Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Efficiency improvement and evaluation of electric hydraulic excavator with MARK

speed and displacement variable pump
⁎
Lei Ge, Long Quan , Xiaogang Zhang, Bin Zhao, Jing Yang
Key Lab of Advanced Transducers and Intelligent Control System of Ministry of Education, Taiyuan University of Technology, 030024 Taiyuan, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Hydraulic excavator driven by an internal-combustion engine is widely used in the construction field. However,
Electric excavator some problems, such as high pollutant emissions, noise and low efficiency, exist universally. To address these
Energy efficiency problems, an electric hydraulic excavator configuration combining with an independent metering in and me-
Independent metering in and metering out tering out system is proposed to improve the overall energy efficiency. In this paper, a displacement variable
Speed and displacement variable concepts
pump driven by a speed variable electric motor is used as power source, and a matching method based on the
segmented speed and continuous displacement control of the pump is proposed to meet the requirements of high
dynamic, high energy efficiency and zero emission of hydraulic excavator under different working conditions.
Then, an independent metering in and metering out system is employed to reduce throttling loss. A test rig with a
6-ton hydraulic excavator was built up and used to validate the proposed scheme. The energy consumption
characteristics of the electro-hydraulic power source under different rotational speeds and different loads are
further investigated to provide analytical and experimental references for control strategy designing.
Furthermore, the working performance and energy distributions of the excavator with the pure displacement
variable concept, and speed and displacement variable concept are studied comparatively. Results show that,
compared with pure displacement variable concept, the electric power consumption during the idle period can
be reduced from 2.05 kW to 0.7 kW, the energy saving ratio under partial load condition can be up to 33%, while
it is 28.5% under digging condition.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, hydraulic excavator is widely used in the construction
field, and there are millions in use in the world, which is about 1.6
million in China in 2015. In the excavator system, a displacement
variable pump driven by an internal-combustion engine is normally
applied as power source to supply high-pressure oil, and the four-sides
spool valves are used to distribute the flow and to control the actuators.
However, the energy efficiency of the internal-combustion engine is
poor when the load changes in a wide range, which is only about 35%
[1], resulting in a huge waste of resources and serious environmental
pollutions [2,3]. Besides, the average energy efficiency of the hydraulic
system is only about 54%, and the energy efficiency of the whole ma-
chine is only about 10% [1]. Thus, energy saving and emission reducing
have been the research focuses in the excavator.
For the power transmissions path, there are two approaches to in-
crease the energy efficiency of hydraulic excavator: one is to improve
the matching performance between the load and engine, and the other
is to reduce the throttling loss.
In a conventional excavator system, the engine speed of excavator is
selected by operator manually according to the excavating job at hand.
Usually, there are five operating modes distinguished by the speed. It
should be emphasized that load torque is distributed widely for each
operating mode. Thus, the engine often works under partial load con-
dition, during which the energy efficiency is poor. Many research ef-
forts have been undertaken to address this issue. A conventional ap-
proach is to adjust the engine speed according to load condition [4].
The other is the diesel engine cylinder deactivation technology [5].
However, these two approaches can only improve the economy of the
diesel engine in light load. An approach to comprehensively improve
the engine efficiency is to add an auxiliary power unit to the system,
called the hybrid technology [6–10]. Furthermore, a relatively thor-
ough approach is to use some accumulators to separate the engine from
the actuators, allowing optimal engine operation independent of the

Abbreviations: SVPS, pure speed-variable power source; SDVPS, speed and displacement variable power source; PSVC, pure speed variable concept; PDVC, pure displacement variable
concept; SSCD, the segmented speed and continuous displacement concept of the pump; IMC, independent metering in and metering out circuit; PMAM, a permanent magnet asyn-
chronous motor
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: quanlong@tyut.edu.cn (L. Quan).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.010
Received 3 July 2017; Received in revised form 2 August 2017; Accepted 4 August 2017
Available online 09 August 2017
0196-8904/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Ge et al. Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71

Nomenclature Pout power output of the electric motor

ɷm rotational speed of the electric motor
Ee electric energy input to the inverter Ψrd rotor flux d axis component for induction machine
Pei electric power input to the inverter Rs equivalent resistance of stator winding
Eh hydraulic energy output of the pump Rr equivalent resistance of rotor winding
pp pump pressure Rm equivalent resistance of stator core loss
qo pump flow Lm mutual inductance between the stator winding and rotor
ηe-h energy efficiency of the electro-power source winding
vbe boom cylinder extending control signal ηm energy efficiency of the electric motor
vbr boom cylinder retraction control signal ηp energy efficiency of the hydraulic pump
pA1 pressure of the rod-less cavity of boom cylinder ηpv volume efficiency of the hydraulic pump
pB1 pressure of the rod cavity of boom cylinder ηpm mechanical efficiency of the hydraulic pump
qB flow into the boom cylinder n rotational speed of the hydraulic pump
Ehloss throttling loss of the hydraulic system k proportionality coefficient
EBhloss throttling loss of the boom system Cs Laminar leakage coefficient
EAhloss throttling loss of the arm system Δp pressure difference of the hydraulic pump
EBuhloss throttling loss of the bucket system μ kinematic viscosity of oil
EShloss throttling loss of the swing system β Displacement factor, V/Vmax
EThloss throttling loss of the travel system CV Laminar drag coefficient
ηh Energy efficiency of the hydraulic system Cf coefficient of mechanical resistance
ηtotal energy efficiency of the excavator Ts Torque loss independent of speed and pressure difference
Ploss power loss of the electric motor Vmax maximum displacement of the pump

