RE: What is a dual-mass flywheel? PH Explains
RE: What is a dual-mass flywheel? PH Explains
Tuesday 30th October 2018

What is a dual-mass flywheel? PH Explains

Ditching a simple solid flywheel might seem a bad idea but there are numerous benefits to a DMF



A dual-mass flywheel is a commonly used type of flywheel that is designed to minimise torsional vibration being transmitted from a car's engine to the rest of its drivetrain.

This vibration causes several unwanted effects, including gearbox noise - usually a pronounced rattling - and resonance in the body, which can result in an annoying droning sound. Both of these issues can be exacerbated further when the engine is working hard. These noises and vibrations reduce comfort and increase driver fatigue, so it's desirable for manufacturers to eliminate them.

These issues arise from the fluctuating torque output of the engine, which is the result of the independent combustion events that occur while it is running - and this fluctuating output can also increase the load on the transmission. This can be countered by using a dual-mass flywheel, which serves to minimise the erratic nature of the forces between the engine and transmission; consequently, excess load on the gearbox is reduced.


These complex flywheels can reduce the forces acting on the crank, too, due to their construction. A conventional solid flywheel and clutch is a typically heavy affair and bolted to the crank, generating significant forces during engine operation. The element of a dual-mass flywheel that is rigidly fixed to the crank, however, is far lighter - reducing stress on it.

Dual-mass flywheels are not a recent innovation, with the first production DMFs arriving in the mid-1980s. There were a plethora of reasons that spurred on their development; for one thing, ever-increasing engine outputs and lighter, more efficient powertrains and bodies were resulting in greater vibration and resonance.

The drive for improved efficiency, however, was also resulting in engines that produced their power at lower RPM and had fewer cylinders - again resulting in increased vibration and necessitating some form of damping.

How does a dual-mass flywheel work?

A four-stroke engine, due to its intermittent combustion cycles, is not the smoothest thing on the planet - and these periodic combustion events cause the torque output to fluctuate, which transmits a vibration through the drivetrain and the rest of the car.

The dual-mass flywheel, which is a type of torsion damper, is designed to reduce the conduction of these vibrations between the engine and transmission - removing the unwanted side-effects.

Unlike a standard solid flywheel, a dual-mass flywheel consists of two separate pieces. These are called the primary and secondary mass and, thanks to a bearing in the middle, the two masses can rotate against each other.

The primary mass, which features the ring gear required for starting the engine, is bolted to the engine's crankshaft. The secondary mass, as you would expect, is coupled to the clutch assembly - which transmits drive to the transmission.


Around the edge of the primary mass is a channel in which a series of large springs are retained - and the ends of these 'arc springs' protrude above the retaining stops in the channels. Attached to the secondary mass is a flange; the wings of this flange sit between the springs, allowing for drive to be transmitted from one mass to the other.

These radially mounted springs dampen the movements between the two masses, meaning that the output to the clutch and gearbox is free from excess vibration. They can also absorb some of the initial surge in torque from an engine, resulting in a smoother delivery of power and more refined clutch action.

Careful design and tuning by the manufacturer is required to phase out the unwanted vibrations, though - and different numbers and configurations of springs may be used to deliver improved damping at various speeds. DMFs are not only used in manual transmissions; you will also find them in dual-clutch and continuously variable transmissions, integrated between the engine and transmission itself to reduce vibrations.

There are some downsides to DMFs, though. Primarily, they are far more complicated than their solid counterparts and, consequently, far more expensive. As they contain moving parts, they can also be prone to failure - particularly in vibration- and torque-heavy diesel applications - and replacements can be comparatively costly. In some cases, owners revert to conventional single-mass flywheels.


Do petrol-engined cars use DMFs?

Yes - and they have done for many years. By 1997, for example, documentation from German technology group Schaeffler indicated that over 75 per cent of new petrol-engined cars with engines displacing more than two litres featured a DMF. Diesel was not far behind, with some 67 per cent reportedly using a DMF.

Due to the higher degree of vibration and larger torques produced by diesel engines, though, DMFs were more common in smaller-displacement engines; in 1997, the figures showed that 17 per cent of petrol engines displacing two litres or below used a DMF - whereas 21 per cent of diesels in that class featured a DMF.

As customer demand for improved refinement has increased, even in smaller and less expensive cars, the use of DMFs has continued to spread. This is in part due to reductions in cost as production has increased and the technology has become more widespread.

PH Explains homepage

Author
Discussion

humphra

Original Poster:

632 posts

122 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
I love these technical articles. Keep 'em coming!

