friction

[ks]

fricton between tyre and road in different conditions ?what value of coefficient of fricton is good?

[ks]

fricton between tyre and road in different conditions ?what value of coefficient of fricton is good?

[exFSAE]

2.718 is optimal.

[The AFX Master]

I disagree... i think is 2.pi

[DG]

We aimed for about -6.

[Zac]

I think you would want to be somewhere around 6 or 7. Any higher than that and you'll run into issues with your driver blacking out mid-corner.

[sbrenaman]

Use 0.05 as the tire coefficent of friction. It will allow you to make your suspension pieces much lighter. In the rain, use 0.075

[woodsy96]

-For what tyre?
-Under what load?
-At what inclination?
-On what road surface, which is how clean?
-What is the tyre temperature?

Do some reading, like Pacejka's book on tyre and vehicle dynamics or RCVD by Milliken. Or consider joining the FSAE TTC.

[L B0MB]

This has to be someone trolling to see what flameage results from such retarded questions...

But hey, the replies are pretty awesome!

[exFSAE]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The AFX Master:
I disagree... i think is 2.pi </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhh.. let's not be ridiculous here. 2*pi? That doesn't even make sense.

It's 2.718.

[Adambomb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Zac:
I think you would want to be somewhere around 6 or 7. Any higher than that and you'll run into issues with your driver blacking out mid-corner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1

[Kirby]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Zac:
I think you would want to be somewhere around 6 or 7. Any higher than that and you'll run into issues with your driver blacking out mid-corner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we just were out tuning and made the mistake of turning the tyres to Cf=~8. We were having issues with rod end failure in the wishbones.

any ideas?

[Bobby Doyle]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kirby:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Zac:
I think you would want to be somewhere around 6 or 7. Any higher than that and you'll run into issues with your driver blacking out mid-corner. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we just were out tuning and made the mistake of turning the tyres to Cf=~8. We were having issues with rod end failure in the wishbones.

any ideas? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd imagine you'd also have problems with car-flippage. This is why you should run the Hoosiers. With a Cf of ~8 and huge camber sensitivity, once your car starts to flip over your outside tires begin to slide. A well balanced car is very effective this way.

[Zac]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">University of Adelaide FSAE </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">we just were out tuning and made the mistake of turning the tyres to Cf=~8. We were having issues with rod end failure in the wishbones.

any ideas? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I think you have two options:

1. Use the same rod ends as this guy:

http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/t...?r=68810648#68810648 (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/648600998/m/68810648?r=68810648#68810648)

2. Give Goodyear their development constructions back.

[Jersey Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bobby Doyle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kirby:
we just were out tuning and made the mistake of turning the tyres to Cf=~8. We were having issues with rod end failure in the wishbones.

any ideas? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is why you should run the Hoosiers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nah. Run the Goodyears. Ours go to 11.

[RyMan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Nah. Run the Goodyears. Ours go to 11.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So does that mean they are one stickier than most tires? Why don't you make 10 stickier and have that be the top number?

[Zac]

Because if your car is on 10 and your driver is on 10, then where do you have left to go? These go to 11.

[AxelRipper]

yes, but you could just make 9 sticker and then go to 10 if you need that one more

[Zac]

But these go to 11.

[Tim.Wright]

Yes!

I've been waiting for 6 years for spinal tap to appear on these forums!

[MalcolmG]

well played, that definitely deserves a high five.

[L B0MB]

Am I still cool if I had to google "But these go to 11" to understand what was going on? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[PatClarke]

No, no, no guys, do not mislead the man!
The real number he needs is 9!

