D. J.

Schuring ~

Dynamic Response of Tires

REFERENCE: Schuring, D. J., "Dynamic Responses of Tires," Tire Science and

Technology, TSTCA, Vol. 4, No. 2, May 1976, pp. 115-145.

ABSTRACT: Tire tests were performed under time-varying inputs on the Calspan Tire
Research Facility with a G78-14 belted tire at low speeds and path frequencies up to 6
rad/ft (20 rad/m). Both slip angle and vertical load were varied, either separately and
periodically or in combination. The combination simulated actual time histories of slip
angle and load measured in road accident avoidance tests.
For path frequencies up to 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m), attenuation of lateral force and
aligning torque amplitudes was negligibly small. However, both lagged static values
substantially, leading to dynamic offsets in these quantities. The offsets appeared to be
the most significant factors for tires. Their effect on the dynamic response of a vehicle
remains to be investigated.

KEY WORDS: tires, dynamic response, transient response, lateral force, aligning
torque, cornering stiffness, aligning stiffness, lateral force offset, aligning stiffness
offset, phase angle, path frequency, slip angle variation, vertical load variation

It has long been recognized that the force and moment response of
pneumatic tires to inputs of vertical load, slip angle, and camber angle is
delayed and that therefore tire performance characteristics measured
under time-varying, or dynamic, conditions may not be sufficient for
predicting the motions of a vehicle. Lippmann [1] showed in 1954 that
"in the dynamic behavior of a tire, there are delays which can affect . . .
the control of the car." Nevertheless, most mathematical models, if not
concerned with shimmy and similar high-frequency phenomena, are based
on tire data obtained under constant conditions; dynamic and transient
effects have been neglected because they are claimed to be small and of
relatively short duration under normal driving conditions. Segel asserted
A portion of the work reported herein was performed by Calspan Corporation for the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under Contract No. DOT-HS-4-00923.
The contents of this paper reflect the views of Calspan Corporation which is responsible
for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily
reflect the official views or policy of the Department of Transportation.
Calspan Corp., Buffalo, N.Y. 14221.

115
1 16 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

in his classic paper on the response of an automobile to steering control

in 1956 [2] that "the effects of lag between tyre slip angle and tyre force
on the directional response of an automobile are very small at oscillation
frequencies below 3 cycles per second for forward speeds greater than 15
mph."
Recently, increasing attention has been given to modeling vehicle handling
in emergency maneuvers, a trend that has stimulated new interest in tire
dynamic properties. Modeling tire dynamic or transient characteristics,
however, is hampered by the lack of pertinent experimental data. Time-
dependent tire phenomena are difficult to measure; they require well-
controlled test facilities with large-range dynamic capabilities, requirements
that none of the existing tire testers, including Calspan's Tire Research
Facility (TIRF), can match fully. TIRF is capable of generating low
frequency variations of slip angle, with maximum rates of 10 deg/s; of
inclination angle, with maximum rates of 7 deg/s; and of vertical displace-
ments, with maximum rates of 2 in./s (5 cm/s) corresponding to, typically,
2000 lb/s (9000 N/s). These rates are well within the range of most
passenger car maneuvers.
Figure 1 illustrates a typical output delay. A G78-14 belted bias tire was
subjected to a rapid slip angle change and the response, the lateral force,
was measured as a function of time t. The slip angle was changed from
0 to 1 deg within about 0.8 s. The lateral force F, developed much more
slowly with a relaxation time tr of roughly 1.1 s, so that

Fy = 200 [1 - e x p ( - t / 1 . 1 ) ] lb

The corresponding relaxation length was lr = vtr = 1.47 • 1.1 = 1.6 ft

(0.48 m) and the rotational relaxation angle was Or = 3601r/2rrRL = 360 X
1.6/2rr • 1.04 = 90 deg, where v = 1 mph = 1.47 ft/s (0.447 m/s) is the
road speed and R~ = 1.04 ft (0.317 m) is the loaded radius of the tire.
Hence, the tire had to Complete a quarter revolution to attain 63~ of the
static lateral force of 200 lb (900 N). To attain 99%, more than one full
revolution was required. (In Fig. 1, the "static" force is not quite constant
but changes periodically by _+ 15% during one revolution because of tire
nonuniformity, a circumstance limiting the accuracy with which the relaxa-
tion time can be determined.)
To measure constant data, then, one has to permit the tire to complete
at least one (or even better, two) full revolutions. Figure 2 shows a sequence
of slip angle-lateral force measurements with 2.5 revolutions completed
between slip angle changes. The solid line indicates constant data taken in
a separate test in which the fluctuations caused by tire nonuniformities
were averaged over several revolutions.
In actual driving situations, slip angle and other input variables may
change rapidly during one tire revolution and, thus, possibly cause devia-
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 1 17

SLIP ANGLE (DEG) RUN 54-50-50

1,2i ,

1.0 ~ ~'~
t *
0.8 ~ §

0.6 i 4

0.4
§
0.2
,+
0'~ .1. ORD: e
(a) SLIP ANGLE INPUT

(-FY) (LB) RUN 54-50-50

225

20(~
~.++§247

175 o2*'% NON-UNIFORMITY_+15Ib

150
/
2
+
125

100

75
,I
§
§
50 § [
§
25 ~++. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] .o~:e
5 6 7
TIME ELAPSED (SEC)

1st REVOLUTION ~I~ 2nd REVOLUTION

I~ TRANSIENT 212
~1 ~ STEADY-STATE
"3
(b) LATERAL FORCE OUTPUT

FIG. 1--Typical tire input-output relation.

