Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online!
Automotive Forums .com - the leading automotive community online! 
-
Latest | 0 Rplys
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical
Engineering/Technical Ask technical questions about cars. Do you know how a car engine works?
Closed Thread Show Printable Version Show Printable Version | Email this Page Email this Page | Subscription Subscribe to this Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-26-2004, 05:58 PM   #46
ivymike1031
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to ivymike1031 Send a message via Yahoo to ivymike1031
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
In other words, as I said, Honda recommends a 60K interval.
Sure, in perhaps 5% of cases they recommend an interval that short. I don't think that's a very strong basis for your assertion that they must be changed frequently.

Score: xOHC motors have cam driving mechanisms that require inspection, service and replacement on a frequent basis over the life of the car. OHV motors have cam driving mechanisms that require nothing and last the life of motor. Advantage OHV as originally stated.

These "frequent" replacements of the timing belt that you keep harping on still amount to a single replacement in the entire life of the vehicle, in the vast majority of cases.

Well, managing editor of C&D Csaba Csere has an engineering degree which is more than you do, and he himself has conducted such tests AND he has an online presence - feel free to contact him and inform him how useless his findings are. Its not all that hard to measure the noise output from the engine bay at any RPM. Why, I even hear the measuring devices are simple enough be used by high school students such as yourself! Aint modern progress grand?

How about if you post a link to a site where this guy actually makes the claims that you attribute to him (belts are noisier than chains, in case you forgot what you're talking about). Alternatively, since you insist that he's making these claims, you contact him, then tell us what he says. That's the responsibility of the person making the ridiculous claims (you), not the person who says that something smells (me). You clearly haven't a clue about NVH measurement practice, nor about the equipment required. Not surprisingly, you have no idea what my credentials are either...

Quote:
Actually, its the SAE who has named the 3800 from GM 'best', criteria being a number of factors not limited to power output, economy, emissions, reliability, noise, smoothness, service ease, and so forth.
References? Year? I gather you're not a fan of supporting your blathering with anything credible...

You are so funny mikey....you want me to do what you have not...but suffice to say, I am satisfied with my college education and degrees earned.
Perhaps you should reassess that level of satisfaction. I think that my college education and present field of work put me on pretty firm ground here... and I can tell you don't have a clue.

I think I'll stand pat...however, when you do graduate high school, I highly recommend a college education if you can swing it. Very beneficial.

...or so you've heard, right?

btw - that fact that you do have a chilton book for your car is admirable, many people fly blind.
btw, it's not a chilton book, and it's not for my car. It's a factory service manual for a Honda Civic, which I keep on my desk for the occasional reference or diagram. It's great for occasional client questions like "can you give me any examples of a lost-motion device that is used in the valvetrain of a current production engine?"

take if from someone much older and more experienced
You may be older, but based on your statements thus far, you're clearly not more experienced in the field of automotive design.
__________________
Come on fhqwhgads. I see you jockin' me. Tryin' to play like... you know me...
ivymike1031 is offline  
Old 01-26-2004, 06:06 PM   #47
quaddriver
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
Posts: 532
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to quaddriver Send a message via MSN to quaddriver Send a message via Yahoo to quaddriver
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaabJohan
Chains are used in both push rod and OHC engines (BMW and Saab are examples on the latter). Chains tend to make more noise, especially when they become worn. (basic engineering)

Many high revving motorcycles use chains for the cams, but at high performance applications gears are common. This introduces however more noise.

The service interval on belts have become a lot better lately, 60k is very low. But the cost of a belt is low and many people can do it theirself if they want (not that much more complex than to change waterpump/generator/servopump/AC belt). A chain lasts longer, but not until the end of engine life (unless you have a low quality engine), and it's more expensive to change.

Both chains and belts are stretched somewhat during their life.

Both push rod and OHC engines need oil to the top of the motor, escecially with high performance engines when valve spring cooling is important.

The difference in size of a push rod and DOHC engine is very small, the increase in performance more than compensate for this.

