Modeling of Tyre Parameters` Influence on Transport Productivity for

Modeling of Tyre Parameters` Influence on Transport Productivity for
good
Modeling of Tyre Parameters’ Influence on
Transport Productivity for Heavy Trucks
Master’s Thesis in Automotive engineering
ZIBO CHEN
SHARAN PRATHABAN
Department of Applied mechanics
Division of Automotive engineering
Vehicle dynamics group
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Gothenburg, Sweden, 2013
Report No. 2013:67
Master’s Thesis in Automotive engineering
Modeling of Tyre Parameters’ Influence on
Transport Productivity for Heavy Trucks
ZIBO CHEN
SHARAN PRATHABAN
Department of Applied mechanics
Division of Automotive engineering
Vehicle dynamics group
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Gothenburg, Sweden, 2013
Modeling of Tyre Parameters’ Influence on Transport Productivity for Heavy Trucks
ZIBO CHEN
SHARAN PRATHABAN
© ZIBO CHEN, SHARAN PRATHABAN, 2013
Master’s Thesis 2013:67
ISSN 1652-8557
Department of Applied Mechanics
Division of Automotive Engineering
Vehicle Dynamics group
Chalmers University of Technology
SE-412 96 Göteborg
Sweden
Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000
Modeling of Tyre Parameters’ Influence on Transport Productivity for Heavy Trucks
Master’s Thesis in the Automotive Engineering
ZIBO CHEN
SHARAN PRATHABAN
Department of Applied Mechanics
Division of Automotive Engineering
Vehicle Dynamics group
Chalmers University of Technology
ABSTRACT
Today in Volvo Group Trucks Technology, in order to increase the accuracy and reliability of tyre
selection, as well as to minimize the rolling resistance to lower the cost of operation, a PhD project
‘TyreOpt – Fuel consumption reduction by tyre drag optimization’ was started in 2012. As the phase one
of this project, this master thesis was to construct a simple but accurate enough model to calculate the cost
of operation for heavy trucks, specifically, fuel cost and tyre cost.
With the help of Matlab and Simulink, a mathematical model was built and it enables to select the best
suitable tyre for a particular vehicle specification and operating environment. Besides, it can also
preliminary demonstrate the relationship between each of the tyre parameters and cost of operation.
In order to ensure that other tyre dependent features are still on acceptable levels for specific vehicle and
operating environment, three constraints equations were also conducted as a supplement to the model.
They are startability, handling and ride comfort models, representing three basic vehicle dynamics in
three directions.
Finally, a Simulink model was built to model fuel cost and tyre wear, and constraints equations were also
created for basic dynamics performance. But future work is needed to improve the result accuracy due to
the models are simplified.
Key words:
TyreOpt, tyre selection, fuel cost, tyre wear, cost of operation, startability, handling, ride comfort
I
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................... I
CONTENTS ..................................................................................................................................................... II
PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................................ V
NOTATIONS ................................................................................................................................................. VII
1.
2.
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Background ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Aim ................................................................................................................................................ 1
1.3
Delimitation .................................................................................................................................. 3
Information review ............................................................................................................................... 4
2.1
Tyre ............................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2
RRC surrogate model .................................................................................................................... 5
2.3
Fuel cost ........................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.1
Transport mission (Gross vehicle weight) ............................................................................. 8
2.3.2
Vehicle utilization (Operating cycle) ..................................................................................... 9
2.3.3
Operating environment (Topography) .................................................................................. 9
2.3.4
Tyre ....................................................................................................................................... 9
2.3.5
Vehicle ................................................................................................................................. 10
2.4
2.4.1
The Schallamach Approach ................................................................................................. 11
2.4.2
The Kraghelsky & Nepomnyashchi Approach ..................................................................... 11
2.4.3
The Bulgin & Walters Approach .......................................................................................... 12
2.5
3.
Constraints equations ................................................................................................................. 13
2.5.1
Startability ........................................................................................................................... 13
2.5.2
Handling .............................................................................................................................. 14
2.5.3
Ride comfort ....................................................................................................................... 14
Methodology....................................................................................................................................... 16
3.1
Objectives definition ................................................................................................................... 16
3.1.1
Truck definition ................................................................................................................... 17
3.1.2
Road definition .................................................................................................................... 17
3.1.3
Tyre definition ..................................................................................................................... 18
3.2
II
Tyre Wear.................................................................................................................................... 10
Fuel consumption ....................................................................................................................... 18
3.2.1
Vehicle block ....................................................................................................................... 18
3.2.2
Gearbox block ..................................................................................................................... 20
3.2.3
Engine & Fuel tank blocks ................................................................................................... 21
3.3
3.3.1
Calculation principle............................................................................................................ 21
3.3.2
Assumptions and limitations ............................................................................................... 23
3.4
4.
Constraints equations ................................................................................................................. 24
3.4.1
Startability ........................................................................................................................... 24
3.4.2
Handling .............................................................................................................................. 24
3.4.3
Ride comfort ....................................................................................................................... 25
Model validation ................................................................................................................................. 27
4.1
Validation of cost response to tyre type variation ..................................................................... 27
4.2
Tyre types .................................................................................................................................... 28
4.3
Tyre parameters .......................................................................................................................... 29
4.3.1
Weight of load..................................................................................................................... 30
4.3.2
Speed................................................................................................................................... 31
4.3.3
Tyre inflation pressure ........................................................................................................ 32
4.3.4
Tyre diameter ...................................................................................................................... 33
4.3.5
Tyre width ........................................................................................................................... 33
4.3.6
Tyre groove depth ............................................................................................................... 34
4.4
5.
Tyre wear .................................................................................................................................... 21
Other parameters ....................................................................................................................... 35
4.4.1
Truck wheelbase ................................................................................................................. 35
4.4.2
Road height ......................................................................................................................... 36
Conclusion & Future work .................................................................................................................. 37
5.1
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 37
5.2
Future work ................................................................................................................................. 37
6.
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................ 39
7.
Appendices .......................................................................................................................................... 41
7.1
Appendix A Models for main objectives and constraints equations ........................................ 41
7.1.1
Fuel cost and tyre wear models .......................................................................................... 41
7.1.2
Models for constraints equations ....................................................................................... 42
7.2
Appendix B Road profiles .......................................................................................................... 46
III
IV
PREFACE
A dynamically excellent truck which is expensive to run is basically like a white elephant, it is not going
to bring the necessary revenue to any company which develops it. Therefore it is essential to strike a
good balance between the dynamic abilities of the truck and its running cost. The running cost of the
truck can be broken down into the two key aspects which are the fuel cost and the tyre cost. This report
focuses on developing a simple but complete model to help select the right tyre for the right job, i.e. to
select the right tyre which offers the lowest fuel cost and tyre wear while being able to fulfill the
dynamic requirements of the given task.
This thesis is a part of the ‘TyreOpt’ project being run at Volvo GTT. The project is funded by Swedish
Energy Agency, and its main aim being to develop a method to select the right tyre for the given task
rather than just pick it based on the information supplied by the tyre manufacturer. The thesis is done in
collaboration with the Vehicle Dynamics group at Chalmers University of Technology under the guidance
of Prof. Bengt Jacobson. The thesis is also guided by project manager Dr. Peter Lindroth of Volvo GTT
and Zuzana Šabartová, a PhD student at Chalmers University of Technology. Zuzana Šabartová is working
with the PhD Project titled ‘TyreOpt – Fuel consumption reduction by tyre drag optimization’ and the
work done in this thesis will be carried forward by her during the course of her PhD.
This thesis was conducted between February 2013 and October 2013 as a requirement for the master
program titled ‘Masters of Science in Automotive Engineering’. During the course of this thesis we were
guided by numerous individuals from both Volvo GTT and Chalmers University of Technology, apart from
the aforementioned guides. This supervision is highly appreciated as it helped greatly to ensure the
work was on the right track and of high quality.
V
VI
NOTATIONS
Abbreviations
Volvo GTT
Volvo Group Trucks Technology
GTA
Global Transport Application
RRC
Rolling resistance coefficient
GVW
Gross vehicle weight
FEA
Finite Element Analysis
UOIT
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
VTM
Virtual transport model
CVM
Complete vehicle model
FEM
Finite element method
RMS
Root mean square
QSS
QuasiStatic Simulation
SEK
Swedish krona
Roman upper case letters
[N], Rolling resistance force
[N], Vertical (normal) force at the tyre-ground contact patch
[N], Gradient resistance
[Nm], Torque on the rear wheel
[m/s2], Calculated acceleration from the speed information of the road
[m/s], Maximum limited Speed on the road
[N], Rolling resistance forces on front tyres
[N], Rolling resistance forces on rear tyres
[N], Front normal force of the truck
[N], Rear normal force of the truck
VII
[N], Aerodynamics driving force
[-], Aerodynamics coefficient
[kg/m3], Air density
[m2], Truck frontal area
[N], Total longitudinal force on front axle
[N], Total longitudinal force on rear axle
[N/rad], Cornering stiffness on front axle
[N/rad], Cornering stiffness on rear axle
[Nm], Torque of the gearbox
[N], Torque of the internal combustion engine
[ ], Ambient temperature
[mm/m], Wear rate
[ ], Tyre surface temperature
[g], Total volume of wear debris produced
[N], Total normal load
[-], Hardness of the softest contacting surfaces
[-], Dimensionless contact
[m], Sliding distance
[Nm], Maximum engine torque from the engine map
[1/N], Understeer tyre gradient
[m], Distance between front axle and center of gravity of the truck
[m], Distance between rear axle and center of gravity of the truck
Fi0
[Hz], Road frequency
[SEK], Total cost of operation
[SEK], Fuel price
VIII
[SEK], Tyre price
Roman lower case letters
[-], Coefficient of rolling resistance
[rad], Combined slip on front wheel
[rad], Combined slip on rear wheel
[m/s2], Acceleration on the rear wheel
[-], Rolling resistance coefficient on front wheel
[-], Rolling resistance coefficient on rear wheel
[-], Constant rolling resistance coefficient on front wheel used in startability
[-], Constant rolling resistance coefficient on front wheel used in startability
[rad], Road inclination
[rad], Front tyre slip in longitudinal direction
[rad], Rear tyre slip in longitudinal direction
[rad], Front tyre slip in lateral direction
[rad], Rear tyre slip in lateral direction
[rad], Toe angle in front axle
[rad], Toe angle in rear axle
[-], Gear ratio upshifting vector
[-], Gear ratio downshift vector
[rpm], Rotational speed vector of the engine
[-], Gear ratio vector
[-], Ratio of the final gear
[m/s2], Acceleration of the gearbox
[mg], Fuel consumption with an unit of ‘mg’
[N/m], Wheel stiffness
IX
[mm], Abradibility
[-], A material constant taken to be independent of temperature
[ ], Reference temperature
[mm], Spacing between abrasion patterns
[m], Radius of wheel rim
[mm/m], Front tyre wear rate
[-], Number of tyres on front axle
[-], Number of tyres on rear axle
Greek lower case letters
[rpm], Rotational speed on rear wheel
[rpm], Rotational speed of the gearbox
[rpm], Rotational speed of the engine
[rad], Maximum slope for startability calculation
[rad], slip angle
[N/m], Resilience of the wheel
[-], Temperature coefficient
[-], Hysteresis coefficient
[-], Correction coefficient
P
[psi], Standard tyre pressure
[-], Maximum friction coefficient
X
1. Introduction
1.1
Background
The transportation industry is increasingly characterized by specialization and customization. Volvo
Group Trucks Technology (Volvo GTT) therefore created a platform called ‘Global Transport Application’
(GTA) to have a common design language across different companies within Volvo Group and eventually
to choose ‘the right vehicle for the mission’. GTA defines a number of parameters that specify
differences in driving and transport conditions for vehicle operations worldwide [1]. It helps to establish
the optimum vehicle specification including selection of tyres in a more systematic way while fulfilling
customer needs and lowering costs.
