W. V. M a r s I a n d J. R.

L u c h i n i I

An Analytical Model for the Transient

Rolling Resistance Behavior of Tires 2

REFERENCE: Mars, Will V., Luchini, John R, "An Analytical Model for the Transient
Rolling Resistance Behavior of Tires." Tire Science and Technology, TSTCA, Vol. 27,
No. 3, July-September 1999, pp. 161-175.

ABSTRACT: The rolling resistance of tires has received increased attention as automakers
and consumers seek to improve fuel economy. Standard rolling resistance tests are currently
performed to characterize steady state rolling resistance. The transient rolling resistance
behavior is also of interest, but requires more elaborate and more expensive testing.
This paper presents a theory to predict the transient response of rolling resistance to
changes in velocity, from empirical data generated at steady state. The current model
neglects the effect of changes in inflation pressure. A general relationship is derived for
an arbitrary velocity history. The special case for instantaneous velocity histories is inves-
tigated. The model is then compared with experimental results. Finally, we use the model
to predict transient roiling resistance results for coast down testing, and a simulated urban
driving cycle.
The model provides a simple and effective way to determine transient tire rolling resis-
tance from steady state test results. This may reduce the need for transient testing in the
future.

KEY WORDS: transient rolling resistance, rolling loss, heat build up, coast down testing

Nomenclature

o~ S e n s i t i v i t y o f r o l l i n g r e s i s t a n c e to t e m p e r a t u r e ( 1 / ~
A O u t s i d e tire s u r f a c e a r e a ( m 2)
/3 Reference heat transfer factor { W/[m 2 ~ (m/s)q }
c S p e c i f i c h e a t o f tire [ J / ( k g ~
h Heat transfer coefficient [W/(m 2 ~
ho Reference heat transfer coefficient [W/(m 2 ~
L Tire load (N)
m M a s s o f tire ( k g )

1Cooper Tire and Rubber Company, Computational Modeling Group, Findlay, Ohio 45840, USA.
2 Presented at the seventeenth annual conference of The Tire Society, Akron, Ohio, April 28-29,
1998.

161
162 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

P Heat transfer exponent, dimensionless

P Tieinlation pressure (Pa)
Qgen Rate of internal heat generation (W)
Qsurr Rate of heat transfer to surroundings (W)
~)stored Rate of heat storage due to thermal inertia (W)
R Instantaneous rolling resistance drag force (N)
R* Steady state rolling resistance drag force (N)
t Time (s)
T Instantaneous operating temperature (~
T* Steady state operating temperature (~
T~ Ambient temperature (~
V Tire speed (m/s)
Vo Reference tire speed (m/s)

Much of the life of a tire can be spent operating under transient conditions.
Transient rolling resistance is therefore an important tire characteristic, since
its magnitude is a strong function of operating conditions. Unfortunately, tran-
sient rolling resistance data are hard to obtain and analyze. This is due to the
complexity and cost that are needed to control and interpret this kind of ex-
periment.
The biggest difficulty associated with studies of transient rolling resistance
is that the behavior is history dependent. The instantaneous rolling resistance
is not only a function of instantaneous operating conditions like load, inflation,
speed, and ambient temperature, but it is also a function of the history of each
of these variables [ 1,2 ]. Figure 1 shows a typical situation, where the history
dependence of rolling resistance leads to different relationships between roll-
ing resistance and speed, depending on whether the tire is accelerating or
decelerating.
Because of the history dependence, measuring the transient rolling resis-
tance is a complicated endeavor, with an uncomfortable degree of arbitrariness.
The experimenter must not only select the operating conditions of interest, but
must also select and control the history of conditions leading up to the mea-
surement to be recorded. Of course, the result obtained is only valid for the
history selected, and is not indicative of the results for any other history.
This paper presents a simple theory that predicts transient rolling resistance
for straight-ahead rolling, at a regulated inflation pressure, given a tire' s steady
state rolling resistance as a function of velocity, and the velocity history in
question. This provides a way to understand and predict the transient behavior.