1 18 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

(-FY) (LB) RUN 54-50-50

1200

1000 I

900,, '' ~/ i'~

800 NON-UNIFORMITY / J ]

,oo

60e "~
STEADY-STATE 9 ~+ §
500 \ 1
~ . 2.5 TIRE REVOLUTIONSAFTER
400 INITIATION OF SLIPANGLECHANGE
" ,z l I 1 J
[~+ ~ ' ~ r ~ - S L I P ANGLE CHANGECOMPLETED

300 1r , SL!P ANGLE !HANGE IJITIATE D

200 . . . .

100 /
i ~,;'+, ,
01 ....
. . . . I. . . _.~
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
SLIP ANGLE (DEG)

FIG. 2--Step change of slip angle with 2.5 tire revolutions completed between steps.

tions from static tire behavior. The following study is preliminary,

although slip-angle variation is investigated in some detail. It attempts to
delineate boundaries within which constant characteristics can be safely
applied and beyond which new, time-varying properties have to be intro-
duced. Such tests performed on TIRF and other facilities [3-9] are
described and their results reviewed in order to assess their possible in-
fluence on current vehicle modeling.

Dynamic Tests
In dynamic tests, the tire is usually subjected to sinusoidal or triangular
variations of slip angle or vertical load. Sinusoidal variations [3,5,7,8]
have the advantage of being amenable to routine analytical treatment,
whereas ramp inputs are claimed to be more closely related to the actual
steering process [4]. In these experiments on TIRF, both sinusoidal and
triangular inputs were employed. Two types of test were performed
involving slip angle changes and vertical load changes. In both cases, two
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 1 19

output variables were measured, lateral force Fy and aligning torque Mz.
Figure 3 gives an example of slip angle tests with sinusoidal variations;
Fig. 4 gives an example of slip angle tests with triangular variations. Figure
5 defines the input data for all tests performed and Tables 1-3 list the
major input data.
The road speed was kept low because dynamic tire phenomena appear
to be independent of speed if referred to distance traveled rather than to
time elapsed (if the speed is not excessive), an observation borne out by
test results presented by Lippmann [1], by Weber and Persch [3], and by
others. Therefore, instead of time frequency, the path frequency cox (in
radians per unit distance) was chosen as the governing input variable.
All tests were performed with a G78-14 belted bias tire with a low
lateral-force nonuniformity of +8 lb (_+36 N). The vertical load was
1380 lb (6.14 kN) for all slip angle tests, and the slip angle was 4 deg for
all load tests. The cold inflation pressure was 24 psi (165 kPa).

Variation of Slip Angle

Plots (computer) such as those in Figs. 3 and 4 contain all the information
necessary for further evaluation. As a first task, the phase angles + between
input and output data were identified. Then, the input variable, the slip
angle a, was plotted (by computer) against the respective output variables,
the lateral force Fy and the aligning torque M,, at given levels of path
frequency wx.
Figures 6 and 7 are examples of plots of Fy against a at various path
frequencies, Fig. 6 for sinusoidal inputs and Fig. 7 for triangular inputs.
At zero path frequency, the familiar static curves were obtained. At path
frequencies larger than zero, however, the static curve developed into
elliptic, clockwise rotating loops. Width, amplitude, and inclination of
these loops appear to depend on the magnitude of COx;at low frequencies
the loops are narrow and of nearly the same amplitude as those of the
constant curve. At higher rates, the loops first widen and then shrink,
with the amplitude dropping steadily.
To characterize the observed loops and to compare them with static
data, four descriptors, shown schematically in Fig. 8, were used.
1. The slope at zero slip angle, interpreted as cornering stiffness C~.
Note that there are two slopes, one for increasing and one for decreasing
slip angle. The two values were averaged and the average value was
expressed as a fraction of the static value of cornering stiffness C~s.
2. The half-width of the loop at zero slip angle FyD, termed dynamic
lateral force offset [4]. The dynamic offset is expressed as a fraction of
the static lateral force at maximum slip angle Fy,.
3. The amplitude Fyo as a fraction of F~s.
4. The phase angle + between the slip angle and the lateral force.
120 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

SLIP ANGLE (deg) R U N 346-2-6

: * I++ +

i!
F
'
:+

+ +
!+ + +
-1! ,~, §
ii 9 9 +
+
-2 !i +. :. ++ :. +
+
+

:: ~+ L;

(a) SLIP ANGLE INPUT

F Y (Ib) R U N 346-2-6
soo I. 1
soo ; i
r, ,~
p :
200 * ' : : t ~ +

100 , ~ ~--- , : ; : ++++ ++: * ++

O + ~ + + + +

.,oo,:. i +
:
+
.'+':.::+' +
9 : :. :
-2oo *+ +' . ,. ,. ,++ ; :. :

-300 ~ : : \ : : "
-4oo :+ I t :

."[. I 5[ I :I .... I.- ...

(b) LATERAL FORCE OUTPUT
M Z (ft-lb) R U N 346-2-6
100:

60 ; ** ,; '~ + , + :
+ : : ,:, + +
40 ii: + ~. +; i: : + 2 +
20-- + + = +
+
O + * + . i
+ :. + . : :
-20 + , + , 9 +
I + +
"4~ 9 r~ : i ~+ :
-oo~ ~ ' ~ , ;
so! ~I ; ;~i ~ "

T I M E E L A P S E D (sec)
(c) ALIGNING TORQUE OUTPUT

FIG. 3--Sinusoidal slip angle variation.

