Anyone heard of the "Aquaplane Formula"???

[ywouldi]

captdm said:

Hi,
Just to clarify the aquaplaning formula that is very accurate.
Firstly the formula applies to aviation and the answer is expressed in Knots (nautical miles per hour) so get the answer and multiply by 1.15 to give you the answer in statute miles per hour (vehicle MPH)

he road. Because of this the wheel will rotate BACKWARDS!

Thought this might help
Regards to all

Yes, but if the conveyor is moving backwards will it take off?

[beefree7]

May I clarify? The formula is correct, but gives the lowest threshold at which aquaplaning becomes a risk. As you correctly pointed out, there are other factors where, ABOVE that threshold, grip is lost. Certainly, a budget tyre will get into trouble at a much lower speed than a very good rain tyre, such as the Continental Contact2 for example.
To summarise, a bald remould is safe up the the speed given by the formula.
Hope this helps.

[beefree7]

I didn't know that it was expressed in knots.
Thanks for the tip.

[dvance]

captdm said:

Hi,
Also, the interpretation of the formula maintains that the value expressed is the speed that aquaplaning MAY OCCUR, NOT WILL OCCUR.

This is as useful as saying that there is a 0.3% chance of me being hit by lightning indoors right now. For starters you need a confidence level.

This is at best a gross approximation.

Some investigation report said:

Reverted rubber (steam) hydroplaning occurs during heavy braking that results in a prolonged locked-wheel skid. Only a thin film of water on the runway is required to facilitate this type of hydroplaning. The tire skidding generates enough heat to change the water film into a cushion of steam which keeps the tire off the runway. A side effect of the heat is it causes the rubber in contact with the runway to revert to its original uncured state. Indications of an aircraft having experienced reverted rubber hydroplaning, are distinctive ‘steam-cleaned’ marks on the runway surface and a patch of reverted rubber on the tire.

I am not sure this is applicable to cars.

As the formula you refer to is used in aviation, the average weight of an aircraft is very different than the average weight of a car. Also, tyre thread pattern I believe is less of a variable in aviation as I am yet to see different patterns on different airplanes (could be wrong though). This makes me think that although this formula could be accurate for airplanes, it might not even be in the ballpark for cars.

EDIT: Also, I don't see how car wheels will rotate back if drive is engaged and the engine is producing torque. Your statement once again applies to aircraft which have free-wheeling wheels.

[CraigyMc]

Any reason why you lot are talking about a thread that died once seven years ago, then a second time five years ago?

Is this the Zombie Thread that Just Wont Die?

C

[Johnnytheboy]

Play nice with the newbie!

[CraigyMc]

Johnnytheboy said:

Play nice with the newbie!

I am trying

[dvance]

I admit I did not check the dates before replying