Alexandria Engineering Journal (2020) 59, 1613–1628

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

Advanced study of tire characteristics and their

influence on vehicle lateral stability and untripped
rollover threshold
Mohamed A. Hassan a,b,c, Mohamed A.A. Abdelkareem c, M.M Moheyeldein c,
Ahmed Elagouz a,c, Gangfeng Tan a,b,*
a
School of Automotive Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
b
Suizhou-WUT Industry Research Institute, Suizhou 441300, China
c
Automotive and Tractors Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Minia University, El-Minia 61111, Egypt

Received 8 February 2020; revised 5 April 2020; accepted 10 April 2020

Available online 5 June 2020

KEYWORDS Abstract This paper investigates the effects of tire characteristics on vehicular rollover and lateral
Conflict analysis; stability. Two tire types with different adhesion coefficients were selected to evaluate the relation
Vibrations; between vehicular rollover propensity and lateral stability. Simulations were used to calculate the
Automobile stability; critical rollover factor and to analyze the effects of vehicular parameters on handling, including
Handling; the center of gravity, payload condition, and vehicle speed, with the two proposed types of tires.
Vehicle suspension To replicate an actual vehicular response, particularly during extreme driving operations, a two-
degrees of freedom (DOF) planar two-track model with nonlinear Pacejka’s Magic Tire Formula
was applied. Subsequently, a 7-DOF vehicle vibration and roll model was developed to consider
the effects of suspension and road excitation. The tire, steering, and vehicle vibration models were
implemented in MATLAB/Simulink by subjecting them to the Fishhook maneuver steering input
defined by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The results confirm that the adhe-
sion capacities of tires have an opposite effect on lateral vehicle stability and rollover propensity,
while both suspension parameters and road excitation inputs significantly influence vehicle rollover
and lateral stability. Additionally, we identified a positive correlation between vehicle properties
and lateral handling, especially when tire characteristics are considered.
Ó 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

* Corresponding author at: School of Automotive Engineering,

The ride comfort and handling characteristics of vehicles are
Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China.
E-mail addresses: mohamed.hassan86@minia.edu.eg (M.A. Hassan),
strongly associated with lateral and roll motions; they are gen-
auto_nova@whut.edu.cn (G. Tan). erally influenced by excitations resulting from factors such as
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria transverse maneuvers, vehicle–road interactions, and cross-
University. winds. Multiple parameters can affect lateral and roll motions,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2020.04.008
1110-0168 Ó 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1614 M.A. Hassan et al.

Nomenclature

English symbols r yaw rate; rad/s, –

ay vehicle lateral acceleration; m/s2, – Vy, Vx lateral and forward vehicle velocities; m/s,
bf, br front and rear wheel track width; m, 1.458 m Vx = 15 m/s
Csfr, Csfl, Csrr, Csrl damping coefficients for each suspen- w(t) random white noise signal, –
sion; N s/m, 1500 N s/m €zb vertical body bounce acceleration; m/s2, –
fo cut-off frequency for road irregularities; Hz,
0.0628 Hz Greek symbols
€
hb vertical body pitch acceleration; rad/s2, –
Fsfr, Fsfl, Fsrr, Fsrl suspension forces for each suspension
corner; N, – €b
u vertical body roll acceleration; rad/s2, –
Fyfr, Fyfl, Fyrr, Fyrl lateral forces for each vehicle wheel; N, hb vehicle body pitch angle; o, –
– ub vehicle body roll angle; o, –
Fyi lateral tire force; N, – df steering angle; rad, –
Fzfr, Fzfl, Fzrr, Fzrl normal forces for each vehicle wheel; N, ai tire sideslip angle; rad, –
–
Fzi normal tire force; N, – Subscripts
Gq(no) road surface roughness, * 10
6; m3, 256 * 10
6 m3 fl, fr front left and Front right, –
hc distance from C.G to the roll axis; m, 0.256 m rl, rr rear left and rear right, –
hcgM C.G height; m, 0.506 m CG center-of-gravity, –
Iy, Ix, Iz pitch, bounce and roll moments of inertia; kg m2,
2131, 522, 2340 kg m2, respectively. Abbreviations
ksfr, ksfl, ksrr, ksrl spring stiffnesses for each suspension set; CG Center of Gravity, –
N/m, 20 kN/m DOF Degree of Freedom, –
ktfr, ktfl, ktrr, ktrl tire stiffnesses for each corner; N/m, 200 HIS Hydraulically Interconnected Suspension,
kN/m PMTF Pacejka Magic Tire Formula, –
lf , lr distance from C.G to front and rear wheels; m, RC Rolling Centre, –
1.464, 1.178 m, respectively. RCF Roll Critical Factor, –
Mb sprung vehicle mass; kg, 1400 kg RSF Roll Stability Factor, –
Mtot total vehicle mass; kg, 1560 kg TWLO Two Wheel Lift-Off, –
mufr, mufl, murr, murl vehicle unsprung masses; kg, 35.6,
35.6, 43.4, 43.4 kg, respectively.

including vehicle design factors, speed, suspension characteris-
tics, road input excitations, frequency, and amplitude of the
wheel, steering, and tire properties [1,2]. A well-tuned suspen-
sion system and suitable vehicle design parameters enhance the
interaction between the tire and the road surface [3–6].
The adhesion coefficient represents a suitable friction force
required between the tire tread and the road surface, for main-
taining vehicular handling and stability during both normal
and extreme steering operations. A tire’s adhesion coefficient
is influenced by several factors, including specific tire parame-
ters (material, tire type, tire tread depth, and internal pressure),
vehicle parameters (such as speed and camber angle), vertical
load, and road surface capacity [7]. In terms of vehicular
parameters, a tire’s cross-section and size significantly affect
the tire adhesion coefficient. Similarly, the tire adhesion coeffi-
cient is considerably influenced by tire parameters; an increase
in tire size and a decrease in aspect ratio cause the tire adhesion
coefficient to increase [8]. In contrast with the behavior of the
tire cross-section, an increase in tire pressure causes the adhe-
sion coefficient to decrease, by reducing the tire–road surface
contact area, while a decrease in tire pressure increases its
adhesion coefficient by increasing the size of the contact patch
[9]. Furthermore, the adhesion coefficient is greatly influenced
by the tread pattern, which increases the tire’s adhesion capac-
ity by removing the moisture between the tread and the actual
contact area on the road surface [10]. Vehicle speed also has a
notable effect on the adhesion coefficient, which gradually
decreases as driving speed increases [11]. Road surface condi-
tions dominate the tire adhesion coefficient, which is affected
by decreased adhesion capacities under wet and snowy condi-
tions [12,13]. This study investigated the effect of tire charac-
teristics with different-sized tires, including coefficients of
cornering, camber stiffness, and peak lateral friction. Accord-
ingly, rollover resistance and lateral stability were examined
under conditions of normal and extreme maneuvering condi-
tions [14].
A well-tuned suspension system and appropriate vehicle
design parameters provide enhanced interaction between the
tire and the road surface [3–5]. Using several maneuvers, this
investigation explored the influence of vehicle inertia proper-
ties, including the moment of inertia, sprung mass, and the
position of the center of gravity (CG), on lateral and roll sta-
bility [15,16]. The roll stability factor was evaluated using ver-
tical and longitudinal variations in the CG [17], and the study
was extended to include the effects of differences in wheelbase
and wheel track width [18]. Chen et al. [19] investigated the
propensity of double and triple long combination trucks for
lateral stability and rollover. The simulation results revealed
that vehicles with triple trailers have a higher propensity for
rollover compared to double-trailer vehicles. The stability
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability 1615

