Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018

2013-01-1737
Published 04/08/2013
Copyright © 2013 SAE International
doi:10.4271/2013-01-1737
saeeng.saejournals.org

Assessing the Propensity for Valve Train Tick Noise

Bruce K. Geist, William Resh, Scott Fisher, Ian McLean and Mark Hannon
Chrysler Group LLC

ABSTRACT
Valve ticking noises within a cam actuated valve train can arise mysteriously. One valve train may produce valve
ticking noises, while a second, geometrically similar valve train may perform more quietly. To better understand this
phenomena, we examine in detail the prototypical motion of a valve driven by a rocker arm with cylindrical rocker pad.
General features of a valve's motion through its guide, induced by a rocker arm with a cylindrical pad, are derived. From
these general features of valve motion, guide contact points during lift events can be inferred, and as a result, detailed
forces and moments acting on the valve may be derived. From this derivation of forces acting on the valve, a metric for
assessing the propensity of a valve train to tick as a result of the valve stem impacting its guide is proposed. The proposed
metric indicates how the likelihood of valve tick noise can be reduced through judicious choices for valve train geometries,
clearances and surface finishes.

CITATION: Geist, B., Resh, W., Fisher, S., McLean, I. et al., "Assessing the Propensity for Valve Train Tick Noise," SAE
Int. J. Engines 6(1):2013, doi:10.4271/2013-01-1737.
____________________________________

INTRODUCTION
Exhaust and intake valves for a given engine are typically
designed to ensure certain ratios of guided versus
unsupported valve stem lengths at the hot and cold ends of
the valve meet prescribed targets (see for example [3]). Other
geometric design criteria specify a zero-lift valve stem height
above a perpendicular to the valve stem that connects the
valve stem axis to the rocker pivot. Typical values are 1/3 or
1/2 of maximum valve lift (see [2]). There are still additional
design criteria that recommend valve guide to valve stem
radial clearance.
To produce a high quality valve train, a focus on design
geometry is of course important. However, geometry targets
alone may not be sufficient to produce a quiet system. It is
not only the valve train geometry, but also the forces driving
noise generating collisions that must be assessed. The metric
proposed in this paper assesses the interaction of geometry
and valve tip forces by estimating the energy of valve stem to
valve guide collision during lift events. Ultimately, the sound
produced by such collisions must be gated by this input
kinetic energy to the collision event. Our metric focuses on
estimating this kinetic energy. The analysis below provides
insight into how the energy-and hence the audible noise
which is in effect a dissipation of this energy-may be reduced
by valve and valve train design specifications.
Our development is specific to the case where the rocker
that drives the valve has a cylindrical rocker pad, and is
oriented so that the contact point between valve and rocker
pad is centered on the valve stem when the vector from
rocker pivot to contact point is perpendicular to the valve
guide axis. (This is common design practice.) Figure 1
depicts a rocker arm and valve. The coordinate system we
will use throughout assumes the y-axis is parallel to the valve
guide axis. The positive y-direction indicates increasing valve
lift. The positive x-axis is perpendicular to the axis of valve
guide moving from the origin at the rocker pivot to the valve
guide. Observe that this is a typical right-handed coordinate
system, meaning that positive rotation about a vector directed
out of the page (the z-axis) is counterclockwise. The unit
vector it is parallel to the plane of the valve tip and the x-
axis. Angle α shown in the picture is measured from the
position vector that locates the zero-lift contact point to the x-
axis. Likewise, the angle η indicates an the angle from the
zero-lift position vector to a position vector of a subsequent
contact point. The angle η − α is therefore the polar angle of a
contact point measured from the positive x-axis (which is
directed left). Note that angles indicating a contact point
above the x-axis (in the negative y-direction) are negative;
those below the x-axis are positive.

