Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BACKGROUND
As we presented in a previous section, the flow capability of the cylinder heads, intake passages and exhaust
passages in a 4-stroke ("Four-Cycle") engine is extremely important to engine performance. However, the motion of
the valves relative to the position and velocity of the piston is perhaps even more important in determining the power
a given configuration can produce.
The motion of a valve is generated by the shape of the cam lobe, which pushes on a cam follower of some sort,
which then connects to the valve by a variety of different mechanisms. The system in which we are most interested
here is the cam follower in a bore, driving a pushrod which moves a pivoted lever ("rocker arm") which presses on the
tip of the valve and imparts reciprocating motion to open the valve. In this system, closing the valve is done by the
valve spring. The following picture (courtesy of Ford Motor Company ) shows the components in this system.
which the valves are in the engine block alongside the cylinders. This system saw early mass production in the
Chevrolet inline-4 that was produced until 1936, replaced by the Chevrolet inline 6 starting in 1935. The system
began to dominate domestic production automotive engines beginning with the 1949 Oldsmobile "Rocket" 324 cubic
inch V8. Because of its inherent performance and cost effectiveness, the pushrod / rocker arm OHV system has
continued to be refined, and is still used in many contemporary (early 21st century) engines. One of the most
noteworthy is the prolific family of GM 4th-generation smallblock V8 engines (the "LS" family).
Note that there are numerous other systems, ranging from the primitive "side valve" engines in which the cam
operates a follower in a bore, which then directly operates the valve, to a variety of different overhead cam
configurations which operate the valves either directly from the cam follower ("direct-acting") or by means of any of
several different rocker arm implementations, and reaches extreme complexity with systems in which there is one
cam profile to open the valve and a different complimentary cam profile which directly closes the valve, eliminating
the need for a valve spring (known as "desmodromic" systems).
Here is a more thorough look into the details of this pushrod-OHV system. In a 4-stroke engine, the crankshaft drives
the camshaft at 1/2 crankshaft speed (obviously, since each valve opens and closes once for evvery two rotations of
the crankshaft) . The camshaft typically contains one cam lobe for each valve in the engine, although that is not
necessarily the case. (For example, in opposed-layout engines such as the VW-Porsche horizontally-opposed
pushrod engines, two intake valves, one on each side of the engine, are operated by a single lobe driving two
different followers.) For convenience, Figure 1 is reproduced below in order to assist the following descriptions.
FUNDAMENTALS
As each cam lobe rotates, it contacts the cam follower (aka "lifter", aka "tappet") and drives the follower away from
the camshaft rotational axis. The cam follower, which is constrained by the bore in which it moves, produces a linear
motion along the bore axis. That linear motion of the follower is transmitted to one end of the pushrod. The other end
of the pushrod moves in a somewhat less predictable manner, constrained by the pushrod socket in the rocker arm,
but also disturbed by pushrod deflections, both compressive and flexural, which vary with the forces and excitations
applied to the pushrod. The rocker arm rotates about its pivot point (typically either a shaft or a semi-ball on a stud),
and the other end of the rocker arm contacts the tip of the valve stem and causes the valve to move along the axis of
the bore ("valve guide") in which it rides.
It is sometimes believed that the cam lobe is only able to directly control the opening portion of the valve motion, by
pushing the follower away from it, and that the valvespring controls the closing half of the cycle.
That view is very incorrect. In actuality, the cam lobe and the valvespring, when operating correctly, work in close
harmony throughout the opening-closing cycle to produce the desired valve motion. The cam lobe provides the
operating force during approximately tie first half aof the opening cycle and the last half of the closing cycle, and, the
valve spring provides the operating forces throughout approximately the last half of the opening cycle and the first
half of the closing cycle. This concept will be made much more clear later in the discussion.
An excellent example of the influence which cam lobe profiles have on performance is in the evolution of what are
known as "restricted" race engines. These engines are "restricted" with respect to the modifications that can be done
to them, in an effort to limit the power, and therefore to limit (in theory, but not in practice) the cost of the engines.
