What production cars use pneumatic or magnetic valve actuators instead of camshafts?

puffpio

Golden Member
Dec 21, 1999
1,664
0
0
I wonder why this technology hasn't been adopted by the automotive world. It seems like the right move to make. Less rotating mass, less parasitic devices, plus the ability to finely control the valve timing (both the opening and the duration) as finely control the valve lift. If more companies would research into it, I'm sure costs would drop to a point where it would be the right thing to do.

Someone told me that Peugeot use pneumatic valve actuators, but what about cars we can get in the US?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,405
8,585
126
expensive. not even F1 has magnetic valves yet. though its gonna happen soon since thats the part limiting RPM currently.
 

puffpio

Golden Member
Dec 21, 1999
1,664
0
0
has any car manufacturers done any research to reduce the cost of pneumatic valves enough to be realistic in cars?
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Hmm.. Pretty interesting question, really. It must not be worth their time in researching, or there would be research being done. Energy is never free.. whatever method you use to lift the valves will still get its energy from somewhere.. most likely the engine.

The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine.

It would require some pretty sophisticated and heavy duty electronics to magnetically lift a valve the way a camshaft does, I would think. Have you ever tried to compress a valve spring with your hands? :) I doubt pneumatic would be any easier.

There are hydraulic valve lifters... But it doesen't do away with the camshaft.
 

Jerboy

Banned
Oct 27, 2001
5,190
0
0


<< Hmm.. Pretty interesting question, really. It must not be worth their time in researching, or there would be research being done. Energy is never free.. whatever method you use to lift the valves will still get its energy from somewhere.. most likely the engine.

The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine.

It would require some pretty sophisticated and heavy duty electronics to magnetically lift a valve the way a camshaft does, I would think. Have you ever tried to compress a valve spring with your hands? :)
>>



Yeah it will take some super strong solenoids or high displacement solenoid in conjunction with a lever.(more parts=more expensive and more things to break)

I took apart a lawn mower engine and even at that size valve springs are stiff and hard to get out with out a screw vallve compressor.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81


<< The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine. >>



Oh, it's definitely worth it. Adjusting the valve lift and valve open duration along with timing can have a dramatic effect on vehicle emissions as well as engine power, because you can optimize specifications based on engine design and RPM. Those Honda VTEC engines are a start, and they have a significant horsepower advantage over non-VTEC engines of similar design and displacement.
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81


<< << Hmm.. Pretty interesting question, really. It must not be worth their time in researching, or there would be research being done. Energy is never free.. whatever method you use to lift the valves will still get its energy from somewhere.. most likely the engine.

The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine.

It would require some pretty sophisticated and heavy duty electronics to magnetically lift a valve the way a camshaft does, I would think. Have you ever tried to compress a valve spring with your hands? >>



Yeah it will take some super strong solenoids or high displacement solenoid in conjunction with a lever.(more parts=more expensive and more things to break)

I took apart a lawn mower engine and even at that size valve springs are stiff and hard to get out with out a screw vallve compressor.
>>



Yeah. And to slowly lift the valve up, and then set it back down softly? I dunno. I almost think that would add much more to the engine than the camshaft, followers/pushrods, rockers and finally valves already do. Not to mention.. when the engine is running, the electromagnets would basically be on contantly. I suppose you could circulate engine coolant around them to keep them cool, or something... Hmm.. lol.

And yeah. The only thing that usually goes wrong in the valve train is the valves themselves wearing out or having other seating problems. Electromagnetic or pneumatic valve actuation wouldn't solve this problem, but it would add more things to the list of possible problems.

Yep, lawnmower valve springs are nothing compared to automotive valve springs, lol.. I collect and restore antique small engines as a hobby.

I don't know what it is about restoring a 60-70 year old hunk of cast iron, and seeing it run as new again.. But it's quite intoxicating.. :D
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81


<< << The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine. >>



Oh, it's definitely worth it. Adjusting the valve lift and valve open duration along with timing can have a dramatic effect on vehicle emissions as well as engine power, because you can optimize specifications based on engine design and RPM. Those Honda VTEC engines are a start, and they have a significant horsepower advantage over non-VTEC engines of similar design and displacement.
>>



Maybe I should have said that differently. I know it would be totally worth it if it were technically feasable, it would be a huge step forward in Internal Combustion Engine design.. And while I'm sure it's totally possible with todays technology.. I just don't think its reasonable in a real world setting, yet.
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Here's an interesting article I found on the subject. I highlighted the parts I thought were interesting.

