MATHEMATICAL MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF

PILOT OPERATED SOLENOID VALVE

1

Guided By,
Mr. DEEPAK .K.P
Assistant prof. Automobile
NCERC, THRISUR

Presented By
SARATHDAS S
NCAOCMD007
M.Tech Machine Design
NCERC, THRISUR

Contents
2

01. Abstract
02. Introduction
03. Objective
04. Working of OSS Thruster Valve
05. Design Specification
06. Division Of Functions
07. Comparison of the analysis results with test results of the
hardware developed
08. Off Nominal Parametric Studies
09. Combined Cumulative Parametric Studies
10. Comparison of the parametric analysis results with test
results
of the hardware developed
11. Seat deformation analysis
12. Conclusion
13. Reference

Abstract
3

In order to minimize the thruster weight, envelope and power

requirements, thereby reducing the system overall weight, a pilot

operated solenoid valve with integral nozzle is used as the thruster valve.
The valve was successfully developed and completed all qualification
tests. The valve is unique in its design by the configuration having a pilot
valve is kept inside the main sealing poppet
This makes the design complicate and prediction of valve responses

difficult in traditional methods. It is proposed to carry out a mathematical

model to predict the performance and parametric study of the valve using
MATLAB software and verify the structural adequacy of the various
elements by FE analysis using ANSYS software. The mathematical
model can be validated using actual experiments carried out the realized
valve.

Introduction
4

Solenoid

valve is an integrated device containing an

electromechanical solenoid which actuates either a pneumatic or
hydraulic valve.
It essentially consists of a valving element with a poppet, seat, spring
etc and an actuator portion consisting of the solenoid coil and
armature which is connected to the valve poppet which controls the
flow.
When an electric current is passed through the coil, it produces a
magnetic field in the axial direction which attracts the spring loaded
piston and thus, opens the fluid flow.
The valve offer fast and safe switching, high reliability, long service
life

Objective
5

Aim of the project

To develop a mathematical model of OSS thruster valve and

there by theoretically predict the response time
To validate the model with experimental test results
To analyze the effect of various parameters affecting the
response time.
Identify the critical design parameters to optimize the design.
Verify the structural adequacy of the various elements by FE
analysis using ANSYS software.

Literature survey
6

K. A. Venkataraman,[1] explain about the response time parameters of

solenoid valves under various working pressures, input pressure conditions,

and orifice diameter are influence response time variations. The newly
proposed six response time parameters can be used to rate and select the
appropriate valve for various industrial applications.
Liu Lei, Zhang Desheng, Zhao Jiyun [2] had suggested in this paper the
pressure change is studied on the process of the opening and closing of the
solenoid valve under different pressures of the liquid supply, which are
response characteristics.
Qianfeng Liu, Hanliang Bo, Benke Qin [3] described that; the response time
of the mechanical valve is calculated based on the lagging time (or time
delay) between the input (electrical signal) and the output (pressure).The
electrical current which depending on the electromagnetic forces of the direct
action solenoid valve, influence response time variation most.

Working of OSS Thruster Valve

7

Fig 1. Configuration of
OSS thruster valve

On energisation of the solenoid coil, the pilot valve opens due to the

magnetic force of attraction between the solenoid plunger and

armature. Since, the pilot valve port is small, the required load and
thereby, the plunger diameter, number of coil ampere turns and power
are less compared to a direct acting solenoid valve with a port equal
to that of main valve.
When the pilot valve opens, the gas in the main valve poppet cavity is

discharged to the nozzle through the pilot valve port, in turn, causing
a differential pressure across the main poppet.
The main poppet now opens under the influence of this differential

pressure and fluid flow takes place to the nozzle.

Design specifications
9

Type

: Solenoid actuated, pilot

operated, pneumatic valve

Operating medium

: N2 gas

Operating temperature
Flow rate
Nominal inlet pressure
Operating inlet pressure range
Allowable pressure drop
Valve port
Supply voltage
Weight

: 223K to 323K
: 25 g/s (max)
: 2.8 MPa
: 2.80.15 MPa
: 0.1 MPa
: 4.5 mm
: 28+4 VDC nominal
:500 grams (maximum)

Division Of Functions
10

Module 1:
Electrical delay: The time from the start of giving electrical command and
to reach the required magnetsing force/ max. current.
Module 2:
Dynamic analysis of pilot poppet: The time delay for the pilot poppet to
start and reach its full specified stroke.
Module 3:
Variation of pressure force acting on the main poppet; Time delay to reach
the opening unbalanced pressure force on main poppet. Mainly determined
by the feeding orifice and pilot valve poppet travel.
Module 4:
Dynamic analysis of main poppet; The time delay for Main poppet to start
travel and reach the maximum specified lift.

