Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Understanding Tire Modeling PDF
Understanding Tire Modeling PDF
The purpose of this document is to describe important While the wheel may have been one of man’s first
tire characteristics and their effect on vehicle inventions, the rubber tire is definitely not one of the
performance. Characteristics considered are those that simplest components to analyze. The rubber tire is a
the Formula SAE judges have deemed important for complex composite consisting mainly of vulcanized
discussion on tires at competition and include coefficient rubber, which more specifically is an elastomer with a
of friction, slip angle, slip ratio, camber angle, cornering high number of sulfur cross-links between the polymer
stiffness, camber stiffness, self-aligning torque, normal chains. The composite also contains carbon black, oil
load sensitivity, load transfer sensitivity and pneumatic extenders and layered reinforcing strands or fabrics
trail. Every effort has been made to list sample values to called plies. These strands are normally made of Nylon,
give the reader a general idea for common values of the Terylene, Rayon or steel cords and are oriented in
considered characteristics. Values relating to a typical various configurations (Ref 1). While much attention is
FSAE vehicle are also listed for available data. paid to the rubber itself, the reinforcing cords also
deserve attention. These cords have a higher modulus
INTRODUCTION of elasticity and less creep and therefore carry the load
while the rubber skin serves to seal the air. An in depth
The importance of the tire’s contribution to a racing study of tire construction would show that cord
vehicle cannot be overstated. Tires are required to orientation (radial or bias ply) can have a significant
produce the forces necessary to control the vehicle. effect on tire characteristics. Racing tires are set up in a
Given that the tire is the only means of contact between bias ply configuration, providing strength in the three
the road and the vehicle, they are at the heart of vehicle planes simultaneously (Ref 2).
handling and performance.
Rubber tires have been present for quite some time and
Insight into the discussed parameters will help the FSAE have seen many improvements such as the use of
student in various ways. Knowledge of these Vulcanization by Goodyear in 1839 and the addition of
characteristics and their effects on racecar performance carbon black by Pirelli in 1907 (Ref 1). With these
can give the engineer insight into performance improvements, the rubber tire has produced superior
optimization. A firm grasp on what influences a tire’s control and durability when compared with other
behavior and what these characteristics mean in terms substitutes that have been attempted over the years.
of vehicle dynamics terminology will better prepare the
student to score higher during design judging at NOTATION
competition.
It is important first to review a tire in its most general
This document only covers one small piece of a very orientation and consider the forces acting on a tire. The
complex assembly. However, the tire itself is also SAE tire axis terminology is shown in Figure 1. The axis
extremely complex. The information contained within system is not the same as the axis system on the 2004
should allow the reader to grasp the vehicle dynamics Platform racecar. The SAE system (SAE J670e)
terminology considering tires with much less effort than if denotes the X being forward, Y to the right and Z
the tire had to be researched independently. downward. The 2004 FSAE Platform racecar uses X
forward, Y left, and Z upward.
1
behavior is not derived from the material properties and
structure of a tire. Simplifications are therefore made in
order to create empirical models for a tire. The three
foremost models used to understand tire forces,
deflection and footprint behavior through the corning
process are the elastic foundation model, the string
model and the beam model (Ref 1). While none of these
models truly addresses the complexity of a physical tire,
realistic results can be obtained when empirical stiffness
values are used.
The coefficient of friction is defined as a unitless ratio of If the direction of travel differs from the wheel heading (if
friction force to normal force. It is generally considered the wheel’s angular displacement is different from the
true that the resulting friction force is not proportional to path the tire is following), the slip angle (α) produces a
the surface area of contact. However, this is far from the component of lateral force (FY). This lateral force will act
truth when a rubber tire is considered. This dissimilar through a point behind the center of the wheel in a
behavior is due to the viscoelastic nature of rubber. direction such that it attempts to re-align the tire. It
Thus, as force is applied, deformation occurs both should be noted that the slip angle is not the same as the
elastically and plastically in a non-linear fashion due to steering angle.
the mechanical behavior of polymer chains (Ref 6).
Viscoelasticity also explains why the coefficient of friction As can be seen from the elastic foundation model, there
of a tire is load dependent. As a tire is loaded, the is a final fiction limited value of the lateral force due to
surface area grows larger increasing the total friction slip angle that is reached (Ref 1).
force but lowering the coefficient of friction (Ref 1).
