Hydraulic Actuator Speed Limiting via Flow Rate Signal Attenuation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing dynamic testing systems face inefficiencies due to pressure drops caused by safety valves, which reduce energy efficiency and provide only a single safety layer, limiting the speed of hydraulic actuators.

Innovation Solution

A method and test station configuration that utilize a flow rate control circuit to adjust the flow rate of hydraulic fluid to the actuators, allowing for controlled reduction of actuator speed without additional pressure drops, by switching between a differential signal and an attenuated differential signal.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If an input safety valve is used to limit hydraulic fluid flow rate for worker safety, then actuator speed is reduced to safe levels, but pressure drops occur and energy efficiency is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveworker safetyVSAvoidenergy efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical input safety valve with an electronic control system that uses a sensor to detect actuator position and a controller to modulate the control valve, thereby substituting a mechanical flow limitation approach with an electronic feedback control approach that avoids unnecessary pressure drops

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback control system where a sensor detects the actuator position and feeds this information back to the controller, which then adjusts the control valve to maintain safe actuator speeds without requiring constant pressure drop-based flow limitation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If an input safety valve is used to control hydraulic fluid flow, then actuator speed is limited, but the system provides only a single safety layer

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety layerVSAvoidsafety system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a feedback control system where a sensor detects the actuator position and feeds this information back to the controller, which then adjusts the control valve to maintain safe actuator speeds without requiring constant pressure drop-based flow limitation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The controller serves multiple functions: it manages normal actuator operation, enforces safety speed limits, and can respond to emergency stop signals, thereby providing multiple safety layers through a single integrated control system rather than requiring separate safety valves

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Productivity

If higher pressurization is used to overcome pressure drops from safety valves, then normal operation can be maintained, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenormal operationVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical input safety valve with an electronic control system that uses a sensor to detect actuator position and a controller to modulate the control valve, thereby substituting a mechanical flow limitation approach with an electronic feedback control approach that avoids unnecessary pressure drops

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses dynamic feedback control to adjust the control valve in real-time based on actual actuator position and velocity, allowing the system to maintain safe operation with minimal energy loss rather than using static high pressurization to overcome fixed pressure drops

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This solution effectively limits the speed of hydraulic actuators while maintaining energy efficiency by avoiding additional pressure drops, providing a safer working environment without redundant safety valves.

Implementation Method 1

The actuators of the test stations are driven by hydraulic fluid flows

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectHydraulic fluid flow: Fluid Spray

Implementation Method 2

The actuations performed by each actuator are controlled using a control valve (e.g., proportional control valve) that regulates the flow rate and direction of the hydraulic fluid flow through the actuator

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectValve control: Valve

Implementation Method 3

Such input safety valves inherently impose pressure drops in the system

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPressure drop: Pressure Drop

Data Source

PatentEP4517107A1Dynamic testing system hydraulic with hydraulic actuator speed control
Publication Date: 2025.03.05 ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC
  • EP4517107A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4517107A1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP4517107A1 patent drawingFigure 4~9

AI summary

In a method of controlling a hydraulic actuator of a test station, a differential signal is generated based on a difference between a reference signal and a feedback signal using an actuator controller. A flow rate control circuit is set in one of a first state and a second state based on a flow rate attenuation signal. The differential signal is delivered to the control valve as an actuator command signal when the flow rate control circuit is in the first state. An attenuated differential signal is delivered to the control valve as the actuator command signal when the flow rate control circuit is in the second state. A flow rate and a direction of the hydraulic fluid flow is controlled based on the actuator command signal. The flow rate corresponding to the attenuated differential signal is less than the flow rate corresponding to the differential signal.