Modeling the Effects of Coulomb Friction on Longitudinal Tire Traction

Werner W. KlingbeiP and Howard W. H.
Witt 2
Some Consequences of Coulomb Friction in

Modeling Longitudinal Traction 3
REFERENCE: Klingbeil, Werner W. and Witt, W. H. "Some Consequences of Coulomb

Friction in Modeling Longitudinal Traction," Tire Science and Technology, TSTCA,
Vol. 18, No. 1, January-March, 1990, pp. 13-65.
ABSTRACT: A three-component model for a belted radial tire, previously developed by

the authors for free rolling without slip, is generalized to include longitudinal forces and
deformations associated with driving and braking. Surface tractions at the tire-road
interface are governed by a Coulomb friction law in which the coefficient of friction is
assumed to be constant.
After a brief review of the model, the mechanism of interfacial shear force generation
is delineated and explored under traction with perfect adhesion. Addition of the friction
law then leads to the inception of slide zones, which propagate through the footprint with
increasing severity of maneuvers. Different behavior patterns under driving and braking
are emphasized, with comparisons being given of sliding displacements, sliding veloci-
ties, and frictional work at the tire-road interface.
As a further application of the model, the effect of friction coefficient and of test
variables such as load, deflection, and inflation pressure on braking stiffness are com-
puted and compared to analogous predictions on the braking spring rate.
KEY WORDS: tire models, traction, contact problem, friction, interracial forces, brak-
ing stiffness
Nomenclature
a R a d i a l d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e w h e e l axle to t h e t r e a d b a n d axis (in. o r

m).
c Offset d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e sidewall h i n g e p o i n t at t h e t r e a d to t h e
sidewall h i n g e p o i n t n e a r t h e b e a d (in. o r m).
D Effective r i n g w i d t h o f t h e c o m p o s i t e t r e a d b a n d (in. o r m).
Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., Research & Development Center, Brccksville, Ohio 44141.
2 Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., Tire Tech Center, Troy, MI 48007.
3 Presented at the seventh annual meeting of The Tire Society, The University of Akron, Akron,
OH, March 22-23, 1988.
13
14 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
DE Circumferential extension stiffness of the composite treadband (lb

or N).
E1 Circumferential bending stiffness of the composite treadband
(lb. in. 2 or N. m2).
F Radial shear force acting on the cross section of the composite
treadband (lb or N).
Fx, Fy Vertical and longitudinal tire forces acting in the directions of the
(x, y) axes, respectively (lb or N).
Force intensity vector acting along the treadband axis (lb/in. or
N/m).
tn, t, Components of the force intensity vector acting along the tread-
band axis in the directions of the local normal and local tangent
vectors, respectively (lb/in. or N/m).
Gs In-plane structural shear stiffness of the tire sidewall, referred to
coordinate directions (r, 0) (lb/in. or N/m).
g Longitudinal shear stiffness of the treading, measured per unit
length of the treadband (lb/in. or N/m).
Effective height of the sidewall membrane (in. or m).
h Deformed thickness of the treading for the deflected tire (in. or m).
ho Initial thickness of the treading for the undeflected tire (in. or m).
i,j Unit base vectors for cartesian coordinates (x, y).
K Belting restraint parameter.
k,s, k0, Distributed structural stiffnesses of the tire sidewall in the radial
and tangential directions, respectively, measured per unit length
of the treadband ((lb/in.)/in. or (N/m)/m).
Zc Length of the tire-road contact zone (in. or m).
Ls Length of the slide zone (in. or m).
Arc length of the sidewall membrane (in. or m).
M Circumferential bending moment acting on the cross-section of the
deflected treadband (in.- lb or N. m).
MRR Rolling resistance moment acting on the deflected tire (in.. lb or
N. m).
rh Moment intensity vector along the treadband axis resulting from
the interfacial force intensities per unit length of contact (in.. lb/
in. or N. m/m).
n, t Unit normal and unit tangent vectors for the deflected treadband
axis, respectively.
P,Q Position vectors for a specific spatial point pair located on the
treadband axis and on the treadface centerline of the deflected
rotating tire, respectively.
Po, Qo Position vectors for a specific spatial point pair located on the
treadband axis and on the treadface center-line of the unde-
tected rotating tire, respectively.
KLINGBEIL AND WITT ON FRICTION IN TRACTION MODELING 15
P Tire inflation pressure (psi or kPa).

p Loading intensity per unit length of the treadband which results
from inflation pressure (Ib/in. or N/m).
Q Radial shear stiffness of the composite treadband (lb or N).
q Compression stiffness of the treading, measured per unit length of
the treadband (lb/in. or N/m).
R Position vector for points along the treadband axis of the defected
rotating tire.
Rf Position vector for points along the treadface center-line of the
deflected rotating tire.
Re Effective rolling radius for the loaded tire under traction (in. or m).
R* Effective rolling radius for the loaded free-rolling tire (in. or m).
RL Loaded radius of the tire under traction (in. or m).
Rs Radius ofcurvature ofthe undeflected sidewall membrane (in. or m).
RRf Rolling resistance force due to friction in tire-road contact (lb or N).
S Arc length along the treadband axis of the deflected tire (in. or m).
s Longitudinal slip (ratio).
Scr Critical value of longitudinal slip for continuous sliding throughout
the footprint.
&,so Sidewall reaction force intensities acting along the edges of the
treadband in the radial and circumferential directions, respec-
tively (lb/in. or N/m).
T Traction vector comprising the tire force intensities acting along
the contact face (lb/in. or N/m).
T Circumferential tension force acting on the cross section of the
composite treadband (lb or N).
To Initial (hoop) tension acting on the cross-section of the composite
treadband of the undeflected tire (lb or N).
Tw Wheel torque associated with braking or driving traction (in.. lb or
N.m).
U, V Displacements of the treadband axis in the radial and tangential
directions, respectively (in. or m).
V Traveling velocity (in./sec or m/s).
vs Sliding velocity (in./sec or m/s).
x,Y Cartesian coordinates for points along the treadband axis of the
deflected rotating tire.
Xf, Yf Cartesian coordinates for points along the tread face center-line of
the deflected rotating tire.
x, y Cartesian reference axes for the undeflected rotating tire.
rf Longitudinal deflection of the rotating tire under a tractive force
(in. or m).
Yfa Longitudinal displacement of the aft adhesion zone in multi-zone
footprint configurations (in. or m).
y~ Sliding displacement (in. or m).

F Treadband-treading interaction parameter for circumferential ex-
tension.
7 Average interfacial shear strain through the deformed treading.
6 Vertical tire deflection (in. or m).
6 Circumferential extension strain of the composite treadband.
0 Angular position variable, employed as the independent variable of
the theory (rad).
0c Half-angle of contact (rad).
02, 0t Angular positions of the leading and trailing edges of contact, re-
spectively (rad).
0s Angular position at the onset of sliding within the contact zone
(rad).
0sf, 0sr Angular positions of the forward and rearward boundaries of the
slide zone, respectively (rad).
K Circumferential curvature of the treadband axis (rad/in. or rad/m).
A Windup angle for the deflected tire under a tractive force (rad).
X Circumferential extension ratio of the composite treadband.
/t Treadband-treading interaction parameter for radial shear.
Nf Coefficient of friction.
Treadband-treading interaction parameter for circumferential
bending.
if, 3 Normal and shear components of the traction vector acting along
the contact face (lb/in. or N/m).
Declination angle of the normal to the treadband axis from the
vertical (rad).
~2 Wheel spin velocity for the deflected tire under a tractive force
(rad/s).
Wheel spin velocity for the deflected tire in free-rolling (rad/s).
~O Rotational frequency (Hz).
t
Differentiation with respect to the independent variable, 0.
Differentiation with respect to time, t.
The current emphasis on development of anti-lock braking systems and

traction control devices has renewed interest in the generation of tractive
forces within the footprint of a deflected rolling tire. Experimentalists have
long considered this problem, both through basic research on rubber friction
phenomena (see reviews [1,2]) and, more directly, by laboratory measure-
ments on actual tires [3], as well as by controlled field testing of tire skid
performance [4-6]. Theoretical aspects of longitudinal tire traction, how-
ever, have received far less attention. While valuable fundamental investi-
gations on simplified tire models do exist [7,8], simulation of real tire behav-
ior in greater detail requires model complexity and computation effort well
beyond such simple treatments. Much current work in this direction has
therefore focused on finite element analysis (see [9,10], for example), where
many design features can be applied to the p r o b l e m - limited only by
computer time and expense.
In the present investigation, we compromise between the simple and
complex by selecting a three-component nonlinear ring model, previously
developed by one of the authors [11], as the basis for our traction analysis.
Ring and beam models, used extensively in various forms [12-16], have
provided valuable insight as well as excellent trend predictions on real tire
behavior. Specifically in relation to tire traction, Sakai [15] used closed-form
results of a simple linear "beam on elastic foundation" model to develop a
semi-empirical computer analysis of tread block traction based on a variable
(sliding velocity, contact pressure, and temperature dependent) coefficient
of friction. The results on each block were then summed to obtain the forces
and moments acting on the complete tire. In contrast, the model of the
present paper retains the more intricate features of the authors' sixth-order
nonlinear ring model with tread interactions, but uses the simplest possible
law of a constant coefficient of friction to deduce some special consequences
and general trends in driving and braking traction.
Review of Deflected Tire Model for Free-Rolling Without Slip
A tire is modeled as an engineering structure, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2,

with three principal components as follows:
1. The composite treadband is considered as an elastic ring of width D
possessing circumferential extension stiffness DE, circumferential
bending stiffness El, and radial shear stiffness Q. The intersection of
the neutral surface in bending with the plane of the wheel is referred to
as the treadband axis, and lies a distance a from the wheel axle.
2. The treadband foundation or support structure comprises the inflated
sidewalls, beads, and buttresses. Sidewall reactions along the treadband
are represented by combined effects from two-dimensional sidewall
membranes in parallel with linear structural springs. Each sidewall
membrane is characterized by an effective height Hs, an offset distance
c from a "hinge point" at the tread to another hinge point near the
bead, and a membrane arc length ls. The undeflected membrane
radius of curvature Rs is determined by the parameters Hs, l~, and c.
The arc length l~ is assumed to remain constant during deflection,
reflecting the inextensibility of the cords compared to the rubber. The
structural springs associated with each sidewall have a distributed ra-
dial stiffness k~, measured per unit length of the treadband, as well as a
tangential stiffness ko~.
@
/-- COMPOSITE
/ TREADBAND ~ i
TREADBANO~ '~ J//'" ~.~
AXlS--.,//7 \'~ ,," _ - i
n/ \.,\ ~g~ 9 p ~ r SLD~W~LL
[!l \~ I~-['~ ~" ~ ~STRUCTURAL
;~ |!1 t "~' j S P R I N G S
~'~] III INFLATEO ~ /
9 MEMBRANES~'.~ //
SIDEWALLS
ROAD~ T R E A D I N G ~
STRUCTURAL STIFFNESS PARAMETERS