Since a tire does not follow Newton’s laws of friction, a
coefficient of friction above unity can be obtained. For µ ⋅ FV
example, given a 500 lb normal load on a tire, it would c⋅ d ≤
l Equation 1
not be uncommon for a tire to produce 800 lb of force
giving a coefficient of friction of 1.6. Under ideal This equation, with c being the foundation stiffness, d
conditions, this would make the vehicle capable of pulling being the tire centerline displacement and l being the tire
1.6 g’s (Ref 2). However, ideal conditions are rarely footprint length, must be satisfied for no sliding. It then
achieved because the coefficient of friction depends on follows that the lateral force is roughly proportional to the
many transients. slip angle. This then gives the maximum non-slide force.
3
lbf N
As can be seen in Figure 4, the upper limit is reached cornering stiffness’ are around 195 /deg (867 /deg) (Ref
very quickly with the maximum force occurring at 90° 1). However, this value can be much higher. For
when the wheel is fully sideways. Generally, a racing tire example, an Indy Road tire and a Formula 1 tire may
lbf KN
will achieve maximum lateral force at slip angles in the have a Cα of 833 /deg (3.7 /deg) at 1800 lbf (8 KN)
lbf KN
range of 3°-7° (Ref 4). In the figure below, the force at 3° normal load and 750 /deg (3.4 /deg) at 1000 lbf (4.5 KN)
is 95% of maximum. At high slip angles, the rear of the normal load respectively (Ref 4). A tire for formula SAE
lbf N
print actually slides laterally along the surface of the would have a Cα around 165 /deg (734 /deg) for a 330 lbf
road, which contributes to less capacity for lateral force (1.5 KN) tire load as can be seen in Figure 15 (also see
and reduces the stabilizing self-aligning torque (Ref 4). Avon Tire Curves in the Appendix). Notice how the
cornering stiffness is sensitive to the range of slip angle
used to find the slope on the lateral force curve. This
further emphasizes that one should use caution when
using cornering stiffness values in calculations, or at
least realize its potential inaccuracies. As an additional
point, the cornering stiffness is normally 5-6 times
greater than camber stiffness for traditional bias tires
(Ref 4).
FY Fα Cα ⋅ α CS⋅ FV⋅ α
Equation 4 FS
Cα CS⋅ FV
Equation 5
FY
CS is the cornering stiffness coefficient and Cα is the
FD
cornering stiffness. Generally, typical values for the
cornering stiffness coefficient are 0.12/deg for bias-ply
tires and 0.16/deg for radial ply tires. (Ref 1)
1 2
Cα ⋅ c⋅ l
2 Equation 6
Cornering stiffness can also be seen to be the initial
slope of the lateral force curve. Typical values for
4
The preceding formulas are valid primarily in the linear The angular velocity of the driven wheel is Ω, the angular
lateral force region. However, when more aggressive, velocity of the free rolling wheel is Ω0, Re is the effective
larger camber angles are employed, as with a two- rolling radius and V is the velocity. Thus, for free rolling,
wheeled vehicle, the cornering stiffness may be reduced SR = 0 while when locked under breaking SR = -1. For
dramatically. When camber angle is included in the dynamic, real time testing, the effective radius cannot be
cornering stiffness, a new equation for cornering measured; therefore, the loaded rolling radius is
stiffness can be used. commonly used in its place. Slip percentage is simply
the slip ratio expressed as a percentage (slip ratio
multiplied by 100).
Cα Cα0 − kCαγ⋅ γ
Equation 8
As stated earlier, longitudinal forces, tractive and
k 0.005 breaking, are functions of the slip ratio. As the slip ratio
Cαγ
Given that deg increases, the longitudinal forces rise rapidly and then
fall off after the maximum is reached in a range of 0.10
This equation is virtually linear up to about 60° (Ref 1). to 0.15 slip ratio (Ref 4). It can also be seen from
However, in a wide racing tire, large camber angles are Equation 10 that as the slip angle increases, the tractive
rarely used as this would begin to lift one side of the tire or breaking force will decrease.
off the ground. More on camber angle will be discussed
in the following sections. The definition of slip ratio used here is the equivalent of
the SAE definition. Many other definitions and variations
When trying to model the cornering coefficient of slip ratio have been used and can be found in Ref 4.
accurately, it becomes evident that it is dependent on
vertical load. The model that best fits analytical data is CAMBER ANGLE
the exponential equation 9 as given below (Ref 1).
