See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271123559

Bond Graph Modeling of a Two-Stage Pressure

Relief Valve

Article in Journal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · July 2013

DOI: 10.1115/1.4023768

CITATIONS READS

3 47

1 author:

Osama Gad
Kuwait University
8 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Impact in Hydraulic cylinders View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Osama Gad on 13 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Osama Gad
Mechanical Engineering Department,
College of Engineering and Petroleum,
Kuwait University,
P.O. Box 5969,
Safat 13060, Kuwait
e-mail: osama.gad@ku.edu.kw
Bond Graph Modeling
of a Two-Stage Pressure
Relief Valve
This study examined the use of bond graphs for the modeling and simulation of a fluid
power system component. A new method is presented for creating the bond graph model,
based upon a previously developed mathematical model. A nonlinear dynamic bond
graph model for a two-stage pressure relief valve has been developed in this paper. Bond
graph submodels were constructed considering each element of the studied valve assem-
bly. The overall bond graph model of the valve was developed by combining these submo-
dels using junction structures. Causality was then assigned in order to obtain a
computational model, which could be simulated. The simulation results of the causal
bond graph model were compared with those of a mathematical model, which had been
also developed in this paper based on the same assumptions. The results were found to
correlate very well both in the shape of the curves, magnitude, and response times. The
causal bond graph model was verified experimentally in the dynamic mode of operation.
As a result of comparison, bond graphs can quickly and accurately model the dynamics
in a fluid power control system component. During the simulation study, it was found that
nonlinearity occur due to three factors: changes in pressure, which cause nonlinear ve-
locity changes of the flow rate; changes in the throttling area of the valve restriction,
which usually changes nonlinearly; and changes in the discharge coefficient of the throt-
tling area of the valve restriction, which does not remain constant.
[DOI: 10.1115/1.4023768]

1 Introduction differential equations model, which had been developed in the pa-
per based on the same assumptions. Dasgupta et al. [3], presented
All power systems modeling techniques require the assembly of
a study on dynamic performance of a servovalve controlled axial
a set of equations, static and dynamic, which together provide an
piston motor used in a transmission system using bond graph sim-
adequate model of the physical system. The differences in these
ulation technique. The simulation results obtained at different
techniques are in how the equation set is formed and in how it is
operating conditions are validated experimentally. The authors
finally presented. Bond graph is one of these techniques. It is a
concluded that the system’s dynamic response can be improved
structure formed to represent the action and interactions taking
by controlling leakage resistances, and with the increase in the
place within a powered system. Bond graph modeling techniques
effective bulk stiffness of the fluid, the peak rise pressure
provide the key link between a proposed system and preparation
increases; however, the delay time decreases. Dasgupta and Wat-
of that equation set, which will allow predictions of its response
ton [4] studied the dynamics of a proportional controlled piloted
and other dynamic characteristics. It is a domain-independent
relief valve through bond graph simulation technique. The simula-
graphical description of physical systems behavior. This means
tion results are verified with experimental results. The effect of
that systems from different domains (electrical, mechanical, hy-
various design parameters on the overall dynamic response of the
draulic, thermal, material, etc.) are described in the same way.
system is discussed. Dasgupta and Karmakar [5] studied the dy-
The basis is that bond graphs are based on energy and energy
namics of a direct operated relief valve with directional damping
exchange. A few publications are found to deal with the bond
through bond graph simulation technique. The authors concluded
graph modeling of the dynamic performance of the two-stage
that some significant parameters of the valve response are identi-
pressure relief valve. This valve is used to limit the maximum
fied, which can be modified to improve the dynamic characteris-
pressure in the hydraulic circuit by relieving the excess fluid to
tics of the valve. Gad [6] developed a nonlinear mathematical
the tank. This makes this class of valves indispensable for the hy-
model of a pilot operated relief valve. The performance of the
draulic circuit protection. Dasgupta and Murrenhoff [1] made a
valve is verified experimentally in the steady state and dynamic
comprehensive model of a closed-loop servovalve controlled
modes of operations. The author concluded that the effect of
hydro-motor drive system using bond graph technique. The
changes of the diameters of the valve damping orifices, precom-
dynamic performance of the complete system has been studied
pression of the adjustment springs and volumes of the valve cav-
with respect to the variation of the parameters of the controller
ities are some of the important design parameters, which affect
that drives the servovalve. The authors concluded that, the servo-
the valve transient response.
valve model presented in this article may be useful for modeling
In this paper, a detailed nonlinear bond graph model of the stud-
all similar types of valve. Muvengei and Kihiu [2] developed a
ied valve is developed. This model is created based on the mathe-
bond graph model for a valve-controlled hydraulic cylinder. A
matical model developed by Gad [6]. This paper presents a new
simplified bond graph model of the interactuator interactions in a
method for creating and drawing the bond graph model based
multicylinder hydraulic system has also been presented in this pa-
upon the mathematical model. This means that, if the designer has
per. The developed overall bond graph model was verified by
a developed mathematical model for a certain dynamic system (no
comparing the open loop state response to those of an ordinary
need to know what that system is), this paper makes it easy to cre-
ate and draw the corresponding bond graph model without prior
Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received
knowledge of that system. A review of the available research
July 5, 2012; final manuscript received February 18, 2013; published online April 2, shows that the subject of this paper might be unique. The mathe-
2013. Assoc. Editor: Yang Shi. matical model developed by Gad [6] is derived based on basic

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-1
C 2013 by ASME
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a