11

Module 1-Electrical delay

Value of magnetic field strength remains constant through out the

length of the solenoid
TABLE input for module-1
Sl. No.

Description

Value

o Permeability of air

4 10-7 H/m

N- No. of turns of the coil

1630

Imax Max. coli current

0.3 A

R resistance of the coil

90

L inductance of the coil

0.257 H

A effective area of the

plunger
l air gap length

50 10-6 m2

0.5mm

12

= B2A/2o

And substitute for B as B =

0 and for i from above we get

Now the variation of current is given as i = Imax(1 - e(-Rt/L) )

F = o N2A/2l2 (Imax(1 - e(-Rt/L) ))2

Therefore After simplification we get

F = 30.033 (1-e(-350.194t))2

13

Figure-2variation of magnetic
force with respect to time

14

Module 2-Dynamic analysis of pilot valve

Fig 3 Schematic diagram

of pilot valve

The valve is kept closed by means of spring force and the pressure force exerted

by the Nitrogen gas at 2.8MPa.

On energisation of the solenoid coil, magnetic force of attraction comes into
action between the solenoid plunger and armature.

15

TABLE input for module-2

Sl. No.

Description

Value

Fs-Assembled spring load of

pilot poppet

7.4 N

P2-Pressure acting above the

pilot poppet

2.8 N/ mm2

P3-Pressure outside the valve

0.1 N/ mm2

As2 sealing area corresponding

to second sealing point dia0.7

0.3848 mm2

Ksp-stiffness of the pilot spring

4.4145 N/mm

Mpp-mass of pilot poppet

Lmaxpp-maximum travel for

pilot poppet

0.0085 Kg
0.2 mm

16

Magnetic force exceeds the sum of the other two forces, there would be

net upward force acting on the system and the pilot valve would start
moving up under this net resultant force which is nothing but the
difference of magnetic force and the sum of pressure force and spring
force.
It is equal to the difference between the pressure acting above the pilot
poppet and the pressure acting outside the valve multiplied by the
sealing area.
Pressure force
= (2.8 0.1) 0.3848
=1.038 N
Thus, net force acting downwards which is responsible for closing the

valve comes out as 7.4 + 1.038 = 8.438 N

17

Now, this is the force under which the pilot poppet is moving. On dividing

this force by the mass of moving parts in pilot poppet, we get the
acceleration experienced by the pilot in that particular time interval.
Now, the velocity at any time t can be calculated from the basic kinematic

equation i.e. v = u + at which can be written for the time interval dt as

Vt1= vt0+ a.dt
Again, lift of the pilot poppet

S=u t +0.5.at2
Lp(t1) =vt0.dt + 0.5.a.dt2 Where Lpt1 is the lift of the pilot poppet

For the next time interval, the net force gets increased by ks.Lp (t1) since the

pilot spring gets further compressed in the previous time interval

i.e. Fnett1 = Fnett0 + ks . Lp (t0)

18

Pilot valve is a flat poppet

type with port of diameter
0.7 mm. Since the seat
internal diameter is also 0.7
mm, valve travel comes to
one fourth of seat internal
diameter
i.e.
0.18mm,
rounded to 0.2 mm.

Fig 4 Lift of the pilot poppet vs. time

19
According to the figure the pilot starts to move from the third millisecond and reaches its

maximum displacement at 5 milliseconds and remains at that position for the remaining
time span.
From this figure we can see that once the pilot starts to move it takes only very less time,

hardly 2 milliseconds to reach its fully opened position.

