[HN Gopher] Michelin's airless tires are scheduled for market la...
___________________________________________________________________
Michelin's airless tires are scheduled for market launch in 2024
Author : mardiyah
Score : 214 points
Date : 2021-09-15 10:56 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (interestingengineering.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (interestingengineering.com)
| gz5 wrote:
| In 'The Wide Lens' by Ron Adner, he uses Michelin's run-flat tire
| initiative (PAX) to show how brilliant innovations can fall flat
| (sorry, couldn't resist) if the entire ecosystem / supply chain
| is not enabled.
|
| In the case of PAX, the service stations (75% of the market is
| replacement) were not ready.
|
| Hopefully, Michelin has the full ecosystem enabled in this case,
| as this seems promising.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| Aren't a lot of tires these days self sealing? Different system
| but also innovation but without the downsides of PAX.
| t0mas88 wrote:
| The sad part for Michelin is that not much later BMW started
| using run-flat tires on all their cars. So it was really just a
| value-chain issue, not a lack of demand or bad timing.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| > In several lawsuits and on some Web sites, consumers have
| complained about the difficulty of finding shops with the
| equipment to work on PAX; they also cite excessive tire wear
| and replacement costs as high as $1,600 for four tires.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/automobiles/20TIRES.html
|
| Seems to be a really bad value for money.
| smbv wrote:
| Cleaned up URL: https://interestingengineering.com/michelin-
| airless-tires-hi...
| chapium wrote:
| Another great way to improve the environment is biking for trips
| below 5-10 miles. This carbon offset would do laps around car
| ownership.
| arbitrage wrote:
| In mountainous locations, that is not an option.
| slaw wrote:
| On hills you could use electric bike. I recommend at least
| 750W motor.
| biftek wrote:
| Bicycles now have these things called gears which make it
| possible to ride in the mountains
| daxfohl wrote:
| I was expecting yet another minor convenience that doubled the
| ecological footprint of a thing. But it looks like reducing
| impact was actually a goal here. Pretty awesome.
| makomk wrote:
| They're trying to spin it as reducing the environmental impact,
| but the actual details in the article seem iffy. Glass fibre
| reinforced plastic is basically non-recyclable and they only
| have some vague ambition to make them out of something that is
| at some unspecified point in the future.
| daxfohl wrote:
| Yeah greenwashing is a thing and even a lot of stuff that
| genuinely well-intentioned can have externalities that
| outweigh the benefit. But at least it looks like they're
| trying.
| lmilcin wrote:
| Just don't let it dry out with mud in it!
| Lio wrote:
| These remind me of the Tannus[1] solid bike tyres that have been
| around for _(...guessing from memory...)_ about a decade now.
|
| I think last time I looked that them the rolling resistance was a
| little more than I'd like on my "fun" bikes but for commuting
| that they look great option.
|
| I think my personal preference for a "ride flat" system would be
| for a tubeless tyre, sealant and an insert like Tannus' Armour
| Tubeless (...or tubs I guess)
|
| 1. https://tannustires.com/en/
| bufferoverflow wrote:
| How do they deal with rocks/mud/dirt/sand getting inside?
| dhd415 wrote:
| Alloy wheels have had open designs for decades and that hasn't
| been a problem for them.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Alloy wheels don't need to flex, though. If a rock wedges
| into nooks and crannies of this, perhaps it could mess up the
| performance. And perhaps it could cause damage since you'd
| have a harder material (rock) rubbing against a softer one
| (rubbery airless tire stuff).
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Those have bigger and fewer holes, and they don't look like
| an ant's nest.
| CountDrewku wrote:
| Tires are different than wheels....
| croon wrote:
| I'm hoping that's a prototype that just shows the structure
| inside and not the final design. But I guess we'll find out, or
| they will in that trial.
| maxcan wrote:
| I suspect the production version will have a covering on the
| sidewall for that and to reduce aerodynamic drag. It won't be
| structural like current tires but I think the "wall-free"
| design you see now is Just prototype marketing.
| lstodd wrote:
| That will interfere with cooling. Heat buildup will reduce
| lifespan.
|
| This was researched and practiced since at least first world
| war, with pioneering applications dating to 1850s.
|
| TLDR: internal friction in the rubber kills it. Acceptable
| for military and heavy-duty vehicles, useless for anything
| else.
| tokai wrote:
| Good that they are glass fiber reinforced plastic and not
| rubber then.
| lstodd wrote:
| Tires were hemp-reinfoced plastic, then steel-reinforced
| plastic, they are now actually fiberglass-reinforced
| plastic.
|
| It doesn't matter. So long as elasticity is provided not
| by gas compression, but solid material
| compression/tension, that solid material will deteriorate
| fast.
|
| Downvote me all you want, but this idea won't fly. It
| can't compete with regular tires at anything above 20mph.
| xmdx wrote:
| Looks like a complete pass through from one side to the other
| so washing them should remove most of that. Rocks might even
| fall out as the tyre rotates.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| It wouldn't be too crazy of an engineering trick to make the
| pores flex in a manner that causes them to crap out anything
| that's clogging them as the tire goes around.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Their FAQ (downloadable from
| https://michelinmedia.com/michelin-uptis/) does address this:
|
| > _21. What will happen if some small stones or mud or snow get
| in between the structure of Uptis?_
|
| > _The objective during the development of the commercial
| product is to test Uptis in all of these situations. Some
| preliminary tests show that stones, mud or ice /snow will not
| stay inside the Uptis structure._
|
| Obviously preliminary tests aren't anywhere near enough to
| prove it's a nonissue, though.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Even if these tires aren't good enough for the snobs who want
| everything to be silent and handle perfectly they'll be great for
| trailers, yard trucks and other rarely used vehicles that rack up
| few miles and run run old-ish tires (which tend to be more
| plagued by slow leaks and whatnot) but still need to go highway
| speed.
| dhd415 wrote:
| Michelin has been selling these under the "Tweel" name[0] for
| skid steers, commercial lawn mowers, and other mid-sized
| wheeled equipment for several years now. Supposedly, they
| improve the handling and ride of the equipment since the
| Tweel's internal structure flexes more than an air-filled tire
| and therefore adds more of a suspension to the tractor.
|
| [0] https://tweel.michelinman.com/light-construction-
| products.ht...
