Avocet Touring Tires

Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
Sheldon Brown wrote:

...
Hydroplaning is an issue for cars and motorcycles (though a rare one: in
my 44 years of driving, I've only experienced hydroplaning once.)....

This proves that Mr. Brown is not sufficiently crazy with the use of the
"loud pedal".

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

In 20 years of driving I have never experienced hydroplaning. Aquaplaning
many times. I enjoyed overtaking Porches especially and would push that bit
harder until loss of steering became apparent, lovely smooth ride. Previous
employment required approx.. 70,000 miles per year driving quickly, mostly
on minor roads. With such intensive amount of high speed driving I learnt
very quickly how far I could push different vehicles. Learnt and used
handling characteristics to drive underpowered vehicles sometimes overloaded
at maximum safe speed.
Sufficiently crazy, I'd say so.
TJ

Trevor Jeffrey wrote:


Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
Sheldon Brown wrote:

... Hydroplaning is an issue for cars and motorcycles (though a rare
one: in my 44 years of driving, I've only experienced hydroplaning
once.)....

This proves that Mr. Brown is not sufficiently crazy with the use of the
"loud pedal".

In 20 years of driving I have never experienced hydroplaning.
Aquaplaning many times.

That's funny, considering these are both accepted words for describing the
same phenomenon. You're not one of those peddants, are you?

--
Benjamin Lewis

Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
-- James Thurber

Peter wrote in message ...

The rule developed for estimating when hydroplaning conditions exist for
landing planes which have smooth tires is that
V(mph) = 10 * tire pressure (psi).

At what depth of standing water? Is this just for a film of water?
It must be taken into account that the usual standard for airstrip
construction is higher than that encountered on roads. So any tyre is
likely to perform better on a landing strip than on the road due to the
enhanced drainage of the landing strip.
TJ

Benjamin Lewis wrote:

wrote:

Not really interested in working out a derivation. If you are I'd
suggest starting by considering the force required to move the water out
of the way and what's available from the pressure of the tire.


I was asking for a citation, not a theoretical derivation. Where did you
get this formula from? Did they publish the data with which they derived
it?

I don't have it at hand, but a place to look would be: Horne, Walter B.,
NASA Langley Research Center, "Skidding Accidents on Runways and
Highways Can be Reduced," Astronautics & Aeronautics, August 1967. Don't
know if this has the technical derivation, but one would probably be
included in the references provided in this paper. The formula is
commonly used in connection with pilot training.

Tim McNamara wrote:
John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
wrote:
A total loss of wheel traction on a single-track vehicle will
result in an immediate sideways fall.
I've skidded both wheels momentarily without falling. Isn't that a
total loss of traction?

No, that's merely insufficient traction for everything you're trying to do,
and doesn't preclude there being sufficient to keep the wheels under the
bike.

No, it's a partial loss. Try riding your bike on wet ice for a good
sense of total loss of traction.

Even wet ice offers more grip than the macroscopic layer of water present
when a vehicle aquaplanes.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!

Robert wrote:
Loss of grip when cornering or braking is one thing. Increase of slip
angle is what happens in the wet, when cornering. But you people must be
a completely different class of riders to be able to go so quickly that
you can cause genuine aquaplaning, and then live to tell the story.

Who are us people, plural? Only one person has claimed this.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!

David Damerell wrote:

Robert wrote:
.. . .
you people must be
a completely different class of riders to be able to go so quickly that
.. . .
you can cause genuine aquaplaning,
.. . .
Who are us people, plural? Only one person has claimed this.

Quite right. I stand corrected. /Robert

David Damerell wrote in message ...
Even wet ice offers more grip than the macroscopic layer of water present
when a vehicle aquaplanes.

And fails to understand what he wrote himself.
TJ

foldedpath wrote in message ...

And extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You're the one
claiming you experienced hydroplaning on a bike.

Maybe it would help advance the discussion if you went into more detail
about that? You've mentioned what you think the water depth was, and
your speed. What happened to the bike? Did your rear wheel suddenly
start spinning faster? Did you brake and lock the front wheel while
still moving forward in a straight line? Did you slide out of control?
What led you to think you were hydroplaning?

I was freewheeling downhill, I locked the front wheel with only a light
touch of the brake, I maintained balance through steering whilst the front
wheel was still locked up without loss of speed. If it was a skid I'd have
pitched over the handlebars. the bike drifted towards the gutter, so I
released brake. There was no snatch at the steering it took maybe a second
for the wheel to get up speed. There where no leaves dirt or oil, and it
was sleeting. If you dont think it's aquaplaning because there was hail
mixed with the rain well that's your misunderstanding..



One reason I'm skeptical is that loss of traction can be caused by many
things, like dirt and other materials mixed with water. The streets in
my neighborhood are extra slippery in the first half hour or so of
rainfall after an extended dry spell. The accumulated dust, vehicle oil
drops and water combine to make an emulsion film on the road. I notice
this when driving a car as well as a bike, and I'm a extra careful when
braking even at low speeds. It has nothing to do with hydroplaning.

If I was riding down a hill and hit a flat spot with a thin film of
water and lost traction, I'm not sure I'd automatically assume this was
hydroplaning, unless all the other possibilities were definitely ruled
out.

--
Mike Barrs

Trevor Jeffrey wrote:
---8----cut
of the brake, I maintained balance through steering whilst the front
wheel was still locked up without loss of speed. If it was a skid I'd have
pitched over the handlebars.

No. No. No. Skidding does not mean that you were aquaplaning. That you
did not lose speed during the braking does not mean that you were
aquaplaning either. It just means that the coefficient of friction for
your tyre on that (wet) surface was pretty close to zero. The small
contact area of the tyre on the road will ensure that you will always
have contact with the road, assuming that the road is close to level,
i.e. does not fall away sharply.

What determines your not going end over end is that the coefficient of
friction of the tyre against road surface was not high enough for you to
lift the back wheel. But that will not be aquaplaning, since the front
tyre will still be in contact with the road, regardless of the water.
Bike tyres are that thin . . . (won't repeat here what 30 or so posters
have already tried to tell you).

Finally, your statement, "If it was a skid I'd have pitched over the
handlebars": It's when your front wheel does *not* skid, that you risk
going over the bars. Coefficient of friction reduces significantly
during a skid, due to the disintegration of the rubber. When you skid
the front, then you will either fall on your side, or, if you are quick
enough to release the brake (as you apparently did - well done),
recover, assuming that you weren't leaning too hard during the lockup.

HTH /Robert