Tom A. wrote:
Probably because the "sharper irregularities" on the dynamic rolling case on typical pavement only really amount to extra flexing of the casing...It seems like your argument is basically that irregularities of the non-highly-width-dependent scale in Silca's testing don't significantly contribute to suspension consequences in road riding at practical pressures, and that breakpoint pressure is dominated by broader-scale stuff. This is plausible, and I have no reason to believe that it's incorrect, but absent data I also don't see that it's self-evident.
Quote:
I think some of smaller feature data in that Silca demonstration can be somewhat misinterpreted in regards to the scale of typical pavement roughness.Yes, I'm open to this idea. When I look at road surfaces, I don't know what filter to apply to isolate the things that do and don't matter to what tire setups and loads.
Tom A wrote:
The air spring of a tire as basically zero damping...the vast majority of the damping losses of the 1st SMD is in the tire casing and tread.Yes, I'm talking in reference to the Wheel Energy air cylinder representing the 2nd SMD load, not the air within the tire.
Quote:
One could argue that the effect of the damping in the 2nd SMD system is demonstrated by the existence of the breakpoint pressure.I'm admittedly not a mechanical engineer, so I might be visualizing this poorly. I'm not entirely sure how you mean. Are you saying that, as damping in the 2nd system is reduced, the onset of inadequate suspension smushes out across a broader inflation range, experiencing a less-abrupt "breakpoint"? Or that the performance of tires as suspension simply matters less within the range of amplitudes and frequencies being discussed?