0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Energy Saving in Pneumatic Servo Control Utilizing Interchamber Cross-Flow

[+] Author and Article Information
Xiangrong Shen, Michael Goldfarb

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 129(3), 303-310 (Oct 04, 2006) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2718244 History: Received March 13, 2006; Revised October 04, 2006

This paper proposes a structure and control approach for the energy saving servo control of a pneumatic servo system. The energy saving approach is enabled by supplementing a standard four-way spool valve controlled pneumatic actuator with an additional two-way valve that enables flow between the cylinder chambers. The “crossflow” valve enables recirculation of pressurized air, and thus enables the extraction of stored energy that would otherwise be exhausted to the atmosphere. A control approach is formulated that supplements, to the extent possible, the mass flow required by a sliding mode controller with the recirculated mass flow provided by the crossflow valve. Following the control formulation, experimental results are presented that indicate energy savings of 25–52%, with essentially no compromise in tracking performance relative to the standard sliding mode control approach (i.e., relative to control via a standard four-way spool valve, without the supplemental flow provided by the crossflow valve).

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Configuration of a typical pneumatic servo system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Modification of a typical pneumatic servo system to include an interchamber flow path. Note that the arrows indicate the direction of positive mass flow for purposes of model derivation.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Tracking performance comparison of the crossflow controller and the standard sliding controller corresponding to 0.25Hz sinusoidal command

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Tracking performance comparison of the crossflow controller and the standard sliding controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal command

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Tracking performance comparison of the crossflow controller and the standard sliding controller corresponding to 1.5Hz sinusoidal command

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Control (valve) commands for crossflow controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Control (valve) command for standard controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

One cycle of control (valve) commands for crossflow controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

One cycle of control (valve) command for standard controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Cylinder pressures for crossflow controller corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of supply mass expenditure between crossflow and standard approaches corresponding to 1.0Hz sinusoidal tracking

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In