Tyres and Roads: Predicting Friction P. Gruber, E. Fina University - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

tyres and roads predicting friction
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Tyres and Roads: Predicting Friction P. Gruber, E. Fina University - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Tyres and Roads: Predicting Friction P. Gruber, E. Fina University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom Vehicle Ride and Handling: Specialist Engineering for an Improved Experience Birmingham, 18 October 2017 Overview Tyre characteristics


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Tyres and Roads: Predicting Friction

  • P. Gruber, E. Fina

University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom Vehicle Ride and Handling: Specialist Engineering for an Improved Experience Birmingham, 18 October 2017

slide-2
SLIDE 2
  • Tyre characteristics and importance of friction
  • Measurement of friction
  • Physical-based friction modelling
  • Friction results and tyre simulations
  • Future work

2

Overview

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Tyre characteristics

Importance of friction

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Velocity and surface characteristics (Bachmann, 1998)

Tyre characteristics (1)

µ reduces with increasing velocity → temperature effect → slip stiffness primarily influenced by elastic tyre properties →tyre force (µFz) more and more influenced by rubber friction

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Generic force against slip curve (pure slip)

Tyre characteristics (2)

sliding region adhesion region force (sliding region) force (adhesion region)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Surface characteristics (Hüsemann, 2010)

Tyre characteristics (3) →µ changes with road surface texture

slide-7
SLIDE 7

How to measure rubber friction?

slide-8
SLIDE 8

 Tyre forces are functions of:

  • normal load
  • surface nature and texture
  • rubber compound
  • rubber temperature
  • surface temperature
  • sliding speed

 Fundamental experiments by Grosch in 1963  Established relationship between:

  • rubber properties
  • surface roughness
  • friction

8

Friction measurement (1)

Parameters

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Grosch experiments (1963)

Friction measurement (2)

temperature controlled enclosure (-50°C to 100°C) force measurement static load on test rubber block silicon carbide paper (also wavy glass) speed-controlled motor (low velocities to avoid heating) Fz V Ffriction

slide-10
SLIDE 10
  • Combining temperature and sliding velocity by Williams, Landel, Ferry (WLF)

transform gives master curves

10

Grosch results (1963) - Master friction curve

Friction measurement (4)

 

S S T

T T T T a      5 . 101 86 . 8 log10

WLF transform

T0 = 20°C T range: -15°C to 80°C

  • A change in temperature can be treated as a change in sliding velocity
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Peak friction values appear to coincide:

  • with excitation of rubber at loss tangent peak for rough surfaces

→ Deformation/hysteresis friction

  • with excitation of rubber at loss modulus peak for smooth surfaces

→ Adhesion friction

11

Grosch results (1963)

Friction measurement (3)

smooth surface (wavy glass)

rough surface (silicon carbide) rough surface ‘without direct contact’ (powdered silicon carbide)

SBR at 200C

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Physical-based friction modelling

12

Approach and results

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Klüppel & Heinrich (~2000) and Persson (~2001)

Concept

Rubber properties (DMA) Surface roughness Friction theory: hysteresis/deformation + adhesion friction, calculate area, temperature Friction coefficient

constant temperature

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Persson’s deformation theory

Friction theory basics

  • μ, friction coefficient
  • C(q), road spectral density function
  • P(q), contact area ratio – actual/nominal
  • q0, q2, wavenumbers for longest and

shortest waves

  • Tq, temperature
  • G, rubber complex shear modulus;
  • , Poisson’s ratio
  • v, sliding velocity
  • σz, nominal normal stress
  • superposition of energy-loss contributions from shortest to longest waves

→ longest wave (q0) non-critical; shortest wave (q2) needs estimating

  • rubber treated as linear viscoelastic (amplitude not considered)

rubber complex surface

V λ L

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Grosch experiments simulated with Persson’s theory

Comparison

  • With favourable treatment, rough-

surface friction peak realistic with respect to Grosch

  • Below peak, adhesion can account

for differences

  • Above peak, predicted friction falls

too much as sliding speed increases

Fina E, Gruber P, Sharp RS. (2014) 'Hysteretic Rubber Friction: Application of Persson's Theories to Grosch's Experimental Results'. JOURNAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 81 (12) Article number ARTN 121001

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Simulation results

16

Standard and racing compounds

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

Influence of compound and temperature – constant temperature

Friction Results (1)

Standard: Lorenz et al., Rubber friction for tire tread compound on road

  • surfaces. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 25(9):095007

Racing: Formula Student Hoosier racing tyre

Increasing temperature No frictional heating

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Influence of compound and temperature – constant sliding speed, 1 m/s

Friction Results (2)

Standard: Lorenz et al., Rubber friction for tire tread compound on road

  • surfaces. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 25(9):095007

Racing: Formula Student Hoosier racing tyre v = 1 m/s

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Friction model included in tyre model

Tyre model results

Global thermal model

Input parameters

Tyre mechanics/ contact patch Local thermal model Friction model

Tyre forces & moments

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Friction model included in tyre model – traction test

Tyre model results

Standard (Lorenz et al., 2013) FS Hoosier racing compound

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

Influence of road surface texture

Friction results (3)

Stowe Vale (resurfaced)

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

Influence of surface texture – contact patch during cornering test

Friction Results (4)

trailing edge leading edge centre plane trailing edge leading edge centre plane

W

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Conclusions and future work

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Friction theories

  • Rough surface friction – deformation; Persson’s hysteresis mechanics plausible
  • Smooth surface friction – adhesion, not well understood

Open questions

  • Surface roughness > contributions of wavelengths
  • Largest wavelength non-critical
  • shortest wavelength uncertain, influenced by cleanliness and debris

 Which q2 to use?

  • Rubber treated as linear viscoelastic material
  • Amplitude dependence

 Which properties to use? More measurements and validation required

24

Conclusions

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

Test rig at University of Surrey

Future work (1)

Linear actuator

Dynamic climate test chamber

3 axis force sensor Test surface Rubber block Normal load applied through weights Linear rail system to support surface

  • 40°C to 180°C
  • compressed air dryer
  • Direct-drive linear motor
  • ~1 µm/s to 5 cm/s
  • Max. force 153N

Weights

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Test rig at University of Surrey

Future work (2)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

Test rig at University of Surrey

Future work (3)