Fig. 1 The studied pressure relief valve
principles of the laws of mass continuity (continuity equation) and
the equation of motion for mechanical moving parts (Newton’s sec-
ond law) applied to each element of the studied valve assembly.
Corresponding nonlinear bond graph submodels are constructed
considering the same elements of the valve assembly. These sub-
models are derived from the same basic principles in order to con-
tribute to educational material regarding the bond graph modeling
tool. The overall bond graph model of the studied valve was devel-
oped by combining these submodels using junction structures.
Once the overall bond graph model is ready, the system equations
can be derived algorithmically in a systematic manner. This process
is usually automated using appropriate software such as CAMP-G, 20-
SIM, ENPORT, SYMBOLS2000, etc., which support bond graphs. Dynamic
response of the studied valve is measured to assess the validity of
the proposed bond graph model.
2 Physical Description of the Studied Valve
Figure 1 shows the basic components of the studied valve,
while its schematic diagram is shown in Fig. 2. The valve consists
of two stages: a pilot stage and a main stage. The pilot stage con-
Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of the studied relief valve
041001-2 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
tains the pressure limiting device, a direct-operated relief valve
controlled by a spring-loaded poppet. As shown in Fig. 1, the pilot
stage includes a conical poppet element loaded by a high stiffness
spring. In this stage, the user adjusts the preload set on this spring,
and this in turn regulates the force necessary to displace the pop-
pet spring. The main stage incorporates the piston of relatively
large area, loaded by a relatively low stiffness spring. The piston
large area and low spring stiffness decrease the valve override
pressure. As shown in Fig. 2, the pressure P in the inlet cavity of
initial volume V affects the piston, while the pressure P2 in the
second cavity of initial volume V2 affects the poppet element.
Pressures P1 and P2 are limited in the pilot stage through the ini-
tial setting of the poppet spring. The valve inlet cavity is commu-
nicated to the pilot stage through two damping orifices. If the
pressure P is smaller than the value necessary to open the pilot
stage, the pilot poppet valve remains closed. The pressure P2 to-
gether with the poppet spring force keep the piston seated in the
closing position. If the pressure P is higher than the value preset
at the pilot stage, the poppet element moves to an opening posi-
tion. The pressure at which the valve starts relieving pressure is
known as the cracking pressure. This causes the limitation of the
pressures P1 and P2. When the pressure P exceeds this limit, the
piston opens to dump the excess fluid to the tank. The main attrac-
tion in using a pilot operated relief valve is its ability to minimize
the pressure override. The pressure override is the difference
between the cracking pressure and the system pressure P when the
valve is passing its maximum flow rate.
3 Modeling the Dynamics of the Studied Valve
To model the dynamics of the studied valve, the following
assumptions are made for developing both mathematical and bond
graph models:
• The hydraulic fluid is ideal, nonviscous, and incompressible.
This assumption is close to reality under most conditions.
• The hydraulic pump delivers a constant supply of pressure,
irrespective of the oil flow demand.
• The reservoir pressure is constant and at atmospheric pres-
sure. Since gauge pressures are considered then Pt ¼ 0.
• The flow rates through the restrictions of the valve are
turbulent.
• The pressure losses in the short pipe lines are neglected.
• The oil temperature and viscosity are constant.
These assumptions have no significant effect on the simulated
performance [1–10]. As operating conditions change within fluid
power system components, nonlinearities of metered flow rate
occur due to three factors:
(1) Pressure variations cause nonlinear velocity changes of the
oil.
(2) The shape and discharge area of the valve restriction usu-
ally changes nonlinearly. During the dynamics mode of
operation, the flow rate passing through the valve throttling
area is assumed to be turbulent flow with an unknown
Reynolds number. The discharge coefficient of this throt-
tling area varies with the Reynolds number in a compli-
cated way. This coefficient is often assumed constant
independent of the flow rate and opening area [1–10]. So,
the discharge coefficients of the valve throttling areas are
considered constant in this work.
First, a mathematical representation based on the basic princi-
ples (the basic laws of the continuity and Newton’s second law
equations) is derived considering each element of the valve as-
sembly. This model is derived based on the model developed by
Gad [6]. Then corresponding bond graph submodels are con-
structed, considering the same elements of the valve assembly.
The overall bond graph model of the studied valve is developed
by combining these bond graph submodels using junction struc-
tures. Finally, it is to be checked whether the bond graph sub-
Transactions of the ASME
 models developed embody the basic laws of the continuity and
Newton’s second law equations.
3.1 Flow Rate Balance in the Valve Inlet Cavity
3.1.1 Mathematical Representation. Considering the geome-
try of the studied valve shown in Fig. 2, the pressure P in the
valve inlet cavity of volume V is sensed on the piston-end area
and opposes a piston spring force setting. A directional control
valve (DCV) is mounted on the pressurized line of the valve and
is connected directly to the valve inlet cavity to introduce a rapid
change in the valve load. When the DCV is switched on, the dis-
charge flow rate of the pump Qp passes to the tank via the DCV
widely opened restriction area. When the DCV is switched off, its
restriction closes and the discharge flow rate of the pump passes
to the tank via the studied relief valve. The transient variation of
the restriction area of the DCV affects the studied valve transient
response. In the case of limited DCV spool displacement, the
DCV restriction area is too small, and the main source of losses is
the DCV spool restriction. As shown in Fig. 3, when the continu-
ity equation is applied to the valve inlet cavity of volume V yields
dV ðV þ As xÞ dP
Qp ¼ Q1 þ Qv þ Qts þ þ (1)
dt B dt
The flow rate Q1 passing through the first damping orifice is given by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 The modulated resistance R2 represents the resistance of the DCV
Q1 ¼ Cd1 A1 jðP  P1 Þjsign ðP  P1 Þ (2)
q opening area av ðxv Þ, through which flow rate Qv passes to the
The first damping orifice is a fixed cross-sectional area orifice and
can be modeled as a short tube with a diameter d1 and a length L1.
In most application and our case, ðd1 ðRe=L1 ÞÞ  50, hence the
discharge coefficient Cd1 is given by [6,7]
1 q
Cd1 ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
64L1
2:28 þ
d1 Re
The flow rate Qv passing through the DCV is given by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 of oil in a closed cavity [6]. Therefore, the effect of oil compressi-
Qv ¼ Cdv av ðxv Þ jðP  Pt ÞjsignðP  Pt Þ (3)
q bility in the inlet cavity of volume V is represented by a displace-
where Cdv and av ðxv Þ are the discharge coefficient and opening
restriction area of the DCV, respectively. For precise modeling of
the studied valve loading, the transient response of the DCV dis-
placement xv is measured, and the results obtained are used to cal-
Fig. 3 Opening area of the piston element
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
culate the transient variation of its restriction area av ðxv Þ [6]. This
relation is introduced in the computer simulation program of the
studied valve through Eq. (3). The flow rate Qts flowing from the
valve inlet cavity of volume V to the tank via the piston throttling
area as ðxÞ is given by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2
Qts ¼ Cds as ðxÞ jðP  Pt Þjsign ðP  Pt Þ (4)
q
The valve flow rate Qtv is given by
Qtv ¼ Qts þ Qtp (5)
The value of the discharge coefficient Cds is assumed to be con-
stant [6–12]. The opening area as ðxÞ of the piston element is given
by
 