properties and rollover thresholds of heavy trucks were ana- pension and roll motion models are subjected to random road
lyzed in terms of design influences and operational factors, irregularities, as illustrated in Section 2.4.
including load distribution, trailer spacing, payload density, The equations for the motion of the suspension system and
and CG height [20,21]. The influence of suspension spring stiff- roll motion can be developed as follows:
ness, shock absorbers, and anti-roll bars were investigated in The vertical vibration and pitch motion of the sprung mass
[15,16], and the effects of suspension kinematics and jacking is expressed as:
forces on rollover propensity were discussed in [22,23].
Advanced investigations were conducted on hydraulically Mb€zb ¼ Fsfr þ Fsfl þ Fsrr þ Fsrl : ð1Þ
interconnected suspension systems to enhance both lateral
and roll stability via suspension tuning [24–28]. The effects
Iy €
hb ¼ ðFsrr þ Fsrl Þ:lr
ðFsfr þ Fsfl Þ:lf : ð2Þ
of suspension system configuration on the rollover dynamics
of a tractor–semi-trailer combination were investigated in where the forces Fsrr ; Fsrl ; Fsfr andFsfl indicate the suspension
Refs. [29,30]. forces for each tire.
Wang et al. [31] studied the behavior of vehicle roll stability The vertical vibration of the unsprung masses is represented
under various road excitations, as well as steering wheel inputs. as
In [32], the correlation between vehicle rollover and lateral sta-

bility, as well as the impact of road excitations, was considered mufr€zufr ¼ ktfr zRfr
zufr
Fsfr ;
to evaluate the influence on vehicle rollover. Steering wheel

inputs with different amplitudes and frequencies on an mufl€zufl ¼ ktfl zRfl
zufl
Fsfl ;
untripped rollover were evaluated [33]. The result confirmed
that during a severe maneuver, steering frequencies in the murr€zurr ¼ ktrr ðzRrr
zurr Þ
Fsfrr ;
region of 0.3–0.8 Hz are a critical reason for the untripped roll-
over. Joshi et al. [34] studied the effect of steering input fre- murr€zurl ¼ ktrl ðzRrl
zurl Þ
Fsfrl : ð3Þ
quency on transient handling dynamics using different sports Then, the roll motion of the vehicle body can be expressed
utility sector vehicles with the same curb weight. The results as
indicated that the yaw rate and lateral acceleration responses
br bf
are significantly correlated with the low frequency of the steer- € ¼ ðFsrr þ Fsrl Þ:
Ix u
ðFsfr þ Fsfl Þ: þ Mb ay hc cos u
ing input below 2 Hz. The critical rollover factor was deter- 2 2
mined with respect to the steering frequency with different þ Mb ghc sin u: ð4Þ
steering amplitudes and vehicle speeds [15]. The result revealed The dynamic suspension forces expressed in the previous
that rollover occurs within a frequency range of 0.52–0.6 Hz. equations can be derived as follows:
This study investigates the influence of changes in the lat-


eral tire capacity coefficient on vehicular lateral stability and Fsfr ¼ ksfr zufr
zbfr þ csfr zufr
zbfr ;
untripped rollover propensity by considering differences in


vehicle design parameters and operational factors. To evaluate Fsfl ¼ ksfl zufl
zbfl þ csfl zufr
zbfl ;
vehicular trajectory and rollover stability, the parameters stud-
ied include the essential vehicle properties of longitudinal and Fsrr ¼ ksrr ðzurr
zbrr Þ þ csrr ðzurr
zbrr Þ;
vertical CG positions, track width, wheelbase, vehicle speed,
and payload. Additionally, the influence of road irregularities Fsrl ¼ ksrl ðzurl
zbrl Þ þ csrl ðzurr
zbrl Þ: ð5Þ
on rollover dynamics is introduced when vehicle tires are sub- According to the geometry relations, body deflections can
jected to a fishhook maneuver. Furthermore, the study be calculated as:
attempts to correlate important vehicle properties and tire
characteristics to provide some useful guidance on tire selec- bf u bf u
tion issues related to lateral vehicle and rollover stability. zbfr ¼ zb
lf h
; zbfl ¼ zb
lf h þ ;
2 2

2. Vehicle modeling br u br u
zbrr ¼ zb þ lr h þ ; zbfl ¼ zb þ lr h
: ð6Þ
2 2
The mathematical model used in this study incorporates the
tire model, the roll and suspension model, and the steering Vertical tire forces at each tire, including both static and
model. dynamic tire loads, can be determined as
M b lr

Fzfr ¼ g þ mufr g þ ktfr zRfr
zufr ;
2.1. Roll dynamics model lr þ lf

This investigation uses vehicle suspension and roll models with M b lr


Fzfr ¼ g þ mufl g þ ktfl zRfl
zufl ;
seven DOFs, as shown in Fig. 1. The sprung mass roll motion lr þ lf
is illustrated in Fig. 2. Note that lateral acceleration is incorpo-
rated into the roll motion of the vehicle’s body. Moreover, the M b lf
Fzrr ¼ g þ murr g þ ktrr ðzRrr
zurr Þ;
suspension model provides a dynamic tire load for the tire lr þ lf
model, which plays a vital role, as the tire is the major link
between the vertical and lateral forces exerted on the road; ulti- Mb lf
Fzrl ¼ g þ murl g þ ktrr ðzRrl
zurl Þ: ð7Þ
mately, this affects the lateral dynamics of the vehicle. The sus- lr þ lf
1616
Fig. 1 A 7-DOF full-car model.
Fig. 2 Vehicle roll model.
2.2. Lateral tire force model
To simulate a real vehicular response, Pacejka’s Magic Tire
Formula (MTF) model [35] is adopted to represent the
response of nonlinear tire forces, instead of linear cornering
stiffness. This model is selected because of its ability to simu-
late the tire behavior in cases of high lateral acceleration and
significant tire deformation. Two tire types with different adhe-
sion coefficients are selected to focus on the relation between
the propensity for vehicle rollover and lateral stability.
For pure sideslip conditions, the nonlinear MTF equations
can be described as