637
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018
638 Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)
Figure 1. Diagram Of Rocker Arm And Valve When The
Valve Is At Zero Lift.
The objective of this paper is to estimate the energy
imparted to the valve just prior to a collision with the valve
guide. To this end, valve tip forces and moments are
determined first. There is a fiction force that acts parallel to
vector , opposite in direction to of the sliding velocity
between rocker arm and valve tip. To support the calculation
of this force, the first section below documents a derivation
of the sliding velocity between the valve tip and rocker pad.
The forces exerted on the valve tip by the rocker arm and the
valve spring will produce a net torque that tends to rotate the
valve. To determine these moments in detail, the exact
contact point path about the rocker pivot is required, and that
is derived next. Approximate kinematics of the valve are then
assessed in order to establish the nature of the valve stem
collision with the valve guide during a lift event. This
preliminary assessment is in part necessary so that the pivot
points, or points about which the valve rotates during
reorientation events, can be determined. Knowing the pivot
points for valve reorientation events enables the calculation
of kinetic energy associated with the valve guide and valve
stem collisions. It is this energy that forms the basis of our
proposed valve train tick-propensity metric.
SLIDING VELOCITY
As indicated in the introduction, the analysis to follow
assumes that the rocker pad cross sections parallel to the
plane of the figure are identical and circular of some radius σ.
Consider that there are two surfaces, ∑1 and ∑2; let ∑1 be the
valve tip surface, which is just a portion of a plane, and let ∑2
be a narrow cross-sectional slice of a cylindrical rocker arm
pad surface where the cylinder axis is perpendicular to the
plane of the figure.
Figure 2. The diagram shows the initial point of contact
at offset angle α from the contact point position vector to
the positive x-axis. Note α is positive for the case shown.
The radial distance r from the rocker arm pivot at the
origin of the coordinate system is specified as a function
of η − α, the angular offset from the positive x-axis. An
intermediate point for a non-zero angle η is shown in the
second diagram. Angles γ and β are used in the proof of
Lemma 1, and in general are functions of angle η.
Let each of these surfaces have their own local coordinate
system fixed to them. Let S1 be the coordinate system that
moves with ∑1, and let S2 be the coordinate system that
moves with ∑2. Suppose also that there is a fixed coordinate
system Sf. ∑1 (the valve tip) translates and ∑2 (the rocker
arm) rotates about the rocker pivot within this fixed
coordinate system Sf.
Let ∑1 and ∑2 meet at point M. The velocity of point M
on ∑i can be decomposed into two types of motion: that
motion due to the surface itself moving within Sf, say , as
well as the motion of the point along, or relative to, the
surface ∑i within coordinate system Si, say . The
subscripts indicate either transfer or relative motion
associated with surface ∑1 or ∑2.
The velocity in Sf of a single contact point common to
both surfaces can be expressed in two equivalent ways:
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018
Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)
Rewriting the last equation, we have
Suppose that point M(1)(t)
represents the point on ∑1 that
makes contact with surface ∑2 at time t in reference frame S1.
Suppose M(2)(t) is the corresponding point on ∑2 that touches
∑1 at time t in reference frame S1. At any given time t = t0,
M(1)(t0) = M(2)(t0) (because the surfaces are in contact there).
The middle equality in (2) shows that υ(12) may be interpreted
as the velocity an observer from surface ∑2 in coordinate
system S2 sees as the direction and magnitude of motion for
point M(1)(t0). On the other hand, the left most equality in (2)
indicates υ(12) is also equal to the speed at which surface ∑1
rubs or slides on surface ∑2.
The rocker arm shown in Figure 1 makes contact with the
valve stem at zero lift at point M0. The rocker arm shaft axis
passes through points Di, i = 1, 2; this axis is perpendicular to
the plane of the page. Surface ∑2 is considered to be a narrow
cross sectional slice of the rocker arm pad that is orthogonal
to . The valve tip surface, labeled surface ∑1, is
planar, and perpendicular to direction of valve movement.
Define the positive x-axis of Sf to be the ray that is
perpendicular to line that passes through point M0,
the initial contact point of contact between ∑1 and ∑2 at zero
lift. The origin of Sf is Di, the point where the x-axis
intersects line . The angle α is that angle between the
x-axis and the projection of this axis on the valve stem plane.
Physically, relative movement of two sliding surfaces
cannot be directed in a way that causes one surface to
puncture the other, the sliding velocity υ(12) must lie in the
tangent plane. Therefore, for all t
Figure 2 shows that , where ω the angular
rotation speed of ∑2, and r is the distance between the center
of rotation (the origin) and the contact point on surface ∑2.
This follows from the observation that the rocker arm is in
pure rotation, and hence a fixed point on the rocker arm can
only move in the u direction, and its distance from the origin
is constant.1 Here,
Figure 2.)
1Note: is defined as the velocity of a fixed point on surface ∑2. The velocity
the rotational speed of the rocker arm, is approximately equal to
2We use the notation that < , > represents the dot product of two vectors
639
On the other hand, has only a component in the
(1) direction, since the valve stem translates without rotation in a
direction normal to its valve tip surface. (Recall that
includes no sliding velocity along the surface of the valve
(2) tip.) It follows that2
(4)
Because the valve tip is planar and does not rotate, and
are constant unit vectors. If r(η(t)−α) is the distance from
the rocker pivot to the point of contact at time t, it follows
that the sliding velocity is
(5)
Here, we have used the approximation that is
approximately equal to rocker arm rotation speed ω.
Figure 3. The radial distance r from the rocker arm pivot
at the origin of the coordinate system is specified as a
function of η − α, the angular offset from the positive x-
axis. An intermediate point for a non-zero angle η is
shown in the second diagram. Angles γ and β are used in
the proof of Lemma 1, and in general are functions of
angle η.
(3)
THE CONTACT POINT PATH
Determining the contact point relative to the central axis
of the valve stem facilitates the calculation of torques acting
on the valve.
Lemma 1 Suppose that angle α represents the angle
between the positive x-axis and the zero-lift contact point
. (See position vector connecting the rocker pivot and a point on the
valve tip surface c0. Suppose the rocker arm pad is
does not include any velocity contribution due to sliding motion along the surface of ∑2. Note that ω,
.
and .
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018

