湿滑路面轮胎接地力学特性模型

doi:10.13229/j.cnki.jdxbgxb.20220951

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究部分滑水状态下轮胎的接地力学特性，以205/55 R16乘用车轮胎为研究对象，建立了耦合欧拉-拉格朗日滑水仿真模型。利用正交试验设计方法创建试验方案，通过极差分析、偏相关分析和多元线性回归分析，建立了适用于不同工况的湿滑路面轮胎侧偏纵滑“亚利桑那大学轮胎模型”。对比分析表明，该模型能够准确预测湿滑路面上的轮胎接地力学特性，可为研究轮胎多工况滑水性能提供理论参考。

关键词: 车辆工程, 轮胎滑水, 接地力学特性, 侧偏侧倾, UA模型

Abstract:

In order to study the grounding mechanical characteristics of tire under partial hydroplaning state， the coupling Euler-Lagrange hydroplaning simulation model was established with 205/55 R16 passenger car tires as the research object， and the orthogonal experimental design method was used to create the experimental scheme. With range analysis， partial correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis， the "University of Arizona Tire Model" was established for different working conditions of wet road tire sideways longitudinal slip. Comparative analysis shows that the model can accurately predict the grounding mechanical properties of tires on wet slippery road， which provides a theoretical reference for the study of the hydroplaning performance of tires under multiple working conditions.

Key words: automobile engineering, tire hydroplaning, grounding mechanical characteristics, sideslip and camber, UA model

中图分类号:

U463.341

刘从臻,陈高,刘洪柱,马强,徐成伟,孟辉,王国林. 湿滑路面轮胎接地力学特性模型[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(6): 1501-1511.

Cong-zhen LIU,Gao CHEN,Hong-zhu LIU,Qiang MA,Cheng-wei XU,Hui MENG,Guo-lin WANG. Tire grounding mechanical model on wet roads[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Engineering and Technology Edition), 2024, 54(6): 1501-1511.