TREAOING TREADBAND SIDEWALLS
Compression, q Extension, DE Radial, krs
Shear g Bending, El Tangential, kas
Shear, O
TREADBANO-TREADING r Extension, r'
INTERACTIONS ~ Bending,
Shear,
FIG. 1 - - Major structural components and stiffness parameters of mathematical tire model.
J
II ~ KD A
~o
TREAOBAND
a radius to axis
M,I D effective width

K belting parameter
TREADING
ho thickness
SIDEWALL MEMBRANES
c bead hinge offset
P
WHEEL Hs height
AXLE Rs radius of c u r v a t u r e
FIG. 2 - - Geometrical idealization of mathematical tire model.
18
3. The treading, of thickness h0 from the treadband neutral axis to the

tread surface, consists of undertread rubber and anti-skid elements
with linear stiffnesses in compression q, and shear g, measured in units
of force per unit length of the treadband. Interaction effects to account
for displacements at the tread face associated with deformations of the
treadband composite are included in the model through interaction
parameters r, ~, tz, for extension, bending, and radial shear respec-
tively.
All stiffness parameters for the treadband and treading are calculated from
design details and material properties through a special treadband compos-
ite theory [17] developed for this purpose.
A measure of the restraint offered by the belt against inflation of the
carcass is introduced into the model through a belting parameter K, defined
by the relation
p = KDP (1)
where P is the inflation pressure, and p is the resulting pressure loading
intensity which acts along the length of the treadband. The product KD is
interpreted as the distance between the tread hinge points of the sidewall
membranes attached to each side of the treadband, as shown in Fig. 2. The
pressure loading intensity p together with the radial components of the
sidewall membrane reactions along the treadband result in an equilibrium
tensile force To, which acts as a "hoop" tension in the undeflected tread-
band.
Under conditions of rolling deflection, points initially at positions Po on
the treadband axis and Qo on the tread face in a freely rotating configuration
move to positions (P, Q) respectively, as sketched in Fig. 3. Thus, the
treadband neutral axis suffers radial and tangential displacements (u, v) as
well as changes in the circumferential curvature Kdefined through the decli-
nation angle ~bof the normal to the treadband axis from the vertical. At the
same time, the tread slab is compressed to a deformed thickness h and
suffers an average shear strain 3' so that 3"h is the shear displacement of the
tread face relative to the treadband axis. The polar angle 0, measured from
the vertical through the contact center, is used as the independent position
variable. The value 0 = 0c denotes the half-angle of contact, and is preas-
signed to establish a particular deflected tire configuration.
The elements of the tread slab in contact with the running surface are
subjected to contact forces induced by rolling deflection, as sketched in Fig.
4a. In addition, the treadband displacements and the curvature changes
which result from deflection induce radial and tangential sidewall reactions
(&, So) along the edges of the treadband (Fig. 4b). These reactions, together
with the contact forces, produce circumferential changes in hoop tension
within the treadband so that the net tension becomes a variable force, T(O).
20 TIRESCIENCE& TECHNOLOGY
x /
\ xi \
TREADBAND .~G ~.,~tO
AXIS-~ i ' ~ ~ \ CONTACT
FACE~_! __/
" S
%
R I M - X ~ /
FREELY ROTATING T I R E DEFLECTED

ROTATING TIRE
FIG. 3 -- Geometry and notation Jbr freely rotating and deflected tire configurations.
al CONTACT
FORCE
INTENSITIES
b) SIDEWALL
REACTIONS
/ TREADBAND
FORCES
I
FIG. 4 -- Tire force systems acting on treading, composite treadband, and sidewalls as a result
of rolling deflection.
Moreover, the structural properties of the treadband generate a circumfer-

ential bending moment, M(O), and a radial shear force, F(O), which act on its
cross section, as shown in Fig. 4c. Both the bending m o m e n t and the radial
shear force are manifestations of non-membrane behavior of the composite
treadband.
The governing differential equations for the model comprise three non-
linear geometric relations of the first order in the treadband displacement
variables (u, v, q~). Equilibrium considerations for the treadband lead to
three more first order differential equations for the three fundamental forces
(T, M, F) induced within the deflected treadband. Boundary conditions for
these six differential equations are obtained from conditions of symmetry,
presuming that the tire distorts symmetrically with respect to the center of
contact. The manner in which the governing system of differential equa-
tions is linked to the structural features of the model is shown schematically
in Fig. 5.
Contact Theory
In the notation of Figs. 2 and 3, we let Rf denote the position vector to an
arbitrary point Q on the contact face with rectangular coordinates (Xf, Yf)
referred to the wheel center. The vector Rf is determined by adding the
deformation of the treading to the deflected position R of a point P along the
treadband axis with coordinates (X, Y). Thus,
Rr = R + hn + 3'ht (2)
where
Rf = Xfi q- YrJ, R = X i + Yj (3)
Introducing the kinematic variables (u, v, ok), we have
X = (a + u) cos 0 - v sin 0
Y = (a + u) sin 0 + v cos 0 (4)
and
Xf = X + h cos ~b - 3'h sin q~
Yf = Y + h sin 0 + 3'h cos 4~ (5)
Moreover,
X' = -Xa sin ~b, Y' = Xa cos ~b, S' = Xa (6)
in which the primes denote differentiation with respect to the independent
variable 0, and X is the circumferential extension ratio of the treadband axis.
The condition for a fiat tire-road interface is expressed by
X~ = 0, Xf = RL (7)
DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS ]
/ Boundary
TREAOBAND Conditions TREADBAND
OEFLECTION EQUILIBRIUM
(u, v, (T, M, F)
/
FORCE- DEFORMATION RELATIONS ,1
Composite Treadband
(T,M,F; u,v, ~; DE, El, Q)
I
Interactions
I
Treading
(O",'C; h,'gh; q,g)
Sidewalls
(Sr, Se; Hs, Rs, e; krs, kes)
FIG. 5 - - Mathematical elements of deflected tire theory underlying computer model.
where RL is the dynamic loaded radius. A second contact relation is given by

the condition of rolling without sliding at the contact face,
Y~ = Re, Yf = ReO (8)
in which Re is the effective rolling radius. The second of Eqs (8) implies that
the tire rolls without resistance so that the longitudinal displacement of the
tread face vanishes at the center of contact; 0 = 0.
Eqs 4-8 yield expressions for the treading deformation variables,

h = RL cos 05 + ReO sin 05 - (a + u) cos (0 - 05) + v sin (0 - 05)
"yh = - R L sin 05 + ReO cos 05 - (a + u) sin (0 - 05) - v cos (0 - 05) (9)
and for their derivatives we obtain
h' = Re sin 05 + 3,h05'
(Th)' = Re C O S 05 - - (),a + h05') (10)
The surface tractions exerted by the road on the tread face are defined
through the traction vector
T = ai + rj (11)
where (a, r) respectively denote the normal and shear force components,
measured per unit length of contact (Fig. 4). Their effects along the tread-
band axis are represented by an equivalent system of distributed force com-
ponents (fn, ft) in the normal and tangential directions, together with a
distributed moment, fit. We find that
= [fn cos 05 - ft sin q~]
r = ~-~Yf [fn sin 05 + ft cos 05] (12)
where
d yf = R~ (13)
dS Xa
The components of force intensity (fn, ft) are directly related to the treading
deformations (h, ~h), and also depend upon the distortion of the treadband.
These load-deformation relations are expressed by
fn = ~ - - 1-- r ~ + ( h o ~
ft = ~00 "yh - #ho (14)
where
e = (T- To)/DE, ()t = 1 + e) (15)
and the parameters (I', (, ~z) account for interaction effects associated with
the fundamental treadband deformation mechanisms of extension (T),
bending (M), and radial shear (F), as noted in Fig. 5.
Eqs 12-15 permit the direct computation of (a, z) from the treading
deformation variables (h, 3'h) and the treadband forces (T, M, F). The
unknown parameters RL and Re which appear in Eqs 17 are determined by
specifying two intermediate boundary conditions which require the vanish-
ing of the surface tractions at the contact extremities, 0 = +0e.
The vertical load Fx applied to the tire to sustain the contact angle 0c is
computed by integrating the normal contact force intensity over the contact
length. The contact angle for a specified load is determined by interpolation.
Computation Procedure and Preliminary Results

The deflected tire equations are solved on a finite-difference mesh by
using standard methods of linearization and iteration to approximate the
nonlinear solution. The technique of incremented load buildup is used to
reach the rated load level. The symmetry of the free-rolling solution allows
the finite-difference mesh to be limited to one-half the tire only, which
results in highly efficient low cost computation.
The output of the computations gives circumferential variations of all the
kinematic and force variables considered in the theory, including the distri-
bution of interfacial forces along the footprint. An example showing the
variation in circumferential curvature of the treadband in the vicinity of the
contact zone is given in Fig. 6. We see that sharp increases in curvature (ca.
0.15~-
T_~0.I0--
UNDEFLECTEDj
CURVATURE
0.05-
I
I i ), I I
-60 _'o
0
ANGULAR POSITION,0 ~
FIG.6 - - Typical variation in circumferential curvature o f treadband K with angular position O,
computed for steeLbelted radial tire under full load; (1 in. 1 = 39.37 m-9.
100%) are predicted just beyond each edge of contact, despite the flattening
of the treadband within the footprint.
An illustration of interfacial force distributions predicted by the theory is
given in Fig. 7. The signs are such that tread elements are compressed and
sheared away from the center of contact by the frictional restraint of the
running surface. This results in opposing tractive forces on each side of
contact center which, under the present condition of free-rolling, yields no
net longitudinal force or moment on the tire. The general shapes of the
predicted contact force distributions conform well to those obtained by
interfacial force measurements [18].
CONTACT
COMPRESSION
O"
(,S/IN)
20O':
I00
i I I 1
- 30 -20 -I0 0 I0 20 30
INTERFACIAL
s. A, ( . . / , . )
I 0 1
-30 I0 20 30
ANGULAR POSITION, e~
FIG. 7 -- Typical variations of contact force intensities (~r, r ) with angular position 0 along tire
circumference, computed for steel-belted radial tire under full load;(1 lb/in. = 175.1 N/m).
Mechanisms of lnterfacial Shear Force Generation