Background
This section presents the history and current state of tire rolling loss testing
and tire modeling.
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 163

60

50

. . . . . . . . . "
z 40

30
3o

~ 20
20

16 min triangle wave

- - - Equilibrium
10 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Time,s

0 5 10 15 20 25 3O
Velocity, m/s

FIG. 1 - - Typical transient rolling resistance behavior.

Testing
In 1972, the oil embargo created renewed interest in fuel economy. The role
of tires in reducing fuel consumption appeared in many publications, both in
the popular press and in technical papers. While tire rolling loss testing was
used in this work, there were no standard conditions, standard equipment, or
standard test procedures. The literature describes testing at "standard condi-
tions," which were only standard for the individual paper. Significant variables
such as tire inflation pressure were not always measured or reported. Different
approaches to measuring the rolling resistance were used with a presumed
correlation among the methods.
In 1974 the D O T / T S C commissioned a study of tire rolling resistance
[3], and in 1975 the DOT and SAE jointly sponsored a study of methods
[4] to improve fuel economy for trucks and busses. One outcome was
the creation of a standardized laboratory test for tire rolling resistance.
Another outcome was the creation of the SAE Tire Rolling Resistance
Committee.
The SAE committee operated actively from 1975 until 1987, when the test
procedure J1269 became stable and standard. In 1979, the first SAE standard
for laboratory measurement of tire rolling resistance was published. From 1979
to 1987 there were several revisions to the SAE standard procedures for mea-
surement of rolling resistance. Although the 1975 study recognized the coast
164 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

down method, none of the SAE standards accepted it as comparable to the

other methods in common use.
During that period, studies of the effects of speed and temperature were
reported in the literature [ 1,2,5-8]. A good summary of the work up to 1980
may be found in Shuring's monograph [9]. Prior to 1975, many facilities had
equipment for measurement of tire rolling loss with the coast down method.
In one study, privately reported to the committee, a very precise experiment
was done comparing results from a single laboratory using both equilibrium
and coast down methodology on the same tires. The study determined that the
coast down technique was a transient test method and it could not give the
same results as the steady state test methods in J1269/J1270. This work
showed that the coast down method is a transient test, and that it is less precise
than equilibrium methods.
There were many attempts to quantify transient tire rolling resistance as a
thermal effect; most notable was the thermal modeling work by Schuring and
his associates [1,2]. There were also attempts made to develop meaningful
transient tire test methodologies. A proposal was made to the committee, by
a representative of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to use the
EPA driving cycle to quantify an "average" tire rolling resistance [10]. The
SAE committee studied that proposal and found that the technique would rank
tires essentially the same as an equilibrium test. Evaluation of the methods and
equipment available at the time also indicated that there were testing disad-
vantages to the method.
The idea of thermal modeling suggested methods of predicting equilibrium
tire temperatures from a rolling resistance test, as reported in a paper by Kenny
[11 ]. It was noted that the predictions of contained air temperature using this
method were comparable to the accuracy of measuring the temperature with
thermal probes and slip rings.
Thus, as of 1987, the committee had found that temperature effects were
significant and that the effect of speed at equilibrium was small, and only
steady state testing was standardized. The SAE committee reactivated late in
1994. The committee and its task groups have met regularly from 1995 until
the present (1998). A new coast down procedure, J2452, has been drafted and
is being further developed and tested.

Modeling
In the early 1980s the computational modeling of tires was reaching a point
where rolling loss of a tire might be predictable from a knowledge of the basic
materials and construction [12-14]. However, at that time the process was
both experimentally and computationally intense, and it was far simpler to
measure prototype tires. Recent advances in tire mechanics and computer tech-
nology have changed this situation. It is now relatively simple to model the
equilibrium rolling resistance of a tire [15]. However, a fully transient, and
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 165

thermo-mechanically coupled, rolling loss prediction for a tire is still com-

putationally intense.
Modern computational methods, combined with precise testing, will give
an opportunity to model transient tire rolling loss as accurately as the historical
testing methods were able to measure the results.