 SCHURING ON TIRE R E S P O N S E 121

SLIP ANGLE (deg) RUN 335-2-6

4J
,t IA'
I\
! \
/\ /
I
.,! / \ \ /
/
J
J
\/
V

(a) SLIP ANGLE INPUT

FY (ib) RUN 335-2-6
600,

~oo!\ A /, \
"2001
i \
\
i
-600 ,*,

!..
(b) LATERAL FORCE OUTPUT
MZ (ft-lb) RUN 335-2-6

60' / i\ /
I
2s t \ J~
l
t
it t t
-25~

J30:
/ , i
\
J
-75

-100

" " " 5 " " 10 15 20 25 30 35

TIME ELAPSED (see)
(C) ALIGNING TORQUE OUTPUT

FIG. 4--Triangular slip angle variation.

122 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

~ ./~ TRIANGU
LARWAVE
/ ,/~SINUSOIDALWAVE; o{ = d-oSin~Yt=d, O sinLdsX

// \io ,o

o N ~ t (orx)
(TRIA

T ~P-

a = slip angle
T = period, s
t = v T = v / f = path period
f = 1 / T = frequency
x = path distance
t = time, s
v = road speed
a0 = amplitude of slip angle
co = 2 n / T = circular time frequency (rad/s)
~o~ = 2n/), = 2rrf/v = w / v = circular path frequency (rad/unit distance)

FIG. 5--Sinusoidal and triangular slip-angle wave inputs and definitions.

TABLE 1--Sinusoidal slip angle input data f o r a G78-14 belted bias tire under a load o f
1380 lb (6138 N) and an inflation pressure o f 24 psi (165 kPa).

Road Speed Amplitude Frequency Path Frequency

Run No. v, ff/s ao, deg f, Hz o~x, rad/ft

350 14.67 2.5 0.67 0.29

346 1.47 4.0 0.125 0.54
349 7.33 2.5 0.67 0.57
345 1.47 3.7 0.33 1.43
348 2.93 2.7 0.67 1.44
344 1.47 3.6 0.50 2.14
343 1.47 2.4 0.67 2.86
342 1.47 1.7 0.83 3.56
341 1.47 1.3 1.00 4.33
347 0.73 2.4 0.67 5.74

1 ft/s = 0.3048 m / s
1 rad/ft = 3.281 r a d / m
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 123

TABLE 2--Triangular wave slip angle input data for a G78-14 belted bias tire under a load
of 1380 lb (6138 N) and an inflation pressure of 24 psi (165 kPa).

Slip Angle
Road Speed Amplitude Frequency Path Frequency Rate 16:1,
Run No. v, ft/s ao, deg f, Hz cox, rad/ft deg/s
336 1.47 4.0 0 0 0
340 14.67 4.3 0.50 0.21 8.5
335 1.47 3.7 0.07 0.29 1.0
339 7.33 4.1 0.50 0.43 8.1
334 1.47 3.8 0.17 0.73 2.6
333 1.47 3.9 0.25 1.07 3.9
338 2.93 4.0 0.50 1.07 7.9
332 1.47 3.7 0.33 1.42 5.2
331 1.47 3.5 0.42 1.81 6.0
330 1.47 3.9 0.50 2.14 7.7
337 0.73 3.8 0.50 4.30 7.5

TABLE 3--Triangular wave vertical load input data for a G78-14 belted bias tire at a
slip angle of 4 deg and an inflation pressure of 24 psi (165 kPa).

Road Speed Amplitude Frequency Path Frequency Loading Rate

Run No. v, ft/s F.o, lb f, Hz cox,rad/s /:., lb/s
352 1.47 700 0 0 0
353 1.47 700 0.125 0.53 370
353 1.47 700 0.25 1.07 780
353 1.47 700 0.50 2.14 2200
1 lbf = 4.448 N

In Figs. 9-12 the four descriptors are plotted against path frequency
cox on a log-log scale and c o m p a r e d with results o f similar tests described
elsewhere [3-5, 7,8]. Phillips [5] p e r f o r m e d extensive time-varying tests
with small tires on a small l a b o r a t o r y belt machine at very low speed with
sinusoidal slip angle waves as input. B e r g m a n and Beauregard [4] varied
the slip angle in triangular fashion using an external d r u m and a cornering
trailer at speeds up to 60 m p h (97 kin/h); only the trailer test results
are reported here. B e r g m a n and Beauregard tested three different tires;
we averaged their results for simplicity. W e b e r and Persch [3] p e r f o r m e d
dynamic tests on a 15-ft (4.6-m) diameter internal d r u m machine at speeds
up to 150 m p h (240 k m / h ) varying the slip angle sinusoidally. In our
discussion, only the low-speed results, up to 20 m p b (32 k m / h ) , are shown.
T a m b r u n [71 employed a 10-ft (3-m) diameter external d r u m for his
sinusoidal slip angle variations, at speeds up to 75 mph (120 kin/h). Brewer
[8] reported similar tests on nosegear aircraft tires. Theoretical results were
published by Segel [6], who t r a n s f o r m e d the " r u n n i n g b a n d " tire model
124 T I R E SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

FY (Ib} RUN 350-2-6 FY (Ib) RUN 348-2-6

,oo
300 ~ ~
I
STEADY-STATE
I I
tl I
200 , ~ "-
100 ]'~, ''

1oo X~,.,
~6o \.~
, ~

... . i . . \ T
"N
-5oo .[.
.
I. . . .
] "~
eLyo,p I "
-4.5 -3 -1.5 0 " 1.5 3 4.5 4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

