How is the lining added to the cam chain tensioner blade

lot of good ideas so far but looking at the dimensional constraints inherent to the current architecture of the actual engine components am going to purse stronger cam chain tensioners, just a matter of custom making them

here are some answers to previous comments

Cannot use the rear leaf springs from my Chevy truck as the actual chassis is a Holden HJ Ute so springs are not 1950 Chevy anymore, they are 1974 Holden springs :cool: :p

I have been machining my own cam chain tensioner "wheels" now for a few years from Delrin as the standard ones got hammered flat, which backs up the theory that the tensioner blade is copping a serious hammering
Even with the Delrin wheels I still see some deformation but no where near as bad as the standard wheels
But I do like the idea of a curved blade instead of the point contact as supplied by a wheel so am going to have a go at machining a curved blade to mount on the standard tensioner and see how that works out

Valve springs, I use PAC Alloy dual valve springs and we machine our own top and bottom plates to suit, installed height is very close to standard but pressures are higher of course
A standard Laverda valve spring as supplied by Wolfgang and probably the exact same piece of kit as supplied by OCT, Andy Wagner etc has the following loads when new, when installed with 4C cams that have 9.8mm lift on Inlet and 9.1mm lift on Exhaust

Inlet closed 55 lbs, open 156 lbs
Exhaust closed 50 lbs, open 144 lbs
Allow for +/- 4-6 lbs on each figure as there are a few variables in play that affect those loads, actual free valve spring length which does vary slightly even when new, where did the valves come from and hence at what height have the Collet grooves been cut at, where is the valve seat in relation to the camshaft center line, etc
I would expect to see slightly lower values as the valves that I have custom made have their Collet grooves lowered slightly hence they increase the spring loads

I am currently running 7C cams in both engines, I do have custom made far higher lift cams in stock but need to order pistons to suit but right now am more than happy with the performance of the 7C cams
Lots of people run them down as being unsuitable but with the Exhaust and Inlet tract design that we have done to date and the amount of dyno runs we have done we have no flat spots in the power and torque curves from 3,000 to 9,000 rpm so see no reason to change them at the moment
7C cams have similar valve opening to a 4C Inlet cam, I have 9.72mm lift on Inlet and 9.62mm lift on Exhaust cam, which gives me the following loads on the PAC Alloy dual valve springs

Inlet closed 84 lbs, open 192 lbs
Exhaust closed 80 lbs, open 186 lbs

Even though these valve loads are higher than a standard engine set up with a single valve spring they are no where near what other race engines are running which can be well over 300 lbs closed and 700 lbs open for say V8 drag race motors or even a Hardly Dangerous engine
I know my mate Ollie runs way higher spring loads in the Harley race engines he builds but in saying that they are also generally Pushrod engines so operate under totally different parameters

Cam, I looked at doing something very similar to what you have drawn to retain the lower section of the cam chain blade but the difficulty I see is actually finding that "keeper slot" when the engine is assembled, cam chain blade is one of the last items to be installed and to try and find that "keeper slot" with an assembled engine is going to be character building
Though may be possible by manipulating the blade end from underneath the engine through the cam chain guide tunnel

Will keep thinking on it, have a few days as have some other issues with this race engine that need attention as well now

Must be mad to race these engines the way we do
 
Just a thought:

Img 1. What I meant with tensioner-tunnel is an extra guide/lip (image left of chain) added to the tensioner to calm down chain vibrations

Img 2. And when you have to much chain left due to shimming of the head, you could opt for an extra tensioner/guide (timing will be slightly affected) between cams

1650803997370.png
 
Not read all the posts, hurts my eyes....ouch...good responses all the same. Free advice, in electronics i would, after removing a failed item, do a fault analysis of the item, example, cut open a large "hockey puck" scr and inspect the wafer for an indication of was it di/dt failure or extreme over voltage damage or exceed Pd, using a microscope. Red if not already done so, the retrieved failed items be inspected by a respected metallurgist and lab, for failure analysis, much to be gained from failed items, very often the actual reason for failure is in plain sight. Sure you did similar in the day of failed drill gear, ignore my post if known already.
 
