# 316

THE STABILITY AND CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES
By R.S. Sharp*
Mathematical models of a motorcycle and rider dependent on three alternative assumptions concerning the tyre behaviour are developed. Stability characteristics deduced from them are compared, and minimum requirements for the model greater than have been previously satisfied are established. Using the most sophisticated of the models, the effects of design changes are calculated, and the design implications are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

of the steering behaviour of automobiles after Segel (I)thave transformed understanding of the subject and provided valuable design information and design evaluation techniques. Parallel studies relating to two wheeled vehicles (2)-(5) have been comparatively unsuccessful, and motorcycle design at present relies on experience rather than understanding for its success. A viable theory of motorcycle stability and control must be consistent with the practically obvious instability of the machine at very low speeds, with the possibility of ‘hands off’ control (i.e. control without the direct application of steering torque) at moderate speeds, and with the possible ociurrence of oscillatory instabilities at high speeds. These were described by Pearsall (3) as ‘speedman’s wobble’. It should also provide some explanation for current design practice, mindful that it should be converging on some evolutionary optimum, and ideally it should support the empirical maxims of motorcycle design (e.g. the mass centre should be as low as possible and as far forward as possible). In the case of the car, Segel (6) has observed that different drivers employ different proportions of fixed and free control, and that particular drivers can alter these proportions to suit the car which they are driving. In the case of the motorcycle, the free control behaviour would appear to be relatively much more important, since the very small steer angles normally employed (7) would make fixed control difficult, and since in the ‘hands off’ condition the fixed control characteristics of the machine have no relevance to the motion. Consequently, the work which is the subject of this paper was directed towards the development of a suitable mathematical model of a motorcycle in free control, and
THEORETICAL STUDIES

the use of such a model to show typical stability characteristics and how these characteristics depend on various parameter values. Also, in the light of Segel’s conclusion (6) that the steady state control force gradient is an important parameter in determining car handling quality, and his statement that this is the case with aircraft too, the steady state behaviour has been studied. The model is easily applied to the fixed control case and appropriate results are included. A particular difficulty in the analysis concerns the treatment of the tyre behaviour. Whipple (2), Pearsall (3), and Collins (5) allowed the tyres no sideslip freedom, while Kondo, Nagaoka and Yoshimura (4) allowed this freedom, but ignored the lag between the steering of a pneumatic tyred wheel and the building up of the side force towards a steady state value, which is of great importance in the wheel shimmy phenomenon (8). Results dependent on each of the three alternative assumptions regarding the tyre behaviour are included and compared.

Coefficient matrices. Linear dimensions (Fig. 1). Front and rear tyre cornering stiffnesses respectively. Front and rear tyre camber stiffnesses respectively. Rear frame product of inertia with respect to above axes. Acceleration due to gravity. Front frame inertias about axes parallel to OX4Y4Z4 (Fig. 2) through mass centre (assumed to be principal axes). Rear frame inertias about axes parallel to O X , Y2Z2 (Fig. 2) through mass centre. Polar moment of inertia of engine flywheel.
Vol I3 No 5 1971

The M S . of this paper was received at the Institution on 10th August 1970 and accepted for publication on 17th M a y 1971. 2 * Lecturer, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitj! of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 93T. t References are given in Appendix 5 .