Approach
When the tire is not in equilibrium, the instantaneous rolling resistance, R,
is assumed to be a function of two things only: the steady state rolling resis-
tance, R*, at the instantaneous conditions, and an instantaneous temperature,
T, representative of the average tire temperature. Equation 1 shows this de-
pendence:
R = R ( R * , T) (1)
When run at conditions of constant load, L, inflation pressure, P, ambient
temperature, T~, and speed, V, a tire's rolling resistance and operating tem-
perature will eventually approach a steady state. This type of data can be
obtained through standard testing [16], and the results summarized as an em-
pirical function of these variables. Equation 2 represents this relationship. Note
that no special restrictions are placed on the steady state rolling resistance
function. This means that any steady state phenomenon can be represented by
the model, including standing waves.
R* = R * ( L , P, I7, T~) (2)
Using the steady state rolling resistance, we derive the steady state operating
temperature, T*, representative of the average tire temperature, using an en-
ergy balance approach. This will give us a relationship of the form shown in
Eq 3:
T* = T*(R*, V, T~) (3)
Note that time is excluded from the set of independent variables in Eqs 1-3.
The time-dependence of rolling resistance is completely attributed to the time
dependence of the instantaneous operating temperature, Eq 4. Note that this
approach does not include the transient torque due to the inertia of the tire.
That effect is not a rolling loss in the same sense as losses due to material
irreversibility. Inertial effects can be superimposed onto the predictions of this
model, if needed. A first order differential equation will be derived, which
must be integrated to find T. With T(t) known, R ( t ) is determined via Eq 1.
T = T(t) (4)
The following basic assumptions are used in developing the general model:
1. The tire has a single, uniform temperature.
166 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

2. The work done by the instantaneous rolling resistance force is entirely

converted to heat in the tire.
3. The instantaneous temperature of the tire adjusts the rolling resistance
relative to the equilibrium rolling resistance at the corresponding load;
inflation pressure, speed, and ambient temperature. This effect is due to
the behavior of rubber, which becomes less hysteretic with an increase
in temperature.
4. It is assumed in this work that the inflation pressure does not vary with
tire temperature. On the road, of course, this assumption is not valid.
However, this condition is true for the SAE transient test standard. Ad-
ditional work is needed to account for the coupling between tire tem-
perature and inflation pressure.
After developing the general model, we investigate the case where the ve-
locity varies fast enough that the tire operating temperature remains essen-
tially constant. This leads to a simple instantaneous prediction that is in-
dependent of time.

Effect of Temperature on Rolling Resistance

At a given set of conditions, we assume that a linear proportionality ap-

proximates the dependence of rolling resistance on the instantaneous temper-
ature. We center the approximation about the steady state rolling resistance
and operating temperature. Note that when the constant of proportionality, a,
is positive, Eq 5 predicts a decrease in rolling resistance for an increase in
temperature. Equation 5 has been established on an empirical basis and is used
in the SAE standard to correct for ambient temperature differences [ 16]:

R-R*
- a(T- T*), o~ > 0 (5)
R*

We solve Eq 5 for the instantaneous rolling resistance. This gives an approx-

imation for the functional dependence proposed in Eq 1:
R = R*[1 + c~(T* - T)] (6)

Steady State Operating Temperature

The steady state operating temperature may be determined in terms of the

steady state rolling resistance, tire speed, and the ambient temperature, as
suggested by Eq 3. At steady state, the tire's internal heat generation, Qge,,
exactly balances the heat energy dissipated to the surroundings, Qs~:
9 ~

Qge. - Q ~ = 0 (7)
The tire's internal heat generation is equal to the work required to maintain
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 167

constant velocity rolling under the influence of the rolling resistance. At steady
state, this is:

O.g~n = V R * (8)
Heat is dissipated via convection to the air, radiation to the surroundings, and
conduction through the rim. We model the effect of heat transfer to the sur-
roundings via Newton's law of cooling:

(2su= = h A ( T - T~) (9)

In Eq 9, h is a heat transfer coefficient, and A is the outside tire surface area.

