View Single Post
Old 12-27-2010, 07:06 PM   #47 (permalink)
arcosine
Master Ecomadman
 
arcosine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 1,156

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
Humm, rolling resistance should be inversely related to the square root of inflation pressure.

referencing the unpublished graph of the proceeding post:

24 psi =100
28 psi = 93
32 psi = 87
36 psi = 82
40 psi = 79

100 * sqr(24/28) = 92.5
100 * sqr(24/32) = 86.6
100 * sqr(24/36) = 81.6
100 * sqr(24/40) = 77.5

Not too bad a fit for simple deflection theory. Looks like at 40 psi and above this tire is over inflated and the contact patch doesn't extend across the tread width, but is more in the center, thus the under prediction of rolling resistance due to the higher defections at the center.

How is tread wear related to contact pressure? I know that elastomer fatigue life is related inversely to the fifth power of cyclic strain, but the strain in a tire is very low and would think that abrasion is the chief component of wear.

Last edited by arcosine; 12-28-2010 at 09:18 AM..
  Reply With Quote