slt2021 2 days ago

From the physics perspective, where does kinetic energy go in E=1/2mv^2 ?

Up to 60% goes back to battery, part goes to air resistance and rolling tire resistance (can be ignored for our case as its the same regardless of regen setting), the rest goes to friction of tire/road due to slowing down tire speed

▲

avalys 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

No one is debating that deceleration results in tire wear.

The two claims you've made are that deceleration results in more tire wear than acceleration, and that regenerative deceleration results in more tire wear than non-regenerative deceleration. These are what people are questioning you about.

	▲	slt2021 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		acceleration is irrelevant because you need to accelerate to move regardless. what is relevant to prolong the tire lifetime is reducing the unnecessary tire friction against the road. There is constant component that depends on the weight * velocity * mileage - you gonna encounter it in all scenarios There is also a variable component that is driven by 1st derivative of speed (rate of acceleration/deceleration). The high regeneration allows you faster acceleration/deceleration, but medium/lower will (1) change your driving behavior so that you accelerate more smoothly, and (2) change your deceleration so that you coast more and decelerate less remember, car's kinetic energy is not a perfect energy storage, so that you could freely move energy from battery into car speed, and regenerate it back into battery. apart from air resistance, there is 60% loss on the way back + tire wear penalty depending on accel/decel curve (1st speed derivative)

▲

NewJazz 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Your claim was that most of the tire wear for cars was due to deceleration. Acceleration could be to blame too. I asked for a source for your claim, not math equations.