Fyi ¼ D sin C tan
1 ðB/Þ þ Sv ; ð8Þ
M.A. Hassan et al.
E
/ ¼ ð1
EÞðai þ Sh Þ þ tan
1 ðBðai þ Sh ÞÞ; ð9Þ
B
D ¼ a1 F2zi þ a2 Fzi ; ð10Þ
a3 sin ða4 tan
1 ða5 Fzi ÞÞ
BCD ¼ ; ð11Þ
CD
E ¼ a6 Fzi þ a7 ; ð12Þ
Sh ¼ a8 c; Sv ¼ a9 Fzi c: ð13Þ
where kN is the unit of the tire’s lateral force Fyi and its vertical
force Fzi , and the unit of the tire’s sideslip angleai is radian.
While the factors B, C, D, E, Sh ;and Sv are the stiffness factor,
shape factor, peak value, curvature factor, horizontal shift,
and vertical shift, respectively. The sub-index ðiÞ indicates the
tire left front, left rear, right front, and right rear.
In this paper, MTF is discussed only in terms of pure lateral
slip. The assumed camber angle is very small, and thus, can be
neglected (c ¼0 and Sh ¼ 0; Sv ¼ 0). In order to estimate the
sideslip based on the PMTF, individual Pacejka’s MTF coeffi-
cients at nominal conditions (B, C, D, E) are estimated as in
Eqs. (8)-(12) [36]. Fig. 3a illustrates the correlation between
the tire adhesion coefficient and tire sideslip angle, which rep-
resents the typical tire characteristics according to the PMTF.
The factor B represents the stiffness factor used during the cal-
culation of the lateral tire force. The effect of the stiffness fac-
tor (B) on the tire characteristics is given in Fig. 3b, in which
increasing the stiffness factor (B) increases the lateral adhesion
coefficient of the tire.
To study the relation between vehicular anti-rollover and
lateral stability performance, two tires with different adhesion
coefficients are selected with variations in vehicle design
parameters and driving operational factors. The parameters
of the MTF model used to assess the values of low and high
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability 1617

(b)

y
Stiffness Factor(B)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1

Fig. 3 A typical tire characteristic of the Pacejka’s MTF coefficients; (a) correlation between tire adhesion coefficient and sideslip angle;
(b) relation between tire adhesion coefficient and sideslip angle with different stiffness factors.

lateral adhesion factors for the front and rear tires are taken (15). The parameters used in the simulation are listed in the
from [37,38]. Nomenclature Section.
Figs. 4 and 5 present the correlations between the lateral


Iz r_ ¼ Fyfr cos df þ Fyfl cos df lf
Fyfr þ Fyfl lr : ð14Þ
tire force and tire sideslip angle of the proposed types of tires
to define the tire properties. The peak lateral friction of the



Mtot v_ y þ vx r ¼ Fyfr cos df þ Fyfl cos df
Fyfr þ Fyfl : ð15Þ
low-adhesion-capacity tire is at a 7.6° sideslip angle, while at
the same vertical load (6 kN), the peak lateral friction coeffi-
cient of the high-adhesion-capacity tire is 3.2°, i.e., the maxi-
mum slip angle of the low-adhesion-capacity tire is lower
than the slip angle of the low-adhesion-capacity tire when
the maximum lateral force is achieved.

2.3. Vehicle yaw dynamics model

Fig. 6 presents the utilized 2-DOFs steering model, including

the lateral and yaw vehicle motions. During the cornering con-
ditions, the lateral force is applied to the CG and thus induced
the rollover. The steering model is governed in Eqs. (14) and

Fig. 5 Characteristics of the proposed tires at 6 kN vertical tire

load.

Fig. 4 Correlation of lateral force and sideslip angle using the

PMTF with different normal forces. Fig. 6 Bicycle steering model.
1618
The slip angles of the front axle (af ) and rear axle (ar ) is
defined in terms of the variables vy and r and using the usual
small angle assumptions as follows:
vy þ lf r vy
lb r
af ¼ df
; ar ¼
: ð16Þ
vx vx
The lateral acceleration is
ay ¼ v_y þ vx r: ð17Þ
where vx is the vehicle forward speed, vy is the vehicle lateral
speed, r is the yaw rate, Mtot is the vehicle mass including
sprung and unsprung masses and df is the front wheel steering
angle.
2.4. Road input profile
Uneven road is used in to evaluate the vehicular lateral and
roll stability. According to the ISO/TC108/SC2N67 standard,
random roads can be simulated in terms of the roughness coef-
ficient [39,40]. In this manner, random road elevation is simu-
lated as illustrated in Eq. (18) [41–43]. In this study, the road
class is ISO grade C road with a roughness coefficient of
256  10
6. In Fig. 7, the road excitation is established for
each tire considering the effect of delayed response between
the front and rear axles, which is a significant factor for the
vehicle roll and lateral motion [44].
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z_ o ðtÞ ¼
2pfo Zo ðtÞ þ 2pno Gq ðno ÞuðtÞwðtÞ: ð18Þ
where Gq(no) is the road roughness coefficient, no is a spatial
reference frequency of 0.1, fo is a minimal boundary frequency
of 0.0628 Hz, u(t) is the speed in m/s, and w(t) is a white noise
signal.
3. Simulation results and discussion
This study uses the MATLAB/SIMULINK platform for the
simulation of a front-wheel-drive passenger car. The random
road excitation during the simulation is Class C, and the vehi-
cle speed is set at 54 km/h. To produce lateral force for the
steering model, a 7-DOF car suspension system and two types
Fig. 7 Time-domain of the road grade C at a speed of 15 m/s.
M.A. Hassan et al.
of tires (with high and low adhesion coefficients) are applied.
These models are developed in the MATLAB/SIMULINK
platform according to the previously stated equations. To eval-
uate the vehicle’s dynamics, this investigation considers the
influences of the tire properties integrated with variations in
vehicle parameters, including vehicle mass, location of the
CG, and speed. The fishhook maneuver (a1) is selected to
explore the effects of tire properties on both lateral vehicle sta-
bility and roll behavior, as shown in Fig. 8. The vehicle’s roll
and lateral stability are evaluated depending on the responses
of the lateral acceleration, roll angle, yaw rate, and the front/
rear tire sideslip angles. In addition, the critical rollover factor
is quantified to study the vehicle rollover. The rollover critical
factor (RCF) compares the proposed tires, which can be calcu-
lated using Eq. (19) [45]. The larger the value of RCF, the
more likely that the vehicle rolls over. If the RCF is greater
than 1, it is regarded that the rollover has already occurred.
At lower RCF (RCF  1), the vehicle indicates higher rollover
resistance capabilities, in which the vehicle rollover occurs
when RCF is greater than 1, meaning that the inner wheel is
lifted-off.
 