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| I know. But unfortunately they're not rated for (and don't
| last long at, tread tends to separate) road speeds.
|
| Various manufacturers have been teasing "airless" prototypes
| for highway use for a long time. I hope this one actually
| goes somewhere.
| tokai wrote:
| Nothing snobbish about wanting silent tires. Tires are one of
| the main factors for road noise, and road noise causes adverse
| health effects and death on a large scale.
| sailfast wrote:
| Death on a large scale? This is the first time I'm hearing of
| this and I'd be interested to read more. Do you happen to
| have a study or something I can read?
| tokai wrote:
| here's something
|
| https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/36/39/2653/23982
| 3...
|
| or this
|
| https://forcetechnology.com/en/articles/traffic-noise-
| danger...
|
| 200-500 annual Danish deaths related to road noise
| pollution. Thats more than the number of people killed in
| traffic yearly.
| pope_meat wrote:
| I'm curious, how do we differentiate dying from noise
| pollution because you live close to a major throughway vs
| dying from the regular pollution that you're breathing in
| because you live close to a major throughway?
| tokai wrote:
| You try to control for statistical variables like
| pollution, occupation, and personal habits. I don't know
| anything about medical statistics, so I'm just accepting
| the conclusions of the road noise research.
|
| This paper should be helpful if you want to dig into the
| methodology one can use.
|
| https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/32/6/737/49702
| 5
| [deleted]
| barbazoo wrote:
| It'll be interesting to hear those on a EV whose afaik main
| source of noise are the tires.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| It's also a decent chunk of what causes economic blight for
| housing nearby highways.
| coryrc wrote:
| I would think it's the air pollution reducing your lifespan
| and causing asthma.
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/su6203a8.htm
| ashtonkem wrote:
| You'll notice I said "decent chunk" and not "100% of the
| cause"
| rootusrootus wrote:
| The air pollution near a highway may be measurable, but
| it is not immediately visible. The road noise, on the
| other hand, is overwhelming as soon as you step outside.
| For sure road noise drives more of the blight on housing
| value near high speed highways.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Any noise a normal-ish passenger car is of no consequence
| compared to the noise of heavy trucks and motorcycles. You
| don't even notice it.
|
| It's only "blighted" because the people who self select to
| live beside a highway tend not to be the ones who care a
| ton about making their residence look nice from the street
| (manicured lawn, nice siding, sealed driveway, etc, etc) so
| the prices stay cheap, the rents stay low and the cycle
| continues.
|
| Source: I live beside a highway
| Jackim wrote:
| I disagree. The difference that I and many other people
| noticed on city streets during the initial COVID
| lockdowns was enormous. Cities aren't loud places, the
| continuous white noise from passing passenger vehicles is
| the loud part.
|
| 60 km/h traffic is 10 times louder than people having a
| conversation.
| ygra wrote:
| Even 30 km/h is far from silent. Especially around
| intersections and traffic lights. And when you have
| trucks or buses accelerating it almost doesn't matter
| that a typical small car doesn't make that much noise at
| that speed anymore.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| "Houses nearby highways are low value because the owners
| are too lazy to manicure their lawns" is an explanation I
| don't buy one bit. It's too "just so" for my tastes, and
| it also contradicts my own personal experience of having
| my house value go up despite us purposefully killing the
| yard. Home values change for a lot of reasons outside the
| owners control; blaming it on the owners for not caring
| sufficiently about curb appeal doesn't hold water.
|
| A more likely explanation is that living near a highway
| sucks. Very few people want to hear traffic noise from
| their back yard, let alone smell exhaust fumes while
| trying to grill outside. People who can afford to will
| pay a premium for a quiet and peaceful backyard, and
| houses with traffic noise close to them will command a
| lower price to compensate for the lowered quality of
| life. The fact that we see a similar effect near airport
| runways is a supporting data point.
|
| I would in fact argue that you've got causation
| backwards. The curb appeal of houses near the highway is
| low because the home values are low. The people who live
| there are aware that nothing they can do will push the
| home value up because of the highway, or they lack the
| time and resources to focus on a manicured lawn.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >"Houses nearby highways are low value because the owners
| are too lazy to manicure their lawns"
|
| Well you're in luck because if you re-read my comment
| without the intent of building a strawman you'll see that
| that's not my explanation. My explanation is more or less
| "selection bias" I tried to offer some examples as to the
| mechanisms of such selection but you read right past
| them.
|
| >A more likely explanation is that living near a highway
| sucks.
|
| I like it specifically because people "who are willing to
| pay a premium for a quiet and peaceful back yard" do not
| elect to live in places like this if they have the option
| of paying that premium. This means I am free to use power
| tools into the evening, the business across the street is
| free to use heavy equipment in the morning, my neighbors
| are free to play loud music, have barking dogs, yell at
| their kids, etc. etc. etc. Things like not having to be
| anal about cutting our grass and keeping our houses nice
| follow quite naturally from that. If you don't care about
| other people's business in a similar manner the cost
| savings from living in this environment are tempting.
|
| >The fact that we see a similar effect near airport
| runways is a supporting data point.
|
| Yes, people who care about noise avoid those too. What's
| your point.
|
| >I would in fact argue that you've got causation
| backwards. The curb appeal of houses near the highway is
| low because the home values are low
|
| Values are low because a subset of people don't want to
| live here. Selection bias applies to both groups
| increasing the disparity.
|
| You are foolishly projecting your opinions onto everyone.
| Some people simply don't care about the noise. They
| cluster where it is noisy because why would they pay more
| to avoid something they don't place a high value on
| avoiding. Are these people a minority when you look at
| the population overall? Probably. Are these neighborhoods
| composed of many people who simply tolerate noise because
| they have no other rational option. You call this blight
| but I call this a reflection of our priorities.
| robocat wrote:
| I suspect a significant causation could be that living
| near a highway is low status, and having a beautifully
| manicured lawn is often about trying to signal high
| status. Why bother with a high status lawn on a low
| status property?
