressure in the chambers,
displacement and velocity of the shock absorber body.
Two configurations are tested:
• Configuration 1: Piston and base valve are both placed in
the special device (Figure (3a)).
• Configuration 2: The base valve is removed and the piston
is kept alone. This configuration allows tracking the
phenomena on the piston only (Figure (3b)).
Figure 3. Illustration of the two tested configurations.
Experimental Results
The high-frequency content of the shock absorber is
observed by applying a band-pass filter [200 - 700] Hz to the
temporal measured rod force at the reference excitation. A
“good” shock absorber from a noise point of view is a shock
absorber with a low level of the rod force above 200 Hz.
The Figure 4 plots the rod force recorded for
configuration 2 during one period. The upper figure is the
measured rod force and the bottom figure is the rod force
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM

Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)

with applied band-pass filter [200 - 700] Hz. The bottom chamber. This moment is the beginning of the compression
figure shows great impulse between 0.96 s and 0.97 s. The phase. This one is visible in the rod force measurement and
phenomenon occurs in both configurations, with a higher we believe it is due to the first spring valve opening.
level in Configuration 1. The moment where the phenomenon
occurs is at the beginning of the compression phase, when the
first compression spring valve opens. The shock absorber
model will be able to confirm this hypothesis.

Figure 5. Measured pressure in the chambers for

Configuration 2.