 4hcgM ay 
RCF ¼  : ð19Þ
ðbf þ br Þg
To evaluate the lateral and roll stability with a change in
the CG longitudinal position, several simulation analyses are
conducted with respect to the two proposed tire types (high-
and low-adhesion-capacity tires). Fig. 9 illustrates the effects
of high and low tire adhesion coefficients, with ±15% varia-
tions in the CG longitudinal position, on the RMS of the lat-
eral acceleration, roll angle, and yaw rate. For both the
selected tires, a CG position closer to the front axle produces
the minimum values of lateral acceleration, roll angle, and
yaw rate. Maximum values are achieved when the CG is
located closer to the rear axle. The results in Fig. 9 also indi-
cate that the yaw rate tendency of the low-adhesion-capacity
tire increases significantly from less than 23° to 40°/s, espe-
cially when the CG position moves toward the rear axle. As
revealed in Figs. 10 and 11, according to the correlation
between the sideslip angle and the lateral tire forces for the
front and rear axles, there is a sharp increase in the front
and rear sideslip angles of the low-adhesion-coefficient tire
when the CG position is moved toward the rear axle. This
Fig. 8 Steering wheel signal of fishhook maneuver (1a).
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability
Fig. 9 RMS contrast diagram of lateral acceleration, roll angle,
and yaw rate vs. variation in the longitudinal position of the CG.
Fig. 10 Conflict analysis of the front sideslip angle and front
lateral tire force vs. the variation in the longitudinal position of the
CG.
translates to an oversteer when the vehicle’s weight is shifted
toward the rear axle; this phenomenon increases with lower-
adhesion-coefficient tires. Consequently, the rollover risk for
low tire adhesion capacity is greatly reduced when the RCF
drops from 0.8 to 0.47, thereby increasing roll stability by
37% (Fig. 12). However, for the low-adhesion-capacity tire,
at the end of the fishhook maneuver (when the steering angle
df ¼ 0), the RCF still presents rollover risks when the CG is
closer to the rear axle; the RCF of the low-adhesion-capacity
tire becomes zero under the same condition. Thus, during
the last stage of the fishhook maneuver, the vehicle constantly
sideslips, which is confirmed by the lateral acceleration
response presented in Fig. 13. A key indication of the above
analysis is that the sideslip phenomenon can be avoided by
decreasing the influence of factors on a vehicle’s lateral accel-
eration, such as vehicle speed.
Figs. 14–16 show the influence of CG height variation on
lateral stability and rollover with respect to the high-and
1619
Fig. 11 Conflict analysis of rear sideslip angle and rear lateral
tire force vs. the variation in the longitudinal position of the CG.
Fig. 12 Comparison of RCF for variation in CG longitudinal
position for the high- and low-adhesion-capacity tires.
low-adhesion-coefficient tires. In Figs. 15 and 16, the solid
lines represent the lateral tire force trends, the dashed lines rep-
resent the sideslip angle trends, the black lines denote the high-
adhesion-capacity tire, and the red lines denote the low-
adhesion-capacity tire. The distance between the CG and the
center of roll are simultaneously and equally changed by main-
taining consistency in other vehicle parameters with those of
the base model. As shown in Fig. 14, a change of ±20% in
CG height slightly affects the responses for lateral acceleration
and yaw rate. However, it is also observed that the lateral
acceleration and yaw rate for high-adhesion-capacity tires
increase with a +20% variation in CG height. Conversely,
the lateral acceleration and yaw rate for low-adhesion-
capacity tires decrease with respect to a +20% variation in
CG height. The most surprising aspect of Fig. 14 is that the
RMS of the lateral acceleration and yaw rate for the high-
1620
Fig. 13 Comparison of lateral acceleration of the high and low-
adhesion-capacity tires.
Fig. 14 RMS conflict diagram of lateral acceleration, roll angle,
and yaw rate vs. variations in the vertical position of the CG.
adhesion-coefficient tires are approximately 50% higher than
those of the low-adhesion-coefficient tires. In contrast, the
RMS conflict for the front and rear sideslip angle responses
of the high-adhesion-capacity tire is lower than that of the
low-adhesion-capacity tires. The front and rear lateral forces
demonstrate opposing behaviors, as shown in Figs. 15 and 16.
CG height is known to be one of the main parameters that
proportionally affect the propensity for rollover. Figs. 14 and
17 indicate a significant positive correlation between the CG
height and rollover stability. For both tire types, the roll angle
increases with CG height. Fig. 17 presents the relation between
the critical rollover factor for the two selected tires and the
variation in CG height. It is evident that the RCF of the
high-adhesion-coefficient tire is higher than that of the low-
adhesion-coefficient tire; the RCF increases from 0.51 to 0.83
and from 0.35 to 0.55, with variations of +20% and
20%,
respectively, in the vertical position of the CG.
M.A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 15 RMS conflict diagram of front sideslip angle and lateral
tire force as functions of variations in the vertical position of the
CG.
Fig. 16 RMS conflict diagram of rear sideslip angle and lateral
tire force as functions of variations in the vertical position of the
CG.
The impacts of payload variation on lateral stability and
rollover threshold for the two selected tire are illustrated
graphically in Figs. 18–21. The lateral acceleration, roll angle,
and yaw rate are linearly proportional to the continuous
increase in payload for both tires. Under conditions of full
load, the rates of increase in lateral acceleration, roll angle,
and yaw rate for the high-adhesion-tire are 33%, 95%, and
32%, while those for the low-adhesion-coefficient tires are
16%, 73%, and 11%, respectively, compared to the unladen
case (Fig. 18). Additionally, an increase in payload is more sig-
nificant on the lateral stability behavior of high-adhesion-
capacity tires than for low-adhesion-capacity tires.
Figs. 19 and 20 present the correlation between the front/
rear sideslip angle responses and the corresponding lateral tire
force for the two proposed tire types. The results obtained
from Fig. 19 reveal that there is a slight growth in the front
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability
Fig. 17 Comparison of RCF for variations in the vertical
position of the CG for the high- and low-adhesion-capacity tires.
Fig. 18 RMS relation diagram of lateral acceleration, roll angle,
and yaw rate as functions of cargo condition.
tire’s lateral force, which results in a decrease in the front side-
slip angle due to an increase in vertical load. This means that
the increase in the vertical load positively contributes to
improving the driving trajectory, while the growth of the lat-
eral force provides increased rollover propensity. Otherwise,
the behaviors of the rear sideslip angle and the corresponding
lateral force present a fair proportional relation, although the
rear sideslip angle increases with the payload.
As can be seen from Fig. 21, an increase in the RCF occurs
when the payload increases while other parameters remain
unchanged. This is attributed to the fact that the increase in
the tires’ lateral forces, caused by an increase in payload, is
lower than the increase in vehicle lateral acceleration, which
increases the RCF, according to [46]. A comparison of the roll-
over critical factor responses of both tires with payload varia-
1621
Fig. 19 Correlation analysis of front sideslip angle and lateral
force as functions of cargo condition.
Fig. 20 Correlation analysis of rear sideslip angle and lateral
force as functions of cargo condition.
tions reveals that the RCF of the high-adhesion-capacity tire
markedly increases compared to that of the low-adhesion-
capacity tire. Fig. 21 shows increases of 33% and 11%, respec-
tively, in the RCF of the high- and low-adhesion-coefficient
tires, compared to the unladen condition.
The second major finding is that the RCF of the high-
adhesion-coefficient tire reaches 0.96 under the laden condi-
tion, which indicates that a rollover is imminent. Contrast-
ingly, the RCF of the tire with a low adhesion coefficient
drops to 0.53. This indicates that low-adhesion-capacity tires
decrease rollover risks by ~45%. However, for the low-
adhesion-capacity tires, the sideslip increases, which causes a
decrease in the vehicle’s lateral stability. When the two selected
tires are excited by a Class C road at a vehicle speed of 15 m/s,
with respect to both laden and unladen conditions, the RCF of
the high-adhesion-coefficient tire reaches 0.96 under the laden
condition, indicating that the vehicle’s rollover is imminent.
1622 M.A. Hassan et al.

