Bringing EU Labeling into the

Lab

Kevin Kefauver, P.h.D.

National Tire Research Center, Technical Director
 Agenda
Introduction
External Rolling Noise
Wet Grip
Conclusions
Questions
 Introduction
EU Labeling is required for tires sold in Europe and the NTRC is
developing test techniques to bring this testing into the laboratory
NTRC has developed techniques to perform noise testing in the
laboratory and compares test results to the EU External Rolling Noise
test for a set of candidate C1 and C2 tires
NTRC has developed techniques to perform EU label Wet Grip testing
on the LTRe and compares the results to the published wet grip
results for a set of candidate C1 and C2 tires
NTRC is currently working test techniques to perform tire energy loss
measurements, but will not discuss it here
 Introduction - Company Overview
Global Center of Automotive Performance Simulation (GCAPS)
National Tire Research Center (NTRC) Tire Characterization
SoVa Motion Vehicle Characterization
Virtual Design and Integration Lab (VDIL) Modeling and Simulation
Provide Testing and Simulation Services of Tires and Vehicles
True third party not affiliated with any vehicle OEM, component OEM, or race
organization
 Introduction
Technology leap to establish high quality tire data for all light truck,
race, and smaller vehicles

Description Specification Units

Minimum Loaded Radius 250 mm
Maximum Loaded Radius 550 mm
Loaded Displacement Rate 160 mm/s
Maximum Tire Width 500 mm
Slip Angle Range +/- 30 deg
Slip Angle Rate 90 deg/s
Inclination Angle +/- 10 deg
Inclination Angle Rate 38 deg/s
Vertical Force 30 kN
Lateral Force +/- 30 kN
Longitudinal Force +/- 25 kN
Spindle Speed +/- 3000/850 rpm
Spindle Torque +/- 5/10 kNm
Spindle Torque Rate 15 kNm/s
Roadway Speed +/- 320/110 kph
Roadway Drag Force +/- 13/25 kN
Flat-Trac Light Truck Racing Electric-Drive Machine
 External Rolling Noise
Purpose is to bring tire airborne and structure borne noise testing into laboratory on a flat belt test
machine
Not directly comparable to the EU procedure because the EU procedure is designed around outdoor
pass by noise tests and this method tests an individual tire and measures the tire noise at the contact
patch
Test consists of pavement standard OBSI probe mounted to the machine, tire test performed and
data collected, and data processed
Multiple Surfaces can be mounted on LTRe belt
Smooth for airborne
Non-uniform surfaces for structure borne
Replication of reference surfaces possible using non-uniform surface application techniques
Tests performed for a variety of EU labeled tires and noise results are summarized and compared
Tests performed using the standard 120 grit test surface
External Rolling Noise Test Setup
Industry first for in lab flat
surface measurement
OBSI sensor fixed to machine
and measures the tire noise at
the contact patch Can quickly
iterate between different loads
and pressures without having
to reposition sensors
Acoustic Chamber around tire
to decrease the effect of
background noise on
measurement
 External Rolling Noise Sample Data Frequency
Histories
Standard test method - Tires are
loaded to 75% maximum load
and test is performed at 80 kph
Standard pavement noise post
processing methods are applied
Sound Intensity measurements
made, but can be converted to
sound pressure
Resulting frequency history can
be weighted and single sound
output metric number
calculated
Standard sound intensity measurement output converted to sound pressure
 External Rolling Noise Test Results

EU Test
NTRC Average
Value
EU Rank NTRC Rank Five European Commercial Tires
Tested and rank ordered and
SRTT 16 inch Ref Tire 98.6 - - - compared to the EU ratings
Tire 1 C2 106.5 74.0 2.0 1.0 Tires are ranked from loudest (1) to
Tire 2 C2 104.5 76.0 1.0 2.0
quietest (5)
Tire 3 C1 101.3 72.0 4.0 3.0
Rank ordering is similar between the
outdoor EU labeling test and the
Tire 4 C1 100.5 72.0 3.0 4.0 indoor non-EU labeling test
Tire 5 C1 99.2 71.0 5.0 5.0 Sound difference range comparable
 External Rolling Noise Repeatability
Variance
106

105

104
Three construction were chosen
Recorded Noise level (dBA)

103
and three different tires were
102 Tire 3 - C1 tested for each construction
Tire 2 - C2
101
Tire 5 - C1 Maximum deviation of <1 dBA
100 during variance investigation
99