{'~; /'JX = 0.29 rad/ft (b) ( J x = 1.44 rad/ft

FY (Ib) RUN 343*2-6 FY (Ib) RUN 347-2-6

400
300
STEADY-STATE
200
100
0
-100 k § , i . + t

-2OO
-300
-400
\ \
-500
t =,1 i I l=,
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 - -4 :-3 -2 ~1 0-- 1 ? 3

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (degl

(c) ('ix = 2.86 rad/ft (d) 0J x = 5.74 rad/ft

FIG. 6--Lateral force response of G78-14 tire under 1380 lb (6138 N) and 24 psi (165 kPa)
to sinusoidal slip angle variations.
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 125

FY (Ib) RUN 340-2-6 FY (Ib) RUN 338-2-6

I I I I I ]
STEADY-STATE STEADY-STATE
600

400 - -

200 ~ ,it , ,%-11. 11

o! . +~ ~_ ~-~
-200 I N

-400

-600
!
jIlID,I
4 ~3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

(a) aJ x = 0.21 rad/ft (b) tjJ x = 1.07 rad/ft

FY (Ib) RUN 330-2-6 FY (Ib) RUN 337-2-6

I I I
STEADY-STATE STEADY-STATE
/ ( I I
600 -----
<
400 -\
200
\ \.._~

~I .. \
,oo I "\~ 1 "\
~00t .... 1 |
...l..[.. t_ |
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1" " 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

(c) b.)x = 2.14 rad/ft (d) tz)x = 4.30 rad/ft

F I G . 7--Lateral force response of G78-14 tire under 1380 lb (6138 N) and 24 psi (165 kPa)
to triangular slip angle variations.
126 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

2F_~y~

TIME
Fy

Fy
STEADYSTATE

~ " Cd~ 2!Fy~

- - CC

CORNERINGSTIFFNESSRATIO Co6 /C ~. s
DYNAMICOFFSETRATIOFyD/Fys
AMPLITUDERATIO Fyo/Fys
PHASEANGLE

FIG. 8--Definition of four dynamic descriptorsfor time-varying lateralforce.

developed by others to the frequency domain and applied sinusoidal slip

angle variations. Additional information pertaining to the referenced
results are given in Table 4.
Although different tires and test conditions were involved, Figs. 9-12
show a common behavior for the TIRF and the other data. The phase
angle ~, Fig. 9, changes little up to cox ~ 0.05 r a d / f t (0.16 rad/m), to
reach - 90 deg at about 2 r a d / f t (7 rad/m) and approximately - 180 deg
at very large values of cos. The amplitude ratio Fyo/Fys in Fig. 10 and the
cornering stiffness ratio C,~/C~s, Fig. 11, remain at static levels up to
cox ~ 0.2 r a d / f t (0.6 rad/m) and decline steadily to very low values at
increasing path frequencies. Figure 12 shows the dynamic offset ratio
Fyo/Fys to be small at very low path frequencies but to increase rapidly to
a maximum of more than half the maximum static value at wx ~- 1 r a d / f t
(3 rad/m).
Figures 9-12 suggest that for sinusoidal and for triangular inputs of slip
angle a a "critical" path frequency value can be fixed, below which
deviations from static data are negligible. At cox = 0.2 r a d / f t (0.7 rad/m),
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 127

/r
STEADY-STATE

L ' ~ .
WEBER (SlNUSOID)
~ ~v-o i 9 ~ PHILLIPS
TAMBRUN (SINUSOID) ~ (SINUSOID)
i-..

SEGEL(TH'EORY)
~ """~:..~_
-90
X %,-'"~. ". o 9 -%

o TI R F, SI NUSOI DA L WAV E
9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE
..... ~ ..... PHI LLIPS (REF 5) TESTS "~i'.'"" "~
WEBER (REF 3) : TIRF (SINUSOID) 7
TAMBRUN (REF 7)
BREWER (REF 8)
SEGEL (REF 6) } THEORY! BREWEIq (SINUSOID)
-180
0.05 0.1 0.5 1 5 10

bJx, RAD/FT

FIG. 9--Phase angle dpof lateral force F y as a function of slip angle path frequency COx.

--o-- TIRF, SINUSOIDAL WAVE

9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE
9 9 , ~ . 9 - PHILLIPS(REF. 5) TESTS
. . . . . WEBER, 0-20 MPH (REF 3)
. . . . . TAMBRUN (REF. 7)
SEGEL (REF. 6) } THEORY

STEADY-STATE
1.0

Fy0
Fys
TIRF (SINUSOID)
0.5
/
J ~ ""'~:~.t
/ PHILLIPS (SINUSOID)
-b o"q,,~ ~ I I
0.1 0.5 5
,.1,
10

tZJx' RAD/FT

FIG. lO--Lateral force amplitude ratio Fyo/Fys as a function of slip angle path frequency COx.
 c0

rn
Z3 A 60
1.0 A ...... z~x . . . . A.
C)
A " ~ 8 ~ T I R F (SINUSOID) I'rl
A z
~'~'XTTEADY.STAT E O
X. 131
0.8
Z
'0
BERGMAN ( T R I A N G L E ) --'-'''-''~. 0 .-I
0.6 k l'n
0
I
Z
O
r-
0.4 O
II. G3
..<

0.2 o - - TIRF, SINUSOIDAL WAVE

9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE I TESTS
i o
.z~--- BERGMAN (TRIANGULAR WAVE, REF. 4)
\o
~