Fig. 23 RMS conflict response of front sideslip angle and front

Fig. 21 Comparison of RCFs for variation in payload for the lateral force vs. vehicle speed.
high-adhesion-capacity tire.

Unlike the other proposed parameters, the influence of a

vehicle’s speed has a relatively positive effect on its yaw rate
response, as shown in Fig. 22. Of additional note in Fig. 22
is the fact that the lateral acceleration and roll angle responses
increase steadily with the vehicle speed. To evaluate the influ-
ences of vehicle speed and road on the anti-rollover and lateral
stability, the correlations between the front/rear sideslip angle
and the front/rear lateral force of the two proposed tires are
presented in Figs. 23 and 24. The results suggest that the side-
slip angle of the low-adhesion-capacity tire is more sensitive
than that of the high-adhesion-capacity tire, with speed
increases of 27% and 13%, respectively. Fig. 25 compares
the RCFs of the two tire types with a ± 20% change in vehicle
speed, considering the road excitation. The results indicate that
the RCFs of the high-adhesion-coefficient tire are greater than
those of the low-adhesion-coefficient tire. Additionally, the
Fig. 24 RMS conflict response of rear sideslip angle and rear
lateral tire force vs. vehicle speed.

increase in the RCF trend for the high-capacity tire at 18 m/

Fig. 22 Conflict analysis of lateral acceleration, roll angle, and
yaw rate vs. vehicle speed.
s is higher than that for the low-adhesion tire at the same
speed.
Figs. 26–29 show the effects of variation in the front and
rear wheel track width by ±20% of its base model for the
two tires while the other properties remain constant. It is evi-
dent that a decrease in the width of the wheel track decreases
the rollover resistance, thereby causing instability. However,
stability is increased by increasing the wheel track, as it has
a better effect on the vehicle’s propensity for rollover. The
change in wheel track affects rollover stability more than lat-
eral stability, as demonstrated by the roll angle response and
roll stability factors presented in Figs. 26 and 29. Conse-
quently, in risk-avoidance maneuvers, where the natural fre-
quency of vehicle roll is provoked, a wider track width can
enhance both vehicle lateral stability and rollover.
The influence of wheelbase length on lateral stability and
rollover propensity of the two selected tires is also investigated
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability
Fig. 25 Comparison of RCFs for the high-adhesion-capacity tire
with variations in vehicle speed.
Fig. 26 Effects of wheel track variations on lateral acceleration,
yaw rate, and roll angle for the two types of tires.
by varying the wheelbase length from 2.1 to 3.15 m while main-
taining the weight distribution on the front and rear axles. In
Fig. 30, the maximum lateral acceleration, yaw rate, and roll
angles are recorded for a 20% decrease in wheelbase
(wheelbase = 2.1 m) for the higher- and lower-tire-adhesion
coefficients. Note that the change in the wheelbase does not
have a considerable effect on the aforementioned responses,
especially the roll angle response. Fig. 33 shows that a 20%
decrease in wheelbase length slightly increases the RCF, which
effectively indicates a low resistance to vehicle rollover with a
reduction in wheelbase. However, the wheelbase is shown to
have a significant effect on the sideslip angles of the front
and rear tires, particularly for the low-adhesion-coefficient tire,
as shown in Figs. 31 and 32.
1623
Fig. 27 Conflict analysis of front sideslip angle and lateral tire
force with variations in wheel track width for the high-adhesion-
capacity tire.
Fig. 28 Conflict analysis of rear sideslip angle and lateral tire
force with variations in wheel track width for the high-adhesion-
capacity tire.
4. Parametric sensitivity analysis of roll and lateral stability
against tire properties
This section analyzes the roll and lateral stability of the two
types of tires in terms of lateral acceleration, roll angle, yaw
rate, and front/rear tire sideslip angle responses against varia-
tions in key vehicle design parameters and operational factors.
These parameters include the vertical and longitudinal location
of the CG, wheelbase length, wheel track, vehicle speed, and
payload. The sensitivity simulations are conducted at a driving
speed of 15 m/s, and a random Class C road excitation is
applied. The simulations confirm the sensitivity of the rollover
and lateral stability of both the high- and low-adhesion-
capacity tires with respect to variations in vehicle design and
operational parameters. In Figs. 33–36, the black-framed bars
1624
Fig. 29 Comparison of RCFs for variations in wheel track width
for the high-adhesion-capacity tire.
Fig. 30 Conflict analysis of lateral acceleration, roll angle, and
yaw rate with variations in wheelbase length for the high-
adhesion-capacity tire.
show the percentage change for the high-adhesion-capacity
tire, while the red-framed bars represent the same change for
the low-adhesion-capacity tire.
The sensitivity changes in lateral acceleration vs. critical
vehicle design and operational parameters for both tire types
are summarized in Fig. 34. It is evident that lateral acceleration
is more sensitive to variations in payload and CG location
than other factors. Furthermore, there is a strong correlation
between the sensitivity change in lateral acceleration with an
increase in payload for the high-adhesion-capacity tire, unlike
the low-adhesion-capacity tire. The sensitivity change in the
lateral acceleration of the high-adhesion-capacity tire is twice
that of the low-adhesion-capacity tire. However, when the
CG’s location is subjected to a 15% shift toward the rear axle,
the sensitivity changes in the lateral acceleration of the high-
M.A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 31 Conflict analysis of front sideslip angle and front lateral
force with variations in wheelbase length for the high-adhesion-
capacity tire.
Fig. 32 Conflict analysis of rear sideslip angle and rear lateral
force with variations in wheelbase length for the high-adhesion-
capacity tire.
and low-adhesion-coefficient tires increase by 3.8% and