640 Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)

cylindrically shaped with radius σ, and that the distance from
the pivot to the center of curvature of the rocker pad is
. Suppose the offset angle from the zero-lift contact
point position vector to a new contact point position vector is
η. Let η satisfy - π/2 < η − α < π/2. Then, the distance from M
at polar angle η − α measured from the positive x-axis
indicated in Figure 3 to the rocker pivot is r(η − α), where
(6)
Pf: When angles β, η and α are as shown in Figure 3, it
follows from the law of sines that
This implies that
(7)
Angle γ = π/2 + (η − α) - β (see Figure 3). Again applying
the law of sines, it follows that
(8)
(9)
calculations will proceed first by calculating the moments
about the valve's center of mass. The initial expression for the
valve tip moment calculated about the valve center of mass
will facilitate making inferences about how the valve moves
within its valve guide.
Considering the valve as a free body (see Figure 4), forces
acting on the valve tip include the force applied at
the point of contact along the valve tip, and a friction force
applied at the same point, sign(υ(12)) μFυt. The coefficient
μ is a friction coefficient indicating the fraction of normal
force converted into tangential loading that opposes sliding
motion. Typical values for μ range from 0.03 to 0.15. The
valve spring force, i.e., that force arising from a valve spring
acting on the valve spring retainer, produces a load that is
equivalent to a force being applied along the center axis of
the valve stem. The spring retainer uniformly distributes
force along the perimeter of the valve, so that the resultant
force acts at and along the valve stem axis. This force is
represented as .
Let d0 be the zero-lift contact point's distance from the
valve stem axis. Define d as indicated in Figure 4. A formula
for d in terms of r, η, α and d0 is as follows.
(11)
Note that Lemma 1 provides a formula for r(η - α) that
defines values of r in terms of basic valve train geometry
parameters like σ and P. If, as indicated in Figure 4, the
position vector of the contact point relative to the valve center
of mass is Rcm and is a unit vector directed out of the page,
it follows that the sliding moment Tsliding, the offset moment
TFυt, and the net moment about the center of mass Tcm are
given in equations (12), (13), and (14).