In order to simplify our study, we will study each

Figure 4. Measured rod force and its dynamic content
between 200 Hz and 700 Hz for configuration 2.
The Figure 5 shows the results of the measured pressures
in the three chambers and the input displacement. The
pressure measurements help dissociating phenomena on the
piston and on the base valve.
The first remark is that the pressure in the reserve
chamber is almost constant. This is due to the small input
displacement and high compressibility of the gas.
The second remark is about the observed discontinuities:
• At the beginning of the rebound phase around 0.92 s, we
observe a “bump” in the compression chamber. This moment
is the beginning of the rebound phase. This is probably due to
a phenomenon preventing the rebound check valve to open
such as stiction. This bump is not visible in the force
measurement and we believe it does not play an important
role in the high frequency emissivity.
• At the beginning of the compression phase around 0.96 s
there is another “bump” in both compression and rebound
component (piston and base valve) separately. As the piston
carries most of the shocks and nonlinearities, we will focus
our study on this component. All the dynamic phenomena are
not visible with a force-velocity characteristic diagram of the
shock absorber. It is necessary to build a detailed model of
the shock absorber components and fluid properties.
SHOCK ABSORBER MODEL
The experiments showed that the shock absorber
generated force contains local phenomena responsible for the
high-frequency emissivity of the shock absorber. The shock
absorber model proposed by Reybrouck in [3] gives good
results in the frequency range of the ride and comfort analysis
for passenger cars. This model was improved by Duym in [4]
with a more detailed model of the oil behavior in contact with
gas. The fluid model takes into account the effects of the
variation of fluid compressibility due to gas bubbles present
in the oil. Models including a mechanical model of valves
made of diaphragms are found in [5] and [6] and for spring
valves in [7]. More detailed spring valves model and analysis
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM
Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)
of their stability can be found in studies of piping pressure
relief valves in [8] and [9].
Forces Acting on the Piston
The piston rod force F is calculated by taking the
equilibrium of forces acting on the piston and on the rod:
(1)
Where Pc (resp. Pr) is the pressure in the compression
(resp. rebound) chamber, and Ac (resp. Ar) is the section of
the piston in contact with oil in compression (resp. rebound)
side. Ff is the sum of all friction forces acting on the piston
and the rod. All these forces are represented in Figure 6.
Friction forces are acting between piston oil seal and inner
cylinder and between rod and rod guide seal. Friction models
for shock absorbers can be found in [10] and in [11]. It is in
general dependent on displacement, velocity and normal
force. In this paper, friction forces are not considered as they
are low and do not play an important role.
Figure 6. Forces acting on the shock absorber piston.
Fluid Equations
In order to determine the pressures in Eq. (1), we write the
mass conservation and the fluid compressibility equation.
Mass Conservation
The shock absorber can be divided into two control
volumes, one for the rebound chamber and the other one for
the compression chamber. The mass balance must be
respected in each control volume. Assuming that fluid density
is not space dependent in the control volume and that the
fluid is homogeneous, we can write the mass balance
equation for each chamber:
(2a)
(2b)
Where ρ is the fluid density and is the fluid velocity
vector. The subscripts r or c designates the chamber (rebound
or compression).
Integrating the local continuity Eq. (2a) and Eq. (2b) over
the control volume and applying the Green-Ostrogradski
theorem leads to Eq. (3a) and Eq. (3b):
(3a)
(3b)
Where Vr,c is the chamber volume and is the control
volume variation, Qpiston is the total flow rate through the Qbv
piston and is the total flow rate through the base valve. Qpiston
and Qbv are positive when the flow enter in the compression
chamber. The control volume variation is due to the relative
movement between the piston and the shock absorber body
and to the valve movement.
Fluid Compressibility Equation
In the shock absorber, the fluid density is affected by the
pressure (compressibility) and temperature (thermal
expansion). In the experiments, the tests duration is short (a
few seconds) so oil temperature is not significantly affected.
In this paper we will assume constant temperature. The fluid
density will depend only on the pressure. The fluid bulk
modulus (inverse of fluid compressibility) is defined by [12]:
(4)
Where χ is the bulk modulus (expressed in Pa).
Substituting Eq. (4) in Eq. (3a) and Eq. (3b):
(5a)
(5b)
is the shock absorber velocity. The term Σ Qvr,i and Σ
Qvr,i are the sum of the additional flow rates due to valve
opening/closing velocity, modifying the chamber control
volume.
The pressure in the reserve chamber will be assumed
constant and is the gas pressure Pgas. This assumption is valid
when the displacement is small (below a few millimeters).
Eq. (5a) and Eq. (5b) are two first order differential equations
in term of pressures. The flow rates through the piston and
the base valve are dependent upon the differential pressure in
the chambers.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM
Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)
Pressure-Flow Rate Relations
The shock absorber is made of orifices with either
constant or variable section. In our case, the shock absorber is
made of one constant orifice at the piston and another at the
base-valve. All others orifices are variable orifices, which
mean that their section is dependent on the valve
displacement. The piston is made of four spring valves for the
compression and one spring valve for the rebound. In the
studied configuration, the base valve was removed. It is
equivalent to consider a constant orifice with a section equal
to the piston section. The flow rate equation is written
according to [13] and [14]:
(6)
Where A is the flow section, Cd is the flow coefficient and
ΔP is the pressure difference between the connected
chambers. is dependent on the valve opening or is constant in
the case of constant orifice section.
To take into account the transition from laminar to
turbulent in a continuous way, we express the flow
coefficient as follow:
(7)
where Dh is the hydraulic diameter of the section. The
hydraulic diameter of the spring valve is a function of the
valve displacement. µ is the kinematic viscosity, Cd,max is the
maximum flow coefficient reached for turbulent flow. l is a
flow number defined in [14] and lc is the critical flow number
handling the transition from laminar to turbulent flow. For
most practical cases, the transition occurs for a flow number
around 1000. But within components with abrupt changes in
