7th EUROMECH Solid Mechanics Conference

J. Ambrosio et.al. (eds.)

Lisbon, Portugal, 711 September 2009

DYNAMIC TIRE FORCES WITH SMOOTH TRANSITION TO

STAND-STILL
G. Rill1 and W. Hirschberg2
1 Regensburg

University of Applied Sciences, Germany

Fakultat Maschinenbau, Galgenbergstr. 30, 93053 Regensburg
e-mail: georg.rill@maschinenbau.fh-regensburg.de
2 Graz

University of Technology, Austria

Institut fur Fahrzeugtechnik, Inffeldgasse 11/I, 8010 Graz
e-mail: wolfgang.hirschberg@tugraz.at

Keywords: Tire Modeling, Dynamic Tire Forces and Torques, Vehicle Dynamics.
Abstract. Sophisticated tests of electronic devices controlling the wheel slip include braking
to stand-still, drive-away and starting on a slope maneuvers. Today, costly and time-consuming
field tests are more and more supplemented or completely substituted by hardware in the loop
(HIL) simulation techniques. In vehicle dynamics the reliability and accuracy of the simulation
results strongly depend on the tire model. The handling tire model TMeasy [1] is characterized
by a useful compromise between user-friendliness, model-complexity and efficiency in computation time on the one hand, and precision in representation on the other hand. The slip based
description of the steady state tire forces and torques which is common to all handling tire
models usually causes numerical problems when approaching stand still [8]. By taking the
compliance of the tire into account the steady state approach can easily be extended to a first
order dynamic tire model. By small modifications in the slip definition the TMeasy approach
can handle not even hard braking maneuvers but also grants a smooth transition to stand-still.
The simulation results of a vehicle breaking to a full stop and moving downhill will document
this particular TMeasy model capacity.

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

INTRODUCTION

For the dynamic simulation of on-road vehicles, the model-element tire/road is of special
importance, according to its influence on the achievable results. It can be said that the sufficient description of the interactions between tire and road is one of the most important tasks
of vehicle modeling, because all the other components of the chassis influence the vehicle dynamic properties via the tire contact forces and torques. Therefore, in the interest of balanced
modeling, the precision of the complete vehicle model should stand in reasonable relation to
the performance of the applied tire model. At present, two groups of models can be identified,
handling models and structural or high frequency models [4].
Complex tire models are computer time consuming and they need a lot of data. Usually,
they are used for stochastic vehicle vibrations occurring during rough road rides and causing
strength-relevant component loads [5].
Comparatively lean tire models are suitable for vehicle dynamics simulations, while, with
the exception of some elastic partial structures such as twist-beam axles in cars or the vehicle
frame in trucks, the elements of the vehicle structure can be seen as rigid. In contrast to purely
physical tire models semi-physical tire models, will rely also on measured and observed forceslip characteristics. This class of tire models is characterized by an useful compromise between
user-friendliness, model-complexity and efficiency in computation time on the one hand, and
precision in representation on the other hand, [2].
Measurements show that the dynamic reaction of the tire forces and torques to disturbances
can be approximated quite well by first order systems [3]. The TMeasy model approach automatically generates a first order dynamic approximation to tire forces and torques with a smooth
transition to stand-still.
2
2.1

STEADY STATE TIRE FORCES AND TORQUES

Contact Geometry

Within TMeasy it is assumed that the contact patch is sufficiently flat. Four road points Q1 to
Q4 located in the front, in the rear, to the left and to the right of the tire patch are used to define
the normal vector eN of a local track plane and to calculate the geometric contact point P on
rough roads, Fig. 1. As in reality, sharp bends and discontinuities, which will occur at step- or
ramp-sized obstacles, are smoothed by this approach.
M
x +x

Q2

+y y
undeflected
tire contour

en

uneven
road

undeflected
tire contour

P Q1

longitudinal
inclination

lateral
inclination Q3

uneven
road

en
P

Q4

Figure 1: Track normal and geometric contact point on rough roads

The direction of the longitudinal and lateral force as well as the tire camber angle are then
derived from the direction of the wheel rotation axis and the track normal.
The tire deflection z which normally is the difference between the undeflected tire radius
r0 and the static radius rS is calculated via equivalent deflection areas on a cambered tire, Fig. 2.

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

=/ 0

=0
eyR

eyR

rS

rSL

r0

en

eyR

rS

rSR

rS
r0

en

rSR
en

P Q

P=Q

r0

z
Fz

Fz

Fz
full contact

partial contact

Figure 2: Tire deflection and static contact point

In consequence the geometric contact point P is shifted to the static contact point Q where
the resulting wheel load Fz will be applied.
By taking into account that the tire deformation consists of the belt and flank deformation
a realistic approximation of the length L of the contact patch is possible. The dynamic rolling
radius rD of the tire which is needed for average transport velocity of tread particles is calculated
by a weighted sum of the undeflected and the static tire radius.
2.2

Normal Force

The normal force or wheel load is separated into a static and a dynamic part
Fz = FzS + FzD .

