See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/228945138

Modelling the elastodynamic behaviour of a desmodromic valve train

Article · January 2002

CITATIONS READS

9 304

3 authors:

Alessandro Rivola Andrea Carlini

University of Bologna KTM Sportmotorcycle GmbH
96 PUBLICATIONS   1,099 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   40 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Giorgio Dalpiaz
University of Ferrara
82 PUBLICATIONS   1,059 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Giorgio Dalpiaz on 05 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Modelling the Elastodynamic Behaviour of a Desmodromic
Valve Train

Alessandro RIVOLA (*), Andrea CARLINI (*), and Giorgio DALPIAZ (**)
(*) DIEM - University of Bologna
Viale Risorgimento, 2, I - 40136 Bologna, Italy
e-mail: alessandro.rivola@mail.ing.unibo.it
(**) Dept. of Engineering, University of Ferrara
Via Saragat, 1, I - 44100 Ferrara, Italy
e-mail: gdalpiaz@ing.unife.it

Abstract
This paper deals with a lumped-parameter model of a motorbike engine’s desmodromic valve train. The
model of such an uncommon cam system is developed and validated with the aid of experimental
measurements carried out on a test bench which operates the cam mechanism by means of an electrically
powered driveline. The model describes the mechanical system taking into account the mass distribution, the
link elastic flexibility, and the presence of several non-linearities. The model parameter estimation is
discussed and the effectiveness of the model is assessed by a comparison with experimental results. In
addition, the model is employed to estimate the magnitude of contact forces and to predict the system
behaviour as a consequence of changes in some design parameters; therefore, it may be used as a tool both in
design optimisation and diagnostics.