area and direction the transition occurs at flow numbers much
less than 1000.
The adopted steady-state pressure-flow rate relationship
in (Eq. 6) only reflects the energy dissipation of the fluid. As
the model aims at reproducing dynamic phenomena, it would
be appropriate to evaluate fluid inertial and capacitive effects
in order to justify if it is relevant to neglect them. But as a
first approach and due to the complex geometries of the
orifices, the steady-state relationship is used.
Mechanical Equation of the Valves
For noise and vibration studies, the dynamics of the
spring-valves must be considered in the model. The
dynamical behavior of a spring valve is described by the
second Newton's law (Eq. 8) and the impact condition (Eq.
9):
(8)
(9)
(10)
M is the spring valve mass, C is the damping coefficient,
K is the spring stiffness and F0 is the valve preload. The
damping coefficient represents the dissipative phenomena
such as fluid friction over the valve and natural structural
dissipation. As shown in [15] the damping coefficient
influences the valve stability. The non-dimensional damping
value will be set to 1. is the valve velocity just before the
impact and its value just after and r is the coefficient of
restitution. If r = 1 the impact is elastic, the energy is
preserved. If r = 0 the impact is inelastic and all the kinetic
energy is lost during the impact. xmin and xmax are the
position of the lower and upper end-stops.
External forces applied on the valves
The Force Fst is a stiction force acting on the valve when
it is closed.
The force Fp(ΔP, xν) is due to the pressure acting on the
valve and a flow force due to the changes of fluid momentum
[14]. As the valve is symmetric, only the axial forces play a
role in the valve movement.
(11)
ΔP is the pressure difference between the two chambers.
Ap is the surface on which the pressure of the upstream
chamber acts, Cd is the flow number, S(x) is the flow section
and θ is the jet angle as defined in [14].
The spring valve orifice section is dependent on the shape
of the valve. It is obtained by geometric analysis of the
opening of the valve. Generally if the valve is axisymmetric,
the valve orifice section is a truncated cone where its
generatrix is the shorter distance between the valve seat and
the valve.
For the compression spring valve as shown in Figure 7,
the area Ap is the section defined by the diameter Dp(x) which
is dependent upon the valve geometry and the valve
displacement. For the rebound spring valve, the area Ap is
different when the valve is closed and when the valve is
totally opened. When it is totally opened, the pressure acts
only on a fraction of this area. In the case of the rebound
spring valve, the upstream pressure area is:
(12)
(13)
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM
Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)
Where Apt is the total area where the pressure acts
uniformly when the valve is closed. This area is all the
annular surface of the valve in Figure 7.b. Al is the area where
the pressure acts when the valve displacement is xν ≥ α. Al is
the sum of the four small areas bounded by the dashed line.
Figure 7. Mechanical model for the piston spring valve.
Resolution of the equations
The set of equations to solve is two first order differential
equations (fluid equations in Eq. (5)) and five second order
differential equations for the spring valves (mechanical
equations in Eq. (11)). All these differential equations are
non-linear and coupled in term of pressure and valve
displacements. The dynamical system is solved with
AMESim which is a simulation software based on bond-
graph theory [16]. In an industrial point of view, this type of
approach is well-suited for our problem because of its
modularity. A component can be easily modified, changed or
removed and the set of equations is automatically updated.
PARAMETERS IDENTIFICATION
AND VALIDATION OF THE MODEL
One of the drawbacks of the model is the important
number of parameters. These parameters can be classified
into four types:
• Deterministic parameters.
• Parameters with variability due to the process such as
geometric dimensions.
• Parameters that are not known precisely such as
compressibility.
• Empirical parameters that are not known precisely such as
the maximum flow coefficients and the critical flow number
that appears in Eq. (7).
Moreover, the purpose of the shock absorber model is to
represent as best as possible the phenomena we want to
study. Some physical phenomena are not or not adequately
modeled because of their complexity or unknown relevancy.
Consequently some parameters need to be updated as shown
in the following section.
Parameters Identification
In this paper, we will only focus on the identification of
the third and the fourth type of parameters. The identification
is made in two steps:
• Identification of the rebound spring valve flow coefficients
and coefficient α with quasi-static excitation (1 Hz-25 mm).
• Identification of the compressibility with dynamic
excitation (12 Hz - 2 mm). The bulk modulus is identified
with the experiments assuming that the rest of the model is
correct.
The parameter identification consists in minimizing e(X):
(14)
(15)
X is the set of parameters to identify, is the
simulated rod force, is the experimental force
recomputed with the measured pressures. It is used instead of
the measured rod force because it does not take into account
the eventual friction forces between the two moving parts of
the shock absorber.
A pattern search algorithm is used for the optimization.
This type of algorithm is suitable for cost functions with high
nonlinearities as it does not require the gradient of the
function to be optimized [17].
Table A1 in Appendix A shows initial and final value of
the optimization and Figure 1A shows the results before and
after the optimization. The upper graph is the rod force vs.
time for one period. The bottom graph is the rod force vs.
body velocity. The first optimization acts on the rebound
phase, whereas the bulk modulus acts over all the period. The
initial value is the bulk modulus of the pure oil. Its value was
almost divided by 3 during the optimization. As the oil is in
contact with the gas it is unavoidable that some gas is
entrained in the oil, reducing drastically the bulk modulus.
Moreover, inner tube compliance may also reduce the oil
compressibility [14].
Correlation of the Model with the
Experiments
The dynamic forces transmitted to the car body via the
piston rod are critical for the acoustics. The model must show
good correlation of the rod force levels between 200 Hz and
700 Hz at the reference excitation signal (sine 12 Hz - 2mm).
Figure 8 compares the simulation and the experimental
results for a 2 mm - 12 Hz sine excitation. The top graph is
the rod force and the middle graph is the rod force content
between 200 Hz and 700 Hz. It is obtained by applying a
perfect band-pass filter to the rod force. The main high level
oscillations are well represented. The smaller oscillations are
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM

Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)

not caught by the model, but their level is so small (around 1

N) compared to the measured force (more than 1000 N) that
they are insignificant. These results show that the piston
model is very accurate for modeling the structure borne noise
due to the compression spring valve of the shock absorber.
The model is less accurate for the rebound spring valve
shocks. The shocks due to this component are very low in
configuration 2, consequently, it is not responsible for
structure-borne noise. The bottom graph is the frequency
content of the rod force. Only the harmonics of the excitation
frequency were represented for more clarity. The frequency
content between each harmonic can be neglected due to its
very low level. The two spectra follow the same tendency.
Another useful result is to observe maximum values of the
temporal rod force between 200 and 700 Hz. The results are
presented in Table 1. These values had been identified as
critical for the car acoustics if they are too high. As the
excitation signal is periodic (12 Hz), the maximum values
were averaged over 5 seconds of experiments and simulation.
The standard deviation of the experimental results represents
about 10 % of the value. The non-zero standard deviation of
the simulation is due to the input signal that comes from the
experiments. The minimum value shows very little difference
with the experiments and it is within its standard deviation.
The error of the maximum value is close to the standard
deviation, therefore the correlation is acceptable.

Models Comparisons
In order to validate the choices of the model, we have
performed simulations with different hypothesis.
Figure 9 compares a static valve model and a dynamic
valve model as described previously. The static valve model
consists in replacing the valve equation Eq. (8) by K.xv = Fp.
The low frequency is very affected and shows great
differences with the dynamic model. The mean maximum
and minimum values of the filtered rod forces (21.8 N and
−25.1 N) are lower than the dynamic one. It is clear that if we
are interested in higher frequency, it is necessary to take into
account dynamics of the spring valves. Figure 8. Comparison of dynamic forces between
In Figure 10, a model with fluid flow forces on the spring experimental and simulation for the piston alone.
valve and without fluid flow forces is compared. The model
without fluid flow forces consists in removing the fluid force
term 2. Cd.S(x). ΔP.sin(θ) in Eq. (11). Fluid flow force Table 1. Extremes of the rod force content between 200
reduces the total force applied on the valve. Consequently, Hz and 700 Hz
for the same applied pressure, the valve displacement is
higher when we do not take into consideration the fluid flow
forces, thus offering less resistance to the fluid. It is evident
that the fluid flow forces has an influence on the low
frequency component (upper figure), but has very little effect
on higher frequency components.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM

Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)

SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The piston shock absorber model presented here shows
accurate results up to 700 Hz for the study of the structure-
borne noises. Some work is in progress in order to build an
accurate base valve model to complete the shock absorber
model. It is necessary to validate the model on other shock
absorbers with the same technology and extend the
methodology to other technologies. Moreover, there is
variability in the level of transmitted vibrations between
different shock absorbers. Work is ongoing to evaluate the
sensitivity of the different parameters on the vibration level
and to perform a stochastic analysis.

