ESE's works engine tuner

[husaberg]

I was recently asked about servos for the Ignitec and if I thought a Radio Control servo could be used for the exhaust power valve.

Well I don't think so, or at least not easily or without a bit of work, and they are only 3 to 5V or so too.


Attachment 263117

I was able to use a RC servo to open/close the Vtec Valve by using two RC Servo testers, one set to open, the other to closed and a Relay that the Ignitec activated when it was time to open the Vtec.

It may be possible to cut into a RC servo and bypass its internal electronics and modify it to work like a normal power valve servo.

This link may show more: http://www.societyofrobots.com/actuators_servos.shtml

If anyone manages to modify a high torque RC servo to work as an ordinary power valve servo, it would be great to have the details posted here.

Are they any cheaper than say a RI servo Rob? I would have thought they (The R1 servo)were err..almost Taylor made for this sort of applications.
Wob wants me to buy one but as i already have an RZ one i am loathe to shell out for one. He warned me they after sitting arround wouldn't last though.
OK so i read a thread the other day were someone (On a Bucket) did the same and guess what just as Wob suggested the old RZ servo soon gave up the ghost.
I guess Wob may have learnt that one the hard way as well.
From what understand the R1 servo is a direct replacement for an RZ is that right? (Not that i am that happy about sullying Honda with Yam parts mind you)

[TZ350]

I had always been a little wary of running the RC servo for the Vtec Valve inside the plenum because of the explosive fuel vapor.

http://www.societyofrobots.com/actua...of_servo.shtml

But this article on water proofing a servo by filling it with oil would also work to make it explosion proof.

[TZ350]

Are they any cheaper than say a RI servo Rob? I would have thought they (The R1 srvo)were almost Taylor made for htis sort of applications. From what understand the R1 servo is a direct replacement for an RZ is that right?

Yes the person who asked was having reliability issues, I don't know if they had tried an R1 unit though. I was not promoting the RC servo as a solution, just replying to an interesting question. Me, for a power valve I would try Wobblys R1 suggestion and play with converting a RC servo only if I got bored.

[Bert]

I was recently asked about servos for the Ignitec and if I thought a Radio Control servo could be used for the exhaust power valve.

Well I don't think so, or at least not easily or without a bit of work, and they are only 3 to 5V or so too.

If anyone manages to modify a high torque RC servo to work as an ordinary power valve servo, it would be great to have the details posted here.

Yes the person who asked was having reliability issues, I don't know if they had tried an R1 unit though. I was not promoting the RC servo as a solution, just replying to an interesting question. Me, for a power valve I would try Wobblys R1 suggestion and play with converting a RC servo only if I got bored cutting my fingers off.

Interesting things these High torque RC servos.. many of them contain metal gears; which would be a great improvement over some Exhaust servos that I've pulled apart...
Thanks for posting up further interesting information.

[TZ350]

... front wheel load; affects handling ... horsepower can gain you tenths of seconds and handling will give you whole seconds?

Improving the handling by moving the engine forward to put more weight on the front wheel.



Its hard to see what can be done. There is already quite a distance between the front sprocket and swing arm pivot, and it doesnt look wise to increase it.

On the dyno under power this bike has a definit squat, is that good or bad? does it unload the front wheel in a corner? this bike does suffer from front end chatter when pushed hard.

Maybe shortining the frame rails to bring the front wheel back to the engine is a possibility and fitting a lighter sub frame and rear wheel like Bert suggested.

Yes, improving the handling is something we are very interested in.

[teriks]

I was recently asked about servos for the Ignitec and if I thought a Radio Control servo could be used for the exhaust power valve.

Well I don't think so, or at least not easily or without a bit of work, and they are only 3 to 5V or so too.

If you have a good DC-source, a BEC for ~20US$ could solve the voltage problem:
Example: http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXSWL3&P=ML

This is the CC BEC 10A Receiver Battery Eliminator by Castle Creations.

FEATURES: Eliminates the need for a receiver and servo battery pack Draws higher voltage from the motor batteries and drops it to a voltage level suitable for the receiver and servos

SPECS:
Length: 1.2" (30mm)
Width: .6" (15mm)
Height: .4" (10mm)
Weight: .4oz (11g)
Input voltage: 5V to 25.2V (2S to 6S LiPo)
Current output: 12 volts input = 7 amps* continuous, 10 amp peak; 24 volts input = 5 amps* continuous, 7 amp peak
*Ratings are determined with a 5mph airflow on the BEC
Selectable Output: 4.8 - 9.0V via the Castle Link (sold separately) Default voltage is 5.1V

It may be possible to cut into a RC servo and bypass its internal electronics and modify it to work like a normal power valve servo.

