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

vertically downwards.Z. and the fact that the tyre and suspension flexibilities and road irregularities have been ignored. ( 3 ) The rear frame consists of the main structure. being the total system kinetic energy. (6) The axis of rotation of the engine flywheel is transverse. (XI X I . will be small compared with tyre effects.. Kinetic energies of front and rear frames (excluding wheel rotation) respectively. Extra kinetic energy accounting for wheel rotation.. 41 Angular displacements (Fig. yo. Y.. etc. of the front frame to steer relative to the rear one. Components of forces Qxo and QYoalong O X ..Z. and the effects of varying the mechanical trail itself are included in the results. X. this is considered to be a negligible extension of the above assumptions. Y Effective front wheel steer angle (Fig. Velocity of front frame mass centre. Bearing in mind the smallness of these vertical motions in normal running. with rigidly attached rider. xl. handlebars and fittings. and rolling moment. Front and rear tyre relaxation lengths re0 1 .T. restrained by a linear steering damper. Steering damper coefficient. and they roll without longitudinal slip on a flat level road surface. YoZosystem. 6).. etc. and to roll. its effect will be very small. As the handlebars are turned. A Y .Y. 5). and for the front tyre. system. The effects of drag. 7 Rider applied steering torque. Mass of front frame. o r ordinates respectively. E Steering head angle (Fig. it is small compared with the mechanical trail. (7) The machine moves at constant forward speed with freedom to sideslip.. @ Rolling velocity (= Front wheel camber angle (Fig. to yaw.. and the ground plane. and A Z . and total system respectively. for the rear tyre. I> contact points respectively (Fig. only small perturbations from straight line running are considered. and T.yo Co-ordinates and velocities of reference point A in O X . Yawing velocity (= $). 2). PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF MODEL The following assumptions are made regarding the representation of the vehicle. in fact. (8) The air through which the machine moves is stationary so that the effects of aerodynamic side force. 4).. V o l 1 3 No 5 1971 . ko. and O Y . the longitudinal plane of symmetry. which moves with the vehicle. il.. 1). Steady state lateral tyre forces. Y’. Angular velocity components of rear frame with respect to axes OX. horizontal and pointing forwards. Mass of rear frame. GI. orthogonal axis set AX.Y. rear forks. (9) Pneumatic trail of the tyres is not considered since. Lateral velocity of 0 (= Column matrix of amplitudes X. rear frame. $44. Camber inertia of rear wheel. (4) Each frame has a longitudinal plane of symmetry. Generalized co-ordinate and force respectively. CL Exponential coefficient. A is the origin of a right-handed. JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE The assumptions that the motorcycle with rigid wheels moves on a flat road surface and that is has no freedom to pitch are. and the axis through the front frame mass centre parallel to the steering axis is a principal one. rear wheel. Lateral velocity and yawing velocity amplitudes respectively.. Polar moment of inertia of rear wheel. 7 Front and rear wheel angular position co01. (5) The road wheels are rigid discs each making point contact with the road. respectively. the petrol tank. treated as if the road surface moved vertically too to maintain contact. Gear ratio between rear wheel and engine A flywheel. (10) The drag force at the front tyre is small compared with the tyre side forces. The motorcycle is represented diagrammatically in Fig. seat. 6 (1) The vehicle consists of two rigid frames joined at the steering axis with freedom.Y. X. ur spectively. Angular velocity components of front frame with respect to axes O X 4 Y 4 Z 4 . the engine-gearbox assembly. (2) The front frame consists of the front wheel. 5 Velocity of rear frame mass centre. Y 2 Forces applied at front and rear tyre to road X.yl Velocities and accelerations of reference point A in OX. 1 with the point A defined as the intersection of the vertical transverse plane containing the rear frame mass centre. yawing moment. forks. A Steering velocity (= 6). x. lift and pitching moment are to modify the vertical loading of the tyres. X I . strictly speaking. Sum of T I . the front tyre to road contact point in general moves vertically and the problem is.Z. has A X .yl.T H E STABILITY AND CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES 317 Polar moment of inertia of front wheel. These effects are accounted for by variations in the coefficients relating tyre side forces to sideslip and camber angles.. and to make necessary a longitudinal force at the driving wheel sufficient to maintain the constant forward speed assumed. G. 6). horizontal and to starboard. and which. incompatible. UIY c(r Front and rear tyre sideslip angles respectively. Potential energies of front frame. Y’. Zr I. with the vehicle in the upright datum condition.