Currently at Volvo GTT, the selection of tyres is done by a methodology which greatly involves the
information supplied by the tyre manufacturers. The required information is requested by Volvo GTT
and provided by the tyre manufacturers. This does not offer complete control to Volvo GTT in helping
the customer pick the right tyre as the accuracy of the data provided by the manufacturer is uncertain.
Therefore a PhD project ’TyreOpt – Fuel consumption reduction by tyre drag optimization’ was started
in 2012. This master thesis is a part of the project and its main aim is to build models needed to pick the
best tyre for the assigned conditions.
1.2
Aim
The aim of this thesis is to produce a model which can be used for optimization of tyre design and
optimization of tyre selection. The model shall be simple enough to execute fast, but complete enough
to cover all relevant objectives, i.e. costs and constraints. Specifically, the model shall reflect the
influence of tyre design and selection on the cost of operation. And the cost of operation has two main
components, which are fuel cost and tyre wear cost.
This principle can be expressed into a mathematical formula as shown in equation 1:
(
Where
)
(
)
(
represents the tyre and
)
(1)
represents the vehicle and the operating environment. Therefore,
it can be understood that once the tyre is selected and the vehicle and operating environment is
specified, the result of
(
) as well as
(
) can be calculated, and the sum of these
factors is the tyre running cost of operation, which is aimed to be minimized as much as possible.
This function is subject to three constraints equations which limit the arguments of
(
) to a
reasonable range and as well fulfill all vehicle dynamics requirement. More specifically,
1
(
)
(2)
(
(
)
)
(3)
(4)
These formulas representing three constraints in three directions, they can be calculated as a
supplement from the main mathematical formula equation (1) above and the result will be compared in
the later phase of the project with some existing models in Volvo to check the accuracy and reliability.
The fuel cost can be predicted by using a mathematical function of various parameters like rolling
resistance coefficient (RRC), gross vehicle weight (GVW), operating cycle, topography, vehicle properties,
tyre properties, etc. [2]. In this thesis, a RRC surrogate model is adopted to help to calculate rolling
resistance coefficient (describe in details in section 2.2). Overall, the fuel cost calculation can be
achieved by a Simulink model using reverse vehicle dynamics which will directly estimate the fuel
consumption [2].
The tyre wear is quite complex to predict accurately but there have been various papers written by
people over the years that give a good overview of the same [3] [4] [5]. Using these papers and other
resources available at Volvo GTT a prediction of tyre wear can be obtained. The factors affecting tyre
wear are mainly the slip angle, tyre stiffness, damping, road conditions, operating cycle; tread surface
temperature, ambient temperature, etc. [6]. From these various parameters a simple enough model
needs to be developed which uses the least parameters possible.
Besides, in order to ensure the optimum tyre is selected for specific driving environment and vehicle
specification, it needs to satisfy various requirements under different circumstances. This is done by
constraining the overall model to three very important parts of vehicle dynamics i.e. longitudinal, lateral
and vertical dynamics. These are basically equations for startability, handling and ride comfort which will
ensure that the vehicle can handle the task assigned to it. The reason for selecting these constraints is to
simplify the overall model which can be evaluated in a reasonable time and they represent important
boundaries such that the optimal solution will be acceptable. This simple model will be used in the next
phase of the project where optimization algorithms requiring many evaluations of model will be
implemented.
2
1.3
Delimitation
As the phase one of the ‘TyreOpt’ program, this thesis work is to create a simple model involving some
basic tyre parameters to calculate fuel consumption and tyre wear. The reason for simplification is since
the optimization will require a large number of simulations and there are many different customers with
different vehicles and operating environments, leading many unique problems needed to be solved.
Hence the accuracy level of the result is not high mainly due to:
(1) For the particular selection of vehicle and roads, not all the correct values can be obtained so some
assumptions of the input data have to be made;
(2) A simplified model leads to some important input variables or relationships are missing.
For example,

Only one truck is used and some components of it are not modeled precisely, like the engine
map does not fit the engine adopted in this thesis, it obviously affects the fuel consumption
prediction. In principle the result can still be accurate by increasing the input values accuracy.

Two different sample roads are used, but data for fuel cost calculation and ride comfort model
are obtained from different roads. So the result accuracy can also be raised by improving the
road specification.

Only three tyres are selected in this thesis, several basic parameters of tyres are used but some
others are not covered here, such as material related parameters. Besides, the tyres are
considered as non-tread which leads to an unreasonable tyre life.

Constraints are only one example in each direction, they guarantee the basic dynamics
performance in these directions but more important factors such as brake performance in
longitudinal and durability in vertical direction are not covered. Besides, these models are
simplified and tyres independent, it leads some constant results in tyre parameters’ validation,
see section 4.3.

RRC surrogate model for the rolling resistance coefficient is used but only adopted in the
Simulink model for the fuel consumption calculation. This model should be related to
constraints equations to improve the result accuracy.
3
2. Information review
2.1
Tyre
In 1845, Robert William Thomson invented and patented the first pneumatic tyres in the world that
consisting of a steel rim and an inflated rubber toroid [7]. As of today, tyres have been well optimized
and widely adopted on cars, trucks, bicycles, etc. Generally, a tyre is a ring-shaped covering that fits
around a wheel's rim to protect it and enable better vehicle performance. Most tyres, such as those for
automobiles and bicycles, provide traction between the vehicle and the road while providing a flexible
cushion that absorbs shock.
Figure 1 Illustration of tyre structure
Figure 2 Illustration of tyre identification
4
The figure 1 above shows different specifications on a typical vehicle tyre and figure 2 explains the
meaning of tyre identification. For a normal truck tyre, a series of tyre marking can be found on the tyre
side wall, for instance, 245/40R17 96Z. The tyre marking determines the tyre basic characters and
properties and it is also one of the references to help to tyre buyers to select the best suitable tyre. In
other words, people can select tyres for different road conditions according to tyre marking, but at the
same time a trade-off must be achieved between handling performance and comfort, between
acceleration and wear, as well as between rolling resistance and desired friction for generation forces in
ground plane [7]. For example, Volvo GTT has many tyre suppliers and customers often have unique
transport missions and operating environment, therefore the tyre marking is probably not enough to be
able to select the most ‘suitable’ tyres, some other factors such the tread depth, tyre materials and
groove patterns need to be taken under consideration.
2.2
RRC surrogate model
In this thesis, a mathematical model to calculate the rolling resistance coefficient (RRC) was adopted to
model the fuel consumption. Generally, the rolling resistance can be defined as the effort required
keeping a given tyre rolling. It includes mechanical energy losses due to aerodynamic drag associated
with rolling, friction between the tyre and the road and between the tyre and the rim; it also includes
energy losses within the structure of the tyre. The rolling resistance is the mechanical energy that is
converted into heat resulting from a tyre rolling a unit distance on the road.
The rolling resistance on a free-rolling tyre when there is no applied wheel torque and no side slip can
be characterized through the RRC [8] as equation 5 below
(5)
Where
represents the coefficient of rolling resistance,
is the rolling resistance force and
is the
vertical (normal) force at the tyre-ground contact patch, as shown in figure 3.
Figure 3 Rolling resistance analysis
5
Here, a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) model is introduced and ran to define both forces. As a result of
cooperation between University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) and Volvo GTT we have access
to a 3-Dimensional FEA truck tyre model [9]. This tyre model is detailed enough to differ between
different tyre parameters settings even so it has many limitations, e.g., a free-rolling tyre when there is
no applied torque was modeled.
In this model, there are four tyre design parameters (tyre inflation pressure, tyre width, tyre diameter,
groove depth) and two operating parameters (vehicle speed, spindle load) get involved. Investigations
done by UOIT shows how the RRC is influenced by them.