1 Introduction train of a Ducati motorbike engine. Only works on

Nowadays the study of the dynamic response of
flexible mechanisms operating at high speed is
becoming more and more important and several
studies can be found in literature [1–4].
As a matter of fact, the link elastic flexibility and
mass distribution, as well as the effects of
backlashes and friction in joints, may affect the
dynamic behaviour of the system so deeply that it
may fail to properly perform its task. In addition,
high accelerations and dynamic stress may occur,
causing early fatigue failure, and high vibration and
noise may arise [5–6].
In the specific field of valve trains for engines
operating at very high speed, the above-mentioned
dynamic effects are particularly important, since
they may cause serious functional troubles, such as
wear, fatigue loads and breakage of mechanical
components, jump and bounce phenomena of the
valve, and alteration of the engine’s fluid dynamics.
Consequently increasing attention is addressed to
the elastodynamic analysis, as a tool for design
optimisation and fault diagnostics as well as for the
estimation of the actual dynamic forces, impacts,
and mechanism performances.
In this context, this paper presents a kineto-
elastodynamic model of the desmodromic valve
widely-used trains with closing spring were found in
literature [7–9]; in those cases the valve spring plays
an important role in the system dynamics.
Conversely, in the case of desmodromic valve trains
– i.e mechanisms with positive-drive cams – the
dynamic effects are partly different, as shown in
[10–12] by the authors.
In order to get insight into the dynamics of such
an uncommon cam system, and to help the
development and validation of the elastodynamic
model, valve motion measurements were retrieved
from experimental tests carried out at the DIEM
Laboratory of the University of Bologna on
cooperation with Ducati [12]. During the test, the
camshaft was operated by means of an electrically
powered driveline.
The model presented in this paper is a lumped-
parameter model having twelve degrees of freedom
(dofs). It describes the desmodromic train and the
driving mechanical transmission of the test bench, in
order to employ the experimental results for model
assessment and validation. The model takes into
account the mass distribution, the elastic flexibility
of all links (including the compliance of the
driveline), and the presence of non-linearities.
After the description of the mechanical system
and its model, the measurement apparatus is
 Camshaft
Timing Belt
θ0
Flywheel
φ2 φ3
φ1
Cylinder Head
Timing Belt
Intermediate Shaft
φ0
τ1 Brushless
Motor
Figure 1: Schematic of the electrically
powered driveline
presented. Secondly, the paper compares the
numerical results to the experimental data in terms
of valve displacement and acceleration by using
proper signal processing techniques. In addition, the
importance of taking into account the stiffness
variability of the rockers is pointed out. Finally, the
model is employed to estimate the magnitude of
contact forces and to predict the system behaviour
as a consequence of changes in some design
parameters.
2 The mechanical system
This work deals with the timing system of the
twincylinder ‘L’ engines of Ducati racing motorbike
which have double overhead camshafts,
desmodromic valve trains and four valves per
cylinder [10, 11].
As mentioned in the introduction, tests are
carried out on an experimental test bench, where the
camshafts are moved by means an electrically
powered driveline. The schematic of the driveline is
shown in Fig. 1: it consists of a brushless motor
driving an intermediate shaft by means of a timing
belt, and a second timing belt which moves the
camshafts. The speed of the intermediate shaft is
obtained by multiplying the motor velocity by the
ratio τ1 = 10/3. In order to reduce fluctuations of
torque and velocity, the intermediate shaft is fitted
with a flywheel. This shaft corresponds, in the
motorbike engine, to the shaft moved by the crank
shaft with a gear transmission having ratio 1/2. The
second belt transmission, which reproduces the
engine belt loop, has ratio τ2 = 1/1 and drives the
Figure 2: Schematic of the cam mechanism
driving a single valve
two camshafts (only one camshaft is shown in the
schematic of Fig. 1). Each camshaft has two
conjugate cams: one camshaft drives the two intake
valves and the other the two exhaust valves.
Figure 2 shows the schematic of the cam
mechanism driving a single valve: the discs of a
conjugate cam are each in contact with a rocker; the
two rockers are then in contact with the backlash
adjuster. It is therefore possible to identify two parts
of the mechanism, each made up of one of the cam
discs and the related rocker: one part gives valve
positive acceleration, while the negative
acceleration is given to the valve by the other part of
the mechanism (the positive direction is that of the
valve opening).
A small helical spring is mounted around the
negative rocker pin and properly preloaded: its
action is mainly needed during the dwell phase,
when separation of the cam discs from rockers takes
place and, consequently, the contact between the
valve-head and the seat might be lost.
3 The elastodynamic model
3.1 Description of the model
The mechanical system described above was
modelled with a twelve dofs lumped-parameter
model which describes the electrically powered
driveline, the intake camshaft and the cam
mechanism driving a single intake valve, namely the
valve close to the camshaft pulley. The other cam
mechanism and the valve driven by the same
camshaft were not included in order to simplify the
 kb ks ks kb
1 12 23 2