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Probably a bit of both.
| anonAndOn wrote:
| Living near a highway can have profound and long-lasting
| detrimental effects to one's health.[0]
|
| [0]https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-
| risk/highw...
| letmeinhere wrote:
| Road noise isn't just a driver aesthetic preference, it's a
| form of pollution that has direct impacts on human and animal
| health.
|
| I could still be convinced that the sustainability or safety
| (from fewer blowouts) gains of these would outweigh that, but
| it's important to consider beings outside of the auto cabin.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Rubber material properties (hardness basically) is a rounding
| error compared to tread design in terms of road noise and the
| dominant factor in terms of how long it takes the tire to
| wear down.
| N1H1L wrote:
| Not true absolutely. The rubber hardness is highly
| temperature dependent, and is modified by tinkering with
| your glass transition temperature. Winter tires have a
| lower glass transition temperature (are softer at lower
| temperatures), and as a result will wear down much, much
| faster in summer.
| tokai wrote:
| Do you have any sources to back that up? All the literature
| I find is pointing to tire vibrations, which I would guess
| is a mix of material properties, tread design, and more.
| captainredbeard wrote:
| > snobs who want everything to be silent and handle perfectly
|
| Ugh, handling == safety, my friend
| wing-_-nuts wrote:
| I wonder about ride quality.
|
| My car had runflats when I bought it, when it was time for new
| tires, I went with some high quality all seasons. My ride quality
| improved, my gas mileage went up and they brake / corner better.
| The risk of an unplugable flat is a small price to pay for that.
| jrgaston wrote:
| Run flat tires are expensive, heavy, and hard riding. On the
| other hand, they don't go flat. I recently had a flat in my VW
| and I missed having my old Mini's run flats. Sometimes you just
| aren't in a place where you want to change a tire.
| Stratoscope wrote:
| I've always had conventional tires, but when my Kia Rondo was
| due for new ones a few years ago, my tire guy suggested the
| Bridgestone DriveGuard. I was skeptical because of everything
| I'd heard about run flats, but he said these were a big
| improvement. And he was right! They feel just like
| conventional tires.
|
| Maybe a bit harder ride, but I had been in the habit of
| inflating my old tires 2-3 pounds more than the manufacturer
| recommendation. So I brought these back down to the
| recommended 32psi and they are just fine. And they proved
| their worth when I got to a job interview on time even after
| getting a flat - and when I went to the tire shop it was a
| free repair instead of a new tire.
| exhilaration wrote:
| My Toyota Sienna AWD (with run flats) doesn't have a spare
| tire, so sometimes you CAN'T even change a tire!
| brink wrote:
| These tires look like they use about 4x the rubber.
| jaclaz wrote:
| >Through its Vision Concept, the company wants to make tires that
| are airless, rechargeable, connected, and sustainable.
|
| 1) airless, check.
|
| 2) rechargeable ??
|
| 3) connected ??
|
| 4) sustainable ??
| OneEyedRobot wrote:
| 5) diverse
|
| ...and then you've got something.
|
| I'm actually surprised that I've never seen a tire with some
| kind of closed-cell super lightweight foam, some kind of
| aerogel maybe. I suppose the problem in that case is that you
| can't spread heat throughout the whole interior.
|
| Which makes me wonder, how do they radiate heat on this
| Michelin? Does it stick around the outer surface and that's it?
| Do the 'spokes' bear it away somehow?
| dntrkv wrote:
| In the off-road motorcycle industry there are these tubes
| called mousse bibs. I run them on all my bikes. They do
| replace the inner tubes, not the tires themselves. But they
| work great and are the best anti-flat solution out there.
| They sound similar to what you're talking about. Michelin
| makes them too.
|
| https://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/michelin-bib-mousse-
| tire...
| robocat wrote:
| The name "Bib mousse" was created by Michelin - Bib is
| short for Bibendum, which is the name of the Michelin man,
| and mousse is French for foam.
| illegalsmile wrote:
| I have something similar for my mountain bike, CushCore.
| They don't replace inner tubes (tubeless setup) but they do
| add a lot of protection, dampening and deflection.
| asciimike wrote:
| Re 3: Michelin has a "track connect" for their track tires (
| https://www.michelinman.com/auto/why-
| michelin/technological-...)
|
| I haven't used it, and most serious track rats have a separate
| data system so the track connect features are potentially
| redundant, but I assume that it's an MVP of what a consumer
| product might look like in the future.
| noipv4 wrote:
| 1) airless?? there's air within the wheel spokes pressurized to
| 1 atm
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Official info on those 4 points:
|
| https://www.michelin.com/en/innovation/vision-concept/
|
| It is a company vision, not a product announcement, so as
| expected much of it is fuzzy and hypothetical, and it may or
| may not apply to this particular product.
|
| But this part offers a clearer idea of what rechargeable means:
|
| > _The tread can be "recharged" using a 3D printer, which means
| that VISION can be adapted to motorists' changing needs, for
| maximum comfort, safety and sustainability._
|
| They also have an official page for this actual product line,
| which is called Uptis (Unique Puncture-Proof Tire System):
|
| https://michelinmedia.com/michelin-uptis/
|
| The FAQ on this latter page says stuff relevant to
| sustainability:
|
| > _Today's level of rolling resistance is about the same as a
| zero-pressure ("run flat") tire_
|
| ...
|
| > _Uptis will have the same mileage of a standard tire._
|
| I believe this is an important part of sustainability because
| if mileage were worse, you'd gain in one area (reduced waste)
| and lose in another (increased energy usage). So if mileage
| really is the same, that's a good thing.
| mrpopo wrote:
| The embedded video seems to show that you can 3d-print on top
| of an existing tire, which would let you "recharge" for a
| certain number of km. It's also more sustainable that way.