FEA models are usually very complex and require a long computation time to be evaluated; each
evaluation of the rolling resistance coefficient function considering hard surfaces takes four to five hours
of computing time. Considering this, a simple, compact and relatively fast model connecting vehicle, tyre
and road is needed for further research. For a further research we need a simple, compact and relatively
fast model connecting vehicle, tyre and road. The rolling resistance coefficient function will be part of
this model and it has to be evaluated many times. Therefore, we need to create a model of the function
describing the rolling resistance coefficient as function of design and operating parameters which can be
evaluated in a reasonable time; we cannot use the FEA model directly. It will be used only to generate a
set of sampled points and this set will be used further to generate a simple surrogate model, and it
should be noticed that this surrogate model was conducted under a specific speed or a static load on the
tyre model, there is no torque applied on the tyre which lowers the result accuracy when doing a real
test on the vehicle.
The FEA model was run many times to receive a set of data points at which the rolling resistance
coefficient varies due to changes in the parameters. Each parameter was varied between its upper and
lower bounds determining a validity region of the model. A surrogate model of the rolling resistance
coefficient is then based on the data set generated by FEA and can be trusted only within these bounds
determining a validity region of the model, see the Table 1. The validity region was subsequently
extended for the needs of complex joint vehicle, tyre and road model by using one dimensional
extrapolation but the accuracy of the model is much lower in the added regions.
6
Table 1 Parameters and validity regions in RRC surrogate model
Parameter
Validity region
Extended validity region
Load [lbs.]
[3000; 9000]
[1000; 9000]
Speed [km/h]
[10; 100]
[10; 120]
Pressure [psi]
[55; 165]
-
Diameter [mm]
[917; 1120]
-
Width [mm]
[228; 455]
-
Groove depth [mm]
[0; 24]
-
The surrogate model was obtained using a radial basis functions interpolation of the simulated points.
The resulting model of the unknown function is then a linear combination of linear radial functions [10].
The implementation of radial basis functions interpolation was done in MATLAB, and this RRC surrogate
model can be then incorporated into the complex joint vehicle, tyre and road model.
2.3
Fuel cost
As one of the most important aspects in vehicle performance, fuel cost has always been paid attention
to in modern automotive industry. Today, a connection between fuel cost and the vehicle itself has been
correctly established and well modeled [11]. In the simplest terms, the fuel is burned inside engine
cylinders to produce power, and eventually transferred to the driven wheels in order to overcome all
the resistance forces that trying to retard or hold back the truck [12]. Therefore, almost all the working
components on a vehicle have influences on overall fuel cost to different extent, like engine operating
condition, aerodynamics force and tyre properties. As mentioned in RRC surrogate model, tyre rolling
resistance results from the internal friction of a tyre as it deflects during motion, and it is the second
most significant contributor to vehicle power requirement [12]. Therefore, one of the objectives of this
thesis is to measure fuel cost for a particular truck by analyzing different influences on vehicle
parameters, especially tyre properties.
Factors affecting the overall fuel cost can be categorized into two main parts: internal factors & external
factors. More specifically, internal factors include all vehicle components and tyre properties, like
vehicle speed, vehicle weight, tyre diameter, etc.; while all the influential factors ‘outside’ the vehicle
can be treated as external factors, like aerodynamics force, road condition. In this thesis work, a RRC
surrogate model [13] and a simplified GTA will be adopted to represent ‘internal factors’ and ‘external
factors’ respectively. And eventually the overall fuel cost can be predicted and calculated by gathering
7
these factors and this output can also be compared to an internal Volvo program ‘PERF’ to verify its
accuracy.
From the GTA program, three blocks will be introduced namely (1) Transport mission (2) Vehicle
utilization (3) Operating environment. One parameter from each of these three blocks will be studied in
this fuel cost prediction model for simplification. Regarding internal factors, Vehicle and tyre blocks will
be modeled but they would be combined and analyzed by adopting a RRC surrogate model which has
been implemented. The figure 4 below shows the basic overview how the overall fuel cost can be
calculated and figure 9 in the next chapter shows a diagram of Simulink model how the fuel cost is
modeled as well as the tyre wear.
Transport mission
(GVW)
GTA
Vehicle utilization
(Operating cycle)
Operating environment
Fuel cost
(Topography)
RRC surrogate
model
Vehicle parameters
(Truck speed, spindle load)
Tyre parameters
(Inflation pressure, tyre diameter,
tyre width, tyre groove depth)
Figure 4 Diagram of fuel cost calculation
2.3.1
Transport mission (Gross vehicle weight)
The nature of the transport mission determines the vehicle type, size, capacity, gross
vehicle/combination weight [1]. Among these specifications, the gross vehicle weight (GVW) has the
greatest influence on fuel cost because an optimized GVW will enable high productivity, high operating
reliability as well as low average costs [1].
It is quite obvious that a heavier truck will burn more fuel. Therefore the gross vehicle weight, which
represents the total weight of a particular truck and influences other vehicle specifications such as
weight distribution and tyre deflection, needs to be taken into account. With advancements in
manufacturing techniques, reducing vehicle weight using lightweight materials leads to the possibility of
8
downsizing the engine, which consumes less fuel while delivering the same level of performance.
Verified assumptions have been made that 20% reduction of vehicle weight is responsible for about a
third of the maximum fuel consumption reduction [14].
2.3.2
Vehicle utilization (Operating cycle)
The operating cycle basically describes how often the vehicle stops to load or unload goods or
passengers [1]. This factor has a great impact on fuel cost as it directly affects the vehicle operating
performance i.e., all the parameters like tyre pressure, engine speed, vertical load, etc., which are
interconnected while measuring the fuel cost.
2.3.3
Operating environment (Topography)
In GTA, operating environment includes the ‘external’ parameters, such as road parameters and
weather conditions. Among these parameters, topography is considered as the most important one
since the vehicle must have enough power to overcome the earth’s gravity when tackling hills and other
difficult terrain [1]. For a road with a constant road slope , the gradient resistance can be calculated by
(6)
where
is GVW, therefore, it means with the increase of gradient slope, more and more fuel needed to
be consumed to overcome this gradient resistance force to climb slope.
2.3.4
Tyre
This thesis mainly focuses on investigating tyre parameters’ influences. Some tyre parameters such as
inflation pressure, tyre geometry, tread pattern and depth, directly affect the fuel cost to different
extents. In the RRC surrogate model, four tyre important parameters, namely tyre width, tyre diameter,
tyre groove depth and inflation pressure have been taken into consideration [13].
Rolling resistance is the force resisting the motion when a vehicle is driving on the road. A previous
study shows tyre rolling resistance is the second most significant contributor to vehicle power
requirements, followed after aerodynamics drag [12]. In the RRC surrogate model, the output, rolling
resistance coefficient is influenced by the tyre design (tyre inflation pressure, tyre width, tyre diameter,
groove depth) and the operating parameters, truck speed, spindle load), as shown in figure 4 above.
9
2.3.5
Vehicle
For vehicle and tyre themselves, this thesis work will connect them together by using RRC surrogate
model. This surrogate model has been represented by creating relationship between rolling resistance
coefficient and several vehicle or tyre specifications. Also, the main component through the driveline
such as gearbox and engine are added and modeled to calculate the fuel consumption.
Despite all the external factors, the vehicle itself has a great influence on fuel cost. In the RRC surrogate
model, vehicle speed and GVW have been taken into consideration to calculate RRC. Also, they affect
the fuel consumption since they affect the aerodynamics force, vehicle weight distribution, suspension
performance and so on.
2.4
Tyre Wear
The modeling of tyre wear has been in debate for many decades now. It is obvious that there is a direct
effect on the running cost of the vehicle because of the wear of the tyres. This wear has been modeled
by various people with numerous different approaches using different parameters [5] [6] [15]. The
various parameters include rolling resistance, temperature, slip angle, wheel stiffness, contact patch
dimensions, etc. Therefore it is clear that defining a single tyre wear formula which can be justified using
the data available at Volvo can be intricate.
Figure 5 The dependence of wear on the main parameters
Figure 5 shows a summary and verification of how the various factors affect the wear properties of a
given tyre [6]. This is also a good reference to use when modeling, to select the right parameters for the
wear equation. It must be remembered that these parameters also depend upon each other.
10
Three main approaches for wear have been modeled in the past which give a different insight on how
wear depends on different parameters. All these models have their own advantages and disadvantages.
2.4.1
The Schallamach Approach
This paper focus on modeling of tyre wears using slip [5]. According to Grosch and Schallamach the wear
could be determined by using the abrasion pattern of the individual tyre and also the temperature [5].
This model corresponds with the conclusions drawn from the multiple interviews conducted at Volvo
GTT and also the Volvo GTA [1]. The origin of forces that cause slip in the wheels can be rolling
resistance, cross-winds, the inertial forces accompanying acceleration and braking, cornering, etc. [5].
Figure 6: Observed to measured values of wear
The figure 6 represents a comparison of the wear calculations to the experimental values and the dotted
lines are the 95% confidence lines [5]. Thus it can be stated that this approach is quite accurate. But,
there are a few constants used by Schallamach which need to be provided by the tyre manufacturer and
also some other information like the distance between the abrasion pattern and the temperature that
need to be directly measured for each tyre. All these unknowns make this equation have a lot of
assumptions when modeled mathematically.
2.4.2
The Kraghelsky & Nepomnyashchi Approach
This concept is quite different from the approach taken on wear by the other authors. The formula
derived for wear in this method takes into account the effect of strength, fatigue factors, modulus of
elasticity, coefficient of friction, load and roughness upon wear under sliding conditions [3] to deduce an
equation of wear for wheels rolling with slip. The main kind of wear of tyres under normal conditions is
caused by fatigue due to interactions with the rough surfaces [3]. The drawback of this equation is that,
11
apart from the fact that it does not include temperature modeled in it, it is necessary to have all the
above mentioned material characteristics measured during some independent experiments. To validate
the formula for sliding conditions the results were compared by the authors to experimental data from
existing literature. For the case of rolling with slip lab experiments were conducted on a range of
rubbers which mainly differed in modulus of elasticity.
2.4.3
The Bulgin & Walters Approach
Bulgin & Walters use a combination of fatigue and abrasive wear and setup an empirical relationship of
tyre wear [6]. This approach therefore can be considered to the better than the above two as it is
obvious that wear is caused under both these conditions. This approach also has the advantage of taking
care of change in slip angle but this also acts as a limitation as it is the only important parameter which
affects the outcome. This is better represented by the figure 7.