The largest valvetrain problem is probably hydraulic lifters, which can cause wear of too high pressure against the cam or start to leak and the cam to lifter clearance till be off.

eh, sorta....OHV motors really only need a smidgen of oil to lube the ball/rocker assembly, pushrod end and cool the springs.

since the cams in an xOHC motor are held in aluminum, in most cases without benefit of a bearing shell, forming a hydrodynamic wedge is critical - and maintaining same across the cam. On a DOHC V, there are 4 steel cams that can wipe out the aluminum bosses in MINUTES, not miles. In the old days, OHV engine had a simple 'x lbs per y rpm' oil pressure requirement...today, the xOHC motors tend to require much more oil rpessure at much lower rpms to ensure all the cams are oiled at idle.

Im not sure what you mean by size, do you mean physical size or displacement? displacement wise, you can have equal displacements with either method of valve actuation, however in terms of physical size - use the example I gave you, the 4.6L SOHC ford pickup motor is LARGER in physical dimensions than the 7.3L diesel!!! and note, a DOHC motor makes it worse.

As for your valvetrain comments....you're all wet. Hydraulic cam followers are what EVERY manu has went to. Now note, save geometry, the parts and use of are the same - with a solid setup, you must set the clearance correctly - just having said clearance leads to a LOT of noise (just ask anyone with an older honda ;car or bike; or toyota) and it accelerates wear. with hydraulic lash, the tension on the plunger is measured in inch-lbs, whereas the seat pressure on the valve is measured in ft-lbs. In solid designs, the lobe must whack the follower which deforms the iron or in some cases steel slowly but surely. In hydraulic designs, the cams are offset ground (in OHV applicatins) to rotate the follower/lifter - wear is negligible. whereas solid deisgns require readjustment every 15Kish miles due to wear, hydraulic designs last forever. but please note, the loss of oil pressure on either will cause negative results. I have seen cam lobes wiped clean, but the vast majority as any professional will tell you will be incorrectly set solid designs - once the clearance is gone, the cam lobe is ALWAYS against seat pressure, (as opposed to plunger pressure in a hydraulic setup) Do hydraulic lifters collapse? yep, but it is so rare as to not require mention.

Of note is the use of roller followers today, I and many others have taken roller lifters out of 200K mile motors and reused them after inspection on a fresh cam. they just dont wear out.
quaddriver is offline  
Old 01-26-2004, 06:29 PM   #48
quaddriver
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
Posts: 532
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to quaddriver Send a message via MSN to quaddriver Send a message via Yahoo to quaddriver
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
you have no idea what my credentials are either...
Correct, I have no idea what you may be imagining.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
I think that my college education and present field of work put me on pretty firm ground here... and I can tell you don't have a clue.
well, you did open the door...so lets procede with the facts:

you dont have a degree in 'automotive design'

you dont work for any automobile or motorcycle manufacturer

you dont simply design automobiles nor any of the components. like it or not, those are the fact that you have now exposed. So you have attacked me ad hominem claiming 'expert status' why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
You may be older, but based on your statements thus far, you're clearly not more experienced in the field of automotive design.
and this exposes more facts....

you are not engaged in employment in any matter dealing with anything automotive on a technical level. If you were, you would not have asked for the reference on the SAEs stance on the 3800, simply because you would have HAD it on your desk (for future reference, when you commit such blunders, especially in an online environment, your credibility is shot forever. shall we examine the other 713 posts you have made?)

Furthermore, you would know who Mr Csere is and have read him quite often. I am not going to do for you the homework you should have already done.