| jaclaz wrote:
| Hmmm, I doubt about the actual duration of something just 3D
| printed over, in the sense of adhesion, I remember the
| process to join (rubber based) watertight expansion joints
| and it involved (after preparation of surfaces and
| application of adhesive) some half hour pressed into a heated
| aluminium cast. (and the procedure is similar AFAIK for
| retreading tyres currently in use)
|
| On the other hand, they were common in Italy in the '70's and
| '80's, there were truck tyres that instead of being re-
| treaded with the "hot" process above were thinned and grooved
| on a sort of lathe and then a monolithic external "ring" that
| included the tread on the outside and matching grooves inside
| was applied, when the tyre was inflated the grooves and the
| pression made the two stay together (until the tyre was
| punctured, it was not so rare that you could find on roads
| these outer rings lost by some truck that had a flat wheel).
| mc32 wrote:
| Buzzword stuffing.
|
| With regard to sustainable, well, I guess they could return to
| the jungles of Malaysia and Brazil for caoutchouc...
| fred_is_fred wrote:
| #3 you'll end up paying $200/tire plus a monthly fee to use
| them. Upgrade to premium and get unlimited mileage plus
| insights on how you can be a better driver!
| leetcrew wrote:
| more like insights for your insurer on how much to jack up
| your premiums.
| jrockway wrote:
| I guess as part of this subscription plan they'll call you
| forty five times a day trying to get you to upgrade the
| warranty on the tires. At least there are a lot of qualified
| contractors they can outsource that to!
| dotancohen wrote:
| Rechargeable: Adding tread.
|
| Connected: Reports tread status and configuration, e.g. to
| inform the driver that he should change to a winter tire tread.
|
| Sustainable: Recycled and recyclable.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >Connected: Reports tread status and configuration, e.g. to
| inform the driver that he should change to a winter tire
| tread.
|
| That sounds like everything that's terrible about printer ink
| but with the decimal moved once to the right.
|
| I can imagine a world where your tires stop working because
| you had them re-treaded with a tread pattern or the OEM won't
| honor a warranty item because you didn't use an approved
| brand of retread.
| Spivak wrote:
| It's only terrible because we've created a system that
| incentivizes it being made purposely terrible for profit.
| The idea that your tires can monitor their own wear should
| be a good thing.
| i_am_proteus wrote:
| Your printer running out of ink does not have an associated
| risk of death and injury. Tire wear does.
|
| Existing air-filled tires are already "connected" on modern
| vehicles - pressure sensors that link to the vehicle's on-
| board diagnostics and inform the driver of low pressure,
| often before there's any other visible, audible, or
| mechanical indication that the tire has a leak.
| m463 wrote:
| "Your printer running out of ink does not have an
| associated risk of death and injury."
|
| I'm sure the printer manufacturers can remove some
| hardware interlocks to make using manufacturer ink
| safety-critical.
| pandaman wrote:
| Modern cars have tons of sensors but none of them are in
| the consumable parts such as tires[+]. It's important
| because it means you can use any consumables (gas, oil,
| coolant, washer liquid, tires) as long as they meet
| objective physical requirements the car expects.
|
| If the tires provide enough traction and are of the
| correct size then any modern car will work with them
| fine. "Connected" tires sounds like there is a direct (as
| opposed to the car measuring the tire's shape in the TPMS
| from your example) information exchange between the tire
| and the car, something that does not happen now and
| appears to be susceptible to the same marketing practices
| printer manufacturers use.
|
| [+] Some cars have "sensors" in the brake pads, which
| amounts to a wire loop inside the pad, which gets cut as
| the pad wears down, owners of these cars are not happy
| about this "feature".
| zardo wrote:
| >"Connected" tires sounds like there is a direct (as
| opposed to the car measuring the tire's shape in the TPMS
| from your example) information exchange between the tire
| and the car, something that does not happen now
|
| Michelin sells a tire mounted TPMS, also available pre-
| installed.
|
| https://business.michelinman.com/construction-
| industry/servi...
| pandaman wrote:
| Not for cars, though. There is probably a market for tire
| monitoring in mining equipment, which is probably not
| constructed with the same built-in systems that consumer
| cars have.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| You are incorrect. Most modern cars have TPMS to tell you
| when a tire is losing air. There are two ways to do it.
| Either you use the same signals ABS uses to tell how fast
| each wheel is spinning and look at the tire which spins
| at a different speed.
|
| The other way is to have actual pressure sensors inline
| with the valves that wirelessly communicate with a system
| in the car. This method has the upside of allowing you to
| see constant tire pressure values on all four tires at
| all times. The downside is that it is more expensive,
| it's something that must be managed when you get tires or
| wheels changed, the batteries run out, you often have to
| pair each wheel-sensor to the car separately so that it
| knows which sensor is which wheel...
|
| This is an example system: https://www.ebay.com/itm/40281
| 6216014?epid=21038233158&_trkp...
| pandaman wrote:
| I am not sure if you replied to the correct message but I
| did mention that modern cars have TPMS. If you are
| actually arguing against my description of the principles
| this system works on (monitoring the wheel shape through
| the rotation speed) then perhaps you should have not
| posted a link to sensors for such a system. I somehow
| don't see how a passive device can monitor any pressure
| least communicate wirelessly. But even if such system
| existed it would still have been mounted in the wheel,
| not in the tire on modern cars.
| IIsi50MHz wrote:
| If I'm reading your posts correctly, you're saying that
| tire pressure sensors are not mounted in tires of common
| cars. This may be true in EU and other places where I
| think monitoring rotation rate of each wheel is typical;
| in USA, as far as I can tell, most tire pressure monitors
| are indeed wireless devices mounted inside the tires in
| connection with the valve stem. This is the case with my
| car, which is an American variant.
| pandaman wrote:
| I am in the USA, all cars I have seen here have valve
| stem in the wheels (rims). What kind of car you have that
| has valves in the tire?
| jaclaz wrote:
| Don't forget fridges:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28478438
|
| Will single tyres e-mail you singularly or as a group?
