Camless engines by '08?

http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103342

This would be a good thing. You could change valve operation w/ a laptop instead of figuring out what cam would work best w/ your set up.

Didn't we talk some time ago about this technology making into C6?

You can adjust the valves to provide optimal performance throughout the entire RPM range, something that would be uber-cool. The question is, how will those magnets hold up after 50K miles? 100K?

That would be sweet. I've been waiting for that for years.

Mail order tunes will get a LOT more popular, and a LOT more complex. :D

So when does the Small block get this? :D

Didn't we talk some time ago about this technology making into C6?
Yes we did. The rumor mill was saying the C6 Z06 would debut a camless motor.

That's great and all but...........at the bottom of the article it says that if something messes up - the pistons could hit and wreck the whole engine.....

Didn't we talk some time ago about this technology making into C6?

You can adjust the valves to provide optimal performance throughout the entire RPM range, something that would be uber-cool. The question is, how will those magnets hold up after 50K miles? 100K?

Not a magnet, its an electromagnet. Essentially a solenoid. But you are right, thats a lot of energizing and deenergizing. The coils that supply energy to your spark plugs hold up pretty well though:)

That's great and all but...........at the bottom of the article it says that if something messes up - the pistons could hit and wreck the whole engine.....

I dont think the results would be that bad. I would think at the most, that cylinder would be out of commision.

That's great and all but...........at the bottom of the article it says that if something messes up - the pistons could hit and wreck the whole engine.....

It depends on the specific engine design.

If you have what's termed an intereference type engine...like most Hondas for example....valves and piston can come crashing together. If it's a non-interference engine...like most domestics...it won't.

DOD, displacement on demand.

Haven't read the article but I definitetly hope so. In fact initial rumors and talks of the Z06 were that it was supposed to go camless.

Talk about the potential for a NICE powerband from start to finish, and inherent DOD to boot.

Don't expect this on anything under a 100k mark for at least another decade or two. Camshafts are too cheap, and this technology is going to be expensive. It's really not *new* technology (Electronically actuated servo valves anyone?) - but getting it as precise, and the speed at which they have to Energize and Deenergize is probably where the problem arises.

Interesting technology, cost effective = no. 20% fuel economy savings... You still have to generate the power to operate those solenoids constantly so I'll wait on that too.

Don't expect this on anything under a 100k mark for at least another decade or two. Camshafts are too cheap, and this technology is going to be expensive. It's really not *new* technology (Electronically actuated servo valves anyone?) - but getting it as precise, and the speed at which they have to Energize and Deenergize is probably where the problem arises.

Interesting technology, cost effective = no. 20% fuel economy savings... You still have to generate the power to operate those solenoids constantly so I'll wait on that too.

That's what I was thinking.

Imagine what an LSx engine could do with this technology. Still be one of the lightest setups and have even more power than they do now.

And also, no cam changes. Just a laptop; how nice is that? :D

Imagine what an LSx engine could do with this technology. Still be one of the lightest setups and have even more power than they do now.

And also, no cam changes. Just a laptop; how nice is that? :D

I doubt the LS engine would be one of the lightest setups anymore, seeing as you wouldn't need a bulky overhead cam head if you don't need cams. I would expect all engines to get smaller from this.

For the tip off on who is moving in this path fastest, look for a manufacturer to introduce a 24v (28v, your choice) electrical system first, if not higher. That is the first step towards anything like this.

The new car electrical systems are supposed to be 42 volts, not 24 or 28.

The new car electrical systems are supposed to be 42 volts, not 24 or 28.


heh heh. no kidding! I think he missed more then a shift the last few years:)

The article states:

Much of the energy produced by the engine is lost because the crankshaft has to spin the camshaft.

Horsepower, torque and fuel economy are improved because the crankshaft's power is driving only the wheels.

This is absolutely not true!!! It still takes the same amount of energy to open and close the valves. Instead of spinning the camshaft, the crankshaft has to spin the alternator harder.

I dont think the results would be that bad. I would think at the most, that cylinder would be out of commision.

If you only hit on 1 cylinder, it would still be bad news. You would need remove the engine and rebuild. Camless technology is expensive to develop because every time it messes up, it takes out the engine!

It depends on the specific engine design.

If you have what's termed an intereference type engine...like most Hondas for example....valves and piston can come crashing together. If it's a non-interference engine...like most domestics...it won't.

As compression ratios increase, this becomes more of a concern. I would be willing to bet that most current production engines would interfere with a broken timing chain. However, timing belts, chains, and tensioners have greatly improved in quality.

This is awesome technology. AT IDLE, the valves open and close about 5 times a SECOND! At 6000 rpm, they open and close at 50 times per second!! To put this in perspective, the picture changes on a TV 60 times per second.

Randy

The article states:



This is absolutely not true!!! It still takes the same amount of energy to open and close the valves. Instead of spinning the camshaft, the crankshaft has to spin the alternator harder.



If you only hit on 1 cylinder, it would still be bad news. You would need remove the engine and rebuild. Camless technology is expensive to develop because every time it messes up, it takes out the engine!



As compression ratios increase, this becomes more of a concern. I would be willing to bet that most current production engines would interfere with a broken timing chain. However, timing belts, chains, and tensioners have greatly improved in quality.

This is awesome technology. AT IDLE, the valves open and close about 5 times a SECOND! At 6000 rpm, they open and close at 50 times per second!! To put this in perspective, the picture changes on a TV 60 times per second.

Randy

Side note: TV picture changes 30fps, not 60fps. Each interlaced field takes place 60 times per second.


My point about 1 cylinder going down is that a sensor could shut the fuel to that cylinder down and you could still get to where you were going. Sure it would have to be repaired, thats a no brainer.

