Yes, "inflation stiffness" is greater.
When you push down on an uninflated wheel and tire, it won't even support your body weight-- you can neglect the stiffness of the rubber in determining the area of the contact patch, so--
F (load on the tire) = P (tire pressure) x A (contact patch area)
Let's try some numbers. A 195 wide tire is 195 /25.4 = 7.68 inches wide at the tread. The load on one tire is about 900 pounds. At 40 psi, the area of the contact patch is--
A = 900 lb /40 psi = 22.5 square inches.
Divide that by the tread width to get the other dimension--
22.5 /7.68 = 2.93 inches long.
To make 2.93 inches of curve flat on a 25 inch diameter tire, you have to deflect the center of it by 0.11 inches.
The harder it is to get the tread surface to move in that amount, the more energy the car loses as it rolls. That means soft rubber is better, and a thin tire is better. "Low friction" rubber and tire construction is also better, and that's what you are paying for in an "energy tire."
Ernie Rogers
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
The offs of a blowout while inflating are quite low (unless you've got a old crappy tire).... It's more of a blowout when you hit a pothole. In any case, the max pressure is based off of a minimum factor of safety.
So I did a quick search... and found a patent for bias ply tires... It makes a reference that says the steel cord safety factor should range between 4 and 11, 7 being a target. Now that's not directly related to inflation pressure - but should be related to hoop stress (P*D/2).... Again, this isn't really an equivalent - and I don't know if the mentioned factor of safety applies to traditional radially belted tires... Really, I doubt I'll find the actual number anywhere as it's probably trade secret.
----
So that makes sense and all...
However, (just thinking intuitively now) - shouldn't we be comparing the deflection delta? That is, a shorter (and stiffer) sidewall doesn't deflect as far when conforming to the road (stiff/bumpy ride) as compared to a larger sidewall with a lower k value...
I am also thinking of a case of a tire with wheel run out (out of round). So we basically have a tire in the shape of an ellipse (a very minute one though). The areas with the shorter sidewall will have more stiffness and translate that into the the vehicle suspension - as compared to the higher sidewall. So that, combined with the assumption that the normal force is constant leads me to the difference in taller versus shorter sidewall is the k. Thus the deflection for the stiffer (shorter sidewall) should be less than the taller sidewall...
So that paragraph above would mean that sidewall stiffness AND inflation pressure are variables that determine contact patch size (something tells me stiffness from the tire is much less than inflation stiffness)
Of course, this could be *** backwards - and x is constant and the force changes (although, intuitively - that seems wrong or I am missing a key point).
In any case, it doesn't matter for me either way. I have no intention to get a shorter sidewall I just like this sort of discussion
|