Despite the complexity of the entire system of governing differential
equations and algebraic auxiliary equations which lead to the computation
of the interfacial force intensities (~, r) of Fig. 7, the rate of change of
interfacial shear, r', is found to be controlled predominantly by the shear
displacement rate of the treading (3'h)'. The shear displacement rate, in turn,
is expressible directly in terms of the basic kinematic variables of the model.
Noting that
4 ' = XaK (16)
and substituting into the second of Eqs 9, we obtain the formula
(3'h)' = (Re cos 4~- Xa) - XaKh (17)
Considering the first term in the right-hand member of Eq 17, we note
that the angle ~ over the contact zone is very small so that cos ~ ~ 1.
Moreover, since the treadband is almost inextensible, we also have X ~ 1.
The first term, therefore, is closely approximated by the constant (Re - a)
throughout the footprint. Physically, this term represents the shear rate
given by the difference in the traveling speed between a point on the tread
face and the corresponding point on the neutral axis of the treadband. Since
the effective rolling radius slightly exceeds the radius to the neutral axis, the
result is a small positive shear rate, as shown by the dashed line in Fig. 8a.
The second term on the fight hand side of Eq 17 gives the combined effect
oftreadband curvature and tread height on the shear rate, and represents the
tendency of the tread face to wipe against the running surface. Since the
highest treadband curvatures occur just outside the contact zone (Fig. 6), the
curvature contribution to the tread shear rate is greatest at the contact
extremities and decreases rapidly to zero towards contact center, as indi-
cated by the solid line of Fig. 8a.
The net shear displacement rate (Th)', is obtained by combining the two
contributions of Fig. 8a as shown in Fig. 8b. The integral of the resulting
curve along the contact length then gives the tread shear displacement ~h
plotted in Fig. 8c. We see that this shear displacement follows the character-
istic skew-symmetric pattern of the interfacial shear force curve of Fig. 7. Eq
17 thus provides a rational mathematical representation for the mechanisms
ofinterfacial shear force generation contained in the model, and facilitates a
simple physical interpretation of the computed results.
Generalization of Model for Driving or Braking Traction

with Perfect Adhesion
The development proceeds with the notation of Fig. 3 by establishing a
one-to-one mapping of points from a freely rotating reference configuration
to a deflected rotating configuration under traction, as illustrated in Fig. 9.
CONTACT CONTACT
ENTRY EXIT
o) f(R e cos 9~- ko)

I I I
1
c) ~f (),h)' dO ~ / ~
I l l ~ I I J I l Ii
I - 2 0I I' -I b
I
- 30 ' ,b 10 ' 30
/,// ANGULAR POSITION, 8 ~
FIG. 8 - - Mechanisms of interfacial shear force generation along footprint under free-rolling.
For mathematical convenience, the wheel axle is held fixed in space, and
the vertical load and longitudinal tractive force are imposed by translating
and tilting the contact plane. Realistically, this corresponds to vertical and
longitudinal deflections accompanied by a windup rotation of the rim rela-
tive to the footprint through the angle A.
The governing differential equations describing respectively the deflected
geometry and equilibrium conditions for the treadband subject to driving or
braking forces differ from those for free-rolling only with respect to the
boundary conditions. The necessary modifications are obtained by replac-
0
-=-,-Ira..
A
/,0t 0c CONTACT
= . . . . ~ ' - PLANE
FREELY ROTATINGTIRE DEFLECTED ROTATINGTIRE

UNDER TRACTION
FIG. 9 - - Geometry and notation for freely rotating tire and deflected tire under traction.
ing the symmetry conditions by six conditions of continuity for the func-
tions (u, v, q~, F, T, M).
Contact Theory
The development of contact relations for traction with perfect adhesion
proceeds in the manner employed for free rolling, with proper account
taken for longitudinal deflection and windup. The condition for a flat inter-
face, Eqs 7, remains unchanged, while for rolling under traction without
sliding the second of Eqs 8 becomes
Yf= R~O + Yf (18)
where ]Tf= Yr(0) denotes the longitudinal displacement of the point 0 = 0 on
the tread face from the center of contact. (We shall also refer to 17f as the
longitudinal deflection.)
The treading deformations (h, "rh) are now expressed by
h = R L c o s (~b - 3-) + (ReO + ]Tf) sin (q~ - 3-)
- (a + u) cos (0 - q~) + v sin (0 - q~)
"yh = --RL sin (~ -- 3-) + (Re 0 + 170 cos (4~ - 3_)
- (a + u) sin (0 - q~) - v cos (0 - q~) (19)
and may be evaluated once the deflected tire constants (RL, Re) and the
traction parameters (A, Yf) are known.
The relations of Eqs 12 for the traction components (a, z) acting on the
contact face become
= - d~ yf)-l [fn COS(q~ -- A) - ft sin (~b - A)]
r = ~-~ ]If [fn sin (r -- A) + ft cos (r - A)/ (20)
d ^ ^
As before, ~-~ Yf is given by Eq 13, and (f,, f ) are computed from the
treading and treadband deformations according to Eqs 14.
The deflected tire constants RE and Re are determined in a manner similar
to the free-rolling without slip case by imposing the intermediate boundary
conditions that both surface traction components (~, r) vanish at the leading
edge of contact, 01 = -0~. Two additional conditions which are necessary
and sufficient for the evaluation of the parameters 3_ and Yf are respectively:
1. the vanishing of normal traction at the trailing edge of contact 0t = 0~,
and
2. the buildup of a specified longitudinal tractive (driving or braking)
force .by.
The construction of solutions is facilitated by specifying Yf a priori as input,
and then computing the corresponding longitudinal force.
Sample Solutions
To illustrate the deflected-tire traction model for driving or braking ma-
neuvers with perfect adhesion, we examine the deflected tire predictions and
associated distributions ofinterfacial forces up to moderate levels of maneu-
ver severity. The deflected tire input data are summarized in Table 1. The
vertical load is held at 80% of the Tire and Rim Association (T&RA) rating,
giving Fx = -1264 lb (5.622 kN).
Table 2 summarizes the deflected tire response parameters generated by
allowing the longitudinal deflection ~-to vary over the range +0.3 in. (+7.62
mm). Positive values of lPf correspond to braking, while negative values are
associated with driving forces. We observe that braking causes small reduc-
tions in contact angle 0~, vertical deflection ~, and contact length L~, and
increases the effective rolling radius Re slightly. The reverse effects are pre-
dicted for driving forces. The windup angle A is very small, and increases in
magnitude with the severity of the maneuver. The windup changes sign for
driving and braking, as expected, and has the direction of the wheel torque.
The distributions ofinterfacial force intensities (o-, ~-) for various levels of
longitudinal deflection are plotted in Fig. 10 as functions of distance
through the contact zone. The contact compression ~ (Fig. 10a) shows a
small increase in the peak force intensity from driving to braking, which
concurs with the predicted contraction of the footprint. The distributions
are slightly unsymmetrical about the geometric center of the contact zone,
with the center of pressure behind the geometric center of contact for driv-
TABLE 1 - - Input data for deflected tire-traction calculations on a steel-belted JR 78-15

tire model under perfect adhesion.
Parameter Value
P inflation pressure, psi 28

Treadband
a radius to neutral axis, in. 13.43
D effective width, in. 6.00
K empirical belting constant 0.7
DE extension stiffness, lb 475 400
E1 bending stiffness, lb-in. 2 210.31
Q radial shear stiffness, lb 1004.3
Treading
h0 thickness to treadband axis, in. 0.5472
g fore & aft shear stiffness, lb/in. 2237.2
q compression stiffness, lb/in. 6334.0
bending interaction parameter 0.1674
F extension interaction parameter 0.4097
# radial shear interaction parameter 0.6532
Sidewall
ls membrane arc length, in. 5.122
Hs undeflected height, in. 4.0
c bead off-set distance, in. 1.5
G, structural shear stiffness, lb/in. 160
/c~ structural component of radial spring rate 15
intensity, lb/in./in.
1 (1 psi = 6.895 kPa, 1 in. = 25.4 mm, 1 lb = 4.448 N, 1 lb-in. 2 = 0.00287 M N . m m 2, 1 lb/in. = 0.1751
N/mm, 1 lb/in./in. = 0.00689 N / m m / m m )
TABLE 2 - - Changes in geometric responses of deflected tire model generated

by driving and braldng widthperfect adhesion.l'~
Longitudinal Deflection, I~f(in.)
Driving Braking
Ref.
Item -0.3 -0.1 0 +0.1 +0.3
Contact Angle # (deg) 16.13 15.76 15.58 15,41 15.05

Contact Length Lc (in.) 7.561 7.426 7.363 7.301 7.178
Vertical Deflection tr (in.) 1.039 1.032 1.029 1.026 1.021
Rolling Radius Re (in.) 13.43 13.50 13.54 13.58 13.67
Windup Angle, A (deg) 0.491 0.160 0 -0.157 -0.457
l Results computed at 80% Tire and Rim Association load (1264 lb or 5.622 kN) from model input data of
Table 1.
2(1 in. = 25.4 mm)
A) CONTACTCOMPRESSION
-200
~ DRIVING,?F=
7F=0.5 I N
b
-IOC
ENTRY I 1 I ~ ~, I EX!T
0 2 4 6 8
LENGTHALONGCONTACTFACE,LF(IN)
B) INTERFACIALSHEAR
20C - BRAKIN.~.~G /
IOC
-.I ..2-" j / 6
.,ooI YF=-0.3 IN
DRIVING
-200 r
F I G . 10 - - Distributions of contact force intensities (or, r) along

footprint length Lr, predicted for driving and braking with com-
plete adhesion at various levels of longitudinal deflection Yf; (1
lb/in. = 175.1N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 mm).
ing maneuvers and ahead for braking. Further asymmetries are expected in
real tires from dynamic and viscoelastic effects not included in the model.
The distributions of interfacial shearing traction T, Fig. 10b, show large
departures from the skew-symmetric distribution obtained for free rolling
without slip (Fig. 7), and these deviations account for the development of
driving and braking forces. The curves for low severity represent approxi-
mately the effects of a uniform tread shear displacement rate due to driving
or braking, superimposed upon the free-rolling tread shear rate of Fig. 8b.
The integrated result is a substantially linear buildup of the driving or
braking tractive force intensity along the contact length which modifies the
skew-symmetric free-rolling distribution.
A marked departure from physical reality [18] is exhibited by the sharp
discontinuities in the interfacial shear force curves (Fig. 10b) at the contact
exit. Further insight into this phenomenon is obtained by examining the so
called tractive ratio, defined by the ratio r/cr of the shearing traction r to the
normal force intensity a. Limiting values of this ratio at points throughout
the contact face are controlled by the laws of rubber friction. While com-
prehensive friction laws for tire-road contact are still under development
[1-3], the interfacial behavior is widely approximated by a generalization of
Coulomb's friction law
I~-/o1 -< m (21)

in which the coefficient of friction /.tf depends not only on the tread com-
pound, but is also a complicated function of the contact pressure, sliding
velocity, road-surface condition, and local temperature. Figure 11 plots the
variations in tractive ratio for the interfacial force curves of Fig. 10. We see
that under complete adhesion infinite tractive ratios are predicted at the
trailing edge of contact for all driving and braking conditions. The traction
theory with complete adhesion therefore violates all the known laws of
rubber friction, and indicates that a condition of incipient sliding exists at
contact exit with the development of either a driving or braking force.
Considering next the tractive ratio at contact entry, the theory predicts
finite values of moderate magnitude, despite the vanishing of both shearing
and normal tractions. Driving maneuvers accentuate the frontal tractive
ratio, while braking (of moderate severity) has an alleviating effect. Under
free rolling without slip, moderate tractive ratios prevail at both the leading
and trailing edges of contact, and are equal in magnitude. Consequently,
sliding will occur at both contact extremities under conditions of sufficiently
low friction, and will persist under such conditions even for the state of free
rolling.
Integrals of the net shear force distributions over the contact length (Fig.
10b) lead to driving and braking force resultants Fy, as required. These
forces, and the associated wheel torques Tw, are plotted against the longitu-
dinal deflection Yf in Fig. 12. The results show essentially linear dependence
of the tractive force and wheel torque on longitudinal deflection, with the
slopes increasing slightly in magnitude from driving to braking conditions.
We define the local slope of the force-deflection curve as the driving (or
braking) spring rate for the condition specified.
.8-
.6
]=;I
ii
_ f II
.2
N , \ " , , "- -z,o.I i'1I
\\, "x II
ENTRYC ~ E X l T
~.4 ~
\','22-.
FIG. 11 - - Variations of tractive ratio r/a alongfootprint length