0 if 0 < x  xo
as ð xÞ ¼ (6)
pds ðx  xo Þ if x > xo
3.1.2 Bond Graph Representation. As shown in Fig. 4, the
pump flow rate Qp supplied to the valve inlet cavity of volume V
is modeled as a source of flow SF1 of bond 1 attached to the 0-
junction with the supply pressure P as the common effort variable.
The bonds shown in this figure and the other bond graph figures
presented in this paper are numbered for easier analysis purposes.
tank. As shown in Fig. 4, this resistance is depicted in the bond
graph by means of the DCV spool displacement xv as the modula-
tion signal. Equation (3) shows that resistance R2 is equal to
sffiffiffi
2
R2 ¼ Cdv av ðxv Þ
The influence of the oil compressibility on the dynamics of the
hydraulic component is similar to that of a spring stiffness in
mechanical systems. A measure of oil compressibility is the bulk
modulus, which relates the variation of the pressure and volume
ment dependent capacitance C3 ðxÞ of compliance ðV þ As xÞ=B
attached to the 0-junction with the pressure P as the common
effort variable. This compliance is modulated by the piston dis-
placement x to take into consideration the variation of volume of
the oil in this cavity as shown in Fig. 4. The resistance of the pis-
ton element to the fluid flow through the opening area as ðxÞ is
taken into consideration by a two-port modulated resistance Rx of
Fig. 4 Bond graph submodel of the inlet cavity
JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-3
 bonds 11 and 12. This resistance influences the fluid flow by the
dissipation of a part of its energy and is depicted in the bond graph
by means of the piston displacement x as the modulation signal, as
shown in Fig. 4. On the level of hydraulic part, it represents the
energy dissipating effect of the piston opening area as ðxÞ, through
which flow Qts passes to the tank. Equation (4) shows that the hy-
draulic part of this resistance Rxh , which is represented in the bond
graph model by bond 11 as shown in Fig. 4, is equal to
sffiffiffi
2 
Rxh ¼ Cds as ðxÞ
q Fjx ¼
On the level of mechanical part, it acts on the poppet element by
the jet reaction force Fjx in the direction to close the piston open-
ing area as ðxÞ, which is represented in the bond graph model by
bond 12. The resistance R13 simulates the energy dissipating effect
of the first damping orifice, through which flow rate Q1 passes to
the first cavity of volume V1 . Equation (2) shows that the resist-
ance R13 is equal to
sffiffiffi
2 right or left seat and is given by
R13 ¼ Cd1 A1
q 2
The flow consumed by the expansion in the inlet cavity dV=dt is
depicted in the bond graph by bond 8, as shown in Fig. 4. The
return line pressure Pt is imposed by a source of effort SE10 of
bond 10.
3.2 Motion of the Piston Element
3.2.1 Mathematical Representation. The piston is subjected
to pressure, coulomb friction, viscous friction, spring, jet reaction,
and seat reaction forces, as shown in Fig. 3. Its motion could be
described by the following equation:
d2 x  dx
mx þ fx ðxÞ þ kx ðx þ xoo Þ 6 Fc þ Fjx þ Frx ¼ ðP  P1 ÞAs
dt2 dt
(7)

where fx ðxÞ is a nonlinear viscous damping factor. To express this
factor in terms of the valve dimensions, let the leakage flow across
the piston circumference be modeled as an orifice [6,7]. Let a1 be
the effective cross-sectional area of the leakage across the piston
circumference. Then, the leakage flow rate Qls is given by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2
Qls ¼ As x ¼ Cdl a1 jðP  P1 ÞjsignðP  P1 Þ (8)
q piston element to the fluid flow by dissipating part of its energy.
acting normal to the plane of fluid at the vena contracta. By New-
ton’s third law, this force has an equal and opposite reaction force,
which may be resolved into two components: axial component Fjx
and lateral component FjL . The lateral component tends to push
the piston sideways against the valve wall and cause sticking.
However, it is compensated in practice by locating the valve ports
symmetrically around the piston. The axial component is not com-
pensated and acts in a direction to close the piston opening area
as ðxÞ. So, the steady state jet reaction force Fjx is given by [11]

q cos /
Q2 (11)
Cc1 as ðxÞ ts
where / and Cc1 are the flow streamline inclination angle and
contraction coefficient, respectively. For the relatively small oper-
ating pressures and flow rates of the studied valve, the transient
flow forces are negligible in this study [11]. The reaction force of
the seat Frx is introduced in the model by considering an equiva-
lent stiffness of the seat material kr and damping coefficient fr rep-
resenting the structural damping of the seat material. This force
appears only when the piston comes in contact with either the
3
0
  if xmax > x > 0:01 mm
Frx ¼ 4 k x þ f dx if xmax  x  0:01 mm
5 (12)
r r
dt
The coulomb friction force is a function of the preload force,
caused by the seal squeeze during assembly. It is proportional to
the pressure difference. This force acts in a direction opposite to
that of piston motion and is given by [12]
Fc ¼ Fpr þ fc ðP  P1 Þ (13)
Usually the value of the preload force Fpr is neglected due to the
lubricated contact surface between the piston and valve wall.
3.2.2 Bond Graph Representation. The transformation of the
hydraulic power to mechanical force needed to displace the piston
element is insured in the bond graph by the transformer TF of
bonds 8 and 9 as shown in Fig. 5. The transformation ratio is equal
to the piston area As subjected to the pressure P. The mass of the
moving parts of the main stage mx is modeled as inertia element I
 x
of bond 20 attached to the 1-junction with the piston velocity x as
the common flow variable. The piston is subjected to the com-
bined action of pressure, spring, flow reaction, seat reaction, cou-
lomb, and viscous friction forces. The two-port modulated
resistance Rx of bonds 11 and 12 represents the resistance of the

where the discharge coefficient Cdl of the leakage flow is given by

1
Cdl ¼ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
64Ls 4
2:28 þ
Re pa1
 
Accordingly, the viscous damping force Fx ffi fx ðxÞ x on the piston
can be obtained from Eq. (8) to arrive at [6,7]

!
qA3s x 
Fx ¼ As ðP  P1 Þ ¼ x (9)
2C2dl a21

Referring to Fig. 3, the inherent fluid accelerating property of the

piston opening area as ðxÞ results in a jet force of [11]