|
| I mean:
|
| Hi, I am your left front tyre and wished to tell you how
| ...
|
| or:
|
| We, the tyres of your car, have determined that ...
| mpol wrote:
| It might work similar to low pressure, where you see the
| wheel light up on the dashboard. Ofcourse the human part
| can make the decision on what to do about it, and if you
| want to replace tyres, how many at once.
| dreamcompiler wrote:
| Personally I welcome our new Tyrius Cybernetics
| Corporation overlords.
| treeman79 wrote:
| Truck tires are retreaded all the time. It's why you see
| bits of tread on the highway. They do fall off now and
| then.
|
| Apparently saves a lot of money.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| Surely it saves a lot of rubber waste too? Like 90%+ of
| the rubber mass of a typical tire must be in the parts
| that never contact the road and therefore should be good
| forever?
| wcarron wrote:
| Unfortunately not the case. Tires go through lots of heat
| and stress cycles. I think most of the heat a tire
| generates isn't from friction with the road, even. It's
| internal friction within the tire itself. The carcasses
| are made of wires/meshes/layers of aramids/steel/aluminum
| and aren't indestructible, even if durable.
|
| And the rubber on the sidewalls gets degraded by
| sun/dirt/sand/etc, too.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| True, true. But from the picture in the article, it sure
| looks like there's a heck of a lot less rubber overall in
| this tire-- so regardless of what it's been historically,
| this is a step toward a tire that "consumes" way, way
| less rubber per X distance of driving, whether due to
| less rubber being in it overall, or it being able to be
| recharged with additional tread before being disposed of.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Tires where purchasing decisions are driven almost
| exclusively by cost per time or distance are routinely
| retreaded. But that does not describe the passenger car
| tire market.
| linsomniac wrote:
| Doesn't it? I mean, I get that some people want to try a
| different make/model of tire when replacing it for
| performance/noise/appearance, I've been one of those
| people at times.
|
| But I also think there are plenty of people who get the
| tire that's available to them and reducing the cost per
| year of use would be welcome.
|
| I will say that having an EV, the cost of tires really
| stands out. In 60K miles the only maintenance expenses
| I've had have been tires and a windshield. Even the
| ongoing cost of charging is basically invisible (plug in
| at home, free on the road), so tires have been about half
| the money I've put into it, it feels like.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I remember retreads being a thing you could buy for your
| car in the 1970s/80s. I remember local radio ads from
| retread shops. I haven't heard of passenger car retreads
| in decades though, so I don't think it's really done
| anymore.
| robocat wrote:
| In New Zealand you could get tyres retreaded decades ago,
| however it was banned for light vehicles, due to safety
| reasons I believe.
|
| Truck and specialty tyres in NZ still get retreaded by a
| company called Bandag, and you sometimes see detached
| tread at the side of the road. I am guessing that
| retreads are only allowed for dual tyres on trailers,
| where if a tyre fails it isn't catastrophic. I imagine
| they are not allowed for the critical front
| steering/braking tyres on the tractor unit.
| Arrath wrote:
| Plain old TPMS is finnicky enough, I can imagine this would
| have plenty more problems.
| JohnWhigham wrote:
| A very small fraction of plastics are recyclable. I highly
| doubt whatever this tire is, it's not recyclable.
| gumby wrote:
| They answered that part: using recycled plastic and making
| the tyre recyclable and organic(!) are "in the future"
|
| Reducing the amount of particulate pollution, however, is
| apparently not part of the remit.
| endswapper wrote:
| This is not true. Essentially, all plastics are recyclable,
| and it merely depends on the technology available.
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| I guess that depends on how you define recyclable. I mean
| really, _everything_ recycles given a long enough time
| frame.
| endswapper wrote:
| I mean recyclable in a conventional sense the way most
| people understand it.
|
| Energy cost is probably the single biggest obstacle for
| the technology I mentioned above. Renewable energy is
| changing this.
|
| Most plastics will soon be a part of an efficient closed
| loop system. Regulations are driving some of this.
| However, the real driver is that these systems are
| incredibly profitable, and serve risk and resource
| management priorities as well.
|
| I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon and others started
| accepting plastics and paper returns. Their consumption
| is massive and they already have a logistics closed loop
| in place.
|
| Plastics are an incredible innovation and a valuable
| resource. Misinformation about their recyclability is a
| threat to their stewardship.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >rechargeable
|
| >sustainable
|
| "retreadable" but the marketing department didn't think that
| had sufficient appeal for the demographics the press release
| was targeted it.
| jagger27 wrote:
| It's common for aircraft and other heavy duty equipment's
| tires to be retreaded. Seems like a reasonable thing to do on
| passenger vehicles if it can be scaled.
| mcguire wrote:
| Something like 45% of commercial tires are retreads and
| something like 90% of large fleets use retreads
| (https://www.worktruckonline.com/10128897/last-miles-
| growing-..., https://www.tirereview.com/revisiting-
| consumer-retreads/).
|
| On the other hand, I'm not sure about retreading tires with
| higher speed ratings.
| dylan604 wrote:
| yeah, that feels about right for all of the swerving
| required to avoid running over the retreads that have let
| go and now lay in the middle of the highways.
| hermitdev wrote:
| It's also common for semis to shed retreads at highway
| speeds. Having hit one on the highway, no thanks. We don't
| need more highway missiles and debris, which is precisely
| what would happen if retreads were common on passenger
| vehicles.
| Alupis wrote:
| This was the number one problem with retreads for the
| trucking industry, and most mechanics viewed retreads as
| cheap (the bad kind of cheap), low quality ways to keep
| trucks rolling, preferring new wherever possible.
|
| Perhaps the tech has matured some, but I doubt it. You're
| still attempting to bond two different soft materials.
| thereddaikon wrote:
| I haven't done too much long distance driving since COVID
| hit but I remember seeing shed retreads last time I was
| on the interstate. I always thought it was amazing that
| semis could get away with shedding them and driving away
| leaving at the least trash on the side of the road and at
| worst causing a dangerous accident.