Now , where sin β = (σ / P) cos(η

− α).
Therefore, (12)

(13)

(14)
(10)

APPROXIMATE KINEMATICS OF
VALVE MOTION
In this section, knowledge of the sliding velocity υ(12)
given in equation (5) and of the contact path as specified in
Lemma 1 by r(η − α) enables the calculation of a net moment
acting on a valve about the valve's center of mass. These
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018

Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013) 641

Figure 5. Coefficient multiplying Fυt that determines the

net moment.

Equation (14) shows that the tip moment calculated from

any point along the valve stem axis can be expressed as a
coefficient function that is multiplied by the valve tip load
Fυt. Typical valve train designs position rocker arms so that,
in a coordinate system such as is indicated in Figure 1 (where
the positive y-axis is directed in the valve-open direction), the
zero-lift contact point has a y-coordinate equal to about
(−1/3) or (−1/2) times the intended maximum valve lift. In
Figure 1, this negative y-coordinate value for the zero-lift
contact point corresponds to a point above the indicated
positive x-axis. In this circumstance, angle α measured from
the zero-lift contact point position vector to the x-axis, is
positive. Additionally, it is typical to position the rocker arm
so that when the contact point passes through the x-axis, it is
centered on the valve stem (assuming the valve stem axis is
aligned with the valve guide axis). This implies that the offset
moment TFυt is zero at approximately the same time that η - α
= 0. The sliding velocity υ(12) (see equation (5)) changes sign
when η - α = 0.
If for all contact points during a lift event, the
implications of the design conventions described in the
previous paragraph are that the valve tip moment changes
sign exactly four times during a lift event: when valve motion
begins, as the valve opens and when η - α = 0, at maximum
lift when changes sign, and as the valve closes and η - α =
0. Normally is always satisfied during a lift event,
since the distance G from valve tip to valve center of mass is
very typically more than 30 times than the radius of the valve
Figure 4. Calculating Moments. stem, which is an upper bound for d. On the other hand, a
friction coefficient μ is typically larger3 than .03.