Q2ts qQ2ts
Fj ¼ qVx ¼ (10) Fig. 5 Combining bond graph submodels of the inlet cavity
aðxÞVx Cc1 as ðxÞ and piston element

041001-4 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 On the level of mechanical part, it acts on the piston element by
the jet reaction force Fjx in the direction to close the piston open-
ing area as ðxÞ. Equation (11) shows that, the mechanical part of
this resistance Rxm , which is represented in the bond graph model
by bond 12 as shown in Fig. 5, is equal to
q cos /
Rxm ¼
Cc1 as ðxÞ
The piston spring effect is represented by a modulated capacitance
C14 . This capacitance is depicted in the bond graph by means of
the piston displacement x as the modulation signal. The seat reac-
tion force Frx is represented by the modulated resistance R15 and
capacitor C16 . As shown in Fig. 5, the resistance R15 and capacitor
C16 are depicted in the bond graph by means of the piston dis-
placement x as the modulation signal. The viscous friction force
opposing the piston motion is taken into consideration by the
modulated resistance R17 . This resistance

is depicted in the bond
graph by means of the piston velocity x as the modulation signal
[6], as shown in Fig. 5. Equation (9) shows that the resistance R17
is equal to
qA3s 
R17 ¼ x
2C2dl a21
The coulomb friction force opposing the motion of the piston ele-
ment is represented by the resistance R19 . The source of effort
SE18 imposes the precompression force of the piston spring.
3.3 Flow Rate Balance in the First Cavity
3.3.1 Mathematical Representation. The continuity equation
as applied to the first cavity of volume V1 yields
dx ðV1  As xÞ dP1
Q1 þ As ¼ Q2 þ (14)
dt B dt
The flow rate passing through the second damping orifice is given
by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2
Q2 ¼ Cd2 A2 jðP1  P2 Þjsign ðP1  P2 Þ (15)
q 3.4.2 Bond Graph Representation. The effect of oil compres-
The second damping orifice is a fixed cross-sectional area orifice
and can be modeled as a short tube with a diameter d2 and a length
Fig. 6 Combining bond graph submodels of the inlet cavity, piston element, and
first cavity
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
L2 . In most application and our case, ðd2 ðRe=L2 ÞÞ  50, hence the
discharge coefficient Cd2 is given by
1
Cd2 ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
64L2
2:28 þ
d2 Re
3.3.2 Bond Graph Representation. The effect of oil compres-
sibility in the first cavity of volume V1 is represented in the bond
graph by a displacement dependent capacitance C23 ðxÞ of compli-
ance ðV1  As xÞ=B attached to the 0-junction with the pressure P1
as the common effort variable. This compliance is modulated by
the piston displacement x to take into consideration the variation
of volume of the oil in this cavity as shown in Fig. 6. The transfor-
mation of the mechanical power to hydraulic power, in the first
cavity of volume V1 , is insured in the bond graph by the trans-
former TF of bonds 21 and 22. The transformation ratio is equal
to the piston area As subjected to pressure P1 . The flow consumed
by the contraction of the first cavity dV1 =dt is depicted in the
bond graph model by bond 21, as shown in Fig. 6. The resistance
R26 represents the energy dissipating effect of the second damping
orifice, through which flow Q2 passes to the second cavity of vol-
ume V2 . Equation (15) shows that this resistance is equal to
sffiffiffi
2
R26 ¼ Cd2 A2
q
3.4 Flow Rate Balance in the Second Cavity
3.4.1 Mathematical Representation. As shown in Fig. 7,
when the continuity equation is applied to the second cavity of
volume V2 yields
 
dy V2 þ ap ðyÞ y dP2
Q2 ¼ Qtp þ ap ðyÞ þ (16)
dt B dt
The flow rate Qtp flowing from the second cavity to the tank via
the poppet throttling area app ðyÞ is given by
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2
Qtp ¼ Cdp app ðyÞ jðP2  Pt ÞjsignðP2  Pt Þ (17)
q
sibility in the second cavity of volume V2 is represented by a dis-
placement
 dependent capacitance C29 ðyÞ of compliance
V2 þ ap ðyÞy =B attached to the 0-junction with the pressure P2
JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-5

Fig. 7 Pilot stage throttling area
as the common effort variable. This compliance is modulated by
the poppet displacement y to take into consideration the variation
of volume of the oil in this cavity as shown in Fig. 8. The flow
consumed by the expansion of the second cavity dV2 =dt is
depicted in the bond graph model by bond 30, as shown in Fig. 8.
The resistance of the poppet element to the fluid flow through the
opening area app ðyÞ is taken into consideration by a two-port
modulated resistance Ry of bonds 33 and 41. This resistance influ-
ences the fluid flow by dissipating part of its energy and is
depicted in the bond graph by means of the poppet displacement y
as the modulation signal, as shown in Fig. 8. On the level of hy-
draulic part, it represents the energy dissipating effect of the pop-
pet opening area app ðyÞ, through which flow Qtp passes to the
tank. Equation (17) shows that the hydraulic part of this resistance
Ryh , which is represented in the bond graph model by bond 33 as
shown in Fig. 8, is equal to
sffiffiffi
2 sion force of the poppet spring, while the poppet spring effect is
Ryh ¼ Cdp app ðyÞ
q
On the level of mechanical part, it acts on the poppet element by
the jet reaction force Fjy in the direction to close the poppet open-
ing area app ðyÞ, which is represented in the bond graph model by
bond 41.
3.5 Motion of the Poppet Element
3.5.1 Mathematical Representation. The pilot poppet element
is subjected to pressure, spring, jet reaction, and seat reaction
forces. Its motion could be described by the following equation:
Fig. 8 Combining bond graph submodels of the inlet cavity, piston element, first
cavity, and second cavity
041001-6 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
d2 y dy
my þ fy þ ky ðy þ yo Þ þ Fjy ¼ P2 ap ðyÞ (18)
dt2 dt
Similarly, the damping factor fy can be obtained according to the
procedure described in Eqs. (8) and (9). Let a2 be the effective
cross-sectional area of the flow across the poppet element, then
qa3p ðyÞ
fy ¼ (19)
2C2dp a22
The jet reaction force Fjy can be obtained according to the proce-
dure described in Eqs. (10) and (11).
 
