THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF LICENTIATE OF ENGINEERING

IN SOLID AND STRUCTURAL MECHANICS

Modelling and optimization of gear shifting

mechanism
Application to heavy vehicles transmission systems

MUHAMMAD IRFAN

Department of Applied Mechanics

CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Gothenburg, Sweden, 2017
Modelling and optimization of gear shifting mechanism
Application to heavy vehicles transmission systems
MUHAMMAD IRFAN

© M U H A M M A D I R F A N , 2017

THESIS FOR LICENTIATE OF ENGINEERING no 2017:01

ISSN 1652-8565

Department of Applied Mechanics

Chalmers University of Technology
SE-412 96 Gothenburg
Sweden
Telephone +46 (0)31 772 1000

Cover:
Figure illustrates sub-phases of the generic synchronization.

Chalmers Reproservice
Gothenburg, Sweden 2017
Modelling and optimization of gear shifting mechanism
Applications to heavy vehicles transmission systems
Thesis for the degree of Licentiate of Engineering in Solid and Structural Mechanics
MUHAMMAD IRFAN
Department of Applied Mechanics
Chalmers University of Technology

ABSTRACT
Without an efficient transmission system the idea of an efficient vehicle is incomplete. During
running of the vehicle especially in case of heavy vehicles the transmission system has to face
different situations during which the system possibly can lose its efficiency. Definitely variations
in efficiency of the transmission system demand from engine to vary its power to maintain the
system efficiency to regulate speed of the vehicle. Gear shifting mechanism of the transmission
system is one of the responsible agents for losing rotational speed of the system. The engine needs
to increase its power to compensate such kind of losses by injecting the more fuel. Ultimately there
will be more emissions on exhaust side. In this scenario the conducted research is concentrated on
the gear shifting mechanism.
To start with the well-defined aim a generic cone synchronizer mechanism modelled by a
mechanical system with five degrees of freedom and comprising three rigid bodies is studied to
understand the gear shifting process. To resolve complexity of the complete gear shifting processes
detailed kinematic description of the phases and sub-phases gives an opportunity to capture the
nature of bodies’ interaction and forces arise during their interaction. In the project a mathematical
model to represent the whole gear shifting process is developed based on Constrained Lagrangian
Formalism. The developed model went through validation test by using experimental data.
Because the developed mathematical model is flexible to adopt other relevant models, the friction
model is applied to the developed mathematical model and analyzed the differences in the results.
The next step is to optimize the gear shifting process based on the input parameters. Using the
developed model the analysis is performed in two steps; in first step the sensitivity analysis is
considered to study the effect of variations of individual parameter on the system performance and
in second step effects of a set of synchronizer mechanism's parameters which vary simultaneously
are studied by using the optimization technique. Time duration of the gear shifting and speed
difference at end of the main phase of synchronization process are chosen as objective functions
of the system. Parameters estimated quickness and smoothness (comfort) of synchronization
processes are cone angle, cone coefficient of friction, applied shift force, blocker angle, blocker
coefficient of friction, cone radius, gear moment of inertia and ring moment of inertia. Eight cases
of the synchronizer mechanism performance are studied under different scenarios of master/slave
and different operating conditions. Further analysis on results obtained from the Pareto
optimization clarifies the degree of influence of the input parameters. It was found that optimal
performance of the system can be obtained by tuning few of the system parameters which have
higher degree of influence instead of changing all the parameters together. For example in the case
where the sleeve is considered as a master at nominal condition optimal performance of the
synchronizer can be obtained by paying attention to applied shift force, cones angle, cones
coefficient of friction, blocker angle and blocker coefficient of friction instead of taking all eight
input parameters. At the end a graphical user interface is developed to obtain the synchronization
performance diagram.

Keywords: Generic synchronizer, constrained Lagrangian formalism, synchronization,

sensitivity analysis, Pareto optimization

i
ii
 PREFACE
The research work has been carried out since 3rd of March 2014 at Division of Dynamic, at
Department of Applied Mechanics, Chalmers University of Technology. The work is a part of the
project of transmission cluster with collaboration of AB Volvo, Scania CV AB, Royal Institute of
Technology, Chalmers University of Technology and VINNOVA. The overall aim of the project
is to develop new knowledge and optimize the gear shifting process of transmission system with
respect to life, robustness, power consumption and shift quality to meet the future demands. The
project is funded by AB Volvo, Scania CV AB and VINNOVA.
First of all I would like to thank my ALLAH ALMIGHTY WHO is the most GRACIOUS and the
most MERCIFUL.
I would like to thank my supervisor Viktor Berbyuk who aggressively tried to lead the research
with his experience and to give the direction to produce the impressive research. I am also thankful
to my co-supervisor Håkan Johansson for his deep interest in the work and his efforts to increase
accuracy of the work. Collectively I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my both
supervisors for contribution of their ideas to increase the quality of the research project.
A special thanks to Magnus Andersson from AB Volvo for discussing the issues during gear
shifting process and conveying the demands in the work. Thanks to the project team in Stockholm,
Ulf L Sellgren at Royal Institute of Technology, Daniel Häggström and Kenth Hellström at Scania
CV AB for their fruitful discussion.
I take this opportunity to express my deepest gratitude to my mother, my father, other family
members and my teacher Al-Shah Mazhar Fareed Subhani for their support and motivation to
continue my higher education.