current power demand [11–16].
Although numerous technologies have been taken to improve the
energy efficiency of the hydraulic excavator, this is not the eventual
solution. Like the development direction of the automotive industry,
the development direction of mobile machine is pure electric drive to
eliminate emissions completely and to achieve low noise. And now, this
system configuration is used in industrial equipments and some hy-
draulic shovels. In addition, there are some small hydraulic excavator
productions with this configuration, such as Wacker Neuson dual-
power 803 and Volvo EX2. This configuration is especially suitable for
urban construction and water conservatory reconstruction projects with
high environmental protection requirements. In these applications, the
electric motor usually operates at its rated speed, resulting in large
energy consumption under idle period and partial load conditions.
What's more, the displacement-variable pump usually operates in small
displacement condition, during which the energy efficiency is poor
[17–19]. Currently, one of the ways to deal with this situation is to use
a quantitative pump driven by a speed-variable motor, named pure
speed-variable power source (SVPS) [20,21]. The other approach is to
use a displacement-variable pump driven by a speed-variable motor,
named speed and displacement variable power source (SDVPS). It is
reported that the energy consumption can be reduced by 20% and more
comparing to pure speed variable concept (PSVC) or pure displacement
variable concept (PDVC) [22]. Therefore, improved efficiency and re-
duced energy consumption are two of the main goals during the design
period of modern electrohydraulic systems.
However, when the speed-variable power source is applied to a
mobile machine, there exist some problems such as dynamic response,

x x Fig. 1. System structure of electric excavator.

Boom xu
Arm x
u
Bucket u Swing u
p p p
u u U
pB1 pB2 pB3
p pB5
p p U p
pA1
U U pA4 p
U pA5 U
pA2

x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7
Power meter qo Įset pset
Controller Po Įref
Sim pp S
up u
ulin
k AC Pi up
380 v

nset Variable
Inverter Pump
nref
motor

63
L. Ge et al.
power supply capacity of mobile equipment, corresponding matching
control strategies, and cost. This paper proposed an electric excavator
configuration, in which an electric converter motor is used to drive a
displacement-variable pump, and a control method based on the seg-
mented speed and continuous displacement concept of the pump
(SSCD) is proposed. Its advantages are that the dynamic response of the
pump can make up for the lack of dynamic response of the electric
motor, and the speed of the motor can be efficiently used to increase the
energy efficiency.
The SDVPS can successfully improve energy efficiency and improve
process dynamics, also reduce the noise level in hydraulic excavators
[23–24]. However, in mobile machine hydraulic system, a four-side
spool valve is used to control the actuator, resulting in considerable
throttling loss, which has larger influences on the machine energy ef-
ficiency. Some articles try to address this problem with an independent
metering in and metering out circuit (IMC). And this is also one of the
hot research topics in valve controlled systems [25,26].
Thus, this paper proposes an electric excavator configuration with
SDVPS and IMC to enhance the overall energy efficiency of the whole
excavator. This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the
structure and principle of the electric excavator system with SDVPS and
IMC. In Section 3, energy consumption characteristics of SDVPS are
analyzed in detail based on mathematical model and experiment re-
sults, and the SSCD controller was design. Section 4 provides the energy
consumption experimental data of the whole excavator with the de-
signed strategy compared to that of PDVC. Finally, conclusions are
drawn in Section 5.
2. System structure and principle
Hydraulic excavator is a typical multiple-actuators construction
machine, which has 6 actuators – swing, boom, arm, bucket, left and
right travelers. The engine's installed power is often designed according
to the peak power of the system and the engine always runs at rated
speed, resulting in poor energy efficiency in partial and no-load con-
ditions. When an internal-combustion engine is used as power source,
there is large emission pollution. In this paper, the electric excavator
system with SDVPS and IMC is proposed to improve the overall energy
efficiency of the whole excavator.
2.1. System structure
As shown in Fig. 1, the system is composed of an electro-hydraulic
power source, a hydraulic control system, joysticks, a controller and
some sensors. In the electro-hydraulic power source, a frequency con-
verter is used to control the electric motor speed, and a displacement
variable pump which the pressure and flow can be continuously tunable
is used to supply pressure oil. Thus, the delivery flow rate can be ad-
justed either by changing the pump displacement or the electric motor
Vboom Controller
qboom
Varm qarm
qbucket
Vbucket pA
Boom
Vswing
pB
pp nr Įr qset
Power Source
nset
Power
Source
Įset Control
Fig. 2. System architecture for excavator.
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
speed.
The boom cylinder, arm cylinder, and swing motor are controlled by
IMC, and the bucket cylinder is controlled with a traditional directional
valve. Moreover, there are additional instruments such as displacement
sensors to detect the displacements of the actuators; pressure sensors to
detect the pressure inside the actuators and the pump port; and the
power sensor and rotational speed sensor on the electric motor to detect
the electric power and rotational speed respectively. The circuit control
concepts are achieved with the ds1103.
2.2. Working principle
As mentioned above, the system mainly consists of two parts:
electro-hydraulic power source and hydraulic control system. The
function of the electro-hydraulic power source is to output demand flow
by adjusting the speed of the electric motor and the displacement of the
hydraulic pump.
And, the function of the hydraulic control system is to distribute the
flows to control the actuators. When only one actuator works, it is easy
to control the actuator velocity by controlling the output flow of the
pump. When there are more than one actuators working simulta-
neously, it is necessary to control the flow distribution ratio besides
controlling the output flow of the pump.
The overall structure of the control system about the electric ex-
cavator is illustrated in Fig. 2. The control system consists of three
major subparts which are electro-hydraulic power source control,
valves control, and coordinated control of the power source and valves.
The proposed system works as below. The operator gives the command
signals through the joysticks to the controller, and the command signals
are proportional to the actuators velocities. And then, the controller
takes in the inputs of the joysticks and the measured quantities, such as
pressures, powers, displacements, flow, and speed of the electric motor.
After that, the controller analyzes the command automatically and
outputs the voltage signals directly applied to the converter motor,
pump, and valves according to the set strategy.
2.3. Energy loss and efficiency analysis
During working process, the electric energy is converted to hy-
draulic energy via the electric motor driving the hydraulic pump, and
then the control valves distribute the hydraulic energy to the actuators
for working. Thus, on the respect of energy conversion and transfor-
mation, without considering the actuator mechanical loss, the energy
loss of the electric excavator can be mainly divided into two parts:
energy loss of electro-hydraulic power source and throttling loss of
hydraulic control valve.
The electric energy inputted to the electro-hydraulic power source
can be calculated as Eq. (1).
Flow Distribution Control
m
Arm
Bucket m
Valve
Control
Cylinder m
Drive pA, pB
Control
64
L. Ge et al. Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71

