1. Field of the Invention
The present invention pertains to electromagnetic valve actuator systems. More particularly, the invention pertains to an electromagnetic valve actuator system that opens and closes the poppet valves of an internal combustion engine.
2. Description of Related Art
Conventionally, valve trains of internal combustion engines include poppet valves that are spring loaded toward a valve-closed position. The poppet valves are biased open either by an overhead camshaft mechanism or by a cam and push rod mechanism. In either case, the camshaft is connected to and rotates in synchronization with an engine crankshaft to open and close each valve at predetermined intervals as defined by the position of lobes on the camshaft. Therefore, the sequence and lift distance of each valve is fixed by the position and size of the lobes on the camshaft, and the frequency of the operation of each valve is proportional to engine crankshaft speed.
Such direct-drive arrangements fix valve train operation and thereby limits engine performance because ideal valve timing varies, and is not fixed, over the full range of engine speed. Therefore, it would be desirable to incorporate an indirect drive arrangement in which the valve train is not fixed, but is independently variable with respect to each valve. Such factors as lift distance, lift speed, and seating velocity could be varied independently for each valve. These factors can be varied to improve breathing of the engine to increase performance, fuel economy, or to reduce emissions. The variable cam timing (VCT) devices of the prior art allow for variable phasing of the valve train with respect to engine crankshaft speed, but do not allow for independent variability of the valves.
Because of the above-described limitation of VCT devices, many inventors have abandoned the direct drive and VCT architectures in favor of electromagnetic valve actuator systems. Such systems have the potential to increase overall engine efficiency by reducing frictional losses associated with the conventional valve train, and by reducing heavy components such as the camshaft, chain, sprockets, and VCT devices. Such systems are also capable of closing certain valves to permit the engine to operate as a “smaller”, more efficient, engine under high speed/low torque conditions. Unfortunately, however, these electromagnetic valve trains have not gained widespread acceptance in the marketplace, primarily due to a substantial increase in part count, poor valve seating reliability, and increased noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH) during operation.
These actuator systems use flat disk-like armatures that are positively secured to the valve and are axially trapped between ring-like tractive electromagnets. The electromagnets have poles at one end that attract the armature to either an open or closed position against the respective poles of the electromagnets. Unfortunately, as the valve heats up under normal operating conditions, the valve expands in length and does not have a chance to seat before the armature stops against the respective pole. Additionally, increased NVH (noise, vibration, and hardness) results from the valve and armature colliding against their respective mating surfaces. This results because the force on the armature increases cubically as the distance between the armature and the pole decreases. Therefore, the armature is accelerating as it approaches the pole, and the force on the armature is at a maximum just as the armature makes contact with the pole.
A review of the prior art yields scores of electromagnetically actuator valve devices directed at remedying valve seating problems and NVH during operation. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,455,543 (Pischinger et al.) and U.S. Pat. No. 4,749,167 (Gottschall) use spring systems attached to electromagnet armatures to decelerate a valve to the full open or closed position. U.S. Pat. No. 4,515,343 (Pischinger et al.) uses a bellows device mounted coaxially within an electromagnetic actuator to adjust the distance between the valve seat and the electromagnet pole so that it corresponds to the distance between the valve head and the electromagnet armature, so that a desired amount of dampening is consistently achieved. U.S. Pat. No. 5,878,704 (Schebrtz et al.) uses a sound muffling layer sandwiched between the electromagnets of the electromagnetic actuator to absorb vibration from the armature slapping against the poles of the electromagnets. U.S. Pat. No. 5,592,905 (Bam) replaces heavy iron armatures with a lightweight conductive armature that is finely controlled by varying current supplied to the armature. U.S. Pat. No. 5,647,311 (Liang et al.) and U.S. Pat. No. 6,003,481 (Pischinger et al.) each use at least one auxiliary electromagnet and armature to provide additional control of the closing force of the valve. Finally, U.S. Pat. No. 5,636,601 (Moriya et al.), U.S. Pat. No. 5,671,705 (Natsumoto et al.), and U.S. Pat. No. 6,016,778 (Koch) use control circuits to vary the current supplied to the electromagnets in accordance with varying operational temperatures to gain a more controlled seating of the valve.
All of the above-listed references have significant disadvantages that render their use unlikely in the marketplace. First, some are limited to a single valve lift distance, and thus do not fully take advantage of potential engine efficiencies and operate on a fixed disk-like armature that may seat against the electromagnet pole before the valve head seats with the valve seat. Others involve expensive additional components such as bellows, current carrying armatures, muffling devices, and additional electromagnets and armatures. Finally, others incorporate complex control circuits to bandage the inherent hardware problems of the prior art. Such control schemes face the difficult task in reducing current to the electromagnet fast enough to slow the accelerating armature.
An electromagnetic valve actuator system for controlling the operation of a valve in an internal combustion engine comprising a valve having a valve stem with a valve head at one end. The valve is reciprocable along the longitudinal central axis of the valve stem to alternatingly move the valve head between a first position and a second position. A first coil is positioned on a first laminated core having a gap and a thickness. A second coil is positioned on a second laminated core having a gap and a thickness. The gaps of the first and second cores are aligned. An armature on the valve stem passes through the gaps of the first and second laminated cores, such that when the armature is centered in either of the gaps at least a portion of the armature extends slightly passed the thickness of the other laminated core.
Prior art
Prior art
The closed control loop for the position sensor, preferably piezoelectric position sensor is shown in
As shown in
In the open position, shown in
Accordingly, it is to be understood that the embodiments of the invention herein described are merely illustrative of the application of the principles of the invention. Reference herein to details of the illustrated embodiments is not intended to limit the scope of the claims, which themselves recite those features regarded as essential to the invention.
This application claims an invention, which was disclosed in Provisional Application No. 60/528,465, filed Dec. 10, 2003, entitled “ELECTROMAGNETIC ACTUATOR HAVING INHERENTLY DECELERATING ACTUATION BETWEEN LIMITS”. The benefit under 35 USC §119(e) of the United States provisional application is hereby claimed, and the aforementioned application is hereby incorporated herein by reference
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3938483 | Firey | Feb 1976 | A |
4312494 | Aoyama | Jan 1982 | A |
4320371 | Coyle et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
4455543 | Pischinger et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4515343 | Pischinger et al. | May 1985 | A |
4686501 | Palmier et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4749167 | Gottschall | Jun 1988 | A |
5124598 | Kawamura | Jun 1992 | A |
5592905 | Born | Jan 1997 | A |
5636601 | Moriya et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5638781 | Sturman | Jun 1997 | A |
5647311 | Liang et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5671705 | Matsumoto et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5782211 | Kamimaru | Jul 1998 | A |
5782454 | Bulgatz et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5878704 | Schebitz et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5904226 | Sakaguchi et al. | May 1999 | A |
6003481 | Pischinger et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6016778 | Koch | Jan 2000 | A |
6024059 | Kamimaru et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6039014 | Hoppie | Mar 2000 | A |
6198370 | Schmitz | Mar 2001 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3641108 | Jun 1988 | DE |
19712064 | Oct 1998 | DE |
19714409 | Oct 1998 | DE |
1215370 | Jun 2002 | EP |
2808375 | Nov 2001 | FR |
WO 02056321 | Jul 2002 | WO |
WO 2004046511 | Jun 2004 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050126521 A1 | Jun 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60528465 | Dec 2003 | US |