It has been a loooooong time since I did this. If you have an automotive scope, set it up like watching alternator output but on the crank sensor. Use the spark plug pickup cable on the cam sensors to trigger one at a time. On the spark plug pickup cable hook it up directly to the cam sensor but with a 1 meg potentiometer in series. Slowly turn it up from 1 meg until it starts to trigger. You should be able to see when the cam sensors happen in relation to the crank sensors. Quick and easy but one cam sensor at a time.
Or get an electronics scope with 5 or more traces.
rpmEngines don't go that fast.... Most never go beyond 6000RPM ... That works out at 200Hz for a cam..
A single pic could read all the data and send it to a PC running excel running 5 graphs... For speeds sake you could use an off the shelf PC datalogger...
A regular programmable controller definitely won't be fast enough to measure these phase differences. You can still use a small PLC as the backbone of the system, but use some external electronics to do the fast phase/timing measurements and then then transfer them to the PLC. This still allows you all the conveniences of the PLC.
Are you going to try and read both banks at the same time?? The two outputs on the left bank "Should" read exactly the same as the right two... Or is this your goal, to syncronise all four cams? If you need to sync the cams then an XOR gate coupled with a pulse lengthener (555 one shot ) so you only get an output when they are not perfectly aligned...
Why not add an extra encoder on the crankshaft with a large number of pulses per rev. For example 3600. this would give 0.1 degree resolution. Have a software counter that is zeroed by the TDC sensor on the crankshaft. Then capture the value of the counter when each camshaft sensor is triggered. An alterative to the extra encoder would be a phase locked oscillator running at 3600 times the crankshaft speed. For this method to work the crankshaft speed would need to be very stable. Yet another possibility would be to drive the crankshaft with a large stepper motor (Probably this would have to be via a reduction drive.) and count step pulses.
Les
I am assuming this unit is to verify the valve timing after replacing the timing chains/belts. As from the picture you are testing double overhead cam V (6, 8, 12) engines I would imagine the unit to have 4 digital displays (One for each camshaft.) The displays would indicate the number of degrees (and tenths) that the camshaft sensors triggered after the sensor on the crankshaft. The person using the unit would just have to check that the readings were correct for that model of engine.
Les.
So what happened to the old fashioned and well-proven method of simply making sure all the factory alignment points match the timing marks they are supposed to?
To me, this sounds like an overly complicated way of doing something that should be a normal and critical but well-understood engine building process.
I'm just asking being that to make precision readings of crank to cam phasing every pickup sensor and its related indexing point on the crankshaft and camshafts will need to be precisely located to do any good and to precisely locate the in reference to the actual crankshaft throws and camshaft lobes requires mechanically indexing them first to make sure they are located properly.
Unfortunately I am as skilled in applied mechanics as I am in applied electronics and I can assure you that all the precision sensing electronics in the world does no good without first having a precise mechanical reference to work from on each and every application and situation.
As far as I have ever seen it all mechanical manufacturing processes have a +- tolerance as do all other items that get attached to them which means that for electronic sensors to work precisely with any mechanical system they have to first be mechanically dialed into one master reference point before their software or other such control/sensing devices have any relevant accuracy in their signal values on any other component.
I agree-
such +/- targets are what is needed to properly align a gauge such as this..
however, the rebuilder doesn't have access to these datapoints.. as this was my first query concerning this project. as im told, neither does the manufacturer, or which theyre willing to supply. this was a bit of a ruse to me,, however- this project dictates that I must work with what I have. so I derived relationships from a supplied (pic) control group example to base preliminary setpoints with... concluding that if I needed wider, or changed margins of acceptability, they should be accommodated by the tester design subsequent to the factors listed above.
The crankshaft position sensor has to be mechanically set to match the TDC of a specific piston before it has any value as an electronic reference just as the camshaft sensors need to first be calibrated to a specific cam lobe or other defined mechanical reference point that is in time with the specific piston being at true TDC or they are just as useless.
Hence the reason of the old fashioned use of dial indicators on pistons to find the true TDC Vs what a crankshaft tick mark or master crankshaft gear tooth on a damper pully says is TDC and then mechanically setting that correctly so that the same can be done next for a cam reference point Vs its timing gear indexing/key/whatever marks say.
I disagree-
piston relationship is arbitrary to this application-
cam(s) to crank timing events are whats relative... although youre assertion is typical in the automotive field in so far as establishing cam / crank events.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?