Ps - it is of light humor that we note you have not to date challenged any point in any of my posts on a technical level, merely the timing of suggested timing belt changes (all the while, on a grander level of humor noting that you skirted the issue that they in fact need changed, whereas chains do not, as I originally stated) I believe my correct stance at this point should be (in your vernacular): Bwahahahahahahah
quaddriver is offline  
Old 01-26-2004, 09:33 PM   #49
ivymike1031
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to ivymike1031 Send a message via Yahoo to ivymike1031
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
you dont have a degree in 'automotive design'
That's correct, my degree is in mechanical engineering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
you dont work for any automobile or motorcycle manufacturer... you dont simply design automobiles nor any of the components.
That is wrong. In fact, I have been involved in the design of valvetrain hardware for some recent US automobile engines that you are probably very familiar with, and some that you will no doubt become familiar with within a year or two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
So you have attacked me ad hominem claiming 'expert status' why?
Because you clearly don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the relative noise levels of different timing drive schemes. You do seem to have plenty of experience with the "I may not be an expert, but I play one on the internet" routine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
you are not engaged in employment in any matter dealing with anything automotive on a technical level. If you were, you would not have asked for the reference on the SAEs stance on the 3800, simply because you would have HAD it on your desk
(for future reference, when you commit such blunders, especially in an online environment, your credibility is shot forever. shall we examine the other 713 posts you have made?)
You really don't know what you're talking about. I am an SAE member (since 1996), and I have several of their publications on my desk currently, mainly dealing with piston and ring lubrication, oil consumption, and recent developments in low-friction coatings. I also read their monthly magazine, Automotive Engineering, and I get the sectional newsletter. I get the idea that you really have no idea what automotive engineers do during the day (work), or what they have on their bookshelves (Roark's formulas for stress and strain, Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design, and/or Heywood, typically, with a smattering of Timoshenko or Hartog texts as well). Do you have any idea how many papers come out of SAE in a year? I get abstracts from about 20 per month, specific to the areas of design that I'm responsible for. You try reading all that sometime (I usually don't).

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
Furthermore, you would know who Mr Csere is and have read him quite often. I am not going to do for you the homework you should have already done.
Yeah, like engineers have time to sit around reading car and driver. Come on. Now you want me to write a letter to him and ask "some kid on the internet says that timing belts are noisier than timing chains. Should I abandon my several years of experience in the design of timing drive systems and adopt his bizarre and ill-formed viewpoint?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
Ps - it is of light humor that we note you have not to date challenged any point in any of my posts on a technical level, merely the timing of suggested timing belt changes (all the while, on a grander level of humor noting that you skirted the issue that they in fact need changed, whereas chains do not, as I originally stated) I believe my correct stance at this point should be (in your vernacular): Bwahahahahahahah
Well, since you clearly need things spelled out for you, let me say it plainly. Your statement that chain drives are quieter than belt drives is absolute rubbish. Technically speaking, you don't have a clue. Read some of the articles I linked to above, or go get a real education!(as I, and several of the other people posting to this thread, have done)

If you read this thread from the start, you might have noticed that in the fourth paragraph of my first post, I made the following statement: The advantage of a chain is that it lasts longer; belts are quieter, easier to package, and offer better high-rev performance if the drive load requirements aren't too high. I stand by that statement. I don't need to "skirt" the subject of timing belt changes. You seem to be intent on misrepresenting the frequency with which they must be performed, which is not entirely surpising, given that you seem to be prone to grandstanding and make-believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quaddriver
eh, sorta....OHV motors really only need a smidgen of oil to lube the ball/rocker assembly, pushrod end and cool the springs.

since the cams in an xOHC motor are held in aluminum, in most cases without benefit of a bearing shell, forming a hydrodynamic wedge is critical - and maintaining same across the cam. On a DOHC V, there are 4 steel cams that can wipe out the aluminum bosses in MINUTES, not miles. In the old days, OHV engine had a simple 'x lbs per y rpm' oil pressure requirement...today, the xOHC motors tend to require much more oil rpessure at much lower rpms to ensure all the cams are oiled at idle.

