I'm envisioning more efficient, tall, narrow tires on our vehicles.?
How bout you??? According to physics traction is not dependent on surface area. I'm vehicles with extremely tall wheels that absorb energy from impact run more efficiently do to lower rotating weight and driven by direct hub drive dc motors powered by small diesel generator/ solar and battery reserve. What would this look like? Who cares about looks
good luck in bad weather of any kind. You have both front to back and side to side traction and surface area certainly pertains to your side to side movement. Surface area is what is needed to keep you grounded. The less surface area, the more endangered you become, especially in rain and snow. Even in strong winds, wider tires are what helps keep the vehicle grounded.
You certainly need to balance between efficiency and safety.
I am not a science person, so pardon my un-educated observation. One of the differences between the old bias tires of the 60's and 70's is that they had much less surface area than the radials we now use. There was no how, no way they had better traction than today's tires, yet I think they would be consider taller tires, based on the height and width ratios between them.
powered by Yahoo Answers
good luck in bad weather of any kind. You have both front to back and side to side traction and surface area certainly pertains to your side to side movement. Surface area is what is needed to keep you grounded. The less surface area, the more endangered you become, especially in rain and snow. Even in strong winds, wider tires are what helps keep the vehicle grounded.
You certainly need to balance between efficiency and safety.
I am not a science person, so pardon my un-educated observation. One of the differences between the old bias tires of the 60's and 70's is that they had much less surface area than the radials we now use. There was no how, no way they had better traction than today's tires, yet I think they would be consider taller tires, based on the height and width ratios between them.
References :
good idea, I've been wondering about that. It will actually be better in snow, as the smaller contact patch will cause the tire to sink through the snow to contact the paving underneath. If you need proof, compare a large heavy car with a light compact. Weight difference is 3 to 1, yet, the tires are about the same width. The heavier car is much better in the snow for the above reason. The thick tires on the light car are only for style.
But style has everything to do with tires. Look at the extremely high aspect ration tires (or is it low, anyway the ones only an inch or two between paving and rim). They are expensive, very fragile, damaged by small potholes. Yet they are becoming standard equipment in many brands, ie, you can't get the car without these impractical tires.
.
References :
In practice, traction does depend on surface area and many other things. Hybrid and electric cars already use tires designed for low rolling resistance. But all designs are tradeoffs. In this case, cost, longevity, and durability. There's a huge range of technologies being applied to transportation to gain energy efficiency. For the personal automobile, electric and plug-in hybrid are looking really good, and supercapacitors could help out a lot. I'm also hopeful that thin-film photovoltaic cells could become practical for the tops of cars. That could provide a large share of the energy needed for a commute vehicle.
Unfortunately, the people who buy cars do care about looks and other things more than energy efficiency.
References :