1 / 9

End of Line Whine Testing vs. Engine Testing

End of Line Whine Testing vs. Engine Testing. 23 rd , July 2004. Summary. Metaldyne has been conducting testing to attempt to detect the whine noise issue that HMC raised in May 2004.

lakia
Download Presentation

End of Line Whine Testing vs. Engine Testing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. End of Line Whine Testing vs. Engine Testing 23rd, July 2004

  2. Summary • Metaldyne has been conducting testing to attempt to detect the whine noise issue that HMC raised in May 2004. • Metaldyne designed and built an end of line test machine and implemented a 100% verification for production parts. • To establish correlation of an agreed upon acceptance criteria, Metaldyne received 3 modules from HMC that had been engine tested and subjectively evaluated (FCT, FDM, & ESN). A 4th part (FEQ) was added to the test from Metaldyne’s production to increase the number of modules in the test. (See next slide for results) • This established the 1.25g-level acceptance criteria on June 14th 2004.

  3. Initial Test Correlation NG Initial testing showed correlation with HMC’s subjective ratings NG 1.25 Acceptance Criteria OK OK

  4. Follow-up Testing • HMC engine tested 4 modules FKL, FKJ, FKK, & FLJ, and provided waterfall plots and subjective ratings (OK / NG) for each module. • Metaldyne tested each module on the end of line test machine in accordance with the acceptance criteria shown on slide 2. • The end of line test results on two of these modules did not correlate with HMC’s subjective ratings. • HMC rated modules as follows: • FKJ - OK, FKK - OK; FKL - NG, FLJ - NG • Metaldyne’s EOL test results were: • FKJ - OK, FKL - OK, FKK - NG, FLJ - NG • Metaldyne tested each module on the Theta engine in Plymouth and confirmed the waterfall plots. Correlation of engine test results were good. • While the order plots correlated with HMC, Metaldyne was unable to confirm the 96th order complaint audibly.

  5. Follow-up Testing • During the July 9th visit to HMC, Metaldyne personnel rode in a vehicle equipped with the Theta engine and FKP BSM. The noise performance of this engine (from a gear whine perspective) was subjectively rated as “marginally acceptable” by HMC. • This was a P2 vehicle and was not equipped with the production engine noise treatments. • Metaldyne is aware of improvements HMC has made since the P2 build that account for at least 2-3 dB noise reduction. • Metaldyne requested the return of module FKP to be tested on the end of line test machine and on the Theta engine for correlation. • Correlation testing was performed on module FKP and compared to module FKL (mentioned on slide 2) which had been subjectively rated as NG by HMC. The results are shown on slide 5.

  6. Module FKP Subjectively Rated as “marginally acceptable” at HMC Note the level of activity around the 96th order in the rpm range that has been identified as objectionable by HMC

  7. Module FKL Subjectively rated as NG at HMC There is less activity around the 96th order in the rpm range that has been identified as objectionable by HMC than measured on module FKP.

  8. Conclusion • Module FKL was subjectively rated as NG tested 0.21g on Metaldyne’s EOL test machine. • Module FKP was subjectively rated “marginally acceptable” tested 0.65g on Metaldyne’s EOL test machine. • Correlation between engine test results and subjective evaluations is inconsistent. • Based on the above, it follows that correlating our end of line measurements with the subjective ratings is very difficult.

More Related