The heat transfer coefficient includes the velocity and geometry dependence
of heat transfer to the surroundings. A power law relationship is commonly
observed between fluid velocity and the heat transfer coefficient. Several au-
thors have reported that the power law relationship is valid for tires [ i 7 - 1 9 ] :

h = ho =/SV p (10)

Note that/3 = ho/V~ is a constant factor that makes Eq 10 give the reference
heat transfer coefficient, ho, at the reference speed, V = V0. The exponent, p,
is an empirical constant expressing the sensitivity of the heat transfer coeffi-
cient to tire speed.
We substitute Eq 10 into Eq 9, then Eqs 8 and 9 into the energy balance,
Eq 7. Solving the resulting expression for T*, we obtain the following equation
for the steady state temperature:
VI-pR *
T * - - - +T= (ll)
/~a

Transient Temperature and Rolling Resistance

For the transient case, the thermal energy balance has an additional term,
Qstored,representing the rate of change of the thermal energy temporarily stored
in the tire because of the thermal inertia of the tire:

0gen -- 0surr = 0stored (12)

This extra term is proportional to the mass and specific heat of the fire, and
the instantaneous time rate of change of the fire temperature:

dT
(2stored = mc - - ( 13 )
dt

As was the case for steady state, Eq 8, the tire's internal heat generation is
equal to the work required to maintain constant velocity rolling. We use Eq 6
168 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

to obtain the instantaneous rate of internal heat generation, in terms of the

instantaneous temperature and steady state rolling resistance:
{)g~n = V R = VR*[1 + a ( T * - T)] (14)
Equations 9 and 10 remain valid in the transient case. We proceed by substi-
tuting Eqs 9, 13, and 14 into Eq 12:
dT
VR*[1 + a ( T * - T)] - / ~ V P A ( T - T~) = m c - (15)
dt

The steady state temperature, T*, is already known. We eliminate it by sub-

stituting Eq 11 into Eq 15, and then expanding and collecting in terms of
(T= - T). This results in a first order differential equation governing the time
evolution of temperature in a tire:

m c - -d~T : ( f l A V p + o W R * ) ( T ~ - T ) + V R * + - a- ~ V ( 2 _ p ) R . 2 (16)

Specific solutions to Eq 16 require knowledge of the initial temperature, the

steady state rolling resistance as a function of speed, and the speed history. In
general, a numerical method must be employed to integrate the solution over
time. We successfully used a fourth-order Runge-Kntta scheme. Once the tem-
perature history has been found, Eq 6 gives the corresponding rolling resis-
tance history.

Instantaneous Coast Down Theory

An important special case of the theory is when the speed changes so rapidly
that the tire temperature remains constant. Note that, in this special case, the
assumption of constant inflation pressure is not so restrictive, since constant
temperature implies constant inflation pressure. This is approximately true for
many short-term driving events. Before t = 0, the tire achieves some temper-
ature T, which may or may not be at thermal equilibrium. In Eq 6, this cor-
responds to holding the T term constant, and letting the T* and R* terms vary
as functions of the velocity:

R ( t ) = R*v(t)[1 + a ( r v ( o - Tt=0)] (17)

If the tire is initially at equilibrium, T may be calculated from Eq 11. If not,
then T may be found by solving Eq 16. In either case, Eq 11 gives T* at the
instantaneous conditions. Equation 17 becomes:

R = R* [ 1 -}-
C1r
(VI-pR * -- VI-P]~*'~
- - eq ~-eqJ (18)