. 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.

With the no-sideslip model. the wobble mode is completely missing and no possibility for explanation of the ‘speedman’s wobble’ phenomenon is afforded. Lowering the mass centre of the rear frame has virtually no effect on the wobble mode. the steep steering head appears advantageous for low speed machines (i. With the normal steering head angle. Also. similar to those of the full model. the weave mode damping at high speed is reduced while at low speed it is increased. particularly at high speeds. and the steering head angle. If the gyroscopic effects of the front wheel are reduced. The last is most sensitive to the steer damping coefficient. Moving the rear frame mass JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE 2 . The author is not aware of any information specifically concerning relaxation lengths for motorcycle tyres. although changes to the latter with varying K are not great. 2 and 3 show that the capsize mode is comparatively little altered. increasing which stabilizes the wobble at the expense of the weave mode. result. By increasing the steering damping in fact. However. which is very likely. The parameter effects recorded in Tables 1. Moving the front frame mass centre up or down by practicable amounts causes changes which can alternatively be achieved by respectively increasing or decreasing the steer damping slightly. however. and from the viewpoint of straight line stability. t. 7 . if this increase is provided. and the figure of 0 8 ft which has been taken for the standard .THE STABILITY A N D CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES Unstable 4 323 21 60 __ 8’0 SPEED -ft/s 100 120 -- 140 140 StableT3-4 -5- -1 ’t centre forwards necessitates an increase in steer damping to maintain the stability of the wobble mode and. As the top speed increases. high trail must be employed or the instability of the capsize mode at medium and high speeds will be too severe. it is apparent that a proper representation of the dynamic characteristics of the motorcycle depends on the inclusion oftyre sideslip and of the tyre relaxation property. With normal and greater than normal trail. too little trail causes an instability of the capsize mode somewhat more severe than normal and a slight lack of damping of the weave mode at high speed. stabilization of the weave mode occurs higher Vol13 No 5 1971 -1 6 Fig. so that the potential problem at high speed is inadequate damping of the weave mode. Stability and natural frequencies of standard machine as a function of forward speed with tyre sideslip inhibited only. of the weave mode. The relaxation length is also an important parameter as already indicated. slightly increased damping of the capsize mode is obtained. less steering damping is necessary to damp the wobble mode at high speed adequately. If this on figure is of the correct order of magnitude. but increases the damping of the weave mode at low and high speeds while decreasing it at medium speeds. adequate damping of the wobble mode at any speed (up to the 160 ft/s maximum employed in this study) can be obtained. Further advantage is obtained from the stabilization of the capsize mode throughout the speed range. With this reduced steer damping.e. substantial improvements to the weave mode in the form of increased damping. and increasing it destabilizes both the weave and wobble modes appreciably. machine is based mainly on measurements by Labarre and Mills (14) a 24 in section 124 in diameter tyre. the steering damper being tailored to damp the wobble mode sufficiently. Changes to the mechanical trail. these changes will be advantageous in practice. those with top speeds less than about 100 ft/s). the steering head angle must be increased to achieve adequate damping of the weave mode. more steer damping is required to stabilize the wobble mode and. e. K. increased damping of the weave mode at high speed is obtained. If the front frame mass centre is moved rearward. show that if the steering head is steepened. the instability of the capsize mode at medium and high speeds is reduced in severity. Since the damping of this mode is normally more than adequate at medium speeds. with a shallow steering head. with this provided. but the weave and wobble modes can be influenced considerably by parameter changes. Employing more trail than normal has very little effect.