Lr, predicted for driving and braking with complete adhesion at
various levels of longitudinal deflection Yr; (1 in. = 25.4 mm).
Calculation o f Longitudinal Slip

We conclude this discussion of the deflected tire-traction model with
complete adhesion by emphasizing the important distinction between
"slipping" and "sliding" terminology. The longitudinal slip under traction
is defined according to the SAE [19] by comparing the change in wheel spin
velocity fl under traction to the value ~* for a free-rolling tire traveling at the
same speed. Thus
s = (fi - ~2*)/a* (22)
and is positive under a driving torque. But at the same traveling speed Vwe
have
V = ~2R~= a ' R * (23)
_,o! /
0
600-
\ \ ~=.400-
\~\
\\
200- -;y
_,
I I I I "" / ~1 I I I
Yf(IN)
\\
-- \\
Tw\
-400- \
--10
-600-
FIG. 12 -- Variations o f tractive force Fyand wheel torque Tw with longitudinal deflection Yf,
predicted for driving and braking with complete adhesion; (1 lb = 4.448 N, 1 in.-Ib = 0.1130
N . m, 1 in. = 25.4 ram).
where Re and R* are the corresponding values of the effective rolling radius
under traction and free-rolling, respectively. Then using Eq 23 in Eq 22, we
express the slip in terms of the effective rolling radii, giving
s = (R*~ - R e ) / R e (24)
Since Re varies with longitudinal deflection as indicated in Table 2, non-
zero values of slip are predicted for the state of complete adhesion at all
(nontrivial) values of the tractive force. Slip, therefore, does not imply the
existence of relative displacements or s l i d i n g at the tire-road interface.
A plot of the tractive (driving or braking) force coefficient Fy/Fx, i.e., net
longitudinal force divided by vertical load, developed as a function of the
longitudinal slip is given in Fig. 13. The amount of slip at moderate levels of
traction with no sliding in the footprint is seen to be very small (ca. 1%), and
/
w~ I /
'd% .4P /
~0~., | /DRIVING
~_~ / / - - -
~s l/
_/2 I V I I
-~ / j 2
SLIP RATIO,s (%)
BRAKIN7 -4 -
-.6 m
FIG. 13 - - Variation of tractive force coefficient Fy/Fx with longitudinal slip ratio s, predictedfor
driving and braking with complete adhesion.
is slightly greater for braking than for driving. The slope near the origin, as
computed for either a driving or braking maneuver, is defined by SAE
terminology [19] as the driving or braking stiffness coefficient. The driving or
braking stiffness thus differs clearly from the driving or braking spring rate
introduced through Fig. 12.
The influence of frictional sliding on longitudinal slip will be examined in
the following section, considering first a slide zone at the rear of the foot-
print, and then slide zones at other locations.
Traction Model for Slide Zones with a Constant Coefficient of Friction

Consider a particular slide zone within the footprint, and let (0sf, 0sr)
denote the angular positions for its front and rear boundaries respectively.
The friction law of Eq 21 with gf constant is assumed to hold throughout the
slide zone, so that
7" = #fO" sgn V~ for 0sr ---< 0 < 0sr (25)
The signum function of the sliding velocity, sgn V~, is introduced here to
indicate that the direction ofinterfacial shear on a tread element opposes the
direction of local sliding, in accord with the physical requirement of fric-
tional energy dissipation.
Modification of Contact Equations

The condition for a flat tire-road interface continues to be expressed by
Eqs 7. However, the second condition for the kinematics of rolling is no
longer applicable within the slide zone, and must be replaced by the friction
law of Eq 25. Consequently, the kinematic and force relationships for the
slide zone are not separable as in the case for complete adhesion, but never-
theless provide a system of six equations in the six variables (h, 3,h, fn, ft, ~,
r) as follows:
h cos (q~ - A) - 3'h sin (q~ - A) = RL -- (a + u) cos (0 -- A) + v sin (0 -- A)
r = Ufa sgn Vs
- 1 - r~ + ~ho
Z = ~o~ y h - ~tho
~= (dr,)-'
~-~ [f~ cos (4~ - A) - ft sin (4~ - A)]
(dye) -1
r = ~ [ f . sin (q~ - A) + ft cos (q~ - A)] (26)
Moreover, the term d Y f / d S which appears in the last two of Eqs 26 can no
longer be computed from Eq 13, but requires a separate evaluation for the
slide zone. Indeed,
d
--~ rf = Y'dXa (27)
where
Y~ = [Xa(1 + rh) + (3'h)'] sec (q~ - A) (28)
and (q,h)' is computed by numerical differentiation.
The positions Yf along the contact face are expressed by the general
relation
Yf = (a + u) sin (0 - A) + v cos (0 - A) + h sin (r - A) + -rh cos (r - A)
(29)
corresponding to the second of Eqs 5. The values for Yf serve to establish the
length of the slide zone,
Ls = Yf(0sr)- Yf(0sf) (30)
as well as the entire contact length,
Lc = Yf(0c) - rf(-0c) (31)
The local sliding displacement is defined by the distance generated be-
tween a point on the running surface and the corresponding point on the
contact face as the point traverses the slide zone. Thus,
Ys ~- re(0) - Yf(0sf) - Re(O - Off) (32)

The local sliding velocity Vs = J)s is now obtained by differentiating Eq (32)
with respect to time, giving
where V = bR~ is the traveling speed, and Y}is given by Eq 28. We see from
Eq 33 that Y} determines the sign of Vs needed in Eq 25.
The boundary and load conditions needed to establish the limits of the
slide zone (0~f, 0~r) as well as the parameters (RE, A, R~) depend upon the
specific problem under consideration, and are considered later in this sec-
tion. General integration formulas for the applied vertical load and for the
longitudinal force are respectively
f x = f0c Yi~dO, Fy = f0c rlrdO (34)

-Oc --Oc
in which Y~ = Re in the adhesion region, and Y~is computed from Eq 28 in

the slide zone (0sf -< 0 _< 0~r).
The wheel torque Tw associated with the contact forces is computed from
the formula
Tw = MRR -- RLFy (35)
where MRR is the rolling resistance moment,
MaR --
f_oo
--0c
Y'fYfedO (36)
Frictional Work. The energy dissipated by frictional work in the slide

zone may be expressed as a rolling resistance (drag) force due to friction,
RRf, and is evaluated as the energy lost per unit distance traveled. The
distribution of frictional work along the contact face is obtained from the
formula
dYf (RRf) = - r --~ (37)
and integration over the slide zone then yields the rolling resistance force
/,0,~ , / Vs\ .
RRf = - [ rYf|-zT]dO (38)
0,r \ I/}
Continuous Slide. If the slide zone encompasses the entire footprint, its
boundaries are at the extremities of contact, -+0c.
The effective rolling radius Re is now expressed in terms of the slip s, so
that from Eq 24
Re = R*/(1 + s), (s 4= - 1 ) (39)
where, from Eqs 22 and 23,
s = (aR* - V ) / V (40)
The values of slip for continuous slide are such that
Is[ >--Iscrl, s >--1 (41)

in which scr is the critical slip ratio for onset of complete sliding. The value
s = - 1 , which corresponds to f~ = 0 in Eq 40, denotes the special braked
condition of locked-wheel skid. For this slide condition, both the effective
rolling radius Re and the sliding displacement y~ cease to have meaning,
while for the sliding velocity we have simply
Vs = - V (42)
at all points of the contact zone.
KLINGBEIL AND WlTT ON FRICTION IN TRACTION MODELING 39
The frictional rolling resistance force RRf for locked-wheel skid is equal to
the braking force Fy, as seen from Eqs 34 and 38, and its distribution is given
by the interfacial shear force intensity 7-which is, in turn, proportional to the
contact pressure intensity a through the coefficient of friction #f.
Two-Zone Adhesion-Slide Solutions for Driving or Braking on Moderate to

High Friction Surfaces
As the first application of the slide zone theory, we consider a single slide
zone at the rear of contact in order to accommodate the condition of incipi-
ent sliding indicated by Fig. 11. For moderate to high coefficients of friction
(#f >_ 0.5, say), we expect this slide zone to be the only slide zone, and to
progress forward with increasing maneuver severity. The angular position at
the onset of sliding, 0 = 0s, is determined by imposing the physical require-
ment of the continuity of displacements across the slide boundary.
We now examine solutions under both driving and braking maneuvers of
increasing severity in which sliding has progressed from small to large areas
of the contact zone. The coefficient of friction was held constant at the
moderate value #f = 0.5 which, according to Fig. 11, precludes the onset of
sliding at contact entry. Separate sequences of solutions were computed for
driving and braking, using incremental techniques in which the previous
solution is used as the starting point for the construction of the next solu-
tion. The vertical load was maintained at Fx -- 1264 lb or 5.622 kN (80%
T&RA) throughout each sequence.
Figure 14 shows plots of the tractive ratio ~'/ff generated along the foot-
print for three driving solutions (D1, D2, D3) and three braking solutions
(B1, B2, B3) corresponding to low, moderate, and high levels of sliding,
respectively. The slide zone of each curve is indicated by a full horizontal
line at the friction limit of the tractive ratio, ~/ff = 0.5, whereas the adhesion
zone is shown dashed. We observe that, below the friction limit, the tractive
ratios for the adhesion zones follow closely the trend of Fig. 11 predicted for
complete adhesion.
The interfacial force intensities (~, r) computed for the solutions of Fig.
14 are plotted in Fig. 15. Figure 15a shows the range in the normal contact
force intensity ~, while Fig. 15b shows the fore and aft shear force intensity r
for each case considered. The curves of Fig. 15a clearly manifest expected
asymmetries in the normal contact force distribution associated with driving
and braking forces. The shear force distributions (Fig. 15b) follow the trends
exhibited by Fig. 10 in the adhesion zones (drawn dashed in Fig. 15), and
then take on the limiting values allowed by the friction law in the slide
regions covering the remainder of the footprint (shown by the full lines of
Fig. 15). We note also that slight discontinuities appear in both contact force
distributions (a, ~-) at the adhesion-slide boundaries. These effects are unre-
.6 __ /-FRICTION LIMIT (SLIDE)