A decent RC servo is surprisingly fast and accurate, IMO it would be nice if you are able to provide a pulse train and let the servo electronics do it's stuff.
Could be a decent product for ignitech to develop, might be worth asking?
RC servo control info: http://www.mitchr.me/SS/batteriesReq...ory/index.html

[husaberg]

Improving the handling by moving the engine forward to put more weight on the front wheel.



Its hard to see what can be done. There is already quite a distance between the front sprocket and swing arm pivot, and it doesnt look wise to increase it.

On the dyno under power this bike has a definit squat, is that good or bad? does it unload the front wheel in a corner? this bike does suffer from front end chatter when pushed hard.

Maybe shortining the frame rails to bring the front wheel back to the engine is a possibility and fitting a lighter sub frame and rear wheel like Bert suggested.

Yes, improving the handling is something we are very interested in.

Depends on how far you wish to go really.
The steering head doesn't look that steep with your current set up either the steering head can be brought back fairly easily as well. Assuming the steering head bearings can be made smaller OD so you can use an eccentric cup or cups without major changes.
The weight bias can be improves with the engine tilted forward.
but the problem you have is it was designed for a 4 stroke 4 with a engine (four stroke leaning forward at 45 degrees or so.(Oh it is wide too as well with kinks in the spars too)
If it was me i would bite the bullet make a jig with the specs you want (say NX4 based) and make the frame fit that.
oh yeah put a fairing on the front that will help too.

Or just weld another steering head into the frame you have now wow there is ample room by the look of it.

But by the time you did all this it would have been far far easier to make a spine frame to the required dimensions.
You may have a drive shaft the right size laying about somewhere and a suitable donor frame for the steering head.
You know you want to TZ.

[richban]

Improving the handling by moving the engine forward to put more weight on the front wheel.



Its hard to see what can be done. There is already quite a distance between the front sprocket and swing arm pivot, and it doesnt look wise to increase it.

On the dyno under power this bike has a definit squat, is that good or bad? does it unload the front wheel in a corner? this bike does suffer from front end chatter when pushed hard.

Maybe shortining the frame rails to bring the front wheel back to the engine is a possibility and fitting a lighter sub frame and rear wheel like Bert suggested.

Yes, improving the handling is something we are very interested in.

From what the scales say the bike sits 50/50 without a rider. Personally I think that is fine. Don't move the engine. All your problems start when you put the jockey in position. So all you need to do is change the riding position to something that works. Sub frame for sure coz that will give you a weight saving no matter what. lifting the seat hight so the rider can get a little more on top of that tank. As I mentioned before. I had front end chatter at the GP. I was just being lazy in a bad body position. I changed that and the bike was clued. When we were looking at my bike on the scales I could alter the front end load with body position by 4ish kg. Question is do you go for a setup that locks the rider in to the correct setup or one that allows more movement.

[richban]

Depends on how far you wish to go really.
The steering head doesn't look that steep with your current set up either the steering head cant be brought back fairly easily as well assuming the steering head bearings can be made smaller OD so you can use an eccentric cup or cups without major changes.
The weight bias can be improves with the engine tilted forward.
but the problem you have is it was designed for a 4 stroke 4 with a engine (four stroke leaning forward at 45 fdegrees or so.
If it was me i would bite the bullet make a jig with the specs you want (say NX4 based) and make the frame fit that.
oh yeah put a fairing on the front that will help too.

Or just weld another steering head into the frame you have now wow there is ample room by the look of it.

But by the time you did all this it would have been far far easier to make a spine frame to the required dimensions you know you want to TZ.
You must have a drive shaft the right size laying about somewhere and a suitable donor frame for the steering head.

Yeah true that. The engine it used to have must have weighed in around 50kg. I am sure you can make some major improvements easy.

[wobbly]

I have had at least 5 of the old RZ servos die on me - they are just too old now.
The R1 EXUP servo is cheap ( I have a box full of them off Ebay ) and all but a direct replacement - bar the female plug is part of the body.
Get the male plug with some lead on it or I have plenty of plugs here.

Squat is complete shite on a racebike,drop the rear of the motor as far as you can, the chain will rub on the swingarm in the static positiion.
Lowering the sprocket creates anti squat, so as you wind in the power, the rear rises and loads up the front, stopping chatter.
Worst place for this is the sweeper onto the straight at Hampton.

[richban]

Worst place for this is the sweeper onto the straight at Hampton.