Js Js Js J0
1 2 3

φ0 φ1 φ2 φ3 θ0

1 1
1 2 2 1

1 1 1 1
1 1
1 2 2 1

τ7 1 1 τ8
δ 13 1 2 2 1

1
τ7 1 1 τ8
1 1 1

k 13
x7 x8
m7 m8
m3
x3
k7 k8
k 34

x1 x2
k 01 k 12

J0 J1 J2

θ0 θ1 θ2

δ 34
m4
δ 46

x4 k 45
k 46
k5

x6 m6
m5

k6 k 26
x5 δ 26

Figure 3: schematic of the lumped-parameter model

model. However, this second mechanism is identical approximately introduced, assuming that this
to the first one and theoretically moves in phase; the mechanism applies the same forces and torques to
effects of the neglected mechanism are therefore the camshaft as the first one.
 In [10, 11] the authors presented models of
desmodromic valve trains having eight dofs; in
those studies the speed of the camshafts was
assumed to be constant, that is, the dynamic
behaviour of the mechanical transmission driving
the camshafts was not considered. Actually,
experimental measurements carried out on the test
bench, have shown that the oscillations of the
camshaft speed around the mean value are quite
important (up to ±10%). Therefore, the driveline
moving the camshafts is taken into account in the
present work.
The model is developed with the aim to include
all the important effects, as well as to get a rather
simple model. In particular, it takes into account the
mass distribution, the elastic flexibility of all links
(including the compliance of the driveline, the
bending and torsional compliance of the camshaft,
and the variation of rocker stiffness as a function of
mechanism position), the damping effects, the
variability of transmission ratios with mechanism
position, and the presence of several non-linearities
(e.g. the Hertzian contact stiffness, the backlashes in
joints, and the lubricant squeeze effect).
With reference to Fig. 3, the known model input
is the coordinate φ0, representing the angular
displacement of the brushless motor’s pulley,
reduced to the intermediate shaft axis by the
transmission ratio τ1. This pulley is assumed to
rotate at constant speed. The compliance of the first
timing belt is taken into account by introducing the
coordinate φ1, representing the angular position of
the first pulley of the intermediate shaft (see also
Fig. 1). The moment of inertia Js1, associated with
coordinate φ1, is obtained by properly lumping the
inertia of the first timing belt together with the first
pulley of the intermediate shaft and a portion of the
shaft close to the pulley. The torsional stiffness kb1
represents the stiffness of the first belt
transmissions.
The torsional compliance of the intermediate
shaft is considered by introducing the coordinates φ2
and φ3, representing the angular displacements of
the flywheel and the second pulley of the
intermediate shaft, respectively. They are associated
with the moments of inertia Js2 and Js3, which are
obtained by lumping the moment of inertia of the
portions of the shaft together with the moments of
inertia of the flywheel and the second pulley,
respectively. The inertia Js3 also includes a portion
of the second time belt. Consequently, torsional
stiffness ks12 concerns the portion of the camshaft
between the first pulley and the flywheel, while
torsional stiffness ks23 is relative to the portion of
the intermediate shaft between the flywheel and the
second pulley.
By means of the coordinate θ0, which represents
the angular position of the pulley fitted on the intake
camshaft, the compliance of the second belt
transmission is considered. The moment of inertia J0
is obtained by properly lumping the moment of
inertia of the camshaft pulley together with the
moment of inertia of a camshaft portion, the inertia
of the exhaust camshaft, and the inertia of a portion
of the timing belt. The torsional stiffness kb2
represents the belt transmissions between the
intermediate shaft and the intake camshaft.
The stiffness of both timing belts are not
considered as constant during the simulation. In
fact, due to the effect of the dynamic loads, the belts
can release, causing the pre-load to be lost.
The torsional compliance of the camshaft is
taken into account by introducing the coordinates θ1
and θ2, representing the angular displacements of
the positive and negative cam discs, respectively. In
fact, with reference to the cam mechanism moving
the considered valve, the positive cam disc is the
closest to the camshaft pulley. The moments of
inertia J1 and J2, associated with these coordinates,
are obtained by lumping the moment of inertia of
camshaft portions together with the inertia of the
positive and negative cam discs, respectively.
Consequently, torsional stiffness k01 concerns the
portion of the camshaft between the pulley and the
positive cam, while torsional stiffness k12 is relative
to the portion between the two cam discs.
In order to include the camshaft bending
compliance, the coordinates x7 and x8 are
introduced: they are the deflections of the camshaft
in correspondence of the conjugate cam and in two
orthogonal directions, respectively coincident and
perpendicular to the direction of the valve motion,
as shown in Fig. 2. The deflections are assumed to
be the same for the two cam discs, due to their small
axial distance. The masses m7 and m8, associated
with the bending coordinates, are the equivalent
masses of the whole camshaft, computed by using
the assumed-mode method with a shape function
coincident to the static deflection. The camshaft
bending stiffness is modelled by the springs k7 and
k8, whilst the camshaft bearing compliance is
considered as negligible.
All the other coordinates, and the related model
parameters, are reduced to the direction of the valve
motion. Thus, the model contains the kinematic
relationships of valve displacement vs. cam angular
displacements and camshaft deflections: the cam
angular displacements, θ1 and θ2, are reduced using