16%, respectively, relative to the lateral acceleration resulting
from the nominal model parameters. A 15% shift in the CG
toward the front axle decreases the lateral acceleration for
the high- and low-adhesion tires by 2% and 6%, respectively.
Fig. 32 reveals that vehicle mass and load distribution on the
front and rear axles are strongly related to vehicular stability.
Furthermore, vehicle handling is strongly influenced by tire
adhesion characteristics.
Fig. 35 concludes the sensitivity simulation results of the
roll angle response vs. ±15% variations in vehicle parameters,
including the vertical and longitudinal positions of the CG,
wheel track, wheelbase, payload, and vehicle speed. For both
high- and low-adhesion-coefficient tires, the variations in these
parameters reveal a significant change in roll angle. With pay-
load variations, these two tires demonstrate the largest change
in roll angles at 96% and 74%, respectively. A 15% increase in
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability
Fig. 33 Comparison of RCFs for variations in wheelbase length
for the high-adhesion-capacity tire.
Fig. 34 Lateral acceleration sensitivity versus vehicle parameters
for two types of the tire.
CG height corresponds to a 34% increase in roll angle for both
types of tires, compared to their original values. Conversely, a
wheel track width increase from 1.45 to 1.75 m translates to
~26% decrease in roll angle. There is no significant alteration
in the roll angle response for a 15% variation in wheelbase
and CG longitudinal position. The most interesting aspect of
this graph is the influence of decreasing track width, as it cor-
relates with a gradual increase in rollover stability. The same
effect on rollover stability is noted for increases in both pay-
load and CG height, especially for the high-adhesion-
capacity tire.
In Fig. 36, the sensitivity change in the yaw rate response
for ±15% variations in the base model parameters is pre-
sented. Manipulating the longitudinal position of the CG pro-
duces the highest sensitivity with respect to the yaw rate,
followed by the payload and vehicle speed, respectively.
Fig. 36 illustrates that the vehicle yaw rates related to low-
adhesion-capacity tires (red-framed bars) demonstrate an obvi-
1625
Fig. 35 Roll angle sensitivity vs. vehicle parameters for the two
types of tires.
Fig. 36 Yaw rate sensitivity vs. vehicle parameters for the two
types of tires.
ous ascending trend with respect to a 15% increase in the dis-
tance between CG location and the front axle. This suggests
yaw instability, which is confirmed by the significant difference
in yaw response rates, at 127% for the low-adhesion-
coefficient tire and 4.9% for the high-adhesion-coefficient tire.
When CG is located closer to the front axle, the low-tire-
adhesion capacity still exhibits higher sensitivity to the yaw
rate compared to the high-tire-adhesion capacity. However,
at ~9.3%, the response rate is significantly low for the high-
tire-adhesion capacity, which enhances the vehicle’s lateral sta-
bility. Conversely, the yaw rate can be similarly increased by
variations in payload and vehicle speed but not to the same
extent as that obtained by varying the CG longitudinal loca-
tions, as concluded in Fig. 36. On the contrary, the maximum
yaw rate can be increased by decreasing the vehicle speed and
wheelbase length.
Fig. 37a and 37b summarize sensitivity change in the front/
rear sideslip angle for both the high- and low-adhesion-
1626
(a)
Fig. 37 Front/Rear sideslip angles sensitivity vs. vehicle parameters for the two types of tires.
coefficient tires. The change in the front–rear sideslip angles is
extremely sensitive to the longitudinal position of the vehicle’s
CG. Moving the CG closer to the rear axle increases the weight
percentage on the rear tires; thus, the distribution of the lateral
tire force is also changed, being less than that of the change in
the weight, owing to the nonlinearity of tire characteristics.
Consequently, there is a shift in the resultant lateral force rear-
ward away from the CG. This leads to oversteer, as depicted in
Fig. 37b. Conversely, understeer is produced by an increase in
the weight percentage on the front tires [47]. The bar chart in
Fig. 36 shows that the sensitivity change of the rear sideslip
angles of the low-adhesion-capacity tires is higher than that
of the high-adhesion-capacity tires. Because of the lateral tire
force produced by the high-adhesion tire, the rear sideslip
angle is more sensitive to load variations than the low-
adhesion tire. The sideslip angles for both the front and rear
tires are highly influenced by the variation in the vehicle’s
speed; however, the influence is not as significant as that pro-
duced by variations in CG location. Furthermore, the tire side-
slip angle is more sensitive to load distribution than that to
payload.
5. Conclusions
In this study, we conducted extensive parametric, conflict, and
sensitivity analyses of vehicular rollover, handling, and stabil-
ity performances, which included lateral acceleration, roll
angle, yaw rate, sideslip angle of the front and rear tires, and
the corresponding lateral tire forces. The parametric analyses
considered variations in CG position, loading condition,
wheelbase, wheel track, and vehicle speed. The simulations
considered two types of car tires with high and low adhesion
capacities. The simulations used a 7-DOF full-car model and
a 2-DOF planar two-track model with nonlinear Pacejka’s
MTF considering Fishhook maneuvering and random road
profiles. The following conclusions are drawn from the results.
1. Vehicular lateral stability and rollover propensity are
highly sensitive to both vehicle design parameters and oper-
ational driving factors. The sensitivity of lateral stability
M.A. Hassan et al.
(b)
and rollover propensity against the vehicle design and driv-
ing factors is strongly correlated with tire characteristics.
2. Tire properties have an opposing effect on lateral stability
and rollover propensity, as follows:
a. The sensitivity change in the lateral acceleration and
roll angle of the high-adhesion-capacity tire corre-