JOURNAL MECHANICAL E N G I N E E R I N G SCIENCE

i

. Y . and finally a rotation 6 about OZ. 3. The requirement for an equation describing the longiJOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE LT I --+T. SHARP / Steer axis Fig. Starting with the reference axes O X . the steer angle 6. and for equations describing the rotations of the wheels. Y. the orientations of the other axis sets are derived as follows. by the co-ordinates xo..Y. through expressions for the tyre sideslip and camber angles. S. . 1. disappears through the constant forward speed and no longitudinal tyre slip assumptions. the latter also allow the elimination of 8. and C. angular displacements and velocities A b Fig. G. which defines the front frame relative to the rear one.Z.Z.4.X4Y. Reference point A and rear wheel looking along O Y . rolling. The generalized forces are derived in terms of the tyre forces. Vol 13 No 5 1971 . and Or from the other equations.. 2.318 R. and the angles 8. The consideration of The equations of motion are derived by the application of Lagrange's equation (9) . The tyre forces are then obtained in terms of the vehicle motion parameters. gives OX.Y. is parallel to the steering axis (pointing downwards). 2. With the vehicle in its datum condition. y o of A. and steering freedoms of the machine. A rotation \$ about OZ..Z. ilq Fig. and the roll angle 4. 6 shown in Fig. the yaw angle \$. which define the rear frame. gives ox.. this moving with the front frame. Next a rotation E about 0 Y 2 gives OX. YoZ. and Or which define the rotational positions of the road wheels and the engine flywheel. (1) d t ( Lq ) ci iT cq The position of the vehicle is defined relative to the inertial axes OXoYoZoby the co-ordinates xo. Diagrammatic representation of the motorcycle The front frame mass centre G. 0 being fixed and in the road surface. Expressions for the kinetic and potential energies in terms of these seven co-ordinates are first obtained and then utilized to give equations for the lateral. Y4Z4. lies in the longitudinal plane of symmetry and is normal to the steering axis. y o of A . gives O X . The motion of the motorcycle is referred to inertial axes O X oYoZ. yawing. Then a rotation 4 I about O X .Z.Z.iV = Q. The latter are shown in Figs 3 and 4. is the origin for another right-handed orthogonal axis set G. G..X. Axis systems. is parallel to A Y. and the angular displacements \$. E Q U A T I O N S OF M O T I O N tudinal motion of the motorcycle.

and finding its eigenvalues through a procedure employing the Q R algorithm (13). Solution of the equations The linear differential equations of motion in homogeneous form. the final equations of motion are linear. ( 3 ) The steady turning behaviour (at low lateral acceleration) as a function of forward speed and machine design. while the fixed control equations are obtained by omission of the steering degree of freedom. . possible values of p must be eigenvalues of -(B)-l(A) (12). forming -(B)-l(A). Front frame in datum condition looking along O Y . a set of algebraic equations. 4. (11) and substituting these solutions back into the original equations. The equations describing steady turning are obtained by elimination of the time varying terms.r = @ = and d = 8. etc. - Fig.THE STABILITY AND CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES /Steer axis 319 Premultiplying by (B) and rearranging. with T = 0. while in Appendix 2 it is shown how the analysis can be restricted by the omission of tyre sideslip. the model which includes tyre sideslip but assumes instant tyre response and the model which includes the dynamics of tyre response. The real parts of the eigenvalues indicate the damping and the imaginary parts the natural frequencies associated with the various normal modes. and then using the equation for the steering freedom to give T.. 9 i . (4) Natural frequencies and damping characteristics of the motorcycle in fixed control. (2) The effects of changes to the design of the machine in the model which includes the dynamics of the tyre response. RESULTS The results fall into one of four categories which cover the following points. 4.. The linear steady state equations were solved by choosing a forward speed and roll angle and solving simultaneously for y. Here. while (X) a and is column matrix of the unknown amplitudes X . 4 -14 -15-16- -1I -I2 -13- 3.cut. Details of the derivations are given in Appendix 1. (B) ( A ) are square coefficient matrices.etc. small perturbations from straight running allows the elimination of all second and higher order terms. X. i. and 6.. 6. assuming solutions of the form v = X. (1) Natural frequencies and damping characteristics of one particular machine in free control according to the model which excludes tyre sideslip. r = X 2 epf.e. which can be expressed in the matrix form ( B ) p ( X ) + ( A ) ( X ) = (0) results. A numerical procedure was therefore employed for calculating the elements of the ( A ) and ( B ) matrices above from the design parameters for a particular machine and from its forward speed. .( B ) . were reduced to a set of first order equations by the introduction of new variables 'u = j.W ( X ) = P(X) and for non-trivial solutions for ( X ) . Then.