Electromagnetic Valve Actuation (EVA)

Siemens? LVA system media.siemensauto.com

WHEN Renault announced they were returning to Formula 1, they declared that they were planning a radical approach to the design of their 3-liter V10 engine. That engine is now running in the Benetton, giving everyone involved a headache, and there has been much speculation about which radical technologies are incorporated. Renault admit that the V-angle is unusually wide at 110 degrees, in order to lower the center of mass of the engine, and there have been rumors that both direct fuel injection (GDI) and electromagnetic valve actuation (LVA) are used.[this line actually confused me.. so is it EVA, or LVA?]

For any new technology to be used in Formula 1, two conditions must be met: Is there a net benefit, and is it feasible?

LVA is being developed for road engines, where it makes a lot of sense. The brochure figures for an engine quote maximum power, occurring in the range 5500-8000rpm, whereas most drivers (except insidef1.com readers!) drive in the 2000-4000rpm range. To achieve the brochure figures requires high valve lift and long valve duration, while cruising in high gear or ambling along in traffic requires lower lift and different valve timing, settings optimized for low fuel consumption and emissions. Throttling a petrol engine generates significant pumping losses, whereas reducing valve opening times and valve lift provides a much more efficient method of modulating the power output. Many modern engines have variable valve timing systems (VVT), and methods of varying lift are being explored. EVA solves all these issues at one go. Using electromagnetic solenoid actuators to open and close the valves permits infinitely variable valve lift and timing.

Formula 1 engines are normally operated in the 15,500-17,500+rpm range, with peak torque available from around 13,500rpm. In 1996, Boretti (Fiat Research), Borghi (University of Bologna), and Cantore and Mattarelli (University of Modena) - surely Ferrari inspired - published an SAE paper on optimizing a racing engine by, among other methods, variable valve timing and lift. On a ?paper engine? that represented a 3l, V12, optimizing valve timing and lift for all RPM between 6,000-19,000 showed benefits below 8,000rpm, but little difference above that figure.

Mario Illien, Ilmor-Mercedes, has gone on the record against LVA on the basis that the power consumption would be too great. The need to accelerate each of the 40, 40gm (1.4oz) valves and associated hardware at around 4000g requires an actuator force of 1600N (360lbf). He also stated that valve to piston clearances are around 0.2mm (0.008 in) and so the precision needed in controlling the valve position would be problematical. Also, the heavy electromagnetic coils and magnets would be above the CofG of the engine and so raise it overall.

So, little benefit versus questionable feasibility means LVA is most unlikely. However, while Renault struggle with whatever they have in their engine, I do wonder what BMW are doing that gives their engine in the Williams higher RPM and power than the opposition?.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81


<<

<< << The idea of being able to dynamically adjust valve timing does seem appealing, though. I just don't think it's worth it. The camshaft isn't really a problem area in an engine. It doesen't really wear out.. It doesen't really have any problems at all throughout the life of any engine. >>



Oh, it's definitely worth it. Adjusting the valve lift and valve open duration along with timing can have a dramatic effect on vehicle emissions as well as engine power, because you can optimize specifications based on engine design and RPM. Those Honda VTEC engines are a start, and they have a significant horsepower advantage over non-VTEC engines of similar design and displacement.
>>



Maybe I should have said that differently. I know it would be totally worth it if it were technically feasable, it would be a huge step forward in Internal Combustion Engine design.. And while I'm sure it's totally possible with todays technology.. I just don't think its reasonable in a real world setting, yet.
>>



Heh.. Somehow it wouldn't surprise me if Smokey Yunick has such an engine already built and sitting somewhere on an engine stand in his shop...

Good point about the technical feasability. Here's a thought: What if you dispensed with the intake valves altogether and went to a direct air and fuel injection into the cylinder? Have a computer connected to a crank trigger determine timing and amounts of air and fuel injected? (Of course, you'd need a method for compressing air, but for 1/4mile use, a nice fat bottle might work...)
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Here's another one dated May 19, 1997 -- Vehicle manufacturers have long sought an electronic method to control engine intake and exhaust valves and meet market demands for greater engine performance and improved fuel economy. Engineers at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) are currently testing a novel electromagnetic valve actuator (EVA) system that provides these benefits.

"Preliminary test results show that the EVA variable valve timing system gives a ten percent increase in engine efficiency and a substantial improvement in power at low speeds," says Principal Investigator Daniel Podnar, a senior research engineer in SwRI's Engine and Vehicle Research Division.