Figure 7: Logarithmic graph showing wear increases as power of slip angle (Different lines represent different tyre types)
Figure 8: Wear Rates on Rough (left) and Smooth (right) surfaces (Different curves represent different tyre types)
12
The approach taken by Bulgin & Walters studied the wear rate on two extreme surfaces as show by
figure 7. They also found that the wear rate in case of smooth surfaces is proportional to the power of
the applied stress and inversely proportional to the carbon content and temperature. However the
proportionality between the wear and the factors mentioned in the previous sentence are only true in a
certain regime as seen in the above figure 8 [6].
2.5
Constraints equations
After the Simulink model to predict fuel consumption and tyre wear is established, a series of
constraints equations needed to be set in order to fulfill the vehicle dynamics requirement. This makes
sure the truck can run in a required operating environment in this assigned job. For simplification, the
model in this thesis work will be constrained by examples from one of each of the three vehicle
directions.
(1) Startability in longitudinal direction
(2) Handling in lateral direction
(3) Ride comfort in vertical direction
During the pre-study phase, a series of existing models (see appendix 7.2) which involve different
specified vehicle components have been found and studied for each of the constraints equations
mentioned above. But in order to keep this model simple, these constraints models have also been
compared then the most suitable components will be adopted into our own model.
2.5.1
Startability
Startability is one of the most critical longitudinal performances which indicate the ability to start from
stand-still and maintain steady forward motion on specified grade when operating at maximum laden
mass. It results from the inclined road which creates a gradient resistance force along the vehicle motion
direction. For a particular truck and road friction, a maximum slope angle can be calculated.
During the pre-study phase, two existing models have been studied for startability constraints equations:
(1) Virtual transport model (VTM) which is the best available model at Volvo GTT
(2) Startability model which uses a half vehicle model to calculate the maximum slope by setting a
group of equilibrium equations in terms of normal force, momentum, etc.
13
The table 7 in appendix 7.1.2 shows how different components specified in different models. It also
shows the operating conditions, quality and computational resources for the same. In this thesis work,
Startability model is simplified by using two formulas representing the total resistance force and total
tractive force [16], and then they are adopted to calculate the maximum slope. But RRC is assumed as
constant instead of using RRC surrogate model due to the invalid speed range in the RRC surrogate
model. This will be introduced in details in the next chapter.
2.5.2
Handling
For handling, three existing models which both being used at Volvo GTT have been studied in pre-study
phase, i.e. VTM, CVM (complete vehicle model) and theoretical calculation.
(1) VTM uses quite a typical representation of the vehicle; i.e. point mass for the body, cab and the
axle, frame is a 2 point mass connected by a spring. It can be used for various operating
environments but is accurate for road conditions of only up to 5Hz.
(2) CVM uses a finite element method (FEM) model for the vehicle whose complexity is fixed
depending on accuracy of the result required. It can be used also for high frequencies of the
road disturbances, but with a fixed constant speed. It is mostly used for on-center handling
analysis without large sweeping motions within the linear tyre range.
(3) The theoretical calculation, which was an outcome of a discussion with a Volvo GTT engineer
[17]. It basically uses the difference in slip gradients of the front and back wheels respectively to
find out if the vehicle handles within required limits.
The table 8 in appendix 7.1.2 gives more details of these models.
After carefully studying these models and discussion with the engineer at Volvo GTT it was decided, for
the reason of simplicity to stick to theoretical calculation which has the least factors and has been
proved accurate [17] .
2.5.3 Ride comfort
Ride comfort is a very important dynamics factor in the vertical direction. The selection of the wrong
tyre can affect the ride comfort of the cab and similarly the selection of the right tyres can completely
change the ride characteristics of a truck from harsh to smooth and vice versa.
The main models compared in this case are:
(1) VTM in this case is rarely used as its results cannot be considered for road frequencies of above
5Hz.
14
(2) The Virtual approach uses a 3-D vehicle model which can be disassembled into six parts to
measure ride comfort. This model can minimize the cost for design which can be passed on to
customers. The disadvantage is that it takes a lot of computation time as it runs on ADAMS, a
multi-body dynamics simulation tool [18].
(3) Half vehicle model is simple model which can be seen as an extension of the quarter car model
but with more degrees of freedom. This model is of good accuracy and can be used for road
disturbances up to 15Hz [19].
(4) CVM is the most accurate model used at Volvo GTT. It can be used for high road frequencies and
also for speeds of 110 km/h with high accuracy. The disadvantage is its high computation time
[20].
The table 9 in appendix 7.1.2 gives more details of these models.
The half vehicle model [19] is used in this master thesis as it is mathematically simple to compute at the
same time being well modeled by Volvo GTT. By using different road profiles parameters like velocity,
road spectra density and inclination, the acceleration in vertical direction can be calculated by
measuring output spectra and root mean square (RMS) value.
So a series of constraints equations representing vehicle dynamics performance in three directions were
decided. A better comparison with existing tools should ideally have been done which could involve
more parameters and came out with better result; therefore some further studies are needed in this
area in the later phase of TyreOpt project.
15
3. Methodology
The whole point of this thesis is to develop a simple way to minimize the overall cost of operation of the
truck while not compromising on its dynamic properties. The methodology gives an overview of how the
models for fuel consumption and tyre wear were finalized, which will be studied in section 3.2 and 3.3.
Then section 3.4 introduces how the constraints equations for the models were decided upon and how
these equations were implemented.
3.1
Objectives definition
Before running the Simulink model (see figure 9 below) and the constraints equations, all the necessary
parameters need to be predefined, i.e. truck, road and tyre parameters. This step is to save the
parameters in the workspace. Then the Simulink model and constraints equations will share the same
workspace to calculate results, like fuel consumption and tyre wear, which secures that all costs and all
constraints equations are evaluated for the same specification.
Figure 9 Diagram of Simulink model
Figure 9 shows the overall diagram of Simulink model which is created to calculate fuel consumption
and tyre wear. It can be seen that after defining all the necessary specifications, the model will go
through the vehicle block which is used to calculate the ‘external’ forces then it will break down into two
separated paths to model fuel consumption and tyre wear respectively. The first path is a basic reverse
driveline while the second path adopts the tyre wear equations as well as the tyre surface temperature
calculation to obtain the tyre wear. Sub-blocks in this Simulink model will be studied in details in this
chapter later.
16
3.1.1 Truck definition
A Volvo FH 4*2 rigid truck was introduced in this project as a reference. In the overall model, this truck
has been separated into several parts with corresponding names, including gearbox, engine, center of
gravity calculation, external parameters. All truck data come from reality. This truck can carry about
eleven tons of goods. Here, two kinds of different goods have been defined: liquid and solid. Specifically,
the liquid goods is distributed from bottom to top in the loading platform which means position of the
center of gravity for the load does not change; in contrast, the solid good is distributed from the
beginning to the end of the loading platform, thus the position of the center of gravity for the load will
move backward with increasing weight of goods, see the figure 10 below. Besides, the cornering
stiffness, which will be used to model tyre wear, is also defined here with the help of vertical load on
front and rear axle.
Figure 10 Diagram of Volvo FH goods distribution
3.1.2 Road definition
Once the truck is featured, it is also necessary to introduce some sample roads. In this thesis, two
sample roads (Road 365 and Road 521 from Volvo program PERF) with road height and road maximum
limited speed as a function of road longitudinal position information are used. Road 365 represents a
hilly road which road 521 is a sample of flat highway. With these data, the road inclination and speed
profile as a function of time can be calculated. It is interesting to notice that the acceleration is
calculated from speed profile, so it would include several acceleration/deceleration points with very
high values. However, these two roads are used only for fuel consumption purposes. They does not
include any road curvature information and the sample points for collecting speed and height data are
quite far apart, so they do not include frequency inputs or road waviness which are important for ride
comfort model. Therefore some typical frequency data [7] are superimposed to these two roads to
calculate the RMS value, more details will be studied later in the section 3.4.3. Figures representing
Road 365 and 521 can be found in appendix B.
17
3.1.3 Tyre definition
As the main object in this thesis, tyre is defined as a separate file in the model. According to the
suggestion from Volvo GTT, three different truck tyres have been introduced. Firstly, six tyre design
parameters (normal load, tyre inflation pressure, truck speed, tyre diameter, tyre width and tyre groove
depth) are defined to calculate rolling resistance coefficient using RRC surrogate model. Then other
parameters such as wheel dynamics radius, wheel rim radius are listed or assumed to model tyre wear.
After setting up the truck, tyre, road specification, all the variables will be saved in the workspace before
running the Simulink model to calculate the fuel consumption and tyre wear.
3.2
Fuel consumption
As mentioned in previous chapter, this thesis focuses on constructing functions which would enable
minimize tyre running cost by optimization of various parameters. Thus, as the biggest part of the cost
operation at least for many transport applications, fuel consumption needs to be calculated and
modeled in this project. According to vehicle dynamics principle, a reverse vehicle driveline has been
created with the aid of Simulink [2]. Each block will be introduced below.
3.2.1
Vehicle block
First of all, as a common block for both fuel consumption and tyre life path, five outputs, namely
,
,
,
,
,
,
are calculated from corresponding inputs (
,
and ) by vehicle dynamics equations.
and
are rolling resistance forces on front and rear tyres respectively, which can be
calculated using equation 7 and 8 below.
and
(
)
(7)
(
)
(8)
are the outputs from RRC surrogate model, representing the rolling resistance
coefficient on front and rear tyre respectively,
forces;
and
are the corresponding front and rear normal
is the road inclination obtained from the road profile.
The aerodynamic driving force
which is proportional to the square of vehicle speed can be
calculated by equation 9.
(9)
The parameters
,
,
and
represent the aerodynamics coefficient, the air density, the truck
frontal area and the truck speed, respectively.
The gravitational resistance force
18
can be obtained by equation 10.