about 95%, which has a negligible effect on the total energy efficiency.
The energy efficiency of the electric motor is about 90% under rated
load and rated speed condition, and it would be less than 40% under
partial load condition. The energy efficiency of the hydraulic pump is
about 80% under rated displacement. When it works under small dis-
placement condition, in particular, the pump efficiency is as low as 50%
or less. In order to have a good knowledge of the energy characteristics
of the SDVPS, the energy conversion characteristics of the electric
motor and pump are analyzed in detail, in the following part.

(1) Converter motor

Most electric motors are designed to run at 50–100% of the rated

load. Its maximum efficiency usually appears under 75% of the rated
load. And its efficiency tends to decrease dramatically when the load is
lower than 50% of the rated load.
The energy losses of an electric motor comprise iron losses, copper
losses, and mechanical and additional losses. When a permanent
magnet asynchronous motor (PMAM) is controlled by an inverter with
Fig. 3. Energy efficiency map of electric motor under different speed and load torque.
VVVF vector control system, the energy efficiency of the electric motor
can be written as Eq. (8).
Ee = ∫ Pei dt (1) P loss
ηm = 1−
P loss + Pout (8)
The hydraulic energy output of the electro-hydraulic power source
can be calculated as Eq. (2). The power loss can be calculated as Eq. (9).

Eh = ∫ pp q0 dt (2) P loss = a
2
Pout
+ bψrd2 + cPout
ωm2 ψrd2 (9)
The energy efficiency of the electro-hydraulic power source can be
depicted as Eq. (3). Where a, b and c can be written as Eq. (10).
E 2
ηe−h = h
Ee (3) ⎪
( Rr + Rm )
⎧ a = Rs + Rr Rm (Rr +2 Rm 2
pm Rm
)

⎪
Take boom cylinder working as an example, the throttling loss can ⎨ ( R R
b = pm2 Rs + R r+ Rm ωm2 +
r m ) Rs
2
Lm
be calculated as Eq. (4). The total throttling loss of the as hydraulic ⎪ 2(Rr + Rm) R +R
⎪c = 2 (Rs + Rr R m )
excavator can be calculated Eq. (5). ⎩ Rm r m (10)