Gothenburg, December 2016

Muhammad Irfan

iii
iv
 THESIS
This thesis includes an extended summary and the following appended papers:

M. Irfan, V. Berbyuk and H. Johansson, (2015), “Modelling of heavy vehicle

transmission synchronizer using constrained Lagrangian formalism”, In Proc.
of the International Conference on Engineering Vibration, Ljubljana, 7 - 10
Paper A September ; [editors Miha Boltežar, Janko Slavi , Marian Wiercigroch]. -
EBook. - Ljubljana: Faculty for Mechanical Engineering, 2015 p. 28-37.

Irfan, M., Berbyuk, V., Johansson, H., (2016), “Dynamics and Pareto
Optimization of a Generic Synchronizer Mechanism”, in Rotating Machinery,
Hybrid Test Methods, Vibro-Acoustic & Laser Vibrometry, Proceedings of the
34th IMAC, A Conference and Exposition on Structural Dynamics 2016,
Paper B Editors James De Clerck and David S. Epp, Volume 8, pp. 417-425, 2016,
Springer, ISBN: 978-3-319-30084-9, [Link]
30084-9_38.

M. Irfan, V. Berbyuk and H. Johansson, "Performance control of the

transmission synchronizer via sensitivity analysis and parametric optimization,"
Paper C To be submitted for international publication.

The appended papers were prepared in collaboration with the co-authors. The author of this thesis
was responsible for the major progress of the work in preparing the papers, i.e. took part in
planning the papers, developing the theory, performing all implementations and numerical
calculations, analysis of the results and writing.

In addition to papers A, B and C the following report has also been part of the research in this PhD
project which is not included in this thesis:

Irfan, M., Berbyuk, V., Johansson, H., "Constrained Lagrangian Formulation for modelling and
analysis of transmission synchronizers," 2015:05 Department of Applied Mechanics Chalmers
University of Technology, Gothenburg, 2015.
[Link]

v
 CONTENTS
PREFACE iii
THESIS v
CONTENTS vi
Part I 1
Extended Summary 1
1 Introduction and motivation 1
1.1 Aim, objectives and research questions 2
1.2 Thesis outline 2
2 Synchronizer and Synchronization 3
3 Methodology 5
4 Synchronization 7
5 Implementation of the friction model 8
6 Sensitivity analysis 10
7 Pareto optimization 12
8 Graphical user interface on Matlab 14
9 Summary of Appended Papers 16
10 Conclusions and outlook of future work 17
10.1 Conclusions 17
10.2 Future work 18
11 References 19
Part II 21
Appended Papers A-C 21

vi
 Part I
Extended Summary

1 Introduction and motivation

The vehicle engine needs to operate efficiently under favorable conditions regarding torque and
speed. The concept of an efficient engine is not possible without improving the transmission
system performance. Synchronizer is a crucial part of the transmission system of a vehicle which
works during the gear shifting process. The gear shifting needs to be as quick as possible while
maintaining the shift quality at the same time. During gear shifting, the selector disengages one
gearwheel and engage another gearwheel at the same shaft, rotating at a different speed. The
synchronizer mechanism reduces the speed difference to allow smooth engagement of the new
gearwheel. Movement and interaction of bodies of the synchronizer are complex and includes
several challenges such as the full transition between full hydrodynamic lubrication to boundary
lubrication as well as internal frictional contact conditions. A lot of research have been done on
different aspects of the gear shifting process, see e.g. [1-24].

Abdel-Halim, Barton, Crolla and Selim demonstrated the performance of improved multi-cone
synchronizer for a typical vehicle by deriving the equations of motions validated by experimental
studies at different oil temperature [1]. Abel, Schreiber and Schindler presented the solutions for
the comfort of automatic shifting and their applications to address the challenges of simulation [2].
Gong, Zhang, Chen and Wang introduced the transmission assembly of heavy duty transport
vehicle and the synchronizer components, and analyze the synchronization process [3]. They
analyzed the factors actually affecting the synchronizer performance by running the gear shifting
process on basis of real application conditions through developing the test rig. Gustavsson studied
control system design, performed modelling and simulated the synchronization process of dual
clutch transmission [4]. He focused to obtain a smooth shift instead of a fast shift and identified
the biggest problem to control the sleeve position. Because of the complexity and shorter time of
the synchronization process Hoshino developed a simulation model using ADAMS to clarify the
abnormality in the shift reaction force during the upshift [5]. Kent created a model of synchronizer,
selector system, driveline and transmission to identify the gearshift quality based on input
parameters [6]. A shift feeling simulator was developed consisting of external and internal linkage
dynamic models together with synchronizer and drivetrain models by Kim, Sung, Seok and kim
[7]. A dynamic simulation model of the synchronizer by using ADAMS is presented by Liu and
Tseng to analyze the abnormal impact during shifting and to provide the comfort and longer
lifespan of the synchronizer [8]. Lovas dealt with synchromesh behavior and divided the process
into eight phases [9]. He validated the results with measured data and studied different phenomena
of stick-slip and double bump. Paffoni, Progri, Gras and Blouët studied the influence of radial and
circumferential grooves on contact pressure, oil film load, coefficient of friction and transmitted
torque [10]. A mathematical relationship of synchronization torque and index torque with
significant parameters was established and validated experimentally by Razzacki and Hottenstein
[11]. A concept of double indexing in single cone synchronizer has been introduced by Sandooja
to increase the gear shifting performance [12]. Neto, Florencio, Rodrigues and Fernandez
described concept and operation of synchronization step by step together with the description of
working of gearshift lever and transmission components [13]. Yuming introduced working