The most common engine in this category is an iron-block 355-cubic inch small-block Chevy (SBC) V8, which is
commonly limited to stock (unported, unmodified) production cast-iron cylinder heads and intake manifolds. In certain
classes these engines are limited to a single two-barrel carburetor which, in stock form, can't flow more than 500
CFM of air at a pressure differential of 3" of water. This configuration represents the very incarnation of a "flowlimited" engine.
In the early development of these engines, the max power we could coax from these engines was in the 425 HP
neighborhood (which, in itself, is impressive). Since approximately 2006, we have passed 500 HP and are continually,
but slowly, approaching 525, while using essentially the same heads and manifolds (as specified by the NASCAR
rules for these engines). All that development costs MONEY, and the cost of these engines is prohibitively high for
many racers.
One major factor in that progress has been the development of ever-more aggressive cam lobe profiles, which are
optimized to this particular flow-limited configuration. Of course, as you might expect, these cam profiles are very
hard on the valve train components, so the successful operation of the system depends on the development of evermore sophisticated valvetrain components. Here, we will attempt to explain why, and how different requirements can
be met through the various compromises taken in cam lobe design.
Given the inherent limitations of that layout at high engine speeds, it is a huge tribute to the skills and knowledge of
the NASCAR engine builders at the "Cup" level that they have succeeded in making this type of engine (358 cubic
inch, flat-tappet, pushrod / rocker-arm, two-valve-per-cylinder, normally aspirated, single-carburetor V8) operate
reliably at over 9,500 RPM and produce unheard-of power levels (over 860 HP as of 2012) for hours at a time. (For
more insight into these amazing engines, CLICK HERE.)
The reason we focus on this configuration is that, with respect to aircraft engines, we think this pushrod / rocker-arm
system is the best solution to the compromises required to achieve a good aircraft engine: (a) maximum power per
pound of engine weight, combined with (b) reasonable piston speeds and valvetrain stresses for maximum reliability.
We will provide support for that argument as the article progresses.
There is little question that an engine with a double-overhead-cam (DOHC) configuration and four valves per cylinder
will produce more power per cubic inch of displacement, but that superiority occurs because of the superior breathing
properties that a 4-valve configuration provides at high engine speeds and the more accurate valve motion that an
overhead cam configuration provides at high engine speeds. However, reliability constraints have historically opposed
the use of high engine speeds in aircraft engines, so the additional weight of the DOHC configuration tends to favor
the pushrod / rocker arm layout.
the piston is still moving upward when the intake valve opens and is also moving upward when the intake valve
closes. This, and other apparent anomalies, are related to the dynamics of air motion, and will be discussed later.
Here is a graph showing the axial motion of the cam followers for one cylinder of a two-valve (one intake, one
exhaust) engine as a function of camshaft rotation. The red trace is the exhaust follower travel and the blue trace is
the intake follower travel. Note that the rotation axis is plotted in degrees of crankshaft rotation (which is twice the
camshaft rotation, since the camshaft spins at half crankshaft speed in a 4-stroke engine). The lobes pictured here
provide a maximum lobe lift of roughly 0.420 inches. That lobe lift, operating through a nominal rocker ratio of 1.6, will
theoretically produce nearly 0.675 of valve lift.
With reference to the customary 0.050 lobe lift points, the duration of this lobe is 258 degrees (20 degrees BTDC,
plus 180 degrees from TDC to BDC, plus 58 degrees ABDC). With respect to the effect on engine performance, that
0.050 duration figure is far more meaningful than what some manufacturers would advertise as the duration of that
lobe (336 degrees, taken at the 0.003 lift points).
The lobe "centerline" (the point of max lobe lift, shown by the green line) is located at 105 degrees after TDC. In this
example, the centerline occurs essentially midway between the opening and closing events. However, that is not
necessarily the case. We now frequently use lobes with lift profiles that are asymmetric about the centerline in order
to tailor opening and closing rates for various purposes.
The next curve (Figure 4) shows the same lift profile (blue) as was shown in Figure 3 above, but something has been
added. The red curve represents the velocity of the follower with respect to the rotation of the cam, in units of inches
per degree (or mm per degree if you are metrificated)..