In typical lab testing, the load and inflation pressure are held constant. On the
 MARS ET AL ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 169

road, or in "capped" lab tests, the inflation pressure varies with tire temper-
ature. The present model does not include this effect, although it could be
added by using the instantaneous temperature prediction to compute an in-
stantaneous inflation pressure. This instantaneous pressure would then be used
in computing R*.
The rolling resistance predicted by this model excludes the effect of tire
inertia on spindle force. For very fast transients, the inertia effect can be large.
Because the energy used in changing a tire's speed does not appear as heat in
the tire, this effect can simply be added to the rolling loss force predicted by
the model, if the total spindle force is desired. Note that this can result in a
negative "apparent" rolling resistance, although the loss in the tire remains
positive. In the following case studies, the inertia effect is left out.

Experimental
A numerical implementation of Eq 16 was written to solve for transient
temperature and rolling resistance histories, given the initial conditions and
velocity history. The case considered is an original equipment P255/45ZR17
tire. The values of the parameters used in the model are given below.

t~ 0.0061/~
c 1300 J/(kg~
ho 100 W/(m2~
p 0.5 dimensionless
T~ 24~
Vo 22.22 m/s = 80 km/h
A 0.64 m z
m 12kg
L 4110 N
P 207 kPa
Figure 1 shows the results of the transient model for the case where the tire
starts from rest and then is cyclically accelerated and decelerated, with a period
of 16 min. Initially, when the tire is cold, the rolling resistance is much higher
than that measured on a steady state test at the same velocity. Within two
periods, the rolling resistance settles into a cyclic pattern that follows the
equilibrium trend somewhat more closely. However, the slope of the transient
pattern remains steeper than the slope of the equilibrium results, and the path
during acceleration does not match the path followed during deceleration. The
instantaneous velocity history equation is able to predict the steeper slope, and
it ignores the path dependence.
Figure 2 shows a comparison between the instantaneous prediction, Eq 18,
and an actual vehicle coast down experiment. The instantaneous prediction is
made based on experimentally measured steady state rolling resistance data.
170 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

5O

l=
a0

- "O- Equilibrium Experiment

[] Transient Coastdown Experiment
Instantaneous Coastdown Theory

5 10 15 20 25
Velocity, m/s

FIG. 2 -- Comparison of experiment and instantaneous velocity history theory.

For an instantaneous speed change, the tire temperature remains constant, and
the rolling resistance is not history dependent. The slope of the resulting curve,
however, remains steeper than the equilibrium curve. The point at which the
transient and steady state curves intersect corresponds to the speed at which
the tire was equilibrated before being accelerated or decelerated. The instan-
taneous theory was fit to the experimental data by adjusting the p and ho
parameters. Excellent agreement is obtained. All other parameters used in the
model were determined independently of the model. Note that the reference
heat transfer coefficient, ho, compares favorably with estimates made by other
researchers. Clark and Schuring [ 19] reported a heat transfer coefficient in the
range of 60 < ho < 78 W/m2/~ at 80 kin/h, and a velocity exponent in the
range of 0.46 < p < 0.84 for the tires they tested. The results are also con-
sistent with those of Browne and Wickliffe [I8].
The model also predicts the tire operating temperature, and this serves
as an independent way to check the model's validity. Figure 3 shows both
steady state and transient temperature results from the model. The transient
temperatures are for the triangle wave history given in Fig. 1, with a period
of 16 rain. It can be seen that the tire temperatures are reasonable in mag-
nitude. For the 16 min triangle wave, the cycle has an amplitude of about
10~ A similar analysis for a 4 min triangle wave gives an amplitude of
about 3~ In general, the faster the speed change, the smaller the am-
plitude.
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 171

- - - Equilibrium
16 rain triangle wave

70

o 60

g 5o

~"40

F-- 3 0 -

T=24 degC @ t=0

20

10

5 10 15 20 25 30
Velocity, rrds

FIG. 3 - - P r e d i c t e d effect o f velocity on temperature.

