关 键 词：

弹性轮胎转鼓试验台的设计 弹性 轮胎 试验台 设计

资源描述：

购买设计请充值后下载，，资源目录下的文件所见即所得，都可以点开预览，，资料完整，充值下载可得到资源目录里的所有文件。。。【注】：dwg后缀为CAD图纸，doc,docx为WORD文档，原稿无水印，可编辑。。。具体请见文件预览，有不明白之处，可咨询QQ:12401814

内容简介：

附 录 附录A：LOW ROLLING RESISTANCE TIRESAccording to the report,80% or more of a cars fuel energy is wasted by friction and other such losses. 1.5 to 4.5% of total gasoline use could be saved if allreplacement tires in use had low rolling resistance. About 237 million replacement tires are sold in the U.S. each year none has rolling resistance labeling.1. Americas Fuel Use, Its Impacts,and Opportunities for SavingsThe environmental impacts of Americas gasoline use are profound. With over 160 million passenger cars and light trucks on the road, we burn about 126 billion gallons of gasoline per year. Our fuel use continues to rise about 3% annually, propelled by continued increases in total number of vehicles, rising average distance driven per car, and falling average fuel economy.Today, light-duty vehicles (cars & light trucks) are responsible for about 20% of the nitrogen oxides, 27% of the volatile organic compounds, 51% of the carbon monoxide, and roughly 30% of all the carbon dioxide (the main greenhouse gas) emitted from human activities nationwide. Rising fuel use also has enormous implications for protection of wilderness and public lands (vulnerable to increased exploration), water resources (vulnerable to tanker and pipeline accidents), and national security. So the opportunity to save money and improve environmental quality through fuel use reductions is clear.One of the most promising opportunities for fuel savings across the entire fleet of existing vehicles is to utilize low rolling resistance tires instead of standard replacement models. This change improves the inherent efficiency of the vehicle, automatically saving fuel over the typical 30,000 to 50,000 mile lifetime of a set of tires.This report examines the opportunity for saving gasoline through use of improved tire technology and recommends particular tire models for which our initial test data suggest environmental advantages. Its findings are applicable to government and corporate fleet managers as well as individual tire buyers.2. How Tires Can Reduce Fuel ConsumptionAccording to the National Academy of Sciences, about 80 to 88% of the energy in a vehicles gasoline tank is wasted in various thermal, frictional, and standby losses in the engine and exhaust system. This leaves only about 12 to 20% of the potential energy actually converted to vehicle motion. One of the key ways to improve that efficiency is to reduce the rolling resistance of vehicle tires. This is not a measure of a tires traction or “grip” on the road surface, but rather simply indicates how easily a tire rolls down the road, minimizing the energy wasted as heat between the tire and the road, within the tire sidewall itself, and between the tire and the rim.Detailed modeling conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory concluded that a 10% reduction in tire rolling resistance should yield fuel savings of about 1 to 2%, depending on driving conditions and vehicle type. According to research for the California Energy Commission, about 1.5 to 4.5% of total gasoline use could be saved if all replacement tires in use had low rollingresistance. This translates roughly into average savings of up to 30 gallons of gasoline savings per vehicle per year, or from $2.5 to $7.5 billion worth of