Cam, I looked at doing something very similar to what you have drawn to retain the lower section of the cam chain blade but the difficulty I see is actually finding that "keeper slot" when the engine is assembled, cam chain blade is one of the last items to be installed and to try and find that "keeper slot" with an assembled engine is going to be character building
Though may be possible by manipulating the blade end from underneath the engine through the cam chain guide tunnel

I was thinking along the lines of making up a special tool. Basically a piece of thin flat springy steel bar with a curve in the bottom that is shaped to hit the keeper slot every time. If you shape the keeper slot so the back wall of the slot is higher than the blade retaining lip at the front, it'll make it easier to find.

Insert the tool until it hits the slot in the retainer, slide the tensioner blade in and let the curved end of the tool guide the blade end straight into the slot, Bolt the top of the tensioner blade in place then pull the guide tool out. Job done, just like a shoe horn. Sounds like a simple idea but I dunno if there's room in the cam tunnel for a thin guide tool though, especially with the chain in place.

I'm aware that the blade normally goes in after the chain, but does it have to? Would it help if you install the tensioner blade before feeding the chain through? That'll give you more room to poke a guide tool down there, or wangle a screwdriver or something in from the bottom.

I've done a chain replacement without removing the tensioner blade, so I know it's possible. But I suppose a chain replacement is different to building an engine because you can use the old chain to pull the new one through.
 
Just a thought:



Img 2. And when you have to much chain left due to shimming of the head, you could opt for an extra tensioner/guide (timing will be slightly affected) between cams

View attachment 63308
In fact, a guide on the top run would not be silly. It's the only run without a guide to damp waves.
Most late model DOHC bikes have a guide on that run now - even though the cams are quite close together.
 
How does delrin compare to, say, phenolic resin, which is commonly used in chain tensioners? Might bond to the metal in a different way, altering the vibration characteristics.
 
How does delrin compare to, say, phenolic resin, which is commonly used in chain tensioners? Might bond to the metal in a different way, altering the vibration characteristics.
Delrin is good up to 120 deg C, I think this may be on its limit for a race bike.
Phenolic resins can go up to 278 deg C. and would be harder than Delrin.
 
I like Beaucars suggestion of a blade 'tunnel' so that the chain can be tensioned but 'slap' movement is controlled (reduced) by having the fwd section. Combine the idea with the right materials such as those being discussed here. The cam chain could be threaded up through it. Would work better if the bottom of it was also secured somehow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAG
I have been machining my own cam chain tensioner "wheels" now for a few years from Delrin as the standard ones got hammered flat, which backs up the theory that the tensioner blade is copping a serious hammering
Even with the Delrin wheels I still see some deformation but no where near as bad as the standard wheelBut I do like the idea of a curved blade instead of the point contact as supplied by a wheel so am going to have a go at machining a curved blade to mount on the standard tensioner and see how that works out

I like Beaucars suggestion of a blade 'tunnel' so that the chain can be tensioned but 'slap' movement is controlled (reduced) by having the fwd section. Combine the idea with the right materials such as those being discussed here. The cam chain could be threaded up through it. Would work better if the bottom of it was also secured somehow.
Additional tensioner blade between cams an interesting idea-but just to control deflection as any change in distance between cams would influence timing (as Beucars stated). Blade could be mounted on cam saddle bolts w/ an offset to center on chain. Seems like a thicker steel blade would last longer & absorb harmonic vibes more effectively as pics of blade failures show top shouldered mount fractured.
 
Hi Red and others which are interested,
our lab made an analysis of the tensoner blade material. It should be C 67 or 1.0603, if available C 70 1.6015 might be better.
But our quality guy had a comment regarding the rough cutting sides. The leaf spings we use are „arrondiert“ at the sides, translation is „round off“, it is a part of the roll process where they also roll the sides.
Maybe it is difficult to do with an existing blade but minimum it could be polished.