EBhloss = ∫ (VBe (pp −pA1 ) + VBr (pp −pB1 )) qB dt (4) According to Eqs. (8)–(10) and some parameters, the energy effi-
ciency of the electric motor can be calculated out, as shown in Figs. 3-4.
Ehloss = EBhloss + EAhloss + EBuhloss + EShloss + EThloss (5) The electric motor used in the analysis was a 37 kW PMAM motor with
1500 rpm nominal speed.
The energy efficiency of the hydraulic control system can be written
As shown in Figs. 3–4, when the load power of the electric motor is
as Eq. (6).
relatively small, the energy efficiency under low speed is high than that
Ehloss under high speed, such as when the load power is 3.7 kW, the energy
ηh = 1−
Eh (6) efficiency under 300 rpm is 16.8% higher than that under 1500 rpm.
The energy efficiency of the whole excavator can be written as Eq. And when the load power is relatively big, the energy efficiency under
(7). high speed is high than low speed. And when the electric motor works
under up than 30% of the rated load and 40% of the rated speed, the
ηtotal = ηe−h ηh (7)
The energy saving potential of IMC has been analyzed in detail in many
articles. In this paper, the IMC is used to minimize the throttling losses,
and the control strategy can be seen in Refs. [26,27]. The core of this
research work is to improve the energy efficiency of the whole machine
by improving the electro-hydraulic power source efficiency and redu-
cing the throttling loss of hydraulic control system, under the premise
of ensuring dynamic characteristics. In the following part, the energy
conversion characteristics of the SDVPS under different load conditions
are further investigated, and the power matching strategy is designed.

3. Energy efficiency of SDVPS and power matching strategy

3.1. Theoretical analysis on the energy efficiency of SDVPS

In this paper, the SDVPS is consist of an inverter, an electric motor,

and a displacement variable pump. During the working process, most of
the energy in SDVPS is wasted in the electrical to hydraulic energy
Fig. 4. Energy efficiency of electric motor under different speed and load power.
conversion stage. Generally, the energy efficiency of the inverter is

65
L. Ge et al.
overall efficiency of the electric motor is about 70%, which is higher
than an internal-combustion engine.
(2) Displacement variable pump
The pump is used for the conversion of mechanical energy into
hydraulic energy. And its losses consist of volumetric and hydro-me-
chanical loss. Thus, the pump energy efficiency can be written as Eq.
(11).
ηp = ηpv ·ηpM
(11)
The main parameters of hydraulic pump are torque, flow, power, and
its efficiency can be described by speed n, pressure difference Δp, dis-
placement factor β. According to some articles, the experience calcu-
lation equation of the volumetric efficiency ηpv and the mechanical
efficiency ηpm of the variable hydraulic pump can be written as Eqs.
(11), (12).
kCs Δp
ηpv = 1−
μnβVmax (12)
1 Rule 3. When there is no flow requirement, the energy consumption
ηpm = μnCs Cf 2πTs
1+ + +
kC V Δpβ β ΔpnβVmax (13)
According to Eq. (12), assuming that the pressure is constant, the vo-
lumetric efficiency of the pump increases with speed and displacement.
In application, it can be stated, that the volumetric efficiency is in re-
lation to the output flow. And when the flow is certain, the volumetric
efficiency can be considered as constant. According to Eq. (13), when
the pressure is given, mechanical efficiency of the pump can be im-
proved with pump displacement increasing or electric motor speed
decreasing.
Assuming that the pump pressure is 50% of the rated pressure and
the displacement is 71 ml/r, according to Eqs. (11)–(13), the energy
efficiency of the pump can be calculated, as shown in Fig. 5. It can be
seen that the overall efficiency of the pump increased with the flow
increasing. And when the flow is given, changing the speed or dis-
placement of the pump have less influence on the overall efficiency.
3.2. Experiment analysis on the energy efficiency of SDVPS
In order to have a good knowledge of the energy efficiency of the
SDVPS, it is tested based on the test rig shown in Fig. 1. In the test
system, the rated power and speed of the used electric motor are 37 kW
and 1500 rpm; the rated displacement and pressure of the pump is
71 ml/r and 25 MPa respectively. According to experimental data and
Eqs. (1)–(3), the energy efficiency of the SDVPS can be calculated, as
shown in Fig. 6.
As shown in Fig. 6a, when the electric motor operates under partial
load, especially lower than 20% of the rated load, its efficiency will
drop obviously. The overall efficiency of the SDVPS is about 70%, when
the load is Up than 30% of the rated load and the speed is up than 40%
of the rated speed.
As shown in Fig. 6b, when the load power is less than 18 kW, the
efficiency under a low speed is high than that when the speed is about
1500 rpm. And also, when the load power is in the intervals A, B, C, D
and E, the high-efficiency speeds are as follows: 300, 600, 900, 1200
and 1500 rpm. Thus, we can conclude that when the electric motor
works under partial load, especially lower than 20%, the low-speed
condition has a good efficiency.
3.3. Segmented speed and continuous displacement concept
According to the theoretical analysis and experimental data, when
the pump speed is above 300 rpm and the flow is given, changing of
displacement or speed has little influence on the overall efficiency of
power source; and when the speed is lower than 300 rpm, the pump’s
66
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
efficiency tends to decrease dramatically below about 300 rpm. For the
PMAM, when the load power is relatively small, the efficiency of lower
rotational speed is superior to that of higher rotational speed; and on
the contrary, when the load power is relatively big, the efficiency of
higher rotational speed is superior to that of lower rotational speed.
Therefore, in order to improve the overall efficiency of the electro-
hydraulic power source, the control strategy can be designed according
to the following principles:
Rule 1. Considering the electric motor starting with load, the de-
mand current may be more than five times of rated current and the
dynamic response are relatively slow, it is necessary to avoid changing
the electric motor speed during a certain process. Therefore, we can
segment the electric motor speed into some ranges, that is, the motor
operates only at the set speed points.
Rule 2. The objective of this paper is to minimize the electric input
power for a given hydraulic output power. When the load power is
relatively small, the controller should choose the condition that the
pump works under low speed and big displacement; and when the load
power is relatively big, the high speed and small displacement condi-
tion should be chosen.
of the SDVPS decreases as the speed decreases. However, in order to
ensure that the electric motor can start quickly, the electric motor
should work under an initial speed during the idle process. And the
pump’s efficiency tends to decrease dramatically below about 300 rpm,
and a displacement variable pump needs a standby pressure for chan-
ging the displacement. Thus, the initial and minimum speeds of the
SDVPS is set as 300 rpm. And the initial pressure of the pump is set as
3 MPa.
Rule 4. During the working process of the SDVPS, when the flow
demand signal has a small fluctuation, the SDVPS needs to be able to
respond quickly. However, the dynamic response of the electric motor
is relatively slow, it is necessary to change the pump displacement
during this process. Therefore, in general, the pump should be avoided
working in full displacement.
According to the above principles, by considering the mutual in-
fluences of motor and pump dynamics, an intelligent control strategy
which can address major issues like energy efficiency and process dy-
namics is designed, as shown in Fig. 7.
As shown in Fig. 7, the designed controller includes two aspects: the
first one is regulating the electric motor speed to enable higher energy
efficiency according to the energy efficiency map and flow demand,
named speed control; and the other is to accomplish the flow control by
regulating the displacement of the pump according to the set speed,
named displacement control.
(1) Speed controller
Fig. 5. Energy efficiency of pump under different speed and displacement.
L. Ge et al. Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71

