DEVELOPEMENT OF A FAULT SIMULATOR FOR PROPORTIONAL SPOOL VALVES

Amit BHOJKAR, Richard BURTON, Greg SCHOENAU, Doug BITNER Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Saskatchewan 57 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A9, Canada (greg_schoenau@engr.usask.ca)

ABSTRACT Failure in a Single Stage Electro-Hydraulic Proportional Direction Control Valve (SS-EHPDCV) is caused mainly by the spool sticking in the valve body. When the friction (stiction) gets large enough, the solenoid is unable to generate enough force to move the spool making the valve inoperable. In this research, a non-destructive fault simulator is developed which can introduce user defined friction faults into the EHPDCV. By employing a closed loop position control scheme, one of the two solenoids is used to generate a desired spool movement. The other solenoid is used to generate a desired friction force. A closed loop control strategy, which uses feedback from a force transducer, allows for the introduction of friction characteristics like stiction, Coulomb and viscous friction. This type of fault simulator can be used for testing and validation of a condition-monitoring scheme where typical friction characteristics in spool valves are used to predict the health of a valve. (This paper is concerned with the first phase of experimental validation of a CMS by developing a fault simulator to artificially introduce the desired faults in the valve.)

Keywords: Load Simulator, Proportional solenoid valve, Friction Simulator

1 INTRODUCTION Proportional Solenoid Valves (PSVs) have been successfully used in the hydraulics industry for many years due to their benefits of higher accuracy in comparison to conventional solenoid valves, their robustness and because they are more economical than servo valves. The PSV employs a proportional solenoid to meter the flow of hydraulic fluid, (i.e. oil), to an actuator or a motor thereby controlling their motion. Because the PSV plays an important role in the performance of a hydraulic system, any deterioration in performance can directly affect the overall performance of the system. This has spurred interest in condition monitoring for hydraulic systems and a considerable amount of research has been directed to different condition monitoring schemes applied to proportional solenoid valves. Techniques like Neural networks [1,2], ordinary least square [3] and extended

Kalman filtering [4] have been used to estimate some valve parameters, with varying degrees of success. Even though many Condition Monitoring Schemes (CMS), have been developed and serve as powerful tools for predictive maintenance strategies, it is imperative that they be tested before being commissioned, since a failure of a CMS to detect any faults can be disastrous economically and dangerous in terms of the safety of personnel. CMS false alarms are equally detrimental. In a typical CMS, the system parameters are tracked and compared with a certain threshold and a fault is diagnosed if the parameter values exceed that threshold. Validation testing requires that the fault be introduced in the system and then checked to see if the CMS is able to detect it. This paper is concerned with the first phase of the experimental validation of a CMS by developing a non-destructive fault simulator to artificially introduce the desired faults in a single stage proportional solenoid valve. 2 BACKGROUND Figure 1 depicts a 4 -way, 3-position, closed center electro hydraulic proportional valve typically used in a circuit where flow is supplied by a pressure-compensated or load-sensing pump. Current through the solenoid coil windings generates a magnetic potential difference across the air gap. This creates an attractive force between the armature and stator, which causes the armature to move and close the air gap thereby minimizing the reluctance in the magnetic circuit. A pushpin connected to the center of the armature acts directly on the spool, causing displacement of the spool, x . The spool slides back and forth within the limits of maximum and minimum permissible spool displacement, throttling fluid across the metering lands. An LVDT is connected to one end of the spool to provide feedback to a control loop that accurately positions the spool as desired. Solenoid A, provides the axial force required to move the spool when x >0. Similarly, another solenoid, Solenoid B, provides the force when x <0. The solenoids have to generate enough force to overcome the spring, flow reaction and non-linear friction forces to position the spool to the desired location. A fault constitutes an abnormal change in operating conditions, which may eventually make the component inoperable. Typical faults that could occur in spool valves and their effects are summarized below: Fault 1: Spool sticking in the valve body due to a local increase in friction force, which may be due to wear, scuffing, contamination, etc. Effect: Increased current consumption leading to coil burnout if the coil is not capable of generating enough force to dislodge the spool. Fault 2: Coil magnetic saturation. Effect: Coil not capable of generating enough force to move the spool. Fault 3: Change in the area gradient of the spool due to abrasion and silting. Effect: Influences the pressure sensitivity and flow gain of the valve at null position (x=0).