and the mechanical trail. that the low speed steering should not be too heavy. s‘peed. 8. Also. this damping is greater than in the case of the standard machine.. brings a noticeable improvement in the damping of the oscillatory modes at high speed. are more difficult to evaluate. up the speed range. together with the stability characteristic$. The addition of a passenger assumed rigidly connected to the rear frame modifies its mass and inertia characteristics so that the weave mode damping is decreased above about 120 ft/s and the divergence rate of the capsize mode is increased somewhat. the tendency will be for large torques to be necessary at low speeds. The hi’& speCd steering is made ‘lighter’ by lowering the rear frame mass centre and moving it forwards. With a normal head angle. Fixed control stability and natural frequency o standard machine as a function f of forward speed JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE Vol 13 No 5 1971 . and by employing a large stwring head angle with a small mechanical trail.ts. When the free control motorcycle is oscillatorily unstable. The steering is made ‘heavier’ at low speed by increasing the front wheel load. S SHARP . a normal capsize mode. Lengthening the wheelbase by moving the rear wheel backwards increases the weave mode damping at high speed at slight cost to its instability at low speed. Its magnitude falls off rapidly as the speed increases. and by increasing the-rear wheel inertia. and for the purposes of this investigation have been estimated rather than measured.. These results imply that it is not necessary to measure the above parameters with extreme accuracy in order to obtain a reasonable representation of a motorcycle’s straight line stability characteristics. The form of the steady state response to steering twgue. in general. 8 indicate that the motorcycle with rigidly attached rider and with the steering system fixed has a divergent instability of decreasing severity as the speed increases. it changes sign usually near 40 ft/s. Converse changes result from increasing the polar moment of inertia of the front wheel. and large head angles give good high speed damping. At low speed. and increases with increasing speed thereafter.. the steering head angle. the orientation of the rear frame principal axes has been altered slightly. and that the friction torque in the steering system should be considerably smaller than the moderate torques required at high speed. in the interests of good control. E . and moderate but slowly rising torques to be necessary as the speed increases thereafter. Others. With hub centre steering arranged to have the steering axis intersecting the front wheel hub so that the effective steering head angle and the mechanical trail are interdependent. The results are not much affected by any of these changes except that reducing the yaw inertia of the rear frame. At high speed the‘hteering is made ‘heavier’ by increasing the polar moment of inertia of the front wheel. indicate roughly how large the control torques must be and. very small ones at medium speeds. require only trivial experiments for their determination. and a possible low frequency oscillatory instability at high speed. The capsize mode is somewhat stabilized.. 20 per cent reductions in the tyre coefficients and inertia values have been made in turn. Some of the motorcycle parameters. however. The fixed control stability characteristics shown in Fig. There appear to be. the torque required is in the sense opposite to the turn being negotiated and is comparatively large. 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 SPEED . but poor low speed damping of the weave mode. but the capsize mode instability becomes less severe. notably the tyre coefficients. Increasing the rear wheel inertia increases the weave mode damping at high speed and maintains the capsize mode stable up to a higher than normal speed with a subsequent decrease in the divergence rate.suggest that the important rider activity is usually c&n&rned with stabilizing the machine about some steady state condition rather than with the condition itself. like masses and the positions of the mass centres. T o find whether or not fairly small errors in the latter group (except the relaxation lengths which have been discussed already) would have much influence on the results. small steering head angles. the relaxation lengths. and the front and rear frame inertia properties. the rider will not have choice of using torque I:. Also. two practical requirements. in the interests of comfort. the high speed weave mode damping is impaired. increased.f t / s 100 1 2 f l P 4 P r 7 7 160 Fig. particularly in so far as it changes sign as the. The steady state steering torques. with the consequent small trail. lead to inadequate damping of the oscillatory modes at high speed. The steady state steering torques shown in Table 4 indicate that all the machines analysed have the same qualitative behaviour in this respect. I.324 R.