Secondly, the signal made by qd multiply with factor k is input to the

q-controller. The factor k is about 1.25 which can avoid the pump
working in full displacement according to Rule 4. And then the speed
set value nset2 can be chosen according to which of the 5 speed values
should be used at least.
At last, the bigger one of the two speed set values is chosen as the
final command value nset.

(2) Displacement control

When the electric motor speed is determined, according to the flow

demand qd, the displacement of the pump can be calculated as Eq. (14).
qd
Vset =
n set (14)
(a) Efficiency map of SDVPS versus speed and torque At last, the two values nset and Vset are applied to control the electric
motor speed and pump displacement.

4. Working performance and energy efficiency of electric

excavator

4.1. Test rig of electric excavator

To investigate the effects of the proposed SSCD, a test rig based on a

(b) Efficiency map of SDVPS versus speed and load power
Fig. 6. Efficiency map of SDVPS.
The aim of speed control is to choose a speed under which the flow
demand and high energy efficiency can be met simultaneously. Thus,
there are two controllers named P-controller and q-controller which
discretize the electric motor’s continuous speed into 300 rpm, 600 rpm,
900 rpm, 1200 rpm and 1500 rpm, according to Rule 1, Rule 3 and Rule
4.
The principle of speed controller can be depicted in detail as fol-
lows.
Firstly, the front-end controller gives the flow demand signal qd,
according to the operator. And the demand hydraulic power Pp can be
calculated according to qd and the actual pressure of the pump pp, and
then it is set as the input of the P-controller. After that, the speed set
value nset1 can be chosen according to which interval in Fig. 6-b does
the Pp belongs to.
6-ton hydraulic excavator is built, as shown in Fig. 8. In the test rig, a
converter motor is used to driven a displacement variable pump, and
the hydraulic control system is based the IMC. The excavator was in-
strumented with pressure transducers at each port of the boom, arm and
bucket cylinders as well as the swing motor. The positions of these three
cylinders were measured via displacement sensor. The working per-
formance and energy efficiency of the single actuator such as the boom
cylinder and arm cylinder, and a typical excavator digging cycle are
select to test under the same working condition with the proposed SSCD
and PDVC. The main difference between these two strategies is the
control mode of the power source. The valves are controlled in exactly
the same way. With the SSCD, the cooperation control method is ap-
plied to control the speed and displacement of the pump. And with the
PDVC, the speed of the pump is set as 1500 rpm.
4.2. Working mode
As mentioned in 3.3, with the SSCD, the speed set value nset may
equal to nset1 determined by P-controller, named power mode; and it
may equal to nset2 determined by q-controller, named flow mode.
(1) Power mode
When the controller works under power mode, nset1 is big than nset2
and nset is equal to nset1. That is, according to the energy consumption

Fig. 7. Energy efficiency controller.