/
D3 .. ..... /Lf o 5
.4
i DRIVING
:.---. ~ADHESION '
I
I
I
X ..,J
.2 - - x D]" " - "
\ \
\ X
b \ i x I
0
\2 \x 4 6 8
\ \ Lf(IN)
\ \ ,,
i \ X\Bl
-.2
X \ \
\\B2 \
t \
t \ \
-.4 _ 1 \ \
~B3 x \ BRAKING
I
X il , ,,
\ I
-.6 L-SUDE
FIG. 14 --Effect of friction coefficient Isf = 0.5 on tractive ratio r/<r along footprint length Lf,
predicted for driving and braking at increasing levels of maneuver severity. Driving solutions D1,
D2, D3, braking solutions B1, B2, B3; (1 in. = 25.4 mnt).
alistic, and arise as a consequence of abrupt increases in sliding velocity

admitted by the Coulomb friction law assumed for this analysis.
It is evident from Figs. 14 and 15b that the limiting values of interfacial
shear imposed by Coulomb friction have far different consequences in
braking than in driving. These effects are contrasted further in Fig. 16,
A) CONTACT COMPRESSION
D3
I I I I
0 2 4 6 8
LENGTH ALONGCONTACTFACE,LF(.IN)
B) INTERFACIAL SHEAR
!--
'~176 B3 BRAKING
Z
en
_.1
-I0(1L DRIVING
FIG. 15 - - D i s t r i b u t i o n of contact forces (o-, r) along footprint length Lf, predicted for driving
and braking with slide zones of Fig. 14; (1 lbfin. = 175.1 N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 ram).
CONTINUOUS SLIDE
>------ I.O-
BRAKING .8-
(.3.6- DRIVING
l
I I i i
-.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.I 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5
TRACTIVE FORCE COEFFICIENT, Fy/F x
FIG. 1 6 - Progression of slide zone length ratio LJLc with tractive force coefficient Fy/F,,,
predicted for driving and braking on a friction surface with ttf = 0.5.
which depicts the progression of the slide zones in driving and braking with
increasing levels of the longitudinal force. The progression of the slide zone
in braking occurs gradually over the entire contact length, whereas in driv-
ing it increases very slowly at first (covering only 10% of the contact length
at 75% of the limiting tractive force), and then increases abruptly to achieve
complete sliding at the friction limit. It follows that a driving maneuver
supports a large adhesion zone up to moderately high levels of tractive force
and then suddenly gives way, whereas a braking maneuver steadily loses
adhesion with increasing braking severity.
The longitudinal force-deflection curves for driving and braking with
sliding at the rear of the footprint (~tr = 0.5) are compared to the curves for
complete adhesion in Fig. 17. We see that sliding introduces a high degree of
nonlinearity in the force-deflection behavior which decreases the effective
longitudinal spring rate with increasing maneuver severity. During braking,
the longitudinal spring rate decreases progressively to zero at the onset of
complete sliding, while during driving this spring rate remains almost un-
changed up to moderately high forces, and thereafter decreases abruptly to
zero at the onset of continuous slide. These variations in driving and braking
spring rates closely follow the progression of the slide zones indicated in
Fig. 16.
The relation between the longitudinal deflection 17fand the slip ratio s for
driving and braking on a friction surface of#f = 0.5 is plotted in Fig. 18. The
800-
==/
600-
---.400-
OD
_J
200-
/// BRAKING
I I I o l l I ,.
--.6 -.4 -.2 .2 .4 6
Yf(IN)
-200
DRIVING /
-400
--600
/
/
--800
FIG. 17 -- Comparison of longitudinal force-deflection characteristics predicted for driving and
braking on a friction surface (/if = 0.5) with those for complete adhesion (#f = oo);(1 lb = 4.448
N, 1 in. = 25.4 ram).
dashed curve gives the corresponding results under conditions of perfect

adhesion. We see that at low levels of slip the curves for #r = 0.5 follow those
for perfect adhesion, but as larger slide zones develop, the dependence of
longitudinal deflection on the slip ratio decreases dramatically. Again, the
effects of sliding, as indicated by the increasing magnitude of the slip ratio,
show a gradual departure from perfect adhesion under braking, but a very
abrupt departure under driving. Moreover, the level of slip generated before
.8--
.6-
/Lf - 0.~
Z
D ~
4" BRAKING
I>-
.2-
I I 0 I I I I I
4 2 -2 -4 -6 -8 -10
SLIP RATIO, s (%)
-.2
DRIVIN/G~ -w.4
fl
I
---.6
FIG. 18 - - Comparison of v.ariation in longitudinal deflection Y f with slip ratio s predicted for
driving and braking on a friction surface (#f = 0.5) with that for complete adhesion (#r = ~ ) ;
(1 in. = 25.4 mm).
complete sliding occurs in braking far exceeds that obtained in the driving
maneuver.
The critical slip ratio scr for the onset of complete sliding in driving or
braking is computed numerically by extrapolation, considering the slip ratio
as a function of the slide zone interval as shown in Fig, 19. Either the slide
zone length ratio Ls/Lc (as used in Fig. 19) or some other equivalent mea-
sure of the slide zone (e.g., Oc - 0~) may be used for extrapolation. The
critical slip ratio provides a lower bound on values of slip used as input
for the construction of continuous slide solutions considered later in this
section.
The friction-slip curve is defined by the plot of the longitudinal traction
coefficient Fy/Fx as a function of the slip ratio, s. Under the present as-
- _ _ _ -
II .e-
z
DRIVING" i
I
I I I I I I I I
4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -I0 -12 -14
SLIP RATIO,s (%)
FIG. 19 - - Variations o f slide zone length ratio LJLo with slip ratio s, predicted for driving and
braking on a frietion surface with ur = 0.5. Dashed curves show extrapolations to critical slip sot
for complete sliding.
sumption of a constant coefficient of friction (].tf = 0 . 5 ) , the traction coeffi-

cient reaches this value at the onset of continuous slide, and remains con-
stant with further increases in the magnitude of the slip ratio. The friction-
slip curves for both driving and braking are plotted in Fig. 20. For
convenience, negative slip is taken as the abscissa so that the braking curve
lies in the first quadrant. The locations for the onset of continuous slide are
indicated by intercepts on each curve. The initial slope of each curve is very
steep so that most of the tractive force is generated at very low levels of slip.
This is particularly so for the driving maneuver, which generates moderately
high levels of tractive force before large slide zones develop (see Fig. 15).
These discrepancies between the curves for driving and braking are attrib-
uted to the differing interactions with the free-rolling interfacial shear force
distributions under the two conditions.
The distribution of sliding displacements and velocities predicted along
the footprint at the three levels of sliding chosen to illustrate the two-zone
solutions for driving and braking are plotted in Fig. 21. Here, again, the
behavior patterns are substantially different for driving and braking. The
sliding displacements (Fig. 2 l a) increase almost linearly with sliding dis-
tance for braking, but show highly nonlinear behavior for driving with a
rapid buildup near contact exit. The maximum level of sliding displace-
ments under braking increases greatly with severe braking, and far exceeds
that under driving with a comparably large slide zone. The sliding velocities
Scr
4 Q
I,I. BRAKING
i.i.~
.2"
I I I OI, I I I
30 20 I0 J -I0 -20 -:30
s(%)
-.2
DRIVING
-.4
Scr
FIG. 20 -- Friction-slip curves showing the variations of tractive force coefficient Fy/F,,with slip
ratio s, predicted for driving and braking on a friction surface with t~r = 0.5.
(Fig. 21b) correspond to the slopes of the displacement curves, and show
sharp spikes near contact exit under driving, in contrast to much more
uniform velocities during braking. Moreover, the peak velocity under driv-
ing increases only slightly with the length of the slide zone, and its magni-
tude exceeds that developed under braking at all levels of maneuver severity.
Both sets of curves shown in Fig. 21 display discontinuous (finite) slide
velocities at the onset of sliding, as allowed by the theoretical formulation.
For low levels of maneuver severity (i.e., small slide zones) these discontin-
uities are larger for driving than for braking, whereas the reverse is true at
high levels of traction. In general, the sliding velocities are small, amounting
to only a fraction of the traveling velocity in each case.
The frictional work contributions generated along the contact face under
A) SLIDING DISPLACEMENT
.2- DRIVING DI--~
I
B
,......
Lf(INI
Z
--.4" BRAKING "~l
--.6'
8) SLIDING VELOCITY
.2"
DRIVING
.I- D2-~ Dl--~p,p
8
>=0 i ~-iJ',l I
,:, L , Lf(IN)
B2 BI
re.I- B3
BRAKING
Variations of sliding displacement Ys and normal-
F I G . 21 - -
ized sliding velocity Vs/V along footprint length Lf, predicted for
two-zone driving and braking solutions of increasing maneuver
severity (Fig. 14); (1 in. = 25.4 mm).
driving and braking conditions are plotted in Fig. 22. Figures 22a and 22b
show the distributions of frictional work under driving and braking respec-
tively, considering the specific maneuvers of Fig. 14. Figure 23 plots the
integrated energy losses (expressed as rolling resistance coefficients due to
friction) as functions of the tractive force coefficient. We see that the fric-
tional rolling resistance forces are small in comparison to the tractive forces
for maneuvers up to moderate severity, but increase rapidly for very severe
maneuvers. For all two-zone traction solutions, the frictional work under
A) DRIVING
8-
Z
r
_J
4-
ri D D/~IDI
ps t
0 2 4' 6 8
Lf(IN)
B) BRAKING
,.-.. 8 - -
Z B3
0 2 4 6 8
Lf(IN)
FIG. 2 2 - Distributions of frictional work ~Vs/V along foot-
print length Lf, predicted per inch of travel for two-zone driving
and braking solutions of increasing maneuver severity (Fig. 14);
(1 lb/in. = 175.1 N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 mm).
brakingfar exceeds that under driving when compared at the same level of
tractive force. The distribution of frictional work under braking occurs quite
uniformly along the slide zone (Fig. 22b). In contrast, the frictional energy
dissipation under driving is concentrated near the trailing edge (Fig. 22a),
irrespective of the slide zone length.
Multi-Zone Traction Solutionsfor Low-Friction Surfaces

