Linköping Studies in Science and Technology

Licentiate Thesis No. 1626

Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power

Steering Systems

Alessandro Dell’Amico

LIU-TEK-LIC-2013:60
Division of Fluid and Mechatronic Systems
Department of Management and Engineering
Linköping University, SE–581 83 Linköping, Sweden

Linköping 2013
Copyright © Alessandro Dell’Amico, 2013

Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

ISBN 978-91-7519-476-9
ISSN 0280-7971
LIU-TEK-LIC-2013:60

Distributed by:
Division of Fluid and Mechatronic Systems
Department of Management and Engineering
Linköping University
SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden

Printed in Sweden by LiU-Tryck, Linköping 2013.

Per Barbara e Leonardo

”
No pain, no gain
 Abstract

There is a clear trend in the vehicle industry to implement more safety-

related functions, where the focus is on active safety systems and today
the steering system is also involved. Steering-related active safety func-
tions can only be realised with a steering system that allows electronic
control of either the road wheel angle or the torque required to steer the
vehicle, called active steering. The high power requirement of heavy ve-
hicles means they must rely on hydraulic power to assist the driver. The
system is a pure hydro-mechanical system with an open-centre circuit
activated by the driver’s steering action and suffers from poor energy
efficiency. The main task of the hydraulic system is to control the press-
ure in the assistance cylinder in such a way that it eases the load on the
driver.
This work suggests a way to design and evaluate a self-regulating
pressure control valve for use as actuator in the steering system. This
valve can be made small and fast and is electronically controlled to
enable active steering. It is based on a closed-centre circuit and has
therefore the potential to improve energy efficiency. The aim of this
work has been to investigate the possibility for the valve to perform as
the original open-centre valve. The suggested approach is a model-based
design and evaluation process where an optimisation routine is used to
design the valve. Together with a validated model of the steering system,
the new concept is compared with the original system. A hardware-in-
the-loop simulation test rig has also been designed and built with the
possibility to test a closed-centre steering system. It has partly been
used to support the modelling process and partly to verify that a closed-
centre steering system is a feasible solution. The simulation results have
shown that the designed valve can perform sufficiently well compared to
the original system.

i
ii
 Acknowledgements

The work presented in this thesis has been carried out at the Division of
Fluid and Mechatronic Systems (Flumes) at Linköping University, with
Scania AB as industrial partner.
I want to thank my supervisor, Prof. Petter Krus, for his supervision
and valuable conversations we had during this work. I also want to thank
the former head of division, Prof. Jan-Ove Palmberg, for giving me the
opportunity to be part of this division, and shearing his knowledge about
pressure control. I also want to thank Dr. Jochen Pohl, for helping me
in the initial part of the work and for shearing his experience of power
steering systems. I am very grateful to all my colleagues at the division.
Thank you for making this a great place to work. I also wish to thank
Ulf Bengtsson and the workshop guys for their support with the test rig.
Finally, I want to thank my family for their support during this time.
Barbara and Leonardo, you are the most important things in my life.

Linköping, November 2013

Alessandro Dell’Amico

iii
iv
 Abbreviations

ABS Anti-lock Brake System

EHPAS Electro Hydraulic Power Assisted Steering

EPAS Electric Power Assisted Steering
ESP Electronic Stability Program

HPAS Hydraulic Power Assisted Steering

v
vi
 Nomenclature

β Bulkmodulus [Pa]
δ Flow angle [rad]
δh Equivalent hydraulic damping [-]
δm Mechanical damping [-]
ωc Resonance of control chamber [rad/s]
ωh Hydraulic breakfrequency [rad/s]
ωm Mechanical resonance [rad/s]
ωs System volume resonance [rad/s]
ωv Valve breakfrequency [rad/s]
ρ Density [kg/m3 ]
τ Step time [s]
θsw Steering wheel angle [rad]
A1 Area opening [m2 ]
A2 Area opening [m2 ]
Ac Control pressure area [m2 ]
Ap Piston area [m2 ]
As Opening area to supply [m2 ]
At Opening area to tank [m2 ]
Acr Damping orifice area [m2 ]