P-Controller Electro-
hydraulic Converter
power source motor
pp Pp nset1
ަ n controller
ަ P
Max G(s)
nset
ABCD
q-Controller
n nset2
qd k
q Hydraulic
÷ Vset pump
ަ

67
L. Ge et al.
Fig. 9. Power mode.
Fig. 10. Flow mode.
characteristics, the electric motor is expected to work at a higher speed
point. Fig. 9 gives the power consumption, cylinder displacement and
speed set values under this mode. At this time, only the boom cylinder
works and the velocity is about 100 mm/s. nset1 is 0.8–1200 rpm, nset2 is
0.6–900 rpm, and nset is equal to nset1.
(2) Flow mode
When the controller works under flow mode, nset2 is bigger than
nset1 and nset is equal to nset2. That is, according to the energy
68
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
Fig. 8. The Test Rig.
Fig. 11. Boom cylinder works without operating load.
Fig. 12. Power and energy consumption when boom working.
consumption characteristics, the electric motor is expected to work at a
lower speed point. Fig. 10 gives the power consumption, cylinder dis-
placement and speed set values under this mode.
At this time, only the arm cylinder works and the velocity is about
100 mm/s. nset1 is 0.4–600 rpm, nset2 is 0.6–900 rpm, and nset is equal to
nset2.
4.3. Working performance and energy efficiency
The results of the excavator with the speed and displacement vari-
able strategy and traditional displacement variable strategy are pre-
sented and compared in this section. And, if the pump pressure and flow
L. Ge et al.
Fig. 13. Boom system energy distribution.
Fig. 14. Arm cylinder works without operating load.
Fig. 15. Power and energy consumption when arm working.
response are similar to these with PDVC, we can say the control per-
formance is similar.
(1) Boom cylinder works without operating load
The main task of the boom cylinder is to lift the working mechanism
and load to the specified position. Its operational characteristics are
that the load condition during extension process is resistance mainly,
and which is overrunning mainly during the retraction process.
In the process of frequent retraction, the gravitational potential
69
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
Fig. 16. Arm system energy distribution.
Fig. 17. Energy consumption during the digging process.
energy of the working mechanism is dissipated into heat in the control
valves, and the pump still outputs the flow to the cylinder during the
overrunning retraction process. A simple way to reduce the energy
consumption is using the flow regeneration technology. In this paper,
when the boom cylinder extends, the inlet and outlet oil valves open
fully to reduce throttling loss. And then the regeneration technology is
used when the boom cylinder retracts.
Fig. 11 gives the measured cylinder displacement, pump pressure,
actual displacement and flow of the pump. The velocity of the boom
cylinder is about 100 mm/s. During boom cylinder extension process,
the pump pressure tends to oscillate with the PDVC, and which is si-
milar to the load sensing system [27]. And this problem can be ad-
dressed with the SSCD. During the non-work cycle, the electric motor
speed is about 300 rpm with the SSCD, and which is about 1500 rpm
with the PDVC.
During the lifting process, the flow outputs of the pump with the
two strategies are basically the same. With the speed and displacement
variable strategy, the motor speed is about 1200 rpm, and the pump
displacement is about 60% of the rated displacement. And with the
PDVC, the pump displacement is about 48% of the rated displacement.
During the retraction process, the boom cylinder works under re-
generation mode, the pump does not output flow, the electric motor
speed is about 300 rpm with the SSCD, and which is about 1500 rpm
with the PDVC.
Fig. 12 gives the electric power and energy input to the inverter, and
the hydraulic energy output of the pump, when the boom cylinder
velocity is about 100 mm/s. It can be seen that the electric power input
L. Ge et al.
to the inverter with SSCD, PeS, is a little bigger than that with PDVC
when the boom cylinder extends. However, during the retraction and
non-working process, PeS is about 0.7 kW and PeP is about 2.2 kW.
During a complete extension and retraction process, the energy input to
the inverter, EeS, is about 56.6 kJ; EeP is about 65.7 kJ, EhS and EhP are
31.7 kJ and 30.4 kJ respectively. It can be concluded that the total
energy efficiency ηtotalS can be increased to 45.8% with the SSCD, and
which is about 37.5% with the PDVC.
During the working process of the hydraulic excavator, the hy-
draulic actuator does not always work at its maximum velocity. In
many cases, the running velocity is relatively low to adjust the position.
And the energy consumption is different under different velocities.
Fig. 13 gives the energy distribution about boom cylinder working cycle
when the velocities are about 100 mm/s, 60 mm/s, and 30 mm/s. It can
be seen that, compared with the PDVC, the energy consumption of the
boom system can be effectively reduced by more than 13% at various
velocities with SSCD, and it can be reached to 42% under the velocity of
30 mm/s.
With the IMC, the energy efficiency of the hydraulic system is high
than that of the load-sensing system [27–28], and it is about 80% under
the velocity of 100 mm/s. For the PDVC, although the throttling loss of