Camber angle is equal to inclination of the wheel from its
vertical position. Or more precisely, camber is the
FV inclination from a plane perpendicular to the ground. A
− KCSFV −1 positive camber angle is defined to be an outward lean
FV FV1
Cα Cα1⋅ ⋅e such that the top of the tire leans outward from the
FV1 vehicle centerline. A non-zero camber angle produces a
Equation 9 camber force directed laterally toward the low axis side,
The unitless value of KCSFV is the sensitivity of CS to FV. producing another component of lateral force. Thus, a
The maximum cornering stiffness occurs when the negative camber angle increases the lateral or cornering
vertical force is equal to the reference load over the force of the tire. Generally, the lateral force produced
sensitivity (FV1/KCSFV). from camber is a function primarily of tire stiffness,
vertical force and camber angle. While there are other
SLIP RATIO (% SLIP) secondary forces present, such as friction effects and
path curvature, these are small and can be neglected for
In contrast to slip angle, which is slip in the transverse most applications. Camber force can also be affected by
plane, the slip ratio is the slip in the longitudinal plane. the shape of the crown. A very round profile develops
The slip ratio affects acceleration and breaking and maximum lateral force with negative camber angles and
therefore bears analogy to the slip angle in the sense a small slip angle while camber angles in the 0° - 4°
that as slip angle is related to lateral force, slip ratio is negative range are better when a flatter crown is used
related to longitudinal force and traction capacity. (Ref 1). For wide street radial tires, camber force tends
Generally speaking, the coefficient of friction will change to fall off at camber angles above 5° (Ref 4).
with changing slip ratio. A plot of coefficient of friction vs.
percent slip increases nearly linearly up to about 5% slip, With the combination of the preceding parameters, a
peaks near 10% slip and then falls of in a nonlinear new tire characteristic, camber stiffness, can be defined
fashion (Ref 2). as the rate of change of camber force with change in
camber angle. The equation for the lateral force
The slip ratio can be defined empirically as a function of component due to camber is seen in equation 11 (Ref 1).
angular velocity of the driven wheels and angular velocity
of the free rolling wheels. The slip ratio is defined in
FY Fγ Cγ ⋅ γ CC⋅ FV⋅ γ
equation 10 (Ref 4). Equation 11
FY is the lateral force, FV is the normal force, γ is the
Ω − Ω0 Ω ⋅ Re camber angle, Cγ is the camber stiffness and CC is
SR −1 defined to be the camber stiffness coefficient. A typical
Ω0 V⋅ cos ( α ) CC value would be 0.018/deg for bias-ply tires and
Equation 10
0.008/deg for radial ply tires (Ref 1). While the camber
force is usually less than the lateral force due to slip
5
angle (see Figure 6 and Figure 9), camber force can CY CS⋅ α + CC⋅ γ
have a significant impact on vehicle handling, especially Equation 15
as suspension geometry may change.
FY FV⋅ CY
Equation 16
50
45 It can be seen that at maximum lateral force, camber
Lateral Force (lbf)
40
force has only a small effect since the camber coefficient
35
30
reduces for large slip angles.
25
20 COMBINED LATERAL AND LONGITUDINAL FORCES
15
10
It has been seen that the lateral force is highly correlated
5
0
with the slip angle and the camber angle while the
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 longitudinal force shows correlation with the slip ratio.
Normal Force (lbf) Now it can be seen how these two forces affect the
Camber Angle thrust or drag of the vehicle. Thrust or drag is defined in
1° 2° 3° 4° 5° equation 17 (Ref 4).
