Tom A. wrote:
Yep...any energy making it past the tire is going to be mostly absorbed and not returned. Here's the thing about roller testing...it's a GREAT way of determining the hysteresis losses from deformation and ranking tires. If you add in additional "roughness" to the test setup that increases the deformations, it's just adding additional hysteresis losses in a proportional manner, and the rankings don't change. This is why I'm not a fan of adding "roughness" to a roller test. It doesn't add any additional information.
Imagine you must have been in loop for this since they quote your work and Josh's work quite a bit... tested on textured drums to simulate cobbles... BUT also add a shock absorber to simulate body hysteresis... the "over thinking" test I was suggesting.. does seem to add imho significant additional info đŸ¤”
Super interesting that
- breakpoint is not just a matter of road roughness, tire width and rider weight.. but also seems to be an inherent characteristic of the tire itself and it's construction as well.. all thing being equal different tires constructions will have different breakpoints!
- As expected, wider tire will have a lower breakpoint pressure, but (as I expected) will have a lower power number at it's break point pressure as well..
Main article link below... need a membership to see the actual testing results...
https://www.velonews.com/...ols-when-testing-it/
Last edited by:
doctorSpoc: Oct 4, 21 15:16