Talk:Cadence braking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 11% quote 2 Tyres / Tires 3 Timing the pulses 4 Myth

[edit] 11% quote

What principle governs the 11% rule? It might be useful to include it here instead of just putting a number. 24.197.173.32 21:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, that would be useful to know. I wrote that figure in the article, based on a number of texts I've read it in, with no further explanation. Intriguing... I guess it's something to do with the maximum shear force that can be transmitted across a compliant medium - intuitively one can imagine that this will be at a maximum for some value of slip between zero and 100%, but why 11% in particular I don't know. Graham 13:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That's just a typical figure for a production tire on asphalt. It varies with rubber compound, construction, speed, pressure and the road surface. and probably a few other things Greglocock 05:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

So would it be fair to change this to "approximately 10%, dependent on factors such as rubber compound, tire construction, speed, pressure and the road surface" rather than quoting a specific figure with no reference? Driver sam (talk) 14:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tyres / Tires

Why is the Commonwealth spelling "tyres" being changed to "tires"? The original article uses "tyres". This should remain. I am reverting the last edit.

--Yaf201 10:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I was checking to see what was right after I read your comment, Seems either would be fine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. That said, WTF is "the Commonwealth" 198.6.46.11 20:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timing the pulses

That thing about timing the braking to the swaying of the car sounds interesting. What is the advantage of doing that? —Bromskloss 00:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

As you hit the brakes the front of the car dips. As this happens, the vertical load on the front wheel increases. This also increases their braking capacity, so you can brake harder. But I'm going to have to say that in modern cars it is not a huge effect in my opinion, and there are good reasons to think that a smoothly applied constant load might be better bet. I'd like to hear from anyone who has used cadence braking succesfully in a competitive environment with modern hardware. Greglocock 12:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Thanks for that. What would the difference be between old and new cars, that make this technique useful only on the old ones? —Bromskloss 13:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

The shock abosrbers on pre-war cars were not sufficinetly powerful to really prevent the car from pitching for several cycles, so you could time teh pressure on the brake pedal to synchronise with that. By the 60s, if not earlier, this no longer happened, the car would just pitch forward and stay there, under braking. If I remember I'll have a look at some real data and see if that is the case. I suspect that cadence braking is an old skill that 'everyone' has heard of, but no-one uses any more. Greglocock 22:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Myth

Edited factual error regarding the cadence braking being the fastest meathod of stopping a moving vehicle.

source: http://www.drivingfast.net/car_control/braking.htm

MadAve (talk) 08:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The argument in that website is based on a false premise. The data shown for grip vs slip bears no strong resemblance to real world data as the peak s approached and exceeded. Threshold braking will stop the car in a shorter distance than locked wheels. Cadence braking may or may not. I removed that section as it is (a) wrong and (b) encourages dangerous behaviour (locking wheels) and is (c) poorly written and (d) unreferenced. See http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/vrtc/ca/capubs/NADSSAE_Paper2006010559.pdf Greg Locock (talk) 00:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)