hydraulic control system is very small with the IMC, the total energy
efficiency of the boom system is still low due to the power source ef-
ficiency is low. And it can be seen that 33.3 kJ of electric energy is
consumed under the velocity of 30 mm/s than that under the velocity of
100 mm/s. And benefit from the SSCD strategy, the energy consump-
tion is slightly different under different velocities.
We conclude that, for the electro-hydraulic system, it is difficult to
improve the total energy efficiency of the whole system by improving
the energy efficiency of one energy conversion unit.
(2) Arm cylinder works without operating load
The main task of the arm cylinder is to push the bucket and to mine
combined with the bucket. Its working characteristic is that there is a
change of load state between resistance and overrunning condition.
Thus, a method to improve the stability is increasing the throttling of
return oil, resulting in large energy loss. In this paper, a method that the
inlet valve opens fully and outlet valve controls flow to increase energy
efficiency and stability.
Fig. 14 gives the measured cylinder displacement, pump pressure,
actual displacement and flow of the pump. The velocity of the arm
cylinder is about 100 mm/s. During working process, the pump pres-
sures under the two strategies are similar with each other.
During the extending process, the flow outputs of the pump with the
two strategies are basically the same. With the SSCD, the electric motor
speed is about 1200 rpm, and the pump displacement is about 80% of
the rated displacement. And with the PDVC, the pump displacement is
about 48% of the rated displacement.
During the retraction process, the flow outputs of the pump with the
two strategies are basically the same. With the SSCD, the electric motor
speed is about 600 rpm, and the pump displacement is about 73% of the
rated displacement. And with the PDVC, the pump displacement is
about 30% of the rated displacement.
Fig. 15 gives the electric power and energy input to the inverter, and
the hydraulic energy output of the pump, when the arm cylinder ve-
locity is about 100 mm/s.
From Fig. 15, it can be seen that, PeS can be reduced at least1 kW
compared with PeP, during the arm working process. Thus, during a
complete extension and retraction process, the energy input to the in-
verter, EeS, is about 60.4 kJ; EeP is about 90.2 kJ, EhS and EhP are 35.3 kJ
and 38.3 kJ respectively.
Fig. 16 gives the energy distribution about arm cylinder working
cycle when the velocities are about 100 mm/s, 60 mm/s and 30 mm/s.
From Fig. 16, it can be seen that SSCD reached energy savings of 33%
and more in comparison to PDVC, and which can be reached to 61%
70
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
with the velocity of 30 mm/s. With the IMC, the energy efficiency of the
hydraulic system is about 60% under the velocity of 100 mm/s. For the
PDVC, when the velocity is 30 mm/s, more than 29.8 kJ of the electric
energy were consumed, compared with the velocity of 100 mm/s. And
with the SSCD, the energy consumption is slightly different under dif-
ferent velocities.
It can be seen that the total energy efficiency of arm system is above
30.7% with the SDVC, and which may be less than 20% with the PDVC.
(3) Energy consumption during digging process
Fig. 17 shows a typical digging cycle. At first, the boom lifted the
working mechanism to the specified position. The arm and bucket were
operated simultaneously for digging, then the bucket dug the soil. After
that, the boom lifted the working mechanism to a high position. At last,
the arm and bucket cylinder retracted to release the soil and then the
boom cylinder retracted to its initial position.
As shown in Fig. 17, EeS and EhS are 188.0 kJ and 109.0 kJ, and EeP
and EhP are 262.9 kJ and 114.3 kJ, respectively. According to the
testing data, the energy efficiency of the electro-power source, ηe-hP and
ηe-hS are 43.5% and 58.0% respectively. Compared to the PDVC, the
proposed system was 28.5% more efficient and 74.9 kJ of electric en-
ergy was saved in a leveling cycle. And the excavator efficiency can be
increased from 33.6% to 46.3%.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a configuration with SDVPS and IMC is proposed to
enhance overall energy efficiency of the whole excavator. And the
working performance and energy efficiency of the excavator are tested
with the displacement and speed variable strategy, compared with the
pure displacement variable strategy.
(1) Compared with the pure displacement variable strategy, the energy
efficiencies of the power source and system can be increased by
10% under high speed; and which were 40% and 30% respectively,
under a relatively low velocity with the displacement and speed
variable strategy.
(2) The electric power consumption during the idle period can be re-
duced from 2.05 kW to 0.7 kW, compared with pure displacement
variable strategy.
(3) Compared with the pure displacement variable strategy, the pro-
posed system with the displacement and speed variable strategy
was 28.5% more efficient. And 74.9 kJ of electric energy was saved
in a leveling cycle. The excavator efficiency can be increased from
33.6% to 46.3%.
(4) Benefit from the IMC, the energy efficiency of the hydraulic control
system was above 62%. And when the velocity was small, it may be
