Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

along that line of topic, I went to a presentation by the engineer (Tony Wallis) who designed the Bishop Rotary Valve for F1 Merc engines...but was subsequently written out of the rules, apparently due to renaults influence on the matter.

interesting design if anyone wants to look into it. Beats poppet valve, pneumatic or otherwise hands down.

A links for those interested.

http://home.people.net.au/~mrbdesign/PDF/AutoTechBRV.pdf

rotary valves are nothing new. IIRC there was a rotary valve head made back in the day for holden grey motors. Dunstan or something. And I doubt that was the first. Rotary valves have always looked good in theory, but have alot of problems in practice.

rotary valves are nothing new. IIRC there was a rotary valve head made back in the day for holden grey motors. Dunstan or something. And I doubt that was the first. Rotary valves have always looked good in theory, but have alot of problems in practice.

That was a different design.

There was also a French engineering company that designed a rotary valve f1 engine in the 80's (similar design to the engines you're thinking of) but I think they ran out of money?

The dunstan engine.

post-83669-13986650347731_thumb.jpg

post-83669-13986650742943_thumb.jpg.

Aussie designed BTW.

Speaking of cylinder head design, I'm very much looking forward to seeing productionized versions of the 'Free Valve' infinitely variable pneumatic poppet valve actuation system Koenigsegg have been working on with their engine partner. Don't think solenoid valve actuation will ever be a reality with pissy low-voltage car electrics, but this other system has promise.

That was a different design.

There was also a French engineering company that designed a rotary valve f1 engine in the 80's (similar design to the engines you're thinking of) but I think they ran out of money?

The dunstan engine.

attachicon.gifImageUploadedBySAU Community1398665034.225958.jpg

attachicon.gifImageUploadedBySAU Community1398665073.979800.jpg.

Aussie designed BTW.

No, that's exactly the same design principle, only difference is in the execution. Dunstan head runs the rotating valve shaft longitudinally with a port that opens to orrifices in the head casting, BRV runs individual rotary valve shafts at 90deg to the crank centerline necessitating a complicated gear drive system and completely incorporates the port into them. Same idea, different execution. The rotating disc valve is a different design, but shares the common trait that they really don't work reliably!

the significant difference is you can see actual images of a real life Dunstan rotary valve head, BRV ironically only had drawings of their design in that article about how they finally made one that worked!

IMG_1468.jpg

IMG_1469.jpg

Edited by hrd-hr30

its just a more effective way of a team getting exposure then a normal sponsor....
just like this shithouse 'jandal' crap, was funny when he said it, but getting f**king annoying seeing it plastered everywhere...

And it continues....thjis time STR . Form Autosport

on JEV.... "While there's been some bad luck this year, the fact he has made Q3 three times (and would surely have done so in Bahrain but for a sudden change in the fuel-flow meter readings that forced the team to turn down the engine) shows he has emerged from the biggest disappointment of his career a stronger driver."

Would be simple to throw a bit of redundancy at them by getting them to run two meters

I was at the Sydney Retro Speedfest at Eastern Creek last weekend, and among the classic cars they had there were some old F1 cars, very cool seeing them out on track.

Team Haas Lola THL1

post-61032-0-40410100-1399351880_thumb.jpg

Benetton B186

post-61032-0-36708700-1399351893_thumb.jpg

Williams FW07

post-61032-0-11974200-1399351908_thumb.jpg

Flame Out Surtees TS9B

post-61032-0-71745600-1399351918_thumb.jpg

Edited by 180fan

yawn... torro rosso = red bull

I've read the full decision of the appeals court - "As evidence of the reliability of its fuel flow model, the Appellant provided a series of graphs...Several graphs actually showed that parameters had changed from one lap to the other and that one cannot, therefore, conclude that the fuel flow model did not change notably... On top of this, it appears that not all parameters... were shown in the graphs"

That was their "proof" - doctored graphs and refusing to fully disclose the parameters used to esitmate fuel flow in their model!

Let's put it to rest already.

Edited by hrd-hr30

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
    • Well this shows me the fuel pump relay is inside the base of the drivers A Pillar, and goes into the main power wire, and it connects to the ignition. The alarm is.... in the base of the drivers A Pillar. The issue is that I'm not getting 12v to the pump at ignition which tells me that relay isn't being triggered. AVS told me the immobiliser should be open until the ignition is active. So once ignition is active, the immobiliser relay should be telling that fuel pump relay to close which completes the circuit. But I'm not getting voltage at the relay in the rear triggered by the ECU, which leaves me back at the same assumption that that relay was never connected into the immobiliser. This is what I'm trying to verify, that my assumption is the most likely scenario and I'll go back to the alarm tech yet again that he needs to fix his work.      Here is the alarms wiring diagram, so my assumption is IM3A, IM3B, or both, aren't connected or improper. But this is all sealed up, with black wiring, and loomed  
    • Ceste, jak se mas Marek...sorry I only have english keyboard. Are you a fan of Poland's greatest band ever?   
×
×
  • Create New...