As for your valvetrain comments....you're all wet. Hydraulic cam followers are what EVERY manu has went to. Now note, save geometry, the parts and use of are the same - with a solid setup, you must set the clearance correctly - just having said clearance leads to a LOT of noise (just ask anyone with an older honda ;car or bike; or toyota) and it accelerates wear. with hydraulic lash, the tension on the plunger is measured in inch-lbs, whereas the seat pressure on the valve is measured in ft-lbs. In solid designs, the lobe must whack the follower which deforms the iron or in some cases steel slowly but surely. In hydraulic designs, the cams are offset ground (in OHV applicatins) to rotate the follower/lifter - wear is negligible. whereas solid deisgns require readjustment every 15Kish miles due to wear, hydraulic designs last forever. but please note, the loss of oil pressure on either will cause negative results. I have seen cam lobes wiped clean, but the vast majority as any professional will tell you will be incorrectly set solid designs - once the clearance is gone, the cam lobe is ALWAYS against seat pressure, (as opposed to plunger pressure in a hydraulic setup) Do hydraulic lifters collapse? yep, but it is so rare as to not require mention.

Of note is the use of roller followers today, I and many others have taken roller lifters out of 200K mile motors and reused them after inspection on a fresh cam. they just dont wear out.
Unfortunately, HLA-equipped pushrod engines (OHV is not an adequate description) typically rely on oil feed through an orifice in the HLA to the pushrod to get lube oil to the over-head area. Oil flow through that orifice is restricted to something in the neighborhood of several grams per minute (say 24gm/min @ 100degC). Cams in the head often get oil drillings, and a much healthier oil supply. Not all overhead cam engines use aluminum heads (see Deere). Idle lubrication is the primary design factor for the oil pump for almost all engine configurations. Aluminum makes a pretty good journal bearing material.

Honda still uses mechanical lash adjustment, with a recommended adjustment frequency of about 60k miles. Mechanical lash adjustment is also used in a number of high-perf applications, and on a very large number of heavy duty diesels. Wear is definitely not neglible at the cam-follower interface on pushrod engines. Ask a mechanic. Pressure is never measured in ft-lbs (duh). With a hydraulic lash adjuster, the expansion spring preload is not very large (say 40N or so), but the force that the lash adjuster exerts against the cam & pushrod on the base circle when the engine is running is much higher (say 150N). If you'd like, I can explain to you how a typical HLA works. There are often collase and pump-up issues with HLAs during development, usually they're sorted out by the likes of me before the likes of you get an engine. A properly adjusted mechanical system will have less force on the cam-follower interface over the base circle than a HLA valvetrain (close to zero).
Roller followers are used on both overhead and in-block cam valvetrain configurations (as noted in my MUCH earlier post).
__________________
Come on fhqwhgads. I see you jockin' me. Tryin' to play like... you know me...
ivymike1031 is offline  
Old 01-26-2004, 11:04 PM   #50
Moppie
Master Connector
 
Moppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Auckland
Posts: 11,781
Thanks: 95
Thanked 101 Times in 80 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to Moppie Send a message via AIM to Moppie Send a message via Yahoo to Moppie


quaddriver do you seriously expect anyone here to take your comments sersiously?

Not only are you attacking one of the most knowledgable enginers I know, but you are doing it with no surporting evidence and incorrect use of terminology already clearly defined in this thread.

You are of course welcome to give and provide your opinions in the forums, but please stick to topics you know something about, unless your asking questions, and please refrain from flaming other members. It would be a shame to have to ban you before you make a complete fool of yourself.
__________________
Connecting the Auto Enthusiasts
Moppie is offline  
Old 01-26-2004, 11:33 PM   #51
quaddriver
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
Posts: 532
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to quaddriver Send a message via MSN to quaddriver Send a message via Yahoo to quaddriver
Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moppie


quaddriver do you seriously expect anyone here to take your comments sersiously?

Not only are you attacking one of the most knowledgable enginers I know, but you are doing it with no surporting evidence and incorrect use of terminology already clearly defined in this thread.