The tractive ratios of Fig. 11, generated under perfect adhesion, have
already suggested the onset of sliding at both contact extremities under
conditions of sufficiently low friction. Since the frontal tractive ratio is
further accentuated by driving maneuvers, we consider it first, and investi-
gate the progression of the slide zones through the footprint.
12
Ff =0.5
I0
8
0
O BRAKING-~
0
!
•
r
n,-
(Z
4
DRIVING~ /
f
f
2
f
0 .I .2 .3 A .5
IFy/F, I
FIG. 23 -- Comparison of rolling resistance coefficients due to friction RRCf predicted for
driving and braking on a friction surface (tzf= 0.5) at increasing levels of tractiveforce coefficient
Fy/Fx.
T h r e e - Z o n e "Slide-Adhesion-Slide'" Solutions f o r Driving. We select a low

coefficient of friction ( # f = 0.2, say) and consider slide zone intervals both at
the leading and trailing edges o f the footprint. Tread elements are presumed
to enter the contact zone with a finite sliding velocity. Sliding continues
through the first zone until the decreasing tractive ratio no longer exceeds
the coefficient of friction, at which point the sliding velocity has decreased to
zero and the tread element adheres to the running surface. The state of
adhesion prevails until the tractive ratio again exceeds the friction coeffi-
cient, at which point tread elements "break away" with a finite sliding
velocity. Physical reality, however, demands that the tread element displace-
ments remain continuous at the trailing adhesion-slide boundary, so that
the conditions for the rear slide zone are unchanged from those for the
two-zone adhesion-slide solutions already presented.
In examining the combinations of parameters and boundary and load
conditions available for the construction of solutions, we see that the effec-
tive rolling radius Re can no longer be determined from the condition r(01)
= 0 used for the two-zone case, since this condition is automatically satisfied
by the vanishing of a and the friction law r = ufa for the leading slide zone.
Instead, the condition of zero sliding velocity at the rear edge of the leading
slide zone is sufficient for the calculation of Re, while the continuity require-
ment on displacements locates the leading slide-adhesion boundary.
Numerical results for the shear traction component r, illustrating the
progression of the slide zones with increasing driving severity, are plotted in
Fig. 24. The upper half of the figure (Fig. 24a) gives the tractive ratios r/~ for
low, moderate, and high fractions of the maximum available traction, while
the lower half (Fig. 24b) shows the distributed interfacial shear force inten-
sity r. The full lines in each plot designate sliding, whereas the dashed lines
indicate adhesion. We see that under a low driving force, a substantial slide
zone exists at the front of the footprint but the rear slide zone is very small,
having the appearance of a "tail" on the interfacial force curve. However,
under additional driving forces, the trailing slide zone progresses rapidly
forward while the leading slide zone enlarges only slightly. The progression
of the rear slide zone strongly resembles that shown for the two-zone theory
(Fig. 16) except that the shearing tractions are now much lower because of
the reduced coefficient of friction.
Five-Zone Solutions Near Free-Rolling. We now consider the reverse
progression of the solutions plotted in Fig. 24, brought about by reducing
the driving force. Indeed, further three-zone calculations predict that the
negative tractive ratio of Fig. 24 reaches its friction limit (r/cr = -0.2) well
before the rear slide zone disappears. This results in the conception of a third
(interior) slide zone under low friction conditions, giving afire-zone foot-
print containing successive regions of "slide-adhesion-slide-adhesion-slide."
The boundary conditions needed for the computation of the interior slide
zone are obtained in a manner following the previous developments. An
additional parameter I?f~is introduced for the aft adhesion zone so that,
corresponding to Eq 18, we have
Yf(O) = ReO + re. (43)

A) TRACTIVE RATIO
/- SLIDE
___ /-- SLIDE
.2 -~,-,~ - , i fl, f=0.2
"~, ~'~ / I
, ~ . ~.,~.~/ I
Io I "d I I /
0
I... 2 4~ 6 I 8
/~-, ; Lf(IN)
ADHESION-/ ~.J
-.2
B) INTERFACIAL SHEAR
m
40-
~. _ ADHESION--~ i,,~-',\
Z 'k~,, t %
< n I _1," I '~
"| 2 .,'4 ._6-, i/
~. I\ ,, _.-~" ~ n Lf(IN)
" r',...-C---- v
SLIDE
FIG. 2 4 - - Variations o f tractive ratio 1"/~rand interfacial shear force intensity -c along footprint
length Lf, for three-zone "slide-adhesion-slide" driving solutions predicted with low friction
(uf = 0.2) at increasing levels o f maneuver severity; (1 lb/in. = 175.1 N/m, I in. = 25.4 ram).
giving the longitudinal position of points along the tread face. The difference
between ITfaand Yf allows for a relative longitudinal displacement between
the two adhesion zones as a consequence of sliding on the intervening tread
52 TIRE SCIENCE & T E C H N O L O G Y
elements. To compute )vfa we impose the further condition that tread ele-
ments traversing the interior slide zone come to rest at the point of entry to
the aft adhesion zone.
As a numerical illustration, we again select the low coefficient of friction
m = 0.2 and compute the solution for zero net traction (Fy = 0). The results
for the tractive ratio r/a and the interfacial shear force distribution 7 are
plotted in Fig. 25, where the full and dashed lines again denote zones of
sliding and adhesion respectively, within the footprint. The slide zones are
also shown cross-hatched for greater emphasis.
We see from Fig. 25 that a small "driving tail" still persists under zero net
traction, along with the expected slide zone at the front. In addition, a small
interior slide zone, with shear traction (and sliding velocity) in the opposite
direction, is induced by the peak interfacial shear forces generated near the
rear of the footprint. Since the direction of sliding within the interior slide
zone corresponds to a braking traction, it is clear that the application of a
braking force will accentuate the interior slide zone while diminishing the
extent of sliding at both the leading and trailing edges.
~--2L'DE (/i.f =0.2') SLIDE

--~
z'~ ~
ni///v'/il i I i I ,,i._ I i I i I i I ill I
~" "l I 2 3 -'4" ,.. 5
Lf(IN) "--. 6 ~ 7/ 8
_.2,._ 7;; # < ,,o,..,,..s,o,,,
,oF
20
f/f f/ ~~ ~
n/ t I t I i I I/I t I I I I'//~I I , i
2 3// 4 5 6 7"~
// LfllN)
,/
/
-20 ~ ,/
_401
Y~-'~I
/
/, I"
FIG. 2 5 - - Variations o f tractive ratio r/~ and interfacial shear force intensity r along footprint
length Lr for five-zone "slide-adhesion-slide-adhesion-slide" footprint configuration predicted
under zero net traction with low friction (ur = 0,2); (1 lbfin. = 175.1 N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 ram).
Progression of Multi-Zone Solutions for Braking. While the propagation

of sliding during driving proceeds naturally from the five-zone zero-traction
configuration through the three-zone configurations to the state of continu-
ous-slide, the progression for braking configurations is not so clear. A series
of solutions generating successively larger and larger braking forces was
therefore computed, beginning with the five-zone configuration (Fig. 25) for
zero net traction. The corresponding distributions of interfacial shear for
several of these solutions are plotted in Fig. 26, using solid lines to indicate
the extent of sliding in each case. Beginning with a five-zone solution for a
small braking force (Fig. 26a), we see that the interior slide zone progres-
sively expands while the slide zones at both edges of contact contract. The
driving tail disappears first, leading to four-zone slide-adhesion-slide-adhe-
sion configurations as shown in Fig. 26b. Sliding at the leading edge of
contact disappears next, giving the three-zone adhesion-slide-adhesion con-
figurations of Fig. 26c. Still further increases in braking force cause the
interior slide zone to propagate to the trailing edge (Fig. 26d), which results
in two-zone adhesion-slide solutions that prevail up to the point of continu-
ous slide.
General Results for Driving and Braking on Low-Friction Surfaces. Fol-
lowing the manner of presentation previously employed for the results of
two-zone traction on high-friction surfaces, Figs. 27, 28, and 29 plot the
relationships between the extent of sliding (as expressed by the slide zone
ratio Ls/Lc), the tractive force coefficient Fy/Fx, and the slip ratio.
Figure 27 shows the dependence of the slide zone ratio on the tractive
force coefficient. The plot has a cusp at the point of minimum sliding, which
shows that this point is attained at a small driving force. The cusp also
signifies the transition from three-zone to five-zone footprint configura-
tions. The continuous curve to the left of the cusp represents the progression
of sliding associated with three-zone slide-adhesion-slide driving configura-
tions, whereas the plot on the right comprises the combined results of
multi-zone braking. Despite the multi-zone configurations, the trends of
Fig. 27 show a close resemblance to those obtained for two-zone high-fric-
tion conditions (Fig. 16).
The corresponding plot of the slide zone ratio as a function of the slip
parameter is shown in Fig. 28. Here again the trends closely resemble those
obtained under high-friction conditions (Fig. 19), and predict that much
higher slip levels are generated under braking than under driving. For each
type of maneuver, however, the critical slip ratio at the point of transition to
continuous slide (Ls/Lc = 1) is substantially lower on the low-friction surface
of Fig. 28 than on the high-friction surface of Fig. 19.
The characteristic curve for the tractive force coefficient as a function of
slip is plotted in Fig. 29, with the horizontal scale expanded to accommo-
date the low slip levels. Apart from the reduced levels for the peak tractive
Ff =0.2 d) Fy ). 200 LB
40-
I I
0
,/t /1t I
.=d ~j J 2 6 8
L f (IN)
-40
/(- SLI DE c) Fy = 165 LB
40-
/I
..-=.
z / %
0 /i / I
._I
...=, /
4 6 8
I.., Lf {IN)
-40/-'0~-- ADHESION
b) Fy = 155 LB
40-
i x
o I I \ I
_J /// 4 6 8
/ Lf {IN)
-40 -
o) Fy=20LB
40-
i X
z
m t A
,,', 0 I ~'/I I, t I
._I 2/'4 6 v 8
~,. , . I / " LfllN)
-4(
F I G . 2 6 - - Distributions o f interfacial shear force intensity r
along footprint length L f showing progression o f slide zones for
braking solutions o f increasing severity on a low friction surface
(~zf = 0.2). Dashed curves show adhesion, solid curves indicate
sliding, (1 lb/in. = 175.1N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 ram, 1 lb = 4.448 N).
force coefficients, the trends again resemble those obtained for the higher
friction conditions of Fig. 20.
Prediction of Test Variable and Friction Effects on Braking Stiffness and