08 0.03 0.08 0.15 -1.02 0.07 0.12 0.55 -3.81 -3.14 -0. Other modes are heavily damped and therefore physically unimportant and detailed results referring to them are not included.55 -3.05 007 0.5 0. It is well damped at low and medium speeds but only moderately so at high speed.20 -2.13 100 0.10 0.60 -3.56 0.13 -0. Table 1 concerns a non-oscillatory mode in which.11 0.08 0.13 -0.11 0.57 -3. Fig.08 0.37 -3.11 -1.57 -3. The wobble mode has a natural frequency which is almost independent of forward speed and is about 9 Hz.2.09 0. at low speed it is well damped but has rapidly decreasing damping as the speed increases above 15 ft/s approximately.01 0.09 0.52 -3. and that of the weave mode is somewhat so (Table 2).08 0.07 0.03 0.56 -3.01 0.02 0.15 -0.13 -0.04 0. weave and wobble modes.56 -3.05 0.54 -3.16 0.03 0.04 0.75 -3.07 0.55 -3.62 -3. and is moderately damped at high speed.06 0.08 -0.21 -2.12 0.01 0.09 0.05 -0.56 -3.05 0.83 -2.64 -3.07 0. and Tables 2 and 3 concern oscillatory modes which will be called the 'weave' and 'wobble' modes respectively.07 0.04 0.13 -0.07 130 0.05 0.08 0.87 -4.03 0.08 0.56 -3.01 -0.10 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.10 -0. 8.05 0.14 0.07 0.13 0.41 -3.08 0.06 0.74 -2.02 0.07 0.44 -1.07 0.10 -0.61 -3.05 0.04 0.8 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.07 008 0.03 -2.90 -0.08 0.22 0.08 0.08 0. Category (2) results are shown in Tables 1. when it is unstable.02 0.04 0.06 0.13 -0.13 50 70 0.03 0.06 0.11 0.06 0.31 0. This degree of damping is strongly dependent on the value taken for the relaxation length.63 -2.04 0.04 0. ft/s 20 -2.91 -2.14 0.05 0.4 Hz at 160 ftjs forward speed.35 -3.) JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE Vol13 No 5 1971 . as = would be expected.03 0.54 -3.04 (The key to the model numbers is given in Appendix 4.08 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.2 Hz at 5 ft/s forward speed to about 3.03 0.05 0.08 -3.01 O W 0. 6 .54 -3.50 -3. well damped in the medium speed range. with the circular frequencies of any oscillatory modes shown against the appropriate parts of the curves.07 0.19 0. and 3.04 0. S.26 0.15 0.50 -3.07 0.01 0.58 -3. The weave mode has a natural frequency increasing from about 0.06 0.04 00 .27 -3.04 0. the motion of the motorcycle is like that of a capsizing ship.56 -3. and. The capsize mode is non-oscillatory.55 -3.05 00 .56 -3. Fig.18 -0.10 -0.00 0.5 0. this will be called the 'capsize' mode.81 -2.01 -0. at low speeds Table 1.08 0.12 -0.57 -2.13 -0. The natural frequencies from the models with instant tyre response and proper dynamic tyre response are similar.02 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.08 008 0. 5 but also shows significantly less damping of the weave mode at high speed.01 0.56 -3.59 -3.06 00 .05 0.22 -0.02 0.01 0. which are referred to here as the capsize.85 30 -0.11 0.15 -0.05 0.03 0.05 0.13 -0.04 0.56 -3.63 -2.07 0. It becomes very mildly unstable above about 35 ft/s with maximum divergence rate near 60 ft/s.59 -3. 7 shows that the no tyre sideslip model gives representations of the capsize mode and.26 -2. each of these tables being concerned with one mode of physical significance. is unstable up to about 20 ft/s.08 0.80 -2.11 -2. as u + 0 the results shown in Fig.02 0.13 -0.03 0.05 0. and markedly different damping of the wobble mode throughout the speed range.08 0.89 -3. 6 shows a capsize mode virtually identical with that of Fig.26 -0.13 -0.03 0.08 0.08 0.54 -3.05 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 -3.03 0.04 0.56 -3.56 -3. For ease of reference.03 0.57 -3.02 0. D I S C U S S I O N OF R E S U L T S Results from the full analysis with the dynamics of the tyre response included (Fig.06 0.23 0.06 0. Category ( 3 ) results are shown in Table 4 while those in category (4) are given in .89 0.56 -3.07 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.15 -0.08 0.08 -0.06 0.16 -0.01 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.08 160 -___ 0. SHARP Category (1) results are shown in Figs 5-7 in which damping factors are plotted against forward speed.07 0. u (Table 3).54 -3.04 0.10 0.03 -0. decreasing thereafter as the speed increases.66 -041 -2.88 -2. 5 become more nearly those of Fig.04 0. Capsize mode damping coefficients Model number 10 ~ Speed. Fig.63 -0.02 0.320 R.06 -0. 5 ) show that the motorcycle has three physically significant modes.04 0.04 0.44 -0.01 0.04 0.51 -3.07 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.11 0.09 -3.79 -2.05 0.13 -0.09 0.57 -3.77 -2.08 0.

