1. Technical Field
The present invention generally relates to methods of designing tread patterns for tire noise. More particularly, the invention relates to a method for designing tread pattern tire noise pitch sequences by pre-selecting variations in lug stiffness characteristics. The invention specifically relates to a method for designing tire noise pitch sequences to achieve preferred characteristics of variations in tread lug stiffness based on the distribution of the lugs in the tire noise pitch sequence.
2. Background Information
One aspect of tire design involves minimizing undesirable tire noise. Tire noise is generated when the lugs of the tread pattern contact the road surface. An unvarying tread pattern, or mono pitch tread pattern, creates an undesirable tonal, or mono pitch sound. Tire designers vary the tread pattern to avoid mono pitch sounds. The tread patterns are typically varied by altering the size of the tread pitches around the circumference of the tire. Varying the sizes of the tread pitches tends to reduce mono pitch tire noise by broadening the frequency domain of the noise spectrum but undesirable noise in the time domain can still be created.
Tread patterns are currently analyzed by comparing the tire noise generated by different variations in the tread pitches. Known analysis techniques allow the tire designer to select a pitch pattern for the tread design that generates acceptable tire noise. One such technique uses the Fourier spectrum of the pitch sequence to identify objectionable pitch sequences. Another technique disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,112,167 analyzes portions of the pitch sequence around the circumference of the tire. Although these techniques have been effective, tire designers have found that known techniques can result in tire noise pitch sequence designs that pass initial screening while still having undesirable tire noise. Tire molds having such sequences must be rebuilt or modified to reduce the undesirable noise. One cause of undesirable noise is tire noise attributed to the variations in the lug stiffness around the circumference of the tire.
When the size of the tread pitches is varied, the size of the lugs of the tread pattern is varied. The lugs thus have different stiffnesses and produce different sound amplitudes when they contact the road surface. These differences create sound amplitude variation that can make an otherwise desirable pitch sequence undesirable. In the past, this undesirable tire noise was not analyzed and tires would be produced before the undesirable noise was recognized. If the customer objected to the noise, the tire manufacturer would have to scrap the expensive tire mold or would have to modify the mold. In response to this issue, the art thus desired a secondary screening method that allows the tire designer to compare a group of otherwise desirable pitch sequences. This screening technique is disclosed in pending patent application US 2003/0040886 A1 dated Feb. 27, 2003, which describes a method for comparing tread designs based on tire noise generated by tire tread lug stiffness variation. The art thus desires a method to develop tread designs with pre-selected lug stiffness variation characteristics. Such a tread pattern design method would define tire noise pitch sequences for optimized lug stiffness variations and tire noise level characteristics.
In view of the foregoing, the present invention provides a method of defining tire noise pitch sequences based on preferred characteristics of the tire noise generated by tire tread lug stiffness variations. The method of the invention may be used to provide a tire noise pitch sequence with preferred modulation characteristics and good level characteristics.
The invention provides a method including the steps of defining the amplitudes of the modulation orders; defining the phases for each order; summing the functions for each order; and defining the tire noise pitch sequence from the summation of the functions.
The invention also provides a tire having a pitch sequence designed from the method of the invention. In one embodiment, the invention provides a tire having a body having a tread that has a pitch sequence; and the pitch sequence having five different size pitches with pitch ratios of 1.00, 1.10, 1.25, 1.4, and 1.50.
The first part of the method is to define the preferred modulation characteristics and to build a function based on the combined modulation characteristics. It is generally known in the art that a first or second order is undesirable. Lug stiffness variations of the first order can magnify any imbalance or out of round in the tire relating to uniformity performance. As the order increases the effect on uniformity is diminished. Thus it is preferred to minimize the first two modulation orders. It is not prudent, though, to minimize all of the modulation orders, because the only way to have a noise treatment without modulation, is one in which all of the pitch sizes are the same. This type of sequence, commonly referred to as a mono pitch, produces a constant tone or mono pitch sound, which is also undesirable. Thus, it is desired to have some modulation in each of the orders 3 and above. It is desirable to have a smooth transition of the modulation orders. The number of modulation orders and the levels selected can vary. It has been found that it is not necessary to analyze modulation orders higher than seven because they generally approach zero and the analysis of these orders consumes too much processing time compared to the benefit received from the analysis.