Proof comes from that site where one can write anything and then claim it as fact =]

Nine is a composite number, its proper divisors being 1 and 3. It is 3 times 3 and hence the third square number. 9 is a Motzkin number. It is the first composite lucky number.
Nine is the highest single-digit number in the decimal system. It is the second non-unitary square prime of the form (p2) and the first that is odd. All subsequent squares of this form are odd. It has a unique aliquot sum 4 which is itself a square prime. 9 is; and can be, the only square prime with an aliquot sum of the same form. The aliquot sequence of 9 has 5 members (9,4,3,1,0) this number being the second composite member of the 3-aliquot tree.
There are nine Heegner numbers.
Since , 9 is an exponential factorial.
8 and 9 form a Ruth-Aaron pair under the second definition that counts repeated prime factors as often as they occur.
A polygon with nine sides is called a nonagon or enneagon. A group of nine of anything is called an ennead.
In base 10 a number is evenly divisible by nine if and only if its digital root is 9. That is, if you multiply nine by any natural number, and repeatedly add the digits of the answer until it is just one digit, you will end up with nine:
• 2 × 9 = 18 (1 + 8 = 9)
• 3 × 9 = 27 (2 + 7 = 9)
• 9 × 9 = 81 (8 + 1 = 9)
• 121 × 9 = 1089 (1 + 0 + 8 + 9 = 18; 1 + 8 = 9)
• 234 × 9 = 2106 (2 + 1 + 0 + 6 = 9)
• 578329 × 9 = 5204961 (5 + 2 + 0 + 4 + 9 + 6 + 1 = 27 (2 + 7 = 9))
• 482729235601 × 9 = 4344563120409 (4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 3 + 1 + 2 + 0 + 4 + 0 + 9 = 45 (4 + 5 = 9))
The only other number with this property is three. In base N, the divisors of N ? 1 have this property. Another consequence of 9 being 10 ? 1, is that it is also a Kaprekar number.
The difference between a base-10 positive integer and the sum of its digits is a whole multiple of nine. Examples:
• The sum of the digits of 41 is 5, and 41-5 = 36. The digital root of 36 is 3+6 = 9, which, as explained above, demonstrates that it is evenly divisible by nine.
• The sum of the digits of 35967930 is 3+5+9+6+7+9+3+0 = 42, and 35967930-42 = 35967888. The digital root of 35967888 is 3+5+9+6+7+8+8+8 = 54, 5+4 = 9.
Subtracting two base-10 positive integers that are transpositions of each other yields a number that is a whole multiple of nine. Some examples:
• 41-14 = 27. The digital root of 27 is 2+7 = 9.
• 36957930-35967930 = 990000, which is obviously a multiple of nine.
This works regardless of the number of digits that are transposed. For example, the largest transposition of 35967930 is 99765330 (all digits in descending order) and its smallest transposition is 03356799 (all digits in ascending order); subtracting pairs of these numbers produces:
• 99765330-35967930 = 63797400; 6+3+7+9+7+4+0+0 = 36, 3+6 = 9.
• 99765330-03356799 = 96408531; 9+6+4+0+8+5+3+1 = 36, 3+6 = 9.
• 35967930-03356799 = 32611131; 3+2+6+1+1+1+3+1 = 18, 1+8 = 9.
Casting out nines is a quick way of testing the calculations of sums, differences, products, and quotients of integers, known as long ago as the 12th Century.
The Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art is a Chinese mathematics book, composed by scholars between the 10th century BC, and the 1st century AD; it is the one of the earliest surviving mathematical text from China.
Every prime in a Cunningham chain of the first kind with a length of 4 or greater is congruent to 9 mod 10 (the only exception being the chain 2, 5, 11, 23, 47).
Six recurring nines appear in the decimal places 762 through 767 of pi. This is known as the Feynman point.
If an odd perfect number is of the form 36k + 9, it has at least nine distinct prime factors.
Nine is the binary complement of number six:
9 = 1001
6 = 0110


And then 9 x 3 becomes 27 and that is another topic.

Cheers

Pat

[MalcolmG]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PatClarke:

And then 9 cubed becomes 27 and that is another topic.

Cheers

Pat </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sure about that? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[PatClarke]

DOH, edited =] =] =]

I shouldn't post and watch the Simpsons at the same time =]

Pat