Figure 1 Schematic of a single stage solenoid valve One of the most common faults in a proportional valve is a local increase in friction at some spool position due to wear, scuffing, etc. that causes the spool to stick in the valve body. Also, the spool may or may not jam each time it passes by the problem point. For example, if the spool is traveling at high speed, it may pass the problem point without difficulty. Conversely, if the spool is traveling slowly, the scuff or wear at the problem point may be more likely to stop or seize the spool. A device that can simulate these various types of friction characteristics (static and sliding friction) is desirable and was the motivation to develop the fault simulator. It makes it possible for prescribed faults to be induced in a valve as desired. 3 FAULT SIMULATOR During the normal operation of the valve, only one of the solenoids is energized, so that the solenoid at the other end can be used to simulate the faults. This arrangement has two benefits: there is no requirement of an additional experimental set up to induce the faults in the valve by using closed loop simulation; better control over the fault characteristics can be achieved The fault simulator developed in this research, focuses on inducing friction faults (i.e. simulating the conditions when the friction in the valve increases to a level of rendering the valve faulty). Generally, when friction is high enough, the force generated by the solenoid is insufficient to move the spool to a desired location. In proportional valves, the solenoid is shaped to give a constant force for a particular current; the change in current due to a fault at any particular spool position can be taken as a measure of the increased friction force. This assumes that the characteristics of the spring and inertia forces remain unchanged during the introduction of the fault. Load simulators, that can simulate different loading conditions like mass, spring and friction loads on the system, have been developed for a variety of applications. Martin, and Nimegeers [5,6]

developed a load simulator for a proportional valve using a hydraulic loading system which could be connected to a test system in order to create different types of loads like friction, damping, spring and inertia. They tried to simulate the friction characteristics using their simulator with limited success, due to the inherent non-linear and complex nature of the friction characteristics. Helduser et al [7] have developed an indirect generic testing m ethod to determine the frictional characteristics of the seals, and as an example, have applied it to pneumatic valves and cylinders. The testing method uses a pressure dying out process generated by a unilateral load of the mass-spring system. During one process of movement, various conditions of the system are monitored as well as typical traces and characteristics of the frictional force. Ramden et al [8] have theoretically analyzed the load simulator using both dynamic simulation and linear analysis by using a technique referred to as dynamic Hardware in Loop Simulation. Although this approach could successfully simulate the loading pattern using the model of two servo valves, validation using an actual system was not mentioned in any recent papers. Most of the techniques for load simulators were designed to imitate the external load on the system/actuator; however, there does not appear to be any published literature on creating artificial loads on a hydraulic valve spool that could emulate the friction faults. In the next section, the fault simulator algorithm is developed and a control strategy to implement it in the valve is proposed. 3.1 Simulation Model Typical friction characteristics in spool valves are shown in Figure 2. The friction force can be decomposed into 2 two parts; i.e. static and sliding friction. During regions of low relative velocity, the friction force is multivalued which means that the force can assume any value in the range [ Fs , Fs ] to keep the contacting surfaces from moving. This is commonly referred to as stiction, breakaway or static friction ( Fs ). The spool does not move until the force generated by the solenoid is sufficient to overcome the stiction. As soon as the valve starts to move, the total friction force drops and only the viscous force ( Fb ) and Coulomb friction force ( Fc ) play a dominant role. The Coulomb friction is due to the sliding between the spool and valve body and is generally considered to be constant, depending only on the sign of velocity. Viscous friction is a function of the velocity of the spool and increases (decreases) linearly with it. The fault simulator should be capable of simulating not only the friction characteristics mentioned above, but also be able to manipulate all three components of friction as specified by the user. As shown in the classical friction curve, the friction force is plotted against a linearly increasing velocity. In order to achieve a linear velocity profile, a specially designed waveform was fed to the valve such that the slope of the displacement waveform gives a linear velocity. A squared displacement waveform of the type x = At 2 when differentiated gives a linear velocity profile of the type dx = 2 At (Figure 3). dt In order for the fault simulator to simulate the friction faults as a function of velocity, control over velocity is necessary. This can be achieved indirectly through closed loop position control. The

closed loop arrangement for position control of the valve spool is shown in Figure 4. The desired waveform x = At 2 is fed to Solenoid A, which moves the spool along the desired trajectory by employing Controller A for closed loop position control.

