See subject: http://www.galileowheel.com. The company is aiming for nothing less than the “military, agricultural, and off-road market.”
Things can always be tweaked, but I assumed tires are a done deal technologically speaking. How new and different is this technology? I know nothing of the issues involved in wheel circumference and technology (the company has a little diagram on one of their pages), but obviously this is a well-hoed (heh) path.
[Side thought: The company is a start-up. I wonder how many times “we’re reinventing the wheel” has been said by marketers and inventors over the centuries…]
It looks like rolling resistance would be enormous, but for tractors dragging far equipment I’m not sure how big a factor that would be. I’d also be concerned about the amount of rubber flex accompanying each turn of the tire and how that would impact the life of the tire.
It does not appear to be the re-invention of the wheel. It appears to be another re-invention of the tire, which has happened many times and will keep happening.
Still not seeing anything new about the wheel. It’s different shape to hold the specific tire is nothing special. There have been a number of non-pneumatic tire designs over the years, going back to the earliest days of motorized tractors. This one looks like it adds a level of transverse flexibility that alleges to be an improvement in traction and stability. Seems to me it would reduce the life of an expensive tire.
Maybe I’m just too cynical, but when I see a startup with a “revolutionary new technology” talk about Galileo, I expect to hear about how their technology is obviously so much better, but they are facing arbitrary skepticism from “big wheel”, just like Galileo and the Pope.
Farmers have been letting air out of the tyres to gain traction for many years. That does come at a cost and a risk of damaging the tyre wall if they go too far. They also have to stop and pump it back up before they go on the road (or at least they should).
This tyre has strengthened walls to take the extra load so maybe it will work. Low volumes will mean high costs though so farmers will be reluctant unless they see clear benefits.
All I see there is things like “This is a term used in tire engineering”, and what look like textbook diagrams, without explaining how any of that is relevant to their tires. When a company shows me a technical drawing of a normal product, but does not show me the corresponding diagram of their own product, my conclusion is that they’re snake-oil vendors who probably don’t have a product at all, or if they do, they know absolutely nothing about how it works (which means it probably doesn’t).
Those tires are designed to remain ridged without air. This tire is designed to flatten out without air giving you all the benefits of a flat tire without the damage. I’d guess the “new tech” is the tire wall being designed to get out of the way and allow the wheel to rest on the backside of the tread.
It seems like it would wear out fast and if your plunking down $10,000 for a set of tires you might not trust and unproven design.
The purpose of the air in pneumatic tires is suspension (i.e. absorb vibration and shock). The “Tweel” has bendable flexures to perform the same function. The “Galileo” wheel appears to have similar flexures.