25 2. 27 -0.74 6.38 22.9 11.10 1 9 .51 .4 -1.09 2. 61 1.20 -0.24 3.73 -6.35 4.2 19.01 1. ~. ~.2 1. the first number is the damping coefficient.15 -6.16 5.28 -2.06 -4.63 -0.20 -0.68 19.26 -3.30 -7.9 2.2 -1.4 ~ 160 -0.13 20.05 -3.16 0.82 21.21 -1.82 -5.95 -2.66 -0.28 0. 23 -0.6 -0.23 -0. 91 1. 67 16. -1.57 -3.87 1.8 1.78 2.0 -0.79 -3.63 2.46 -4.02 -3.96 2 .90 20.33 -6.5 1.05 -0.3 -2.19 19 .2 -1.09 2. 89 1.3 -0.95 -5.8 16.7 -1. 91 1.4 1. 66 17.4 1.91 342 -3. 9 20.0 20.2 0. 14 11.3 -0-32 20.4 1.60 -3.75 -3.01 20. 22 11. 15 -1.50 50 -6.29 -7.86 -6.9 -3. 11 2.2 -0-24 21.5 17.97 -4.8 19.10 2.30 21.66 -3. 89 1.48 20.2 18.8 12. 71 20.09 17 .2 1.37 -4.29 -3.03 1.76 -1. 61 18.17 -3.58 0.0 17. 95 1.28 -0.98 -2. 75 1.2 1.50 -2. ft/s - 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 20 -0.64 1 6 1.45 30 2.07 20.57 -1.21 -0.93 2 .42 -6.07 1.00 1.82 2.50 -0.36 -6.49 4.39 -3.75 4.6 1. 15 -2.2 -3.18 -4.98 1-78 19 14 . 73 20.2 11..01 1.76 -2.93 -4.27 1.63 -3.63 2.10 2.0 7*3! 14.4 -1. 62 16.4 11.7 -2.2 -1-16 22.9 20.09 20.7 1.97 2. 61 12.05 -0.58 -344 4. the second the circular frequency.f 1.0 -2.49 0.54 4.36 4 3 .94 2 .23 -1.2 2-48 1. 68 1.7 -3.14 -3. 79 1.6 -0. 58 16.59 -4.09 2.14 2.5 .1 1.02 1.) Unstable 60 SPEED- I 80 ft/s I 100 I f 20 1 140 19 7 20 5 I 160 T -9 -10 -1 I -13.01 1.27 21.51 2.34 3.64 -2.03 -0.4 0-27 20. 85 1.09 2.00 -3.17 -4.98 -2.65 -3.5 -1.51 544 -3.63 2.05 2.55 -6.99 -8.80 -1.8 1.f 11.5 2.77 -5.77 2 .74 19 .40 21.85 -0.3 1.1 -1.12 20.8 -2. 66 16.01 3.7 -2.10 22.98 2 . 10 -1.12 20.27 -2.70 3.3 1 6 1. 97 -2.34 -3.17 -2.2 16.70 1.66 -2.96 21.82 7 2 .82 -2.4 -1.7 1.16 -4.THE STABILITY AND CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES 32 1 Table 2.53 -344 4.37 1-10 1-89 1 6 .07 22.99 -1.4 -0.00 -3.5 -1.31 4.9 2.9 1.65 1 9 1.48 -6. 93 1.36 -0.36 18 .0 -0. 89 19.54 -5.48 -2.93 2.4 1. Weave mode damping coefficients and natural frequencies Model number Speed.9 2.40 -3.3 -1.65 -3.07 22. 