q cos b
Fjy ¼ Q2 (20)
Cc2 app ðyÞ tp
where b and Cc2 are the flow streamline inclination angle and con-
traction coefficient, respectively. Considering the geometry of the
pilot poppet valve shown in Fig. 4, the poppet opening area app ðyÞ
and the area ap ðyÞ subjected to the pressure P2 are given by the
following equations [12]:
app ðyÞ ¼ ðpdp sin bÞy  ðp sin2 b cos bÞy2 (21)
dp2
ap ðyÞ ¼ ðp Þ  ðpdp sin b cos bÞy þ ðp sin2 b cos2 bÞy2 (22)
4
3.5.2 Bond Graph Representation. The mass of the moving
parts of the pilot stage my is modeled as inertia element Iy ofbond
38. It is attached to the 1-junction with the poppet velocity y as a
common flow variable as shown in Fig. 9. The transformation of
the hydraulic power to mechanical force needed to displace the
poppet element is insured by a modulated transformer MTF of
bonds 30 and 31. The transformation ratio is equal to the piston
area ap ðyÞ subjected to the pressure P2 . The poppet is subjected to
the combined action of pressure, spring, flow reaction, and viscous
friction forces. The source of effort SE18 imposes the precompres-
represented by a modulated capacitance C35 . This capacitance is
depicted in the bond graph by means of the poppet displacement y
as the modulation signal. The viscous friction force opposing the
poppet motion is taken into consideration by resistance R37 . Equa-
tion (19) shows that this resistance is equal to
qa3p ðyÞ
R37 ¼
2C2dp a22
The two-port modulated resistance Ry of bonds 33 and 41 repre-
sents the resistance of the poppet element to the fluid flow by dis-
sipating part of its energy. On the level of mechanical part, it acts
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 9 Combining bond graph submodels of the inlet cavity, piston element, first cavity, second
cavity, and poppet element

on the poppet element by the jet reaction force Fjy in the direction  ðV þ As xÞ dP
f3 ¼ C3 ðxÞ e3 ¼
to close the poppet opening area app ðyÞ. Equation (20) shows that B dt
the mechanical part of this resistance Rym , which is represented in pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the bond graph model by bond 41 as shown in Fig. 8, is equal to f4 ¼ f11 ¼ Qts ¼ Rxh jðe3  e10 Þjsignðe3  e10 Þ
sffiffiffi!
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
q cos b ¼ Cds as ðxÞ jðP  Pt ÞjsignðP  Pt Þ
Rym ¼ q
Cc2 app ðyÞ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f6 ¼ f13 ¼ Q1 ¼ R13 jðe3  e23 Þjsign ðe3  e23 Þ
sffiffiffi!
The action of the return pressure Pt in this cavity is represented by
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
SE24 through modulated transformer MTF of bonds 24 and 28. ¼ Cd1 A1 jðP  P1 Þjsign ðP  P1 Þ
q
dx dV
3.6 Overall Bond Graph Model of the Studied Valve. The f8 ¼ As f20 ¼ As ¼
developed bond graph model that carries the physical structure of the dt dt
studied valve is shown in Fig. 9. Assuming zero return pressure
ðPt ¼ 0Þ, the bonds 10, 24, 28, and 34 transmit zero power, and then The common effort P of this junction is defined by
they can be eliminated. Figure 10 shows the overall bond graph
e1 ¼ e2 ¼ e 3 ¼ e4 ¼ e 6 ¼ e8 ¼ P
model of the studied valve with causality assigned using the sequen-
tial causality assignment procedure as clearly illustrated in Refs.
[13,14]. After the assignment of causality, the resulting overall bond Summing the flow variables in this junction, we get
graph shown in Fig. 10 also carried the mathematical structure of the
studied valve model. Next, it will be checked if the basic laws of f1 ¼ f2 þ f3 þ f4 þ f6 þ f8 (23)
mass continuity (continuity equation) and the equation of motion for
mechanical moving parts (Newton’s second law) are embodied in Comparing Eq. (23) with Eq. (1) shows that the continuity equa-
the overall bond graph model. As shown in Fig. 10, the flow varia- tion at the inlet cavity of volume V is satisfied in the bond graph
bles of the 0-junction with common supply pressure P are given by model. Therefore, the common pressure P of this 0-junction is
given by
f 1 ¼ Qp ð
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
f2 ¼ Qv ¼ R2 jðe3  e10 Þjsignðe3  e10 Þ P ¼ e3 ¼ ðf1  f2  f4  f6  f8 Þdt
C3 ðxÞ
sffiffiffi!
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
¼ Cdv av ðxv Þ jðP  Pt ÞjsignðP  Pt Þ Referring to Fig. 10, the effort variables of the 1-junction with
q common piston velocity x are given by

Fig. 10 Overall bond graph model of the studied valve

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-7

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 e9 ¼ e3 As ¼ PAs Referring to Fig. 10, the flow variables of the 0-junction with
  common pressure P2 are given by
q cos /
e12 ¼ Rxm f42 ¼ Q2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Cc1 as ðxÞ ts
ð f27 ¼ f26 ¼ Q2 ¼ R26 jðe23  e29 Þjsignðe23  e29 Þ
1 sffiffiffi!
e14 ¼
C14
f20 dt ¼ kx x 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
¼ Cd2 A2 jðP1  P2 ÞjsignðP1  P2 Þ
  q
0 if xmax > x > 0:01 mm
ðe15 þ e16 Þ ¼  Ð   
kr f20 dt þ fr f20 if xmax  x  0:01 mm  V2 þ ap ðyÞy dP2
! f29 ¼ C29 ðyÞ e 29 ¼
 B dt
 dx qA3s x dx
e17 ¼ fx ðxÞ ¼ R17 f20 ¼ dy dV2
dt 2C2dl a21 dt f30 ¼ ap ðyÞf38 ¼ ap ðyÞ ¼
dt dt
1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
e18 ¼ xoo ¼ kx xoo f32 ¼ f33 ¼ Qtp ¼ Ryh jðe29  e10 Þjsignðe29  e10 Þ
C14 sffiffiffi!
e19 ¼ fc ðe3  e23 Þ ¼ fc ðP  P1 Þ 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
¼ Cdp app ðyÞ jðP2  Pt ÞjsignðP2  Pt Þ
q
 d2 x
e20 ¼ mx f20 ¼ mx
dt2
The poppet opening area app ðyÞ and the area ap ðyÞ subjected to
e21 ¼ e23 As ¼ P1 As the pressure P2 are given by Eqs. (21) and (22), respectively. The
common effort P2 of this junction is defined by
The opening area as ðxÞ of the piston element is given by Eq. (6).
The common flow x of this 1-junction is defined by e27 ¼ e29 ¼ e30 ¼ e32 ¼ P2

