Car and Bike Talk Discussions and comparisons of cars and motorcycles of all makes and models.

Mercedes Camless Engine

Thread Tools
 
Old 04-17-2006, 09:58 AM
  #11  
Registered User
 
FO2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Fair Oaks
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by fx991,Apr 17 2006, 09:27 AM
Often the valves have to undergo up to nearly 1000 lbf's the amount of electricity to compress the air/other fluid to the required pressures can be staggering.
I'm a little confused as to what you mean here.



I didn't know someone was using the twin cam technology to close valves. I'm surprised the use isn't more widespread.
Old 04-17-2006, 10:16 AM
  #12  
Registered User
 
Christople's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Corn Country
Posts: 5,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

MB pushing new tech like usual
Old 04-17-2006, 10:19 AM
  #13  

 
JonBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 19,699
Received 225 Likes on 159 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by FO2K,Apr 17 2006, 11:49 AM
Just think- no valve float! 12K rpm engines should not be a problem.
No valve float, but what about throwing a rod? Your connecting rod forces are going to be huge at that size - probably not that reliable for most applications (ie, anything over 1.5L).
Old 04-17-2006, 10:19 AM
  #14  
Registered User
 
Penforhire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: La Habra
Posts: 8,603
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

We knew this was coming. Prototypes have been around for over a decade and there are some awesomely reliable solenoid valves (they'd need to be here). I still have to believe the early production models will use a non-interference piston/valve design, just in case it fails...
Old 04-17-2006, 10:39 AM
  #15  
Registered User
 
FO2K's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Fair Oaks
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JonBoy,Apr 17 2006, 10:19 AM
No valve float, but what about throwing a rod? Your connecting rod forces are going to be huge at that size - probably not that reliable for most applications (ie, anything over 1.5L).
Yeah, I agree the bottom end would have to be beefed up, and wouldn't be used in most applications.
Old 04-17-2006, 11:01 AM
  #16  
Registered User
 
Dr. WOT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Easton
Posts: 5,643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

German electronics controlling my valve train? LOL, no thanks.
Old 04-17-2006, 11:09 AM
  #17  
Registered User
 
ccarnel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Johnson City
Posts: 2,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'll believe it when I see it. Apparently, it requires a brutally powerful electrical system in the car to even have a chance of running this set-up.
I'm going to bet that the "solenoid" is something a bit different than we are thinking. I read an article a while back (for the life of me cannot remember the source) where they were using a magnetorheological or piezoelectric-elastomer to control the valve actuation. Here they acuatly had a working engine using this technology. Initially it did not work well because a single solid piezoelectric elastomer stack did not move far enough when "activating" it with a current. They also had initial problems with the speed of activation.

They wound up using several small disks stacked on top of each other and when activated in unison they were able move the valve far enough to actuate the valve. By vayring the current you can vary how far the valve can move.

I think that this was working a lot better than the electromagnetic solenoids because when a fixed current is applied to the elastomer and it moves some fixed distance but is difficult to compress that elastomer in that fixed position. This system therby uses much less current than an electromagentically activated solenoid
Old 04-17-2006, 11:21 AM
  #18  
Registered User
 
mastamind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Dr. WOT,Apr 17 2006, 11:01 AM
German electronics controlling my valve train? LOL, no thanks.
LOL, true enough. If VW can't keep their windows from randomly falling off track, how reliable do you think their solenoids will be?
Old 04-17-2006, 11:38 AM
  #19  
Registered User
 
Fencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Don't hydraulic lifters already exist in Indy racing or have I gotten something mixed up? In which case this infinitely variable valve timing capability already exists they just want to do it with coils now.
Old 04-17-2006, 11:42 AM
  #20  
Registered User
 
fx991's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm a little confused as to what you mean here.



I didn't know someone was using the twin cam technology to close valves. I'm surprised the use isn't more widespread.
right here i'm pretty much just summarizing an article i've read in Evo mag, and read a couple more over the internet (can't find the links sorry!).

The valvetrain is called desmodromic, and in actual fact it uses 3 camshafts to operate the valve train (1 to open the inlet, 1 to open the exhaust, and 1 to close the valves). The entire assembly is gear driven off of the crankshaft, and all the cams do are push on little rocker fingers. So the inlet camshaft will push on the finger to open the inlet, then a millisecond or so later the exhaust camshaft will open (valve overlap), meanwhile the 3rd camshaft will rotate around and push on another finger rocker to close the inlet valve and then close the exhaust.

The drawbacks to this valvetrain design are that accurate component machining and finishing is difficult, making it exceedingly expensive. And add to that the fact that today's metal valve springs can reliablely rev over 9K RPM (s2000 and various bike engines). Therefore this type of valvetrain is limited in it's use to extreme high speed motorcycle engines.

And i meant that today's metal valve springs have to undergo extreme pressures and forces to be able to compress and expand rapidly enough to keep up with the engine. That a valve with such a small cross sectional area (say of 38 mm) would have to support 225 N of force, would equal a surface pressure of about 30 psi to expand, but then it would have to almost instanteously contract to a negligible pressure. That's where the statment of an enormously powerful pump would be needed.

Hope that helps F02K!

And hey Christople, Mercedes isn't pushing new technology this idea of the camless engine has been around since engine's were born. And the technology and money to tinker around with it and start making prototypes has been around for 20 years. Just noone has really put any effort into it because of the advances in valve spring technology.


Quick Reply: Mercedes Camless Engine



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:35 AM.