In order to show an example of the invention, the data shown in Table 1 is analyzed in the following description. Table 1 lists the pre-selected levels for the selected modulation orders. Although the levels for the first and second orders preferably are selected to be zero in the exemplary embodiment, values other than zero may be used with the method of the present invention as long as these values are minimized with respect to the remaining orders. It is also desirable to set the value of the third order to be less than the values of the fourth and fifth orders. As noted above, all of the values cannot be set to zero because a monopitch would be the result. The levels should be set high enough to avoid a monopitch while low enough to avoid undesirable tones. The individual level can range from as little as 0 to as much as 20. The preferred embodiment sets a preferable range of between 1 to 5 for modulation orders above and including 3. The numbers in Table 1 meet these limitations and provide a smooth transition between different orders.
After the levels for the modulation orders have been defined, a complex wave is created by a summation of cosine waves with pre-selected amplitude and phase characteristics. Equation 1 is the Fourier series expansion of the cosine functions.
. . . where Y is the resultant function, Ak are the amplitudes of each kth order, theta is the angle from 1 to 360 degrees and phik is the phase angle of the kth order.
By building a series of Y functions for a set of pre-defined Ak values as defined in table 1, noise sequences can be defined by randomly, or in an orderly manner, defining the phase angles, phik, for each order. The phase angles may be defined in an orderly manner by looping through the potential phases at a fixed increment such as 1 degree. Table 2 shows two sets of phases. The first set has all of the modulation orders in phase and the second set has orders 4 through 7 with varying phase.
The second part of the method constructs a tire noise pitch sequence where the calculation of the lug stiffness variation curve matches, as closely as possible, the resultant wave shape. The shape of the lug stiffness variation curve D, as discussed in prior art (publication no. US 2003/0040886 A1 dated Feb. 27, 2003), is defined as the accumulation of the deviation of the arc length from the arc length of the mean pitch size. D is a vector of the difference in the actual arc length from a fixed arbitrary reference point to the end of the ith pitch size.
D={D1, D2, D3, . . . , Di, . . . DN−1, DN}
N is the total number of tread pitches placed about the circumference of the tire. Di can be calculated using the following relationship:
wherein:
Y is a function of circumferential angle, theta. Yi can be defined as the target curve, Y, evaluated at the at i times the circumference, C, divided by the number of pitches, N.
Di, the design curve shape at i is an approximation of Yi.
Once the desired number or tread pitches, N, each pitch length can then found in sequential order. For reference in this example N=60, although N can range from as low as 20 to as high as 100 total pitches. The first size is found by solving the equation for i=1 with N=60 & C=360.
The second size is found in the same manner as the first while utilizing L1.
The general form of the solution of the Liarray is as follows.
This process will define a unique set of pitch sizes, Li, which will give the specified lug stiffness variation characteristics. Li will yield N unique pitch lengths. N unique tire tread pitch lengths, while desired by the tire noise pitch sequence designer, is impractical when considering the design of a tire mold. The higher the number of unique pitch lengths, the higher the complexity and cost associated with the production of the tire mold. The art typically uses as few as 2 to as many as 10 unique pitch sizes in order to decrease the complexity of the mold making process. If desired, a larger number of pitch sizes may be used.
The third part of the method involves converting from N unique pitch sizes to M prescribed pitch sizes. A numeric value is selected that defines the ratio between the largest pitch size to the smallest pitch size (the pitch ratio). This pitch ratio typically ranges from 1.2 to 1.8, but other ratios are not outside the embodiment of this method. For the purposes of continuing the example of N=60, M is chosen as 3 and the pitch ratio, P, is set at 1.5. The three sizes, designated as 1, 2, and 3 have the internal pitch ratios of 1.00, 1.25, and 1.50 respectively. The N unique pitch sizes are then fit to the M selected sizes. For example, if N ranges from 3.5 degrees to 6.5 degrees, size 1 may be set to include all N sizes from 3.5 degrees to 4.5 degrees; size 2 may be set to include all N sizes from 4.5 degrees to 5.5 degrees; and size 3 may be set to include all N sizes from 5.5 degrees to 6.5 degrees. If this example, size 1 may be 4 degrees, size 2 may be 5 degrees, and size 3 may be 6 degrees. The pitch ratio is 6/4 or 1.5.
As can be seen, the actual response function, bottom set of curves in
Another pitch design that has been found to be particularly useful with the method of the present invention is a pitch design having five different pitch sizes defined by the pitch ratios of 1.00 (smallest pitch length), 1.10, 1.25, 1.4, and 1.5 (largest pitch length). This type of pitch design has been found to be useful for creating pitch sequences having between 53 and 80 pitches. Exemplary pitch sequences that have been designed using the method of the present invention and this pitch design include the following pitch sequences for 53 pitch, 68 pitch, and 80 pitch sequences.