Figure 2 Typical friction force characteristics

Figure 3 Desired displacement and velocity profile of the valve spool

Figure 4 Control system to position the spool and introduce frictional effects The spool position is differentiated and is used as the input to the force simulator part of the algorithm. The main part of the fault simulator is the friction function or friction model (Figure 5). Different friction models like the Karnopp model [9] and a recently proposed reset integrator model [10] have been used to model friction in dynamical systems for which friction plays a significant role. The friction model used for this research was similar to that of the Karnopp model, except that the magnitude of stiction is modeled as a gain that can be changed independently of the applied force on the spool by the other solenoid.

Figure 5 Friction function to produce the desired friction on the spool

The amount of stiction in the valve is controlled by setting the velocity band and Fs to specific values. When the relative velocity between the spool and valve body falls within the v band, the algorithm outputs a stiction force proportional to Fs . If the gain and band is increased sufficiently, it can simulate the extreme case where the stiction force becomes too high for the solenoid to move the spool. To introduce Coulomb and viscous friction forces, Fc and Fb of Figure 5 are adjusted accordingly. Generally stiction is present for only a small duration, until the solenoid force overcomes it and the relative velocity is high enough to accelerate the spool. As the velocity increases, the model switches from a stick (static) to slip (Coulomb and viscous) mode as shown in Figure 5. In the slip mode, the Coulomb force is modeled as a constant that depends on the sign of velocity and the damping force is modeled as a function of velocity. This algorithm can approach the classical friction force with the only condition that the velocity increases linearly with time. Since the displacement is differentiated, the signal can become noisy, hence a 4th order Butterworth filter was used to obtain a relatively noise free velocity signal. This desired friction force becomes the command signal to Solenoid B. Force feedback is employed to correct for any disturbances due to the displacement of the spool. Since push type solenoids are employed in this valve, only unidirectional friction forces can be generated by Solenoid B. 4 EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEM The experimental system is primarily comprised of a Vickers proportional valve with solenoids on each end. Each solenoid has a coil resistance of 2.07 ohms and a current limit of 2.5 amperes. As shown in Figure 6, Solenoid A is used to drive the spool to the right using closed loop position control. Solenoid B is used to generate the desired friction force. To compensate for disturbances due to spool displacement, a controller employing force feedback using a strain gauge type force transducer is placed between Solenoid B and the valve body. A spring cap is placed on the valve end of Solenoid B to accommodate the main spring with the original pre-compression. The force transducer is connected to the pushpin of Solenoid B on one side and the spool on the other side using self-aligning rods that are not fixed at the ends. To ensure that no external friction effects are introduced as a result of adding the force transducer, a thin cable of about 0.5 meters was used to suspend the transducer. The cable offsets the weight permitting free motion in the axial direction. A data acquisition system with 12-bit resolution and a sampling frequency of 500 Hz was used for all experiments. Two power op-amps, one for each solenoid, were used to amplify the signal from the controller. Instead of using the valve controller provided by the manufacturer, a PI controller was designed in Matlab/Simulink for force and position control. An LVDT integral to the valve was used to measure the displacement of the spool, while a force transducer was used to measure the force due to Solenoid B. 5 PRELIMINARY VALIDATION OF THE FAULT SIMULATOR Open loop force control is used to induce the friction force and closed loop position control is used to obtain the desired velocity profile. When the velocity is within a specified band, the corresponding stiction, Coulomb and viscous force signals are generated. Since position control is employed on one of the solenoids, it tries to compensate for any external disturbances on the spool. Hence, one of the

ways to observe any faults in the valve is through the current characteristics of Solenoid A before and after the faults are introduced.