national average gasoline savings.As part of their efforts to meet Federal fuel economy standards, automakers routinely specify low rolling resistance tires on their new vehicles. Between 1980 and 1994, the lowest rolling resistance tire models available achieved a 48% reduction in rolling resistance, and have likely continued to improve thereafter. These original equipment (OE) tire models are occasionally available in the replacement tire market, but often only by special order. In general, the tires marketed to the replacement tire market tend to place greater emphasis on longevity and low price, and therefore often have higher rolling resistance than OE tires.Unfortunately both OE and replacement tires lack any sort of rolling resistance labeling currently, so fleet managers and consumers that wish to buy highly energy-efficient tires when their first set of OE tires wear out have been stymied. Even when tire makers claim that particular replacement models are more fuelefficient than others, they do not always use consistent test methods or independent laboratory data to back up those claims. About 237 million replacement tires are sold in the U.S. each year for cars and light trucks, and none of them provides rolling resistance labeling.In 2002, the Energy Foundation funded Ecos Consulting to analyze the tire market, select representative models for rolling resistance testing, and work with Green Seal to recommend particular models that perform well while achieving low rolling resistance. Those findings are being published for the first time in this Choose Green Report. Additional background on Ecos Consultings key findings can be found in a separate report prepared for the California Energy Commission, available at /reports/2003- 01-31_600-03-001CRVOL2.PDF.3. Balancing Tire Resistance and Other ConsiderationsThe manufacture of tires, like other industrial processes, involves material extraction and production, as well as energy consumption and the emission of various pollutants. Each of these manufacturing stages impacts the environment in different ways. However, tires, like a number of other consumer products, are actually responsible for more environmental impacts in their use and ultimate disposition than in their manufacturing. They significantly impact the amount of fuel consumed by the vehicle to which they are attached, leading to global warming emissions as well as local and regional air pollution. They create particulate air pollution in the process of wearing, and they can be a significant solid waste problem if not properly recycled.An analysis conducted by Italian tire manufacturer Pirelli (Figure 1) revealed the dominance of tire use in overall life-cycle energy consumption. Fully 82% of the lifecycle energy use occurs from the tires contribution to vehicle fuel use, compared to roughly 18% associated with obtaining the raw materials and manufacturing the tire itself. Thus, a tires rolling resistance is likely to be a larger factor in its life-cycle environmental impact than its composition, longevity, or ultimate fate, though those factors merit consideration as well.This report places greatest significance on the measured rolling resistance of tires, followed closely by consideration of the tires expected longevity and performance characteristics. A tire with high rolling resistance can cause profound environmental impact, even if it capably grips the road and lasts for 80,000 miles. By contrast, a