3The value of μ for most surface finishes and materials is expected to be between 0.03 and 0.15.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018
642 Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)
Figure 5 shows a plot of the coefficient that multiplies Fυt
for a valve train configuration where the zero-lift contact
point has a y-coordinate that is about −1/3 of the maximum
lift of the valve event. The initial radius r(−α) is about 30
mm, and the center of mass of the valve is 100 mm from the
valve tip. The coefficient that multiplies Fυt is shown as a
function of η. For this plot, μ = .08. When the valve is seated,
angle η = 0, and the net moment is negative. As the valve lift
event begins, sliding velocity υ(12) is negative, and so the net
moment Tcm (oppositely signed to sliding velocity) is
positive. Tcm remains positive during valve motion through
the first 1/3 to 1/2 of the valve's total lift. Then, the moment
changes sign suddenly as the contact point passes through the
center of the valve stem. Tcm remains negative until reaching
maximum lift, at which time and the sliding velocity υ(12)
changes sign, causing Tcm to become positive. As the valve
closes, there is another sign switch when η = α, so that Tcm
becomes negative until the next lift event. The plot in Figure
5 is representative of any tip moment coefficient plot for a
valve train where the contact point is centered on the valve
stem as it passes through an axis that is perpendicular to the
axis of the valve stem, and where the zero-lift contact point is
a distance above this axis that is equal to 1/3 or 1/2 the total
valve lift.
Figure 6. Part-lift reorientation event. The diagram
indicates how, at a part-lift valve reorientation event, the
valve stem pivots about the bottom corner of the valve
guide, collides with the sidewall, then pivots about the
top corner of the valve guide.
Figure 6 indicates how, at a part-lift valve re-orientation
event, the valve stem pivots about the bottom corner of the
valve guide, collides with the sidewall, then pivots about the
top corner of the valve guide. For both part-lift reorientation
events, the sign of the tip moment just before the event is
positive. As a result, the valve is balanced in a counter-
clockwise direction within the guide, angled off the vertical
by a small angle that depends on guide length and valve
clearance through the guide. Both Tsliding and TFυt change
signs when η - α = 0. The sliding moment changes sign
because the friction force changes sign. Just before the event,
the frictional force is positive (roughly directed left in our
upside-down coordinate system). When the event begins, the
friction force becomes negative (so that it is directed to the
right). Left unopposed, the friction force would not only
induce a moment, but would also tend to accelerate the valve
to the left. There is an equal and oppositely directed force
created by the guide at the guide's bottom corner. (This must
be true because the center of mass does not accelerate in the
horizontal direction.) The reaction force from the guide is
what keeps the valve pivoting about the bottom corner until
the side-wall collision. After the sidewall collision, the valve
begins pivoting about the top corner of the guide until the
valve is again balanced against both top and bottom corners
of the guide, as shown in Figure 6.
The valve re-orientation event at maximum lift is similar
to the part-lift events, except that the tip moment just prior to
the maximum lift event is negative, and hence the valve is
balanced in the guide as shown in the left-most image in
Figure 7. The reason the moment changes sign during this
event is purely because the sliding velocity reverses direction
as rocker arm rotation changes sign at maximum lift. The
sign switch of the friction force again causes the valve to
pivot on the bottom corner of the valve. After a collision with
the sidewall, the valve pivots about the top corner of the
guide.
Figure 7. Maximum Lift Reorientation Event. The
diagram indicates how, at a maximum lift reorientation
event, the valve stem initially pivots about the bottom
corner of the valve guide, just as in the part-lift events.
After collision with the sidewall, the valve pivots about
the top corner of the valve guide until coming to rest as
indicated in the rightmost image in the figure.
The valve re-orientation event that occurs just after a
valve lift event begins requires additional information to
analyze. Because a valve is pressed against the valve seat in
the cylinder head prior to the reorientation event, the valve
seat's alignment with the valve guide axis influences valve /
valve guide collisions. These collisions could be quite
different than part-lift or maximum lift type collisions. Once
the valve moves away from the guide, the valve tip moment
will cause the valve to align as indicated in left-most image
of Figure 6. Other than the final orientation of the valve after
valve lift begins, we will not analyze the zero-lift valve
reorientation event further.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018

Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013) 643

DETAILED KINEMATICS OF VALVE right corner, as indicated in Figure 8. Let be perpendicular

to the plane of the page, and parallel to the cylindrical axis of
REORIENTATION EVENTS: the rocker arm pad that drives the valve shown in the figure.
SIDEWALL COLLISION ENERGY Fυt is the magnitude of the force that drives the valve in the
At Chrysler, we have observed that when an engine with a direction, overcoming the spring force . Note that
ticking valve train is motored, it can be quieted by Fυt = Fspr +mυa, where a is the acceleration of the valve
introducing oil into the valve guide during valve motion. The parallel to , and mυ is the mass of the valve. As before, sign
oil is introduced by applying an oil soaked swab to the
bottom of the valve guide and allowing the oil to be drawn up is the frictional force acting on the valve tip.
into the valve guide via viscous drag. Upon introduction of From the scenario indicated in the diagram, it follows that the
the oil, the valve is quieted. The oil eventually leaks out of sliding moment about the pivot point is
the valve guide. After the oil dissipates, the previously noisy
valve becomes noisy again. We infer from this that the
sidewall collision is likely the reason for the noise; an oil film
in the valve guide buffers the collision contact, thereby (15)
reducing the noise.
It is reasonable to conclude therefore, that the energy of The moment due to the valve tip force being offset from
the sidewall collision will likely correlate with the loudness the valve stem axis is
of valve ticks. Therefore, in this section, a technique for
estimating the kinetic energy associated with the sidewall
collision during a valve reorientation event is presented. As
shown in Figures 6 and 7, during a reorientation event the
valve pivots about the bottom corner of the guide, then
collides with the guide side wall. This collision is inevitable
for valves driven by cylindrical rocker pads where the zero
lift contact point has a negative y-coordinate and the contact
point that passes through the x-axis is centered on the valve (16)
stem.