The last information is necessary for the assessment of the correct wheel loads and tractive effort at the driving wheel as functions of forward speed. increasing the steering damping increases the damping of the wobble mode. since the human being does not respond sufficiently quickly to compensate for them. increases with forward speed would be better than a fixed coefficient damper. but it seems unlikely that such a device will be commerciably viable. the improvements which result from moving the rear frame mass centre downwards and forwards. These are (1) excessive low speed instability of the weave mode. There is also the possibility of two oscillatory instabilities at high speed. The setting required JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE The main conclusions from this work are that the fixed control characteristics of the motorcycle are unimportant. Frequently. moving rearward the front frame mass centre. Detailed experimental confirmation of the theory. However. The conventional engine flywheel effectively contributes to the rear wheel inertia and so makes a positive contribution to the straight running characteristics of the motorcycle. CONCLUSIONS Within the scope of this work it appears that straight line stability problems will have one of three origins. increasing the front wheel inertia worsens (2) and ( 3 ) above but improves (1). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges helpful advice received from Professor F. one having a natural frequency of about 3 Hz. Steepening the steering head improves the low and medium speed behaviour at the expense of that at high speed.g. and increasing the rear wheel inertia. K . D E S I G N IMPLICATIONS for such a devicc is such that at the top speed of the machine. Otherwise (i. Among these are lowering the rear frame mass centre. 5) shows the advantage to be always with the latter. application of the theory to other machines. 6 ) with the free control characteristics (Fig.e. but a comparison of the fixed control characteristics (Fig. the amplitude of the wobble mode vibration subsequently reduces rather than builds up. and decreases that of the weave mode at all but the lowest speeds. and the steady state response to steering torque is probably of secondary importance. and must use torque control to stabilize the rider-machine system. A proper representation of the free control characteristics requires the use of at least an eighth order model in which the tyre relaxation property is included. The consequences of wrongly adjusting the damper can be serious. The stability characteristics can be significantly controlled by practicable design changes and the model developed can be used to study individual designs to assist in their optimization in the pre-prototype and prototype stages. With such a setting. It is therefore apparent that the rider will not use displacement control significantly. and (3) instability or lack of damping of the gscillatory modes at high speed.T H E S~fr\BILI'I'YXSL> CONTROL 01: MO1'OKCYCLES 325 or displacement control. when the free control motorcycle is either stable or divergently unstable) the rider will have choice. The conventional motorcycle has a small stable speed range below which its instability is a low frequency oscillatory one and above which it is a slow divergence. moving forward the rear frame mass centre. and with the largest steering displacement caused by such things as running over bumps. Just what degree of instability in (1) and (2) is excessive. control of the machine will be worsened by including friction in the steering system on account of the more complex rider applied steering torques which will then be necessary. as brought about by offsetting the front wheel from t h i forks rather than offsetting the forks from the steering axis. A linear damper whose coefficient. with normal skill. The higher frequency instability is stabilized at the expense of the other by increasing the steering damping. production motorcycles are fitted with adjustable friction steering dampers. the steeper steering heads which are employed on low speed machines as compared with high speed ones as well as the increased requirement for a steering damper when the front frame mass centre is comparatively rearward. Other design changes bring advantage with no disadvantage (provided the steering damping is suitably adjusted). and how much damping is necessary in ( 3 ) are not yet known. Moving the rear wheel rearwards to increase the wheelbase reduces the weave mode damping at low speed but increases it at high speed. They also explain the occurrence of 'speedman's wobble'. and aerodynamic characteristics is needed. D. Notably. Some of the design changes which can be made bring both advantages and disadvantages. Also. and extension of the theory to include the cornering case are also needed. oscillatory instabilities of the machine with frequency in excess of about 2 Hz are certainly not tolerable. (2) excessive instability of the capsize mode at medium speeds. The results obtained are consistent with the facts that motorcycles can be controlled at all and that. the other about 10 Hz. and that the manufacturer take responsibility for setting up adequate steering damping rather than leaving it to the rider. scooters. and it is recommended that viscous damping be provided. moments of inertia. and that the fixed control characteristics have little practical importance. e. F U R T H E R WORK T o obtain accurate detailed results useful in the development of particular machines. Hales of Loughborough Vo113 No 5 1971 . the deleterious effect of the damper on the low speed characteristics will be greater than the corresponding ones from a correctly adjusted viscous damper. they can be controlled with 'hands off' at medium and high speeds. more information than is currently available on motorcycle tyre characteristics.