This is because of the less mass (0.0085kg) of the pilot due to which even a very small

force can produce a high acceleration coupled with the small distance 0.2mm that it need
to travel .
Now the total electrical delay which is the time taken by the pilot valve to reach its fully

opened condition from the point at which the solenoid is switched on is obtained from
the figure as 5 milliseconds

20

Module 3 -Variation of Pressure Force acting on Main Poppet

The diameter of feeding orifice is less than diameter of vending orifice

and also pressure difference between main chamber and main poppet
cavity is less than that of main poppet cavity and nozzle cavity so the
mass of gas entering into main poppet cavity will be less than mass of
gas leaving main poppet cavity .
Hence there will be a drop in pressure in the main poppet cavity due to

the drop in mass. This drop in pressure in main poppet cavity causes a
net resultant pressure force to act on main poppet, which acts against
main spring and there by causes the main poppet to open.

21

Fig.5 Schematic for pneumatic

delay

The main poppet cavity is connected to two infinite volume

pressure tanks 1 &2 through orifices A12 &A23. The infinite volume
pressure tank 1 is assumed to be at a higher pressure P1 which here
will be designated as source pressure while the infinite volume
pressure tank 2 is at a lower pressure designated as sink pressure.

22

In the initial stage the orifice A12 (which represents the feeding orifice)

is open while the orifice A23 (which represents the venting orifice
operated by pilot valve) is closed.
Under this condition, the pressure within the main poppet cavity is the
source pressure P1. Now let us assume that A23 is opened for a small
time interval dt .There will be a gas flow between main poppet cavity
and Nozzle cavity, depending on the pressure ratio the flow can be
either a choked flow or non choked flow.
Calculating mass flow rate in the above specified condition.

mact= Cd. .A

mact= Cd. A.P

Non choked flow

Choked flow

23

Due to this flow pressure inside the main poppet cavity drops from P1to

P2. Since P2 is less than P1, there will be again a flow of gas from
source tank to main poppet cavity, due to which the final pressure
inside the main poppet cavity will be at P2 higher than P3but less than
P1so here in the simulation model the approach followed is
1.Calculate critical pressure ratio for the used gas(Rc =

2.Calculate existing pressure ratio depending on the pressure of

main valve cavity and nozzle cavity (R23 = P3 / P2)
3.If R23 < Rc, then equation for choked flow condition
4.If R23 > Rc, then equation for non-choked flow is used to
calculate the mass flow rate.

24

5.New density value is calculated by dividing the new mass

by volume of main valve cavity i.e.V2.
6.Then depending upon this new density, by using isentropic
relationship new pressure value inside the main valve cavity
calculated.

is

Due to this pressure drop now P2 becomes lesser than P1 hence mass

starts flowing from main chamber cavity to main valve cavity. Hence
pressure inside main valve cavity tends to increase. For the same time
step the increase of pressure inside main valve is calculated in
following way:

25

1.Calculate critical pressure ratio for the used gas R c

2.Calculate existing pressure ratio depending on the pressure of
main valve cavity and main chamber cavity R12
3.If R12 < Rc, then equation for choked flow condition
4.If R12 > Rc, then equation for non-choked flow is used to calculate the
mass flow rate.
5.Now new density value is calculated by dividing the new mass
by volume of main valve cavity i.e. V2.
6.Then depending upon this new density, by using isentropic
relationship new pressure value inside the main valve cavity is
calculated.

26

Since the area A12 is lesser than the area A23 and also pressure difference

between main chamber cavity and main valve cavity is less than that of
main valve cavity and nozzle cavity hence net mass flow rate from
main chamber cavity to main valve cavity is lesser than the net mass
flow rate from main valve cavity to nozzle cavity.
So after each time step a drop in pressure inside main valve cavity will

occur. This drop in pressure of main valve cavity causes the pressure
force generation which acts on the main poppet.

27

Module 4-Dynamic analysis of main poppet

Fig 6 Schematic of main poppet valve

The main poppet valve will have upward motion only when pressure

force is going to exceed net resultant of spring and O-ring(std parker

number: 2.016) force which is 45.93N.

