3D Printers are Fun! Gen 3 Hemi Roller Rockers

Here's some pics of my latest project for my Gen 3 Hemi. I designed up some Roller Rockers. Designed them up in Solid works and a friend at work has a 3D printer. Unbelievably Cool to be able to print a working mock up prototype in 1 1/2 hrs. These are version 2. I have one more dimensional change to the intake rocker to try and next step will be FEA analysis to refine weak points, eliminate unnecessary material weight and then off to manufacture a full set of working prototypes. Material will be steel.

What advantages/improvements did you design into them?

Where's the "like" button? Very cool!

Much improved geometry for larger lift cams. Changed the angle relationship between the valve typ contact to the pushrod cup by 12 degrees to get the pivot centerline to the valve and pivot centerline to pushrod to 90 degrees at mid lift.

Schwing!

Mid lift of what lift?

Google you tube Joseph de Simone 3 -d printers are now antiques

Don't forget an adjuster! What ratio are you planning?

Way too cool.

That is awesome! What's it cost to print something like that? What kind of tolerances can they produce?

Was that a Bucky Ball he made onstage?
Very cool stuff!

Great work on the design!

Very cool Steff. adjusters?

Nice work! Since they will be made of steel, are you going to press in bronze bushings?

A great concept but these guys are still a long way from having their product on the market.

3D printers will still be around for a while yet.

That is so cool.
Any design changes on your belt drive or updates?

Unless you want to run Jesel's Keyway or Dogbone Lifters, or until someone comes out with a less expensive aftermarket lifter for the Gen 3's, stock lifter travel is pretty much maxed out with .400 /.420 max lobe lift. These rockers are set up with a 1.65 rocker ratio. My solid lifter cam has a .410 lobe. .410 x 1.65 = .676. Then take away lash.... .676 - .014 (int)= .662. Mid valve lift = .331"

Friend is doing them. I gave him few bucks. Printing Tolerance is +/-.005"

No adjuster. Setting lash with Lash Caps like NASCAR has evolved to.

Yes

The Belt Drive has shown to work flawlessly!! I want to make a couple small changes to be a little more user friendly.

Great that you're making stuff for the GIII.

I have one nagging question, though...Isn't the best valve action obtained from having the rocker/pushrod angle to be 90 degrees at full lift? IIRC that gets the valve off the seat faster, so the valve is open longer. Or is this an area where best practice has changed? I mean, you are in the heart of NASCAR country and they do obscene testing.....

R.

I would have liked to see a 1.7-1.75 ratio rocker. Still nice work as always Steff

I may be able to do a 1.7 ratio for the prototypes on my heads. Need to check spring installed heights.

Oh man when?! Was on a search for Arrington rollers but another option would be great. Will they clear the big retainer from the dual valve springs? The T&D was an option till I found out the wouldn't clear. Would be nice to be able to do .700 lift at the valve without spending $10k on a Jesel.

So when you putting all this cool eye candy into production and selling it to us?

Any updates on the rockers

90 degrees at full lift is slower from closed, and has smaller area under the curve.

Just a guess: the 12 degree correction isn't because the OEM parts are bad - the 90 degree/50% lift is the best plane geometric model, but not necessarily the best rocker arm. Pallet rocker don't use it to get some anti-scrub effect.

90 degrees at zero lift gives you fastest off the seat valve action and least lift at max lift.

90 degrees at open gives you most total lift and softest touchdown on the seat but it is hard to keep the valve from losing contact with the rocker tip.

90 degrees at mid lift (or somewhere close depending on who you talk to) gives you the best of everything.

Anywhere except 90 degrees rocker/valve relation will give less than max ratio. Don't forget that if you have a roler tip than the (theoretical) tip of the valve is actually going to be the center of the roller.

My point: the largest possible area (average lift X degrees open) as a math model isn't always what the engine wants, or what provides the best service life for the parts.
500 years ago, Warren Johnson (yes, the same guy) adjusted the rockers on his Olds for higher lift early in the event to get closer to the piston's maximum velocity = highest vacuum.
Note: no, the ICL can't be at the stroke's midpoint without very bad results.
Vizard has been doing some interesting work comparing BBC rockers that (are designed to and/or adjusted to) produce high lift very quickly.

