0
Research Papers

Experimental Study on Analytical Models for Predicting the Horn Effect of a Tire/Road Interface

[+] Author and Article Information
Yong-Bin Zhang

Institute of Sound and Vibration Research,
Hefei University of Technology,
193 Tunxi Road,
Hefei 230009, China
e-mail: ybzhang@hfut.edu.cn

Hua Chen

Institute of Sound and Vibration Research,
Hefei University of Technology,
193 Tunxi Road,
Hefei 230009, China
e-mail: ch_arsphe@126.com

Chuan-Xing Bi

Institute of Sound and Vibration Research,
Hefei University of Technology,
193 Tunxi Road,
Hefei 230009, China
e-mail: cxbi@hfut.edu.cn

Gang Ma

GITI Tire (China) R&D Center,
88 Danxia Road,
Hefei, Anhui 230601, China
e-mail: ma.gang@giti.com

Yu Gao

GITI Tire (China) R&D Center,
88 Danxia Road,
Hefei, Anhui 230601, China
e-mail: gao.yu@giti.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Noise Control and Acoustics Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF VIBRATION AND ACOUSTICS. Manuscript received May 26, 2016; final manuscript received October 5, 2016; published online February 6, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Nicole Kessissoglou.

J. Vib. Acoust 139(2), 021008 (Feb 06, 2017) (9 pages) Paper No: VIB-16-1267; doi: 10.1115/1.4035110 History: Received May 26, 2016; Revised October 05, 2016

The phenomenon that the tire/road noise is amplified when propagating outward from the hornlike geometry enveloped by the tire belt and the ground surface is referred to as the horn effect. In the present paper, three analytical models for predicting this so-called horn effect, which are a spherical model, a cylindrical model, and a model that combines the previous two models, are examined. Results from the three analytical models are compared with experimental results. Three different sizes of cylinders are designed for the measurements of the horn effect. Comparisons between predicted and measured results show that the cylindrical model gives comparatively accurate predictions of the horn amplification and interference pattern, but overestimates the horn amplifications at low frequencies. The spherical model can predict the general trend of the horn amplification, but underestimates the horn amplification and gives less accurate interference pattern. The combined model can accurately predict the horn amplification and interference pattern at frequencies below approximately 2 kHz.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The geometrical configuration of the two-dimensional cylindrical model for the horn effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The change of Bessel functions, Jn(krr), with order n, where the truncated order N= ceiling (krr+10), rr= 0.3096 m, and the frequency f= 100 Hz (a), 1000 Hz (b), and 5000 Hz (c), respectively

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The geometrical configuration of the three-dimensional spherical model for the horn effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

One of the cylinders used in the experiments. The other cylinders are exactly the same as this one except for the diameter.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic diagram of the measurements. The reciprocal theorem was used. The microphones (PCB, 1/4 in.) were mounted flush with the surface of the rigid floor. The sound source was a loudspeaker with a diameter of 5 cm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison between the BEM and the experimental results for the cylinder with the diameter of 603.2 mm when θ  = 0, l  = 0, and d= 40 (a) and 70 mm (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of the amplification factors of the spherical, cylindrical, and combined models with experimental results when d  = 70 mm (a), 90 mm (b), and 110 mm (c). The diameter of the cylinder used in experiments was 603.2 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the amplification factors of the spherical, cylindrical, and combined models with the experimental results when d  = 70 mm (a), 90 mm (b), and 110 mm (c). The diameter of the cylinder used in experiments was 636.4 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of the amplification factors of the spherical, cylindrical, and combined models with the experimental results when d  = 70 mm (a), 90 mm (b), and 110 mm (c). The diameter of the cylinder used in experiments was 745.2 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The absolute errors between the results of the combined model and the experimental results. The diameter of the cylinder was 745.2 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Experimental results (a) and predictions of the combined model (b) when d  = 40 mm, 70 mm, 110 mm, 150 mm, and 220 mm. The diameter of the cylinder used in this experiment was 603.2 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of the amplification factors predicted by the spherical model (the right column) with the experimental results (the left column) for different offset distances l at d  = 90 mm. The cylinder with a diameter of 636.4 mm ((a) and (b)) and the one with a diameter of 603.2 mm ((c) and (d)) were used.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of the amplification factors predicted by the spherical model with the experimental results for different distances d when θ=30 deg ((a) and (b)) and 60 deg ((c) and (d)). The cylinder with a diameter of 636.4 mm was used.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In