Motorcycle: Lean Angle, Speed, and Turn Radius

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between lean angle, speed, and turn radius for motorcycles negotiating curves. The lean angle θ is initially approximated by the formula tan(θ) = v²/(rg), where g is gravity and r is the curve radius. However, the conversation highlights the need to refine this relationship for motorcycles with wider tires, which can affect stability and handling. The impact of tire width is considered, with the assumption that the contact area is semicircular and the tire widths are uniform. Ultimately, the refined equation accounts for the height of the mass center and the geometry of the motorcycle during a lean.
Julian Solos
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Suppose you are riding a motorcycle at a constant speed v[/color] and about to enter a level, circular, curve of radius r[/color]. You intend to lean with the bike and want to make negotiating the curve as smooth and effortless as possible.

Then the lean angle (from the vertical) of the motorcycle \theta to which the motorcycle will settle into is approximated by the following relationship

tan (\theta) = \frac {v^2} {rg}

where g[/color] is the acceleration due to gravity.

If the widths of the tires of the motorcycle are narrow, like those of bicycle tires, the above relationship should give a good approximation. However, many of today's motorcycles have wide tires, i.e. 19 cm. Can we refine the above relationship with the addition of a variable or variables related to the widths of the tires of the motorcycle?

(For simplicity's sake, shall we assume the widths of the front and rear tires are the same so hat we need to use only one width and the sections of the tires which make contact with the ground are semicircles of the radius equal to the tire width and their shape remains the same throughout the range of possible lean angles?)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Julian Solos said:
Suppose you are riding a motorcycle at a constant speed v and about to enter a level, circular, curve of radius r. You intend to lean with the bike and want to make negotiating the curve as smooth and effortless as possible.

Then the lean angle (from the vertical) of the motorcycle \theta to which the motorcycle will settle into is approximated by the following relationship

tan (\theta) = \frac {v^2} {rg}

where g is the acceleration due to gravity.

If the widths of the tires of the motorcycle are narrow, like those of bicycle tires, the above relationship should give a good approximation. However, many of today's motorcycles have wide tires, i.e. 19 cm. Can we refine the above relationship with the addition of a variable or variables related to the widths of the tires of the motorcycle?

(For simplicity's sake, shall we assume the widths of the front and rear tires are the same so hat we need to use only one width and the sections of the tires which make contact with the ground are semicircles of the radius equal to the tire width and their shape remains the same throughout the range of possible lean angles?)
Just need to consider the point of contact with the ground and the position of the nass centre of bike+rider. If the height of the mass centre is h when upright and the tyre radius is r then when the bike leans at angle θ the height is ##r+(h-r)\cos(\theta)## and the horizontal displacement of mass centre from point of contact is ##(h-r)\sin(\theta)##.
Going around a curve radius R at speed v we have ##\frac{v^2}{Rg}=\frac{(h-r)\sin(\theta)}{r+(h-r)\cos(\theta)}##.
Note that setting r=0 gives the simpler equation.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top