28

For this short time interval dt, difference between pressure force and combined

force constituted by spring and O-ring would be responsible for main poppet
movement.
Now, this is the force under which the main poppet is moving. On dividing
this force by the mass of moving parts in main poppet, we get the acceleration
experienced by the main poppet in that particular time interval.
.
Now, the velocity and displacement at any time t can be calculated from the
basic kinematic equation i.e. v = u + at , S=u t +0.5.at 2 which can be written
for the time interval dt as
Vt1= vt0+ a.dt, Lp(t1) =vt0.dt + 0.5.a.dt2
For the next time interval, the net force gets increased by ks.Lp

pilot spring gets further compressed in the previous time interval

i.e. Fnett1 = Fnett0 + ks . Lp (t0)

(t1)

since the

29

The main seat internal diameter is 5.5 mm, for flat poppet configuration, the
poppet travel to get an effective port opening of 4.5 mm, comes to 0.92 mm and
is rounded to 1.0mm.
From the figure we can see that
movement
of
main
poppet
commences at 72nd ms and from there
it took 6 ms to reach its fully opened
position.
Main poppet to reach its fully
opened position starting from point at
which the solenoid valve is switched
on is found to be 78 ms.
Fig 7: Lift of the main poppet vs. time

Comparison of the analysis results with test results of the

hardware developed
30

During loaded time the electrical delay of pilot valve could not be

measured since pilot has two movements, initial movement due to

magnetic force and then upward lift along with main poppet.
The total response of valve is measured from time of giving electrical

command to time to build up 90% of the maximum thrust developed.

Since there was no chamber pressure measurement, the thrust

developed was measured using load cell.

The load cell result as shown below figure.

31

Response characteristics
of the developed hardware for
No Load (without source
pressure) and Load (with
source pressure) are plotted in
fig 8.1 and 8.2. The no load
curve will directly give
electrical delay of the valve

Fig.8.1 No load Characteristics of OSS

thruster valve.

32

The test results show

that electrical delay in
5ms and total response at
load is 72ms. These
values are comparable
with the predicted results
which are 5ms and 78ms
respectively. This shows
the model is validated
closely
to
physical
model.
Fig.8.2 Load Characteristics of OSS thruster
valve

Off Nominal Studies

33

Once the model starts to give results comparable with test results, then

it can be used to study the effect of various design parameters on the

desired effect. The variables selected for parametric studies are
1.air gap
2.feeding orifice diameter
3.venting orifice diameter
4.source pressure
The air gap is varied from 0.3mm to 0.7mm and response time is

calculated for these values of air gap keeping other parameters a

constant. The results are shown on Fig. 7.8 below

34

From graph we can see that as air

gap increases response time also
increases beyond an air gap of 0.7
mm the response time shoots up
drastically because beyond that
point magnetic force developed is
less than spring load of pilot which
it needs to overcome.
Fig 9: Variation of response time
with air gap

35

This is because as diameter

increases more gas will be
entering into main cavity
which will delay process of
lowering pressure inside main
cavity and thereby increasing
response time. The above
graph shows that feeding
orifice diameter is also a
significant
parameter
in
deciding response time.

Fig 10: Variation of response time

with feeding orifice diameter

36

This is because as venting

diameter increases mass of
gas leaving main poppet
cavity increases which in turn
leads to a faster pressure drop
and thereby reducing the
response time.

Fig 11: Variation of response time

with venting orifice diameter

37

This is because as the source

pressure
increases,
net
upward pressure forces also
increases which causes main
poppet to quickly open and
thereby reduce response
time. This shows that source
pressure is a significant
parameter in deciding the
response time.

Fig 12: Variation of total response

with source pressure.

Combined Cumulative Parametric Studies

38

Cumulative effect of parameter causing extreme deviation in pilot

operated solenoid valve and the effect of these parameters on the

desired effect i.e. response time.
Some of the parameters are widely depending varying response time of
the pilot operated solenoid valve.
In the parameters range increases the response of time increases and
parameter range decreases the response of time will increses.
Combination of the cumulative effect of parameter causing changing
the response time are shown below table.