Side note: TV picture changes 30fps, not 60fps. Each interlaced field takes place 60 times per second.


My point about 1 cylinder going down is that a sensor could shut the fuel to that cylinder down and you could still get to where you were going. Sure it would have to be repaired, thats a no brainer.

It will probably take out 2 cylinders, not just one.

Having said that, i don't understand why every car still does not have interference free design.

Imagine what an LSx engine could do with this technology. Still be one of the lightest setups and have even more power than they do now.

And also, no cam changes. Just a laptop; how nice is that? :D

A Electronic solenoid on a cartridge valve weighs I'd guess around a POUND. And these only have to open and close several times a MINUTE, not a SECOND.

To build one strong enough to hand 20-40x per second look for this to weight 2-3 pounds FOR EACH VALVE. 16x3 = 48lbs. This technology will ADD weight, not subtract it.

It will probably take out 2 cylinders, not just one.

Having said that, i don't understand why every car still does not have interference free design.

How would it take out 2 cylinders?

In order to have an interference free design, there must be enough room for the valves to be fully open when the piston is at top dead center. To do this, you either have to have a huge combustion chamber or huge cutouts in the pistons. Neither of these leads to efficient combustion.

Randy

The new car electrical systems are supposed to be 42 volts, not 24 or 28.
42 VDC is not likely to happen due to issues with electrical arcing, faster corrosion of electrical components, and light bulb life. There's also the added cost, since the car would be a hybrid 14 VDC and 42 VDC system.

But if they don't go to 42 VDC then all those solenoids and related equipment end up being 1/3 larger due to the increase in amperage needed to produce the same power. This further complicates packaging and weight issues.

Back in August we heard Mercedes would have this in their C class.
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=392900

To build one strong enough to hand 20-40x per second look for this to weight 2-3 pounds FOR EACH VALVE. 16x3 = 48lbs. This technology will ADD weight, not subtract it.

You're forgetting to take off all of the gear that wouldn't be needed anymore. I'll bet you can come up with 48 lbs worth:

Camshaft(s), cam drive sprocket(s), the sprocket on the crank the drives them, the chain/belt/gears that connect the crank sprocket to the cam sprockets, rockers, lifters, springs...

You're forgetting to take off all of the gear that wouldn't be needed anymore. I'll bet you can come up with 48 lbs worth:

Camshaft(s), cam drive sprocket(s), the sprocket on the crank the drives them, the chain/belt/gears that connect the crank sprocket to the cam sprockets, rockers, lifters, springs...

Then there's the frictional component of the camshaft itself... which is the gist of it.

I question hood clearance with large valve control packs over the heads. How much taller would these be?

Personally, I can see this being a mechanic's worst nightmare.....

Does the article mention how the valves are actually actuated by the magnets? Do they open the valves or does the magnet hold them close, then turn off to allow them to open. If the magnet causes them to open it would be better in the event of magnet failure cause it would just be sorta like DOD.

Does the article mention how the valves are actually actuated by the magnets? Do they open the valves or does the magnet hold them close, then turn off to allow them to open. If the magnet causes them to open it would be better in the event of magnet failure cause it would just be sorta like DOD.
One of the more promising strategies is to have the valves at the halfway position when at rest. This has a few benefits:
- avoids interference issues in the event of loss of power
- reduces amount of power required to move the valve to full-open or full-closed position
- reduces the size of spring required (springs would likely still be necessary to help with a 'soft landing' and give the valve a push-off in the opposite direction)

I think my Clutch is made by valeo :confused:

Whatever happened to those valveless heads in Hot Rod several years back?

yes, but will they try to guess my mood??? ;)


Horsepower, torque and fuel economy are improved because the crankshaft's power is driving only the wheels.

oh yeah?? what about the A/C, the power steering, the water pump, the oil pump, and the GIGA-amp alternator required to operate this thing? I know they're going to try and push for a 42-volt standard to make current generation in the required capacities feasible but it's still not going to be "free". far, far, far from it. considering all that the net benefit after all this work and engineering seems dubious. especially when long-term reliability is unknown.

besides, this thing will have to rely on software, and implemented software (not the actual theory behind it), is art, not science. Prius owners having to reboot is a prime example of software in action. only there's no "rebooting" for a camless interference engine...

yes, but will they try to guess my mood??? ;)



oh yeah?? what about the A/C, the power steering, the water pump, the oil pump, and the GIGA-amp alternator required to operate this thing? I know they're going to try and push for a 42-volt standard to make current generation in the required capacities feasible but it's still not going to be "free". far, far, far from it. considering all that the net benefit after all this work and engineering seems dubious. especially when long-term reliability is unknown.

besides, this thing will have to rely on software, and implemented software (not the actual theory behind it), is art, not science. Prius owners having to reboot is a prime example of software in action. only there's no "rebooting" for a camless interference engine...


Guys said the same thing when computer controlled fuel injection came on the scene. Every new technology has its detractors. Every new technology has its bugs. Given the chance, everything can be overcome.

Forget stuff still in the testing phase. I'd like to see direct injection on GM cars. You think highway fuel economy is good now... How about another 10-30HP at the crank as well as 1-3 mpg increase in fuel economy?

-B

Forget stuff still in the testing phase. I'd like to see direct injection on GM cars. You think highway fuel economy is good now... How about another 10-30HP at the crank as well as 1-3 mpg increase in fuel economy?

-B
Direct injection is currently on many imports. Cadillac will have in their HFV6 next year. The 3.6 is going to jump from about 255 to close to 300 hp.

Forget stuff still in the testing phase. I'd like to see direct injection on GM cars. You think highway fuel economy is good now... How about another 10-30HP at the crank as well as 1-3 mpg increase in fuel economy?

-B
I'm against horsepower and fuel economy ;)