Figure 6 - Lateral vs. Normal Force for Varying TorD FX⋅ cos ( α ) − FY⋅ sin ( α )
Equation 17
Camber Angle
Formulation of an equation for rolling resistance (a drag
CAMBER STIFFNESS force) can now also be seen in equation 18 (Ref 4):
Equation 19
FY Fα + Fγ Cα ⋅ α + Cγ ⋅ γ
Equation 12
This equation can also be useful in calculating the
longitudinal force. Note that when the camber angle is
FY Cs ⋅ FV⋅ α + CC⋅ FV⋅ γ small, as well as the acceleration and rolling resistance,
Equation 13
then the input torque is equal to the longitudinal force
times the loaded radius (Ref 1).
FY (
FV⋅ CS⋅ α + CC⋅ γ ) Equation 14
Path curvature is not included in these equations for
SELF-ALIGNING TORQUE
lateral force. Path curvature is a small contribution and
is often neglected for most cases (Ref 1). It may also be Self-aligning torque, also known as self-aligning moment,
convenient to define a total lateral coefficient CY as is the resultant of the lateral force and the moment arm
shown in equations 15 and 16. known as pneumatic trail, t. It is a restoring moment that
attempts to return the wheels to a zero slip angle state
(strait running). Essentially, the presence of the self-
aligning torque exposes the fact that a tire likes to head
6
in the direction it is presently running. It may be The self-aligning torque can also be influenced by tire
important to note that the self-aligning torque may be pressure. As the pressure is decreased, the contact
influenced by a mechanical trail induced from patch lengthens and thus gives a longer moment arm,
suspension geometry. For example, more mechanical which in turn increases the aligning torque (Ref 4).
trail and therefore more self-aligning torque can be
induced with the presence of caster and kingpin offset PNEUMATIC TRAIL
(Ref 4). Trail may also be affected by camber, which can
induce a small destabilizing force (Ref 4). However, this The pneumatic trail is essentially the moment arm
is also small and often neglected. This discussion through which the lateral force acts. As predicted by the
assumed no mechanical trail or trail effects due to foundation stiffness model, the lateral force acts behind
camber. the centerline of the tire. This is the result of the near-
triangular contact patch distribution as shown earlier in
Empirical equations for this torque have been derived Figure 3. The model predicts that this distance t is equal
from the foundation stiffness model and are as follows 1
to the ratio of self-aligning moment to lateral force, or /6
(Ref 1): of the contact patch length as seen in equation 22.
FY⋅ l 2
c⋅ l ⋅ tan ( α ) MZ l
MZ FY⋅ t t
6 12 Equation 20 FY 6
2 3 Equation 22
6 12
2 2 3 3 While this model is reasonably accurate, larger values
µ ⋅ FV µ ⋅ FV are commonly found when the slip angle is small. (Ref 1)
MZ −
4⋅ c⋅ l⋅ tan ( α ) 2 3 2
6⋅ c ⋅ l ⋅ ( tan ( α ) ) Equation 21 When using the foundation stiffness model to investigate
further, Equation 23 is obtained for slip angles greater
It should be noted that the above equations are for slip than the non-slide limit. This allows more relationships
angles greater than the non-slide limit. The relationships about the pneumatic trail to be distinguished. It can be
defined by Equation 21 can be seen by graphing self- seen that the pneumatic trail decreases once sliding
aligning torque over slip angle for various values of beings and approaches zero when the slip angle is 90°
normal load as is done in Figure 7. (Ref 1).
2 2 2
3⋅ µ ⋅ FV⋅ c⋅ l ⋅ tan ( α ) − 2⋅ µ ⋅ FV
t
2 3 2
12⋅ c ⋅ l ⋅ ( tan ( α ) ) − 6⋅ µ ⋅ FV⋅ c⋅ l⋅ tan ( α )
Equation 23
700
600
400
300
200
100
0
50 150 250 350 450
Normal Force (lbf)
Slip Angle
1° 2° 4° 6° 8°
10
CONCLUSION 8. Skaggs, A. (2003) Suspension Loads and Spring
Rate Analysis. Unpublished Technical Senior
The tire is one of the most important components on a Design Contribution, Colorado State University.
racecar. Knowledge of how the tire operates can give 9. Avon Tires, Downloads http://www.avonracing.com
the engineer insight into design considerations and can 10. Hoosier Tires, Colligate Formula SAE
yield information on the capabilities of a vehicle. http://www.hoosiertire.com/rrtire.htm
Knowing these capabilities can be the difference
between winning a race, or having tires break away CONTACT
through a turn and finishing last.