39

TABLE - Combined cumulative parametric studies Result

Sl no:

1
2
3

Combined parameters

All parameters are in maximum condition

All parameters are in minimum condition
Air gap ,source pressure nominal condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
minimum condition
Air gap ,source pressure nominal condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
maximum condition
Air gap ,source pressure minimum condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
maximum condition

Air gap ,source pressure maximum condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
minimum condition

Air gap ,source pressure minimum condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
nominal condition

10

Air gap ,source pressure maximum condition and venting, feeding orifice diameter
nominal condition
Air gap ,feed orifice diameter maximum condition and venting orifice diameter
,source pressure minimum condition
Air gap ,feed orifice diameter minimum condition and venting orifice diameter ,source
pressure maximum condition

Electrical response

Total response

ms

ms

07
02

547
72

05

43

05

258

02

208

07

71

02

38

07

124

07

78

02

217

40

Figure 13 Variation of total response with cumulative parameters like air gap ,
feeding orifice diameter maximum and minimum & source pressure, venting
orifice diameter is maximum and minimum

Comparison of the parametric analysis results with test results

of the hardware developed
41

Test was carried out to determine valve on response with the test step
described below.

Fig 14: Experiment setup for cumulative combined parametric

study

42

TABLE - Different hardware are tested with parameters changed result

Serial Number

Hardware Name and

Number

Experimental test results

of the valve Total
Response of time(ms)

Analysis test results of the

valve Total Response of
time(ms)

Parameters Changed
Air gap kept to maximum
and other parameters
nominal

A4552-EV-301 T1

79.2

81

A4562-EV-302 T2

74.6

72

A4554-EV-304 T4

A4555-EV-306 T6

A4553-EV-307 T7

73

77

64

All parameters set to

minimum

71

Air gap, source pressure

maximum and vent orifice
diameter, feed orifice
diameter minimum

78

Air gap, feed orifice

diameter maximum and
vent orifice diameter,
source pressure minimum

68

Feed orifice diameter

minimum and other
parameters constant

43

The total response of the valve is

measured from time of giving
electrical command to the time
to build up 90% of the
maximum thrust developed,
thrust developed was measured
using load cell.
Fig 15 Load Characteristics OSS
thruster hardware A4562 thruster valve

Seat deformation analysis

44

The material used as metal is stainless steel AISI 430 and as plastic is

polycarbonate, main poppet valve seat with reference springs.

The loads experienced the pilot poppet valve very less as compared to

main poppet. Since the sealing diameter are very less in the compare to
main poppet. This slot will never experience stresses above the elastic
limit. Hence finite element analysis is not carried out for pilot poppet.

45

Properties

TABLE PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS

AISI 430

Properties

Polycarbonate

Elastic modulus

200000 N/mm2

Elastic modulus

2300 N/mm2

Possions ratio

0.30

Possions ratio

0.38

Yield strength

345 N/mm2

Yield strength

70N/mm2

Tangential modulus

688 N/mm2

Tangential modulus

37N/mm2

Input data for the calculation of the seat stress

Diameter of the seat, ds

= 6.5 mm

Land width of the seal, lw

Initial spring load, Fs
Initial pressure force, Fp
Spring Constant, K1

= 0.4 mm
= 21.5 N
=0N
= 8.4 N/mm2

46

Seat Area

= 33.183 mm2

Sealing Area

= (6.52-5.72) = 7.6654 mm2

Seat stress(initial)

Force due to Pressure load

=
=

Seat stress

= 2.80 N/mm2
pressure X seat area
0.2 X 33.183 = 6.6366 N
= 3.67 N/mm2

47

TABLE Theoretical seat stress of main poppet valve at RT

Pressure
(N/mm2 )

Spring force,
Fs(N)

Pressure force,
Fp(N)

Theoretical Seat

21.5

2.80

0.4

21.5

13.2732

4.536

0.8

21.5

26.5464

6.26

1.2

21.5

39.8196

7.99

1.6

21.5

53.0928

9.73

2.0

21.5

66.366

11.46

2.4

21.5

79.6392

13.19

2.8

21.5

92.9124

14.92

3.0

21.5

99.549

15.79

Stress (N/mm2)

Finite Element Modeling & Analysis

48

Fig 16 Main poppet valve seat

The modulus of elasticity of stainless steel (GPa) is higher than the

polycarbonate (2.3 GPa), the deformation due to the action of load is
higher in plastic material than in stainless steel. So only the plastic
material polycarbonate is taken the analysis purpose.