(
Here,
)
(10)
is the total mass of the truck, including the weight of the load.
(9.81m/s2),
is gravitational acceleration
is the road inclination angle.
Due to the truck is rear wheel driven; the total force on front axle is considered only the rolling force.
(11)
The tractive force on the rear axle is equal to the sum of all resistance forces, which is given by equation
12 below:
(12)
is the truck acceleration.
Regarding the tyre life calculation, the combined slips at front and rear tyres are calculated here as well.
For longitudinal direction,
and
Where
and
(13)
are the cornering stiffness on front and rear axle respectively.
For lateral direction,
(
)
and
(
and
)
(14)
are the toe angle in front and rear axle. In this model,
constant value and the value of
is assumed to one fourth of the
is given from Volvo GTT as
.
Hence, the combined slip can be obtained by equation 14 and 15.
√
(15)
√
(16)
Once the combined slip value is obtained, the torque, rotational speed and acceleration of the wheel
can be calculated using the following equations:
(
)
(
(
(
Here
(17)
))
(
is the tyre radius,
(18)
))
(19)
is the truck speed from the road definition.
Thus, five outputs (
,
,
,
,
) have been obtained in this
vehicle block and from here the Simulink model will break down into two path to calculate the fuel
consumption and tyre wear.
19
3.2.2
Gearbox block
The gearbox block is modeled by using an existing block in QuasiStatic Simulation Toolbox (QSS) as a
reference [2], which is a Simulink-based simulation tool. After predefining the gearbox’s parameters in
the truck file, three outputs can be calculated (i.e. the torque, acceleration and rotational speed of the
gearbox). The gearbox block design can be found below.
Figure 11 Diagram of the gearbox block
The gear selector sub-block uses gear upshift and downshift vector. According to the range of the engine
rotational speed and the gear ratio vector, which can be obtained from the truck specification, the gear
upshift and downshift can be roughly calculated using equation 20 and 21.
(
(
(
The unit of
) (
)
(
and
(
)
) (
)
(
vector is km/h. Here,
2100 rpm with unequal steps. Specifically,
(
)
)
)
(21)
has been defined as a vector from 800 to
is 2100 rpm and
is a gear ratio vector with 12 elements and
In the Simulink model, once a certain value of is
(20)
)
(
)
is 1900 rpm. Also,
represents the ratio of the final gear.
is input, the switch point with a unit of ‘km/h’
can be calculated by the following equation:
(22)
Then use this switch point to compare with
or
vector according acceleration or
deceleration. For example,
If
Then
20
( )
( )
(23)
( ) will be chosen to get the corresponding gear ratio by using equation 20 and 21 above.
Thus, the proper gear ratio can be obtained to calculate three gearbox’s outputs namely
,
,
, representing the rotational speed, acceleration and torque of the gearbox, respectively.
3.2.3
Engine & Fuel tank blocks
By using the three outputs from the gearbox block as inputs to the engine block, this engine block can
predict initial fuel consumption with the aid of corresponding engine map. Here an old engine map is
introduced here due to confidentiality at Volvo GTT, but this does not have considerable influence on
the model as the objective here is to prove the model works and gives a sufficiently accurate results. The
engine map can be easily switched in later by whatever the situation calls for.
In the Simulink dynamics system, at each time signal the engine block will get one
and one
value respectively. After going through a ‘pre-engine’ sub-block which is introduced to scale these two
inputs into a proper range,
and
become
and
, in order to locate the
corresponding fuel consumption point at this vehicle operation moment.
Therefore the fuel consumption depending on the engine speed
(rpm) can be calculated by using
equation below:
(24)
Here,
represents any fuel consumption point for one cylinder in the engine map(mg/stroke), so for
each engine revolution, the fuel consumption of this six-cylinders engine is 6 /2=3 ,this is because for
a typical four-stroke engine, it needs two engine revolution to complete one operating cycle. So the
overall fuel consumption with the unit ‘mg’ can be integrated through the whole road profile.
Regarding the fuel tank block, it is used to transfer units from ‘mg’ to eventually ‘L/100km’. Finally, the
overall fuel consumption can be calculated according to different user inputs. It also varies by changing
different roads and tyres specifications.
3.3
Tyre wear
3.3.1 Calculation principle
The aim was to develop a simple tyre wear equation which is fairly accurate and helps to provide a good
estimation of overall tyre cost. This arises the question of how simple is simple enough while providing
results that can be justifiable. Mainly three different models were chosen to be studied during the initial
phase of the thesis of which the Schallamach model was chosen as it included temperature and this
factor was concluded as one of the major factors affecting the wear from the various discussions with
experts at Volvo. The model was based around the Archard wear equation and the A. Schallamach and
K.A. Grosch tyre wear equation at controlled slip [15]. The combination of Archard’s and Schallamach’s
21
equation was chosen as for the overall model as it was noticed during modeling that the Schallamach
equation missed important wear parameters which were present in the basic wear equation of Archard.
The Schallamach wear equation can be represented as:
(
Here
)
(25)
is wear rate with unit mm/m, it shows that the wear rate can be affected by a series of
parameters, such as slip angle , wheel stiffness , temperature and so on.
And the Archard wear equation is given as:
(26)
Here
is the total volume of wear debris produced, it is proportional to normal load
and sliding
distance , while reversely proportional to hardness of the softest contacting surfaces.
The similarities between the two equations are quite apparent when they are compared above so they
were combined to create the wear equation used in this model. The value for surface temperature was
found out by the equation provided in the paper ‘Analysis of impact factors of tyre wear [4] where the
necessary validation is done to prove the temperature achieved is very similar to the real surface
temperature. The slip was assumed to be combined slip and found out with the basic slip equations [7].
The tyre temperature equation is stated as:
√(
(
)
(
)
)
(
)
(27)
The equation is rather complicated; all the variables are explained in the notations. It can be noticed
that the main factors which affect the surface temperature are vehicle speed and the size of the tyre.
The Overall outcome used in the code is:
(
In this equation,
(
(
(
)) (
)))
is the wear rate of front tyre with unit mm/m,
tyre, which was calculated in the vehicle block.
(28)
is combined slip on front
is tyre surface temperature, calculated by equation 27
above.
The whole concept described in the above equation was stored as a Simulink model. The whole model
had mainly three input structs in which all the common data is input, the data possessed in these structs
are then transferred to the workspace, here they can be used by the different equations as required.
22
The
was calculated in the vehicle block and was provided to the block consisting of the wear
equation. The surface temperature was also independently calculated and provided as an input. But the
combined slip and the surface temperature are directly dependent on the vehicle load, speed and the
rolling resistance coefficient. The wear rate is converted from mm/m to mm/100 km to match the
output of fuel consumption from the Simulink model. In the overall model the tyre cost and tread depth
is added which helps us to achieve the running cost of the tyre/100 km and also the overall running cost
of the tuck per 100 km.
3.3.2 Assumptions and limitations
There are a lot of factors like resilience of the wheel, wear rate constant, spacing constant between the
abrasion pattern and temperature coefficient which changes with the change in material of the tyre,
these factors are assumed in model developed here. The reason behind this is that the tyre companies
do not provide this information publicly and it is hard to convince the company to provide it, therefore
these values are picked up from old wear papers which written in the 1960’s because these papers seem
to have the values for a few tyres. Requesting and getting this information from the tyre companies can
decrease the number of assumptions made in the equation and provide a more accurate result, also
because it could be hard to measure these values. It is also hard to measure these parameters as they
can change from tyre to tyre and it is also highly dependent on the manufacturing process of the rubber
and the tyre itself - same tyre from different factories can give different values of these material
parameters. At least one material parameter should be added in a further research.
Though the Simulink model had both the front and rear wear modeled into it for the final result only the
front tyre wear value is used. This is due to the fact that when Schallamach developed the wear
equation it represented the wear of a tyre which is just rotating with a specific speed and a point load.
This also applies to the rolling resistance model used in the overall model where there is no torque
considered. The truck is rear wheel driven and there is an added factor of torque at the rear wheels
which is more complex to implement at this stage, it is definitely an area which can be worked upon in
the future. This may not have such a big impact however because after speaking to many experts at
Volvo it was concluded that the front wear is always greater than the rear wear because of the higher
slip angles up front, during turning the slip angles at the rear maybe greater but the time period for
which these slip angles are experienced because of long haul operation are very small when compared
to the overall running of the truck and hence have negligible effect on the wear. This can however be
different in the case of other operational cycles and needs further looking into.
23
3.4
Constraints equations
The constraints equations help to ensure that the dynamic abilities of truck stay acceptable when the
running cost is minimized. They are equations of Startability, Handling and Ride comfort which justify
the truck’s dynamic ability in the X, Y and Z directions. These equations are dependent on much less
factors than in the model developed.
3.4.1 Startability
The aim of the startability constraints equations is to model the vehicle longitudinal dynamics then
further define a maximum slope which this truck can climb under a particular tyre specification. By
setting up a series of equations of motion, the maximum slope as well as some other vehicle parameters
can be obtained. However, the rolling resistance coefficient is not adopted from the RRC surrogate
model because the range does not cover the low speed, i.e. 0-10 km/h. In this case, constant values for
rolling resistance coefficient have been assumed for front and rear axles respectively.
To obtain the maximum slope, two main equations are used here, representing the total resistant force
and the total tractive force respectively.
(
)
(
)
(
( )
(
The symbol
and
(
)
))
(29)
(30)
are the constant rolling resistance coefficient on front and rear axles
respectively, differ from
and
which used to model fuel consumption.
In equation 29, the sum of the resistance force is equal to rolling resistance force at both front and rear
axles and the gravitational force.
In equation 30, the tractive force is chosen from the smaller value between the force produced from
( )
engine maximum torque
(
direction
) . Here,
represents the maximum friction coefficient using magic tyre
formula [21]. Thus, once the weight of load is known,
slope
3.4.2
and the friction force in longitudinal
and
can be calculated so the maximum
then can be obtained by solving the system of equations 29 and 30.
