Digitizing Cylinder Heads Help

[Jim D'Amore]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

Jesse,

Most of the OEM's and big aerospace companies either use the Renishaw Cyclone digitizer or the Nikon Laser scanner. You can basically reverse engineer anything with those scanners.

Well I guess NHRA is a big company now, they purchased a $60,000 scanner to use on showdown cars and stock eliminator cars. I received a phone call from Ford Performance letting me know that NHRA scanned cylinder heads for the Ford showdown cars. For six weeks all Ford show down cars were illegal. They just reversed that rule and said show down cars will have designated cylinder heads starting 2020. So with show down cars out of the way my guess would be they are going to focus on Stock Eliminator cars at Indy. It is no longer just runner volume, cylinder heads have to match all OEM and Aftermarket (ie Edelbrock) After 50+ years there is a new sheriff in town.


Jim D'Amore

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Jim D'Amore

Well I guess NHRA is a big company now, they purchased a $60,000 scanner to use on showdown cars and stock eliminator cars. I received a phone call from Ford Performance letting me know that NHRA scanned cylinder heads for the Ford showdown cars. For six weeks all Ford show down cars were illegal. They just reversed that rule and said show down cars will have designated cylinder heads starting 2020. So with show down cars out of the way my guess would be they are going to focus on Stock Eliminator cars at Indy. It is no longer just runner volume, cylinder heads have to match all OEM and Aftermarket (ie Edelbrock) After 50+ years there is a new sheriff in town.


Jim D'Amore

I know. Very Very old thread. Does anyone know what happened to this?


Stan


PS - Took awhile for the memory to work lol There was another thread somewhat like this a few years later which I had made a post in. But that had no real answer either.

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Wasn't there a rumor a few years ago that NHRA bought faro arm to check heads?

Stan

[Dan Bennett]

This brings back memories of too much too soon. In 1996 through conversations I had with Jere Stahl, the pro stock team I was working with decided to go this route.

The only person we could find that was even slightly interested was a wheel maker (of all people) who had just bought a 5 axis and was willing to try but not sure if it could be done. "I need to make chips 24/7" was what was his motivation.

The plan was to digitize the best port(s) on the best handground heads we had and use that as the program for all ports on a new head. The plan failed because the inhouse engine builder was very protective of his position and status and threw wrenches into the plan anytime he could.

And looking back along with knowing what we now know, that plan was probably flawed. I have the impression that even with the most precise standarization that could be done, different cylinders are going to want different things.

So many things have changed for the better. I can't tell you how many times both the head builder and the manifold constructor would say variations of "I wasn't in the mood" or "I just haven't been feeling it" when contacted about long delays in delivery of what they'd already been paid for.

[SSDiv6]

The current digitizing equipment available nowadays would blow your mind!

I purchased for use by my Inspectors, a laser-based CMM made by Keyence, that will measure parts in seconds based on a reference CAD file; no calipers or other measuring devices are required.

We also have a Keyence hand-held, laser-based scanner that will measure parts and create a CAD file.

[Alan Roehrich]

When NHRA decided to do that, they, a tech inspector, and a couple of engine builders got sued.


Some people vehemently defend their cheating, and NHRA doesn't want the hassle of all of it.

[BRETV]

Maybe the new IHRA could implement these techniques during teardown and enforce the rules like they should be. Then winning an Ironman would mean more than winning a Wally. Just an idea.




Bret Velde
2003 I/SA

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by BRETV

Maybe the new IHRA could implement these techniques during teardown and enforce the rules like they should be. Then winning an Ironman would mean more than winning a Wally. Just an idea.




Bret Velde
2003 I/SA

Bret

Does anyone have a WAG of how many / what % of the cars have illegal heads. If this number is high enough I don't see the IHRA doing this. Most people will not build another engine to run IHRA. I don't see the IHRA making a rule which would limit car counts.


Stan

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by BRETV

Maybe the new IHRA could implement these techniques during teardown and enforce the rules like they should be. Then winning an Ironman would mean more than winning a Wally. Just an idea.




Bret Velde
2003 I/SA

Unfortunately, like it or not, for the vast majority of Stock, Super Stock, and Comp racers, and probably the .90 Super racers, the NHRA Wally is the Holy Grail, it has been for decades, and it is not likely to change.


I think the new IHRA, as much as we want them to succeed, is going to struggle, and I seriously doubt they're going to have the money or personnel to police class racing. Let's be honest here, you're not likely to find many like Dave Ley, Wesley Roberson, and Travis Miller.



I wish IHRA and my friend Alan Rheinhart the most success possible.

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by BRETV

Maybe the new IHRA could implement these techniques during teardown and enforce the rules like they should be.

This looks good at first glance, but would be pretty much impossible in practice.

Even if the sanctioning body did aquire virgin examples of every single head in the guide they would run into issues. There are enough variations from casting to casting that a "tolerance" would have to be allowed. If not, lots of untouched heads would fail when compared to the sample. With that allowance, the scan is useless and we are in a similar (but worse) situation than what we have now.

[SBillinson]

Originally Posted by SSDiv6

The current digitizing equipment available nowadays would blow your mind!

I purchased for use by my Inspectors, a laser-based CMM made by Keyence, that will measure parts in seconds based on a reference CAD file; no calipers or other measuring devices are required.

We also have a Keyence hand-held, laser-based scanner that will measure parts and create a CAD file.

Joe,

I have a digitizer similar to a renishaw but only 3-axis, which limits port digitizing, especially at the short turn and bore wall side.

I looked at Keyence, but am unclear about which product would work best for port digitizing. Laser, I assume, would provide the best detail, but at what cost?

Having a digitizer that has file extensions compatible with CFD software would be ideal (like Autodesk CFD, not Siemens or something only OEMs can afford). I'm sure it exists, but, again, how much?

Thoughts?

Hope all is well.