lates strongly with an increase in payload; however,
in the low-adhesion-capacity tire, the risk of rollover
is increased.
b. The two types of tires have different influences on
lateral stability and rollover propensity. For exam-
ple, lateral stability is reduced by the low-adhesion-
capacity tire but increased by the high-adhesion-
capacity tire. These effects are attributed to the fact
that high-adhesion-capacity tires are more sensitive
to load variations than low-adhesion-capacity tires.
c. The front/rear sideslip angles are extremely sensitive
to the longitudinal position of a vehicle’s CG com-
pared to the other parameters. A shift in the CG
either forward or backward alters the distribution
of the vertical forces at the front and rear tires. Con-
sequently, when the CG moves toward the rear, the
lateral tire forces are altered, which leads to over-
steer. Conversely, understeer is created when a for-
ward shift of the lateral force increases the weight
percentage on the front tires.
3. Note that the adhesion coefficient of a car tire influences the
critical factors of vehicle rollover; this effect is increased by
altering the vehicle design and driving parameters. Thus, it
is important to choose a suitable tire that is compatible with
the adhesion coefficient and the vehicle design parameters,
to ensure good stability of rollover and handling.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Advanced study of tire characteristics and their influence on vehicle lateral stability
Acknowledgments
Great acknowledgments are given to Hubei Key Laboratory of
Advanced Technology for Automotive Components (Wuhan
University of Technology), Wuhan 430070, China and Hubei
Collaborative Innovation Center for Automotive Components
Technology, Wuhan 430070, China. The authors would also
acknowledge the funding by the Science and Technology
Innovation Project of the Ministry of Public Security.
References
[1] M.A. Abdelkareem, M.M. Makrahy, A.M. Abd-El-Tawwab, A.
EL-Razaz, M. Kamal Ahmed Ali, M. Moheyeldein, An
analytical study of the performance indices of articulated truck
semi-trailer during three different cases to improve the driver
comfort, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. K: J. Multi-body Dyn.
2018;232:84–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464419317709895.
[2] M.A.A. Abdelkareem, L. Xu, X. Guo, M.K.A. Ali, A. Elagouz,
M.A. Hassan, et al, Energy harvesting sensitivity analysis and
assessment of the potential power and full car dynamics for
different road modes, Mech Syst Sig Process. 110 (2018) 307–
332, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2018.03.009.
[3] R.S. Sharp, Fundamentals of the lateral dynamics of road
vehicles, Springer, Mechanics for a New Mellennium, 2001, pp.
127–146.
[4] R. Rajamani, Lateral vehicle dynamics, Springer, Vehicle
Dynamics and control, 2012, pp. 15–46.
[5] J. Zou, X. Guo, M.A.A. Abdelkareem, L. Xu, J. Zhang,
Modelling and ride analysis of a hydraulic interconnected
suspension based on the hydraulic energy regenerative shock
absorbers, Mech Syst Sig Process. 127 (2019) 345–369, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.02.047.
[6] M.A.A. Abdelkareem, A.B.M. Eldaly, M. Kamal Ahmed Ali, I.
M. Youssef, Xu.L. Monte, Carlo sensitivity analysis of vehicle
suspension energy harvesting in frequency domain, J. Adv. Res.
24 (2020) 53–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2020.02.012.
[7] Zheng B, Huang X, Zhang W, Zhao R, Zhu S. Adhesion
Characteristics of Tire-Asphalt Pavement Interface Based on a
Proposed Tire Hydroplaning Model. Advances in Materials
Science and Engineering. 2018;2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/
2018/5916180.
[8] Allen RW, Myers TT, Rosenthal TJ, Klyde DH. The effect of
tire characteristics on vehicle handling and stability. 2000.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2000-01-0698.
[9] Smith ND. Understanding parameters influencing tire modeling.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State
University. 2004.
[10] C-s Liu, Adhesion coefficient of automobile tire and road
surface, J Central South Univ. Technol. 15 (2008) 210–214,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-008-0348-5.
[11] Y. Oh, H. Lee, Characteristics of a tire friction and
performances of a braking in a high speed driving, Adv.
Mech. Eng. 6 (2014) 260428, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/
260428.
[12] Y.-Q. Zhao, H.-Q. Li, F. Lin, J. Wang, X.-W. Ji, Estimation of
road friction coefficient in different road conditions based on
vehicle braking dynamics, Chinese J. Mech. Eng. 30 (2017) 982–
990, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10033-017-0143-z.
[13] B.N. Persson, U. Tartaglino, O. Albohr, E. Tosatti, Rubber
friction on wet and dry road surfaces: the sealing effect, Phys.
Rev. B. 71 (2005) 035428, https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevB.71.035428.
[14] Wielenga TJ. Tire properties affecting vehicle rollover; 1999.
https://doi.org/10.4271/1999-01-0126.
1627
[15] G.-M. Dong, N. Zhang, H.-P. Du, Investigation into untripped
rollover of light vehicles in the modified fishhook and the sine
manoeuvres, part II: effects of vehicle inertia property,
suspension and tyre characteristics, Veh Syst Dyn 49 (2011)
949–968, https://doi.org/10.1080/00423110701344752.
[16] Shim T, Velusamy PC. Influence of suspension properties on
vehicle roll stability. 2006. https://doi.org/10.4271/2006-01-1950.
[17] Whitehead R, Travis W, Bevly DM, Flowers G. A study of the
effect of various vehicle properties on rollover propensity. 2004.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2004-01-2094.
[18] Marimuthu RP, Jang B-C, Hong SJ. A study on SUV
parameters sensitivity on rollover propensity. 2006. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2006-01-0795.
[19] Y. Chen, A.W. Peterson, C. Zhang, M. Ahmadian, A
simulation-based comparative study on lateral characteristics
of trucks with double and triple trailers, Int J Veh Saf 11 (2019)
136–157, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVS.2019.101857.
[20] L.O. Garcı́a, F.R. Wilson, J.D. Innes, Heavy truck dynamic
rollover: effect of load distribution, cargo type, and road design
