Flow control for electro-hydraulic systems

Data processing: vehicles – navigation – and relative location – Vehicle control – guidance – operation – or indication – Construction or agricultural-type vehicle

Reexamination Certificate

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

C701S054000, C417S216000, C060S428000

Reexamination Certificate

active

06498973

ABSTRACT:

FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to a method for distributing hydraulic flow between a plurality of hydraulic actuators wherein at least one of the flow rates of the actuators is determined not by a manual control but by a valve controller.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Many construction and work vehicles typically for earth moving purposes, have many, if not all of their systems, driven by hydraulic fluid. In the case of a backhoe, for example, the engine in the vehicle not only drives the backhoe over the ground, but drives boom swing cylinders that move the backhoe arm laterally side-to-side, as well as a boom cylinder to lift and lower the boom, a dipper cylinder to lift and lower the dipper and a bucket cylinder for opening and closing the bucket. In the case of a front loader, the engine not only drives the vehicle across the ground, but also drives a hydraulic pump that is connected to one or more arm cylinders to lift and lower the two arms on which the bucket is attached and one or more tilt cylinders to tilt the front loader bucket in or out with respect to the vehicle. In the case of road graders, for example, several different hydraulic actuators are used to angle the blade with respect to the road, tilt it, and raise it and lower it. In the case of forklifts, several hydraulic actuators are used to raise and lower the forks, tilt the forks backwards and forwards so the load will be located over the vehicle or away from the vehicle, and to extend the forks (in some types of lifts) to place a packet on a high shelf without moving the vehicle itself back and forth.
In addition to these examples, one should recognize that many work vehicles also provide for auxiliary hydraulic devices to be attached and detached for use in special situations. For example, hydraulic post hole diggers which include a hydraulic motor and a rotating bit approximately eight inches (8″) in diameter are often attached to a front loader or a backhoe in place of the bucket. As another example, pneumatic or hydraulic pavement breakers are often mounted on the front of skid-steer loaders in place of a bucket to break up pavement. These attachments are typically separately controllable through an auxiliary hydraulic control manifold to which they are attached with quick-connects.
One of the continuing problems of work vehicles is that the market is highly competitive and they must be made to sell at a reasonable price. This always involves design and engineering trade-offs in which the designers and engineers attempt to identify the most common uses and ensure that the vehicle is able to perform those functions. The inevitable compromises typically include providing a hydraulic pump that does not have capacity sufficient to simultaneously drive every single hydraulic actuator and motor without being overloaded. By “overloaded” I mean that the motor cannot provide pressurized hydraulic fluid at a sufficient flow rate to drive all the devices simultaneously. Inevitably, in almost every work vehicle, there is some point within the performance envelope in which the pump, providing as much fluid as it can, is unable to drive the actuators and motors as fast as the operator commands them.
The operator commands these various actuators or motors by either operating on/off switches, by moving a proportional control lever, rotating a potentiometer, or manipulating a one or two axis joy stick. Most commonly, two or more of these controls are provided for the operator to manipulate. Most of the controls are configured to generate a flow rate roughly proportional to the degree of deflection of the control lever. By manipulating two proportional control levers, the operator can vary the speed of two separate hydraulic actuators in order to coordinate the movement of one or more actuators at the same time. For example, an operator may extend the boom of a backhoe while simultaneously lifting the dipper and opening the bucket by manipulating two joysticks, one in each hand. This permits the operator to substantially increase the productivity he would have if he could only operate one actuator at a time. In many earth working operations or excavating operations, the operator must control at least two actuators at once in order to dig or shape a hole in the ground, for example. If an operator of a backhoe is attempting to scrape the bottom of an excavation flat, he will typically have to operate the boom, the dipper, and the bucket cylinders simultaneously. No single control can be operated to follow the contours of the ground as accurately as all three together.
It is in these situations where the limitations of the pump are most apparent. An operator who is trying to simultaneously swing a boom while raising the boom, extending the dipper and opening the bucket may find that there is insufficient hydraulic fluid and one or more of the hydraulic cylinders may suddenly cease moving. If the operator has been manipulating in his various hand controls and levers in order to achieve a smooth coordinated movement, the sudden erratic motion of one hydraulic actuator may gouge the ground improperly, making an error in excavation that he must later go back and repair.
One result of this failure of the pump to provide sufficient pressurized hydraulic fluid flow is that operators instinctively slow down whenever they operate several different actuators simultaneously. From experience, they know that something may “grind to a halt” as they are trying to perform the coordinated operation. As a result, they slow the entire operation down until it is performed at a coordinated speed that they are reasonably assured will be within the flow capacity of the hydraulic pump on the vehicle. This, however, requires years of experience, and even with the experience, may cause the operator to operate well within the permissible total flow capacity of the pump, thus reducing his productivity. In other words, he may slow down unnecessarily.
In U.S. Pat. No. 4,712,376 issued to Hadank and assigned to Caterpillar Corporation at issue, one way of compensating for this problem was described. In the compensation method described in Hadank, the operator would simultaneously operate two controls moving them to positions that were roughly proportionate to the flow rate to the actuators and therefore to the speed of movement of the actuators. Rather than convert the control signals directly to a flow rate (or rather valve position) and drive the proportional control hydraulic valve to that opening, an electronic valve controller would read the signals from the two manual proportional controls (joysticks) would sum the two flow rates that were equivalent to those two positions and would determine what proportion of the total available flow from the pump those commanded flow rates (or valve openings) represented. For example, if the operator moved one control lever indicating that the hydraulic valve for that levers actuator should be open 100% and the operator moved another control lever for another actuator to a position that indicated it should also be open 100%, the control system would add these two requested flow rates or demand signals together. If the two 100% flow rates added up to 150% of the total hydraulic flow capacity of the hydraulic pump, the electronic valve controller would scale both of the signals back proportionately. In other words, since the operator was requesting for each flow controller 50% more flow than could be handled together, the electronic valve controller would send a proportionately reduced signal of 66% (instead of the 100%) to the first hydraulic valve and 66% (of the second hand control) to the second hydraulic valve. In this manner, the total flow permitted through the two proportional control valves would always be within the total flow capacity of the pump. No valve or actuator or motor would be starved of hydraulic fluid. What the operator would notice when manipulating the two hand controls was that the relative motion of each hydraulic actuator stayed the same, while the overall speed of

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for the USA inventors and patents. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

Flow control for electro-hydraulic systems does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Flow control for electro-hydraulic systems, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Flow control for electro-hydraulic systems will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2992338

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.