1
principle, designing formula and range of designing parameters of the synchronizer [14].
Häggström and Nordlander developed user friendly Matlab program for synchronization [15].
Häggström, Sellgren and Björklund have presented a numerical method to assess the performance
of pre-synchronization. It is concluded from results of the numerical method that grooves on cones
surfaces of synchronizer are more important than the grooves design [16]. Häggström, Stenström
and Björklund developed a simulation model to measure the transient thermomechanical load of
the synchronizer [17]. Häggström, Sellgren, Stenström and Björklund are studied effect of
different external load and variation of design parameters on the temperature transient in the
friction lining by using a generalized FE-based thermomechanical simulation model [18].
Häggström, Nyman, Sellgren and Björklund are developed a friction model for a lubricated
molybdenum-steel contact by integrating the results from physical rig test and FEM simulation
[19].

1.1 Aim, objectives and research questions

However, the above studies are not sufficient to find answer of the several questions. One of the important
issue is to maintain the gear shift quality under different conditions. To start with study of the gear
shifting mechanism there is a need of a tool to represent the shifting process thoroughly and deeply
which is not develop in the research work done so far. One of the main aim of the project is to
develop a mathematical model suitable for deep study of the dynamics of a generic synchronizer
mechanism under different settings of master/slave and system operational scenarios. The model
should be flexible to implement various realistic assumptions about friction between system
components.
In particular the following research questions are in focus:
Is there any mathematical model to study the whole gear shifting process in detail? Is it possible
to understand the complex movement of the bodies in synchronizer mechanism through the
available models? Is it possible to capture the forces arise during interaction of the bodies?
What are the relevant objective functions to optimize the synchronization process?
Which structural and input parameters describing the synchronizer mechanism are influencing the
gear shifting process?
What outcome can be expected from the results obtained from optimization technique?
Is the model sufficiently flexible and general to give opportunity to extend the research either on
component connected with the synchronizer or for deep study of the synchronizer component?

1.2 Thesis outline

In chapter 1 a brief summary of the work, references of the research papers on synchronizer, aim
and objectives, questions about the conducted research are outlined. In chapter 2 explanation of
the synchronization process is given and later on the applied methodology to model the
synchronization process is explained. Results of newly developed model of synchronization are
presented. In chapter 3 problem statement of the Pareto optimization is given along the results
from simulations. In chapter 4 appended papers are summarized briefly. The last chapter discussed
the conclusions and outlook of the future work. Afterwards the published papers are attached.