When I had a look to the blade I see it is just fixed on top and it ist supported in the middle and 13 cm are henging free downwads and can move free backwards may be mor than 1 cm I think any item which can limit the free movement would be a step forward.
Good luck for the next races.
Andre
 

Attachments

  • FE92C7AB-7E58-446E-A234-6BDD0A9262C6.jpeg
    FE92C7AB-7E58-446E-A234-6BDD0A9262C6.jpeg
    122 KB · Views: 30
  • 9A639160-5DA2-4BD4-B8FD-3FA075490015.jpeg
    9A639160-5DA2-4BD4-B8FD-3FA075490015.jpeg
    132.9 KB · Views: 30
  • 68CD2D4B-DF84-4215-91BA-694EEB20B097.jpeg
    68CD2D4B-DF84-4215-91BA-694EEB20B097.jpeg
    138.4 KB · Views: 30
Hi Andre,
Thank you very much for taking the time to do the analysis on the cam chain tensioner blade, that is very helpful
I'll try and find the steel specification that you recommend within Australia and look at making my own
They can be made longer as well so they go past the center point of the crankshaft sprocket which will help

Been too busy trying to catch up on customers work to do anything more than just research on this problem so far which is unfortunate as we are racing this weekend
I found some good used original factory stock tensioner blades in my stock so am using those in the race engines this weekend instead of the reproduction versions

I also swapped some emails with Piero asking if the factory had any issues back in 1976/77 when they raced the triples in the endurance races, he replied that they did not have too many issues but also pointed out that they limited their revs to 8,500 whereas we have our rev limiter set at 9,500
He made some interesting remarks about the strain the cam chain system sees under heavy engine braking, if I decide to keep racing next year I may have to start building slipper clutches especially if we go to the 180 rear tyres that Matt wants us to install
Is hard to keep your rider happy

Many thanks again for taking the time to do that for us, very much appreciated
Red
 
I would still recommend you replace the tensioner bolt with strain gage bolt so you can see under what conditions the chain starts to beat the tensioner to death.


As you are lucky to have John Wilson in AUS he can be of great help with reading the output of the device.
 
He made some interesting remarks about the strain the cam chain system sees under heavy engine braking, if I decide to keep racing next year I may have to start building slipper clutches

Did Piero explain how engine braking affects the cam chain?
According to my limited understanding of how an engine works, I can't see any possible connection, and I don't think a slipper clutch would would achieve anything as far as the camshaft drive is concerned.
If anything, the cam chain would be less loaded during engine braking than acceleration because the exhaust valves would be opening against lower cylinder pressure.
I wouldn't expect there would be sufficient flywheel effect from the camshafts to cause any loading on the "slack" side of the chain as the engine slows down.
 
The engine braking is affecting the cam chain due to the engine accelerating when you down shift. The engine is indeed slowing down when you close the throttle but once you down shift say from 5th to 4th gear and let out the clutch, the engine has to speed up much faster than it would under power. The rear wheel has a lot of flywheel energy to hit the engine pretty hard when you shift to a lower gear with the throttle closed.
 
Last edited:
Is that the same effect as rubbers have in Coosh drives, reducing sudden shock loads? When KTM first released their modern 4 stroke single dirtbikes they recommended minimal bitumen use as they didn't have coosh drives fitted and they were worried too much traction from bitumen would destroy gearboxes. Add another 100hp and slick tyres and see what loads get produced and what they brake in the process. I wonder how a slipper clutch would reduce these sudden shocks.
 
I'm still struggling with the concept of camchain stress during overrun (ie deceleration). It has to be related to the inertia of the cam and chain train - which is surely minimal. If the engine revs increase at the time of a downshift, isn't this generating the same forces from crank to cam as if the throttle were being used to accelerate the bike?
 
Back
Top