Handling
The tyre understeer gradient is calculated here to predict the handling performance using equation 31
even though there is no steering information in the model [7], it is a prediction how the vehicle will
behave in the steering situation.
(31)
24
It can be noticed that there is no relationship between tyre parameters and understeer gradient. This
parameter is only affected by the cornering stiffness and the center of gravity, which both depend on
how much weight of loads are carried on the truck. Thus, this is one part of the future work which will
involve some tyre parameters into the understeer coefficient calculation, so then a clear comparison
about how understeer gradient influenced by different tyres can be seen.
3.4.3 Ride comfort
The ride comfort model is based on the simple four degree of freedom model where the various
components of the truck are represented as masses which are connected by a spring and damper
between each of them [7] represented by figure 12 below. Here the different representations of Z are
the distances moved in vertical direction of each of the present components in the model.
Figure 12 Four DOF Truck Model
These blocks are primarily the seat, cab, frame, front axle and then the road. The value of root mean
square (RMS) acceleration of the seat will provide the information about the ride comfort of the truck.
The weighted RMS value of the seat depends mainly on two main factors of the road which are the road
spectra inclination and the road spectra density. It also depends on factors of the vehicle like the speed,
CGW, length of the vehicle, etc.
25
Table 2 : Ride Comfort for diffrerent road frequencies
Road
Fi0 (Hz)
Road condition
RMS_wk
Full Load
Unloaded
Road 1
1e-6
Good road
0.2890
0.3030
Road 2
5e-6
Normal road
0.6462
0.6775
Road 3
10e-6
Bad road
0.9138
0.9581
Road 4
100e-6
Very bad road
2.8838
3.0299
Table 2 gives an insight into the actually effect of road roughness Fi0 (road spectral density) when the
inclination is kept constant. The road spectral density is a measure of the frequency of the road that is
experienced by the vehicle when it travels over a particular road. The road conditions described here as
good, normal, bad and very bad are conditions as described by Volvo GTA [1] classified according to
their different frequencies. The weighted RMS (RMS_wk) uses an ISO 2631 filter which weights together
several time periods which have different vibrations spectra [7].
It is apparent from the table that as the roughness increase the ride comfort becomes worse and goes
up to a value of 3 which is unacceptable conditions for the driver (the limit is in-between 0-1.5) [22].The
two values of weighted RMS represent the two extreme conditions of the vehicle i.e., fully laden and
unloaded. A point which can be noted from table 2 is also that the ride comfort remains in the
acceptable range even for bad roads which covers most of the conditions the truck will be used in.
26
4. Model validation
This chapter intends to show the Simulink model result and validate that the models respond in a
credible way to variation in three different respects:
(1) Tyre types
(2) Tyre design parameters
(3) Other parameters
Some tables and figures are attached in this chapter to illustrate which type of tyre is the ‘best’ under
different operating conditions and how each of the tyre parameters affect the rolling resistance
coefficient (RRC) and then change the fuel consumption and tyre wear. Moreover, the result of three
constraints equations will be studied in this chapter.
4.1
Validation of cost response to tyre type variation
As the main object in this thesis model, the Simulink model will output fuel consumption in L/100km and
tyre wear in mm/100km. Figure 13 shows the fuel consumption with increasing loads for the three
different tyre types. Generally, the fuel consumption increases by roughly 10 liters from empty to fully
loaded truck and also it can be noticed that tyre 1 and tyre 2 have very similar curves while tyre 3 saved
about 2 liter of fuel in the same condition.
Figure 13 Fuel consumption VS tyres
As discussed earlier in section 3.2 the wear plotted in Figure 14 is the front wear. The unit used to
measure tyre wear is mm of tread depth worn over a distance of 100km. The model works as it is
27
expected to i.e. there is an increase in tyre wear as the load on the vehicle increases, the wear increase
from around 0.014 mm to around 0.024 mm from completely unloaded to fully loaded. The reason why
rear wear is not considered can be clearly understood table 3 below, it is close to 10 times smaller than
the front wear which is unusual but the reason for the same is explained in section 3.3.
Figure 14 Front tyre wear VS tyres
Table 3 Tyre wears comparison Chart
Tyre 1
Tyre 2
Tyre 3
4.2
Empty(front)
Fully loaded (front)
Empty(rear)
Fully loaded(rear)
0.01496
0.01507
0.01398
0.02427
0.02447
0.02248
0.001406
0.001418
0.001315
0.003689
0.003723
0.003419
Tyre types
In this section, tables will show the two outputs from the Simulink model (i.e. fuel consumption and tyre
wear) and how they vary with different tyres. And the total cost can be calculated with respect to these
two outputs.
Table 4 Tyre type validation 1
Fuel consumption
Fuel
Front
Tyre tread
Tyre
Fuel
Front wear
Total
(L/100km)
Price(SEK)
wear(mm/100km)
depth(mm)
price(SEK)
cost(SEK)
cost(SEK)
cost(SEK)
Tyre 1 39.77
13.60
0.02427
15.8
2876
540.872
26.51
567.38
Tyre 2 40.11
13.60
0.02447
13.5
2095
545.496
22.78
568.28
Tyre 3 38.53
13.60
0.02248
16.2
2612
524.008
21.75
545.76
28
Table 4 above illustrates the differences among three model tyres under road 521. The operational case
has been defined into fully liquid loaded truck (18 tons), which means the center of gravity of the loads
in longitudinal direction is fixed. Total cost is calculated using equation below.
(
Where,
)
is 13.6 SEK,
(
(
(
) and
)
)
(
(
) are the final outputs of the Simulink model after
integration, representing the fuel consumption and front wear respectively.
tyre, and it varies with tyre types.
(32)
)
is the price of
is the number of tyres on this truck, 2+4=6
numerically. Hence, it can be concluded that the tyre 3 has the best performance regarding both fuel
consumption and front tyre wear. While the tyre 2 consumes the highest amount of fuel and tyre wear,
but the total cost is almost the same when compared with tyre 1. This is due to the price of tyre 2 is the
cheapest among them.
Table 5 Tyre type validation 2
Fuel consumption
Fuel
Front
Tyre tread
Tyre
Fuel
Front wear
Total
(L/100km)
Price(SEK)
wear(mm/100km)
depth(mm)
price(SEK)
cost(SEK)
cost(SEK)
cost(SEK)
Tyre 1
42.9
13.60
0.02405
15.8
2876
583.44
26.27
609.71
Tyre 2
43.20
13.60
0.02424
13.5
2095
587.52
22.57
610.09
Tyre 3
41.52
13.60
0.02230
16.2
2612
564.67
21.57
586.24
Once changing the road condition (road 365 in this case), similar performance can be noticed from table
5 above. The tyre 3 saves about 20 SEK per 100 km in total cost, still remain the top among three model
tyres. Therefore from these two tables, it can be concluded that tyre 3 has the best performance under
two road conditions.
4.3
Tyre parameters
Regarding the tyre parameters’ validation, the road condition was stick to only road 521 and the tyre 1
was used as reference. Then each of the tyre parameters in the RRC surrogate model has been modified
according to their valid ranges. Correspondingly, loops in overall model have been tested to see how
these parameters affect the fuel consumption, tyre wear and total cost. In additional, three constraints
dynamics figures are also plotted here to compare the tyre parameters’ influences. In this section, a
series of figures will be shown, each of them includes six different model responses, namely fuel
consumption, tyre wear and total cost in the first row and startability, handling and ride comfort in the
second row.
29
4.3.1 Weight of load
As the first tyre parameter to validate, the weight of loads is separated into two different types, see the
truck definition previously. Different load distribution makes an influence on center of gravity position
then change the fuel consumption and tyre wear indirectly.
Figure 15 Weight of liquid load validation
Figure 15 shows the weight of liquid loads increases from zero to fully loaded. It can be noticed from the
first row that the all these three variables ascend smoothly as expected. Specifically, the fuel
consumption increases from 30 to about 40 L/100km. the similar trend occurs in front tyre wear and
total cost, which go up from 0.015 to 0.024 mm/100km and from 425 to 570 SEK/100km respectively.
Regarding the constraints equations, the maximum slope increases from 15 to 30 degree with increasing
load, this is due to vertical force on the driven axle increases faster than the longitudinal resistance
forces and also the friction coefficient
remains the same in this model, which means that the truck can
climb higher with increasing weight of loads. Regarding the lateral dynamics, according to the equation
31, the tyre understeer coefficient drops from 8e-8 to around 3e-8. The last figure on the bottom right
shows us the change in weighted RMS values when there is a change in GCW of the vehicle. This
basically is the measure of ride comfort of the tuck, which can be seen is within 0.5 m/s2 because if it
increases over that then action must be taken [7]. (The road considered here is a good road from section
3.4.3)
The result is proved as valid as the fuel consumption and tyre wear will increase with increasing weight
of load, but the accuracy of the result can be improved by some future studies.
30
Figure 16 Weight of solid load validation
The situation is different if solid loads are carried, especially the front tyre wear. This is because the
center of gravity moves backward with increasing loads, the load on front axle reaches its peak at about
60% loaded before it drops back with full loads. So the front tyre wear gets the similar trend, see figure
16 above.
About the constraints equations, the changing curves of the startability are a bit different compared
with figure 15. The reason again is the center of gravity changes and the truck is rear axle driven. It is
interesting to notice that the ride comfort in this condition is better at partially loaded condition than in
figure 15. This is down to the fact that in this condition the loading is done from the front of the truck to
the back which affects the center of gravity by a large extent and hence affecting the overall weight
distribution.
4.3.2 Speed
The vehicle speed has a great influence on all these objectives. Apart from the invalid range, like 0-10
km/h, fuel consumption goes up greatly from about 22 to 52 L/100km, as well as the tyre wear from
0.0242 to 0.0244 mm/100km. this is because the truck is forced to run in a constant speed for the whole
road condition without considering the proper torque and optimal driving speed. Moreover, it should be
noted that the fourth subplot in figure 17 is ‘meaningless’ due to the truck speed does not affect the
startability performance. Actually in this model, only the load has effect on these three constraints
equations. Speed does not make influences on them which can be seen from the second row of figure
16, and same situations happen in tyre inflation pressure, tyre diameter, tyre width and tyre groove
31
depth validations which will be mentioned later. This is due to the model has been simplified as well as
the RRC surrogate model only has one output which used to calculate fuel consumption. Therefore,
future studies are needed to introduce more tyre parameters into this model.