very low rolling resistance tire may not be worth recommending if its lifetime is unusually short or test data indicate that it provides poor traction.Every tire currently on the market represents a balance between a wide assortment of desired performance characteristics and price (we surveyed tires ranging from $25 to over $200 per tire). Careful balancing of these characteristics can yield not only a high-performing tire, but also one that is better for the environment than others currently available on the market.4.Rating Tire Rolling Resistance and Related FactorsRolling resistance has traditionally been measured through an official Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) test procedure known as J1269. It measures the force required to roll a tire against a dynamometer at a fixed speed of 50 miles per hour. A newer procedure, SAE J2452, promises improved accuracy by assessing rolling resistance at a variety of speeds, but no independent laboratory currently has the capability to conduct such testing in-house. As a result, all of our testing was conducted at a single independent laboratory according to SAE J1269.The highest and lowest rolling resistance tires we tested differed in efficiency by 60%, indicating that tire choice can have a bigger impact on fuel economy than most people realize. Rolling resistance differences of 20 to 30% are not uncommon among tires of an otherwise similar size, type, and level of performance. This means an individual vehicle could save up to 6% of its gasoline use if it were fitted with very efficient tires, paying for the modest additional cost of low rolling resistance tires in approximately a year of fuel savings. In other words, a typical compact car such as a Ford Focus can improve its mileage from 30 mpg to 32 mpg simply by using lower rolling resistance tires. For a car averaging 15,000 miles per year the fuel savings is about $50 (at $1.50 per gallon).All tires have imprinted information on their sidewalls indicating size, type, load, and speed ratings, as described in Figure 2. The majority of tire models employ a “P” designation for passenger vehicle use, but some bear the “LT” designation for use with light trucks. In general, “P” tires appear to be gaining in popularity relative to “LT” tires of a given size.In addition, the U.S. Department of Transportation requires each manufacturer to grade its tires under the Uniform Tire Quality Grading System (UTQGS) and establish ratings for the following characteristics: tread wear, traction, and temperature resistance. Unfortunately, the ultimate results published for each tire model are less “uniform” than they should be. The government specifies how each test should be conducted and prevents a manufacturer from claiming better performance than measured. However, it does not prevent manufacturers from claiming worse performance than measured. And, curiously enough, many do, primarily to amplify marketing distinctions among their tires at different price points and encourage buyers to move up from a “good” to a “better” or “best” model in a particular category.Given the variability of ratings and the number of relevant factors, we have compiled our own composite metrics of performance for assessing tires, including the Federal ratings noted below and a variety of other published data.5.Rolling On to the FutureEfforts to differentiate replacement tires on the basis of rolling resistance are still in their very early stages. Without data on the rolling resistance of all tire models across a range of sizes, it is impossible to say for sure if the models identified in this report represent the most efficient models or simply a subset of them. For now, consumers and fleet managers can start with the data shown here and request additional information directly from retailers and manufacturers.