Figure 6 Experimental setup 5.1 Current as an indicator of fault propagation Before friction can be induced in the valve, the valve characteristics under normal operating conditions need to be recorded. In a proportional valve, force is assumed to be proportional to current within the operating range and can be estimated by recording the plot of current vs. time. Figure 7 shows the current characteristics of Solenoid A before and after the faults are introduced. When a simulated stiction fault is introduced, the current rises momentarily around 2.7 seconds and then continues normally (Figure 7a). In practical cases, an asperity or a contaminant could cause the spool to stop momentarily, causing an abrupt increase in current similar to that of Figure 7a, which then produces sufficient force to overcome the obstacle. Similarly, a simulated Coulomb and viscous friction fault causes an increase in current to Solenoid A as shown in Figure 7b. Since the Coulomb friction is assumed constant and the viscous friction is a function of velocity, Solenoid A continuously draws more current to maintain the desired trajectory of the spool. Figure 7c shows the combined effect of static, Coulomb and viscous friction on the Solenoid A current. The desired friction force produced by Solenoid B, having the classical friction characteristics, is shown in Figure 7d as a function of measured spool velocity.

a) Static friction (stiction)

b) Coulomb and viscous friction

c) Effect of all three faults on current

d) Friction force generated

Figure 7. Effect of friction faults on Solenoid A current CONCLUSIONS A fault simulator that can simulate user defined friction characteristics like stiction, Coulomb and viscous friction was presented. The fault simulator was used to induce the desired friction effects in an electro-hydraulic proportional solenoid valve and experimental results were used to evaluate the simulator. The fault simulator uses the velocity of the spool in real time to compute the desired friction force, which acts on one end of the spool. The experimental results indicated the feasibility of this approach using current as an indicator of fault propagation.

Since the fault simulator uses an existing solenoid of the valve to induce friction faults, this arrangement is cost effective. Also the arrangement does not induce any extra frictional effects due to proper alignment of the force transducer. The ability of the fault simulator to produce desired faults is limited by the dynamic performance of the solenoid and the type of control being employed. In the preliminary study, only open loop force control was used to investigate the feasibility of this approach. REFERENCES 1. Burton, R., Mourre, D., Bitner, D. and Ukrainetz, P., A Technique to Estimate Some Valve Parameters in a Proportional Valve, Bath Workshop on Power Transmission and Motion Control, 8-10 September 2000. 2. Schoenau, G., Burton, R. and Rosa, A., Estimating Parameters in a Proportional Solenoid Valve, MSc Thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Canada, 1992. 3. Schoenau, G., Burton, R. and Ansarian, A., Parameter Estimation in a Solenoid Valve using the ML and OLS Techniques, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid Power and Transmission, Hangzou, China, pp 124-129, March 2001. 4. Khoshzaban-Zauarehi, M., On-Line Condition Monitoring and Fault Diagnosis in Hydraulic System Components Using Parameter Estimation and Pattern Classification, PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, 1997. 5. Martin, M., Analysis, Design and Compensation of a Computer Controlled Hydraulic Load Simulator, ASME winter Annual Meeting, Anaheim, CA, Paper #92-WA/FPST-5. 6. Nimegeers, C., Schoenau, G. and Burton, R., A Computer Controlled Hydraulic Loading System for Simulating Loads, Proceedings of the Ninth International Fluid Power Workshop, University of Bath, England, September 1996. 7. Helduser, S. and Muth, A., Dynamic Friction Measurement Method Evaluated by Means of Cylinders and Valves, 3rd JHPS International Conference on Fluid Power, Yokohama, Japan, 1996. 8. Ramden, Janson, A. and Palmberg, J.-O., Design and Analysis of a Load Simulator for Testing Hydraulic Valves, 10th Bath Workshop on Power Transmission and Motion Control, Bath, UK, 15-18, September 2000. 9. Karnopp, D., Computer Simulation of a Slip-Stick Friction in Mechanical Systems, ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Vol. 107, pp 100-102, 1985 10. Haessig, D. Jr., and Friedland, B, On the Modeling and Simulation of Friction, Transactions of the ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control-1991, 113, No.3, pp 354362.