vii
bv Damping coefficient of valve spool [-]
brw Equivalent damping of the rack [-]
bsw Equivalent damping of steering wheel and column [-]
Cq Flow coefficient [-]
Cs Capacitance of volume [m3 /Pa]
Crw Equivalent spring stiffness of the rack [N/m]
da Diameter of opening area of valve [m]
dc Diameter of pressure area [m]
e Control signal [-]
e1..n Weight functions [-]
F Force [N]
f Frequency [Hz]
f0 Spring preload [N]
fs Flow forces [N]
f1..n Optimisation objectives [-]
Gc Closed loop transfer function [-]
Go Loop gain transfer function [-]
Jsw Inertia of steering wheel and column [kgm2 ]
K1 Pressure-flow coefficient of damping orifice [m3 /sPa]
Kc Flow-pressure coefficient [m3 /sPa]
Ke Equivalent spring stiffness [N/m]
Kh Equivalent hydraulic spring stiffness [N/m]
Kq Flow gain [m2 /s]
Ks Closed loop gain [-]
KT Spring stiffness of torsion bar and column [Nm/rad]
Kv Open loop gain [m2 Pa/N]

viii
k1..n Normalising factors [-]
KcOC Flow-pressure coefficient of open-centre valve [m2 /s]
Kp0 Control gain [-]
KqOC Flow gain of open-centre valve [m2 /s]
mv Mass of spool [Kg]
Mrw Total mass of rack [kg]
pc Control chamber pressure [Pa]
PL Load pressure [Pa]
ps System pressure [Pa]
pen1..n Penalty functions [-]
qc Flow into control chamber [m3 /s]
ql Load flow [m3 /s]
qp Pump flow [m3 /s]
qs System flow [m3 /s]
qvs Flow from supply side [m3 /s]
qvt Flow to tank [m3 /s]
RT Steering system gear ratio [rad/m]
Rv Static characteristic of the valve [Ns/m5 ]
Td Driver’s torque [Nm]
Tsw Steering wheel torque [Nm]
Vc Control chamber volume [m3 ]
Vp Chamber volume of cylinder [m3 ]
Vs System volume [m3 ]
w Area gradient [m]
xp Piston position [m]
xv Spool position [m]

ix
xrw Rack position [m]

x
 Papers

The work in this thesis is presented as a monograph. Parts of the work

are based on the following publications.

[I] Alessandro Dell’Amico, Jochen Pohl, and Petter Krus. “Concep-

tual evaluation of closed-centre steering gears in road vehicles”.
In: The 7th FPNI PhD Symposium on Fluid Power. 2012.
[II] Alessandro Dell’Amico and Petter Krus. “A Test rig for Hydrauilc
Power Steering Concept Evaluation using Hardware-in-the-loop
Simulation”. In: The 8th International Conference on Fluid Power
Transmission and Control (ICFP13). Hangzhou, China, 2013.
[III] Alessandro Dell’Amico, Jochen Pohl, and Petter Krus. “Model-
ing and Simulation for Requirement Generation of Heavy Vehi-
cles Steering Gears”. In: Fluid Power and Motion Control (FPMC
2010). Bath, UK, 2010.
[IV] Alessandro Dell’Amico, Magnus Sethson, and Jan-Ove Palm-
berg. “Modeling, Simulation and Experimental Verification of a
Solenoid Pressure Control Valve”. In: The 11th Scandinavian Con-
ference on Fluid Power (SICFP09). Linköping, Sweden, 2009.

xi
xii
 Contents

1 Introduction 1
1.1 Future demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Formulating the research question . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2 The steering system 7

2.1 Hydraulic power assisted steering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3 Test rig 13
3.1 Hardware description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.2 Test rig measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4 Modelling of the steering system 23

