Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Multi Body Simulation of a Valve Train, Comparison of 1D and 3D Models and Measurement

442

Published on

Valvetrain dynamics can greatly influence engine characteristics such as NVH, thermodynamics and durability. Thus it’s important to gain system knowledge on the dynamic behavior at a rather early …

Valvetrain dynamics can greatly influence engine characteristics such as NVH, thermodynamics and durability. Thus it’s important to gain system knowledge on the dynamic behavior at a rather early point in the design process. With the growing availability of numerical tools, such as 1D system simulation and MBD simulation accessing data on valvetrain dynamics has become more comfortable. MBD and 1D models greatly vary in terms of calculation time, model building and the ability of applying multiple physics like mechanics and hydraulics (especially important for the modeling of valve clearance compensators). Regarding the necessity of easy to use models and justifiable calculation times, at Hatz we were running a comparison between a 1D model and a MBD model regarding result quality, calculation times and model building efforts. To evaluate the results we conducted dynamic valve lift measurements on a test engine.

Published in: Engineering, Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
442
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Valvetrain dynamics A comparison between 1D model, MBD and measurement Tobias Winter Hatz Diesel
  • 2. Agenda 2 • About Hatz • 1D Valvetrain dynamics – model building and results • 3D Valvetrain dynamics – model building and results • Measurement of dynamic valve train behavior • Comparison between different modeling approaches and measurements
  • 3. Hatz – the company 3 Hatz CZ Headquarters at Ruhstorf, Germany New Diesel, Italy … branch offices all over the world (France, Italy, GB, Spain, USA, Australia, …)
  • 4. Hatz – the company 4 Light-Duty-1B-Engine Family • low fuel consumption • reliable start-up at very low termperatures • tightly arranged & low weight • high torque and output power • multi-purpose usability … Heavy-Duty-1D-Engine Family • long lasting • easy startup with crank-handle • vertical crankshaft available • multi purpose usability … 2G40/2G40H • extremely fuel economic • very good power/weight ratio • direct drive of hydraulic pumps • multi purpose usability … L/M-Series as 2, 3 & 4 Cylinder • extremely long lasting, easy to service • highly reliable due to mechanical and electronic surveillance • mutli purpose usability ...
  • 5. Hatz – the company 5 H50 engine family • Water cooled • Turbo charged with intercooler • EGR, DOC  TIER IV final • Side PTO • 500h service intervalls • …
  • 6. 1D Valvetrain dynamics 6 AmeSim Model for 1D dynamics • Multiphysics approach • Special attention to the hydraulic lash adjusters • No 3D setup for the rods available • Stiffness of rocker arms etc. from FEM model or analytic calculations
  • 7. 1D Valvetrain dynamics 7
  • 8. 1D Valvetrain dynamics 8 Intake valve Lift Velocity Acceleration @3000 rpm
  • 9. 1D Valvetrain dynamics 9 Difference between designed liftcurve and dynamic liftcurve @3000 rpm
  • 10. 1D Valvetrain dynamics 10 Difference between liftcurves at idle speed and max operating speed
  • 11. 3D Valvetrain dynamics 11 Multi Body Dynamics model using Altair Motionsolve/Motionview Flexbody Rigid body Part Flexbody Rigid Body Camshaft • HLA-Housing • Pushrods • Rocker Arms • Valve • Bolt (rockers) • Bolt mounting •
  • 12. 3D Valvetrain dynamics 12 Multi Body Dynamics model using Altair Motionsolve/Motionview Contact Joint Connection Type Cam-Follower CTC HLA-Housing  Piston Nonlinear spring HLA-Piston  Pushrod Joint Pushrod  Rocker arm Joint Rocker arm  axis Joint Rocker arm  Valve Contact Valve  seatring Contact
  • 13. 3D Valvetrain dynamics 13 Modeling details on the HLA and it‘s components • Cam follower is represented by a rigid body • Needle bearing is represented by a stiffness value • No contact interface between cam and follower, CTC-constraint was used instead
  • 14. 3D Valvetrain dynamics 14 Modeling details on the HLA and it‘s components • All of the inner parts of the HLA are represented by rigid bodies • Working piston is connected to the rest of the HLA by a nonlinear spring characteristic • Spring characteristic is taken from a 1D Model • But what about the damping?
  • 15. 3D Valvetrain dynamics 15 Results for Intake valve @ 3000 rpm
  • 16. Measuring valve train dynamics 16 Testbench for measuring lift and speed (acceleration is calculated)
  • 17. Measuring valve train dynamics 17 Measurement results for intake valve
  • 18. Comparison 18 Comparison for intake valve @ 3000 rpm
  • 19. Comparison 19 Timing deviations (according to a valve lift of 0.5mm) @ 3000 rpm in °CA Results from Delta IVO Delta IVC 1D +2,7° -2,1° 3D +3,0 -3,0 Measurement +2,8 -2,2  Both modeling approaches bring good results in terms of timing deviation  3D model accuracy suffers from underestimated HLA damping
  • 20. Discussion of results 20 Some additional comments on the results: • Both simulations were conducted without measurement results available  especially in the 3D model no tuning of contact dampings etc. was possible • Overprediction of valve lift of the 1D model was a known issue from the start, as the inclination of push rods wasn‘t taken into account (would be possible by using „planar mechanics“ library, wasn‘t available in our license package) • HLA has vital influence on the dynamic behaviour of the valve train (was a new insight for us, as this was our first engine with HLA)
  • 21. Discussion of results 21 Some additional comments on models: • The main advantage of the 1D approach is the detailed modeling of the HLA (multiphysics) • Result quality of 3D model surely can be increased by using a 1D-3D cosimulation to give a detailed modeling of the HLA • Additional information in the 3D model (component stresses, visualization) • Calculation times of 3D model aren‘t that much longer on todays desktop workstations than those of the 1D model (~90s for 3D vs. ~4s for 1D)  3D modeling approach with a 1D cosim for the HLA seems to be best practice to access highly accurate valve train dynamic behavior. Nevertheless both approaches bring good results in terms of timing deviation
  • 22. Discussion of results 22 Improving dynamic behavior of valve train: • Bringing more stiffness to the valve train is difficult as the HLA is the „weakest link“ • Redesign of intake cam brings improvement
  • 23. Thank you for your attention Tobias Winter Hatz Diesel

×