| Alupis wrote:
| Well, they don't really "get away" with shedding them.
| It's the equivalent of a blowout. Part of the reason they
| have such a bad reputation among semi mechanics.
| mikestew wrote:
| It _used_ to be done for passenger car tires. A quick
| search says one can still find recapped tires if
| determined. But why isn 't it more common, when it was
| common about 40-50 years ago? Well, that time began to
| approach the time I spent as a mechanic, and the reason was
| cheap, imported tires that were starting to come out of
| Asian factories. I can sell you a retread, or you can have
| a brand new tire from some off-brand for about the same
| money, and guess which was chosen more often?
|
| This link seems to line up with what I remember from 40
| years ago:
|
| https://www.treadwright.com/blogs/treadwright-blog/are-
| retre...
|
| If the Michelin's are built with retreading in mind, should
| work fine. After all, it always did before. :-)
| clircle wrote:
| I wonder how the road noise is when driving with a set of these.
| sparsely wrote:
| There have been a number of reports of components of rubber tiers
| being harmful to humans[1] or the broader environment[2] beyond
| the waste issue, would be interesting to know if these manage to
| improve on that.
|
| [1]
| https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/11/pollutin...
| [2] https://www.opb.org/article/2020/12/04/scientists-point-
| to-c...
| rjsw wrote:
| Michelin is French, the tyres will all end up getting burnt
| during protests.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| If it's biodegradable, that would help. Only what remains of
| the tires ends up in landfills/recycled. The rest is a major
| contributor to microplastics in our oceans. The tires don't
| just erode into nothing. Those particles (mixed with particles
| from the road service) become dust that ends up in sewers when
| it rains, which drain to rivers, which drain to oceans. By the
| time the tire is used up, we're talking a sizable amount of
| material. Vulcanized rubber is nasty; it doesn't really break
| down (that is the whole point of vulcanizing) that easily and
| is also toxic.
| veemjeem wrote:
| Has anyone done analysis on microplastics to figure out what
| percentage are from vulcanized rubber? It's probably a high
| percentage, but would be nice to have an actual scientific
| study on the figure.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/tire
| s...
|
| Several studies apparently. 10-30 percent depending on the
| study.
| Robotbeat wrote:
| Dust generally is bad, too.
|
| EDITING to provide source because I was downvoted. All types,
| including rail dust: https://www.railway-
| technology.com/features/feature-air-in-u...
| Pxtl wrote:
| This is one of the many reasons I'm firmly in the
| "urbanization or bust" camp. Rail-based infrastructure is
| lower-carbon, doesn't require batteries, and doesn't require
| tires, but it's only practical in high-density cities.
| Streetcar suburbs represent a reasonable minimum.
| nebula8804 wrote:
| Can vulcanized rubber be broken down by something like
| Hydrous pyrolysis?
| question002 wrote:
| I have biodegradable tires in a pile next to my screen doors
| designed for submarines.
| mrpopo wrote:
| Very cool. Would this also help with particle release from tire
| wear?
| qutreM wrote:
| If you want one for your mower, etc:
| https://tweel.michelinman.com/michelin-tweel-family-of-produ...
| ck2 wrote:
| Based on the number of nails I find every week in the parking lot
| around my car, this can't come too soon to the mainstream.
|
| Just hope it becomes affordable for basic cars by the end of the
| decade, I'm sure China will make a cheaper knockoff.
| runawaybottle wrote:
| Elon Musk on airless tires for Tesla:
|
| https://youtu.be/HojNb3qf-uw
| yoz-y wrote:
| > Rechargeable, connected and sustainable
|
| Hmm. Do these have batteries and computers inside? Do they have
| to? Making things "smart" usually decreases the time span.
| martimarkov wrote:
| In the concept video it's shown that a 3D printer can print
| layers on top of the tyre. I think this is what they meant by
| rechargeable - the ability to "fix" the tyres.
| yetihehe wrote:
| We can do that already to normal tires and without 3d
| printing. Such tires are of lower quality though.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >Such tires are of lower quality though.
|
| And you've found the problem. Michilin is trying to compete
| with Firestone to sell the next set of $1k tires you put on
| your expensive car. They're (mostly) not competing with
| Deestone and Linglong to produce the cheapest tire for your
| beater car. The people buying the former don't buy
| retreads. But they might if you find a way to re-spin the
| same fundamental idea as something that isn't low-end. And
| if you're the first to figure out how to sell that product
| to those people you can make boatloads of money while
| everyone else plays catch up.
| tsjq wrote:
| >Making things "smart" usually decreases the time span.
|
| how else to add planned obsolescence to such a durable product?
| meisel wrote:
| What impact does this tire have on car mileage?
| RegBarclay wrote:
| Adjusting inflation pressure is a feature. I run my tires
| higher than the vehicle recommendation but still below the
| sidewall limit for improved fuel economy. Airing down for sand
| is a thing too.
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| That will likely increase wear and decrease traction. What's
| happening is that the contact patch is getting narrower and
| the sides of the tread aren't helping support the weight as
| much.
|
| I worked in a tire shop, and chronic overinflation caused
| tires to go bald in the center of the tread while the sides
| had tread left. Have to replace them more often then.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Contact patch and rubber compound being close to constant when
| compared to a pneumatic tire the mileage impact would primarily
| depend on weight. I don't think it will be much of an impact
| since Michilin is unlikely to make a very heavy tire as that
| would have bad NVH characteristics which don't jive at the high
| end and reading between the lines of the press release stuff
| seems to indicate that's where they're targeting.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| My guess is bad, and they're destined for riot-control vehicles
| or all-terrain vehicles where mileage doesn't matter as much as
| other concerns.
| megablast wrote:
| Have they reduced the plastic coming off and polluting
| waterways??
|
| The number one cause of micro plastics near waterways is from car
| tyres.
| OOvsuOO wrote:
| Anyone know the lifetime of the threads or tire? How often will
| they have to be replaced? So if it's the same it's not really
| much of a improvement. Just for the luxury of being "airfree".