2
2 Synchronizer and Synchronization
Transmission system transmits torque from engine to wheels of a vehicle at different driving
conditions. There is a gearbox with different gear numbers inside the transmission system which
matches the torque produced by engine with vehicle desire speed. It is clear that shifting between
the gears is required for smooth driving of the vehicle. The mechanism used for gear shifting is
called synchronizer. Still there is demand of automotive industry to complete the gear shifting
process as quick as possible with smoothness. Before proceeding to analyze the gear shifting
process for quickness and smoothness, in paper A the process is explained in detail together with
the mathematical model. A short description of the gear shifting mechanism and the gear shifting
process is given below.
The synchronizer can have different number of bodies with different shapes, and a variety of
different concepts are used in vehicles today. To avoid specific existing commercially available
synchronizers, this thesis will concern a generic synchronizer as shown in Figure 1. The
synchronizer consists of three rigid bodies; sleeve, ring and gear. Basic purpose of the synchronizer
is to engage the teeth of sleeve and gear which are rotating at different speed during shifting of the
gear. The gear has its own speed and the sleeve has almost speed of the previously engaged gear
because the driver first disengages the sleeve from the current gear, brings at neutral position and
then moves the sleeve to next gear. Definitely if the teeth come in contact with different rotational
speed, there will be clashing that will wear down the engaging teeth rapidly. So to reduce the speed
difference between the engaging teeth there is a ring between the sleeve and the gear. In this
synchronizer sliding friction is used to reduce the speed difference by making the frictional cones
between two rotating bodies. The considered generic synchronizer has frictional cones between
the sleeve and the ring. The engaging teeth during the time when frictional cones are sliding over
each other and reducing the speed difference should not come in contact in order to produce
clashing. For this purpose the ring and the gear have blocking chamfers which stops the sleeve to
move further axially for engagement of teeth. When the speed difference approaches to zero, the
blocking chamfer contact will release and the engaging teeth will come in full contact at end of
the gear shift.
The gear shifting process, synchronization, is a complex process to figure out. To understand easily
the synchronization process is explained in four phases which are further divided into several sub-
phases (paper A). In the three body mechanism of synchronizer the sleeve is considered as a master
which will retain its rotational speed throughout the synchronization, the gear behaves as a slave
and the ring is free to rotate. In phase 1 which is called presynchronization the synchronizer
prepares itself just to bring the friction cones together. When the shift force applies on the sleeve
in phase 1a, it starts to move axially and cover the clearance between the sleeve and the ring before
fluid contact of the cones. During phase 1b the ring gets its angular indexing position while in
phase 1c the clearance finishes between chamfers of the ring and the gear. When the chamfers
come in contact, the fluid starts to squeeze from the cones during the phase 1d. The phase 1e just
shift the synchronizer from mixed friction phase to dry friction phase. It is considered that during
phase 1f the shift force will overcome the spring axial resistance without considering the decrease
in speed difference because of cones sliding. In short during phase 1 the ring gets its angular
position and the fluid squeezes out from the cones. In phase 2 chamfers are in contact that’s why
the sleeve cannot move further axially. Rotational speed difference decreases because of sliding
of the cones over each other. At chamfers contact there are two main forces which are opposing
each other in axial direction. One force is the gradually increasing axial force which is pushing the
ring and the sleeve together to move further axially and second force is the gradually decreasing
chamfers frictional force which is opposing the ring and the sleeve to not move axially further.
When the first axial force cross over the second opposing force, the sleeve starts to move axially

3
again with a surety of at least acceptable rotational speed difference which is the end of the phase
2. During the phase 3a, 3b and 3c the ring gets its axial indexing position, the engaging teeth
chamfers come in contact and after the teeth leave chamfer contact respectively. In phase 4 the
engaging teeth complete the gear shift after meshing completely. The all sub-phases are described
in Figure 2. More detailed description of kinematics of synchronization process is presented in
Paper A and in [21].

Figure 1: 3D and 2D front view of the generic synchronizer.

4
 Figure 2: Sub-phases of the generic synchronization.

3 Methodology
The methodology used to develop the mathematical model for synchronization process of the
generic synchronizer is given in paper A and [21]. Here we present elements of constrained
Lagrangian formalism used to derive the equations of motion of a generic synchronizer
mechanism.
Let’s suppose multibody system comprises n bodies as shown in Figure 3. Some of the bodies are
connected through kinematic constraints. Motion of some bodies get influence by other bodies.

5
 Figure 3: Multibody system.

=
. . .
Let the generalized coordinates of the multibody system is represented by
where is the number of coordinates. Let also assume that the set of
independent constraints is imposed on the system that can be represented by the following

= , , . . . , = 1
equations

If the equations of the constraints can be written in the above vector form, i.e. , = , the
constraints as well as the respective system are called holonomic. In the holonomic system if
appears explicitly, the system is said to be rheonomic whereas if does not appear explicitly, the

, , = are called nonholonomic constraints.

system is said to be scleronomic. The constraints which can't be expressed in the form (1) and can
be written as

According to the orthogonality theorem and Lagrange multiplier theorem [20] the constraint force

=− 2
can be written as

Here is vector of the Lagrangian multipliers and is the constraints Jacobian of the system.

By introducing the Lagrangian as

= −!

where ! is the potential energy including strain energy and potential of any conservative external
forces, the equations of motion of the multibody system can be written as follows

" $ $
# % −# % + '=( 3
" $ $

The equation (3) together with constraints (1) describe the motion of constrained multibody system
and constitutes constrained Lagrangian formalism used to model the synchronization processes.

6
4 Synchronization
The developed mathematical model of a generic synchronizer mechanism went through validation
test and used for modelling and analysis of dynamics of synchronization processes for different
scenarios. In the thesis work the gear shifting process is simulated by the mathematical model
where the sleeve is considered as a master and gear is considered as a slave at nominal condition.
Values of the parameters to simulate the gear shifting process are considered as used in [21]. In
Figure 4 when the shift force applies on the synchronizer, the sleeve starts to move axially but
retains its rotational speed because of considering as a master. The gear loses its rotational speed
during the phase 1a and 1b but its speed increases from phase 1c till end of the main phase 2 by
increasing the shift force gradually. The ring gets its angular indexing position during the phase
1a and afterwards it rotates with the gear. During the phase 1f and 2 the sleeve does not move
axially. The phase 2 ends with a speed difference. In the phase 3 the sleeve moves again axially
and at end of the phase 4 it gets the full engagement position. More results of simulation of
dynamics of a generic synchronizer mechanism for different scenarios and conditions
(transmission vibrations, road grade, others) are presented in details in Papers A-C and [21].