Case Study 1: Coast Down Simulation

With the model, it is possible to study transient rolling resistance behavior
for any desired speed history. We first consider a series of hypothetical vehicle
coast down tests. As shown in Fig. 4, the tire is initially operating at equilib-
rium at 37 m/s ( 130 kph). At time = 0, the speed begins to decay exponentially
to 9 m/s (30 kph). Several time constants were modeled: 1 rain, 4 rain, 16
rain, and 64 min.
The rolling resistance history for each time constant is also shown in Fig.
4, All results fall between the limiting cases of equilibrium and instantaneous
coast down. Initially, all curves start at equilibrium and follow the slope of
the instantaneous coast down equation. The full range of intermediate results
is obtained as the time constant varies from zero to infinity. Note that at the
minimum speed, a worst case difference of about 10N/40N, or 25%, exists.
Transient effects on rolling loss can be very significant.

Case Study 2: Driving Cycle Simulation

The model can also be applied to computing rolling loss during typical
driving conditions. Figure 5 shows the results of the model for an approxi-
mated version of the EPA's standard urban driving cycle. It is again seen that
transient rolling resistance is more sensitive to speed than equilibrium. Note
that, while the increments of rolling resistance history follow roughly parallel
172 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

35
80

15

60
Z

= H ~
50

................... L--~_ ...........

_-=
I= 40

...... EquilibriUm
30 ---- Tau=64 rain
--Tau=16 rain
--Tau=4 min
20 --Tau=l rain
- - Instantaneous Coastdown

10

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Velocity, rnfs

FIG. 4 - - Effect o f coast d o w n rate on rolling resistance.

paths, the intersection of the transient and equilibrium curves does not remain
fixed. Instead, it moves in response to the tire temperature. Because of this,
the rolling resistance varies by as much as 8% at different times for a given
speed. This result is, of course, totally dependent on the particular speed history
analyzed.
Several instantaneous coast down curves are also overlaid for comparison.
It can be seen that the transient results follow the trend predicted by the in-
stantaneous theory, since many driving events are short in duration. Note,
however, that no single instantaneous curve completely characterizes the tran-
sient behavior.
The changing intersection point is due to changing tire temperature. Figure
6 compares the temperature and rolling resistance histories predicted by the
model. It can be seen that the tire naturally heats up faster than it cools off.
Because of this, the transient rolling resistance will be lower, on average, than
predictions from an instantaneous model. For the speed history considered,
the max-to-min temperature difference is about 7~ While short-duration driv-
ing events have almost no effect on the temperature, sustained features have
a pronounced effect.
The instantaneous model works well to predict the change in rolling resis-
tance due to a rapid change in speed. It does not account for the change in tire
temperature, however. In the longer term, the transient model is needed to
account for this effect.
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 173

50

- - Driving Cycle
48
- - - Equilibrium

Instantaneous Coastdown

46

t
J

,14
J
#
J

42 9
f
z

-.=
40

E 25

38
20- w

15
36

10.

34 L

500 1000 1500

Time, s

30, ; , , , ;
0 5 10 15 20 25
Velocity, m/s

FIG. 5 -- Driving cycle simulation results.

Conclusion

This paper shows that the transient rolling resistance of a tire, at a fixed
inflation pressure, can be predicted from knowledge of its behavior on an
equilibrium test. The model attributes the transient effect to thermal behavior.
174 TIRE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

6oI
55

30 +
0

50
49
48

~ 46

~ 43
42
41
40
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time, s

FIG. 6 - - Comparison of temperature and rolling resistance histories for driving cycle simulation.