-0.2 L o
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.5 1 5 10

(J') x ' rad/ft

FIG. l 1--Cornering stiffness ratio CJC.s as a function o f slip angle path frequency cox.
 1.0
o-- TIRF, SINUSOIDAL WAVE 7 I
I
9 TIRF, T R I A N G U L A R WAVE , TESTS !
SINUSOID
---A--- BERGMAN (TRIANGULAR WAVE, R E F 4 )
FyD
oJ
0.5
Fys

STEADY-STATE TRIANGLE~ .~,~. ~.~. I " c)

I
c
. . . . . .
z
0.01 0,05 0.1 0.5 10
O
z
OJx, RAD/FT -I
m
F I G . 12--Dynamic offset ratio FyD/Fys as a function of slip angle path frequency Wx.
50
m
13
O
z
o'J
m

~o
 0

m
60
T A B L E 4--Information pertaining to Figs. 9-12 and 17-18.
m
z
O
Inflation m
Pressure, Form of Amplitude Source o f
a0, deg Data Equipment z
Reference Tire Size and Type psi Load, lb Speed, m p h Input o

TIRF (this paper) G78-14 belted bias 24 1380 0.5-10 sinusoid 3-4 test belt m
o-1-
and triangle
Phillips [5] 145 SR 10 radial 25 500 0.68 sinusoid 2 test belt z
O
Weber and Persch [3] 215/60 VR 15 radial 32 882 2-150 sinusoid 1 test internal d r u m P
O
fi3
(15 ft)
..<
Bergman and JR 78-15 radial (two) 26 1580 5-60 triangle 4 test trailer
Beauregard [4] H R 78-15 belted bias (one)
T a m b r u n [7] 145-14 radial 29 830 25-75 sinusoid 1 test external d r u m
(10 ft)
Brewer [8] 18 x 5.5 aircraft 125 3000 1-50 sinusoid 4 test external d r u m
(10 ft)
Segel [6] 6.40-15 bias . . . . . . . . . sinusoid ... theory ...

1 psi = 6.8948 k P a
1 lbf = 4.448 N
1 m p h = 0.447 m / s = 1.61 k m / h
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 131

for instance, corresponding to a path wave length of )~ = 2n/oJx = 30 ft

(10 m), the amplitude and cornering stiffness ratios are still essentially
unity. The phase angle is still - 2 0 deg or so, however, and the dynamic
offset ratio is about 30~
Another, more generous, estimate of the critical path frequency follows
from Segel's statement [2] that a frequency of 3 Hz at 15 mph (24 km/h)
would not cause dynamic effects on vehicle response. A frequency of
3 Hz at 15 mph corresponds to a path wave length of ~ = v / f = 15 x
1.47/3 = 7.35 ft (2.24 m) or a path frequency of co, = 2n/), -- 0.85 rad/ft
(2.8 tad/m), that is, about four times the more conservative value of
cox = 0.2 rad/fl (0.7 rad/m). At cox = 0.85 rad/ft (2.8 tad/m), significant
deviations from static values are observed: the lateral force amplitude is
reduced by 25%, the cornering stiffness is reduced by 60%, and the
dynamic offset passes through its maximum value (of more than 50~ of
the constant maximum force). In the following discussion, we will use
cox = 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m) as a critical value for both amplitude and
cornering stiffness ratio attenuations. However, the two other descriptors,
dynamic offset and phase angle, start deviating from static values at much
lower path frequencies.
With respect to the dynamic behavior of tires, the dynamic offset may
he the most important of the four descriptors, for it reaches rather high
values at path frequencies well below 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m). For instance,
a path frequency of 0.1 rad/ft (0.3 rad/m), corresponding to a path wave
length of 60 ft (19 m), is not unusual in an emergency maneuver. At this
frequency, the dynamic offset reaches about 15~ of the maximum con-
stant force (Fig. 12). With a maximum static force of 600 lb (2.67 kN),
for instance, the lateral force could be offset from the constant curve by
_+90 lb (+_400 N). Within this range, the actual lateral force and also the
cornering stiffness could assume many different values, depending on the
past slip angle history, as illustrated for the G78-14 tire at a higher path
frequency in Fig. 13, which can be considered the result of a steering
maneuver initiated by a straight run (a = 0) followed by alternating
turns. The difference in slope (cornering stiffness) between the run-in
curve OA and the static curve and, likewise, the dynamic offset are
remarkably large--a consequence of the large path frequency of 0.54
rad/ft (1.8 tad/m) in Fig. 13. At smaller frequencies, the deviation of
cornering stiffness and lateral force from the constant values would be
smaller but probably still large enough to cause concern.
The aligning torque, an important factor in vehicle handling and
control, is perhaps even more susceptible to dynamic effects than the
lateral force. Figures 14 and 15 show some response loops of aligning
torque for various path frequencies of sinusoidal and triangular slip angle
inputs. The trends are similar to those exhibited by the lateral force.
 Co
I'0
"11
,,<
--4
~7 m
m

.+"+~ 0
m
Z
c-)
/ ; m

--~
o m
0
41- -r
m- Z
0
+ r t~
o
~'~ G')
-<
rll
m o/

~'~
I+/~ I

~.
"~" 41" § -tl- ~ / z
911~ / .j§ .
,m
- - 6~
+ ~
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 133

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 350-2-6 MZ (ft-lb) RUN 343-2-6