f9 ¼ f12 ¼ f14 ¼ f15 ¼ f16 ¼ f17 ¼ f18 ¼ f19 ¼ f20 ¼ f21 ¼ x Summing the flow variables in this junction, we get
f26 ¼ f29 þ f30 þ f32 (26)
Summing the effort variables in this junction, we get;
e12 þ e14 þ ðe15 þ e16 Þ þ e17 þ e18 6 e19 þ e20 ¼ e9  e21 (24) Comparing Eq. (26) with Eq. (16) shows that the continuity equa-
tion at the second cavity of volume V2 is satisfied in the bond
Comparing Eq. (24) with Eq. (7) shows that Newton’s second law graph model. Therefore, the pressure P2 is given by
of motion applied to the piston motion is satisfied in the bond ð
1
graph model. Therefore, the piston velocity x is given by P2 ¼ e29 ¼ ðf26  f30  f32 Þdt
C29 ðyÞ
ð
 1
x ¼ f20 ¼ ððe9 e21 Þ  ðe12 þe14 þe15 þe16 þe17 þe18 6e19 ÞÞdt Referring to Fig. 10, the efforts variables of the 1-junction with
mx
common poppet velocity y are given by
Referring to Fig. 10, the flow variables of the 0-junction with e31 ¼ e29 ap ðyÞ ¼ P2 ap ðyÞ
common pressure P1 are given by: ð
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
e35 ¼ f38 dt ¼ ky y
f7 ¼ f13 ¼ Q1 ¼ R13 jðe3  e23 Þjsignðe3  e23 Þ C35
sffiffiffi! !
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qa3p ðyÞ dy
¼ Cd1 A1 jðP  P1 Þjsign ðP  P1 Þ e37 ¼ R37 f38 ¼
q 2C2dp a22 dt
dx dV1  d2 y
f22 ¼ As f20 ¼ As ¼ e38 ¼ my f38 ¼ my
dt dt dt2
 ðV1  As xÞ dP1 1
f23 ¼ C23 ðxÞ e 23 ¼ e40 ¼ yo ¼ ky yo
B dt C35
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f25 ¼ f26 ¼ Q2 ¼ R26 jðe23  e29 Þjsignðe23  e29 Þ  
q cos b
sffiffiffi! e41 2
¼ Rym f32 ¼ Q2
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Cc2 app ðyÞ tp
¼ Cd2 A2 jðP1  P2 ÞjsignðP1  P2 Þ
q 
The common poppet velocity variable y of this junction is defined
by
The common effort P1 of this 0-junction is defined by

e7 ¼ e22 ¼ e23 ¼ e25 ¼ e26 ¼ P1 f31 ¼ f35 ¼ f37 ¼ f38 ¼ f40 ¼ f41 ¼ y

Summing the flow variables in this junction, we get Summing the effort variables in this junction, we get

f7 þ f22 ¼ f23 þ f26 (25) e31 ¼ e35 þ e37 þ e38 þ e40 þ e41 (27)

Comparing Eq. (25) with Eq. (14) shows that the continuity equa- Comparing Eq. (27) with Eq. (18) shows that the Newton’s second
tion at the first cavity of volume V1 is satisfied in the bond graph law of motion applied to the poppet motion is satisfied in the bond
model. Therefore, the pressure P1 is given by graph model. Therefore, the poppet velocity y is given by
ð ð
1  1
P1 ¼ e23 ¼ ðf7 þ f22  f26 Þdt y ¼ f38 ¼ ðe31  ðe35 þ e37 þ e40 þ e41 ÞÞdt
C23 ðxÞ my

041001-8 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 4 Simulation and Experiments
The simulation of the valve dynamic response based on bond
graph model is carried out using 20-SIM software. In this case, the
overall bond graph model, shown in Fig. 10, should be modified
in order to introduce the effect of the valve nonlinearities. These
nonlinear relations are introduced in the bond graph by the addi-
tion of the convenient 20-SIM blocks as shown in Fig. 11. This soft-
ware is an interactive tool, where the model entry and model
processing are fully integrated. This means that, during entry and
editing phase of the model, it can be run, and the results are shown
in the model itself [15]. The simulation of the valve dynamic
response based on the mathematical model is carried out by solv-
ing Eqs. (1)–(22) using SIMULINK [16]. The numerical values of the
valve constructional and operational parameters were obtained by
direct measurements carried out on the valve elements. The simu-
lation results of the dynamic responses of the valve pressures P
and P1 for a certain value of the precompression of the poppet
spring yo of both models are shown in Figs. 12(a) and 12(b). The
simulation results of both models are carried out under the same
assumptions. As shown in these figures, the simulation results of
both models are seen to correlate very well both in the shape,
magnitude, and response time. They gave almost the same results,
thus indicating that both developed models might be representing
the dynamics of the studied valve. The minor difference between
the simulated results, appearing in these figures, may be attributed
to the difference between the numerical simulation structures of
both SIMULINK and 20-SIM softwares.
During the modeling and simulation processes, it is found that
bond graphs give a good description of the physical nature of the
system, its elements, and the interaction between the system ele-
ments. The advantage of bond graph over the conventional mathe-
matical way is the simplicity of bond graph drawing. Moreover,
drawing the bond graph and the correct causality assignment indi-
cates good understanding of the physical nature of the studied
valve as well as the nature and interaction between its elements. It
provides a universal tool for understanding the system nature irre-
Fig. 11 Bond graph 20-SIM simulation model of the studied valve
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
spective to the specialty of the reader. As for the mathematical
model, it is a partial gain of the bond graph. It can be generated
systematically from the bond graph without going back to the sys-
tem schematic. The bond graph simulation can be directly carried
out based on the developed bond graph drawing using convenient
software without deducing any mathematical relations. Moreover,
the mathematical relations describing the system dynamic behav-
ior can be simply deduced from the bond graph drawing either
directly or by using a simple computer code. However, when the
valve simulation is carried out using SIMULINK, the derived mathe-
matical equations should be transferred to a SIMULINK block dia-
gram by a complicated way, before starting the simulation.
The experimental work aims at validating the proposed bond
graph model in the dynamic mode of operation. The resistance to
the studied relief valve circuit, the variation of loads, and the flow
demands are represented in this work by a directional control
valve DCV fitted at the studied valve inlet line, as shown in
Fig. 2. The rapid loading of the studied valve is carried out by
rapid closure of the DCV. In this case, the whole pump exit flow
Qp is forced to pass to the tank through the studied relief valve.
When the studied valve is going out of operation, a safety valve is
used to protect the system against overloading as shown in Fig. 2.
The dynamic responses of the pressures P and P1 are measured
experimentally for different values of the precompression of the
poppet spring yo and the results obtained are plotted in Figs. 13
and 14. The same figures carry also the simulation results obtained
from the bond graph model.
5 Analysis of Results
Figures 13 and 14 show that the increase of the precompression
value of the poppet spring yo increases the pressures P and P1 .
When the valve is fully opened (i.e., the precompression of the
poppet spring yo ¼ 0), the pressures P and P1 are increased to the
value needed to overcome only the precompression of the piston
spring xoo . In this case, the studied valve flow rate Qtv is flowing
JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-9