the cam curve functions x1=x1(θ1) and x2=x2(θ2); the
camshaft deflections, x7 and x8, are reduced using
the transmission ratios τ71=dx1/dx7, τ72=dx2/dx7,
τ81=dx1/dx8 and τ82=dx2/dx8. The reduction of the
coordinates to the direction of the valve motion is
represented by a lever system in Fig. 3. More details
on the procedure of reduction can be found, for
example, in [2].
The linear coordinates x3 and x6 correspond to
the angular displacements of the positive and
negative rockers (respectively indicated by θ3 and θ6
in Fig. 2), after the reduction to the direction of the
valve motion.
The masses m3 and m6 , which are associated to
the coordinates x3 and x6, are the reduced moments
of inertia of the rockers. The parameters k13 and k34
are firstly computed by reducing and composing in
series the stiffness of the positive rocker and the
stiffness of the Hertzian contacts cam-rocker and
rocker-adjuster, and then sharing out the global
compliance between the two springs. Stiffness k26 is
obtained by reducing and composing in series the
stiffness of the negative rocker arm in contact with
the cam and the stiffness of the related Hertzian
contact; similarly, k46 concerns the stiffness of the
negative rocker arm in contact with the adjuster and
the related Hertzian contact; the bending compliance
of the negative rocker pin is also included in the
evaluation of k26 and k46. The parameter k6 is the
reduced stiffness of the helical rocker spring.
It is noteworthy that the stiffnesses of the rockers
are assumed to be variable as a function of the
mechanism position. Moreover, also the Hertzian
stiffness is variable, as it depends on the contact
force; in the simulation it is evaluated
instantaneously.
The possibility of separation of the rockers from
the cam discs and the adjuster is included, in order
to appropriately model the effects of backlashes.
The parameters δ13, δ34, δ26, δ46 refer to the amount
of separation in the joints when the mechanism is at
rest, that is during the dwell phase; they are reduced
to the valve motion direction.
The mass valve is lumped partly in mass m4, in
correspondence of the adjuster, and partly in mass
m5, in correspondence of the valve-head. The axial
stiffness of the valve stem is k45, while stiffness k5
represents the stiffness of the valve-head in contact
with the seat.
In order to globally take account of structural
damping, as well as other damping, a viscous
damper is associated with each stiffness. The
damper coefficient is taken proportional to the
corresponding stiffness; consequently, the
variability of some of the model stiffnesses (due, for
example, to the contribution of Hertzian contacts, or
the variability of rocker stiffness with mechanism
position) affects the associated damper coefficients.
In case there is no contact in joints with backlash
and links are approaching, the damper coefficient is
computed in order to represent the lubricant squeeze
effect [2, 5, 11]. Coulomb friction forces have not
been introduced into the model, due to their low
value.
It is worth noting that the system is highly time-
varying. As a matter of fact the active cam-follower
system is different in the phases of positive and
negative acceleration. In addition, several model
parameters change with mechanism position. As a
consequence, the differential equations of motion
are strongly non-linear. They are numerically
integrated by using the software Simulink.
3.2 Estimation of the model parameters
The model parameters were preliminarily evaluated
on the basis of both design and literature data. The
values of inertial parameters, stiffnesses and squeeze
coefficients were computed based on the geometry
and the material of mechanism links.
With reference to the mechanical transmission
moving the camshafts, the main uncertainty
concerns the estimation of the stiffness of the two
timing belts. As a matter of fact, no experimental
data about belt stiffness were available.
Concerning the others mechanism links, the
finite element method (FEM) was employed in
order to evaluate the stiffness of the rockers and the
valve-head. It is worth noting that the stiffness of
the rockers was computed taking into account the
effect of the variation of position and direction of
the contact forces cam-rocker and rocker-adjuster,
as the mechanism changes its position. The FEM
analysis was carried out considering only few
positions of the mechanism; during the simulation
the instantaneous value of rocker stiffness is
computed by means of interpolation.
The values of the backlashes into kinematic pairs
cam-rocker and rocker-adjuster, which are important
functional parameters, were measured during the
experimental tests, that is, taking into account the
link thermal deformation. Although the backlashes
have a nominal value that is the same for the two
parts of the mechanism, the ‘positive’ backlash
tends to increase, due to thermal deformation, whilst
the ‘negative’ one suffers a reduction.
The damper coefficients were preliminarily
established based on previous models of the
desmodromic valve train developed by the authors
[10, 11].
 * Ignoring Hertzian stiffness possible to assign the same value to the
Js1 = 8.00×10 kg m
–5 2
k*
= 32.2÷233.8 proportionality constants between damper
13 coefficients and the related stiffnesses, because of
Js1 = 2.51×10–2 kg m2 MN/m different causes of damping which take place in the
various parts of the mechanism. However, the
Js3 = 6.12×10–4 kg m2 k*26 = 4.14÷15.6 proportionality constants were set within the limited
range 0.5×10–5 s ÷ 1.5×10–5 s, with the exception of
J0 = 1.65×10–4 kg m2 MN/m
the timing belts, to which was assigned the value
J1 = 1.21×10–5 kg m2 k*34 = 32.2÷233.8 5×10–4 s, due to their high structural damping.
The values of the model parameters are listed in
J2 = 4.90×10–5 kg m2 MN/m Table 1.