4.1 Mechanical modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.2 Hydraulic modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3 Linear modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4 Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.5 Validation of steering system model . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5 Pressure control 37
5.1 Mathematical modelling of the pressure control valve . . . 38
5.1.1 Static characteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.1.2 Linearisation of the pressure control valve . . . . . 40

6 Closed-centre power steering system 45

6.1 Valve design by optimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.1.1 Characteristics of the valve design . . . . . . . . . 50

xiii
 6.2 Controller design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.3 Closed-centre system evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

7 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation 59
7.1 Force control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7.2 Pressure control with servo valves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

8 Results 71
8.1 Results from controller design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
8.2 Results from closed-centre steering system simulation . . . 72
8.3 Results from closed-centre steering in the test rig . . . . . 76
8.3.1 Step response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
8.3.2 On-centre driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

9 Discussion 79

10 Conclusions 83

11 Outlook 85

Bibliography 87

xiv
 1
Introduction
The demand for higher safety on our roads is constantly increasing and
the trend within the vehicle industry is going in the same direction with
more advanced systems being introduced to the market. Safety systems
can be divided into passive and active safety systems. A typical passive
safety system is the seat belt. Active safety systems refers to systems
that provide assistance to the driver in more or less critical situations
in order to avoid accidents. Typical active safety systems include the
Anti-lock Brake System (ABS), Electronic Stability Program (ESP),
and traction control. These systems use the brakes or engine control to
increase safety by stabilising the vehicle when necessary. To further meet
the demand for more safety, the latest trend within the vehicle industry
is to also incorporate the steering system. Examples of functions that
use the steering system are lane keeping assist, emergency lane assist [1],
collision avoidance [2], [3], [4], roll-over prevention [5], yaw disturbance
attenuation to stabilise the vehicle [6], and jackknife avoidance [7] (trucks
with semitrailers). To enable this functionality, the steering system, or
the steering gear, must allow for a modification of the steering wheel
torque to turn the wheels or the road wheel angle by means of an external
signal. This is here referred to as active steering. Another aspect within
the industry is to also look at comfort functions that in some way could
improve the steering feel1 or reduce the work load of the driver, e.g.
by variable steering ratio [8], [9]. In a much wider perspective, active
steering is a step towards automatic driving where the engine, brakes,
1
The term steering feel summarises a number of characteristics such as on-centre
torque built up, steering wheel return ability as well as torque levels during off centre
handling and low speed manoeuvring/shunting.

1
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

and steering system are all controlled by computer, [10], [11].

A traditional power-assisted steering system uses hydraulic power
to assist the driver, referred to as Hydraulic Power Assisted Steering
(HPAS). This system is a pure hydro-mechanical system and lacks the
possibility to be activated other than by driver input. Compromised
by an open-centre circuit and a constant flow pump, one of the major
drawbacks with this system concerns energy efficiency [12]. Within the
passenger car industry, Electric Power Assisted Steering (EPAS) has
been implemented in recent years, which inherently gives the possibility
to control the torque to turn the wheels by means of an external signal,
though the main objective has been to decrease energy consumption.
Here the hydraulic system is replaced with an electric motor that helps
the driver turn the wheels. For heavy vehicles, such as trucks and to
some extent premium cars, pure EPAS is not available today, mainly due
to high power requirements during low speed manoeuvring. Hydraulic
power is still needed. The steering gear or hydraulic system needs to be
modified in order to open up the possibility to implement active safety
functions. Several different solutions exist already that address both the
problem of reducing the energy consumption and increasing the func-
tionality of the steering system. Different solutions of the supply system
was investigated in [13], and the so called Electro Hydraulic Power As-
sisted Steering (EHPAS) was investigated in [14], [15], [16], [17]. The
EHPAS refer to systems where the supply pump is driven by an electric
motor instead of the engine. A closed-centre power steering system for
both increased functionality and reduced power consumption was inves-
tigated in [18], [19], [20], [21]. A hybrid steering system for commercial
vehicles which uses both electric and hydraulic power to assist the driver
was investigated in [22]. Solutions to increase functionality by overlaying
the torque or steering angle were presented in [23] and [24].