125 I I I
ST EADY -STA/~E
100
75
...,;V, ~ "
5C ." ~ L:
25

STEADY'ST~TS~ J ~1 "
-251
-5C
-75
y
154'' ,
./
.. j a~,~

-4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3 -4 -3 -2 -1 O 1 2 3

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

(a) t.t) x = 0,29 rad/ft (b} OJ x = 1,44 rad/ft

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 348-2~ MZ (fl-lb) RUN 347-2-6

125 i I 1 1
STEADY-STATE
100 --- - - J I ~ A

75

25 I (-]., 9

-251
X ..,.. , -if
s"rEAp'~-~'~, TE j.~ / =
"2"" t~g-,'- t I I~,"
"50 I
-75
I !/,,~.r
Z
-3 -2
" -1 0
I. . . .1.
1 2 3
.~_'o
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
SLIP ANGLE (de9) SLIP ANGLE (deg}

(c) (t.] x = 2,86 rad/ft (d) O.)x = 5.74 rad/ft

FIG. 14--Aligning torque response o f G78-14 tire under 1380 lb (6138 N) and 24 psi (165
kPa) to sinusoiclal slip angle variations.
134 T I R E SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 338-2-6 MZ (ft-lb) RUN 338-2-6

100
/
75
@
50
25 K ,, r t'
/
O
,/ /
-25
..--.
-50
. / ) /
-75
/~'~STEkDY-'STATE
-100
;iLJi __ oil0 ,ql
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 -0 1 2 3 4

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

(a) /_z)x = 0.21 rad/ft (b) (JJx = 1.07 rad/ft

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 338-2-6 MZ (ft-lb) §

+ RUN 338-2-6
$ ' r
+a: **o,,,~P
100

7~ /~ I /Q
/,a. §
/ .+~1

/ k

/
-50 / :2
-75 ~STE/~OY~TATE ' "p~'*f'-~ ) ~ q" "1
" ~ ' S T E ADY-STATE
_,oo. . . . . ."" i .... :_)..I -,,
... I J I I 010,!
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 3 4

SLIP ANGLE (deg) SLIP ANGLE (deg)

(c) (z) x = 2.14 rad/ft (d) C,Jx = 4.30 rad/ft

FIG. 15--Aligning torque response of G78-14 tire under 1380 lb (6138 iV) and 24 psi
(165 kPa) to triangular slip angle variations.
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 135

However, they are more pronounced, as shown in Figs. 17 through 20.

Figure 16 illustrates the four descriptors used in Figs. 17 through 20:
1. The slope at zero slip angle interpreted as aligning stiffness N, and
expressed as a fraction of the static aligning stiffness N,,.
2. The half-width of the loop at zero slip angle Mzo termed dynamic
aligning torque offset and expressed as a fraction of the static aligning
torque at maximum slip angle M,,.
3. The amplitude M,0 as a fraction of M,s.
4. The phase angle d~between slip angle and aligning torque.

// xMzo

" II ~ - TIMEMz

t
2 x Mzo

----6
2xMZs
l
STEADY STATE

ALIGNING STIFFNESS RATIO N~/N~: s

DYNAMIC OFFSET RATIO MZD/Mzs
AMPLITUDE RATIO Mzo/Mzs
PHASE ANGLE

FIG. 16--Definition of four dynamic descriptorsfor time-varying aligning torque.

136 TIRE SCIENCE AND T E C H N O L O G Y

0 ~ I

! ]O
STEADY-STATE " " - " ' " "'w-....

i90
.'x
SEGEL ( T H E O R Y ) ~ ~.[~o

~, DEG

-180

-270
.- - -- T', ,S',OSOIDAL WAV I 9
9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE J
-- 9 SEGEL (REF 6) THEORY o ~ , ~ o...~._

-360 I I 1
0.1 0.5 1 5 lO

( ~ x ' RAD/FT

FIG. 17--Phase angle d? of the aligning torque Mz as a function of slip angle path fre-
quency Wx.

The phase angle of the aligning torque is approaching very large values,
up to nearly 360 deg at 10 rad/ft (33 rad/m), as is shown in Fig. 17. The
transition at 180 deg is marked by a reversal in circulating direction, as is
evident from Figs. 14 and 15. For phase angles between 0 and 180 deg,
for example, the aligning torque is lower than static values if the slip
angle is increasing and higher if it is decreasing. For phase angles between
180 and 360 deg the opposite is true: the aligning torque is higher than
static values if the slip angle is increasing and lower if it is decreasing.
The transition of ~ through 180 deg is also indicated by the occurrence
of minima in aligning torque amplitude, aligning stiffness, and dynamic
offset (Figs. 18-20). In Fig. 18 we again note good agreement between
TIRF data and data from other sources.
For the path frequency of 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m), aligning torque
amplitude and aligning stiffness are practically identical with their static
values. The dynamic offset, however, reaches approximately 40% of the
static aligning torque. Hence, it is again the dynamic offset which proves
to be the potentially most important dynamic tire characteristic at low
path frequencies.

Variation of Vertical Load

An investigation of the dynamic behavior of tires would also include

the effect of load rates on tire performance. Figures 21-23 show the
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 137

MZO
MZS
2.0
o TIRF, SINUSOIDAL WAVE
...
9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE TESTS ."
~9 ~ PHILLIPS (REF. 5) o~
..... SEGEL (REF. 6) I THEORY , :.
1.5
o.O
o/
,~---7~ /
9

PHILLIPS (SINUSOID)
STEADY-STATE ~
1.0
/

0.5
(SINUSOID)

SEGEL (THEORY)

0.1 0.5 5 10

/ ~ x ' RAD/FT

FIG. 18--Aligning torque amplitude ratio Mzo/Mzs as a function of slip angle path
frequency COx.