to account for the rotations of the road wheels and the engine flywheel. to zero.yo ax. Part of the work was carried out while the author was employed in the Motorcycle Division of the Birmingham Small Arms Company Limited. For the rear wheel. the tyre-road contact point has 6 tan 4 -sin E 8. For no longitudinal tyre slip + The translational kinetic energies of the wheels are accounted for in T . . = extra terms over and above those included in T.+ a sin E cos 44 .= i. angular velocity components in OX. qr = sin &. but the rotational kinetic energies are not.. therefore 72 = ( x l . = +Mr(il-h sin 4$)z+( j+h cos +$)2 + ( h sin &>z++Zrx$2++~ry(sin 44)' ++Zr. (2) Similarly T.2 r -CrxaPrrr and T. Vr and includes only the gravitational potential energy of front and rear frames. 1.p++ir. + h cos $4 along O Y ..2>+i(h sin 4$er++Azerz) +i.(sin #$dr+@. Similarly.pf2 T = +Mr7'++Irxp.-e cos E sin 66-(a sin E sin 4 +e sin 6 cos 4 + e sin 6 cos 6 sin q5 +f cos E sin +)$}z { j . (3) + respectively. (3) and (4).y{-cos sin 66 E +(sin E sin 6 cos ++cos 6 sin 4)$}z ++Ifr-{S+sin E$+COS E cos +$>z .2T .[{k.{cos E cos 64 (sin 6 sin 4 -sin E cos 6 cos ~)$)z++4~. gives rotational kinetic energy = +ir.h sin +$)Z+(yl+hcos +4)z+(h sin #J$)~ + + Potential energy V = V . cos +$$ .0 ixo .(cos JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE +$Iz Vol 13 No 5 1971 . .[{-cos -E sin 6$+(sin E sin 6 cos 4 +cos 6 sin 4)$>8. and T.-h sin 44 along OX. and T. i. G . of a general point on the front wheel circumference.-r.YzZz axes are The lowest point on the circumference of the front wheel. ay0 The inertia and external forces are resolved along 0 Y1to obtain the lateral equation of motion thus d i3T PT. so that To... SHARP University of Technology. necessity for replacing iland j1 i o yoin the kinetic by and energy expression is avoided. Equating the velocity component along O X .gh cos 4 (5) + + + also therefore pr = 4. = +M. taken as zero when both mass centres are at ground level.. with the above condition 8. (4) giving T by addition of equations (2). ( h sin 44 ')along OZ. = --E imposed.326 R.-. = +Mft2++If ++Zfyqf2 +Ifzrf .2 +. since PT = .V EV . ++efz] T.+ sin eTz) and this term therefore contributes to To. rr = cos +$ Lateral equation o motion and aT/@ f The equations for the translation of the vehicle along O X o and O Y o reduce to d 2T d dt i x o = Qxo and d t ?jo = QVo -(-) T.g(a sin E cos 4-e sin 6 sin 4+e sin E cos 6 cos 4 f cos E cos 4) M. Elimination of 4 and 6.e.+Tw with These terms have already been accounted for by including the rear wheel in the rear frame except+irY(2 +@.Qho sin #+ Qyo cos 4 = Qyl = $ (6) dt CYl also (-) +z $4 Through the use of these expressions (6) and ( ) the 7.(sin +$+ Br)2 ++i. . (9) ( COSE ) {?el} = l n 4 $44e r } cos + ignoring the second order term 6 tan 4.(c0s ~$>"Cr.. S.= d . the engine flywheel and the front wheel contribute T.e sin 6 sin +j+e cos 6 cos 4s +e sin E cos 6 cos 44-e sin E sin 6 sin 46 +fcos -E cos &$+(a cos -E+e cos -E cos 6 -f sin -E)$>z+{asin -E sin +$+e sin 6 cos 44 + e cos 6 sin @+e sin -E cos 6 sin +e sin -E sin 6 cos @+f cos -E sin 44>z] ++I.Zryq. Therefore V = M. APPENDIX 1 DERIVATION O F THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION Kinetic energy T = Tf+T.2 +Ir. has velocity components j . = tan-' 2 --E . .