53 pitch
The fourth part of the model involves selecting a tire noise treatment. The tire noise treatment can be selected in any number of ways used by one skilled in the art. Preferably, for a tire noise treatment to be acceptable it should have good level characteristics. A comparison of the two tire noise treatments, A and B, from
In the foregoing description, certain terms have been used for brevity, clearness, and understanding. No unnecessary limitations are to be implied therefrom beyond the requirement of the prior art because such terms are used for descriptive purposes and are intended to be broadly construed.
Moreover, the description and illustration of the invention is an example and the invention is not limited to the exact details shown or described.
This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/423,094 filed Nov. 1, 2002; the disclosure of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1956011 | Evans | Apr 1934 | A |
2124821 | Hubach | Jul 1938 | A |
2808867 | Buddenhagen et al. | Oct 1957 | A |
2878852 | Lippmann et al. | Mar 1959 | A |
3023798 | Moore et al. | Mar 1962 | A |
3861436 | Poque | Jan 1975 | A |
3926238 | Vorih | Dec 1975 | A |
3951191 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 1976 | A |
3989780 | Vorih | Nov 1976 | A |
3998256 | Verdier | Dec 1976 | A |
4178199 | Lippman et al. | Dec 1979 | A |
4327792 | Landers | May 1982 | A |
4416316 | Clatworthy et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4442499 | Sekula et al. | Apr 1984 | A |
4474223 | Landers | Oct 1984 | A |
4503898 | Hitzky | Mar 1985 | A |
4721141 | Collette et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4727501 | Parker et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4784200 | Fujiwara | Nov 1988 | A |
4785861 | Fujiwara | Nov 1988 | A |
4785862 | Konishi et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4788651 | Parker et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4798236 | Fujiwara | Jan 1989 | A |
4823853 | Hitzky | Apr 1989 | A |
4936364 | Kajiwara et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
5027875 | Kogure | Jul 1991 | A |
5062461 | Noguchi | Nov 1991 | A |
5125444 | Yoshida | Jun 1992 | A |
5209793 | Cusimano, II | May 1993 | A |
5223059 | Himuro | Jun 1993 | A |
5223065 | Kogure | Jun 1993 | A |
5240053 | Baumhofer et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5240054 | Kogure | Aug 1993 | A |
5269357 | Killian | Dec 1993 | A |
5295087 | Yoshida et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5309965 | Williams | May 1994 | A |
5314551 | Williams | May 1994 | A |
5327952 | Glover et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5353855 | Kajiwara et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5358022 | Glover et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5363895 | Wells et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5365987 | Ishii et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5371685 | Bandel et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5373882 | Nakagawa | Dec 1994 | A |
5383506 | Kogure | Jan 1995 | A |
5394916 | Williams | Mar 1995 | A |
5617341 | Nakajima | Apr 1997 | A |
5658409 | Kakumu | Aug 1997 | A |
5690760 | Brown, Jr. | Nov 1997 | A |
5714021 | Ochi | Feb 1998 | A |
5717613 | Nakajima | Feb 1998 | A |
5733393 | Hubbell et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5743974 | Wesolowski | Apr 1998 | A |
5746848 | Schulze et al. | May 1998 | A |
5753057 | Wesolowski | May 1998 | A |
5759310 | Wesolowski | Jun 1998 | A |
5759311 | Williams | Jun 1998 | A |
5759312 | Wesolowski | Jun 1998 | A |
5769990 | Hoffmeister | Jun 1998 | A |
5824169 | Landers et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5865921 | Zakelj et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5964266 | Boiocchi et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974872 | Morishita et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5996660 | Kakumu et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6109318 | Yukawa | Aug 2000 | A |
6112167 | Zakelj | Aug 2000 | A |
6161431 | Drahne et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6216757 | Ohara et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6311748 | Boiocchi et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6321180 | Hubbell, Jr. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6363984 | Morgan | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6409861 | Yukawa | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6439285 | Elkurd et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6450223 | Landers et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6514366 | Xie | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6531012 | Ishiyama | Mar 2003 | B2 |
20030040886 | Stuckey | Feb 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 454 658 | Oct 1991 | EP |
0 528 577 | Feb 1993 | EP |
0528577 | Feb 1993 | EP |
0 645 264 | Sep 1994 | EP |
0 691 219 | Jan 1996 | EP |
0 743 200 | Nov 1996 | EP |
0 846 576 | Jun 1998 | EP |
0846576 | Jun 1998 | EP |
1-178005 | Jul 1989 | JP |
4-123907 | Apr 1992 | JP |
20000142029 | May 2000 | JP |
9709184 | Mar 1997 | WO |
WO 9709184 | Mar 1997 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040093106 A1 | May 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60423094 | Nov 2002 | US |