68 1.5 .5 -1. 95 1.40 20.1 2. 71 16.47 4.6 -6.51 2.04 21.27 1.6 2.88 -2.61 1.3 -1.26 -3-51 4.14 -16 Fig.24 -3.0 10.85 -2.15 -2.25 21. .8 2.01 1.88 130 19.34 2 .7 17.2 -3. 85 1. 09 19.0 1.92 (In each column. 14 1.9 -0.15 2 .3 -1.17 -0.0 -1.75 -3.03 -8. 75 17.3 1.0 1.92 1.13 20.35 20.21 -3.0 -1. 6 .11 -0.6 15.28 .95 -3.61 20.8 100 -1. 17 -1.2 -1.50 0.88 -3. 4.03 20.83 -7.34 2.: 8Q 98 .35 -0.20 -6.87. 46 19.34 -5.72 -2.30 18 .1 -0.05 20.02 3.02 1.) (The key to the model numbers is given in Appendix 4.18 -0.97 2 .45 17.59 -6.06 1.30 4.36 4.18 -0.66 1.15 1 .67 18. 91 20.07 2 .88 -3. 77 1.29 -2.4 -1.11 2. 18 11.03 1-65 2. 91 20.18 20.15 2.8 -0.15 2.4 -2.72 -1.95 1 6 1.08 -1.0 02 -0.63 2.01 1.95 -6.68 -048 -1.2 -1-13 20.84 -9. Stability and natural frequencies of standard machine as a function of forward speed with tyre sideslip but with instant response JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE Vol13 No 5 1971 .99 21.1 2.18 -10.63 2.14 5.41 2 .56 -3.57 -540 -3.3 70 -3.02 1-69 2.71 20.00 19.70 .13 1. 12 -0435 19.~ 1 2 ~~-0.5 11.75 23..18 20.82 1.3 -1.2 19.93 -7.62 2.29 4.73 1.89 -5.16 -2. 86 18.7 11.36 4.25 -1.12 -2.67 1.3 14.50 0-18 -0.04 -0.52 3 9 .7 -0.26 -7.12 -1.19 -0.01 1 5 . 11 -0.5 .71 -142 -1.75 1.27 -0.91 -4.09 -7.9 1 9 1.5 -0.32 -4.6 -1-50 22.38 -6. 11 86 . 69 1.08 -3.96 -2.82 2.4 -1.10 -3.0 19.63 21.22 -7.14 -2.9 1.65 2.39 2.34 4 7 .56 4.6 -3.77 18.8 11.1 -1.09 4.68 -3.07 2 .2 -1.0 -3.20 0.4 1.92 -1.09 20.1 11. 69 1.51 1.7 21.4 -0.19 -1.20 -5.12 -0. 62 15. 17 10.28 21. 11 -1.33 -1.1 10.74 -5. 12 -0.18 0. 92 1.66 21.63 2.49 20.52 -6.0 -2.9 -1-45 20.82 21.44 21.40 .6 -0.95 -3.29 2.87 -4.21 -5.7 12.1 1.2 10.3 -0.2 19.59 -7.54 -1.40 1.85 18.93 1 1 .35 2.98 5 1 .67 -4.35 0.3 1.33 -5.3 -1.32 4 5 '4 -3.11 1.69 2 .14 -0.17 1 4 .64 2.00 -1.33 21.70 -1.7 1. 89 1.65 20.3 10.96 -4.1 2.18 20.30 5.4 67 .63 .