You are of course welcome to give and provide your opinions in the forums, but please stick to topics you know something about, unless your asking questions, and please refrain from flaming other members. It would be a shame to have to ban you before you make a complete fool of yourself.
yes as a matter of fact I do. In my initial post I centered on 3 disadvantages of the xOHC engine. 'Mikey' jumped on one, and only incorrectly. He has obviously pulled a bit of wool over your eyes but I repeat, he has not coherently or accurately challenged any of the facts presented, in fact, in a bizarre form of transferrence, his last post(s) confirm what I said in my first, but he still ignores the third because the one thing I can assure you of, he is not whom he claims to be.

Ban if you must, but the attacks have only come from him.
quaddriver is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 12:15 AM   #52
calgary_redneck
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: calgary
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Well ivy mike they cirtianly didn't teach you any modesty or maturity at university.
calgary_redneck is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 12:29 AM   #53
quaddriver
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
Posts: 532
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to quaddriver Send a message via MSN to quaddriver Send a message via Yahoo to quaddriver
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
That's correct, my degree is in mechanical engineering.
I do not believe that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
That is wrong. In fact, I have been involved in the design of valvetrain hardware for some recent US automobile engines that you are probably very familiar with, and some that you will no doubt become familiar with within a year or two.
name one. Its put up or shut up time. Since you and you alone have claimed to be THE expert, its time to prove it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Because you clearly don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the relative noise levels of different timing drive schemes.
I have already stated that an OHV (which will perfectly suffice for a defn here, only a field mouse would not know what is being discussed) is quieter than any xOHC in same application. If you are sooooo sure of yourself and have done sooo much research, you will simply post sound measurements of the engine bay. Or are you now claiming that xOHC engines are soooo quiet that the manus use noisier alternators and PS pumps because they can?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
I am an SAE member (since 1996), and I have several of their publications on my desk currently, mainly dealing with piston and ring lubrication, oil consumption, and recent developments in low-friction coatings. I also read their monthly magazine, Automotive Engineering, and I get the sectional newsletter. I get the idea that you really have no idea what automotive engineers do during the day (work), or what they have on their bookshelves (Roark's formulas for stress and strain, Shigley's Mechanical Engineering Design, and/or Heywood, typically, with a smattering of Timoshenko or Hartog texts as well). Do you have any idea how many papers come out of SAE in a year? I get abstracts from about 20 per month, specific to the areas of design that I'm responsible for. You try reading all that sometime (I usually don't).
Again, I do not believe this. Comments you have made here and in other threads do not belie this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
I don't need to "skirt" the subject of timing belt changes. You seem to be intent on misrepresenting the frequency with which they must be performed,
yes you do need to skirt it. As I am saying now for the forth? time, one needs changed, one does not. I even listed (correctly) which design that is an advantage to and I did not misprepresent the frequency, I *GAVE* the frequency and you later confirmed it. If we assume, as the 'industry' does, that a cars primary and secondary life is 10 years, and if we gather up all the models sold in 10 years (1994-2004) and averaged the timing belt change frequency, who is more correct? you or I? (hint: I would not bet on yourself)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Unfortunately, HLA-equipped pushrod engines (OHV is not an adequate description) typically rely on oil feed through an orifice in the HLA to the pushrod to get lube oil to the over-head area.
Besides being off topic, so? As I said and you have learned in the last 2 hours, the oil needed in the OHV heads' area is small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Oil flow through that orifice is restricted to something in the neighborhood of several grams per minute (say 24gm/min @ 100degC).
No mikey, it is spec'd as a volume.

sidebar: I have to ask, because the answer I fear is apparent: you have never actually SEEN any of these systems in component form have you? Just ask and I will photo any of the components and upload them and explain to YOU how they work. the fact that oil travels up the pushrod is apparent. but how the flow is triggered you got wrong. way wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Cams in the head often get oil drillings, and a much healthier oil supply.
I believe I mentioned that the oil system is different. And I beleive I mentioned that the supply requirements are higher. So you agree with me finally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Not all overhead cam engines use aluminum heads (see Deere).
I didnt say they did, in fact I think I used the word 'most'. So aside from clouding the fact that I was, once again, not surprisingly right your point is? ps - iron on iron cam/boss contact is just as undesirable