Figure 8. Force-moment calculation for part-lift

reorientation events. During a part-lift reorientation
event, the valve tip moment as it pivots about the bottom-
Figure 9. Sample valve tip force, Fυt. This plot shows an
right corner of the valve guide.
estimate of the force exerted by the rocker arm on the
valve tip when the engine is running at low speed. Cam
angle θ = 0 corresponds to the nose of the cam.
Calculating Moments about Pivot Points at
the Bottom of the Guide
The previous section showed that the part-lift and In the previous section, a maximum-lift reorientation
maximum-lift valve reorientation events begin with the valve event begins with the valve pivoting about the bottom-left
pivoting at the bottom corner of the guide. In the case of part- corner of the valve guide. A similar analysis for a maximum-
lift reorientation events and assuming the coordinate system lift reorientation event (where the pivot point is on the left
is as indicated in Figure 1, the initial pivot point is the bottom
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018
644 Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)
side of the diagram) shows that offset moment is TFυt =
(υ/2)mυa + d · Fυt.
To simplify computations, we neglect terms involving
mυa for purposes of producing plots that appear below. Our
interest is in valve noise produced at low engine speeds.
These terms are small relative to the magnitudes of other
terms contributing to the tip moment calculation at low
engine speeds. We shall approximate the magnitude of |TFυt|
as d · Fυt. To determine the tip loading as a function of η,
observe that there is a relationship between the lift l(θ), where
θ indicates cam rotation4 and contact point polar angle η:
(17)
Lemma 1 indicates r as a function of P, σ, and angle η −
α. Root finding software can be used to determine pairs of η
and θ that can be used to construct a spline interpolant for the
function η(θ). Then, a parametric plot of the total tip moment
can be produced. For each cam angle θ, a valve tip force can
be determined (see for example Figure 9). Then the total
moment can be plotted as in Figure 11, as a function η(θ). As
θ varies between opening and closing cam angles, a curve is
created that represents the valve tip moment
(18)
where d is defined in equation 11. This moment is calculated
about a pivot point on the bottom corner of the valve guide.
At each cam angle θ, the distance from the lower corners of
the valve guide are calculated from knowledge of lift at this
angle, l(θ). The computed torque reflects only the bottom-of-
guide pivot points, since it is this energy that contributes to
the valve collision with the valve guide side wall.
Figure 10. Calculating angular slack ΔΦ.
Kinetic Energy Calculations
4Cam angle θ = 0 corresponds to maximum lift, θ < 0 indicates valve opening lift values, and θ > 0 indicates valve closing lift values.
In order to calculate the energy that the valve tip moment
imparts to the valve during reorientation events, it will be
important to know how much room there is in the guide for
the valve to rotate about the bottom corner of the valve. We
identify the angle ΔΦ as the angular slack that exists because
the guide diameter is by design slightly larger than the valve
stem diameter. Figure 10 shows how this angle can be
calculated from the guide length Y, the valve stem diameter υ,
and the guide diameter Gd.
Next, using the calculated value of ΔΦ, we derive an
estimate of valve rotational kinetic energy the valve gathers
as it rotates about the bottom corner of the valve guide during
reorientation events. Because the valve reorientation events
happen in very short time frames, we may assume that J, the
rotational inertial about a pivot point and M, the valve tip
moment, are approximately constant during the event. The
total kinetic energy due to the loading of the valve is mainly
comprised of the rotational kinetic energy imparted to the
valve by the moment M. To determine the kinetic energy of a
reorientation event, first observe that the time Δt required to
rotate the valve from its initial alignment within the guide
until the valve collides with the sidewall after rotating
through an angle ΔΦ can be calculated as
(19)
The kinetic energy imparted to the valve will be ,
where is the angular velocity of the valve just before
impact with the sidewall. From , it follows that the
angular speed may be calculated by integrating from t =
0 to t = Δt:
(20)
This then implies that the kinetic energy is
(21)
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018
Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)
Figure 11. Sample moment calculation. The blue portion