characteristics, Transport. Res. Rec. 1851 (2003) 25–31, https://
doi.org/10.3141/1851-03.
[21] El-Gindy M, Kenis W. Influence of a Trailer’s Axle
Arrangement and Loads on the Stability and Control of a
Tractor/semitrailer; 1998.
[22] Hac A. Rollover Stability Index Including Effects of Suspension
Design; 2002. https://doi.org/10.4271/2002-01-0965.
[23] Hac A. Influence of chassis characteristics on sustained roll,
heave and yaw oscillations in dynamic rollover testing. 2005.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2005-01-0398.
[24] L. Wang, N. Zhang, H. Du, Experimental investigation of a
hydraulically interconnected suspension in vehicle dynamics and
stability control, SAE Int. J. Passenger Cars-Mech Syst. 5 (2012)
759–768, https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-0240.
[25] Qi H, Zhang B, Zhang N, Zheng M, Chen Y. Enhanced lateral
and roll stability study for a two-axle bus via hydraulically
interconnected suspension tuning. SAE International Journal of
Vehicle Dynamics, Stability, and NVH. 2018;3. https://doi.org/
10.4271/10-03-01-0001.
[26] W.A. Smith, N. Zhang, W. Hu, Hydraulically interconnected
vehicle suspension: handling performance, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 49
(2011) 87–106, https://doi.org/10.1080/00423111003596743.
[27] Mi J, Xu L, Guo S, Abdelkareem MAA, Meng L, Zuo L. The
Dimension Match and Parameters Setting of the Hydraulic Motor
for the Hydraulic-Electromagnetic Energy-Regenerative Shock
Absorber; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-68093.
[28] J. Zou, X. Guo, L. Xu, M.A.A. Abdelkareem, B. Gong, J.
Zhang, et al. Simulation Research of a Hydraulic Interconnected
Suspension Based on a Hydraulic Energy Regenerative Shock
Absorber. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0582.
[29] F.A. Barbieri, V. de Almeida Lima, L. Garbin, J. Boaretto,
Rollover study of a heavy truck combination with two different
semi-trailer suspension configurations. 2014. https://doi.org/10.
4271/2014-36-0025.
[30] D.L. White, Parametric study of leveling system characteristics
on roll stability of trailing arm air suspension for heavy trucks,
2000. https://doi.org/10.4271/2000-01-3480.
[31] Z.-F. Wang, M.-M. Dong, L. Gu, J.-J. Rath, Y.-C. Qin, B. Bai,
Influence of road excitation and steering wheel input on vehicle
system dynamic responses, Appl. Sci. 7 (2017) 570, https://doi.
org/10.3390/app7060570.
[32] Y. Li, W. Sun, J. Huang, L. Zheng, Y. Wang, Effect of vertical
and lateral coupling between tyre and road on vehicle rollover,
Veh. Syst. Dyn. 51 (2013) 1216–1241, https://doi.org/10.1080/
00423114.2013.791395.
[33] Baumann FW, Eckstein L. Effects causing untripped rollover of
light passenger vehicles in evasive maneuvers. 2004. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2004-01-1057.
1628
[34] D. Joshi, S. Kedia, S. Muthiah, A study on the effect of steering
input frequency on transient lateral dynamics of four-wheeled
passenger vehicles. 2019. https://doi.org/10.4271/2019-26-0070.
[35] E. Bakker, Pacejka H.B., L. Lidner, A new tire model with an
application in vehicle dynamics studies, 1989. https://doi.org/10.
4271/890087.
[36] C-y Lu, M-c Shih, An experimental study on the longitudinal
and lateral adhesive coefficients between the tyre and the road
for a light motorcycle, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 43 (2005) 168–178,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00423110500140708.
[37] Y. Sabry, M. Aly, W. Oraby, S. El-demerdash, Fuzzy control of
autonomous intelligent vehicles for collision avoidance using
integrated dynamics, SAE Int. J. Passenger Cars-Mech. Syst. 11
(2018) 5–21, https://doi.org/10.4271/06-11-01-0001.
[38] U. Lath, S. Kakkar, A. Agarwal, B. Ashok, V.R. Babu, S.D.
Ashok, et al., Modelling and Validation of a Control Algorithm
for Yaw Stability & Body Slip Control Using PID & Fuzzy
Logic Based Controllers, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4271/2019-28-
0054.
[39] J. Mi, L. Xu, S. Guo, M.A.A. Abdelkareem, L. Meng,
Suspension Performance and Energy Harvesting Property
Study of a Novel Railway Vehicle Bogie with The Hydraulic-
Electromagnetic Energy-Regenerative Shock Absorber. SAE
paper 2017-01-1483, 2017. https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-
1483.
[40] M.A. Abdelkareem, M.M. Kaldas, M. Kamal Ahmed Ali, L.
Xu, Analysis of the energy harvesting potential–based
suspension for truck semi-trailer, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part
D J. Automob. Eng. 233 (2019) 2955–2969, https://doi.org/
10.1177/0954407018812276.
M.A. Hassan et al.
[41] M.A. Abdelkareem, L. Xu, J. Zou, M.K.A. Ali, F. Essa, A.
Elagouz, et al., Energy-harvesting potential and vehicle
dynamics conflict analysis under harmonic and random road
excitations, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0568.
[42] M.A. Abdelkareem, L. Xu, M.K.A. Ali, M.A. Hassan, A.
Elagouz, J. Zou, On-field measurements of the dissipated
vibrational power of an SUV car traditional viscous shock
absorber, ASME 2018 International Design Engineering
Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in
Engineering Conference, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1115/
DETC2018-85148.
[43] M.A.A. Abdelkareem, L. Xu, M.K.A. Ali, A.-R.B.M. El-Daly,
M.A. Hassan, A. Elagouz, et al, Analysis of the prospective
vibrational energy harvesting of heavy-duty truck suspensions: a
simulation approach, Energy 173 (2019) 332–351, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.02.060.
[44] X-w Chen, Y. Zhou, Modelling and analysis of automobile
vibration system based on fuzzy theory under different road
excitation information, Complexity (2018), https://doi.org/
10.1155/2018/2381568.
[45] R.V. Dukkipati, J. Pang, M.S. Qatu, G. Sheng, Z. Shuguang,
Road Vehicle Dynamics: SAE International, 2008.
[46] N. Zhang, G.-M. Dong, H.-P. Du, Investigation into untripped
rollover of light vehicles in the modified fishhook and the sine
maneuvers. Part I: Vehicle modelling, roll and yaw instability,
Veh. Syst. Dyn. 46 (2008) 271–293, https://doi.org/10.1080/
00423110701344752.
[47] W. Bergman, The Basic Nature of Vehicle Understeer-
Oversteer, 1965. https://doi.org/10.4271/650085.