I believe this technology is now common in nearly all F1 engines.
F.
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 14:14 -0700, Robert N. Eaton wrote:
> Lyndon Tiu wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:05:10 -0700 mike@garfias.org wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm.
> >>
> >> Did you know that overhead cams are an OLDER technology than pushrods?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > I wonder why most cars today use overhead cams?
> >
> > --
> > Lyndon Tiu
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
> >
> Reciprocating weight. Push-rods and rocker arms weigh more than the
> thimble + shims that most ohc engines use. The heavier the reciprocating
> weight, the heavier the valve springs have to be to prevent valve float
> (which can lead to interference with the pistons, making very expensive
> noises.) Many modern engines use twin cam, four valve per cylinder,
> design (pioneered by Isotta-Fraschini in 1911, I believe. I used to have
> some pictures of a marvelous old chain drive IF with a gigantic four
> cylinder engine with just such a layout.)
>
> At any rate, two valves of half the valve surface area weigh about half
> of what one valve would weigh and would need lighter valve springs. Less
> reciprocating weight equals higher rpm without valve float, and that
> equals more power from a given displacement engine.
>
> The upper end of the rpm scale is usually governed by a phenomenon
> called valve spring surge. This occurs when the valve reciprocation
> equals the natural vibration frequency of the spring, causing
> catastrophic failure of the spring, resulting sometimes in an engine
> devouring itself. Various schemes were tried to get around this
> limitation: hairpin valve springs, torsion bar valve springs (both
> difficult to contain, requiring huge valve covers.) Mercedes-Benz in the
> fifties 300SLRs used desmodromic valve actuation, in which the valve is
> forced open by a cam and forced closed by an "anti-cam." This won some
> races for them, but was extremely expensive to manufacture and maintain.
>
> Probably the most elegant answer to this problem was the one devised by
> Ferrari a couple of years ago, when they set for themselves the task of
> wringing 900 horsepower from a
> V-10 twin cam multi-valved unblown three liter engine. They figured that
> if they could get 300 hp out of a three liter engine at 6000 rpm then
> they would have to spool up the engine to 18 grand to get 900 hp. No
> known valve spring would survive that, so they used 150 lbs of air
> pressure to close the valves. Air has no natural frequency, so the
> valves could operate at this rate. The only thing limiting the rpm was
> the reciprocating weight of the pistons and connecting rods. These they
> had to fabricate from titanium, at a cost that probably made even
> Ferrari blink. I never found out whether they ever raced that engine,
> but what a marvelous tour de force!
>
> Bob Eaton
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)