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Idle lubrication is the primary design factor for the oil pump for almost all engine configurations.
So? this was not the topic, other than the fact that I and I alone mentioned that xOHC have a greater need at idle than OHV designs and you have agreed with now twice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Aluminum makes a pretty good journal bearing material.
Once again I ask not so rhetorically if you have ever seen the component pieces. I dont believe I mentioned any preference in bearing material (but I would prefer trimetal designs if asked), however, without, as I and I alone mentioned, ANY bearing between the cam and boss, loss of material is catastrophic. Unless of course you think it is a good design to have the cylinder head itself literally eaten away....its not the most bizarre thing I have heard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Honda still uses mechanical lash adjustment, with a recommended adjustment frequency of about 60k miles. Mechanical lash adjustment is also used in a number of high-perf applications, and on a very large number of heavy duty diesels.
I didnt say there wasnt, for this other off topic presentation. I did say however that manus have moved away from mechanical systems, which I notice you do not dispute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Wear is definitely not neglible at the cam-follower interface on pushrod engines. Ask a mechanic.
LOL, you get funny, OK, I asked one, myself. What is the wear then mikey? how much have you measured? on engines without oiling problems using hydraulic systems cams usually only need polished and the lifter bottoms reground. On mechanical systems, the lobes are ALWAYS deformed and the cam itself needs reground, IF it can be saved, often however with a smaller base circle. Again, it is hideously apparent that you have never observed first hand the components.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Pressure is never measured in ft-lbs (duh).
yes, I should have just said lbs. try to get as much mileage as you can out of that because it is the only error I have typed to date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
With a hydraulic lash adjuster, the expansion spring preload is not very large (say 40N or so), but the force that the lash adjuster exerts against the cam & pushrod on the base circle when the engine is running is much higher (say 150N).
I know what you did, you looked at the torque spec for a zero net lash hydraulic motor, but since you have never actually seen one, failed to realize that the plunger was as fully depressed as far as it would go long before the target torque on the rocker stud was reached. nice try. And when running, because of HOW oil is force up the pushrod, when the valve seats (return pressure zero) and the cam returns to base circle, there is an instant where the plunger actually rises to the lash point, and the lifter fills. at this point the pressure on the cam base circle is neglible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
If you'd like, I can explain to you how a typical HLA works.
Given previous errors, I doubt that. But also given that I use, assemble, disassemble, modify and improve same, Id be happy to do the reverse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
There are often collase and pump-up issues with HLAs during development, usually they're sorted out by the likes of me before the likes of you get an engine.
they were sorted out perhaps 30 years ago mikey. The automotive community pretty much trusts the hardware as bulletproof

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
A properly adjusted mechanical system will have less force on the cam-follower interface over the base circle than a HLA valvetrain (close to zero).
Boy, must be that CLEARANCE I was mentioning. Clearance=gap = no pressure. I never said this was a problem, I did however point out that the take up of said clearance IS a problem. But then again, you seem to feel that mechanical camshafts suffer less wear than hydraulic cams. Not only does that fly in the face of well, nearly everything learned to date, but pretty much defines the quality of the techincal responses received to date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivymike1031
Roller followers are used on both overhead and in-block cam valvetrain configurations (as noted in my MUCH earlier post).
I dont recall saying they were not. In fact, I think to date my only comments about roller followers is that they seem to wear very well (meaning slightly if at all) - but again, that comes from actually SEEING the parts, using them etc. the whole gamut.

ps- GMs newest valve train technology, the VVT used on one of its 660 motors, hmmmm, is it mechanical or hydraulic? Not that this was ever the topic, but it shows which direction the industry continues to travel.
quaddriver is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 12:31 AM   #54
texan
Writer Mod
 
texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 714
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgary_redneck
Well ivy mike they cirtianly didn't teach you any modesty or maturity at university.
And they didn't teach you guys when to quit.