In conventional combustion engines, a mechanically driven camshaft is used to operate the valves with fixed values for valve lift, timing, and duration. This system does not allow any operational variation to maintain peak engine efficiency as road or driving conditions change. Most cam-operated car valves are tuned to operate at a specific range of engine speeds. These speeds are typically when the vehicle is running between 40 and 55 mph, and there are severe penalties in combustion efficiency and fuel economy at other speeds or at partial load.

The EVA system under evaluation is one of a series of electromagnetic valves patented by Aura Systems of El Segundo, California. The valve system is being tested in a two-cylinder, 18-horsepower, Kohler Command utility engine converted by SwRI to operate on natural gas. The project is part of a multi-year program sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop efficient hybrid vehicles using natural gas auxiliary power units for military and commercial applications.

"Using the EVA system provides an engineer with an infinite number of camshaft profiles at the touch of a control," says Edward Bass, manager of Advanced Vehicle Technology and project manager. "This capability allows us to tune and test the benefits of variable valve timing under a variety of operating conditions. For example, Miller cycle operation, where the intake valve is closed earlier or later than in conventional engines for more efficient throttleless operation, is one technique currently being evaluated."

The EVA system places one actuator at each valve site. Two opposing spring coils are also fitted at each site providing the primary force to open and close the valves, and to reduce power consumption and increase reliability. The spring forces are supplemented by electromagnetic force from the EVA coils. The intake and exhaust valves are independently computer-controlled and timed, making it possible to fine-tune air-fuel and exhaust flows to engine needs in a way no camshaft can.

"Use of the EVA system eliminates the need for a lot of parts that are subject to wear such as the camshaft, rocker assembly, pulley and timing belt," adds Bass. "Hybrid vehicles represent an ideal use for this kind of valve because of the high voltage available that increases the efficiency of the EVA system. There are, however, numerous applications for electronic valve actuation systems within the vehicle field, and we are looking forward to applying this technology to other combustion engines, such as heavy-duty engines."

SwRI has a long history of research in designing and developing advanced engine and vehicle electronic control systems and a wealth of experience in combustion analysis and engine design.
-----

So it looks like there is research being done. Sounds like it's just a matter of time before perhaps we see some of these technologies being used. It really wouldn't shock me.. since so many aspects of the engine running are computer controlled already. It could be made to be reliable. It all sounds quite interesting, actually. :)
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Here's a link to another interesting thing, I won't paste it this time.. lol

Cam Technologies

Very interesting. There is definately research being done in this area. I think we can look forward to Infinately Variable Valve Timing(IVVT?) for ultra-fuel efficent and emissions compliant engines in the future.

I guess all the other car freaks are still sleeping..

Actually, I'm not a car freak.. I'm an engine freak.. lol..
 

Jerboy

Banned
Oct 27, 2001
5,190
0
0


<< I wonder why this technology hasn't been adopted by the automotive world. It seems like the right move to make. Less rotating mass, less parasitic devices, plus the ability to finely control the valve timing (both the opening and the duration) as finely control the valve lift. If more companies would research into it, I'm sure costs would drop to a point where it would be the right thing to do.

Someone told me that Peugeot use pneumatic valve actuators, but what about cars we can get in the US?
>>



It is going to be a rather challenging project.

First of all, let's take a look at the four cycles

E=exhaust, I=Intake
TDC=Top dead center, LDC=Lower Dead center

Intake cycle: piston starts at TDC, intake valve open as soon as possible and closes before or at the moment piston reaches BDC

Compression: I and E closed, piston reaches TDC

Power: I and E closed, piston rolls off TDC slightly and ignited at certain timing

Exhaust: immediately before or right when piston reaches BDC exhaust valve opens, then immediately switch over to intake cycle.

The engine has exactly half a revolution to complete each intake and exhaust cycle. In order to effectively complete each cycle, the valve must be opened as soon as possible at the beginning of each cycle.

Valve only operates on the first and the fourth cycle.

Let's say within 20% of the cycle time, which is 1/20 a revolution.


First of all, the valve springs needs to be very strong to give reasonable closing response time. To open the valve you have to counter the resistance of spring and the momentum of the valve. According to F=m * a, greater the acceleration greater the force you need. I'd rule pneumatic valve out at this point since air is too cushiony in it's piping and drags the response time too long.

At 8,000RPM, crank shaft turns 133 times(532 individual cycles) a second. In order to completely open the valve within 1/5 the cycle time, valves needs to be capable of completely opening within 1/20 the revolution.