49

Fig: 18 Numerical model with

boundary condition of main poppet

Fig: 17 Numerical model for

analysis of main poppet

SEAT ANALYSIS RESULTS

50

For numerical analysis of main poppet valve seat, the analysis was

computed by incorporating room temperature properties of

polycarbonate into the numerical model.
Results from the numerical model with spring load and pressure force
were acting at room temperature condition was shown in figure.

Fig 19 Contour vonmises

Stress plot of main poppet valve
seal at room temperature

51

TABLE Comparison of seat stress of main poppet valve theoretical and

numerical analysis at RT
Pressure
(N/mm2 )

Spring force,
Fs(N)

Pressure force,
Fp(N)

Seat Stress (N/mm2)

Theoretical results

Analysis results

21.5

2.80

2.608

0.4

21.5

13.2732

4.536

4.261

0.8

21.5

26.5464

6.26

6.150

1.2

21.5

39.8196

7.99

8.038

1.6

21.5

53.0928

9.73

9.652

2.0

21.5

66.366

11.46

11.061

2.4

21.5

79.6392

13.19

13.172

2.8

21.5

92.9124

14.92

15.945

3.0

21.5

99.549

15.79

16.4196

52

The model assembly is

validated as both the
theoretical and numerical
analysis results are of the
same value. But pressure
force increases the seat
stress increases

Fig 20 Variation of seat stress of main

poppet valve seat theoretical and numerical
analysis at RT

Conclusion
53

Here in this project, I am tried to model the valve mathematically and there by

to produce a complete idea about the response time and performance of the
OSS Thruster Valve.
Results generated by the model are compared with the test results and there by
the model is validated. Validated model is used to study the effect of critical
design parameters on response time.
It was formed that maximum seat stress expected is 15.79 N/mm 2 the
allowable seat stress for polycarbonate material is 70 N/mm 2, which is the
margin of 4.4 existing in the seat stress. This is safe and ensures trouble free
performance. Hence stress in sealing mechanism is not a life limiting
parameter for this valve design.

References
54

[1] B. W. Anderson, The analysis and design of pneumatic systems, John Wiley & sons,
1967
[2]K. A. Venkataraman, K. Kanthavel, B. Nirmal Kumar Investigations of Response Time
Parameters of a Pneumatic 3/2 Direct Acting Solenoid Valve under Various Working
Pressure Condition, ETASR - Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research
Vol. 3, No. 4, 2013, 502-505.
[3]Liu Lei, Zhang Desheng, Zhao Jiyun Design and Research for the Water Low-pressure
Large-flow Pilot-operated Solenoid Valve Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical
Engineering 60(2014)10, 665-674
[4]Qianfeng Liu, Hanliang Bo, Benke Qin Design and analysis of direct action solenoid
valve based on computational intelligence Nuclear Engineering and Design 240
(2010) 28902896

55

[5] Qianfeng Liu, Hanliang Bo, Benke Qin Optimization of direct action
solenoid valve based on Cloud PSO Institute of Nuclear and New Energy
Technology, Annals of Nuclear Energy 53 (2013) 299308
[6] R.W Zappe, 1998, valve selection handbook, 4 th edition, gulf professional
publishing.
[7]Robert Flitney, seals and sealing handbook, 5 th edition, Butterworth
publishing.
[8] Itzhak Green et al.,6-8 April 1994, stresses and deformation of compressed
Elastomeric O-ring seals, 14th international conference on fluid sealing
,Firenze, Italy, organized by BHR Group Limited, Cranfield, Bedford, UK.
[9]Darren Clark, 2008, formability of polycarbonate, a thesis report presented
to university of waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

56

[10]
S. R. Goldstein, H. H. Richardson, A differential pulse-length
modulated pneumatic servo utilizing floating-flapper-disc
switching valves, Journal of Basic Engineering, Vol. 90, No. 2,
pp. 143-151, 1968
[11]
T. Noritsugu, Development of PWM mode electro-pneumatic
servomechanism, Part I: Speed control of a pneumatic cylinder,
Journal of Fluid Control. Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 65-80, 1986
[12]
T. Noritsugu, Development of PWM mode electro-pneumatic
servomechanism, Part II: Position control of a pneumatic
cylinder, Journal of Fluid Control, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 7-28, 1987

57

for your attention!