m3 = 1.34×10–2 kg k*46 = 18.9÷23.3

4 Experimental apparatus
m4 = 0.66×10–2 kg MN/m
As previously mentioned, the experimental study is
m5 = 3.34×10–2 kg k45 = 36.4 MN/m
carried out on a test bench which was planned to
m6 = 2.62×10–2 kg k5 = 66.8 MN/m reproduce, as well as possible, the functional
conditions of the valve train. In particular, the test
m7 = 6.64×10–1 kg k6 = 600.0 N/m bench and the measurement apparatus can operate
for different cylinder head type, at high camshaft
m8 = 6.64×10–1 kg k7 = 97.3 MN/m speed, under high temperature of the lubrication oil,
and reproducing the motorbike power belt
kb1 = 4.483×102 Nm/rad k8 = 97.3 MN/m transmission.
The experimental apparatus includes a test stand,
ks12 = 4.765×104 Nm/rad
a cylinder head, an electrically powered driveline to
ks23 = 5.600×104 Nm/rad δ13 = 0.25 mm operate the camshaft, a lubrication circuit, and
measurement instrumentation [12].
kb2 = 1.053×102 Nm/rad δ26 = 0.10 mm The maximum speed available at the camshaft is
10000 rpm. In order to properly lubricate the valve
k01 = 7.622×103 Nm/rad δ34 = 0.0 mm train, pressurized oil is fed into the cylinder head oil
galleries; oil pressure and temperature are similar to
k12 = 1.466×105 Nm/rad δ46 = 0.0 mm those picked up from the motorbike during the
Table 1: Model parameters racing (i.e. 6 bar and 130°C, respectively).
It is worth noting that only the components
required for the operation of the valve train are
The values of some parameters were then included into the system; as a consequence, no gas
adjusted in order to better match experimental forces, combustion, or spurious vibrations occur.
results. Therefore, the system response is not the actual one,
In particular, due to the uncertainty in estimating that is, the response of the motorbike engine system.
the stiffness of the two timing belts, it was expected However, the inclusion (or exclusion) of the forces
that the parameters kb1 and kb2 would be due to compressed gases does not compromise the
significantly adjusted. On the contrary, the other validity of the experimental data as a modelling tool
stiffnesses would be decreased to some amount, as [13].
commonly occurs in modelling [6, 10, 11]. As a The measurement equipment consists of a laser
matter of fact, after the comparison between the vibrometer and data acquisition apparatus. The laser
model simulation and experimental valve motion, equipment is a Polytec’s High Speed Vibrometer
the stiffness of the timing belts was set to 20% of (HSV-2002), used for non-contact measurements
the preliminarily established value, while the and high velocity applications, which can measure
camshaft bending stiffness, the stiffness of positive the absolute and relative velocity and displacement
and negative rockers, and the valve-head stiffness up to 30 m/s and 41 mm respectively; the maximum
were assumed to be the 80, 80, 40, and 80%, of their frequency is 50 kHz.
computed values, respectively. The centre of the valve-head plane surface was
Concerning the viscous dampers, it was not chosen as measurement point, thus making it
possible to minimize possible valve’s flexional
 4 4
3 Experimental 3 Experimental
Normalised Valve Acceleration