Or Pothole at Ruapuna.

[husaberg]

Yeah true that. The engine it used to have must have weighed in around 50kg. I am sure you can make some major improvements easy.

There was a reason i choose a MC16 frame for a start off it had pretty straight rails and i believe it was the narrowest Honda NSR frame.
As it was made for a V-twin it was also a great deal narrower than a 4 cylinder one.
These below are the dimensions for a NSR250 one the MC16 should be similar it might be a better starting point failing that i guess the swingarm, forks etc might slot in a TZR frame.
But like i said it would be easier i reckon to make your own. You have the technology and the facilities. You have access to a NX4 frame as well too.

[F5 Dave]

Bump? .

ok, a question for the panel;
Small end bearing axial (to piston) clearance; How much is too much? Obviously if the bearing can travel far enough so the rollers touch the edge of the rod they will grab on the sharp end & lock immediately causing mondo destruction. I found this out the hard way running RD50 pistons in my MB50 20 years ago, they needed thrust washers in that application.


The MB pistons (in the 50 as the 100, which is what I'm now talking about, the 100) are bevelled at the piston pin bosses. They leave a scant .4mm clearance at the top & ~4mm at the bottom, which is obviously nice for lubrication. Yamaha KT pistons are straight edged at the bosses.

The OEM stuff I have measured for small pistons seems to run 1mm clearance, so .5 per side. 250cc cylinders run up to almost 2mm it seems.

So I'm left with the suitability question over 17mm wide MB SE bearing in a Yam piston with 19.2mm between the bosses, so 2.2mm clearance. With a wider rod it should not make it out of the small end.

I'm not overly happy with the 2.5mm rollers (making for a 14x19 bearing) that only has 11 rollers, but they seem to go ok in std bikes. Most of the 18x14 brgs seem to run 12 rollers.

[husaberg]

Bump? .

ok, a question for the panel;
Small end bearing axial (to piston) clearance; How much is too much? Obviously if the bearing can travel far enough so the rollers touch the edge of the rod they will grab on the sharp end & lock immediately causing mondo destruction. I found this out the hard way running RD50 pistons in my MB50 20 years ago, they needed thrust washers in that application.


The MB pistons (in the 50 as the 100, which is what I'm now talking about, the 100) are bevelled at the piston pin bosses. They leave a scant .4mm clearance at the top & ~4mm at the bottom, which is obviously nice for lubrication. Yamaha KT pistons are straight edged at the bosses.
The OEM stuff I have measured for small pistons seems to run 1mm clearance, so .5 per side. 250cc cylinders run up to almost 2mm it seems.
So I'm left with the suitability question over 17mm wide MB SE bearing in a Yam piston with 19.2mm between the bosses, so 2.2mm clearance. With a wider rod it should not make it out of the small end.

I'm not overly happy with the 2.5mm rollers (making for a 14x19 bearing) that only has 11 rollers, but they seem to go ok in std bikes. Most of the 18x14 brgs seem to run 12 rollers.

Maybe you should have offered a Chocolate fish?
As for the width stuff not sure ....
but I do share your concerns regarding 19x14mm small ends and how often do we agree on anything.(other than to disagree)
Samarin i think had same other widths (i think). I personally would rather go 18x14mm and then some beautiful billet silver plated ones are available in these sizes and are freely available.

I think your case is a rare example when Honda parts should not be used in your Honda powered Honda framed er...Non Honda.

Added a frame pic for TZ
I think this frame is an 1994 Aprilia 125 as well BTW.
Its from the Aussie GP at Eastern Creek.

[2T Institute]

Maybe you should have offered a Chocolate fish?
As for the width stuff not sure ....
but I do share your concerns regarding 19x14mm small ends and how often do we agree on anything.(other than to disagree)
Samarin i think had same other widths (i think). I personally would rather go 18x14mm and then some beautiful billet silver plated ones are available in these sizes and are freely available.

I think your case is a rare example when Honda parts should not be used in your Honda powered Honda framed er...Non Honda.

Added a frame pic for TZ
I think this frame is an 1994 Aprilia 125 as well BTW.
Its from the Aussie GP at Eastern Creek.

That's a TZ125 4JT frame not an Aprilia. Have used the 14 X19 small end in a kart motor that lived at 14,000 only one to fail was when we were forced to run a bearing for the extra meeting when the supplier was out of stock. With the width of the bearing according to my crank bloke( a clever Kiwi as well ) there was a certain year TZ that switched to a wider bearing, with the rollers poking out the sides of the rod, that solved lots of small end drama's on the previous model.