With those values, valves can take no grater than 376µS to go from completely closed to completely open position. Give it a little headroom and make that 350µS. The driving solenoid will be powered with approximately 3,000Hz pulse.

The solenoid must be capable of generating a force great enough to operate a valve within 350µS, have good enough inductive response to 3,000Hz pulse is capably mechanically and thermally to repeat this cycle 133 times every second.

Those solenoids will use alot of inrush power and each one might even need a farad capacitor.


If you guys want to discuss technical aspects invovled in this valve system, discuss here





 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Yep. That seems to be their biggest downfall, their incredible energy requirement.

Maybe they would have to up the ante on the alternator. Instead of ~75 amps average, we'd need say.. 300 amp alternators. :D

I know there are high performance 200+ amp alternators... Or perhaps you could have two alternators and two seperate electronic systems.. One for the valvetrain, and one for the regular electronic systems. I realize this would add to parasitic devices, but it sounds like the gains in an optimized system would be worth it.



<< Heh.. Somehow it wouldn't surprise me if Smokey Yunick has such an engine already built and sitting somewhere on an engine stand in his shop...

Good point about the technical feasability. Here's a thought: What if you dispensed with the intake valves altogether and went to a direct air and fuel injection into the cylinder? Have a computer connected to a crank trigger determine timing and amounts of air and fuel injected? (Of course, you'd need a method for compressing air, but for 1/4mile use, a nice fat bottle might work...)
>>




Heh.. Is he still alive? ;) Whatever happened to his "super efficent" engine? I think I still have the Popular Science with that article in it around here somewhere.....

Yeah. Why don't we do that already? Is it that hard to meter air? Hmm.. Maybe it's because of the sheer volume of air that would need to be injected? I don't know. Seems like it would be pretty easy.. have the injector actuated by vaccum in the combustion chamber..

It would be best if they could integrate the two into a single injector unit. Seems like the fuel/air charge could be atomized extremely efficently.. and the fuel/air ratio controlled precisely. The ultimate goal would be to keep the air/fuel ratio stoichiometric 100% of the time.. That would be a pretty significant development for the Engine right there...
 

WW

Golden Member
Jun 21, 2001
1,514
0
0
The advance power requirements of a system like this is why manufactures are moving to a 42 Volt electrical system. The goal is a 'beltless' engine, which will be more efficient because you don't have friction losses, wear and tear, etc. Supposedly vehicles with a 42 volt system will be about 10% more fuel efficient.




 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81


<< The goal is a 'beltless' engine, >>



What about things like the alternator, power steering, and A/C? :Q
 

Jerboy

Banned
Oct 27, 2001
5,190
0
0


<<

<< The goal is a 'beltless' engine, >>



What about things like the alternator, power steering, and A/C? :Q
>>




Alternator could be made much much larger and runs in direct drive. power steering and A/C can run off of electric motors.
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Yeah, but wouldn't using the engine to run an alternator to charge a battery to run electric motors be less efficent than just having the engine run those devices itself? Kinda like taking out the middleman... lol
 

puffpio

Golden Member
Dec 21, 1999
1,664
0
0
Interesting post about what the Mclaren guy said about no gains above 6000 rpm. But since we are passenger cars we have benefits :D

Another advantage of no more rotating camshaft is that the rpm limit could be lifted
 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81


<< Interesting post about what the Mclaren guy said about no gains above 6000 rpm. But since we are passenger cars we have benefits

Another advantage of no more rotating camshaft is that the rpm limit could be lifted
>>



Yeah. But that isn't really very advantageous for the average ICE(Internal Combustion Engine). The people who stive for RPMs are the racing people.

We can already hit ~15 - 17,000+rpm(There are two cycle engines that can hit 25,000rpm.. However, they have no conventional valves). Those racing engines are torn down and rebuilt after every race. ;) RPMs kill. If anything, EVA could be used to lower the shift limits, due to a better power curve.... therefor extending overall engine life.


 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Another thing is that it's not the camshaft itself that limits RPM, it's the tendancy of steel springs to "float" once a certain RPM is reached..

 

DIRTsquirt

Senior member
Sep 13, 2001
424
0
0
There is no doubt the big auto makers are already investigating this.. With the government (EPA) lobbying for stricter cafe #'s
and the American publics Enamour for SUV's They are doing all they can to give the public what they want and not run amuk with Uncle Sam..
Look for more Diesel engines in american cars and trucks in the neart future..
I read an article 1.5 years ago dealing with cat experimental electrical mechanical valve operating system.. Will be a revolution when it is finally released..