I
STEADY-STATE
1.0 / i
0s o/o

0.6
a~
N~ S
0.4 ~e

0.2

0 --~ WAVE t TESTS 1~ N N ~

9 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE -~-'~"

-0.z I i
0.1 0.5 5 10
/-r x, RAD/FT

FIG. 19--Aligning stiffness ratio N./N.s as a function of slip angle path frequency COx.
138 TIRE SCIENCE AND T E C H N O L O G Y

I I
TIRF, SINUSOIDAL WAVE
1.0 TIRF, TRIANGULAR WAVE

,..o f
MZD
MZS
0.5 i o/~176 /
y. , -,\./
STEADY-STATE
/ I V"
0.1 0.5 1 10

b.) x' RAD/FT

FIG. 20--Dynamic offset ratio MzD/Mzsas a function of slip anglepath frequency O~x.

results of some exploratory TIRF runs (Table 3). These tests do not
simulate actual road inputs but were selected to show general trends. In
Fig. 22 we notice that static lateral forces are considerably smaller than
corresponding time-varying forces if the load is increasing. We notice
also that the difference between the two forces increases with increasing
path frequency. By contrast, if the load is decreasing (in absolute value),
the time-varying lateral forces do not change with path frequency and
remain at approximately the same level, at least for smaller loads. A
similar observation was made by Metcalf [9], who concluded that "after
the vertical load has reached a maximum and has begun to decrease, a
point is reached where the (delayed) side force equals the instantaneous
load on the tire multiplied by the friction coefficient between tire and
road. For the remainder of the loading cycle, the side force is limited to
the product of the vertical load times the friction coefficient." The validity
of Metcalf's suggestion will not be discussed here, but Fig. 22 demonstrates
that, indeed, the ratio Fy/F, does not exceed a constant value (coefficient
of friction); here Fy/F= = 1.
A quantitative evaluation of Figs. 22 and 23 was not attempted, but
they clearly show that, in general, deviations of Fy and M= from static
levels become quite pronounced at larger path frequencies; the amplitudes
of Fy and M, decrease while the loop widths increase. For low levels of
cox, up to 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m) or so, dynamic effects are probably
small, however.

Simultaneous Variation o f Slip Angle and Vertical L o a d

Since under actual conditions both load and slip angle vary simul-
taneously, an accident avoidance maneuver was simulated on TIRF. The
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 139

FZ (Ib) RUN 353-2-6 FY (Ib) RUN 353-2-6

0 0
~oo ~ t~ ^ -100 ~+ §
' A
$§
§ +§

'~176 i -200

-30(2
t +
§
+~.

-400

-50C
ski,
,,oo t w
Vv
-60(

- 1600 -700
ORII~O 01~,O

(a) LOAD INPUT (b) L A T E R A L FORCE OUTPUT

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 353-2-6

120

60 ~ t ,

Ol~ , O
20 25 30 35 40
TIME ELAPSED (sec)
(c) A L I G N I N G TORQUE OUTPUT

FIG. 21-- Triangular vertical load variation.

maneuver was first run on a skid pad with a standard-sized passenger car
equipped with an instrumented rear wheel. The measured data (vertical
load, vehicle slip angle, lateral force, and speed) were edited and trans-
formed into two smooth curves of tire slip angle and load as functions of
time [10]. The two curves were then used as T I R F inputs for a G78-14
tire. Figure 24 shows the actual T I R F input traces.
Because both a and F, were continuously changing in frequency and
amplitude, they could not be characterized by a fixed path frequency
140 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

100
FY (Ib) RUN 353-2-6

-1001 J
-200 i

-300i

.400 i
-5001

.7oo
STEADY-STATE

I I I
ii
(a) Y_./Jx = 0,53 rad/ft
FY (Ib) RUN 353-2-6
100

-100i
/
-200

-300 ~ 4
.t###~# m
400

-500
/
-600 - - STEADY~STATE /y'z=l
-700 I I I I I
(b) 6.Jx = 1.07 rad/ft
FY (Ibi RUN 353-2-6
100,

-lOO .1
-2001
"300 i
-400-
~ t r +~ /
-500

-600- -STEADY-STATE ~ y Fz = 1 . . . .

-700 [ I I I 1
-1600 -1200 -800 -400 0
FZ (Ib)
(c) LJ x = 2.14 rad/ft

F I G . 22--Lateral force response o f G78-14 tire at 4 deg slip angle and 24 psi (165 kPa) to
triangular load variations.
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 141

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 353-2-6

~ -STI~ADCr !
10C,[

,i
i; -.%
,i
i ' [
FZ (Ib)
~0.1
(a) ~'Jx = 0.53 rad/ft
MZ (ft-lb) RUN 353-2-6
~STEAD~(-STkTE
lOC ~ t t
7~ "~
5(

h 01~11

(b) (z) x = 1.07 rad/ft

MZ (ft-lb) RUN 353-2-6
I I I I
N [~STEADY'STATE
10(
\ I
75 N
i
50
\

t -1600 m,!
o
-1400 .1000 -600 -2oo

FZ (Ib)
--~(c)
e-/x = 2,14 rad/ft

FIG. 23--Aligning torque response o f G78-14 tire at 4 deg slip angle and 24 psi (165 kPa)
to triangular load variations.
142 TIRE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

SIMULATED TEST COURSE

9 - @

1:SLIP ANGLE (deg)