above 80% under resistance load, which was 70% under the over-
running load.
Acknowledgement
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for
the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work
was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(Grant Nos. U1510206 and 51575374).
References
[1] Johann Lodewyks, Pascal Z. Decentralized energy-saving hydraulic concepts for
mobile working machines. In: 10th international fluid power conference, Dresden,
Germany, March 8–10 2016:79–90.
[2] Kamal NM, Bakar WAW, Ali R. Catalytic optimization and physicochemical studies
over Zn/Ca/Al2O3 catalyst for transesterification of low grade cooking oil. Energy
Convers Manage 2017;137:113–20.
[3] Uusitalo V, Väisänen S, Inkeri E, Soukka R. Potential for greenhouse gas emission
L. Ge et al.
reductions using surplus electricity in hydrogen, methane and methanol production
via electrolysis. Energy Convers Manage 2017;134:125–34.
[4] Peng T, Yang H, Fu X. Hydraulic excavator overall power match harmony control.
Chinese J Mech Eng 2001;37(11):50–3.
[5] Jing Y, Long Quan, Yang Yang. Excavator energy-saving efficiency based on diesel
engine cylinder deactivation technology. Chinese J Mech Eng 2012;25(5):897–904.
[6] Lajunen A, Suomela J. Evaluation of energy storage system requirements for hybrid
mining loaders. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2012;61(8):3387–93.
[7] Wei Shen, Jiang Jihai SuX, et al. Control strategy analysis of the hydraulic hybrid
excavator. J Franklin Inst 2015;352(2):541–61.
[8] Kim H, Yoo S, Cho S. Hybrid control algorithm for fuel consumption of a compound
hybrid excavator. Autom Construction 2016;68:1–10.
[9] Casoli P, Gambarotta A, Pompini N, et al. Hybridization methodology based on DP
algorithm for hydraulic mobile machinery—application to a middle size excavator.
Autom Construction 2016;61:42–57.
[10] Lin T, Huang W, Ren H. New compound energy regeneration system and control
strategy for hybrid hydraulic excavators. Autom Construction 2016;68:11–20.
[11] Sugimura Ken, Murrenhoff Hubertus. Novel hydraulic system for mini excavators
without electronic controls. In: BATH/ASME 2016 symposium on fluid power and
motion control, Bath, UK, September 7–9, 2016:V001T01A025.
[12] Heybroek K, Vael G, Palmberg J. Towards Resistance-free Hydraulics in
Construction Machinery. In: Proceedings of the 8th international fluid power con-
ference, Dresden, Germany, 2012; 2:123–38.
[13] Inderelst M. Efficiency improvements in mobile hydraulic systems. Ph.D. Thesis
RWTH Aachen, Shaker Verlag, 2013.
[14] Sgro S, Hydraulic design for engine integration. Ph.D. Thesis RWTH Aachen, 2014.
[15] Vukovic M, Sgro S, Murrenhoff H. STEAM – a holistic approach to designing ex-
cavator systems. In: 9th international fluid power conference, Aachen, Germany,
March 24–26, 2014;2:250–60.
[16] Vukovic M, Sgro S, Murrenhoff H. STEAM – a mobile hydraulic system for engine
integration. In: Proceedings of the ASME/BATH symposium on fluid power &
motion control, Sarasota, Florida, USA, October 6–9, 2013:V001T01A005.
[17] Lux J, Murrenhoff H. Experimental loss analysis of displacement controlled pumps.
71
Energy Conversion and Management 150 (2017) 62–71
In: Proceedings of the 10th international fluid power conference, Dresden,
Germany, March 8–10, 2016:441–52.
[18] Tadej Tašner, Kristian Les, Vito Tič, et al. Energy efficiency of different electro-
hydraulic drives. In: The 9th international fluid power conference, Aachen,
Germany, March 24–26, 2014, 1:14–26.
[19] Ivantysynova M. Innovations in pump design–what are future directions?
Hidravlični pogoni in krmilja. 2009;2:126–32.
[20] Helduser S. Electric-hydrostatic drive—an innovative energy-saving power and
motion control system. Proc Inst Mech Engineers Part I: J Syst Control Eng
1999;213(5):427–37.
[21] Tadej Tašner, Darko Lovrec. Maximum efficiency control – a new strategy to control
electrohydraulic systems. 2012; 3(5):107–9.
[22] Johannes Willkomm, Matthias Wahler, Jürgen Weber. Potentials of speed and
displacement variable pumps in hydraulic applications. In: 10th International Fluid
Power Conference, Dresden, Germany, 2016;6:379–92.
[23] Long Quan, Helduser S. Energy saving and high dynamic hydraulic power unit
based on speed variable motor and constant hydraulic pump. China. Mech Eng
2003;14(7):606–9.
[24] Minav TA, Pyrhonen JJ, Laurila LIE. Permanent magnet synchronous machine
sizing: effect on the energy efficiency of an electro-hydraulic forklift. IEEE Trans
Industr Electron 2012;59(6):2466–74.
[25] Kyujeong Choi, et al. Energy-saving in excavators with application of independent
metering valve. J Mech Sci Technol 2015;29(1):387–95.
[26] Dong Zhixin, Huang Weinan, Lei GE, et al. Research on the performance of hy-
draulic excavator with pump and valve combined separate meter in and meter out
circuits. J Mech Eng 2016;52(12):173–80.
[27] Bin Liu, Long Quan, Lei Ge. Research on the performance of hydraulic excavator
boom based pressure and flow accordance control with independent metering cir-
cuit. Proc Inst Mech Engineers Part E J Process Mech Eng 2016.
[28] Zimmerman JD, Pelosi M, Williamson CA, et al. Energy consumption of an LS ex-
cavator hydraulic system. In: ASME 2007 international mechanical engineering
congress and exposition, Seattle, Washington, USA, November 11–15,
2007:117–26.