Fig. 12 Simulation results of the dynamic response of the
studied valve: (a) supply pressure P and (b) control pressure P1
to the tank via the widely opened restrictions areas as ðxÞ and
app ðyÞ at relatively small steady state values of the pressures P
and P1 , as shown in Figs. 13 and 14. When the poppet spring pre-
compression yo increased to reach its maximum value, the flow
rate Qtv decreased until the studied valve could be going out of
operation. In this case, the pressures P and P1 are increased con-
tinuously to the values needed to overcome the preset hydraulic
and mechanical forces. When the valve is fully closed (i.e., the
poppet spring is totally compressed on the poppet element,
yo ¼ yo max ), the studied valve is going out of operation and the
pressures P and P1 are increased continuously until the safety
Fig. 13 Measured and simulated results of the dynamic
response of the studied valve supply pressure P
041001-10 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
Fig. 14 Measured and simulated results of the dynamic
response of the studied valve control pressure P1
valve opens (see Fig. 2) to protect the system against overloading
as seen in Figs. 13 and 14. These figures also show that the valve
response presents a settling time within 0.65 s. This time is rela-
tively long, due to the small stiffness of the piston spring kx and
the relatively large inertia of the moving piston mass mx . The var-
iations of the pressures P and P1 in these figures are explained by
the following. When the DCV is switched off, the load is applied
on the valve and the pressure P increases. This pressure causes the
pressures P1 and P2 to increase. When the pressure P reaches the
value needed to overcome the poppet spring force, the poppet ele-
ment starts to displace. The time at which the piston starts to dis-
place, the motion of the piston leads to rapid decompression of the
oil in the valve inlet cavity of volume V and rapid compression of
the oil in the first cavity of volume V1 . This motion leads to fur-
ther increase in the operating pressure P1 . Due to the continuous
displacement of the piston, the valve inlet cavity of volume V is
connected to the tank via the piston opening area as ðxÞ, and so the
valve starts to dump the oil at a flow rate Qts . However, the con-
tinuous supply of the oil from the pump to the valve inlet cavity
and then to the first cavity of volume V1 , through the first damping
orifice, causes the pressures P and P1 to increase rapidly and reach
their steady state values. These stages of dynamic variation are
clearly indicated in Figs. 13 and 14. Since the coulomb friction
force Fc acts in the direction opposite to that of piston motion, it
is one of the factors that contribute to the hysteresis exhibited by
the valve during its opening and reseating. This effect is clearly
seen in Figs. 13 and 14 in the time range of 0.5–1.5 s. The exami-
nation of Figs. 13 and 14 shows that experimental and simulation
results are in good agreement from the point of view of the gen-
eral shape of response. But the simulation results show observable
difference with the corresponding measured ones at certain pres-
sure ranges. This difference may be attributed to the following:
• The discharge coefficients of the valve throttling areas are
assumed constant.
• The pressure variations are very sensitive to the flow rates
due to great bulk modulus.
Considering these factors, the obtained simulated results and
the corresponding measured ones are in a good agreement during
the whole operating pressure range, which insures the validity of
the proposed bond graph model.
6 Conclusion
In this paper, a detailed nonlinear bond graph model of a two-
stage pressure relief valve has been accurately developed based
upon a previously developed mathematical model. This paper
introduces a new method for creating and drawing the bond graph
model, based upon the developed mathematical model. The simu-
lation results of the bond graph model were compared with those
Transactions of the ASME
 of the mathematical model, which had been developed based on L1 ¼ length of the first damping orifice
the same assumptions. The results were found to correlate very L2 ¼ length of the second damping orifice
well both in shape, magnitude, and response times. The bond Ls ¼ length of the piston element
graph model was also verified experimentally in the dynamics kr ¼ equivalent seat material stiffness
mode of operation. The study showed good agreement between kx , ky ¼ spring stiffness
simulation and experimental results. As a result of comparison, mx ¼ reduced mass of the piston moving parts
bond graphs can quickly and accurately model the dynamics in my ¼ reduced mass of the poppet valve moving parts
the fluid power system components. The bond graph model was MTF ¼ modulated transformer element
developed from basic principles, and hence this work can be used P¼ valve supply pressure
as an educational tool on bond graphs representation. During the P1 ¼ pressure in the first cavity of volume V1
simulation study, it was found that nonlinearity appears due to P2 ¼ pressure in the second cavity of volume V2
three main factors: Pt ¼ pressure in the valve return line
• the pressure changes, which cause nonlinear velocity changes Q1 ¼ flow rate via the first damping orifice
of the fluid flow Q2 ¼ flow rate via the second damping orifice
• the throttling area of the valve restriction, which usually Qp ¼ pump flow rate
changes nonlinearly Qv ¼ flow rate via the DCV opening area
• the discharge coefficient of the throttling area of the valve Qtv ¼ valve flow rate
restriction, which does not remain constant Qts ¼ flow rate via the piston opening area
Qtp ¼ flow rate via the poppet valve opening area
During the simulation processes, the effect of various design R2 ¼ modulated resistance
parameters on the overall dynamic response of the valve is stud- R13 ¼ resistance element
ied. The effect of changes of the diameters of the first and second R15 ¼ resistance element
damping orifices, precompression of the poppet spring, the seat R17 ¼ modulated resistance
diameter of the poppet element, and the volumes of the valve R19 ¼ resistance element
cavities are some of the important design parameters that affect R26 ¼ resistance element
the valve dynamic response. R37 ¼ resistance element
Rx ¼ modulated resistance
Rxm ¼ mechanical resistance
Nomenclature
Rxh ¼ hydraulic resistance
A1 ¼ area of the first damping orifice Ry ¼ modulated resistance
A2 ¼ area of the second damping orifice Rym ¼ modulated mechanical resistance
As ¼ main piston area Ryh ¼ modulated hydraulic resistance
a1 ¼ effective cross-sectional area of the leakage across the Re ¼ Reynolds number
piston circumference SF1 ¼ source of flow
a2 ¼ effective cross-sectional area of the leakage across the SE10 ¼ source of effort
poppet circumference SE18 ¼ source of effort
av ðxv Þ ¼ DCV opening area SE24 ¼ source of effort
as ðxÞ ¼ main piston opening area SE34 ¼ source of effort
ap ðyÞ ¼ poppet area subjected to pressure P2 SE40 ¼ source of effort
app ðyÞ ¼ poppet valve opening area t¼ time
B¼ bulk modulus TF ¼ transformer element
C3 ðxÞ ¼ modulated capacitance V¼ volume of the valve inlet cavity
C14 ¼ capacitance element V1 ¼ volume of the first cavity
C16 ¼ capacitance element V2 ¼ volume of the second cavity
C23 ðxÞ ¼ modulated capacitance Vx ¼ volume of fluid flow
C29 ðyÞ ¼ modulated capacitance x¼ piston displacement
C35 ¼ capacitance element xo ¼ initial displacement of the piston
Cc1 , Cc2 ¼ contraction coefficients xoo ¼ precompression of the piston spring
Cd1 , Cd2 ¼ discharge coefficients xv ¼ DCV spool displacement
Cds , Cdp ¼ discharge coefficients y¼ poppet element displacement
Cdl , Cdv ¼ discharge coefficients yo ¼ presetting of the poppet spring
d1 ¼ diameter of the first damping orifice yo max ¼ maximum presetting of the poppet spring
d2 ¼ diameter of the second damping orifice q¼ oil density
ds ¼ piston diameter /¼ flow streamline inclination angle
dp ¼ poppet seat diameter b¼ poppet inclination angle
dv ¼ DCV spool diameter
e¼ bond graph effort variable
f¼ bond graph flow variable
fc ¼ coulomb friction coefficient
References
[1] Dasgupta, K., and Murrenhoff, H., 2011, “Modeling and Dynamics of a Servo-
fr ¼ equivalent seat viscose friction coefficient Valve Controlled Hydraulic Motor by Bondgraph,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 46,
fx, fy ¼ damping coefficient pp. 1016–1035.
Fc ¼ coulomb friction force [2] Muvengei, M., and Kihiu, J., 2011, “Bond Graph Modeling of Inter-Actuator
Fx ¼ viscous damping force Interactions in a Multi-Cylinder Hydraulic System,” Int. J. Aerosp. Mech. Eng.,
5(3), pp. 147–156. Available at http://www.waset.org/journals/ijame/v5/v5-3-
Fjx ¼ axial component of the jet reaction force 21.pdf
FjL ¼ lateral component of the jet reaction force [3] Dasgupta, K., Watton, J., and Pan, S., 2006, “Open-Loop Dynamic Perform-
Frx ¼ seat reaction force ance of a Servo- Valve Controlled Motor Transmission System With Pump
Fpr ¼ preload force Loading Using Steady-State Characteristics,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 41, pp.
262–282.
Fjy ¼ jet reaction force [4] Dasgupta, K., and Watton, J., 2005, “Dynamic Analysis of Proportional Sole-
Ix ¼ inertia element noid Controlled Piloted Relief Valve by Bondgraph,” Simul. Model. Pract.
Iy ¼ inertia element Theory, 13, pp. 21–38.