Prototypes are being machined.

What's the max lift you are looking to handle
Assuming steel as the material but if they work out will you consider aluminum for lighter duty engines
How do you test them assuming on an engine of course but are there other test or is there such a thing as a dyno for rocker gear
Thanks for the info steve

I ended up with a 1.72 ratio on the intake rockers and 1.68 on the exhaust. I have a .410" lobe. With lash, looking at about .691" lift on the intake and about .670" on exhaust. Material is steel. No plans to experiment with aluminum. I designed them to clear a 1.300" dia. LS dbl. valve spring. Testing is putting them on my own motor and let er' rip!! What ever happens, happens....good or bad. It's the only way you learn things.

Steff that is just awesome.

so are you thinking the springs were your problems? You really cant run a dual valve spring on the newer heads because of the boss is holding the guide on top instead of in the port like the 6.1 heads. But you can fit much bigger behives on the newer heads

It sounds like STEFF is using the companion software to Solid Works called Simulation I am assuming. I have used Simulation for many engineering projects in the past. It is a very powerful and accurate program, that is about the best testing you will get from a design side of things. If I was a betting man, I would say if STEFF has all the bases covered, which it looks like that is the case, there will be no surprises with the prototypes when they are tested in real life application.

-Kenny

Good work there. Do you happen to know the offset of the intake rockers and the angle between the intake valve and pushrod?






While I don't agree that testing is the only way to learn things it is a necessary part of the design process, and fun too!

KOOL...

His process is already commercially available here.

http://formlabs.com/

What he has done is a better job of refining the laser/resin printing. Luckily that technology has lost its patent (expired do to age of patent) this past February so it has become open technology.

A lot of exciting things can happen with 3d printing technology that most people don't think about. I don't have time to go into all the details but it has the potential to do more than just make prototype parts. I teach this stuff and your talking Environmental impact, lifestyle changes, innovative design princples. Imagine a world where you create mechanical designs or art that can be sold or shared like music on an Ipod.

I will tell you what will determine the presiding 3D manufacturing technology and it won't be what is best. In a few years Amazon/Walmart/Target/ etc will find a technology that will allow them to lease you a 3D printer the likes of which you could never afford. They will do it for cheap/free so they can sell you stuff online and no shipping cost for them except the supplies they may have to send you once a month. Once they latch on to something, better technology will be ignored in the face of profit margins. Think about Betamax vs VHS, the better lost and the higher profit margin product won.

I am glad to see that my rocker shaft collar design is still in use.

any testing yet

No. Still waiting on machine shop.

how are the rockers coming along

not trying to hijack, but could a drag-pak style intake manifold be 3D printed? The factory does other Gen III in "plastic".

if you can get a 3-d file with all the ports and everything its possible

Yes, but it would be costly. It would be done on a fused deposition modelling style 3D printer. Most prototyping done by the car makers use the SLA (polymer resin) style machines as they are much cheaper for a model of this size.

Srill waiting on machinist.

This is cool as hell! I am currently running a set of Arrington 1.7 roller rockers on my
Motor. I looked long and hard at the t&d rockers, but the extra weight and the pretty serious clearance Made me shy away from them so that only left the arringtons. I broke 2 rockers so had to buy another complete set of them so I would have spares. It would be really nice to have options like this. Keep up the good work bud, anxious to see how they do

I think we shell out 5-10k ea for rapid prototype plastic manifolds...

Thought I would give you guys an update. The rocker project is dead. After waiting 8 months for nothing, the vendor I had making the rockers will be sending me my money back......hopefully.

Sorry to hear that Steff. Any hope for trying another vendor?

Thats a shame STEFF, sorry to hear that. It always amazes me how certain business throw money away. They shouldn't have even taken the order if they're that backlogged.

No. I'm burnt out over the whole thing. Going back to stock rockers and juice lifters.

If I can help out Steff, let me know. I'm sure I can make up something for you.

Steff, I'm finally drawing up the valvetrain layout and would like to ask a question. Upon drawing everything, it looks like the Intake pushrod centerline is sitting 5 degrees forward of the lifter centerline where as the exhaust pushrod centerline is nearly straight inline with the lifter centerline. Is this correct?