Ivymike's been posting here for years, dutifully answering engineering questions for the masses and without having to piss on anyone's parade. Now some people are waltzing in and after a few days on the board want to question his integrity, knowledge and honesty without even knowing who he is, what he does or where he's coming from (though some of you have made plenty of INCORRECT assumptions throughout this thread). Quit before I have to close the thread, and learn to be a little more respectful of the guys who regularly help others and just might be able to do the same for you... if you'd chill out and listen to them.
__________________
'03 Corvette Z06
'99 Prelude SH
texan is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 01:20 AM   #55
quaddriver
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
Posts: 532
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to quaddriver Send a message via MSN to quaddriver Send a message via Yahoo to quaddriver
Re: Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by texan
And they didn't teach you guys when to quit.

Ivymike's been posting here for years, dutifully answering engineering questions for the masses and without having to piss on anyone's parade. Now some people are waltzing in and after a few days on the board want to question his integrity, knowledge and honesty without even knowing who he is, what he does or where he's coming from (though some of you have made plenty of INCORRECT assumptions throughout this thread). Quit before I have to close the thread, and learn to be a little more respectful of the guys who regularly help others and just might be able to do the same for you... if you'd chill out and listen to them.
this is good advice, however, lets be totally honest with history. I made one post, which as you note was challenged soley on the frequency of timing belt changes. A quick review of the posts shows that HE and he alone attacked. I have made no claims as to expertise - the unchallenged technical facts I post speaks for themselves. I feel no need to slam 'dicks' on the table. But, he has claimed:

Quote:
In fact, I have been involved in the design of valvetrain hardware for some recent US automobile engines
Now please note, this statement is meant to give weight to his posts, however the statement can be true if he is the guy who sweeps the floors in said engineering building up to and including the project lead. This statement can even mean that he works for a sinterer manufacturing rocker arms. I know 30 or so people in St Marys PA making control arms for GM, does that mean I am gonna ask suspension tuning questions of them??? So yea, since he presented himself as THE expert in the US of A, Im gonna challenge him. In short, his statement was meant to confuse and support a damaged argument, nothing more. Why nothing more specific? I am close friends with design engineers for Powertrain, Motorsports, Shelby as well as people on the joint GM/chrysler design council. Many people know this from elsewhere and know I will find out a BS-er in a heartbeat. And when I say close friends I dont mean exchanging emails, I mean at my table, on my boat kind of close friends.

And texan, with all due respect, read his other posts in other threads, I took a few moments to do so after his first attack. His 'Im smarter than thou' additude is duplicated in each thread he contributes to. If that is help, then so be it, but my experience has found that people asking for help do not like smart azz answers.
quaddriver is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 01:39 AM   #56
Evil Result
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Binghamton, New York
Posts: 164
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Evil Result
seems as though i'll be spaming ivymike with questions.

Anyways what is the simpler design OHV(Cam in block?) or OHC(Cam in head?)?

I'd have to say belts create less noise than chains if we consider there application to an OHC design, and a chain that long would be heavy, we also have to consider the HP of the engine and how much stronger the transfer medium to the cams has to be, which reflects the size and weigh increase.

Discuss amongst your selves
Evil Result is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 02:19 AM   #57
texan
Writer Mod
 
texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 714
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Result
Anyways what is the simpler design OHV(Cam in block?) or OHC(Cam in head?)?

I'd have to say belts create less noise than chains if we consider there application to an OHC design, and a chain that long would be heavy, we also have to consider the HP of the engine and how much stronger the transfer medium to the cams has to be, which reflects the size and weigh increase.

Discuss amongst your selves
Simpler is a term neither layout lends itself to. Valve actuation is still a complex process, involing many rotating, reciprocating and sometimes heavy componentry (some of which requires VERY close production tolerances and high grade materials). Both have relative complexities in design, though all things considered I believe pushrod actuation through an in-block cam is mechanically simpler (it is after all a later invention). It's certainly more space efficient, but then again block design is significantly more complex, and cylinder head ports are flow compromised (though this could be minimized further than today's designs).