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control JULY 2013, Vol. 135 / 041001-11

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/ on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 [5] Dasgupta, K., and Karmakar, R., 2002, “Modelling and Dynamics of Single-
Stage Pressure Relief Valve With Directional Damping,” Simul. Model. Pract.
Theory, 10, pp. 51–67.
[6] Gad, O., 2013, “Comprehensive Nonlinear Modeling of a Pilot Operated Relief
Valve,” ASME J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control, 135(1), p. 011011.
[7] Zung, P.-S., and Perng, M.-H., 2002, “Nonlinear Dynamic Model of a Two-
Stage Pressure Relief Valve for Designers,” ASME J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Con-
trol, 124(1), pp. 62–66.
[8] Shin, Y. C., 1991, “Static and Dynamic Characteristics of a Two Stage Pilot
Relief Valve,” ASME J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control, 113(2), pp. 280–288.
[9] Dasgupta, K., and Karmakar, R., 2002, “Dynamic Analysis of Pilot Operated
Pressure Relief Valve,” Simul. Model. Pract. Theory, 10(2), pp. 35–49.
041001-12 / Vol. 135, JULY 2013
DownloadedViewFrom:
publicationhttp://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/926730/
stats
[10] Petherick, P. M., and Birk, A. M., 1991, “State-of-the-Art Review of Pressure
Relief Valve Design, Testing and Modeling,” ASME J. Press. Vess., 113(1), pp.
46–54.
[11] Merritt, H. E., 1967, Hydraulic Control Systems, John Wiley, New York.
[12] Galal Rabie, M., 2009, Fluid Power Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York.
[13] Karnopp, D. C., and Rosenberg, R. C., 1983, Introduction to Physical System
Dynamics, McGraw-Hill, New York.
[14] Gawthrop, P., and Smith, L., 1996, Metamodeling: Bond Graphs and Dynamic
Systems, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[15] Controllab Products, 2003, 20-SIM, http://www.20sim.com
[16] The Math Works, Inc., 2002, MATLAB, Simulink Package version 7 R14, Natick,
MA.
Transactions of the ASME
on 06/19/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a