(15) 0 Linear equations of motion Appropriate differentiations of the expression for T (by addition of equations (2). . 10.ek+I. N Y.K S + t [ { ( X . 9. . = sin ++sin X E cos +S . - + . The generalized forces are given in equations (ll). (20) 111 2 1 when the tyre relaxation property is accounted for.e8 + t + Fig.= Y'. from equation (7).THE STABILITY AND C O N T R O L OF MOTORCYCLES 327 and sin y = { 1-(sin + 6 cos E +sin c cos +8)2}112 . .. U Or +. all the terms required for the lateral equation (6) and for the other three equations in standard form (equation (1)) are available. (16) Forward velocity of front tyre contact point is &+ti3 cos +$ using equation (9) and t6 cos +$ y.. a V/a+. give aT/a+. instead of equations (20). Therefore Generalized forces By reference to Fig. + b Y . The front wheel load Z. k 2 + I . 21 -tS(cos +Z. . I -(Y. with E K parallel to 0 Y . the steady state tyre side forces are accurately described by linear functions of sideslip and camber angles of the form Ll . and the sideslip and camber angles in equations (15)-(17). When the sideslip and camber angles are small.jk -C. aT/aS. cos y+ Y .) sin E cos ~}d. Plan view of motorcycle showing road to tyre forces in the ground plane < . (M.+(M. 10 with EI the unit vector along the wheel axis. and Y . This property is omitted from the analysis by putting Y .+. JQURNAL M E C H A N l C A L ENGINEERING SCIENCE -($+?) cos c)S-2'"sin R. (13) and (14). + I . . . the tyre side forces in equations (18)-(20). =1 +M. and K is parallel to the ground plane O X . and.l Y . d/dt(aT/3yi.-b$) Tyre side forces The tyre side forces are functions of the respective sideslip and camber angles of the tyres. d/dt(aT/a&. (12) Q.). y) cos E + ( Y . 6V/aS. sin2 +Ifz COS' E ) $ + M .Y ... . 9 and a. = tan-' QUl = X . = 0 M. 5) d/dt(aT/a$). $ .Yr+ Y.+ Mr)(jl +a.$) M.+I$+t(S Fig. J. (12). and . the equations are (M.sin+)]+T (14) replacing sin y by y and putting cos y = 1. ..sin -Z..+ Y . .tl..k$+(M.Y . aT/ax. Lateral velocity is sin 4d-S cos +) again using equation (9).-sin +Y. . = Y . is taken as constant. . ~ + ( M . .kj. . The plane through E. N IYf-bY. =0 Vol 13 No 5 1971 . k ~ .+ Y .. The front wheel in some generally displaced position is shown in Fig. = Y ' . . (17) with the rear wheel camber angle simply 4. . (11) and using equation (9) Q. Y . are related to their steady state values by equations (10) 2 Y. . and Y.) . aT/ay. i .j+Mrh)d. (3) and ( ) and V (equation 4) (). EI has components Therefore sin and the tyre side forces Y . Thus. With second and higher order terms omitted. * (13) Q6 N . .Y. .cos+)sinc}S-(Y. (I. -I. aT/a#.cos++Z. sin y+ Y .. . = Y ' . Cambered and steered front wheel. d/dt(aT/a8).