图/表 25

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

图11

图12

图13

图14

图15

图16

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

图17

表6

表7

表8

参考文献 24

1	Dolwichai P, Limtragool J. The effect of tire treads shape to stick-slip phenomenon in frictional contact[C]∥The 20th Conference of MENETT, Nakorn Ratchasima, Thailand, 2006: 18-20.
2	El-Sayegh Z, El-Gindy M. Cornering characteristics of a truck tire on wet surface using finite element analysis and smoothed-particle hydrodynamics[J]. International Journal of Dynamics and Control, 2018, 6(4): 1567-1576.
3	El-Sayegh Z, El-Gindy M. Sensitivity analysis of truck tyre hydroplaning speed using FEA-SPH model[J]. International Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, 2017, 12(1/2): 143-161.
4	Jeong J Y, Jeong H Y. Hydroplaning simulation of a tire in thin water using fem and an estimation method and its application to skid number estimation[J]. International Journal of Automotive Technology, 2013, 14(2): 325-331.
5	Ong G P, Fwa T F. Mechanistic interpretation of braking distance specifications and pavement friction requirements[J]. Transportation Research Record, 2010, 2155(1): 145-157.
6	Fwa T F, Anupam K, Ong G P. Relative effectiveness of grooves in tire and pavement for reducing vehicle hydroplaning risk[J]. Transportation Research Record, 2010, 2155(1): 73-81.
7	陈磊,周海超,潘公宇. 轮胎花纹凹坑非光滑表面对抗滑水性能的影响分析[J]. 现代制造工程, 2019, 19(1): 23-31.
	Chen Lei, Zhou Hai-chao, Pan Gong-yu. Influence analysis of bionic pit non-smooth surface pattern on tire hydroplaning performance[J]. Modern Manufacturing Engineering, 2019, (1): 23-31.
8	杨建,王国林,周海超,等. 仿生非光滑花纹沟对轮胎抗滑水性能的影响[J]. 华中科技大学学报: 自然科学版, 2015, 43(2): 21-25.
	Yang Jian, Wang Guo-lin, Zhou Hai-chao, et al. Study on influence of bionic non-smooth pattern groove on tire anti-hydroplaning performance[J]. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition), 2015, 43(2): 21-25.
9	Zhou H C, Zhai H H, Ding Y M, et al. Numerical investigation of passive control flow to improve tire hydroplaning performance using a V-riblet non-smooth surface[J]. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 2017, 9(11): 1-13.
10	黄晓明,刘修宇,曹青青,等. 积水路面轮胎部分滑水数值模拟[J]. 湖南大学学报: 自然科学版, 2018, 45(9): 113-121.
	Huang Xiao-ming, Liu Xiu-yu, Cao Qing-qing, et al. Numerical simulation of tire partial hydroplaning on flooded pavement[J]. Journal of Hunan University (Natural Sciences), 2018, 45(9): 113-121.
11	季天剑,黄晓明,刘清泉. 部分滑水对路面附着系数的影响[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2003, 3(4): 10-12.
	Ji Tian-jian, Huang Xiao-ming, Liu Qing-quan. Part hydroplaning effect on pavement friction coefficient[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2003, 3(4): 10-12.
12	董斌. 部分滑水条件下高速公路车辆行驶安全性研究[D].重庆: 重庆交通大学土木建筑学院, 2011.
	Dong Bin. Study of safety drive on expressway under partly hydroplaning[D]. Chongqing: School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Chongqing Jiaotong University, 2011.
13	Fiala E. Seitenkraefte am rollenden Luftreifen[J]. Verein Deutscher Ingenieure, 1954, 96(29): 973-979.
14	刘青,郭孔辉,陈秉聪. 轮胎刷子模型分析Ⅰ.稳态侧偏刷子模型[J]. 农业机械学报, 2000, 31(1): 19-22.
	Liu Qing, Guo Kong-hui, Chen Bing-cong. Review of tire brush models I. Steady state cornering brush models[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2000, 31(1): 19-22.
15	郭孔辉. 汽车轮胎动力学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2018.
16	郭孔辉,李宁,庄晔. 轮胎侧向力影响因素试验[J]. 农业机械学报, 2011, 42(12): 1-5.
	Guo Kong-hui, Li Ning, Zhuang Ye. Test on factors of tire lateral force[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2011, 42(12): 1-5.
17	Horne W B, Joyner U T. Pneumatic tire hydroplaning and some effects on vehicle performance[J]. SAE Transactions, 1966, 74: 623-650.
18	Horne W B, Yager T J, Ivey D L. Recent studies to investigate effects of tire footprint aspect ratio on dynamic hydroplaning speed[J]. ASTM Special Technical Publication, 1986, 929: 26-46.
19	Gim G, Nikravesh P E. An analytical model of pneumatic tyres for vehicle dynamic simulations. Part 1: pure slips[J]. International Journal of Vehicle Design, 1990, 11(6): 589-618.
20	Gim G. An analytical model of pneumatic tyres for vehicle dynamic simulations. Part 2: comprehensive slips[J]. International Journal of Vehicle Design of Vehicle Design, 1991, 12(1): 19-39.
21	周海超,陈磊,翟辉辉,等. 基于CFD的轮胎滑水及其性能影响因素分析[J]. 重庆交通大学学报: 自然科学版, 2017, 36(1): 110-116.
	Zhou Hai-chao, Chen Lei, Zhai Hui-hui, et al. Research on flow field and influencing factors of tire hydroplaning based on CFD method[J]. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Natural Science), 2017, 36(1): 110-116.
22	张丽霞,郑超艺,杨朝会,等. 湿滑路面汽车轮胎滑水性能影响因素仿真[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2020, 20(30): 12589-12595.
	Zhang Li-xia, Zheng Chao-yi, Yang Chao-hui, et al. Simulation on factors affecting hydroplaning performance of vehicle tire on wet pavement[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2020, 20(30): 12589-12595.
23	庄楚强,何春雄. 应用数理统计基础[M]. 广州: 华南理工大学出版社, 2006.
24	王婷婷. 严寒地区居民用能行为对住宅能耗影响的偏相关分析[J]. 建筑与文化, 2021, 18(10): 195-197.
	Wang Ting-ting. Partial correlation analysis of the influence of residents' energy-using behavior on energy consumption in severe cold region[J]. Architecture and Culture, 2021, 18(10): 195-197.