Nicholas D. Smith smithn@engr.colostate.edu
Thorough knowledge of how the above characteristics
affect a vehicles capabilities and handling can be very
RECCOMENDED READING
useful. Specifically, the use of tire slip curves, either
published from the manufacturer or determined by the
user’s testing, can be very useful. Knowledge of the Tire Friction
principle forces involved in tire dynamics as well as
weight transfer sensitivity, self-aligning torque and g-g 1. The Unified Theory of Tire and Rubber Friction
diagrams can also be vitally useful tools for the engineer. by H.W. Kummer and W.E. Mayer
These characteristics are those deemed important by the 2. The Physics of Tire Traction edited by D.F. Hays
design judges for formula SAE. It is the intent of the and A.L. Brooke
author that this short discussion of tire terminology will
benefit future Colorado State FSAE students in two Various factors including horsepower loss from slip
ways; it will allow them to quickly grasp the concepts and heating
considerations dealing with tires, but it is also anticipated
that the specific examples and numbers will give 3. Understanding Racing Tires by Chuck Hallum
students a feel for what the values of the different SAE Paper # 983028
parameters may be for a typical FSAE vehicle. While the
capabilities were not available to the author at the time of
composition, it would be a worthwhile task to model the
Colorado State University FSAE tire in Adams/Tire® and
compare the results with measured data. Modeling the
tire either with simple formulas or with a computer
program such as Adams could also become useful in tire
selection if ample data is available.
REFERENCES
11
DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS FY – Lateral Force [lbf]
•
CFT – Load Transfer Sensitivity [-]
Ω - Angular velocity of wheel [rad/s2]
CFV – Ratio of Change in FY to FV [-] ft
V – Velocity [ /s]
1
CS – Cornering Stiffness Coefficient [ /deg]
Re – Effective radius of free rolling tire [ft]
CY – Lateral Force Coefficient [-]
Rl – Loaded Tire Radius [ft]
CSU – Colorado State University
T – Thrust [lbf]
FD – Tire Drag Force [lbf]
D – Drag [lbf]
FS – Tire Central Force [lbf]
FR – Rolling Resistance [lbf]
FV – Normal Force [lbf]
Tin – Input torque to wheel [lbf * ft]
FVT – Transferred Vertical Load [lbf]
SAE – Society of Automotive Engineers.
FX – Longitudinal Force [lbf]
12
APPENDIX
Presented here is technical data given for Avon Tires (Ref 9). This tire is very similar to that used by many FSAE Teams.
The CSU 2004 FSAE team will be using Hoosier tires with a 2° camber (available data is shown below in Table 1). While
the tires are not the same, the following information should give the reader an estimate of what the lateral force and self-
aligning moments could be.
120
100
80
Self Aligning Torque (Nm)
60
40
20
0
-20
0
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
-40
-60
-80 150 kg
250 kg
-100
350 kg
-120
Slip Angle (deg)
13
5
150 kg
4
250 kg
3 350 kg
Cornering Force (KN)
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
-1
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
Slip Angle (deg)
14
Project: RC353STB Size: 7.0/20.0-13 Camber: 1°
3 ply Pro 26
Spec: 10998 Tyre: Series Pressure: P.S.I.