Figure 4: The generic synchronizer performance diagram.

Next question after studying performance of the synchronizer by the developed mathematical
model is that how the performance will vary by changing parameters of the synchronizer. By the
sensitivity analysis effects of the parameters are studied in chapter 6.

7
5 Implementation of the friction model
One of the advantages of the mathematical model based on CLF is the adoptability that means
other relevant model to the synchronization can be applied in the developed mathematical model.
In this task the friction model proposed in [19] is applied. The synchronization time is compared
obtained from the developed CLF based mathematical model and from mathematical model of
friction used in [19].

Fourier series is used to make an expression for the coefficient of friction in [19]. The Fourier
series expression of coefficient of friction is applied in the developed model and values of the
coefficients are given below.

*+ = −1.,-.,/ 01 , * = 2.2312/ 01 , * = −1.2435/ 01 , * = 2.335,/ 06 , *7 = 2.-542/ 08 ,

*9 = −2.-15-/ 08 , *8 = 1.24../ 08 , *6 = −1.1--,/ 09 , : = 1.1333/ 01 , : = −1.4351/ 01,
: = ..2.11/ 06 , :7 = −3.232./ 06 , :9 = 3.54-,/ 08 , :8 = −5.-322/ 09, :6 = 1.,123/ 07 ,
; = 3.-5.3

where w is the fundamental frequency.

Figure 5: Coefficient of friction in [19] and by Fourier series.

<=> in Figure 5 (a) is the coefficient of friction between the cones proposed in [19] and <= in
Figure (b) is the coefficient of friction obtained by the Fourier series. <= has constant value after
the maximum value as shown in Figure 5 (b) because it is assumed in Figure 5 (a) the
synchronization process has completed till the maximum value.

Five common variables in the developed mathematical model and friction model proposed in [19]
are taken as input variables. Synchronization time is obtained at two particular values as shown in
Table 1. Synchronization time at nominal values of the input variables by [19] is 0.2957 sec and
by the developed model is 0.3334 sec.

8
 Common Nominal Particular Synchronization Shift time (sec)
input values of input values of input time (sec) in by the developed
variables variables variables [19] model

1 Inertia 0.42 0.3-0.7 (kgm2) 0.2499-0.3829 0.2894-0.3977

2 Initial Speed 60 10-85 (rad/s) 0.1016-0.3570 0.1515-0.3903

difference

3 Rate of shift 7000 7000-20000 0.2957-0.1841 0.3334-0.1970

force (N/s)

4 Cone radius 0.085 0.05-0.12 (m) 0.3777-0.2510 0.3977-0.2827

5 Cone angle 6.5 5-15 (degree) 0.2598-0.4554 0.2942-0.3980

Table 1: Implementation of the friction model into the developed model on synchronization time.

Figure 6: Synchronization time at lower values of common variables in [19] and the developed model.

The synchronization time in Figure 6-7 and in Figure with <= is higher than the synchronization
time with <=> because the developed CLF based mathematical model describes more detail
kinematics of the generic synchronization by several sub-phases than the model presented in [19].

9
Figure 7: Synchronization time at upper values of common variables in [19] and the developed model.

6 Sensitivity analysis
One of the main objectives under all circumstances is to shift the gear as quick as possible. But it
is also demanded to make the gear shift as smooth as possible. Synchronization time and speed
difference are taken as objectives which should be minimized. Synchronization time is considered
as quickness and speed difference is considered as smoothness of the synchronization process.
To this end two objectives of the generic synchronizer are defined as follows

1. Synchronization time; time from neutral to full engagement of the teeth ? @A B C as a measure
of quickness.

from where the sleeve starts to move axially again ?DE@FG C as a measure of smoothness.
2. Speed difference; the difference between rpm of the master and the slave at end of the phase 2

The developed mathematical model has been used for sensitivity analysis of dynamics of
synchronization processes with respect to structural system parameters as well as shift force.
Sensitivity analysis with eight parameters is given in paper C. In Figure 8 and Figure 9 degree of
influence of five parameters: cone angle, cone coefficient of friction, rate of shift force, blocker
angle and blocker coefficient of friction, is analyzed with respect to synchronization time and
speed difference at end of the phase 2.
In Figure 8 synchronization time increases with increasing cone angle and blocker angle but the
time decreases with increasing cone coefficient of friction, rate of shift force and blocker
coefficient of friction. Change in the synchronization time is approximately 0.05 sec within
prescribed range of blocker angle and rate of shift force. But within prescribed range of other
parameters, change in the synchronization time is approximately 0.09 sec.
The objective functions @A B and DE@FG have contradicting behavior with the parameters. For
instance @A B increases with increasing cone angle but decreases with increasing rate of shift

10
force. DE@FG has opposite trends than @A B with cone angle and rate of shift force. With such a
kind of conflicting behaviour of objective functions with parameters it is not easy to find optimal
values of the parameters of the synchronizer. The Pareto optimization is taken into account to find
the optimal parameters as explained in chapter 7.