98
1 2 3
Measurement Number
 Wet Grip
Purpose is to perform EU Wet Grip Testing in Laboratory
Test utilizes the LTRe large controlled braking capacity coupled with its
wet test capability
Standard 120 grit test surface utilized for testing, but other surfaces can
be installed on machine Sand Patch Test indicates this surface has a
texture depth smaller than required by standard
Replication of reference surfaces possible using non-uniform surface
application techniques
Tests performed for a variety of EU labeled tires and results are
summarized
Wet Grip
 Wet Grip Water Delivery Specifications
1.4000

25% Flow
Puddle Height for various
1.2000
flow capacities and
50% Flow
1.0000
roadway speeds.
Puddle Height, mm

75% Flow
100% Flow provide 0.91
0.8000 100% Flow mm puddle depth at test
0.6000
speed of 65 kph (spec 1
mm +/- 0.5 mm)
0.4000 Volumetric flow rate per
0.2000
section width - 16.4
liters/s per meter of
0.0000 section width (spec 18
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 liters/s per meter for 1 mm
Speed, kph
depth)
Water flow rate versus puddle height versus speed for the LTRe water delivery system
 Wet Test Test Results
PBFC Coefficent of Calculated Letter
Variation Wet Grip Index Rating from Tire Label
Tire PBFC (%) (%) Testing Rating
T1 - C2 0.6773 1.03 96.54 E C
T2 - C2 0.6377 1.56 91.23 F C
T3 - C1 0.7177 1.41 106.70 F E
T4 - C1 0.7210 1.37 102.04 F E
T5 - C1 0.8229 0.99 117.31 E E

Five European Commercial Tires Tested 2 Light Truck C2 tires and 3 Passenger C1 Tires
Wet Grip Index Calculated for each tire and associated rating assigned and compared
the label rating
The NTRC data is consistently smaller for both the C1 and C2 tires
Two factors can be associated with these differences
The texture depth of the test surface is lower than what is specified
The tire pressure for the C2 tires may not be correct. The test pressure of 220 kPa was used for all
tests which may be lower than what may be actually required
 Wet Test Test Results
Difference
between
Calculated Calculated and Corrected Wet
Wet Grip Index Letter Tire Label Actual Grip Index Corrected
Tire (%) Rating Rating (%) (%) Label
T1 - C2 96.54 E C 13.46 115.31 C
T2 - C2 91.23 F C 18.77 110.00 C
T3 - C1 106.70 F E 3.30 114.66 E
T4 - C1 102.04 F E 7.96 110.00 E
T5 - C1 117.31 E E 7.31 125.27 C

Possible surface and pressure correction factor for the NTRC data
Tire category specific correction
For all C2 tires, if the wet grip index is increased by 18.77%, the correct label rating is achieved
For all C1 tires, if the wet grip index is increased by 7.96%, the correct label rating is achieved
for all tires except T5. It is a C rating by the 1% (if it were 124% instead of 125% it would have
the correct E rating)
More development is required
 Wet Test Repeatability
PBFC Coefficent of
Variation Wet Grip Index Percent Difference
Tire
T1A - C2
PBFC
0.6915
(%)
0.90
(%)
95.29
(%)
1.30
Five European Commercial Tires
T1B - C2 0.6795 0.89 97.12 0.60 Tested with three different tires
T1C - C2 0.6608 1.31 97.22 0.70
T2A - C2 0.6596 2.80 90.96 0.30 of each construction
T2B - C2 0.6329 1.28 90.95 0.31
T2C - C2 0.6206 0.60 91.79 0.61 Wet Grip Index Calculated for
T3A - C1 0.7100 1.09 105.55 1.07 each tire and percent difference
T3B - C1 0.7219 1.56 107.32 0.59
T3C - C1 0.7212 1.56 107.22 0.49 relative to mean for each
T4A - C1 0.7242 1.07 99.63 2.36
T4B - C1 0.7230 1.40 102.23 0.19
construction is less than 2.4%
T4C - C1
T5A - C1
0.7159
0.8467
1.62
1.29
104.25
116.67
2.17
0.54
Test process is very repeatable
T5B - C1 0.8088 0.99 115.61 1.44
T5C - C1 0.8131 0.71 119.63 1.99
 Conclusions
NTRC has demonstrated the ability to perform noise testing on the LTRe
Similar rank ordering of tires and magnitude of variation in tires can be found
between the NTRC tests and the tire labels
Repeatability between tires of the same construction were very good
More development work is required to relate the indoor test to outdoor test as
prescribed by the EU labeling regulations
NTRC has demonstrated the ability to perform wet grip testing on the LTRe
Results produced similar rank ordering as the labeled tires with a consistently lower
wet grip index
Repeatability between tires of the same construction were very good
More development work is required in the test surface used for testing, lower grit test
surface paper or molded non-uniform test surfaces need to be evaluated
 Questions?

Come see us at booth number 5132