Figure 17 Speed validation
4.3.3 Tyre inflation pressure
In the RRC surrogate model, the range of the tyre inflation pressure is from 55 to 165 psi. Theoretically,
the ‘harder’ the tyre is, the less fuel will be consumed. And it is confirmed by the figure 18 below. Front
tyre wear decreases from around 0.027 to less than 0.024 mm/100km, which makes the total cost drops
by 20 SEK in one hundred kilometer. Additionally, fuel consumption, tyre wear and total cost points for
three tyres under their nominal inflation pressures are also showed in three different markers here.
With the almost same pressure, it can be seen clearly that tyre 3 performs much better in fuel
consumption, tyre wear and then total cost than the tyre 1 and 2. Here the reader might be misguided
from this result to have an incorrect conclusion: The tyre inflation pressure should be set as high as
possible as it will save both fuel consumption and tyre wear. This is due to so far the constraints
equations are tyre-parameters independent, tyre pressure obviously affects the vehicle dynamics
performance, such as ride comfort. With the continuous improvement of this model, a balance tyre
pressure between minimizing the cost operation and dynamics performance will be found. Another
point to be noted here is that the tyre wear decrease with the increase in inflation pressure which is
contradicting figure 5, this is due to the fact that figure 5 is plotted after comparing three different
models and in our case the inflation pressure is used to calculate the surface temperature of the model.
Further validation is required to prove the results of figure 18 though.
32
Figure 18 Tyre inflation pressure validation
4.3.4 Tyre diameter
In the RRC surrogate model, the rolling resistance coefficient is inversely proportional to the tyre
diameter. This is due to the reduced tyre deflection as the diameter increases. Similarly, the fuel
consumption, tyre wear and total cost fall down with the increasing tyre diameter, see the figure 19
below.
Figure 19 Tyre diameter validation
4.3.5 Tyre width
Regarding the tyre width, it has been simulated within the default range of the RRC surrogate model, i.e.
from 227.66 to 455.31mm. It can be seen that the fuel consumption is not significantly increased as the
33
tyre width increases. In contrast, the front tyre wear drops by about 0.006 mm/100km. the reason for
this decreasing phenomena is due to the increased tyre width increases the tyre/road intersection and
further reduce the tyre wear which is perpendicular to the direction of intersection. Also, it should be
noticed that with almost the same tyre width, tyre 3 always performs better than tyre 1 and 2, see the
three markers in figure 20.
Figure 20 Tyre width validation
4.3.6 Tyre groove depth
The tyre groove depth figures show that these three main objectives have the same reducing trend as
expected. This is due to the ’smooth’ tyre generates tyre slip while a new tyre can produce good grip
force, see figure 21 below.
Figure 21 Tyre groove depth validation
34
The results of tyre parameters validations have been discussed with Volvo engineers and have been
proved as valid. The constraints equations need to be improved later and then can be validated with
some existing models which mentioned in the information review chapter above.
4.4
Other parameters
This section studies some other parameters’ validations apart from those six tyre parameters. They
mainly belong to the truck specification. The reasons for having this validation is to justify most of the
important parameters in this model are changeable and also will not produce unreasonable results, and
since model is created to minimize the function of (
), means that the
factor which representing
the vehicle and operating parameters should not be neglected. It is an essential step for the ‘TyreOpt’
project to expand this basic model and make more parameters involved.
4.4.1
Truck wheelbase
Figure 22 Wheelbase validation
Wheelbase is defined as the distance between the front and rear axles. In this thesis, the position of
truck front axle is fixed and then the wheelbase can be varied by moving the rear axle. Here, figure 22
shows the wheelbase validation which changes from 5 to 6 m. When the truck is fully loaded, the
distance between front axle and the center of gravity of the truck is about 5.2 m, which means the rear
axle will locate exactly under the center of gravity point when the wheelbase is 5.2 m. In this case, the
rear tyres will carry the maximum load and reach the fuel consumption peak, and it can be seen in figure
22.
35
4.4.2 Road height
In this thesis, the road data is changeable. Table 6 below shows different result when road height is
alternated by multiplying coefficients. It can be seen that fuel consumption did not change a lot when
the road became one fourth ‘smoother’, while obvious increasing of fuel consumption can be noticed
when the height is multiplied by 2 and 4. The fuel consumption does not increase with corresponding
coefficients, this is due to only the gravity resistance will change but some other slope-independent
forces such as aerodynamics will remain the same. In addition, it is interesting to see that front tyre
wear keeps constant in this validation. It is supposed to vary with coefficients because the road distance
will change. But due to a simplified calculation principle is used, tyre wear will only be affected some
factors, like truck speed, weight of loads, etc.
Table 6 Road height validation
Height * 0.25
Height * 1
Height * 2
Height * 4
36
Fuel consumption
(L/100km)
38.31
39.77
43.19
52.62
Front tyre wear
(mm/100km)
0.02427
0.02427
0.02427
0.02427
Total cost (SEK/100km)
547.53
567.38
613.89
742.14
5. Conclusion & Future work
5.1
Conclusion
The aim of this thesis work is to create a complete and simplified model for ‘TyreOpt’ project, which
identifies how different tyre parameters affect the cost of operation, while simultaneously balancing
other tyre-dependent criteria such as handling properties and ride comfort [23]. Therefore, even though
comparing which tyre is the best one under particular conditions has been successfully implemented
from the model in this thesis, it is not the most important conclusion needed to be paid attention. The
core of this thesis is to build up a framework which involves some tyre parameters and tyre-dependent
models, for example RRC surrogate model, to demonstrate the relationship between each tyre
parameters and total operation cost, specifically, fuel consumption and tyre wear.
Previous chapters have shown the corresponding results and model validations. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the model created for this thesis is able to pick the best tyre for different operating
conditions and preliminary clarify how each of the tyre basic parameters affect the fuel consumption
and tyre wear. Additionally, three basic constraints models representing vehicle dynamics in different
directions are also built as a supplement to the Simulink model.
5.2
Future work
However, the accuracy level of the result has not been properly discussed and completely proven. This is
mainly due to the time limitation. It is also important to note that the model has been simplified to a
large extent. The model simplification problem can be overcome by comparing the results to the wellestablished models available at Volvo GTT and relating those using mathematical methods to the model
in this thesis, this will lead to a reduced analysis time. The best example of simplification can be the
model of ride comfort which is a simple 4 DOF models when the accuracy can be increased by using a 35
DOF model, but this will also lead to and increased computation time. The tyre wear model is one where
there has been a lot of data used from some old papers from 1960’s and 1970’s. Use of the
aforementioned data was necessary as this data is not easily provided by tyre manufacturers now (more
on tyre wear limitations can be found in section 3.3). One key improvement area can be to look into the
overall wear model and see which of those assumed values can be implemented into the RRC surrogate
model and the data can then be requested from the tyre manufacturers. This will help to increase the
dependency of the wear model with the RRC surrogate model and also pin point the data which affects
these models the most. As mentioned earlier, the constraints equations are not well related to tyre
parameters; the outcome is constant results for tyre parameters’ validation. Hence, one of the key areas
37
further studies is to increase the dependence of tyre parameters in the constraints equation models
which will only raise the accuracy and integrity of the whole model result.
38
6. Bibliography
[1] S. Edlund and P.-O. Fryk, "The Right Truck for the Job with Global Truck Application Descriptions,"
SAE International 2004-01-2645, Göteborg, 2004.
[2] L. Guzzella and A. Amstutz, "The QSS toolbox manual," Eidgenössiche Technische Hochschule,
Zurich, 2005.
[3] I. Kraghelsky and E. Nepomnyashchi, "Fatigue Wear Under Elastic Contact Conditions," Wear, vol. 8,
no. 4, pp. 303-319, 1964.
[4] Y. Li, S. Zuo, L. Lei, X. Yang and X. Wu, "Analysis of impact factors of tire wear," Journal of Vibration
and Control, vol. 18, no. 6, p. 8, 2011.
[5] A. Schallamach and D. Turner, "The wear of slipping wheels," Wear, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-25, 1960.
[6] E. Saibel and C. Tsai, "Tire wear model," Washington,D.C., 1969.
[7] B. Jacobsson, Vehicle Dynamics Compendium, Göteborg: Chalmers University of Technology, 2012.
[8] J.Y. Wong, Theory of ground vehicles, Ottawa: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[9] R. Ali, D. Ranvir, M. EI-Gindy, Ö ijer Fredrik, I. Johanson and M. Trivedi, "Prediction of rolling
resistance and steering characteristics using finite element analysis truck tyre model," International
Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 179-201, 2013.
[10] W. Holger, Scattered data approximation, Cambridge Monographs on Applied and Computational
Mathematics, 2005.
[11] M. Guillou and C. Bradley, "Fuel Consumption Testing to Verify the Effect of Tire Rolling Resistance
on Fuel Economy," SAE Technical Paper 2010-01-0763, 2010.
[12] Cummins, "Secrets of better fuel economy," Cummins Inc.(Techinical report), 2007.
[13] Z. Sabartova, P. Lindroth and A.-B. Stromberg, "Determining a surrogate model for the rolling
resistance coefficient of a truck tyre," Chalmers University of Technology(Technical report),
Göteborg, 2013.
[14] L.W. Cheah, A.P. Bandivadekar, K.M. Bodek, E.P. Kasseris, and J.B. Heywood, "The trade-off
between automobile acceletation performance, weight, and fuel consumption," SAE International
Journal of Fuel and Lubricants, vol.1, pp. 771-777, 2008.
39
[15] K. A. Grosch and A. Schallamach , "Tyre Wear at Controlled Slip," Rubber Chemisry and Technology,
vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1342-1359, 1962.