相关文章 15

[1]	黄玲,崔躜,游峰,洪佩鑫,钟浩川,曾译萱. 适用于多车交互场景的车辆轨迹预测模型[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(5): 1188-1195.
[2]	郭洪艳,王连冰,赵旭,戴启坤. 考虑侧向运动的整车质量与道路坡度估计[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(5): 1175-1187.
[3]	陆玉凯,袁帅科,熊树生,朱绍鹏,张宁. 汽车漆面缺陷高精度检测系统[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(5): 1205-1213.
[4]	汪少华,张启睿,施德华,殷春芳,李春. 双行星排式混合动力传动系统非线性振动响应特性分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(4): 890-901.
[5]	高镇海,蔡荣贵,孙天骏,于桐,赵浩源,班浩. 人机共驾下的驾驶行为数据滤波方法[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(3): 589-599.
[6]	谢宪毅,王禹涵,金立生,赵鑫,郭柏苍,廖亚萍,周彬,李克强. 基于改变控制时域时间步长的智能车轨迹跟踪控制[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(3): 620-630.
[7]	邓小林,杨馥模,覃善甘. 新型仿竹六边形梯度层级多胞管耐撞性对比分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(2): 333-345.
[8]	王毅刚,王玉鹏,张昊,赵思安. 高速列车转向架区域气动噪声源识别与分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(2): 346-355.
[9]	聂建军,侯军凯,解晓琳,鄢鸿桢. 新型巡检机器人移动底盘设计及越障性能分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(2): 356-364.
[10]	胡宏宇,张慧珺,姚荣涵,陈国迎,高菲. L3级自动驾驶接管过程驾驶员情景意识研究[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(2): 410-418.
[11]	吴骁,史文库,郭年程,赵燕燕,陈志勇,李鑫鹏,孙卓,刘健. 基于Ease off的准双曲面齿轮多目标优化[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(1): 76-85.
[12]	王铁,李旭东,田程,赵宏伟. 基于多轴载荷投影构建轮辋双轴疲劳损伤模型[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(1): 99-104.
[13]	李旭东,王新宇,田程,张新峰,牛治慧,赵志强. 基于用户关联的车辆耐久性载荷谱编制[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2024, 54(1): 66-75.
[14]	陈兆玮,蒲前华. 弹性车轮对大跨斜拉桥车桥耦合振动的抑制特性[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(9): 2519-2532.
[15]	刘平义,李晓婷,高偌霖,李海涛,魏文军,王亚. 车辆侧倾驱动机构设计与试验[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(8): 2185-2192.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

水平	因素
水平	x₁/N	x₂/MPa	x₃/mm	x₄/mm	x₅/（km·h^-1）
1	4 000	0.23	4	3.6	40
2	4 500	0.25	6	5.6	50
3	5 000	0.27	8	7.6	60
4	5 500	0.29	10	9.6	70

试验编号	试验参数					试验指标
试验编号	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅	F_x	F_y	F_z
1	1	1	1	1	1	1 104.816 4	1 865.509 4	3 620.265 2
2	1	2	2	2	2	936.068 8	1 584.363 2	2 941.541 1
3	1	3	3	3	3	429.401 7	1 036.253 1	1 762.497 9
4	1	4	4	4	4	183.030 4	212.911 0	473.129 2
5	2	1	2	3	4	610.756 5	800.652 9	1 611.070 2
6	2	2	1	4	3	981.650 1	1 701.306 1	3 120.232 6
7	2	3	4	1	2	903.351 7	1 502.759 6	2 845.741 7
8	2	4	3	2	1	1 198.141 7	1 962.085 2	3 757.652 7
9	3	1	3	4	2	1 397.311 8	1 832.173 8	3 684.340 5
10	3	2	4	3	1	1 624.036 7	2 026.572 1	4 198.854 5
11	3	3	1	2	4	900.835 0	1 331.454 9	2 590.056 5
12	3	4	2	1	3	920.261 6	1 645.599 3	3 024.884 2
13	4	1	4	2	3	1 119.515 3	1 422.594 1	3 030.685 2
14	4	2	3	1	4	819.354 6	910.036 5	1 901.389 9
15	4	3	2	4	1	2 041.706 2	2 346.287 4	4 976.508 0
16	4	4	1	3	2	1 683.228 9	2 342.364 2	4 644.339 8

试验结果	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅
K₁_j	2 653.317 3	4 232.400 0	4 670.530 5	3 747.784 2	5 968.700 9
K₂_j	3 693.900 0	4 361.110 2	4 508.793 1	4 154.560 8	4 919.961 3
K₃_j	4 842.445 1	4 275.294 6	3 844.209 7	4 347.423 9	3 450.828 7
K₄_j	5 663.804 9	3 984.662 6	3 829.934 1	4 603.698 6	2 513.976 6
R_j	3 010.487 6	376.447 6	840.596 4	855.914 4	3 454.724 3

试验结果	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅
K₁_j	4 699.036 8	5 920.930 2	6 320.864 5	5 923.904 8	8 200.454 2
K₂_j	5 966.803 8	6 222.277 9	6 376.902 7	6 300.497 3	7 261.660 7
K₃_j	6 835.800 1	6 216.755 0	5 740.548 8	6 205.842 3	5 805.752 6
K₄_j	7 021.282 2	6 162.959 7	5 164.836 7	6 092.678 4	3 255.055 4
R_j	2 322.245 4	301.347 7	1 212.066 0	376.592 6	4 945.398 9

试验结果	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅
K₁_j	8 797.433 4	11 946.361 1	13 974.894 1	11 392.281 0	16 553.280 4
K₂_j	11 334.697 2	12 162.018 1	12 554.003 5	12 319.935 5	14 115.963 1
K₃_j	13 498.135 7	12 174.804 1	11 105.881 0	12 216.762 4	10 938.299 9
K₄_j	14 552.922 9	11 900.005 9	10 548.410 6	12 254.210 3	6 575.645 8
R_j	5 655.489 5	274.798 2	3 426.483 5	957.654 5	9 977.634 6