Investigation of Truck Tire Rubber Material Definitions Using Finite Element Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper investigates the tire-road interaction for tires equipped with two different solid rubber material definitions within a Finite Element Analysis virtual environment, ESI PAMCRASH. A Mixed Service Drive truck tire sized 315/80R22.5 is designed with two different solid rubber material definitions: a legacy hyperelastic solid Mooney-Rivlin material definition and an Ogden hyperelastic solid material definition. The popular Mooney-Rivlin is a material definition for solid rubber simulation that is not built with element elimination and is not easily applicable to thermal applications. The Ogden hyperelastic material definition for rubber simulations allows for element destruction. Therefore, it is of interest and more suited for designing a tire model with wear and thermal capabilities. Both the Mooney-Rivlin and Ogden-equipped Mixed Service Drive truck tires are subjected to a simulated static vertical stiffness test to validate their static domain characteristics against experimental data. The tires are then subjected to simulated rolling resistance tests using Finite Element Analysis at varying operating conditions and the results are compared. These tests yield normalized Rolling Resistance Coefficient results that can be analyzed. The Rolling Resistance Coefficient is a suitable output as it is a tire-terrain parameter that is dependent to varying operating conditions. The operating conditions consist of a range of vertical loads (13.3 kN-40 kN), a range of tire inflation pressures (586 kPa-1275 kPa), and a constant longitudinal velocity of 25 km/h. This work investigates the effect of the different material definitions against the Rolling Resistance Coefficient at varying operating conditions using the Finite Element Method. The difference in tire-road results between the two material definitions in this study were found to be miniscule. This research aims to set the foundation for a tire model that is equipped with the more capable Ogden material card definition for tire wear and thermal applications. The study suggests that Ogden-equipped Mixed Service Drive Tire tire performs similarly to the Mooney-Rivlin tire and is capable to perform potential thermal and wear simulations through the newer advanced Finite Element Analysis platform.</div></div>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".