Figure 8: Effect of five parameters on synchronization time.

11
 Figure 9: Effect of five parameters on speed difference.

7 Pareto optimization
The results of optimizations of the synchronization process at eight different cases are presented
in paper C. Here a brief description is given about performing optimization of the synchronization
process.

synchronizer; first is synchronization time, @A B , and second is speed difference, DE@FG , at end
Two objective functions (quality factors) are taken into account to measure performance of the

of the phase 2. Both objective functions need to be minimized at the same time for robustness of

H , cone coefficient of friction <= , shift force IJKLM , blocker angle N , blocker coefficient of
the synchronization. Eight parameters are considered as input parameters which are cone angle

friction ?<O C, cone radius P= , gear moment of inertia ?QG C and ring moment of inertia QJ . Before

are defined. The constraint of wedging condition RST H U <= means tangent of cone angle must
applying the Matlab routine of multi-objective optimization with genetic algorithm two constraints

be greater than cone coefficient of friction. The second constraint correspond to the condition that
cone torque must be greater than the index torque V otherwise the synchronizer will
produce clashing all the time.

Mathematical statement of the problem is given below

Z[\T? @A B , DE@FG C
X
RST U
Y ]
U V
X
W ^ _ _ `

12
where = , , , 7, 9, 8, 6, 1 = H, <= , I@ , N, <O , P= , QG , QJ ,

^ = ,,-.1,,---,4-,-.-2,-.1,-.1,-.--3 , ` = 12,-.2,2----,,-,-.2,-.2,-.2,-.-1

I@ <= P= 1 − cO RST N
= , = PO I@ b d
a\T H V
cO + RST N

Figure 10: Pareto front between synchronization time and speed difference.

Pareto front is shown in Figure 10 between the synchronization time @A B and the speed
difference DE@FG . Both objective functions @A B and DE@FG have contradicting behavior with
each other. The synchronization selected at point 1 has minimum @A B but highest DE@FG and
the synchronization selected at point 3 has highest DE@FG but minimum @A B . The point 2 is
tradeoff between DE@FG and @A B .

Figure 11 shows variations of the Pareto sets along the objective functions @A B and DE@FG .
Results of the Pareto optimization in Figure 11 show optimal values of the parameters at which

results indicate degree of influence of the parameter on objective functions. IJKLM has smooth trend
the synchronizer can give optimal performance. Percentage change and scattering behavior in the

trends and less percentage changes in values along the objective functions. IJKLM has highest degree
and highest percentage change in values (see Figure 11, h) but other pareto sets have non-smooth

of influence on the objective functions than rest of the parameters (H, <= , N and <O , QJ , QG and P= ).
In Figure 11 (f) most of the points are along the single value of cone angle which is almost 8 degree
and in Figure 11 (g) along single value of cone coefficient of friction which is almost 0.14. This
kind of trend of the particular parameters shows that different values of the objective functions can
be obtained at single value of the particular parameter while changing the values of rest of the
parameters or in other words the particular parameters can be ignored from the optimization
process if the values of these parameters are selected at a point explained above.

13
More results on sensitivity analysis of synchronizer dynamics and Pareto optimization are
presented in Paper C.

Figure 11: Pareto sets along synchronization time and speed difference.

8 Graphical user interface in Matlab

Sometimes it is quite tedious to operate with the developed mathematical model by handling the
input variables. A graphical user interface is developed in Matlab where the user can easily select
values of the five variables (cone angle, cones coefficient of friction, rate of force, blocker angle
and cones radius) as shown in Figure 12 and can see the synchronization performance diagram.
When user select values of the variables, graphical user interface call the developed mathematical
model for synchronization process and display the results. Graphical user interfaces for sensitivity
analysis of the input variables with respect to the speed difference and the synchronization time
are developed as shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14.

14
 Figure 12: Graphical user interface of the generic synchronization in Matlab.

Figure 13: Graphical user interface of sensitivity analysis with respect to speed difference in Matlab.

15
Figure 14: Graphical user interface of sensitivity analysis with respect to synchronization time in Matlab.

9 Summary of Appended Papers

Paper A: Modelling of Heavy Vehicle Transmission Synchronizer using
Constrained Lagrangian Formalism.
The generic synchronization process is a complex phenomenon because of design of the bodies
(sleeve, ring, gear) and their movement. Constrained Lagrangian formalism (CLF) explained the
whole synchronization process in a unified manner with unilateral or/and bilateral constraints.
Mathematical model of used CLF turns out into differential-algebraic equations to model the
kinematics and kinetics of the generic synchronizer. Before solving the equations of motions by
using the numerical algorithm, the sleeve is considered as a master and the gear is considered as a
slave. Validation of modified form of the generic synchronizer with available experimental test rig
predicted reasonable accuracy of the developed mathematical model of using CLF. Effect of sleeve
vibrational motion, cone angle, cone coefficient of friction and shift force on synchronization time
is also analyzed.