26 -7._.2 60.42 -8.38 -7.58 -0.87 0.97 0.30 55.73 -6.84 -5.9 46.29 -5.17 -2.09 0.46 -12.48 -5.3 56.22 1.6 -0.1 57.22 -3.25 -6.20 -5.9 -1.37 -4.9 55.55 -4.93 -6.6 44.86 -4.49 0.73 0.0 67.6 56.0 53.34 -4.92 -6.9 53.09 -6.0 50.51 57.26 -7.9 54.9 55.7 55.83 -5.60 -2.36 57.0 54.3 -1.05 0.8 60.04 -3.6 60.46 -11.9 46.10 -5.52 -2.44 1.94 -3.38 -1.4 0. ft/s 10 20 55.05 -3.4 54.39 55.39 -0.6 -0.7 59.76 -5.0 60.2 55.95 -5.19 0.1.2 -8.86 0.97 -6.88 -3.88 -4.33 -6.2 47.0 55.3 -8.36 58.87 58.1 51.62 -1.55 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 24 25 -9.1 -1.40 -6.0 63.4 53.72 -7.23 -3.50 -4. lblft Model number Speed.90 -10.63 -9.27 -0.08 -11.9 48.8 54.44 50.30 -5.0 59. -2.72 -5.6 56.0 160 -0.7 45.32 1.28 0.4 44.37 -0.6 59.9 55.19 -3.01 0.2 56.77 -7._ _ .27 -2.16 -0.0 59.20 0.7 53.05 54.08 -4.1 59.0 -8.80 -3.41 54.6 54.23 -3.0 ~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 -5.12 1.09 -4.3 63.19 0.8 55.50 -6.11 -0.68 0.34 -7.1 63.3 55.92 -1.6 -2.7 60.24 -0.86 -6.1 57.6 55.2 -0.4 48.59 0.4 -0.82 0.9 3.2 52.5 55.08 -2.53 -2.4 48.7 56.83 0.8 59.42 -6.3 55.47 -6.10 -3.57 -7.75 0.98 -4.5 54.88 0.2 54.2 48.0 56.14 -2.19 -6.10 0.34 0.6 47.10.82 -7.31 -5.92 -2.4 49.63 55.8 47.6 53.29 -0.20 0.33 0.24 2.76 57.7 50.85 0.) Table 4.21 55.48 -1.41 -4.09 61.4 42.5 54.69 -3.88 -0.6 -1.2 55.51 0. -1.5 55.1 57.75 -8.22 -5.4 55.90 0.6 59.0 57.2 56.53 -5.98 -8.36 60.2 59.93 -7.91 -6.3 52.0 55.6 61.39 -4.61 -6.71 -6.1 58.39 -6.4 43.25 -0.2 54.76 -2.90 -5.0 1.96 64.75 -0.51 -6.97 -5.3 54.33 -0.82 -2.4 59.2 55% 55.91 -3.20 -4.71 0.6 54.4 53.71 2.6 46.4 51.32 0.7 56.00 -5.15 -5.45 -544 -5.67 57.9 54.5 3.96 -2.0 64.58 57.2 56.03 30 -0.74 -4.35 72.72 0.2 52.61 65.79 57.01 52.6 56.5 48.4 54.5 100 -3.81 -5.2 55.5 55.6 54.55 009 0.6 -1.6 46.47 63.1 60.44 I 50 0.52 -7.06 .02 1.52 -0.56 -2.4 55.53 -0.3 42.15 -4.3 54.9 -15.4 54.4 49.74 (The key to the model numbers is given in Appendix 4.1 55.13 59.6 -0.0 -1.00 57.58 -10.5 55.37 0.2 58.82 -8.0 48.3 62.86 -5.39 61.24 -5.96 -6.9 52.44 -5.79 -540 -3.4 65.4 59.53 -6.38 45.63 0.69 -7.5 47.25 -2.29 -4.28 -0.71 0.59 0.8 55.6 -1.02 0.80 0.4 55.22 -5.11 -4.79 .6 -34.86 0.0 59.5 55.94 58.89 0.42 -3.70 0.9 -8.18.18 -5.50 0.21 -6.50 -6.5 45.67 -2.17 -5.43 -6.0 