Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 01 Dec 2009

Comfort and Durability Tire Model Validation3

and
Page Range: 302 – 322
DOI: 10.2346/1.3251339
Save
Download PDF

Abstract

In this study, a systematic validation of comfort and durability tire models (CDT) using LMS software was performed by focusing on the measured tire data collection, bench test, and full vehicle model predictions. Different road events are considered in the validation process, including deterministic and random type roads, as well as braking/accelerating and cornering events. The study shows that the current version of commercial CDT models is reasonably accurate for durability road loads simulation, but requires simulation time improvement. The seven published SAE J-documents for road load tire model parameterization tests cover the necessary data to parameterize the CDT model for “non-misuse” road loads simulation.

Keywords: tire model; durability; road loads; validation
Copyright: The Tire Society
FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Challenge in validation of a full vehicle with tire model.

FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Run-to-run variations due to track width and road profile.

FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Validation scheme used in this study.

FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Full vehicle model with flexible body graphical representation.

FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

RTRV from 90° cleat test.

FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

RTRV from 90° cleat test.

FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Four-corner spindle longitudinal force responses when crossing over a wood plank at 10 MPH velocity three times.

FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Four-corner spindle longitudinal force responses when crossing over a transverse trench at 5 MPH velocity three times.

FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Left-front corner spindle longitudinal, lateral and vertical force responses when crossing over four diagonal trenches at 5 MPH velocity three times.

FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Spindle longitudinal and vertical force on 90° cleat test.

FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force on 45° cleat test.

FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

Left-front spindle longitudinal force response under wood-plank crossing event at 10 MPH velocity.

FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Left-front spindle longitudinal and vertical force responses under transverse trenches event at 5 MPH velocity.

FIG. 15.
FIG. 15.

Left-rear spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under diagonal trenches event at 20 MPH velocity.

FIG. 16.
FIG. 16.

Left-front spindle lateral force responses under cobble stone event at 20 MPH velocity.

FIG. 21.
FIG. 21.

Spindle longitudinal and vertical force, and vehicle speed responses under hard-stop braking event (start speed=30 MPH).

FIG. 22.
FIG. 22.

Spindle longitudinal force and vehicle speed responses under acceleration event (start speed=30 MPH).

FIG. 23.
FIG. 23.

Spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under “figure-eight” event.

FIG. 24.
FIG. 24.

Vehicle speed and displacement responses under “figure-eight” event.

FIG. 14.
FIG. 14.

Left-rear spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under diagonal trenches event at 20 MPH velocity.

FIG. 17.
FIG. 17.

Left-front spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under cobble stone event at 20 MPH velocity.

FIG. 18.
FIG. 18.

Rear spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under combination of staggered bumps, fiagonal trenches, random pothole, and cobblestones at 20 MPH velocity.

FIG. 19.
FIG. 19.

Left-rear spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under Belgian block event at 5 MPH velocity.

FIG. 20.
FIG. 20.

Left-rear spindle longitudinal, lateral, and vertical force responses under Belgian block event at 5 MPH velocity.

  • Download PDF