Paper B: Dynamics and Pareto Optimization of a Generic Synchronizer

Mechanism.
In Paper B, the optimization problem to improve the shift quality by shifting the gear as quick as
possible and as smooth as possible is addressed. Two objectives are selected as measures of shift
quality; one is synchronization time and another is speed difference at end of the main phase.
Speed difference is the main characteristic to measure smoothness of the generic synchronizer. To
16
contribute to the goal effect of three parameters (cone angle, cone coefficient of friction and rate
of applying shift force) are studied on two objectives. It is concluded that both objectives have
contradicting behavior. Synchronization time decreases but speed difference increases with
increasing friction coefficient and rate of force. Whereas synchronization time increases and speed
difference decreases with increasing cone angle. Because of conflicting behavior of the objectives
optimization is performed by taking the three parameters as inputs. Optimized values of the
parameters in form of Pareto sets and trade-off values of the objectives in form of Pareto front are
presented.

Paper C: Performance Control of the Transmission Synchronizer via

Sensitivity Analysis and Parametric Optimization.
Time duration of the gear shifting for heavy vehicles sometimes exceeds than the normal time
duration. The phenomenon of abnormal gear shifting is expected to occur more frequently during
different operating conditions. Besides the nominal operating condition effect of the vibrational
motion and road grade are also studied on the gear shifting mechanism (synchronizer). Delay in
the gear shifting (synchronization) puts more burden on the engine to work smoothly that results
in more emissions. To optimize the gear shifting process the research is conducted by optimizing
parameters of the mechanism. Before starting the optimization the developed mathematical model
of the gear shifting mechanism is validated against the available test rig. Synchronization time and
speed difference are selected as performance measures of the synchronizer. Through sensitivity
analysis it is found that the eight selected parameters are prominent parameters to measure the
performance of the synchronizer. The synchronizer mechanism can work in three kind of settings
by considering the sleeve as a master, the gear as a master and both as slaves. Optimization is
performed with different operating conditions under three type of settings of master and slave. It
is concluded that instead of taking eight parameters together only the highest influencing
parameters are sufficient to measure the performance of the synchronizer.

10 Conclusions and outlook of future work

10.1 Conclusions
It is concluded that the developed mathematical model based on CLF can represent the
synchronization process. The model is validated by the available experimental setup. The
developed model can not only describe in detail the synchronization process by sub phases but
also can provide the opportunity to implement other relevant mathematical models. For example
the friction model used in [19] is applied in the mathematical model. Parameters: cone angle, cone
coefficient of friction, applied shift force, blocker angle, blocker coefficient of friction, cones
radius, gear moment of inertia and ring moment of inertia are considered as input parameters. The
synchronization time (quickness) and the speed difference (smoothness) are considered as
objective functions in the sensitivity analysis. It is predicted from the sensitivity analysis that both
objective functions have same trends with increasing cone radius, gear moment of inertia and ring
moment of inertia but both objectives have opposite trends with increasing rest of the parameters.
Because of the conflicting behavior between quickness and smoothness Pareto optimization is
performed to determine optimal values of the parameters through which the synchronizer can
perform optimally. In addition to optimal values of the parameters it is also found from Pareto
optimization analysis that the robust gear shifting process can be achieved by just taking into
account the parameters which have higher degree of influence instead of taking all effecting
parameters. The most influencing parameters are different in different cases with different settings
of master/slave and with different conditions of vibrations, road grade and nominal. For instance

17
applied shift force, cones angle, cones coefficient of friction, blocker angle and blocker coefficient
of friction are the highest influencing parameters where the sleeve is considered as a master at
nominal condition. At conditions of vibrations the ring moment of inertia replaces the blocker
angle and at condition of road grade the cones radius replaces the cones angle among the highest
influencing parameters. But some of the parameters are common in some cases which have highest
degree of influence. For example the applied shift force is among the highest influencing
parameters in the cases where the gear or the sleeve is considered as a master. In short the research
work has contributed a mathematical model of the synchronization process and found the
parameters with their optimal values which can give optimal performance of the gear shifting
process. To deal easily with the mathematical model a graphical user interface is developed where
the user can choose values of the input variables and can see the synchronization performance
diagram.

10.2 Future work

It is suggested to verify the developed synchronizer model and relevant results with industrial
simulation tool. The multi-objective optimization at different load cases will be studied in future.
Idea of concentrating on the presynchronization phase in order to decrease time of the phase has
also given for future work.

18
11 References

[1] N. A. Abdel-Halim, D. C. Barton, D. A. Crolla and A. M. Selim, ”Performance of multicone

synchronizers for manual transmissions,” Journal of automobile engineering, doi:
10.1243/0954407001527213,, pp. 55-65, Jan 1, 2000.

[2] A. Abel, U. Schreiber and J. Schindler, ”Engine and Gearbox Modeling and Simulation for
Improving the Shifting Behavior of Powertrains with Manual or Automated Transmission,”
SAE Technical Paper, doi: 10.4271/2006-01-1641, 2006.