SnoochyPooch

9 posts

116 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
“There are some downsides to DMFs”

Particularly weight. My petrol BMW DMF plus clutch was over twice the weight of a mid weight solid fly wheel and standard sprung clutch plate.

xjay1337

15,966 posts

148 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
SnoochyPooch said:
“There are some downsides to DMFs”

Particularly weight. My petrol BMW DMF plus clutch was over twice the weight of a mid weight solid fly wheel and standard sprung clutch plate.
Because it is effectively two flywheels.
Also much smoother with a DMF.

I had a SMF fitted to my last car (track car) and it did drive significantly better at the expense of smoothness and a very loud idle.

CedricN

855 posts

175 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Its not only about vibrations that you feel, but it makes the life significantly easier for the gearbox since the torque transmitted through the shafts are much less oscillating. This can results in longer life, or cheaper parts on the gear box side.

DMFs has been with us for so long, its fascinating that they still brake fairly often, the std answer in this industry is almost slways companies keeping costs down, hence being on the limit and sometimes over..

jmcc500

679 posts

248 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
I worked on DMFs for AP back in the late 90's. They had a design which linked the two halves with bob-weights, the benefit being that the flywheel would be stiffer at high speed and softer at low (where vibration isolation is more critical. After a huge development program, and having built a factory to manufacture them, the main client pulled out as their existing supplier slashed the price massively when they heard that the client was going to dual supply etc. Unfortunately the product died at that point. Shame.

BogBeast

1,145 posts

293 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
SnoochyPooch said:
“There are some downsides to DMFs”

Particularly weight. My petrol BMW DMF plus clutch was over twice the weight of a mid weight solid fly wheel and standard sprung clutch plate.
And they turn something thing that was principally a wear item that failed rarely into something that wears AND fails. My company had a fleet of VW group cars that had frequent DMF failures and replacement with a solid, much cheaper, alternative. Nobody mentioned any difference in noise/vibration or any noticeable variation in reliability.

My small block chevy has a fluidampr bolted on the nose of the crank. Ostensibly for exactly the same reason. It seems to be a lot better solution to the problem.

Midgster

634 posts

264 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Had a solid flywheel fitted to a Vauxhall 1.9CDTi 150 (with a DTUK tuning box taking it to over 200bhp) after the DMF turned into a bucket of spanners at 100,000 miles.

Didn't notice the slightest bit of difference and clocked up well over another 50,000 miles on the solid flywheel with no problems to the gearbox either. It was half the price of a DMF too.

I'm sure in the lab, a DMF is smoother, but in the real world, you can't tell the bloody difference.

NickGRhodes

1,291 posts

102 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Wonder how the pros/cons of a DMF compare to using counterbalance shaft(s) ?

JonDerz

156 posts

157 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
I noticed no difference in smoothness when I switched to a lightened SMF but a hell of a lot more responsive and quicker revving.

fireball-xl5

19 posts

227 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
I wonder if a dmf will be more of an issue with 3 cylinder engines or when a 4 cylinder becomes 2 after deactivation?
I can't remember noticing vibrations in 6 or 12 cylinder engined cars - noticeably Jaaaaaags cool

xjay1337

15,966 posts

148 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Midgster said:
Had a solid flywheel fitted to a Vauxhall 1.9CDTi 150 (with a DTUK tuning box taking it to over 200bhp) after the DMF turned into a bucket of spanners at 100,000 miles.

Didn't notice the slightest bit of difference and clocked up well over another 50,000 miles on the solid flywheel with no problems to the gearbox either. It was half the price of a DMF too.

I'm sure in the lab, a DMF is smoother, but in the real world, you can't tell the bloody difference.
Depends on the car / gearbox / clutch kit you go for.

On my 1.9 Mk5 Golf, I noticed 0 difference in terms of quietness etc.

but on my Scirocco , with 6 speed box, it was VERY rattly. I have a video somewhere.

Oilchange

9,724 posts

290 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Sounds like an overcomplicated piece of nonsense the manufacturers can charge the earth for when, not if, it breaks.
Bit like ‘swirl flaps’ and dpfs...

TiMopar

187 posts

204 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Oilchange said:
Sounds like an overcomplicated piece of nonsense the manufacturers can charge the earth for when, not if, it breaks.
Bit like ‘swirl flaps’ and dpfs...
Heard nothing but horror stories about these things.

gm77

99 posts

150 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Interestingly, my dad had a DMF in his Transit, used as a delivery van for his business. After the clutch and flywheel had to be replaced twice within 60k miles, he decided to replace it with a SMF (which was about 1/3 of the price). His words, the van was virtually "undriveable". Nothing to do with vibration, but the fact was that the engine had purposefully been designed to have little low-down torque, the power and torque arriving at a higher rev range. The DMF had been used to improve the stats for emissions, power, acceleration, but in reality it basically just covered up the bad design of the engine. When the SMF was in, he had so little low down torque, he had to continually drop down to lower gears to stop the engine from stalling (pretty awful for a delivery van). Anything less than 10 mph had to be in first gear!