of curve indicates the valve is opening. The red portion
of the curve shows points corresponding to valve closing.
CALCULATING THE “SMACK”
METRIC
The kinetic energy imparted to the valve as it pivots about
the bottom corner of the valve guide will define the value of
the “smack” metric. To calculate the smack energy, do the
following:
1. Calculate the angle .
2. Calculate angle α, the angle that measures the angular
offset (in radians) from the zero-lift position vector to the x-
axis.
3. Calculate T just after the sliding velocity sign change
at η = α and at maximum lift (when changes sign). This
requires calculation of D, the distance from the valve tip to
the bottom of the guide, the offset distance d from the center
of the valve to the contact point, the sign of the sliding
velocity υ(12), and Fυt, the force exerted by the rocker arm to
the valve tip. See equations (18) and (11). Calculating d using
equation (11) and Lemma 1 requires knowledge of σ, the
rocker pad radius, and P, the distance from the rocker pivot to
the rocker pad center of curvature.
4. Calculate |T·ΔΦ| for each side-wall collision event.
These values are the smack metric values for each of the
three collision events.
Though detailed correlation testing and validation has yet
to be carried out, we can report on qualitative evidence that
supports the validity of the proposed new valve train “smack”
metric. The smack metric at a maximum lift event was
calculated to be 60% higher on a noisy prototype engine than
on a quiet production engine. The smack metric calculation
for the quiet production engine assumed an identical friction
coefficient as was used for the noisy prototype engine
calculation, since the rocker arm / valve tip material and
surface finishes were similar. We observed that upon
reducing friction between rocker and valve in the prototype
engine, the valve train ran virtually silently. Our explanation
645
is that the reduction in friction reduced the smack metric
value (and hence the collision energy), thereby quieting the
valve train. Detailed measurements that can confirm the exact
numerical values of the smack metric for a given valve train
await additional experimental investigation and testing.
CONCLUSIONS
It is not just geometry, but rather the combination of
geometry and loading that controls the energy that creates a
valve tick. Design adjustments that reduce the “smack”
metric defined above, which is an estimate of the kinetic
energy of valve stem collision with the guide sidewall, will
reduce or eliminate valve tick noise during reorientation
events. Any such adjustments will reduce input energy to the
noise generating collisions between valve guide and valve
stem.
The kinetic energy that the valve takes up during a valve
reorientation event can be mitigated, and hence the potential
noise from a sidewall collision reduced, by adjusting the
geometry so that |ΔΦ| is minimized. One obvious way to
reduce |ΔΦ| is to reduce the clearance Gd − υ between valve
stem and guide. It is also possible to lengthen Y, however it is
best to do this by adding guide length to the cold side of the
valve. This because adding guide to the hot side of the valve
increases D, and hence increases the total moment T.
To reduce T, processing materials so that friction is
reduced between rocker pad and valve tip could greatly
reduce the total moment the valve is subjected to, since the
reduction in T reduces the smack metric value |T · ΔΦ|.
Of course, the level of permissible energy and hence the
target values for the smack metric will likely depend on the
engine architecture and surrounding vehicle structure
(because those things will influence whether noise produced
will be audible and/or objectionable). As experience with this
metric grows, threshold design guidance values can be
established and reported in the literature for various engine
architectures. Such information could greatly aid valve train
engineers achieve quieter valve trains in future engine
designs.
REFERENCES
1. Geist Bruce and Eovaldi David. Analysis and customization of rocker
arm joint sliding velocity. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power, 131, November 2009.
2. Turkish Michael C.. Valve Gear Design. Waverly Press, Inc., Baltimore,
Maryland, first edition edition, 1946.
3. Wang, Y., “Introduction to Engine Valvetrains,” Society of Automotive
Engineers, Inc., Warrendale, PA, ISBN 978-0-7680-1079-4, 2006, doi:
10.4271/R-339.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Bajaj Auto Ltd, Sunday, January 28, 2018

646 Geist et al / SAE Int. J. Engines / Volume 6, Issue 1(May 2013)

Table 1. Symbols Index.