2 A

o: / '~J ~
I'
-21
-4 t
-31 I k

~ I ]~] ] ] ]..... 0R0

(a) SLIP ANGLE-TIME VARIATION

I:FZ (Ib)
-401 (~
[
-600
.,oo / \
| 't
J~
-800
\
-900
-1000 , , ~
-1100
/
!
|
-1200
1300~.S _j J..$.i .... ~| ' i.,,
01~,|

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TIME ELAPSED (sec)
(b) LOAD-TIME VARIATION
FIG. 24--Slip angle and load time histories o f G78-14 tire in accident avoidance maneuver
simulated on TIRF.
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 143

except for small portions, for instance for the range CDE. Here, wx = 0.1
rad/ft (0.3 rad/m), a value well below the critical value of 0.2 rad/ft (0.7
rad/m). For other ranges, such as A B C or EFG, cox appears to be even
smaller. Hence, dynamic effects should be negligible with the exception of
the dynamic offset. And, indeed, if Fy is plotted against a as in Fig. 25, a
dynamic offset is apparent throughout. The curve describes several loops
as the tire proceeds through the prescribed variations of a and F,, thereby
building up a total maximum dynamic offset of about _+120 lb (___530 N),
a value that may have some effect on vehicle motions and handling.

F~

\~ ~/~ /HIGH LOADS

FY (Ib)
600,

m - v "
50O ,4w'- I" "

40O

300
'*+~.+~i ~"++++.
20O
100
0
q
-1001
-200 !I

.300 ~

-4O0 i
~W
-5OO

.-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
SLIP ANGLE {deg)

FIG. 25--Lateral force response o f G78-14 tire in accident avoidance maneuver simulated
on TIRF (see Fig. 24).
144 T I R E SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Conclusion
The following tentative conclusions are based on the few exploratory
time-varying tests performed on the G78-14 tire at speeds up to 10 mph
(4.47 m/s) and path frequencies up to about 6 rad/ft (20 rad/m), varying
both slip angle and load separately (in sinusoidal or triangular form) and
in combination. The combination simulated actual slip angle and load-time
histories measured in road accident avoidance tests.
For path frequencies of 0.2 rad/ft (0.7 rad/m) or less, attenuation of
lateral force and aligning torque amplitudes are negligible. However, both
quantities develop considerable hysteresis-like loops at low frequencies
and, as a consequence, appear to be offset from their static values by
significant amounts. For slip angle variations, the dynamic offset reaches
maximum values at 0.5 rad/ft (1.6 rad/m) for aligning torque and 1.0
rad/ft (3.2 rad/m) for lateral force.
Slip angle path frequencies up to 0.1 rad/ft (0.3 rad/m) are not
uncommon in accident avoidance maneuvers. In this range the dynamic
offsets of both lateral force and aligning torque are as high as 15% of
their respective maximum values, amounting to typically + 100 Ib (+ 0.4 kN)
for lateral force and _+20 lb. ft (+ 27 N. m) for aligning torque. These
large offsets may considerably change a vehicle's dynamic response with
respect to predictions based on static inputs.
To substantiate these tentative conclusions, further time-varying tests
should be performed under controlled conditions, with different tires run
at various speeds, slip angles, camber angles, and loads. These input
parameters should be varied in periodic fashion as well as in realistic
time-dependent combinations. From these tests, analytical expressions
should be developed characterizing dynamic tire behavior under realistic
conditions. Such expressions could then be used in mathematical vehicle
simulations to predict the sensitivity of vehicle handling response to time-
dependent tire properties.

References
[1] Lippmann, S. A., "Car Stability and Transient Tire Forces," SAE Paper 269, Society
of Automotive Engineers, New York, March 1954.
[2] Segel, L., "Theoretical Prediction and Experimental Substantiation of the Responses
of the Automobile to Steering Control," Automobile Division Proceedings, The Insti-
tution of Mechanical Engineers, London, 1956.
[3] Weber, R. and Persch, H. G., "Lateral Frequency Response of Pneumatic Tires,"
Automobiltechnische Zeitschrift, Vol. 77, No. 2, 1975.
[4] Bergman, W. and Beauregard, C., "Transient Tire Properties," SAE Paper 740068,
Society of Automotive Engineers, New York, March 1974.
[5] Phillips, B. D. A., "The Static, Steady-State and Dynamic Characteristics of Pneu-
matic Tires," Ph.D. Dissertation, Lanchester Polytechnic, Coventry, England, 1973.
[6] Segel, L., "Force and Moment Response of Pneumatic Tires to Lateral Motion Inputs,"
Journal of Engineering for Industry, Transactions of the American Society of Mechani-
calEngineers, Series B, Vol. 88B, No. 1, Feb. 1966, pp. 37-44.
 SCHURING ON TIRE RESPONSE 145

[7] Tambrun, J., "The Renault-Peugeot Tire Tester" in Fisita Congrds International XVe,
1974, Societ~ des Ing~nieurs de L'Automobile, Paris, Paper C-1-14, pp. 473-479.
[8] Brewer, H. K., "Measurement of Steady State and Transient Aircraft Tire Forces,"
Tire Science and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, May 1975, pp. 111-126.
[9] Metcalf, W. H., "Effect of Time-Varying Load on Side Force Generated by a Tire
Operating at Constant Slip Angle," SAE Paper 713C, Society of Automotive Engineers,
New York, June 1963.
[10] Schuring, D. J. and Gusakov, I., "Tire Transient Force and Moment Response to
Simultaneous Variations of Slip Angle and Load," SAE Paper 760032, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Pa., Feb. 1976.