Braking Spring Rate
As a further application of the traction model for a deflected tire, we
compute the dependence of braking stiffness and braking spring rate on
1.0-
9 2-ZONE 9
Ff = 0.2 a3- ~ /
.8 A 4- " 9/ I
o5- ,, ~ I
.6 I
r
._1 I
I
._l. 4 G I
I
I
.2'
I
I
i I i i I I I
-.2 -.I 0 .I .2
-Fy/F x
Dependence o f slide zone ratio L,/Lr on tractive force coefficient Fy/Fxfor multi-zone
F I G . 27 - -
driving and braking solutions on a low friction surface; (tzf = 0.2).
-1.0 ~o ----o,~o~
J
9J of
I:z .B" ~f=0.2
,.;6' 9 2- ZONE
a 3- "
0
& 4- "
DRIVING "~~4, ~176
~ BRAKING 0 5- i=
I I I I I 1 I I I
I 0 -I -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8
SLIP RATIO,s (%}
Variation o f sfide zone ratio L , / L c with slip ratio s for multi-zone driving and braking
F I G . 28 - -
solutions on a low friction surface; (uf = 0.2).
56 TIRESCIENCE& TECHNOLOGY
F f= 0.2 ,.2
.2 zo.E
f "..'.,: ,,
0 5- ii
I I I I I i O~ i I I I i I ~ I
6 4 2 o -2 -4 -6 -8 -I0
SLIP RATIO, s(%)
j -.I
-.2
Friction-slip curves showing the variation of tractive force coefficient Fy/Fx with slip
F I G . 29 - -
ratio s predicted for multi-zone driving and braking solutions on a low friction surface; (m = 0.2).
vertical load, inflation pressure, and vertical deflection, and also on the
coefficient of friction. Both response characteristics are first calculated for a
moderately high friction coefficient of 0.8 with the tire model input data of
Table 1. Initial slopes of the respective braking force curves (Fy as functions
of s and lPf) are determined by passing quadratic approximations through
two successive braking traction solutions computed near the origin.
The vertical deflection 6 is computed from the dynamic loaded radius RL
by the formula
= a + ho - RL (44)
Inasmuch as vertical deflection is a function of both vertical load and infla-
tion pressure, as indicated by the contour plot of Fig. 30, we present the
traction variables in the form of response surfaces with Fig. 30 as the base.
The effects of deflection are then displayed by projecting the curves of
constant deflection upon the traction response surfaces.
Effects of Test Variables on Braking Stiffness

The results computed for the braking stiffness are shown by the isometric
plot of Fig. 3 I. We see that the braking stiffness increases rapidly with
increasing load and with decreasing inflation pressure. These conditions also
yield progressively higher deflections, so that the condition for maximum
deflection gives the highest value for the braking stiffness.
120 I / I / I
I00
{E
e~
t
ti
8o
_J
._J
(.~
W
~3.~ _
6O
401
2O 28 56 44 52
INFLATION PRESSURE P (PSi)
F I G . 30 - - Dependence o f vertical deflection ~ on vertical load Fx and inflation pressure P,
predictedJ~om tire model input data o f Table 1; (1 in. = 25.4 mm, 100% T&R load = 1580 lb or
7.028 kN, I psi = 6.895 kPa).
The strong relationship between braking stiffness and vertical deflection

indicated in Fig. 31 becomes even more transparent by plotting the braking
stiffness directly against the vertical deflection, as shown in Fig. 32. The
result is essentially a single "master curve" of braking stiffness as a function
of vertical deflection for all values of vertical load and inflation pressure. It
follows that the effects of vertical load and inflation pressure on braking
stiffness are manifested uniquely through the corresponding values of verti-
cal deflection. The dashed lines of constant deflection in Fig. 31 thus corre-
spond to level curves of the braking stiffness response surface.
The superlinear dependence of braking stiffness on vertical load evident
in Fig. 31 can be suppressed by normalizing the braking stiffness with re-
spect to the load to obtain the braking stiffness coefficient. The correspond-
BRAKING
STIFFNESS
(LB X I04}
t ~ KI
24
3.4E
52 40
FIG. 31 - - Dependence o f braking stiffness on vertical load Fx,

inflation pressure P, and vertical deflection 6, predicted for a
moderately high friction surface (l~f = 0.8)from the tire model
input data o f Table 1; (1 lb = 4.448 N, 100% T&R load = 1580
lb or 7.028 kN, 1 psi = 6.895 kPa, 1 in. = 25.4 ram).
ing isometric plot is given in Fig. 33. We now see a small, almost linear,
increase in braking stiffness coefficient with increasing load, and the rate of
change is greatest at the lowest inflation pressure. Although the braking
stiffness coefficient increases with increasing deflection, it does not remain
constant along lines of constant deflection but decreases in the direction of
increasing load and inflation pressure. A direct plot of braking stiffness
coefficient against vertical deflection (Fig. 34) shows that the response
values for different levels of vertical load and inflation pressure no longer lie
on a single master curve, but form a two-parameter family of intersecting
curves.
Effects of Test Variables on Braking Spring Rate

The results computed for the braking spring rate are plotted in isometric
form in Fig. 35. Here we see that the braking spring rate increases with
increasing inflation pressure and decreases with increasing vertical load. The
KLINGBEIL A N D W I T T ON FRICTION IN T R A C T I O N M O D E L I N G 59
20 I I I I
P(PSI)
X-20
p.f = 0.8
5/
%15 -- ZX-28
x 9
Ix)
.J + - 44
0-52
w
z IO
I.-
Fx(% T 6 R)
(.~
z I) 40
,~ 5 _ 2_.:o ~ 4 2) 60
m 3) 80
4) I00
5) 120
o'T 3~
/ I I I I I
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
VERTICAL DEFLECTION(IN)
FIG. 3 2 - - Master curve o f braking stiffness as a function o f vertical deflection 6 plotted from
response values o f Fig. 31 for various combinations of vertical load Fx and inflation pressure P.
Pressure symbols denote plotted points and adjacent numbers indicate their load level; (1 lb
= 4.448 N, 1 in. = 25.4 ram, 100% T&R load = 1580 lb or 7.028 kN, 1 psi = 6.895 kPa).
dashed curves of constant deflection show that the braking spring rate is
greatest when the deflection is least, and vice versa. These results contrast
sharply with opposite trends predicted for the braking stiffness (Fig. 31).
A direct plot of the braking spring rate against vertical deflection at dif-
ferent levels of vertical load and inflation pressure is given in Fig. 36. The
two-parameter family of response curves indicates differing sensitivities of
braking spring rate to deflections induced by vertical load and by inflation
pressure. The sensitivity to load changes is greatest at the highest inflation
pressure, whereas the sensitivity to variations in inflation pressure is greatest
at the lowest load level. At high levels of deflection, the braking spring rate
becomes almost insensitive to further increases in load or deflection. If the
deflection is held fixed, the braking spring rate increases in the direction of
increasing load and increasing inflation pressure which are required to
maintain that deflection.
Effects of Changing the Coefficient of Friction

The effects on braking stiffness and braking spring rate predicted by
changing the coefficient of friction while maintaining fixed conditions of
BRAKING
STIFFNESS
COEFFICIENT
_ _ .
P (PSI} Fx (% T 8=R)
52 40
FIG. 33 -- Dependence of braking stiffness coefficient on vertical load Fx, inflation pressure P,
and vertical deflection 6, corresponding to response values of Fig. 31; (l Ib = 4.448 17, 1 psi
= 6.895 kPa, 1 in. = 25.4 mrn).
vertical load and inflation pressure are shown in Fig. 37. The computations
were performed over a wide range of moderately low to high friction coeffi-
cients (0.3 < uf < 1.2) using the two-zone adhesion-slide theory with a single
slide zone propagating from the rear of the footprint. Operating conditions
were fixed at 80% of the Tire and Rim Association rated load of 1264 lb
(5622 N) and an inflation pressure of 28 psi (193 kPa).
The results show that both the braking stiffness and the braking spring
rate depend strongly on the coefficient of friction for low-friction surfaces,
#f < 0.5, and increase with increasing friction. However, for uf > 0.5, the
braking stiffness rapidly stabilizes to a constant value while the braking
spring rate continues to increase slowly with further increases in the friction
coefficient.
Summary and Conclusions
M o d e l Development and Consequences o f C o u l o m b Friction
After a brief description of the tire model, the equations of contact were
developed and applied to illustrate the generation of interfacial shearing
90
, , , 120.[~0'
80
?0
""'"' '/I i
)=)J
- 'l/Ill
b
oo . / /
g
,,/~%/iti@3 6 PIPSI}
~ 4o
30
20 ~,f = 0.8
I I 1 I
0.5 1.0
VERTICAL L5
DEFLECTI N 2.0
O(IN) 2.5
FIG. 34 -- Curves o f braking stiffness coefficient as functions o f
vertical deflection ~ plotted from response values o f Fig. 33 for
various combinations of vertical load Fx and inflation pressure
P. (1 in. = 25.4 mm, 100% T&R load = 1580 lb or 7.028 kN, 1
psi = 6.895 kPa).
tractions under the simplest conditions of free rolling without slip. The
typically skew-symmetric distribution of interfacial shear along the foot-
print is explained through the combined effects of a uniform shear rate
associated with a tire's rolling radius and a nonuniform shear rate which
results from variations in circumferential curvature.
The application of tractive forces generated by driving and braking was
considered next, while retaining the condition of perfect adhesion employed
for free rolling. The analysis shows that both longitudinal deflection and
rotational "windup" are necessary to hold a tire in a state of traction.
Sufficient boundary conditions for the evaluation of these parameters from
the governing equations were introduced. Changes in rolling radius caused
by tractive forces are interpreted through a slip parameter s, in accord with
standard SAE terminology [19].
A mathematical treatment of interfacial sliding under the action of trac-
tive forces was then presented for the simple Coulomb friction law
-< uf
BRAKING
SPRING RATE
(LB/IN XlO3)
1.29
2.85
1.65
2 0
36 -L_ I fso
P(PSl) FxI%T&R)
52 40
FIG. 35 --Dependence of braking spring rate on vertical load Fx, inflation pressure P, and
vertical deflection ~, predicted for a moderately high friction surface (]2f = 0.8)from the tire model
input data of Table 1. (1 lb/in. = 175,1 N/m, 100% T&R load = 1580 lb or 7.028 kN, 1 psi
= 6.895 kPa, 1 in. = 25.4 mm).
where r/cr denotes the tractive ratio computed from the interfacial shear
force intensity r and the normal force intensity ~, and ~f is a c o n s t a n t
coefficient of friction. Necessary and sufficient boundary conditions for the
computation of solutions were developed, and the results illustrated through
numerical examples. The propagation of slide zones through the footprint
was examined in detail, first for high friction surfaces with the onset of
sliding at the trailing edge, and then for low friction conditions under which
multiple slide zones occur simultaneously. Different behavior patterns
under driving and braking were emphasized, and plots were provided to
compare sliding displacements, sliding velocities, and the frictional work
generated at the tire-road interface. It was found that:
1. On moderate to high friction surfaces, interfacial sliding occurs at
contact e x i t under all (nonzero) levels of driving or braking forces, and
progresses forward with increasing maneuver severity. The state of
traction for either driving or braking is characterized by a two-zone
"adhesion-slide" footprint configuration which persists to the point of
continuous slide.
2. On sufficiently low friction surfaces, slide zones in addition to that at
contact exit are conceived both at contact entry and within the interior
of the footprint. Such five-zone "slide-adhesi~176
footprint configurations can occur even in the absence of a net tractive
force, i.e., under free rolling.
! I ! I
t
0
% Pf =0.8
~4
Z
m
Q:}
._1
v
"I,-' 3
n,.
z
0::
O. 2
Z \
v.
,r162
(Z 40 60 80 I00 120
OO
F (%TSR)
I I I I
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
VERTICAL DEFLECTION (IN)
Curves o f braking spring rate as functions o f vertical deflection 6 plotted from
F I G . 36 - -
response values o f Fig. 35for various combinations o f vertical load Fx and inflation pressure P;
(1 lb/in. = 175.1 N/m, 1 in. = 25.4 mm, 100% T&R load = 1580 lb or 7.028 kN, 1 psi
= 6.895 kPa).
3. Coulomb friction has far different consequences in driving than in