附录：低滚动阻力轮胎根据报告80的或更多的汽车的燃料是由摩擦和其他类似的损失所消耗的。翻新轮胎具有较低滚动阻力可节省1.5%至4.5燃料。每年约2.37亿美元的翻新轮胎在销往美国。1. 美国的燃料使用、影响和机遇储蓄美国的汽油使用对环境的影响是深远的。拥有超过1.6亿轿车和轻型卡车的道路上，每一年燃烧约126亿加仑汽油。我们的燃料使用以约3的速度继续增长，在推动整体车辆数目持续增加和每辆汽车的平均距离上升带动下，平均燃油经济性下降。今天，轻型车（汽车和轻型卡车）的约20的氮氧化物，27的挥发性有机化合物，一氧化碳的51，大约30的二氧化碳（主温室气体）全部是由全国人类活动排放的。不断上涨的燃料的使用也有保护荒野和（容易增加探索）公共土地，水资源（油轮和管道事故），国家安全产生巨大影响。因此，机会节省资金，提高燃料的使用，通过减少环境质量是明确的。为横跨整个车队现有车辆节油最有希望的机会之一是利用而不是标准低滚动阻力轮胎置换模式。这一变化提高了车辆的固有效率，自动节省了典型的3万至5万英里的一套轮胎寿命燃料。该报告审查了通过改进轮胎的节能技术的使用汽油的机会，特别是轮胎型号的建议而我们的初步测试数据表明，环境优势。其结果是适用于政府和企业车队经理以及个人轮胎买家。 2.轮胎如何能降低油耗据美国国家科学院，约80%至88在汽车的油箱的能源被浪费在各种热，摩擦和备用的发动机和排气系统损失。只留下约12%至20%转换为实际车辆运动的势能。减少车辆轮胎的滚动阻力是提高工作效率的主要途径之一。这是不是一个轮胎的牵引或“握”在路面的措施，而是简单地说明如何轻松地轮胎在道路上卷，尽量减少在轮胎侧壁本身之间的轮胎与路面之间的轮胎和轮辋的热量浪费的能源。 详细的建模由国家可再生能源实验室进行的结论是：根据驾驶条件和车辆类型，在轮胎滚动阻力减少10应产生约1%至2的燃油节省。据在美国加州能源委员会的研究，如果使用的所有更换轮胎具有低1.5%至4.滚动阻力，约5汽油的使用总量可节省。这相当于大约为平均节省高达30汽油每车每年节约，或由$ 2.5至750亿美元的全国平均汽油节约价值加仑。 由于他们的努力，以满足联邦燃油经济性标准的一部分，汽车制造商通常指定其新车低滚动阻力轮胎。 1980年至1994年，最低的滚动阻力轮胎型号实现了滚动阻力减少48，并有可能以后继续提高。这些原始设备（OE）的轮胎模型，偶尔会在替换轮胎市场，但往往只能通过特殊订货。一般来说，轮胎销售给更换轮胎市场往往把对长寿和低价格更加重视，因此往往有较高的OE轮胎的滚动阻力比。 不幸的是两个OE和更换轮胎的滚动阻力没有任何标签，目前，使车队经理和消费者愿意购买高能源效率的轮胎时，他们的第一套OE轮胎磨损已经陷入困境。即使轮胎制造商声称，特别是更换车型比其他人更好的燃油经济性，他们并不总是一致的测试方法或使用独立的实验室数据支持这些说法。每年，约2.37亿没有提供滚动阻力的标签的更换轮胎销往美国的汽车和轻型卡车。 2002年，能源基金会资助的ecos咨询，分析轮胎市场，选择滚动阻力测试代表车型，并与绿色标记的工作建议，表现良好的同时实现低滚动阻力特别车型。这些发现第一次被发表在此选择绿色的报告。的ecos咨询的主要发现其他背景中可以找到为加州能源委员会编写的另一份报告，在/reports/2003- 01 - 31_600 - 03 - 001CRVOL2.PDF可查。 3. 轮胎平衡性及其它注意事项轮胎的生产，像其他工业生产过程，涉及重大的开采和生产，以及能源消耗和各种污染物的排放。这些制造每个阶段以不同的方式影响环境。然而，轮胎，像其他消费产品的数量，实际上更多的环境影响在其使用和最终处置比他们负责制造。他们大大影响了车辆消耗的燃料量以它们所连接，导致全球变暖的排放以及当地和区域空气污染。他们创造微粒在穿着过程中的空气污染，他们可以是一个重大的固体废物问题，如果没有妥善回收。 由意大利倍耐力轮胎制造商（图1）所作的分析显示，轮胎在整个生命周期能源消耗利用的主导地位。全生命周期的82来自能源使用轮胎的贡献，汽车燃料使用时，大约18相比，与获得的原料和生产的轮胎本身相关联。因此，轮胎的滚动阻力很可能是在其生命周期比它的组成，寿命长，最终的命运或环境影响较大的因素，虽然这些因素也值得考虑。 这份报告的地方测得的轮胎滚动阻力的轮胎之后的预期寿命和性能特征的考虑密切合作，最大的意义。一个具有高可导致滚动阻力的轮胎对环境的影响深远，即使它干练扎道路和八点零零零万英里持续。与此相反，一个非常低滚动阻力轮胎可能不值得推荐，如果它的寿命是非常短或试验数据表明，它提供了可怜的牵引力。 每一个轮胎目前市场上代表的期望之间的性能特点和价格各式各样的平衡（我们调查的轮胎从25美元到200美元以上，每胎）。仔细地平衡这些特性不仅可以产生高效能的轮胎，而且是一个比目前市场上其他可用的环境更好。朗读显示对应的拉丁字符的拼音4. 轮胎滚动阻力评价和相关因素滚动阻力历来是通过测量汽车工程师学会（SAE）的测试程序为J1269称为官方社会。它需要推出措施以每小时50英里的速度对一个固定的测功机轮胎的力。一个新的程序，SAE的J2452，承诺改善评估在不同的速度滚动阻力的准确性，但目前没有独立的实验室有能力进行内部这类测试。因此，我们进行的所有测试均在一个单一的符合SAE J1269标准的独立实验室。我们测试的最高和最低的滚动阻力在效率上相差60，这表明轮胎的选择有对燃油经济性有比大多数人意识到的更大的影响。 在类似的大小、类型和性能水平的轮胎中20%至30的滚动阻力差距并不少见。这意味着如果配用合适的轮胎，为适度的低滚动阻力轮胎支付额外费，一辆私家车大约每年可节省燃料多达6。换言之，一个典型的如福特福克斯小型汽车可以提高其从30英里到32英里的里程只需使用低滚动阻力轮胎。对于一个平均每年节省约15000英里的汽车的燃料约50美元（每加仑1.50美元）。所有轮胎大小，类型，负载和速度等级都印在他们的侧壁，如图2所描述的信息。大多数型号的轮胎采用了“P”的客运车辆使用的名称，但有些用“LT”的为轻型卡车使用的名称。一般来说，“P”的轮胎似乎相对“LT”更受欢迎。此外，美国运输部要求各等级的轮胎制造商根据统一轮胎品质分级系（UTQGS），并为建立评级以下特点：胎面磨损，牵引和耐高温性。不幸的是，每个轮胎型号公布的最终结果都比他们应该的要少。政府规定每个测试应该如何进行，并防止声称性能优于衡量制造商。然而，它并不能阻止厂家声称比测量值差的性能。并且，奇怪的是，许多人，主要是为了扩大自己的轮胎营销之间的区别在不同的价格点和鼓励买家从一个“好” 移动到特定类别的“好”或“最佳”的模式。由于收视率的变化及相关因素，我们已编制评估轮胎，包括联邦额定值下文提到的和其他公布的我们自己的高性能复合指标各种数据。5.滚动阻力的未来发展努力在区分的基础上更换轮胎滚动阻力仍处于非常初期的阶段。如果没有对整个的尺寸范围内的所有型号的轮胎滚动阻力的数据，就不可能肯定本报告确定的模式是否代表了最有效的模型或只是其中的一个子集。现在，消费者和车队经理可以开始看在这里显示的数据，并直接要求零售商和制造商提供更多的信息。10SY-025-BY-5毕业设计（论文）中期检查表填表日期4月20日迄今已进行 8 周剩余 8 周学生姓名吴 中系部汽车与交通工程学院专业、班级车辆工程07-1班指导教师姓名纪峻岭职称副教授从事专业车辆工程