Normalised Valve Acceleration

2 2
1 1
0 0
-1 -1
-2 -2
4 4
3 Numerical 3 Numerical
2 2
1 1
0 0
-1 -1
-2 -2
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Camshaft angle [deg] Camshaft angle [deg]

Figure 4: valve acceleration (4500 camshaft rpm) Figure 6: valve acceleration (6500 camshaft rpm)

4 0.3
3 Experimental Experimental
0.2
Normalised Valve Acceleration

2
Valve Displacement [mm]

1 0.1
0
0
-1
-2 -0.1
4 0.3
3 Numerical Numerical
0.2
2
1 0.1
0
0
-1
-2 -0.1
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 160 200 240 280
Camshaft angle [deg] Camshaft angle [deg]

Figure 5: valve acceleration (5500 camshaft rpm) Figure 7: valve displacement (6500 camshaft rpm)

vibration effects, which may negatively affect valve
motion measurement. An area close to the valve seat
was selected as a reference surface. The differential
measurement between valve surface and reference
plane permits the elimination of raw vibration
effects of head cylinder support.
The signals were collected by means of a
National Instrument PXI data acquisition system;
the sampling frequency was 102 kHz and the filter
cut-off frequency was set to 45 kHz in order to
prevent aliasing. During the tests, both valve
velocity and displacement were recorded. The
digital signals were processed and analysed with
MATLAB software.
5 Results and discussion
This Section firstly presents, by Figs. 4–6, some
numerical results in comparison with experimental
data in terms of valve acceleration over one cam
revolution. They refer to camshaft speed of 4500,
5500, and 6500 rpm. The experimental valve
acceleration is obtained by means of numerical
derivative, while the numerical valve motion is
represented by the acceleration of the mass m5 of the
model. The acceleration scale is made dimensionless
with reference to the theoretical maximum value.
Figures 4–6 show that a good agreement between
simulated and experimental results is attained for a
wide range of camshaft speed. In particular, the
simulation results are very similar to the actual
valve motion within both positive and negative
acceleration phases. As a matter of fact, the model is
able to reproduce the more important dynamic
phenomena and oscillations, and the level of the
acceleration peaks is globally matched, even if some
discrepancies exist.
 4

Force [kN]
2

0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Camshaft angle [deg]

Figure 8: wavelet transform of valve acceleration Figure 10: positive cam-rocker contact force

4 6900
3 Experimental Angular speed [rpm]
Normalised Valve Acceleration

2 6800
1
6700
0
-1
6600
-2
4
Numerical 6500
3
2 (constant rocker
stiffness) 6400
1
0 6300
-1
-2 6200
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Camshaft angle [deg] Camshaft angle [deg]

Figure 9: valve acceleration Figure 11: angular speed of camshaft pulley

As a further example of the simulation accuracy, clearly the same.