| There will be some negative aspects or tradeoffs to be made with
| the tire? Companies are in it to make money and surely they won't
| make a new time that is 100x lasting than the current because
| that will be a losing proposition in their view.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| This website is funny in the EU. I have to scroll to the bottom
| of the disclosure before it lets me press "reject all", as if I
| would care about exactly what I'm rejecting.
| cge wrote:
| It is perhaps useful to consider the entirety of the
| disclosure, however, in that it would let you know that by
| pressing "reject all", it appears that you are _allowing_ all
| their listed purposes: they claim legitimate interest for
| _every_ purpose they list. Reading further, after scrolling
| through one list of around 700 partners, you would also find a
| second list of what appears to be around 700 other partners,
| with, it appears, likely around 300-400 legitimate interest
| switches, all defaulting to on.
| kwhitefoot wrote:
| Not for me. But I'm running uBlock Origin with Javascript
| disabled. It rendered perfectly.
| GavinMcG wrote:
| Then how did you reject the cookies?
| kristofferR wrote:
| I think they aren't allowed to use the tracking cookies
| before you've given permission.
| GavinMcG wrote:
| That depends on jurisdiction. In the U.S. there are
| plenty of sites that opt you in, and either allow you to
| reject or don't but link to their privacy policy (which
| then might say "we don't care about your privacy").
| cassepipe wrote:
| Sometimes I see "Accept" on some website. Are some cookies
| opt-in and other opt-out depending on the legislation ?
| makapuf wrote:
| I would like to know if bikes could be equipped with this kind of
| tires, I tend to never have my tires fully inflated...
| Zigurd wrote:
| You can buy airless inserts for bikes, as well as airless
| tires. These are not used in higher performance applications.
| In performance road, gravel, and mountain bikes you find
| tubeless tires that use sealant instead of airless inserts.
| piqufoh wrote:
| Airless tyres for bikes are quite common (our kids bikes are
| all airless). Here are some grownups airless tyres!
| https://tannus.co.uk/tyres
| jack_riminton wrote:
| There've been quite a few already. Most popular in bike sharing
| schemes, but they're pretty awful
| https://link.medium.com/UrBG7Dkrzjb
| boyaintbright wrote:
| These look like they will quickly collect debris, become
| unbalanced, and vibrate horribly at highway speeds.
| RC_ITR wrote:
| What would stop them from putting on sidewalls in production?
| datameta wrote:
| That would be a separate engineering problem. If it needs to
| be a different rubber or polymer compound then there's the
| bonding issue. They would need to have an air outlet to avoid
| pressure differential, but that then means one needs to
| figure out how to have a cheap waterproof valve because it
| probably is not desirable to have stagnant water inside.
| mrfusion wrote:
| GOOD point by my wife, why don't we work on puncture resistance
| instead? Reinforce the tires with Kevlar or carbon fiber?
| masklinn wrote:
| Kevlar-reinforced tyres exist, they're used on off-road
| vehicle. I expect they don't protect much against the sort of
| very thin puncture you'd find on a standard road because
| there's simply too much pressure being applied when driving a
| car over a nail/screw.
|
| I don't think carbon fibre would be of any use here, it's not
| super strong against high transversal forces AFAIK. It'd mostly
| be useful for sidewall rigidity (and I'd be surprised if it
| didn't already exist).
| sudosysgen wrote:
| I have Kevlar reinforced tires on my ebike. It's expensive.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Handling and NVH tradeoffs. You can reduce tire pressure to
| combat these but a more substantially built tire will succumb
| to heat related early failure more easily if you do that. Also
| money. Tires with more stuff in them and more exotic stuff in
| them are more expensive because that directly translates to
| more manufacturing steps.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Because traditional tires wear down over time even if they
| aren't punctured. The goal is to make ones that last longer
| than that.
|
| Also, airless tires are puncture proof by definition.
| [deleted]
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| Airless tires will still wear out though. That's the nature
| of friction with the road. The important one is: how much
| more durable are these compared to your normal rubber ones?
| sailfast wrote:
| Per the video, their plan is to 3D print additional
| sustainable tread on demand and/or switch you over to snow
| tires if you need them using 3D printing techniques while
| you have a snack (apparently)
| ashtonkem wrote:
| They can be re-belted like a semi truck tire, with a
| sacrificial wear layer on top of an airless support
| structure. Obviously they will still consume the rubber
| that wears down, but most of the tire will be reused rather
| than disposed of.
| ben_w wrote:
| My bicycle tires are kevlar (I think) reinforced for puncture
| resistance. For me it was absolutely worth the cost, given how
| often I had been getting punctures before that: on a roughly
| 12-18 minute cycle commute, I went from one every month or so
| with normal tires to no puncture ever until the tire itself
| wore out.
| StefanHamminga wrote:
| The concept looks interesting, but I wonder what will happen when
| a car or trailer with these drives a road with snow / and or
| grit?
|
| The open structure looks perfect for launching anything that will
| go into the slots into other traffic.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| Yes, but that's a known issue that has nothing to do with it
| being airless.
|
| Back when I used to go off-roading a lot it was common behavior
| to leave a lot of space between you and the truck ahead when
| you got back onto a paved road. The open tread pattern of
| offroad tires picks up lots of small rocks and sends them
| flying back at highway speed. Not good for the windshield on
| the following vehicle.
|
| I live on a gravel road now. You learn not to follow other
| vehicles too closely!
| FuriouslyAdrift wrote:
| There's a video on how it performs in snow.
|
| https://michelinmedia.com/site/user/files/44/MNA342_Uptis_Sn...
| troglonoid wrote:
| I don't think this video shows how it performs in snow if we
| consider usage beyond a parking maneuver.