Whether or not chains or belts create the most noise isn't of much importance IMO. With either layout there is a combustion event regularly taking place just inches away that produces far more noise than either drive system, but it is also well suppressed with something as simple as a muffler. Chain driving Honda's S2000 motor doesn't seem to create any great underhood noise, and it's actually got a reasonably complex variable cam timing device thrown into this drive system. On the other hand my belt drive system seems nearly transparent underhood, but both have enclosures that are designed to supress their respective noise generating properties. In other words, it's how well you supress the noise coming off each that will matter to the end consumer, because both can be noisy or nearly silent depending upon how good a job the NVH crew does.

Lastly, there's also that intangible difference between noise and sound that will always muddle this argument. For example the quitest exhaust system isn't often the best appreciated, it's the "quality" of sound that matters more than it's quantity in these types of discussions. I prefer the metallic goings on of a double roller timing chain to a cogged belt drive, but that's just me.
__________________
'03 Corvette Z06
'99 Prelude SH
texan is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 10:47 AM   #58
ivymike1031
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to ivymike1031 Send a message via Yahoo to ivymike1031
Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgary_redneck
Well ivy mike they cirtianly didn't teach you any modesty or maturity at university.
No, you're generally expected to learn that sort of thing on your own. I must not quite be there yet, since I keep letting myself get dragged into these silly "discussions" on the internet, where "yeah, well I know a guy who knows an editor at a magazine who once said this, and his cousin knew my grandpa" gives as much weight to a position as "here are five published documents on the subject, by people who are familiar with the topic." I certainly get a whole lot more respect around the office than I do around the internet, which I suppose is a great deal more important in the end.

...and the latest VVT mechanism that I've seen from GM, which is mentioned here, uses a hydraulically actuated vane-type phaser (as opposed to a spline-type phaser) on each cam (OHC). It also uses three separate chains (hydraulically tensioned) to drive the cams.

more info: http://media.gm.com/division/powertr.../2004LY7A1.DOC
__________________
Come on fhqwhgads. I see you jockin' me. Tryin' to play like... you know me...
ivymike1031 is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 02:34 PM   #59
454Casull
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 615
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgary_redneck
Well ivy mike they cirtianly didn't teach you any modesty or maturity at university.
You don't see him harping on your spelling, do you?
__________________
Some things are impossible, people say. Yet after these things happen, the very same people say that it was inevitable.
454Casull is offline  
Old 01-27-2004, 02:35 PM   #60
454Casull
AF Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 615
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Pushrod vs. SOHC vs. DOHC

IM - that link says 60-deg V6 engines don't need balance shafts. True?
__________________
Some things are impossible, people say. Yet after these things happen, the very same people say that it was inevitable.
454Casull is offline  
 
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DOHC ZC vs. SOHC VTEC 90civichatch '88 - '91 Civic | CRX | Wagon | Shuttlee 19 04-13-2004 01:05 PM
sohc vs dohc rolnaldo33 Neon | Plymouth Neon 13 02-16-2004 05:09 PM
DOHC Non-Vtech(137hp) vs. SOHC Vtech(125) Bilson8tor '88 - '91 Civic | CRX | Wagon | Shuttlee 16 01-02-2004 01:31 AM
SOHC vs DOHC friday86 '92-'95 Civic | EL | Civic Hybrid | Civic GX NGV 17 06-16-2003 02:56 PM
pros and cons zc dohc Vs. sohc Crxce '88 - '91 Civic | CRX | Wagon | Shuttlee 30 04-29-2003 05:39 AM

Closed Thread

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD


Bookmarks
Go Back   Automotive Forums .com Car Chat > Engineering/Technical

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Community Participation Guidelines | How to use your User Control Panel

Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 
 
no new posts