ejZl (kZ) (kZ) (a. I.+Z.j~-C. C. R.8 ft. cos E 8 + t S and j .)bti.y.jk-C. Y 0 5 3 slug ft2. I. +(IjZ-I.574 ft. I3 0.t S ) .)i12b cos E + M .+M.2~ 0 = The condition that the tyres do not sideslip implies that uf = C I . a 3. cos &+tS) $= b+Z for 1. 1 ft.+M. S. +t{(M. sin2 c)Zli -(M.~~+(Z.02 ft. x..+(Z. Substituting these expressions in the linear equations of motion and eliminating Yfand Y.+Mr)b2 +2Mfbk+Mfk2 +I.h)b cos +(M. giving .j+M.+hk.) e}il cos E sin E cos +[(M. 23 slug ft2. 3559 lb/rad. ZIx 0. constant. z . sin2 cos E +2M."'R'.h2+Z.j M.. C . Thus. +K. cos E S + t S ) + + +I. 0. 14.328 R. 1554 slug ft'.j2+M... ci.08 ft. 211 lb/rad. 298 Ib/rad.k2+Z.Zl2 sin E +bli t(M. = b$.h) +tzi{M.+hi 0. and no steering torque is applied.6 cos E = 0 X1 where I .-l1' R..= 0.bki1 cos E+(M.. t 0. ..9 slug.326 slug ft'.. 0.91 slug ft2. R..j +M..4715 rad = 27".093 ft. C .+M. C .~-Z.)sin APPENDIX 2 EQUATIONS OF M O T I O N W I T H TYRE SIDESLIP ELIMINATED E I cos E } ] J + -t t-+. E 0.ejZl2++l..1 slug..)b'il Z' +(M.. M.28 slug ft'. Rf +{M. Z 1 i l sin c cos2 c ) i 1 cos E ZftZ12 c-M. K 5 lb ft/(rad/s). = (x. '..j+M.775 slug ft'.. obtain we [( M .. b 1. + z * . k i 1 2 cos E } S+[M. 2512 lb/rad. 1. from equations (16) and (17) 1 7( ~ ...h)gl.h)bt M.) sin E cos e}t]E.Jl'+M. cos EZ. These equations were used to give the results in Fig. COS' e+Z.")] i Z1ilQ+(Z.eZ12g sin E sin i 1 2 Z 1 cos E+t{(M.+Z~.. -226 lb. sin dl +{~.e2Zl2+tZ{(M. = b+Z and is the wheelbase.t-Mfeg)Z. cos E 8 + t 8 and y. C .38 ft... APPENDIX 3 PARAMETER VALUES FOR T H E S T A N D A R D M A C H I N E A N D RIDER and j .~-Z. = b+Z '= and hence 2. 7. I.fj = o JOURNAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE 2. e 0. SHARP and [I.jk-c. f h 2..1 12 ft. Vol 13 No 5 1971 M.