| [deleted]
| gbil wrote:
| That "Hit the Streets" is an exaggeration, the actual quote from
| the article on timeline: -- the company said they were on track
| for tires to reach the market by 2024. --
| dang wrote:
| Ok, we've taken them off the streets and scheduled them for
| market launch in 2024, in the title above. Thanks :)
| Taniwha wrote:
| I saw them on bikes in China 5 years ago .... perhaps they're
| already here
| throwawaytire01 wrote:
| I am an engineer working in the tire industry (throwaway is
| needed here). The Michelin "Tweel" IP was actually acquired
| when Michelin bought BF Goodrich 31 years ago. Goodrich
| developed the concept as a replacement for compact spare tires,
| doing the initial R&D in the 1980s. Every 3--5 years Michelin
| has a press release like this, and the technology is always 3--
| 5 years away from release. Currently the US DOT and it's
| equivalents abroad are still in the rulemaking phase regarding
| airfree technologies, so there's that, too.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| Thank you for perspective; I felt strongly that I've seen
| excited articles like this several times in the last decade
| or more. I was starting to wonder if I'm missing some changes
| or concepts that would explain the discrepancy :)
| cscharenberg wrote:
| Thanks for explaining that. I feel like I heard about the
| "Tweel" in the 90s in Popular Mechanics, and occasionally
| since then.
| mojomark wrote:
| > The Michelin "Tweel" IP was actually acquired when Michelin
| bought BF Goodrich 31 years ago.
|
| If thw core patent is 31 years old then that means it's been
| in the public domain for 11 years. Anyone should be able to
| make a variation thereof at this point - steering clear of
| other derivative patents of coarse.
| godelski wrote:
| What are the reasons for it constantly being 3-5 years away?
| Technology? Regulations? Both? Manufacturers not thinking the
| public will understand tradeoffs and unwilling to take the
| risk and explain this to them? Can it at least work as a
| spare tire?
| Decker87 wrote:
| I can't answer your question exactly, but I can add that
| regular air tires have advanced tremendously in the last 30
| years. It's also a moving target for these airless ones to
| compete against.
| mcguire wrote:
| I've seen them quite a bit lately on commercial lawn mowers.
|
| Of course, there, puncture resistance trumps vehicle control
| and ride comfort by a large margin.
| clairity wrote:
| i would love to see this or a similar technology for
| electric scooters. the tubes seem to reliably pop every
| dozen or so rides, and the current alternative solid/no-
| flat tires really compromise on ride quality and handling.
| larger wheels (they're usually in the 7-9" range) would
| help too, but there's probably a practical limit to how big
| the wheels can be, perhaps 12-15" without too much
| compromise (motor power and ergonomics being two limiting
| factors).
| chromaton wrote:
| I was impressed by the Slime brand bike tire tubes.
| They're thicker rubber than the stock tubes and pre-
| filled with Slime self-sealing compound.
| miketery wrote:
| The unagi scooter has them[1]. In all honesty, they're
| garbage for NYC. They are somewhat of a hard plastic, and
| do not provide the kind of give that your want for roads
| which have imperfections. It saddens me that peoples
| first impression of micro mobility is this piece of junk
| that makes riding scarier and more dangerous than it
| would be with air tires.
|
| It's likely possible to make a good airless tire, but I
| bet the materials would be expensive and I'm not sure
| what it's lifetime would be. Air tube tires remain the
| best option for micro mobility options.
|
| 1 - https://unagiscooters.com/products/the-scooter/
| (ctrl+F "tires")
| clairity wrote:
| yah, i'm skeptical that a solid (rubber/plastic) tire can
| provide good suspension _and_ handling performance
| cheaply across a wide variety of road hazards, in
| comparison to an air tire. that 's why i think bigger
| tires (and thicker tubes) is probably the way to go, but
| perhaps advances in materials/manufacturing will make all
| kinds of tires incrementally better.
| vel0city wrote:
| I grew up down the street from NASA. Airless tires was always
| just a few years away since I learned to ride a bike.
| HPsquared wrote:
| NASA has some unique challenges because they usually can't
| use elastomers (too hot/cold), so their tires are usually
| metal.
|
| Airless tires usually depend on a finely-tuned elastic
| polymer of some kind with a fairly narrow temperature
| range.
| barbazoo wrote:
| > the technology is always 3--5 years away from release
|
| just in time for Tesla's FSD then /s
| avelis wrote:
| The video looked like a fancy PR piece and that's it. Sad
| that this tech has been shelved for 31 years. Maybe there
| isn't a viable go to market strategy.
| sb057 wrote:
| I think it's supposed to be taken literally, per this
| paragraph:
|
| >The company recently took the Uptis out in public for the
| first time and even invited a limited number of people for the
| test drive.
| kazinator wrote:
| > _Puncture-proof tires have been an intriguing concept for many
| years. Tire maker, Michelin, has been working on it since 2005
| and after more than a decade of work, it is now closer to
| reality._
|
| That is false. Tires like this are nothing hew; they have been
| around for over 100 years. They are useful in niche applications,
| like earth-moving machinery and whatnot.
|
| Other than that, airless tires are rubbish and will not displace
| pneumatic tires.
|
| https://www.ikkaro.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ruedas-sin...
|
| http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/411944/414262.jpg
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| I have airless tires on my bicycle. They are slightly firmer
| than regular tires, but the trade-off for knowing I will
| literally never get a puncture is more than worth it.
|
| They are not "rubbish".
| kazinator wrote:
| Almost nothing is objectively rubbish in cycling, because
| cycling is about experimentation and personal choices, which
| can be all over the place.
|
| A lot of cycling is recreational and light commuting, and so
| performance factors do not matter.
|
| Airless tires are certainly right for someone who abhors
| punctures and wants to avoid them at all costs. Factors like
| efficiency, weight or ride quality don't necessarily matter
| his or her use case, or even if they somewhat do, they are
| overridden by the abhorrence of having to pull off to the
| side and deal with a flat. You get more exercise, and never
| fix flats or add air: win-win for you.
|
| I think that some Ozark Trail bike for under a hundred bucks
| from Walmart is rubbish, but people ride those and nothing
| will convince them that they could have a better experience
| if they upgraded to something at least entry-level.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-15 23:01 UTC)