(1)

The static part FzS is described as a nonlinear function of the tire deflection z and the dynamic
part FzD is roughly approximated by a damping force proportional to the time derivative z of
the tire deflection, [1]. Because the tire can only apply pressure forces to the road the normal
force is restricted to Fz 0.
2.3

Longitudinal and Lateral Forces

The longitudinal force as a function of the longitudinal slip Fx = Fx (sx ) and the lateral force
depending on the lateral slip Fy = Fy (sy ) are defined by characteristic parameters: the initial
M
M
M
inclination dFx0 , dFy0 , the location sM
x , sy and the magnitude of the maximum Fx , Fy as well
as the sliding limit sSx , sSy and the sliding force FxS , FyS , Fig. 3.
A simple brush model delivers the longitudinal and lateral slip as
sx =

(vx rD )
rD ||

and sy =

vy
rD ||

(2)

where denotes the angular velocity of the wheel, rD describes the dynamic rolling radius and
vx , vy are the components of the contact point velocity in the longitudinal and lateral direction. In TMeasy both slips which in general driving situations will appear simultaneously are
vectorially added to the generalized slip
s =

v
u 
u sx 2
t

sx

sy
sy

!2

=
3

sN
x

2

+ sN
y

2

(3)

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

Fx

Fx

Fx

Fy

0
dF x

sx
sSx

sM
x

Fy Fy

dF 0
FS

FM

Fy

F(s)
Fx

sy

dF y
sSy
sS
sM

sy

sM
y

sx

Figure 3: Simple and generalized tire characteristics

N
The longitudinal and lateral slip were normalized, sx sN
x and sy sy , in order to achieve
a nearly equally weighted contribution to the generalized slip. The normalizing factors sx and
sy take characteristic properties of the longitudinal and lateral tire force characteristics into
account. If the longitudinal and the lateral tire characteristics do not differ too much, the normalizing factors will be approximately equal to one.
If the wheel locks, the average transport velocity will vanish, rD || = 0. Hence, longitudinal, lateral, and generalized slip will tend to infinity, s . To avoid this problem, the
N
normalized slips sN
x and sy are modified to

sN
x =

(vx rD )
sx
=
sx
rD || sx

and
sN
y =

sy
vy
=
sy
rD || sy

sN
x =

sN
y =

(vx rD )
rD || sx + vN

vy
.
rD || sy + vN

(4)

(5)

In normal driving situations, where rD ||  vN holds, the difference between the original slips
and the modified slips are hardly noticeable. However, the fictitious velocity vN > 0 avoids the
singularities at rD || = 0 and will produce in this particular case a generalized slip which
points exactly into the direction of the sliding velocity of a locked wheel.
By combining the longitudinal and lateral slip to a generalized slip s the combined force
characteristic F = F (s) can be automatically generated by the characteristic tire parameter in
longitudinal and lateral direction, [1]. In reverse, the longitudinal and lateral tire forces are then
given by the projection of the generalized force characteristic into the longitudinal and lateral
direction
sN
F
Fx = Fx cos = F x = sN
s
s x

sN
F
and Fy = F sin F y = sN
s
s y

where F/s represents the global derivative of the combined force characteristic.

(6)

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

3
3.1

FIRST ORDER TIRE DYNAMICS

Normal Driving Situation

Measurements show that the dynamic reaction of the tire forces and torques to disturbances
can be approximated quite well by first order systems [3]. Taking the tire deformation into
account the TMeasy approach to steady state tire forces can easily be extended to dynamic tire
forces. The tire forces Fx and Fy acting in the contact patch deflect the tire in longitudinal and
lateral direction, Fig. 4.
rim

dx

cx

rim
dy
tire

tire

xe vx - rD

Fx

cy

Fy

ye

vy

Figure 4: Tire deflection in longitudinal and lateral direction

The tire forces Fx and Fy acting in the contact patch deflect the tire in longitudinal and
lateral direction, Fig. 4. In a first order approximation the dynamic tire forces in longitudinal
and lateral direction follow from
Fx
x e
(7)
Fx (vx + x e ) Fx (vx ) +
|
| {z }
{z
}
vx
FxD
FxS
Fy
Fy (vy + y e ) Fy (vy ) +
y e
(8)
vy
|
{z
}
| {z }
FyD
FyS
where xe and ye name the longitudinal and the lateral tire deflection. In steady state the longitudinal tire forces FxS and FyS will be provided by Eq. (6) as functions of the normalized slips sN
x
and sN
.
Their
derivatives
with
respect
to
the
components
of
the
contact
point
velocity
are
given
y
by
FxS
FxS
=
vx
sN
x
FyS
FyS
=
vy
sN
y