47. SHARP Table 3.21 -7.9 -0.7 55.53 -3.0 61.59 0.92 0.48 1.8 68.4 49.19 -5.7 55.5 56.72 160 0.55 -6.64 -6.73 0.4 57.16 0.90 -5.4 48.0 54.24 -1.4 47.21 52.0 55.23 -0.6 50.55 0.56 -6.3 55.40 0.2 45.6 50 -6.82 57.49 -4.81 -2.61 -5.8 64.3 55.8 54. ft/s 10 1 20 -1.43 -8.7 554 56.85 -6.28 -5.8 53.1 48.69 -7.26 -2.59 -1.0 55.31 -2.7 -4.8 58. S.10 -6.8 54.64 54.3 53.38 -6.7 55.20 -2.26 -5.4 68.74 -1.37 -3.7 ~~.7 -10.9 54.0 55.09 -5.94 0.9 46.07 -3.0 59.80 -3.5 55.78 -0.42 -6.6 54.7 54.77 -7.10 0.43 -9.36 0.45 -2.54 -2.9 44.99 -8.7 55.90 -3.6 54.6 49.15 1.35 70 0.17 -3.93 -4.42 -3.87 -5.54 -5.9 48.5 58.07 -7.6 42.17 1.7 53.34 0.12.0 -1.11 -5.) (The key to the model numbers is given in Appendix 4.62 0.6 70 -5.81 -7.65 -2.3 56.4 54.5 54.6 54.3 55.37 -5.8 (In each column.2 55.65 -8.2 -6.18 -12.8 56.7 54.33 -7.5 30 -6.8 42.3 60.27 -9.1 57.5 56.91 -2.1 0.25 -3.63 -0.8 57.2 54.3 -3.9 56.80 -7.02 -13.97 -7.8 -0.18 -7.17 -0.99 -4.4 65.49 47.6 -2.82 0.99 -2.9 -1.6 46.05 58.49 -1.88 -6.28 -9.47 -5.53 -6.8 55.53 0.39 -3.7 -2.29 -4.83 -4.08 0.01 -5.34 -5.3 -2.6 -0.67 0.05 -0.70 -1.56 100 0.5 0.6 44.56 0.39 0.4 63.1 43.68 0.8 62.93 -1.8 55.3 -0.15 0.06 -5.8 -10.63 -6.8 ~.1 54.90 -3.0 54.4 -1.51 1. Steady state steering torques for Q = l o ' .64 -2.2 54.77 48.3 58.52 -6.00 -13.2 58.9 56.0 54.40 -6.6 .91 -5.2 57.3 56.7 0.37 0.43 -6.6 .59 -1.4 62.84 0.7 54.90 -0.5 -0.88 -5.61 -8.60 -5.67 -6.95 -8.1 45.11 -5.8 -0.36 -5.7 57.61 -4.16 1.54 -6.64 -5.1 1.0 55.67 130 0.24 -6.6 48.43 -5.28 0.19 0. the first number is the damping coefficient.82 0.14 56.47 -5.5 55.4 55.9 58.6 55.20 -9.5 53.0 66.80 -3.72 -8.5 46.19 0.03 0.7 55.2 -1.5 55.) J O U R N A L MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE Vol I3 No 5 1971 .37 -0.65 54.6 56.5 48.86 -5.89 0.85 -11.88 57.69 -2.54 0.25 53.58 0.83 57.80 55.6 57.76 -3.37 -6.24 1.322 R.8 48.77 -7.20 -6.3 55.82 -3.8 55.27 -3. the second the circular frequency.21 -6.84 -5.0 -5.05 0.34 -13.74 -2.8 -20.70 -5.30 -6.45 -9.0 53.6 -23.8 46.5 58.41 0.7 54.32 0.6 46.74 -3.1 54.64 0.5 55. Wobble mode damping coefficients and natural frequencies Model number Speed.6 55.0 49.41 -5.7 55.1 1.3 54.22 -0.2 130 -2.55 -1.7 54.84 -6.35 66.18 0.16 -5.19 -4.7 54.18 59.5 54.8 55.89 -7.