braking so that a driving maneuver supports a large adhesion zone up
to a high level of tractive force and then suddenly gives way, whereas a
braking maneuver steadily loses adhesion with increasing braking se-
verity. Consequently, the corresponding slip predicted for complete
sliding in driving is very low (2.6%), while that for braking is much
higher (13.2%).
4. Sliding velocities which occur during partial sliding within the foot-
print are generally small, amounting to only a fraction of the traveling
velocity. The model (based on Coulomb friction) admits a jump dis-
continuity in velocity at an adhesion-slide boundary.
5. Sliding velocities for braking on a moderate friction surface are quite
uniform over the slide zone, whereas those for driving show sharp
spikes near contact exit.
6. Frictional work during partial sliding on a moderate friction surface
yields rolling resistance forces which are smaller than the tractive
forces.
7. Frictional work during partial sliding under braking is about three
times as great as that for driving at the same level of tractive force.
I I '1 I I I
Fx=80% TBR -
0
P = 28 PSI x
Z
x BRAKING m
-d STI FFNESS--~ -A
~D
lad
Z
1.8 "
p- Z
n
z
/ SPRING RATE Z
I v
o0
1.6 m
I I I I I I
.2 .4 ,6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4
COEFFICIENT of FRICTION
Dependence of braking stiffness and braking spring rote on the coefficient o ffriction
F I G . 37 - -
#r, predicted for fixed vertical load Fx and inflation pressure P from tire model input data of
Tcible 1; (1 lb = 4.448 N, 1 lb/in. = 175.1 N/m, 80% T&R load = 1264 lb or5.622 kN, 28psi
= 193 kPa).
Frictional work in braking is distributed quite uniformly along the

length of the slide zone, while that for driving is concentrated at the
trailing edge.
Effects of Test Variables on Braking Stiffness and Braking Spring Rate

As a further application of the model, a computer study was conducted to
predict the effects of tire load, inflation pressure, and deflection on braking
stiffness (initial slope of the plot for braking force as a function of longitu-
dinal slip) and on braking spring rate (herein defined as initial slope of the
plot for braking force as a function of longitudinal deflection) at a moder-
ately high friction coefficient of 0.8. These results showed that:
1. Braking stiffness increases rapidly with increasing load and decreasing
inflation pressure in ways that depend uniquely on vertical deflection.
2. Braking spring rate decreases with increasing load and decreasing in-
flation, and its sensitivity to deflection induced by load differs from
that induced by inflation pressure.
Variations in the coefficient of friction were then investigated over the range
0.3 < ~f < 1.2 at fixed load and inflation pressure. The results predicted that
on low friction surfaces both the braking stiffness and the braking spring rate
depend strongly on the coefficient of friction, and increase with increasing
friction. However, the rates of change quickly diminish so that for tXr> 0.5,
the braking stiffness rapidly stabilizes to a constant value, while the braking
spring rate continues to increase slowly but steadily with further increases in
the coefficient of friction.
Acknowledgments
The authors express their gratitude to the Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Com-
pany for permission to publish this paper. Special thanks are also due to
Robert W. Iden for computer assistance, to Arthur R. Canterbury for pre-
paring most of the figures, and to Towanda E. Colbert for typing the manu-
script.
References
[1] Roberts, A. D., "Friction of Rubber," The Plastics and Rubber Institute, Progress of
Rubber Technology, Vol. 41, 1978, pp. 121-158.
[2] Schallamach, A. and Grosch, K., "Tire Traction and Wear," Chapter 6, Mechanics of
Pneumatic Tires, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, National Highway Safety Administration,
1981.
[3] Browne, A., Ludema, K. C., and Clark, S. K., "Contact Between the Tire and Roadway,"
Chapter 5, Mechanics of Pneumatic Tires, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, National High-
way Safety Administration, 1981.
[4] Dijks, A., "A Multifactor Examination of Wet Skid Resistance of Car Tires," SAE Paper
741106, 1974.
[5] Veith, A. G., "Tire Wet Traction Performance: The Influence of Tread Pattern," Proceed-
ings of the Second International Skid Prevention Conference, Transportation Research
Board, National Academy of Sciences, Transportation Research Record 621, 1977.
[6] Speyer, A. G., "Evaluation of Various Passenger Tire Constructions for Wet Traction
Performance," SAE Paper 780197, 1978.
[7] Schallamach, A. and Turner, D. M., "The Wear of Slipping Wheels," Wear, Vol. 3, 1960,
pp. 1-25.
[8] Livingston, D. 1. and Brown, J. E. Jr., "Physics of the Slipping Wheel. II. Slip Under Both
Tractive and Lateral Forces," Rubber Chemistry and Technology, Vol. 43, No. 2, 1970,
pp. 244-261.
[9] Stechschulte, R. A. and Luchini, J. R., "A Laminated Composite Solid Element and its
Application to Tire Analysis," Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1987, pp.
42-57.
[10] Rothert, H. and Gall, R,, "On the Three-Dimensional Computation of Steel-Belted
Tires," Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1986, pp. 116-124.
[11] Klingbeil, W. W., "Theoretical Prediction of Test Variable Effects, Including Twin-Rolls,
on Rolling Resistance," SAE Paper 800088, 1980.
[12] Clark, S. K., "The Rolling Tire Under Load," SAE Paper 650493, 1965.
[13] Brhm, F., "Mechanik des Gurtelereifens," lngeniurArchiv, Vol. 35, 1966, p. 82.
[14] Yamagishi, K. and Jenkins, J. T., "The Circumferential Contact Problem for the Belted
Radial Tire," ASMEJournal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 47, 1980, pp. 513-518.
[15] Sakai, H., "Theoretical and Experimental Studies on the Dynamic Properties of Tyres,
Part 2: Experimental Investigation of Rubber Friction and Deformation of a Tire," Inter-
national Journal of Vehicle Design, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1981, pp. 182-226.
[16] Loo, M., "A Model Analysis of Tire Behavior under Vertical Loading and Straight-Line
Free Rolling," Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1985, pp. 67-90.
[17] Klingbeil, W. W., Hong, S. W., K_ienle, R. N., and Witt, H. W. H., "Theoretical and
Experimental Analysis of Dual-Compound Tread Designs for Reduced Rolling Resis-
tance," American Chemical Society, Rubber Division Symposia Volume L "Tire Roiling
Resistance," 1982, pp. 299-362.
[18] Lippmann, S. A., and Oblizajek, K. L., "The Distributions of Stress Between the Tread
and the Road for Freely Rolling Tires," SAE Paper 740072, 1974.
[19] "Vehicle Dynamics Terminology - - SAE J670e," Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.,
1978.

Modeling the Effects of Coulomb Friction on Longitudinal Tire Traction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modeling the Effects of Coulomb Friction on Longitudinal Tire Traction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Werner W. KlingbeiP and Howard W. H.

Some Consequences of Coulomb Friction in

REFERENCE: Klingbeil, Werner W. and Witt, W. H. "Some Consequences of Coulomb

ABSTRACT: A three-component model for a belted radial tire, previously developed by

a R a d i a l d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e w h e e l axle to t h e t r e a d b a n d axis (in. o r

DE Circumferential extension stiffness of the composite treadband (lb

P Tire inflation pressure (psi or kPa).

y~ Sliding displacement (in. or m).

The current emphasis on development of anti-lock braking systems and

Review of Deflected Tire Model for Free-Rolling Without Slip

A tire is modeled as an engineering structure, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2,

STRUCTURAL STIFFNESS PARAMETERS

M,I D effective width

3. The treading, of thickness h0 from the treadband neutral axis to the

FREELY ROTATING T I R E DEFLECTED

Moreover, the structural properties of the treadband generate a circumfer-

where RL is the dynamic loaded radius. A second contact relation is given by

Eqs 4-8 yield expressions for the treading deformation variables,

= [fn cos 05 - ft sin q~]

r = ~-~Yf [fn sin 05 + ft cos 05] (12)

ft = ~00 "yh - #ho (14)

Computation Procedure and Preliminary Results

Mechanisms of lnterfacial Shear Force Generation

Generalization of Model for Driving or Braking Traction

o) f(R e cos 9~- ko)

FREELY ROTATINGTIRE DEFLECTED ROTATINGTIRE

= - d~ yf)-l [fn COS(q~ -- A) - ft sin (~b - A)]

r = ~-~ ]If [fn sin (r -- A) + ft cos (r - A)/ (20)

TABLE 1 - - Input data for deflected tire-traction calculations on a steel-belted JR 78-15

P inflation pressure, psi 28

TABLE 2 - - Changes in geometric responses of deflected tire model generated

Longitudinal Deflection, I~f(in.)

Contact Angle # (deg) 16.13 15.76 15.58 15,41 15.05

F I G . 10 - - Distributions of contact force intensities (or, r) along

I~-/o1 -< m (21)

FIG. 11 - - Variations of tractive ratio r/a alongfootprint length

Calculation o f Longitudinal Slip

Traction Model for Slide Zones with a Constant Coefficient of Friction

Modification of Contact Equations

Ys ~- re(0) - Yf(0sf) - Re(O - Off) (32)

f x = f0c Yi~dO, Fy = f0c rlrdO (34)

in which Y~ = Re in the adhesion region, and Y~is computed from Eq 28 in

Frictional Work. The energy dissipated by frictional work in the slide

dYf (RRf) = - r --~ (37)

The values of slip for continuous slide are such that

Is[ >--Iscrl, s >--1 (41)

Two-Zone Adhesion-Slide Solutions for Driving or Braking on Moderate to

.6 __ /-FRICTION LIMIT (SLIDE)

alistic, and arise as a consequence of abrupt increases in sliding velocity

dashed curve gives the corresponding results under conditions of perfect

sumption of a constant coefficient of friction (].tf = 0 . 5 ) , the traction coeffi-

--.4" BRAKING "~l

Multi-Zone Traction Solutionsfor Low-Friction Surfaces

T h r e e - Z o n e "Slide-Adhesion-Slide'" Solutions f o r Driving. We select a low

Yf(O) = ReO + re. (43)

~--2L'DE (/i.f =0.2') SLIDE

_.2,._ 7;; # < ,,o,..,,..s,o,,,

Progression of Multi-Zone Solutions for Braking. While the propagation

Prediction of Test Variable and Friction Effects on Braking Stiffness and

Effects of Test Variables on Braking Stiffness

The strong relationship between braking stiffness and vertical deflection

FIG. 31 - - Dependence o f braking stiffness on vertical load Fx,