MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253921977 · doi:10.4271/2010-01-1096

Optimizing Valve Rotational Speed Using Taguchi Techniques

2010· article· en· W2253921977 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Refalo, Stephen Bowyer, Mahlon Smith, M. Hijawi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaguchi methodsRotational speedComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As fuel economy regulations increase and customer preference shifts to smaller, higher power density engines it is more important to effectively cool certain areas of the cylinder head and valvetrain. In order to maximize valvetrain life and increase engine performance it is critical to maintain a near uniform valve seat temperature to enable proper sealing. As cylinder head bridges narrow, and the temperature increases, the water jacket may not be sufficient. An alternative method to ensuring equal temperature distribution across the valve is to promote low speed valve rotation. This will not only aid, cooling the valve seat, as well as cooling and cleaning the valves' seating surface. This paper describes the development and testing of a valve rotation study, utilizing the Taguchi approach in order to determine the most robust design. A test stand was utilized to examine the valve rotation in which the cam was driven directly using a DC motor. The testing was performed on a type II valvetrain, using a donor cylinder head. The Taguchi based project focused on three noise factors: cylinder head machining variability, oil pressure and engine speed, as well as various control factors including valve guide clearance, valve tip surface finish, keeper geometry, valve seal tension, spring shim amount, spring design, rocker arm tab clearance, rocker arm roller radius and rocker arm pad alignment. The testing was conducted using an L18 orthogonal array and a subsequent L9 to further optimize the system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207