View Single Post
Old 12-26-2010, 03:42 PM   #42 (permalink)
arcosine
Master Ecomadman
 
arcosine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 1,154

sc1 - '98 saturn sc1
Team Saturn
90 day: 43.17 mpg (US)

Airplane Bike - '11 home built Carp line Tour

rans - '97 rans tailwind

tractor - '66 International Cub cadet 129

2002 Space Odyssey - '02 Honda Odyssey EX-L
90 day: 28.25 mpg (US)

red bug - '00 VW beetle TDI

big tractor - '66 ford 3400

red vw - '00 VW new beetle TDI
90 day: 58.42 mpg (US)

RV - '88 Winnebago LeSharo
90 day: 16.67 mpg (US)
Thanks: 20
Thanked 337 Times in 227 Posts
Its a law of physics, not a dumb table.

The contact pressure equals the inflation pressure of the tire, period. The load equals the pressure times the contact area.

A narrow tire will had a narrow contact patch, a wide tire will have a wide contact patch. At the same inflation pressure, the narrow tire's belt will deflect more. The energy lost to deflection of the tire is 1/2 times the loss stiffness times the deflection squared. The imaginary stiffness, the part that absorbs energy is related to Tan delta (loss modulus) for the rubber compound and the construction of the belt. Silica reinforced compounds and compounds with tighter cures have lower tan delta that carbon black reinforced NR/BR compounds.

Lets take 2 cases; a 1 inch wide tire and a 2 inch wide tire, same pressure, load,construction and diameter.

The one inch tire deflects twice as much, but the belt is half a stiff, so it has twice the rolling resistance. But the 1 inch tire can be inflated to twice the pressure without over stressing the cords, so now the deflection is the same as the 2 inch tire, but has half the rolling resistance.

Tony Levand

Last edited by arcosine; 12-26-2010 at 03:50 PM..
  Reply With Quote