In his view, DMFs are scandal far greater than Dieselgate!

TwistingMyMelon

6,517 posts

235 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
gm77 said:
Interestingly, my dad had a DMF in his Transit, used as a delivery van for his business. After the clutch and flywheel had to be replaced twice within 60k miles, he decided to replace it with a SMF (which was about 1/3 of the price). His words, the van was virtually "undriveable". Nothing to do with vibration, but the fact was that the engine had purposefully been designed to have little low-down torque, the power and torque arriving at a higher rev range. The DMF had been used to improve the stats for emissions, power, acceleration, but in reality it basically just covered up the bad design of the engine. When the SMF was in, he had so little low down torque, he had to continually drop down to lower gears to stop the engine from stalling (pretty awful for a delivery van). Anything less than 10 mph had to be in first gear!

In his view, DMFs are scandal far greater than Dieselgate!
TBF my Ford Connect is like that with the original clutch/gearbox!! If its anything under 10mph I need to be in first, ive had to drop down to 1st to get up steep hills (unladen), which Ive never done in any vehicle before!!!!! This is partly due to the very very long gearing, on the plus side it will carry 5 passengers with a small van load of stuff to the ceiling cruising @ 85-90 all day long, but round town its comical. It also has the worst turning circle of anything I have ever driven, although again it does handle well for the vehicle it is.

GroundEffect

13,864 posts

186 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
NickGRhodes said:
Wonder how the pros/cons of a DMF compare to using counterbalance shaft(s) ?
The two are not linked. "Vibrations" are a very broad brush in the article.

A DMF is there for torsional (rotational) vibration isolation due to the fact that only 1 out of 4 strokes is a combustion stroke (per cylinder) - to reduce the vibrations in to the transmission & driveline (which then has an effect on the upright of the suspension). A primary focus of a DMF is both seat-track acceleration but as well audible noise from gear-rattle. These are at their worst in diesels and the fewer the cylinders the worse it gets.

A balance shaft is there to stop lateral/longitudinal rocking of the powertrain due to the unbalanced reciprocating masses in the engine.

GroundEffect

13,864 posts

186 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
gm77 said:
Interestingly, my dad had a DMF in his Transit, used as a delivery van for his business. After the clutch and flywheel had to be replaced twice within 60k miles, he decided to replace it with a SMF (which was about 1/3 of the price). His words, the van was virtually "undriveable". Nothing to do with vibration, but the fact was that the engine had purposefully been designed to have little low-down torque, the power and torque arriving at a higher rev range. The DMF had been used to improve the stats for emissions, power, acceleration, but in reality it basically just covered up the bad design of the engine. When the SMF was in, he had so little low down torque, he had to continually drop down to lower gears to stop the engine from stalling (pretty awful for a delivery van). Anything less than 10 mph had to be in first gear!

In his view, DMFs are scandal far greater than Dieselgate!
Not related. A DMF allows you to bring the engine down to a lower operating speed and keep the lugging performance acceptable, as well as improving NVH due to gear rattle. They have no impact on the torque output of the engine.

apm142001

293 posts

119 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
Thanks for another interesting tech article, they always make good lunchtime reading.

One query - surely reverting to a conventional flywheel, as mentioned, in a setup designed for a dual-mass will cause damage to the gearbox and/or the crank?

NickGRhodes

1,291 posts

102 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
The two are not linked. "Vibrations" are a very broad brush in the article.

A DMF is there for torsional (rotational) vibration isolation due to the fact that only 1 out of 4 strokes is a combustion stroke (per cylinder) - to reduce the vibrations in to the transmission & driveline (which then has an effect on the upright of the suspension). A primary focus of a DMF is both seat-track acceleration but as well audible noise from gear-rattle. These are at their worst in diesels and the fewer the cylinders the worse it gets.

A balance shaft is there to stop lateral/longitudinal rocking of the powertrain due to the unbalanced reciprocating masses in the engine.
Thanks, I did try and google but got loads of stuff about golf clubs ?!?

gm77

99 posts

150 months

Tuesday 30th October 2018
quotequote all
GroundEffect said:
Not related. A DMF allows you to bring the engine down to a lower operating speed and keep the lugging performance acceptable, as well as improving NVH due to gear rattle. They have no impact on the torque output of the engine.
Agreed. I think you missed the point of my comment. I wasn't suggesting that a DMF impacts torque. I was suggesting (as you do in your response) that a DMF covers up the fact that an engine may have limited low down torque by design. Take the DMF away, and the engine's deficiencies in this respect are laid bare