20
Tested: 31/07/01 Rim: 6 x 13 Speed: KPH
120
100
80
Self Aligning Torque (Nm)
60
40
20
0
-20
0
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
-40
-60
-80 150 kg
250 kg
-100
350 kg
-120
Slip Angle (deg)
15
5
150 kg
4 250 kg
3 350 kg
Cornering Force (KN)
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
-1
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
Slip Angle (deg)
Lateral Force vs Slip Angle At 1deg Camber and 330 lbf (150kg) Normal Load
400
y2 = -139.03x + 5.4779
300
-1 to 1 (y1)
-2 to 2 (y2)
200
y1 = -164.37x - 1.5432
100
Lateral force (lbf)
0
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
-100
-200
-300
-400
Slip Angle (deg)
16
Figure 15 - Lateral Force vs. Slip Angle for Different Ranges of Slip Angle (Data taken from Ref 9)
17
Example Calculations for the Avon Tire
Point of interest: Slip angle: α := 1.3⋅ deg
FY( α ) :=
(α − α 2)⋅ (α − α 3) ⋅ F + (α − α 1)⋅ (α − α 3) ⋅ F + (α − α 1)⋅ (α − α 2) ⋅ F
(α 1 − α 2)⋅ (α 1 − α 3) Y1 (α 2 − α 1)⋅ (α 2 − α 3) Y2 (α 3 − α 1)⋅ (α 3 − α 2) Y3
M Z( α ) :=
(α − α 2)⋅ (α − α 3) ⋅ M + (α − α 1)⋅ (α − α 3) ⋅ M + (α − α 1)⋅ (α − α 2) ⋅ M
(α 1 − α 2)⋅ (α 1 − α 3) Z1 (α 2 − α 1)⋅ (α 2 − α 3) Z2 (α 3 − α 1)⋅ (α 3 − α 2) Z3
Lateral Force: FY( 1.3⋅ deg ) = 186.889lbf FY( 1.3⋅ deg ) = 831.323N
M Z( 1.3⋅ deg )
Pneumatic Trail t := t = 1.492in t = 37.89mm
FY( 1.3⋅ deg )
FY2 − FY1
CFV := CFV = 0.582
FV2 − FV1
18
Lateral Force From Slip angle
800⋅ lbf
Vertical Load: FV := FV = 200lbf FV = 889.644N
4
µ := 1.5
Coefficient of Friction
6
Foundation Stiffness c := 5⋅ 10 ⋅ Pa c = 725.189psi
2 2
µ ⋅ FV
Lateral Force: FY( α ) := µ ⋅ FV −
2
2⋅ c⋅ l ⋅ tan ( α )
200
F Y( α )
lbf
100
0
0 5 10 15 20
α
deg
Slip Angle (deg)
19
Camber Angle
0.018
Camber Stiffness Coefficient CC :=
deg
Normal Load Range Fv := 50, 50.1.. 500
Lateral Force ( )
FY γ , Fv := CC⋅ Fv⋅ γ
(
F Y 1⋅ deg, Fv ) 40
F Y( 2⋅ deg, Fv)
Lateral Force (lbf)
30
F Y( 3⋅ deg, Fv)
F Y( 4⋅ deg, Fv)
20
F Y( 5⋅ deg, Fv)
10
0
100 200 300 400 500
Fv
Normal Force (lbf)
2 2 3 3
µ ⋅ FV µ ⋅ FV
(
M Z α , FV :=) 4⋅ c⋅ l⋅ tan ( α )
−
2 3 2 α := 0 , 0.001..
π
6⋅ c ⋅ l ⋅ ( tan ( α ) ) 2
60
M Z ( α , 500⋅ lbf )
M Z ( α , 200⋅ lbf ) 40
M Z ( α , 100⋅ lbf )
20
0
0 10 20 30 40
α
deg
Slip Angle ( deg )
500 lbf
200 lbf
100 lbf
20
Pneumatic Trail
2 2
µ ⋅ FV
FY( α ) := µ ⋅ FV −
Normal Load FV := 200⋅ lbf 2
2⋅ c⋅ l ⋅ tan ( α )
15
Trail (in)
t( α )
in 10
0
0 1 2 3 4
α
deg
Slip Angle (deg)
2 2 2
Pneumatic Trail (Equation 22) 3⋅ µ ⋅ FV⋅ c⋅ l ⋅ tan ( α ) − 2⋅ µ ⋅ FV
t( α ) :=
2 3 2
12⋅ c ⋅ l ⋅ ( tan ( α ) ) − 6⋅ µ ⋅ FV⋅ c⋅ l⋅ tan ( α )
15
t( α )
Trail (in)
in 10
0
0 1 2 3 4
α
deg
Slip Angle (deg)
21
Load Transfer Sensitivity
0.14
CS :=
deg
( )
FY α , Fv := CS⋅ Fv ⋅ α
(
F Y 1⋅ deg, Fv )
F Y( 2⋅ deg, Fv)
Normal Force (lbf)
400
F Y( 4⋅ deg, Fv)
F Y( 6⋅ deg, Fv)
0
100 200 300 400 500
Fv
Lateral Force (lbf)
22