sN
x
vx
sN
y
vy

FxS
1
N
sx rD ||
sx + vN
S
Fy
1
=
N
sy rD ||
sy + vN

(9)
(10)

where the definition of the normalized longitudinal slip in Eqs. (4) and (5) were used to generate the derivatives of the slips with respect to the components of the contact point velocity.
Corresponding to the accuracy of the first order approximations in Eqs. (7) and (8) the partial
derivatives of the steady state tire forces with respect to the normalized slips will be approximated by their global derivatives
FxS
sN
x
FyS
sN
y

FxS
1
F N 1
F
= FxS N =
sx N =
N
sx
sx
s
sx
s
S
F
1
F N 1
F
Ny = FyS N =
sy N =
sy
sy
s
sy
s

(11)
(12)

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

Then, Eqs. (7) and (8) will read as

F N
F
1
sx +
x e
s
s rD ||
sx + vN
F
1
F N
sy +
y e

s
s rD ||
sy + vN

FxD

(13)

FyD

(14)

where according to Eq. (6) the steady state tire forces FxS and FyS were replaced by the terms
F N
s and Fs sN
y . On the other hand, the dynamic tire forces can be derived from
s x
FxD = cx xe + dx x e
FyD = cy ye + dy y e

(15)
(16)

where cx , cy and dx , dy denote stiffness and damping properties of the tire in longitudinal and
lateral direction. Inserting the normalized longitudinal slips defined by Eqs. (4) and (5) into
Eqs. (13) and (14) and combining them with Eqs. (15) and (16) yields two first order differential
equations for the longitudinal and lateral tire deflection
!

F
1
F (vx rD )
x e =
cx x e
dx +
s rD ||
sx + vN
s rD ||
sx + vN
!
1
F
vy
F
cy ye
y e =
dy +
s rD ||
sy + vN
s rD ||
sy + vN

(17)
(18)

Multiplying these differential equations with the modified transport velocities

vT x = rD || sx + vN

and

vT y = rD || sy + vN

(19)

finally results in
F
F
x e = (vx rD ) vT x cx xe
dx +
s
s


F
F
vT y dy +
y e = vy vT y cy ye
s
s

vT x

(20)
(21)

where Eqs. (15) and (16) will then provide the tire forces Fx = FxD and Fy = FyD . A corresponding dynamic model of the bore torque which is needed for simulating the parking effort is
described in Ref. [6].
This first order dynamic tire force model is completely characterized by the combined force
characteristic F = F (s) as well as the stiffness cx , cy and damping dx , dy properties of the
tire. Via the steady state tire characteristics the dynamics of the tire deflections and hence the
dynamics of the tire forces automatically depends on the wheel load Fz and the longitudinal and
lateral slip.
3.2

Transition to Stand-Still

At stand still the contact point velocities vx , vy and the angular velocity of the wheel will
vanish. At = 0 the fictitious velocity vN replaces the modified transport velocities vT x and
vT y defined in Eq. (19) and avoids the singularities in the normalized slips defined by Eqs. (4)

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

and (5). Hence, for vx = 0, vy = 0 and = 0 the generalized slip given by Eq. (3) will vanish
s = 0 and the differential equations (20) and (21) simplify to
F 
x e = vN cx xe
vN dx +
s s=0



F 
vN dy +
y e = vN cy ye
s s=0


(22)
(23)

At s = 0 the global derivative F/s is defined by the initial inclination of the generalized tire
characteristic


d F (s) 
F 
=

= dF 0
(24)


s s=0
d s s=0
Then, Eqs. (22) and (23) may be written as
dx
dF 0
+
cx vN cx

{z

x e = xe

Tx

and
|

dy
dF 0
+
cy
vN cy

{z

Ty

y e = ye

(25)

At stand still existing tire deflections xe 6= 0 and ye 6= 0 and hence existing tire forces Fx 6= 0
and Fy 6= 0 which will keep the vehicle at the stopping point are not maintained but will decay
in time. However, a small fictitious velocity results in considerably large time constants and
will thus approximate the discontinuous stick-slip model described in [9].
4

SIMULATION RESULTS

The results of a driving and braking maneuver on a hill are shown in Fig. 5 for a simple
quarter car model with an overall mass of m = 400 kg.
Vehicle Position [m]