two-wheeled vehicles 1964 (University Microfilms Inc. Engrs 1965-66 180 (Pt 2A). Reduced steer damping. Southampton). u = 0.18 ft. Michigan). Hum. Ann Arbor. t = 0. (34) Z. Proc. Div. Hub centre steered with 25" castor angle. SOC. Shallow steering head. Q. WHIPPLE. (3) PEARSALL. Proc.55 slug ft2. l).265 slug ft2.. (11)KARMAN. reduced by 20 per cent to 2847 lb/rad. Factors 1964 6. Mathematical methods in T. B. Reduced front wheel inertia. Proc. 333. C.12 ft. (13) WILKINSON.. Engrs 1956-57 (No.73 slug ft2..18 ft. A mathematical analysis of the stability of R. 312. E = 19". (Clarendon Press. (10)HALES. t = 0. Shallow steering head. E = 19". 'An investigation of automobile handling as implemented by a variable-steering automobile'.58 ft. (6) SEGEL. c = 0.reduced by 20 per cent to 238 lb/rad. (2) J O U R N A L MECHANICAL E N G I N E E R I N G S C I E N C E Vol13 No 5 1971 . H. Symp. W.y = 0. with K = 7. VON and BIOT. A. 251. t = 0. Proc. 'Theoretical prediction and experimental substantiation of the response of the automobile to steering control'. (33) I. Rear frame mass centre moved 1 ft forwards with K = 8 lb ft/(rad/s).F. E = 35".4 ft.58 ft. Auto. 395. (9) BISHOP. B.58 ft. N. T h e University. NAGAOKA. f (12) CRANDALL. D. K = 2 lb ft/(rad/s). Proc. 'Analysis of the shimmy phenomenon'. Inc.L. = 1.. and JOHNSON. Numerical Methods for Vibration Problems 1966 (Institute of Sound and Vibration Research. (4) KONDO. 'Steering and stability of single track R.26 slug ft2.01 ft. Div. E.5 lb ft/(rad/s). C. with short trail.43 slug ft2. .L. P..06 slug ft2. 'Theoretical M. I reduced by 20 per cent to 18. .. 113. (5) COLLINS. Auto. New York and London). Znstn mech. Shallow steering head. Instn mech. dynamic stability of steering systems'. E = 35". study on the running stability of the two-wheelers'. h = 1.5 ft to lengthen wheel base. H. Auto.18 ft. C. and MILLS. 3. 'Transient response of a non-linear steering F. = 1. Steep steering head.4 ft.f = -0-41 ft. With pillion passenger and K = 4 lb ft/(rad/s). C. APPENDIX 5 REFERENCES (I)SEGEL. engineering: an introduction to the mathematical treatment of engineering problems 1940 (McGraw-Hill. H. with short trail. auto. A. with K = 6 lb ft/(rad/s). with K = 6 lb ft/(rad/s). c = 0. Engineering analysis: a survey o numerical S. oscillation'. Hub centre steered with 15" castor angle. 8. F. Engrs 1968-69 183 (Pt 2A). u = 1. A. and YOSHIMURA.T H E STABILITY AND CONTROL OF MOTORCYCLES 329 APPENDIX 4 KEY T O M O D E L N U M B E R S (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) Standard machine (parameter values in Appendix 3). .. Increased steer damping. Long relaxation length. . with long trail. EngrsJapan 1963 17 (No. C. Math. reduced by 20 per cent to 169 lb/rad.4 slug ft2. The mechanics of D. Long trail. New York and London). Short trail. Oxford). Znstn mech. H. 'An investigation into the R. 1899 30. e = -0. 310. 191. procedures 1956 (McGraw-Hill.. Trans. Increased front wheel inertia. t = 0.. Steep steering head. vibration 1960 (Cambridge University Press).M. reduced by 20 per cent to 0. reduced by 20 per cent to 2010 lb/rad. i. with K = 3 lb ft/(rad/s). Inc. Znstn mech. (31) Z reduced by 20 per cent to 12. (14)LABARRE. Proc. Short relaxation length. Hub centre steered with 35" castor angle. Low rear frame mass centre. with k = 8 lb ft/(rad/s). Steep steering head. (7) WILSON-JONES. E = 35". (32) Orientation of principal axes of rear frame altered. Engrs 1951-52. Increased rear wheel inertia. 'The stability of a bicycle'. i. Front frame mass centre moved back. Engrs 1922 17. t = 0. J. 7). D.reduced by 20 per cent to 0. Rear wheel moved back 0. 'The stability of the motion of the bicycle'. The algebraic eigenvalue problem 1965 J. vehicles'. E = 19".. K = 10 lb ft/(rad/s). ir. Znstn R. Front frame mass centre moved down. with long trail. ( 8 ) PACEJKA.R.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful