Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Analysis of the absolute and the relative
Evaluation of the effectiveness of elastomeric transmissibility on the centrifugal pump
N Falasifah, I Taufan, D Arifianto et al.
mount using vibration power flow and - Vibration transmissibility and damping
behaviour for auxetic and conventional
transmissibility methods foams under linear and nonlinear regimes
Matteo Bianchi and Fabrizio Scarpa

To cite this article: M N Arib Rejab et al 2017 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 908 012034 - Design, analysis and experimental
investigation on the whole-spacecraft
vibration isolation platform with
magnetorheological dampers
Ming Cheng, Jianwei Xing, Zhaobo Chen
et al.
View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 45.168.147.38 on 18/04/2023 at 01:10

ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

Evaluation of the effectiveness of elastomeric mount using

vibration power flow and transmissibility methods

M N Arib Rejab1, S A Abdul Shukor1, M R Mohd Sofian1, J I Inayat-Hussain2, A

Nazirah3, I Asyraf3
1
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Pauh Putra Campus,
02600 Arau Perlis Malaysia.
2
College of Graduate Studies, Universiti Tenaga Nasional.
3
Malaysian Rubber Board (MRB), Engineering & Product Design Unit, Technology &
Engineering Division.

[email protected]

Abstract. This paper presents the results of an experimental work to determine the dynamic
stiffness and loss factor of elastomeric mounts. It also presents the results of theoretical
analysis to determine the transmissibility and vibration power flow of these mounts, which are
associated with their contribution to structure-borne noise. Four types of elastomeric mounts
were considered, where three of them were made from green natural rubber material (SMR
CV60, Ekoprena and Pureprena) and one made from petroleum based synthetic rubber
(EPDM). In order to determine the dynamic stiffness and loss factor of these elastomeric
mounts, dynamic tests were conducted using MTS 830 Elastomer Test System. Dynamic
stiffness and loss factor of these mounts were measured for a range of frequency between 5 Hz
and 150 Hz, and with a dynamic amplitude of 0.2 mm (p-p). The transmissibility and vibration
power flow were determined based on a simple 2-Degree-of-Freedom model representing a
vibration isolation system with a flexible receiver. This model reprsents the three main parts of
a vehicle, which are the powertrain and engine mounting, the flexible structure and the floor of
the vehicle. The results revealed that synthetic rubber (EPDM) was only effective at high
frequency region. Natural rubber (Ekoprena), on the other hand, was found to be effective at
both low and high frequency regions due to its low transmissibility at resonant frequency and
its ability to damp the resonance. The estimated structure-borne noise emission showed that
Ekoprena has a lower contribution to structure-borne noise as compared to the other types of
elastomeric mounts.

1. Introduction
One of the research and development efforts in automotive area is for controlling noise and vibration
problems in order to achieve improvements in ride comfort. This can be done by improving the
isolation system of its powertrain. Engine and mounting systems play critical roles in noise, vibration
and harshness (NVH) of the vehicle. The main causes of vibration are the engine excitation force
generated by gas pressure of fuel explosion in the cylinder, and the inertia force of the piston and
connecting rod. The vibration is transferred through the mounting system to the seat track structure
causing discomfort to passengers.
Various types of isolators have been proposed to attenuate the unwanted vibration of powertrain
that is transferred to the body structure. Elastomers have been used as engine mounts to reduce

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

vibration from the powertrain to the structure since 1930s. Compactness, cost-effectiveness and low
maintenance are the main advantages of these elastomeric mounts.
Currently, most of the elastomeric mounts used for this application are made from petroleum-
based synthetic rubber (SR). This is mainly due to their better resistance to heat, oxidation and oil as
compared to natural rubber (NR). The use of petroleum-based raw material not only depletes the
earth’s non-renewable natural resources but also causes environmental hazards. Elastomeric mounts,
which are disposed everyday, usually ends up in the landfill. Elastomers buried in landfill sites release
high toxic chemicals into the groundwater, and carcinogens are also released to the environment. The
increasing awareness of environmental sustainability in recent years has motivated researchers to
explore the use of environmental-friendly non-petroleum-based raw materials in the development of
eco-friendly elastomeric mounts.
NR is considered as an alternative to SR due to its advantages as a way to conserve land, that
also acts as a sink for CO2 generated by automobiles [1-6]. From the perspective of energy
consumption in the preparation of these elastomers, NR also has an advantage over SR, as shown in
table 1.

Table 1. Energy consumption for preparation of various elastomers [2]

Material Approximately Energy Comsumption

(GJ/t)
Natural Rubber (NR) 15-16
Polybutadiene Rubber (BR) 108
Polypropylene (PP) 110
Styrene-Butadiene-Rubber (SBR) 130-156
Ethylene-Propylen-Dien-Modify (EPDM) 142-179
Butyl Rubber (IIR) 174-209
Chloroprene (CR) 120-144

NR is categorized as ‘green’ material because its production uses natural material or renewable
resources and it is produced with minimal waste. The use of these eco-friendly and low-energy
products exerts less stress on the environment and improves carbon life cycle.
Ekoprena and Pureprena are advanced natural rubber products resulting from research and
development activities conducted by Malaysian Rubber Board (MRB) in order to improve the
properties of natural rubber depending on a conventional grade used such as Standard Malaysia
Rubber (SMR). These advanced natural rubber products have been tested on curing characteristics and
physical mechanical properties. The properties of Ekoprena and Pureprena were found to be quite
similar to the properties of synthetic rubber. Ekoprena has properties such as oil resistant, low water
absorption, high damping, high wet grip, low rolling resistance and gas permeability, while Pureprena
has properties such as low creep, stress relaxation and low compression set, low water absorption,
good dynamic properties, low protein and low ash. Unfortunately, there is no data or information
available on the vibration control characteristics of these advanced natural rubber. Therefore the main
aim of this work is to investigate the potential and suitability of these advanced natural rubber mounts
as an alternative to the more widely used synthetic rubber mount in controlling vibration and noise.
This paper presents the comparison between natural rubber and synthetic rubber mounts’ effectiveness
in controlling vibration and noise using transmissibility and vibration power flow methods. Vibration
power flow is used as a tool, in addition to vibration transmissibility, in quantifying the effectiveness
of the elastomeric mount, and to identify the elastomeric mount that contributes the most to structure-
borne noise. The natural rubber considered in this work is a conventional grade, SMR CV60, and the
advanced natural rubber are Ekoprena and Pureprena. The syntetic rubber used in this work is EPDM.

2
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

2. Methodology
This section describes the experimental set-up and procedures for the dynamic test used to determine
the dynamic stiffness and loss factor of the elastomeric mounts, as well as the analytical model to
determine the characteristic of elastomeric mount associated with its contribution to structure-borne
noise, namely the transmissibility and vibration power flow.

2.1. Dynamic Test

Dynamic test was conducted according to Japan Industry Standard (JIS) K6385-1977 [7] using the
MTS 830 Elastomer Test System. The elastomeric mount was placed on a jig plate which was then
fixed between two plates, figure 1. Preload considered in the dynamic test was 313.92 N. This preload
which is about ¼ of the weight of the powertrain was also applied for the testing of the original
elastomeric mounts. The frequency range was between 5 Hz and 150 Hz, and the dynamic amplitude
applied in the radial direction was set to 0.2 mm (p-p). LVDT was used to measure the displacement
and load cell was used to measure the force. Figure 2 shows the schematic drawing of the dynamic
testing machine. The elastomeric mount was subjected to a single frequency sinusoidal signal at
increment of 5 Hz. The time domain signals were analysed, and the dynamic stiffness and loss factor
of these elastomeric mounts were derived from the measured force, displacement and the phase angle
between the force and the displacement.

Figure 1. Elastomeric mount placed on a jig plate and fixed between two plates of the MTS 830
machine for static and dynamic tests.

Figure 2. Schematic drawing of the dynamic testing machine.

3
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

2.2. Analytical Model to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Elastomeric Mount

In the analytical work, a simple 2 Degree-of-Freedom (DOF) vibration isolation system with a flexible
receiver was modelled. The model is based on three main parts of a vehicle which are the powertrain
and engine mounting, the flexible structure and the floor of the vehicle. The model is shown in Figure
3. M1 represents the block mass, and K1 represents the elastomeric mount’s stiffness in complex form.
M2 represent the mass of the flexible structure, which consists of the mass of the beam and the mass of
the plate that is attached to it. K2 represents the beam stiffness. A harmonic force F of frequency 𝜔
acts upon M1, in the line of motion (vertical direction).

Figure 3. The 2- DOF model.

The transmissibility (Tr) for the elastomeric mounts was evaluated using measured values of
dynamic stiffness and loss factor of elastomeric mount for a range of frequencies from 10 Hz to 150
Hz. The beam stiffness (K2) has a constant value. The general equation of transmissibility (Equation 1)
was derived from the 2-DOF model shown in figure 3. Kd is the dynamic stiffness of the elastomeric
mount, δ is the loss factor of elastomeric mount, and Kb is the beam stiffness. M is the mass of the
block and Mb is the mass of the beam and the plate.

( ) ( )
√( ) ( )
(1)

The source acceleration (Equation 2) and receiver acceleration (Equation 3) were also derived
from the 2-DOF model shown in Figure 3.

( )
̃ 𝜔 ( ) (2)

( )
̃ 𝜔 ( ) (3)

The vibration power flow through the elastomeric mount was evaluated using Equation 4 and
Equation 5 [8-9], where Mrs is the apparent mass, which is obtained from the dynamic stiffness ( )
and loss factor (ɳ) of the elastomeric mount. The other components, as and ar, represent the source and
receiver acceleration, respectively. Both accelerations are in complex forms. The dynamic stiffness
and loss factor from the measurement were required to determine vibration power flow through the
elastomeric mount. The total vibration power flow was determined by the summation of the vibration

4
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

power flow at each frequency from 30 Hz to 150 Hz. The values used to calculate transmissibility and
vibration power flow are given in Table 2.

(̃ ̃ ̃ ) (4)

̃ (5)

Table 2. Values used in the calculation of transmissibility and vibration power flow.

F (N) M (Kg) Mb (Kg) Kb (N/m)

2.5 (average) 10 Kg 15.26 Kg 2189604 (constant)

3. Results and Discussion

Measurements of dynamic stiffness and loss factor were undertaken for eight different elastomeric
mounts. These elastomeric mounts were SMR CV60 with carbon black (CB) content of 45% and 20%,
EPDM with CB content of 45% and 20%, Ekoprena with CB content of 45% and 20% and Pureprena
with CB content of 45% and 20%. Figures 4(a) and 4(b) show the dynamic stiffness and loss factor of
these elastomeric mounts for a range of frequency between 5 Hz and 150 Hz, and for dynamic
amplitude of 0.2 mm (p-p) and preload of 313.92 N.

(a) (b)
Figure 4. (a) Dynamic stiffness of the elastomeric mount and (b) Loss factor of the elastomeric mount.

Figures 4 (a) shows that the dynamic stiffness increases with the increase in the frequency
excitation from 5 Hz to 150 Hz for the natural rubber and synthetic rubber with 45% and 20% CB
content. The dynamic stiffness also increases with the increase in CB content for both the natural
rubber and synthetic rubber. Figure 4(a) shows that the synthetic rubber (EPDM) has the highest
dynamic stiffness followed by natural rubber (SMR CV60, Ekoprena and Pureprena) for both cases of
CB 45% and 20%. Ekoprena is however seen to have a relatively high dynamic stiffness although its
hardness is close to SMR CV60 and Pureprena. Figure 4(b) shows that the loss factor increases with
the increase in the frequency excitation from 5 Hz to 150 Hz for both natural rubber and synthetic
rubber. The loss factor also increases with the increase in CB for both natural rubber and synthetic

5
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

rubber. Figures 4(b) shows that Ekoprena has the highest loss factor followed by Pureprena, EPDM
and SMR CV60, for both CB content of 45% and 20%.
Figure 5(a) represents transmissibility of elastomeric mounts with 45% carbon black (CB),
while Figure 5(b) represents transmissibility of elastomeric mounts with 20% CB.