[3] Z. Gong, W. Zhang, G. Chen and W. Wang, ”Analyses and Evaluation on Synchronizer of
Manual Transmission,” in IEEE Pacific-Asia Workshop on Computational Intelligence and
Industrial Application, doi: 10.1109/PACIIA.2008.121, 842 - 845, Wuhan, China, , 19-20
Dec. 2008.

[4] A. Gustavsson, ”Development and Analysis of Synchronization Process Control Algorithms

in a Dual Clutch Transmission,” Masters thesis, LiTH-ISY-EX-09/4191--SE, Department of
Electrical Engineering Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden.

[5] H. Hoshino, ”Analysis on Synchronization Mechanism of Transmission,” SAE Technical

Paper, doi:10.4271/1999-01-0734, Detroit, Michigan, March 1-4, 1999.

[6] D. K. C. Kent, ”Gear Shift Quality Improvement In Manual Transmissions Using Dynamic
Modelling,” SAE Technical Paper 2000-05-0126, Seoul, Korea, June 12-15, 2000.

[7] J. Kim, D. Sung, C. Seok and H. Kim, ”Development of Shift Feeling Simulator for a Manual
Transmission,” SAE Technical Paper, doi:10.4271/2002-01-2202, p. 8, 2002.

[8] Y. C. Liu and C. H. Tseng, ”Simulation and analysis of synchronisation and engagement on
manual transmission gearbox,” International Journal of Vehicle Design, doi:
10.1504/IJVD.2007.012304, vol. 43, p. 21, 2007.

[9] L. Lovas, D. Play, J. Marialigeti, and J. F. Rigal, ”Mechanical behaviour simulation for
synchromesh mechanism improvements,” Journal of Automobile Engineering, vol. 220, doi:
10.1243/09544070D21604, pp. 919-945, 2006.

[10] B. Paffoni, R. Progri, R. Gras and J. Blouët, ”The hydrodynamic phase of gearbox
synchromesh operation: The influence of radial and circumferential grooves,” Part J:
Journal of Engineering Tribology 1997 211: 107, doi: 10.1243/1350650971542354, vol.
211(J2), pp. 107-116, 1997.

[11] S. T. Razzacki and J. E. Hottenstein, ”Synchronizer Design and Development for Dual
Clutch Transmission,” SAE Technical Paper, doi:10.4271/2007-01-0114, p. 10, 2007.

19
[12] A. Sandooja, ”Double synchronizer to amplify the synchronizer capacity,” SAE technical
paper series, doi:10.4271/2012-01-2003, p. 12, 2012.

[13] D. V. Neto, J. Fernandez and P. Rodrigues, ”Manual Transmission: Synchronization Main

Aspects,” SAE Technical Paper, doi:10.4271/2006-01-2519, p. 8, 2006.

[14] G. Yuming, ”Discuss designing method of transmission synchronizer,” in International

Conference on Advanced Technology of Design and Manufacture (ATDM 2011),
doi:10.1049/cp.2011.1030, Changzhou, China, 3-5 Nov. 2011.

[15] D. Häggström and M. Nordlander, ”Development of a Program for Calculating Gearbox

Synchronization,” Master thesis, Department of Engineering Sciences and Mathematics,
Luleå University of Technology, Södertälje, Luleå, 2011.

[16] D. Häggström, U. Sellgren and S. Björklund, "Robust pre-synchronization in heavy truck

transmissions," in In Proc. Of the Int. gear conference, Lyon, 2014.

[17] D. Häggström, W. Stenström and S. Björklund, ”Parameter study of the thermomechanical

performance of heavy duty synchronizers,” in 15th International VDI Congress–Drivetrain
for Commercial Vehicles, Friedrichshafen, Germany , 2015.

[18] D. Häggström, U. Sellgren, W. Stenström and S. Björklund , ”A Verified and Validated

Model for Simulation-Driven Design of Heavy Duty Truck Synchronizers,” in ASME 2015
Power Transmission and Gearing Conference; 23rd Reliability, Stress Analysis, and Failure
Prevention Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, August 2–5, 2015.

[19] D. Häggström, P. Nyman, U. Sellgren and S. Björklund, ”Predicting friction in synchronizer

systems,” Tribology International, vol. 97, pp. 89-96, 2016.

[20] E. J. Haug, Intermediate Dynamics, Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey , 1992.

[21] M. Irfan, V. Berbyuk and H. Johansson, "Constrained Lagrangian Formulation for

modelling and analysis of transmission synchronizers," 2015:05 Department of Applied
Mechanics Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, 2015.

[22] A. A. Shabana, Dynamics of multibody system, Cambridge University Press Cambridge,

1998 Second edition.

[23] D. Häggström, ”On synchronization of heavy truck transmissions,” Licentiate thesis,

Department of Machine Design KTH Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44, Stockholm,
Sweden, 2016.
[24] V. Berbyuk, "Towards pareto optimization of performance of a generic synchronizer of
transmission systems," in In proceedings of IDETC/CIE 2015 ASME Conference, Boston,
USA, August 2-5, 2015 paper DETC 2015-46773.
[Link]

20