[16] M. S. Kati, "Definitions of Performance Based Characteristics for LongHeavy Vehicle Combinations,"
Chalmers University of Technology (Technical report), Göteborg, 2013.
[17] N. Fröjd, Interviewee, Dicsussion about handling model. [Interview]. 18 February 2013.
[18] G. Wang and W. Yang, "A virtual test approach for vehicle ride comfort evaluation," SAE Technical
Paper 2004-01-0376, 2004.
[19] A. Soliman, S. Moustafa and A. Shogae, "Parameters affecting vehicle ride comfort using half vehicle
model," SAE Technical Paper 2008-01-1146, 2008.
[20] I. Johansson, C. Iwanaga and F. Ö ijer, "Correlation between vehicle measurements and virtual
analysis (CVM) of tyre influence on cab," Göteborg, 2012.
[21] H. Pacejka, Tire and vehicle dynamics, Delft: Elsevier, 2012.
[22] I. Johansson, Interviewee, Discussion about Ride Comfort model. [Interview]. 10 May 2013.
[23] P. Lindroth, "TyreOpt-Fuel consumption reduction by tyre drag optimization: Project plan," Volvo
Group Trucks Technology (Technical report), Göteborg, 2012.
40
7. Appendices
7.1
Appendix A Models for main objectives and constraints equations
7.1.1 Fuel cost and tyre wear models
During the pre-study, several existing models which designed to calculate fuel cost were found.

PERF, a Volvo GTT internal tool based in FORTRAN. PERF offers customers an opportunity to
evaluate the truck’s driveline and the criteria for low fuel consumption. It is possible for
customers to define your truck specification by selecting engine, gearbox, tyres and so forth
from the PERF main interface. Also, alternative specifications such as GVW, air resistance and
road specification can be defined. As a result, PERF will sum up an overview of the performance
of this specified truck, like economic speed range, maximum nominal speed, startability, etc.

GSP, another Volvo GTT internal tool based in Simulink. It is a high-fidelity model. But due to the
time limitation, we have not been able to find more information about it and used it to evaluate
our model result.

Simulink model from QSS toolbox, a fuel cost model based in Matlab/Simulink environment. QSS
toolbox makes it possible for powertrain systems to be designed and improved quickly. It
contains all the main components in powertrain driveline, including vehicle, gearbox, engine,
fuel tank and battery (for hybrid powertrain). Each component has several elements for user to
change easily and eventually calculates and compares the fuel consumption. This thesis work
finally adopted this simulink model as a reference to design our fuel cost model.
Modeling and predicting tyre wear is a very intricate process. To the best of our knowledge, there is not
tool available at Volvo GTT for tyre wear calculation. There are some approaches and tools studied
during the pre-study stage which predicted tyre wear with good accuracy. Some approaches we found
are from 1960’s to 1970’s, they are already studied in the information review and methodology chapters
of this report.
41
7.1.2 Models for constraints equations
There are some models listed which obtained from papers or from Volvo GTT. They have been used or
being used to simulate the vehicle dynamics.
Table 7 Startability reference models
No. Model
name
1
VTM
Tyre
Vehicle
MF-Tyre
with
relaxation,
Valid up to
10
hz
frequency
Point mass for
the body, cab
and the axle,
Frame is a 2
point
mass
connected by a
spring
2
Magic tyre one
formula
dimensional
longitudinal
movement and
links
engine
torque, vehicle
sped and road
grade
(only
relatively low
frequency
dynamics
of
the
vehicle
itself is of
interest)
42
Startability
model
Operating
environment
Drive uphill or
downhill till the
truck flips over,
Road
disturbances up
to 10hz, simple
powertrain
model, everything
from
simple
brake model to a
very
realistic
brake model
Road model: α is
road grade. For a
constant
grade
road, der(α)=0,
and the road
grade
is
the
derivative of the
altitude, so the
road
altitude
model becomes
̇ (s)=sin α (s) in
spatial
coordinates and ̇
(t)=v(t)*sin α (t)
when expressed
indexed in time
Quality
Computational
resource
Best
Runs real time
available
so
runtime
model
at depends on the
Volvo,
no time you want
traction
to
run
the
control
is simulation
(1
included.
second
takes
Shouldn’t
one second)
consider
results
above 5 Hz
(7/10)
Depends on Depends on the
the
complexity
of
complexity
the model
of the model
Table 8 Handling reference models
No.
Model
name
VTM
Tyre
Vehicle
MF-Tyre
with
relaxation
, Valid up
to 5 Hz
frequency
Point mass
for the body,
cab and the
axle, Frame
is a 2 point
mass
connected
by a spring
2
CVM (Used
for basic
handling Steady
state
cornering,
Random
steer
input)
linear
spring
and
damper,
Lateral(Ca
n be nonlinear)
and
longitudin
al
also
taken into
considera
tion, slip
equations
also are
important
FEM
description
of
the
vehicle.
It
can be very
complex.
Very detailed
description
of frame and
cab for ride
comfort.
Same cab in
different
versions
depend on
the level of
detail
required
3
Theoretical Tyre not Simple
Static
calculation included
vehicle
model, only
wheelbase
required
1
Operating
environment
Drive uphill or
downhill
till
the truck flips
over,
Road
disturbances
up to 10hz,
simple
powertrain
model,
everything
from simple
brake model
to
a very
realistic brake
model
Road
is
specified
as
vertical profile
height,
can
run with any
speed, both
measured
road profiles
and
profiles
generated in
matlab,
No
elevation.
Road
disturbances
of
any
magnitude. 0110kmph.
Curvature as a
time
signal,
again
both
generated
curvature
Quality
Best
available
model at Volvo,
no
traction
control
is
included.
Shouldn’t
consider results
above 5 hz (7/10)
Computational
resource
Runs real time
so
runtime
depends on the
time you want
to run the
simulation
(1
second
takes
one second)
Not Always used
for
Handling,
VTM has control
systems it is
preferred,
but
they complement
each other, It’s
very close to
reality, a fixed
constant speed. It
is mostly used for
on-center
handling analysis
without
large
sweeping
motions within
the linear tyre
range
Can be from a
couple
of
minutes to a
few hours. Use
super elements.
Takes time to
reduce
the
model in to
super elements.
Once that is
done it can run
very fast. Can
re-use
the
super elements
need to be
changed only
when changes
are
made.
Normally
run
with 2000 hz
frequency
(1
second takes 4
seconds)
Theoretical
Very fast direct
calculation, only computation
depends
on
several
parameters
43
Table 9 Ride comfort reference models
No. Model
name
1
VTM
Tyre
Vehicle
Simple Spring
damper vertical
dynamics. Valid
up to 10 hz
frequency
Point mass
for
the
body, cab
and
the
axle, Frame
is a 2 point
mass
connected
by a spring
2
Virtual
Test
Approac
h
The front and
rear tyres and
the wheel ring
are 6.00-14LT
and
4.5J
respectively
Three
dimensiona
l
vehicle
model
consisting
of all main
parts
3
Half
Vehicle
Model
point mass for
front and rear
tyres, spring and
damping model
Half vehicle
model with
wheel
base, body
mass and
pitch
inertia.
Anti-roll
bar
is
included as
part of the
vehicle.
44
Operating
environment
Drive uphill or
downhill till the
truck flips over,
Road
disturbances up
to 10hz, simple
powertrain
model,
everything from
simple
brake
model to a very
realistic brake
model
virtual
test
proving ground,
consists of road,
traffic
signals
and
some
external
environment
be
described
statistically by
using a simple
spectral density
formulation,
vehicle speed
20m/s,
Road
disturbances up
to 15hz
Quality
Rarely used
for
ride
comfort
because of
the
low
frequency
range.
Shouldn’t
consider
results above
5 hz (2/10)
Can
minimize the
cost,
both
designers
and
customers,
even
the
users
can
gather and
share
the
experience
of
vehicle
ride comfort
Not
mentioned,
but it may be
more
accurate
than
a
quarter car
model
because the
best
suspension
and anti-roll
bar stiffness
can
be
obtained
from
half
vehicle
model
Computational
resource
Runs real-time so
runtime depends
on the time you
want to run the
simulation
(1
second takes one
second) (Low cost
as it only requires
matlab)
A relatively long
time required to
build models by
using
ADAMS,
might
not
be
adopted in this
thesis because it
wasn't built in a
mathematical
method
Not
mentioned
also. But it needs
longer time than a
quarter car model
to evaluate ride
comfort due to
both front and rear
wheels involved.
Low assuming they
are all simple
4
CVM
Non-linear
spring
and
damper(Preferr
ed) Handles loss
of contact from
the
road
properly, A rigid
ring model - belt
as a rigid ring up
to
80
hz
(Required above
50hz)
Fem
description
of
the
vehicle. It
can be very
complex.
Very
detailed
description
of
frame
and cab for
ride
comfort.
Same cab
in different
versions
depend on
the level of
detail
required
Road
is
specified
as
vertical profile
height, can run
with any speed,
both measured
road
profiles
and
profiles
generated
in
matlab,
No
elevation. Road
disturbances of
any magnitude.
0-110kmph.
Curvature as a
time
signal,
again
both
generated
curvature
Always used
for
ride
comfort, Its
very close to
reality,
no
effect with
vehicle
speed (9/10)
Can be from a
couple of minutes
to a few hours. Use
super
elements.
Takes time to
reduce the model
in
to
super
elements.
Once
that is done it can
run very fast. Can
re-use the super
elements need to
be changed only
when changes are
made.
Normally
run with 2000 hz
frequency
(1
second takes 4
seconds)(Need to
run for 5 min)
45
7.2
Appendix B Road profiles
Here shows the road profiles of road 365 and 521.
Figure 23 Road 365 height data VS longitudinal data
Figure 24 Road 365 speed data VS longitudinal data
46
Figure 25 Road 521 height data VS longitudinal data
Figure 26 Road 521 speed data VS longitudinal data
47
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Related manuals

Download PDF

advertisement