(a) (b)
Figure 5. (a) Transmissibility of elastomeric mounts with 45% CB and (b) Transmissibility of
elastomeric mounts with 20% CB.

Two regions can be observed in Figures 5(a) and 5(b), namely the amplification and isolation
regions. There are two resonance peaks (dot circle) in amplification region which are primary and
secondary resonances. Based on the observation of the natural frequencies of the system in Figure
5(a), the natural frequency is about 25 Hz for primary resonance and 55 Hz to 75 Hz for secondary
resonance. The natural frequencies of the system in figure 5(b) is about 23 Hz for primary resonance
and 45 Hz to 55 Hz for secondary resonance. These natural frequencies are based on the dynamic
stiffness of the elastomeric mounts. The dynamic stiffness of elastomeric mounts are in turn dependent
on the CB content. The dynamic stiffness increases with the increase in CB content for both natural
rubber (NR) and synthetic rubber (SR). The synthetic rubber (EPDM) has the highest dynamic
stiffness followed by natural rubber (SMR CV60, Ekoprena and Pureprena) for both cases of CB
content of 45% and 20%. The characteristics of high dynamic stiffness produced natural frequency
(primary and secondary) at relatively higher frequencies for both cases of CB coontent of 45% and
20%. However natural rubbers (SMR CV60 and Pureprena) showed that the secondary resonance
occurred at a lower frequency compared to EPDM and Ekoprena for both cases of CB contnet of 45%
and 20%. It was also observed that natural rubber, SMR CV60 and Pureprena, are soft materials that
produce low dynamic stiffness and low loss factor even for the same CB content as the EPDM and
Ekoprena. Natural rubber, SMR CV60 and Pureprena, also showed low transmissibility at higher
frequency as compared to EPDM and Ekoprena for both cases of CB content of 45% and 20%.
Pureprena has low loss factor which makes it suitable to be used to reduce vibration at high frequency.
It is observed from Figures 5(a) and 5(b) that the elastomeric mounts based on synthetic rubber
(EPDM) and natural rubber (SMR CV60 and Pureprena) produced higher transmissibility at resonant
frequency (dot circles), about 25 Hz for primary resonance and 55 Hz to 75 Hz for secondary
resonance for CB content of 45% and about 23 Hz for primary resonance and 45 Hz to 55 Hz for
secondary resonance for CB content of 20%. Ekoprena, on the other hand, produced lower
transmissibility at the same resonant frequencies for both cases of CB 45% and 20%. Ekoprena
appeared to have a higher ability to reduce or damped resonance compared to the other elastomeric
mounts. This is attributed to the higher loss factor of Ekoprena. By having a high loss factor, the
magnitude of the transmissibility at the amplification region is reduced. On the other hand, the higher
loss factor, also caused the value of the transmissibility to increase in the isolation region. The high

6
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

loss factor is beneficial in the amplification region as it reduces the transmissibility at the resonance
frequency. The results show that the natural rubber from Ekoprena and Pureprena are suitable to be
used as an alternative to synthetic rubber (EPDM) for vibration isolation application. This is because
Ekoprena has characteristic of high loss factor that makes it suitable to be used at low frequency to
reduce vibration amplitude at resonance, while Pureprena has characteristic of low loss factor that
makes it suitable for vibration reduction at high frequency.
The bar graphs shown in figures 6(a) and 6(b) are the total vibration power flow through each
elastomeric mounts.

(a) (b)
Figure 6. (a) Total vibration power flow through elastomeric mounts with 45% CB and (b) Total
vibration power flow through elastomeric mounts with 20% CB.

Figure 6(a) shows the level of total vibration power flow through each elastomeric mount based
on synthetic rubber (EPDM) and natural rubber (SMR CV60, Ekoprena and Pureprena) for the case of
CB content of 45%. The results showed that Ekoprena was the highest contributor to the transmission
of energy to the structure, followed by EPDM. SMR CV60 and Pureprena showed a relatively lower
total vibration power flow. The higher total vibration power flow for Ekoprena is due to its high
dynamic stiffness and loss factor as compared to the other natural rubbers (SMR CV60 and Pureprena)
and synthetic rubber (EPDM). Referring to the vibration power flow formula, ( ̃ ̃ ̃ ),
the apparent mass, ̃ ( ) is a combination of dynamic stiffness and loss factor.
Therefore, the characteristics of elastomeric mount that have high dynamic stiffness and high loss
factor will produce high vibration power flow, while elastomeric mount that have low dynamic
stiffness and low loss factor will produce low vibration power flow. If the CB content of Ekoprena is
reduced from 45% to 20%, the total vibration power flow is reduced from 0.077W to 0.032W;
approximately 58% reduction of the energy transmission to the structure is reduced as shown in figure
6(b). This is because the dynamic stiffness and loss factor of Ekoprena is reduced with the decrease in
the CB content.

4. Conclusions
The results for the transmissibility and vibration power flow, presented in this work, indicate that
vibration power flow can be used as a tool to augment vibration transmissibility in assessing the
effectiveness of rubber isolators in controlling vibration and noise. Ekoprena and Pureprena were
found to be suitable for this application, as an alternative to the more widely used synthetic rubber
(EPDM). This is because Ekoprena has high loss factor, while Pureprena has low loss factor. Ekoprena
is therefore suitable to be used at low frequency to reduce amplitude at resonance while Pureprena is
suitable to be used to reduce vibration at high frequency.

7
ICADME 2017 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
908 (2017) 012034 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/908/1/012034

5. References
[1] Eleanor W T, Paul M D and David P E 2015 Increasing Demand for Natural Rubber
Necessitates a Robust Sustainability Initiative to Mitigate Impacts on Tropical
Biodiversity Conservation Letters. 8(4): 230–241.
[2] Mukhopadhyay R, Sengupta R and Gupta S D 2008 Recent Advances in Eco-Friendly
Elastomer Technology In: Current Topic in Elastomer Research. United State. Taylor &
Francis Group Publisher. 1021-1041.
[3] Zairossani M N 2010 Sustainability of the Natural Rubber Industry. Malaysian Rubber Board:
Rubber Technology Developments. 10(2): 3-11.
[4] Cook, S 2010 Sustainability as a Global Issue. Malaysian Rubber Board: Rubber Technology
Developments. 10(2): 12-15.
[5] Wei T, Lei L, Kang, H., Qiao B, Wang Z, Zhang L, Coates P, Hua K C and Kulig J 2012 Tough
Bio-Based Elastomer Nanocomposites with High Performance for Engineering
Applications. Advanced Engineering Materials. 14, 112-118.
[6] Swetha D V and Rani K D 2014 Effect of Natural Rubber on the Properties of Bitumen and
Bituminious Mixes. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology. 5(10) 9-
21.
[7] Japanese Standard Association. Testing Methods for Rubber Vibration Isolators. Japan, JIS
K6385. 1977.
[8] Lee S K 2004 Identification of a Vibration Transmission Path in a Vehicle by Measuring
Vibrational Power Flow. Proceedings of the IMECHE Part D. Journal of Automobile
Engineering 218 (2), 167-175.
[9] Lee S K 2000 Application of Vibration Power Flow to a Passenger Car for Reduction of Interior
Noise. Shock and Vibration. 7: 277-285.