the contact between the valve-head and its seat is
investigated for 6500 camshaft rpm. In fact, the
dynamic effects at the valve closure strongly affect
the engine performances and, as such, have to be
taken into account in order to predict the actual gas
flow dynamics. Figure 7 compares the numerical
displacement of the mass m5 to the actual valve
displacement, by means of an enlarged detail at the
valve closure. The comparison shows that the model
is able to properly simulate the impact location of
the valve-head against the seat (at camshaft angle of
about 175 degrees), as well as the bounce
phenomena. In particular, the amount of separation
between the valve-head and the seat, due to the
bounces, is correctly estimated. Actually, in the
experimental result, the first bounce takes longer
and the second one occurs later than in the
simulation case, but the nature of the phenomena is
In order to evaluate the model effectiveness from
the point of view of the frequency content, a wavelet
analysis of both numerical and experimental valve
acceleration is presented in Fig. 8, in the case of
6500 camshaft rpm. As a matter of fact, since the
data have non-stationary nature, a signal processing
technique able to study how the frequency content
changes with time has to be used [14]. The wavelet
analysis reported in Fig. 8 shows that the most
important dynamic phenomena are the impacts in
the kinematic pairs of the rockers (at about 15, 65,
and 155 camshaft degrees) and between the valve-
head and its seat (at about 180 cam degrees). These
impacts, due to their broadband frequency content,
excite the mechanism resonances leading to damped
oscillations. As noted in Sect. 3.1, the dynamic
system is highly time-varying; thus, the resonance
frequencies are different in the various angle phases.
 4 0.3
3 0.1
Force [kN]
2 -0.1
1 0.1
0 -0.1
0 60 120 180 240 300
Camshaft angle [deg]
Figure 12: positive cam-rocker contact force
(increased backlash)
In particular, the comparison of Fig. 8 demonstrates
that the excited natural frequencies of the model
generally agree with the experimental ones, with the
exception of the simulated valve-head impact which
has lower frequency content.
With the aim to remark the importance of taking
into account the stiffness variability of the rockers,
their stiffness was set to a constant value,
correspondent to the position of zero and maximum
valve displacement, for the positive and negative
rocker, respectively. Figure 9 compares the
numerical valve acceleration, obtained by assuming
the stiffness as constant [Fig. 9(b)], with the
experimental one [Fig. 9(a)], at 6500 camshaft rpm.
Disagreements between actual and simulated valve
motion clearly appear both for the positive and
negative acceleration phases. In particular, during
the negative phase the period of the oscillations is
incorrectly simulated, while in the second positive
phase, the oscillation amplitude is overestimated.
The model can be employed as a tool for design
optimisation. In fact, by means of the simulation,
the magnitude of dynamic forces can be predicted,
thus making it possible to determine dynamic stress
levels, to verify the structural strength of mechanism
links, or to compute contact pressures. As an
example, Fig. 10 reports the contact force between
the positive cam (inertia J1 in the model) and rocker
(mass m3) for 6500 camshaft rpm. As expected, the
contact mainly deals with the positive acceleration
phases.
As a further example of model application, the
angular speed of the camshaft pulley (inertia J0) is
computed and reported in Fig. 11, over one cam
revolution. It shows that the oscillations of the
camshaft speed around its mean value are quite
with rocker spring
0.2
Valve Displacement [mm]
0
0.3
without rocker spring
0.2
0
360 160 200 240 280 320
Camshaft angle [deg]
Figure 13: numerical valve displacement
important. These are the effect of the dynamic
behaviour of the driveline moving the camshaft. As
expected, the angular speed of the inertia Js2 (i.e.
the flywheel) is practically constant; thus, the
camshaft oscillations are essentially due to the
compliance of the timing belt reproducing the
engine belt loop. From a functional point of view,
the estimation of these oscillations is very
important, as it makes it possible to relate the
camshaft angular position and, consequently, the
valve motion, to the crank shaft position. The
importance of modelling the driveline is therefore
justified.
As a final example, the model is employed to
predict the system behaviour as a consequence of
changes in some parameters. Since the dynamics of
the desmodromic valve train is strongly affected by
the backlash value in the kinematic pairs cam-rocker
and rocker-adjuster, it is useful to predict the effect
of variations of this important functional parameter
due, for example, to wear or improper assembling.