REFERENCES
1. Lauwerys, X., Augusztinovicz, F., Maes, M., and Nagy, G.,
“Identification and Reduction of Sound Sources in Car Wheel
Suspensions,” SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-1437, 2000, doi:
10.4271/2000-01-1437.
2. Sacramento, G., Biera J., “Simulation tool for shock absorber noise
prediction in time and frequency domains,” 3(3):217-229, 2007, doi:
10.1504/IJVNV.2007.015174.
3. Reybrouck, K., “A Non Linear Parametric Model of an Automotive
Shock Absorber,” SAE Technical Paper 940869, 1994, doi:
10.4271/940869.
4. Duym, S., Stiens, R., Baron, G., and Reybrouck, K., “Physical Modeling
of the Hysteretic Behaviour of Automotive Shock Absorbers,” SAE
Technical Paper 970101, 1997, doi: 10.4271/970101.
5. Talbott, M. and Starkey, J., “An Experimentally Validated Physical
Figure 9. Comparison between static valve model and Model of a High-Performance Mono-Tube Damper,” SAE Technical
dynamic valve model. Paper 2002-01-3337, 2002, doi:10.4271/2002-01-3337.
6. Czop P., Sławik D., Śliwa P., Wszołek G., “Simplified and advanced
models of a valve system used in shock absorbers,” Journal of
Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering 33/2
173-180, 2009.
7. Eyres, R., Champeneys, A. R., Lieven, N. A. J., “Modelling and
Dynamic Response of a Damper with Relief Valve,” Nonlinear
Dynamics, 40(2) 119-147, 2005, doi:10.1007/s11071-005-4144-6
8. Kasai, K., “On the Stability of a Poppet Valve with an Elastic Support :
1st Report, Considering the Effect of the Inlet Piping System,” Bulletin
of JSME, 11(48) 1068-1083, 1968, doi: 10.1299/jsme1958.11.1068.
9. Hayashi, S., Hayase, T., and Kurahashi, T., “Chaos in Hydraulic Control
Valve,” Journal of Fluids and Structures, 11(6), 693-716, 1997, doi:
10.1006/jfls.1997.0096.
10. Lizarraga, J., Biera, J., and Sala, J. A., “Modelling of friction
phenomena in sliding conditions in suspension shock absorbers,”,
46(supplement), 751-764, 2008, doi: 10.1080/00423110802037024.
11. Zubieta, M., Elejabarrieta, M. J., and Bou-Ali, M. M., “Characterization
and modeling of the static and dynamic friction in a damper,” 44(8),
1560-1569, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2008.12.005.
12. Surace, C., Worden, K., and Tomlinson, G.,R., “An improved nonlinear
model for an automotive shock absorber,” Nonlinear Dynamics, 3,
413-429, 1992, doi: 10.1007/BF00045646
13. Dixon, J.,C., “The Shock Absorber Handbook,” Wiley-Professional
Engineering Publishing Series, ISBN: 9780470510209, 2007.
14. McCloy, D., Martin, H.R., “Control of fluid power: Analysis and
design” 2nd (Revised) Edition, Ellis Horwood, New York, ISBN:
0-470-27012-8, 1980.
15. Benaziz, M., Nacivet, S., Thouverez, F., “Nonlinear dynamic analysis of
a shock absorber hydraulic spring valve,” ISMA 2012 Proceedings,
2012.
16. LMS Imagine.Lab AMESim Revision10, 2010
17. Audet, C., and Dennis, J.E., “Analysis of generalized pattern searches,”
SIAM Journal on Optimization, 13(3), 889-903, 2003, doi: 10.1137/
S1052623400378742.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figure 10. Comparison of the configuration with and The authors would like to acknowledge the PSA Peugeot
without fluid flow forces (θ = 90°). Citroën's staff for experimental testing of the shock
absorbers.
 THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT.
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by Marouane Benaziz, Thursday, April 18, 2013 03:13:52 AM

Benaziz et al / SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. / Volume 6, Issue 2(July 2013)

APPENDIX

Table A1. Results after the optimization

Figure 1A. Results of the identification results before and after parameters identification.

View publication stats