The model derives from well-established principles, uses only physically

meaningful parameters, and agrees well with limited experimental results. It
captures realistic features of transient rolling resistance behavior, including the
history effect, and the speed effect. Additional work is needed to incorporate
the coupling between tire inflation pressure and operating temperature.
Our modeling shows that transient rolling resistance effects are significant
and more relevant to the actual conditions experienced by tires. The model
uses the more accurate results of steady state testing to make a better transient
prediction than can be measured. In lieu of a transient test, equilibrium tests
at multiple speeds can be run, then used to obtain the transient rolling resis-
tance prediction for any desired speed history.

Acknowledgment
The authors thank members of the SAE rolling resistance committee for
helpful discussions of this work.

References
[1] Schuring, D. J., Siegfried, J. F., and Hall, G. L., "Transient Speed and Temperature Effects
on Rolling Loss of Passenger Car Tires," SAE Paper No. 850463.
[2] Schuring, D. J., "Transient versus Steady State Tire Roiling Loss Testing," SAE Paper No.
790116.
 MARS ET AL. ON TRANSIENT ROLLING RESISTANCE 175

[3[ Clark, S. K., et al., "Rolling Resistance of Pneumatic Tires," DOT-TSC-74-2, July 1974.
[4] SAIE, DOT/SAE Truck and Bus Fuel Economy Measurement Study Report, 1975.
[5] Brown, C., and Gusakov, I., " A Mathematical Technique for Predicting Equilibrium Rolling
Resistance of Tires from Short Duration Tests," SAE Paper No. 790118.
[6] Janssen, M. L. and Hall, G. L., "Effect Of Ambient Temperature on Radial Tire Roiling
Resistance," SAE Paper No. 800090.
[7] Prevorsek, D. E., Kwon, Y. D., Sharma, R. K., and Beringer, C. W., "Analysis of Tire
Deformation in Operation from the Data of Temperature Rise," SAE Paper No. 800181.
[8] Warholic, T. C., "Rolling Resistance Performance Of Passenger Tires During Warm-Up - -
Speed, Load, and Inflation Pressure Effects," SAE Paper No. 820455.
[9] Schuring, D. J., "The Rolling Loss of Pneumatic Tires," Rubber Chemistry Technology,
Vol. 53, 1980, pp, 600-727.
[10] Thompson, G. D. and Burgeson, R. N., "Determination of Tire Energy Dissipation - - Anal-
ysis and Recommended Practice," EPA Technical Report, Emission Control Technology
Division, April 1978.
[11] Kenny, T. M., "Prediction of Contained Air Temperature from SAE Standard Rolling Re-
sistance Test Data," SAE Paper No. 831796.
[12] Whicker, D. and Rohde, S. M., "Modeling Tire Deformation for Power Loss Calculations,"
SAE Paper No. 810161.
[13] Segalman, D. J., "Modeling Tire Energy Dissipation for Power Loss Calculations," SAE
Paper No. 810162.
[14] Browne, A. L. and Arambages, A., "Modeling the Thermal State Of Tires for Power Loss
Calculations," SAE Paper No. 810163.
[15] Luchini, J. R., Peters, J. M., and Arthur, R. H., "Tire Rolling Loss Computation with the
Finite Element Method," Tire Science and Technology, TSTCA, Vol. 22, No. 4, 1994, pp.
206 - 222.
[16] SAE J1269, "Rolling Resistance Measurement Procedure for Passenger Car Tires," SAE
Handbook.
[17] Oswald, L. J. and Browne, A. L., "The Airflow Field Around an Operating Tire and its
Effect on Tire Power Loss," SAE Paper No. 810166.
[18] Browne, A. L., and Wickliffe, L E. "Convective Heat Transfer Coefficients at the Tire
Surface: A Parametric Study," Tire Science and Technology, TSTCA, Vol. 8, No. 3-4,
1980, pp. 37-67.
[19] Clark, J. D. and Schuring, D. J., "Load, Speed, and Inflation Pressure Effects on Rolling
Loss Distribution in Automobile Tires," Tire Science and Technology, TSTCA, Vol. 16,
No. 2, 1988, pp. 78-95.