Driving and Braking Torque [kNm]

40

TB

TD
0

20

TD

TB

-1

m
-2

[s]

10

90

Velocities [m/s]

[s]

20

-20

100

Fx

[s]

10

90

[s]

10

90

[s]

100

1.0165
1.0156

r
v

[s]

10

Longitudinal Force [kN]

30

-10

32.615
32.572

-2
-4

100

[s]

10

90

[s]

100

Figure 5: Driving and braking on a hill (time interval 10 s < t < 90 s skipped)

The inertia and the radius of the wheel are given by = 1.2 kgm2 and r = 0.3 m. The longitudinal force characteristic is defined by the initial inclination dFx0 = 100 000 N , the maximum
7

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

S
S
force FxM = 3200N at slip sM
x = 0.1 and the sliding force Fx = 3100N at sx = 0.4. The fictitious
velocity was set to vN = 0.05 m/s.
The vehicle starts from stand still on a hill with the inclination angle = 15 . At first it
rolls backwards (v r and v 0). Then, the vehicle is accelerated by a driving torque
TD > 0. After a short period a braking torque TB < 0 is applied which causes the wheel to
lock in an instant (r = 0). As described in [7] the braking torque is generated here by an
enhanced dry friction model. When the vehicle comes to a stand still at t 6 s the enhanced
dry friction model automatically provides a positive braking torque TB > 0 which prevents
the vehicle from moving downhill again. As the brake is not released yet the vehicle oscillates
some time in longitudinal direction. During this period where the wheel is locked the system
vehicle and tire represents a damped oscillator. The stiffness and damping properties of the
tire in longitudinal direction cx = 180 000 N/m and dx = 1500 N/(m/s) together with the
corresponding overall vehicle mass of m = 400 kg result here in a frequency of f = 3.4 Hz.
At t 8 s the vibrations have completely ceased and the vehicle is in steady state. The tire
force of Fx = 1.0165 kN which is needed to compensate the downhill force m g sin slowly
decays to the value of Fx = 1.0156 kN in a time interval of 80 s. This causes the vehicle to
creep from the stopping position at x = 32.615 m down to x = 32.572 m with a sliding velocity
of v 0.6 mm/s in same time interval. Even in this considerably large stopping interval the
creepage of the vehicle is hardly noticeable, Fig. 5.
Finally, at t = 98 s the brake is fully released TB = 0 and the vehicle starts to roll downhill
again.

CONCLUSION

This simple but effective extension to first order dynamic tire forces and torques allows a
smooth transition from normal driving situations to stand still and keeps the dynamics of the
system finite. The simulation results show that it will serve as a good approximation to a
discontinuous stick slip model.
REFERENCES
[1] W. Hirschberg, G. Rill, H. Weinfurter, Tyre Model TMeasy. Vehicle System Dynamics,
Volume 45, Issue S1 2007, pages 101-119.
[2] W. Hirschberg, F. Pal`ea k, G. Rill and J. otnk, Reliable Vehicle Dynamics Simulation
in Spite of Uncertain Input Data. In: Proceedings of 12th EAEC European Automotive
Congress, Bratislava, 2009.
[3] P. van der Jagt, The Road to Virtual Vehicle Prototyping; new CAE-models for accelerated
vehicle dynamics development, Tech. Univ. Eindhoven 2000, ISBN 90-386-2552-9 NUGI
834.
[4] P. Lugner and H. Pacejka and M. Plochl, Recent advances in tyre models and testing
procedures. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2005, Vol. 43, No. 67, pp. 413436.
[5] A. Riepl, W. Reinalter and G. Fruhmann, Rough Road Simulation with tire model RMODK and FTire. Proc. of the 18th IAVSD Symposium on the Dynamics of vehicles on Roads
and on Tracks. Kanagawa, Japan, Taylor & Francis, London 2003.

G. Rill and W. Hirschberg

[6] G. Rill, First Order Tire Dynamics. In: Proceedings of the III European Conference on
Computational Mechanics Solids, Structures and Coupled Problems in Engineering. Lisbon, Portugal, 2006.
[7] G. Rill. A Modified Implicit Euler Algorithm for Solving Vehicle Dynamic Equations.
Multibody System Dynamics, Vol. 15, Issue 1, pp. 1-24, 2006.
[8] G. Rill, Wheel Dynamics. In: P.S. Varoto and M.A.Trindade (editors), Proceedings of
the XII International Symposium on Dynamic Problems of Mechanics (DINAME 2007),
ABCM, 2007.
[9] G. Rill, C. Chucholowski, Real Time Simulation of Large Vehicle Systems. ECCOMAS
Multibody Dynamics, Mailand, Italien 2007.