Figure 12 shows the prediction of the positive cam-
rocker contact force, due to backlash values that are
increased with respect to those reported in Table 1:
δ13=0.30 mm, δ26=0.15 mm, and δ34=δ46=0 mm. The
peaks of the contact force increase of about 20%
with respect to the previously examined case (see
Fig. 10).
Another important aspect of the desmodromic
train is the presence of the helical spring acting on
the negative rocker. Figure 13 shows the effect of a
breakage of the rocker spring, by comparing the
simulated valve displacement in normal condition to
that one in fault condition, that is, when the value of
the stiffness k6 of the model is set to zero. In the last
case, the valve keeps open for a longer time, thus
affecting the engine’s fluid dynamics.
 6 Conclusions
This paper presents a model for the simulation of the
kineto-elastodynamic behaviour of the desmodromic
valve train of Ducati engines, as well as a test bench
designed in order to closely reproduce the functional
conditions of the valve train. The model - having
twelve dofs – describes all the experimental
mechanical system, i.e. both the valve train and the
driveline. The model contains some non-linear
elements and it is highly time-varying. In fact, the
active cam-follower system is different in the phases
of positive and negative accelerations. In addition,
some model parameters – in particular, the rocker
stiffness – strongly depend on the mechanism
position.
By comparison with valve motion measurements
picked up on the test bench, the effectiveness of the
model is satisfactorily assessed: it properly
reproduces all the important dynamic phenomena
taking place in the system, in a wide range of
camshaft speed. It is pointed out that it is essential to
take into account the variability of the rocker
stiffness with mechanism position for obtaining
satisfactorily simulations. Finally, applications of
model for both design improvement and fault
diagnostics are shown with some examples.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank DUCATI CORSE and
engineers for cooperation and assistance in the
construction of the experiment.
References
[1] Erdman, A. G., Sandor, G. N., A Review of the
State of the Art and Trends, Mechanism and
Machine Theory, Vol. 7, (1972), pp. 19–33.
[2] Koster, M. P., Vibrations of Cam Mechanism,
McMillan Press, London UK, 1974.
[3] Sandor, G. N., Erdman, A. G., Advanced
Mechanism Design: Analysis and Synthesis,
Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, Vol. 2, (1984), pp.
483–530.
[4] Dresner, T. L., Norton, R. L., Modern
Kinematics: Developments in the Last Forty
Years, Erdman Ed., Wiley, New York, (1993),
pp. 305–312.
[5] Dalpiaz, G., Maggiore, A., Monitoring
Automatic Machines, Mechanical Systems and
View publication stats
Signal Processing, Vol. 6, (1992), pp. 517–534.
[6] Dalpiaz, G., Rivola, A., A Kineto-elastodynamic
Model of a Mechanism for Automatic Machine,
Proceedings of the Ninth World Congress on the
Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, Milano,
Italy, Vol. 1, (1995), 327–332.
[7] Pisano, A. P., Freudenstein, F., An Experimental
and Analytical Investigation of the Dynamic
Response of a High-Speed Cam-Follower
System. Part 2: A Combined, Lumped/
Distribuited Dynamic Model, Journal of
Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in
Design, Vol. 105, (1983), pp. 699–704.
[8] Nagaya, K., Watanabe, K., Tsukahara, Y.,
Vibration Analysis of High Rigidity Driven
Valve System of Internal Combustion Engines,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 165, No. 1,
(1993), pp. 31–43.
[9] Özgür, K., Pasin, F., Separation Phenomena in
Force Closed Cam Mechanisms, Mechanism
and Machine Theory, Vol. 31, No. 4, (1996), pp.
487–499.
[10] G. Dalpiaz, and A. Rivola, A Model for the
Elastodynamic Analysis of a Desmodromic
Valve Train, Proceedings of the Tenth World
Congress on the Theory of Machines and
Mechanisms, June 20–24, Oulu, Finland, Oulu
University Press, Vol. 4, (1999), pp. 1534–1542.
[11] G. Dalpiaz, and A. Rivola, A Non-Linear
Elastodynamic Model of a Desmodromic Valve
Train, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol.
35, No. 11, (2000), pp. 1551–1562.
[12] A. Carlini, A. Rivola, G. Dalpiaz, and A.
Maggiore, Valve Motion Measurements on
Motorbike Cylinder Heads Using High Speed
Laser Vibrometer, to be presented at the 5th
International Conference on Vibration
Measurements by Laser Techniques, 18–21
June, 2002, Ancona, Italy.
[13] A.P. Pisano, and F. Freudenstein, An
Experimental and Analytical Investigation of the
Dynamic Response of a High-Speed Cam-
Follower System. Part 1: Experimental
Investigation, Journal of Mechanisms,
Transmissions, and Automation in Design, Vol.
105, (1983), pp.692–698.
[14] O. Rioul, and M. Vetterli, Wavelets and Signal
Processing, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine,
Vol. 8, No. 4, (1991), pp. 14–38.