1.1 Future demands

An attempt to phrase the requirements for future commercial vehicles
might result in the list below, (compare to [25] for passenger cars):

1. Possibility to realise steering-related active safety and comfort

functions.
2. Enabling the possibility to design the change of steering feel with
load and predictable steering feel for a broad range of vehicle con-

2
 Introduction

figurations.

3. Increased directional stability.

4. Significant reduction in fuel consumption compared to present hy-

draulic power-steering systems.

5. Sufficient power capacity for all vehicle classes.

6. Providing means for safe operation during failure modes of the

system and fulfilling legal requirements for steering wheel torques
for a wide range of vehicle configurations.

7. Reduced system costs, improved packaging capabilities, including

potential weight savings, and improved NVH (Noise, vibration,
and harshness) performance.

1.2 Formulating the research question

The aim of the work is to investigate how a steering gear can be modified
in order to open up the possibility to implement active steering func-
tions. The focus is on the actuator controlling the assistance pressure.
The design of the actuator must reflect the future demands concerning
steering systems in commercial vehicles. This means that the actuator
must be electronically controlled, have the same performance as today’s
actuator, and reduce energy consumption. Research has shown that a
closed-centre system has the greatest impact on energy consumption.
Cost and packaging are also important aspects. A self-regulating press-
ure control valve is therefore the actuator chosen for the design. The
research question can then be formulated as:
Can a self-regulating pressure control valve be used as an actuator in a
closed-centre circuit for a power-assisted steering system with preserved
performance compared to the open-centre actuator?
This includes studying the design of the valve and controller design. An-
other aim is to investigate whether a closed-centre power steering system
can be evaluated in a test rig. A further research question can therefore
be formulated as:
Can a proof of concept be stated through hardware-in-the-loop simula-
tion of a closed-centre steering system?

3
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

1.3 Limitations
This work has only focused on the actuator of the hydraulic power steer-
ing system, i.e. the element that controls the pressure in the assistance
cylinder. The steering system itself and any models are only considered
to be tools in the evaluation process of the actuator. The vehicle model
used is arbitrary and is only used for a complete simulation environ-
ment and is not part of the research. Any aspects concerning steering
feel or on-centre handling are not dealt with other than as valuable
knowledge when understanding the application or system. No possible
failure modes are considered, nor are legal requirements. It is, however,
assumed that if the closed-centre actuator has similar performance and
characteristics to the open-centre actuator, the steering feel should be
the same. The valve is assumed to be actuated by a solenoid. This is
not part of the work at this point, but it is rather assumed that a small
solenoid is fast. For a better overview of the work and to better support
the modelling and design process, the system studied is the designed test
rig with dimensions for a passenger car. Although the functionality of
the steering system is the same for a heavy vehicle, the requirements dif-
fer somewhat. However, the aim of the design process is to be functional
on any vehicle configuration and this is the more important aspect of
this work. All aspects of this work concerns the operating range related
to on-centre driving, which indicates moderate steering action around
centre position of the steering wheel, with an amplitude of not higher
than ±30°. This region is where the performance of the steering system
is most evident for a driver.

1.4 Contributions
This work suggests a way to design and evaluate a self-regulating press-
ure control valve for use as an actuator in the steering system loop.
The suggested approach is a model-based design and evaluation pro-
cess where an optimisation routine is used to design the valve. A com-
plete simulation model of the suggested design, together with a validated
model of the steering system and a vehicle model, is used to compare
the closed-centre system with the original system.
A hardware-in-the loop simulation test rig was also designed and built
with the possibility to test a closed-centre steering system. It is partly
used to support the modelling process and partly to verify that a closed-

4
 Introduction

centre steering system is a feasible solution.

1.5 Outline
The outline of the thesis begins with describing the steering system in
chapter 2, with intention to give the reader an overview of the applica-
tion. Chapter 3 describes the test rig, that is developed for evaluation
of steering system actuator concepts, but also to support the modelling
of the steering system in chapter 4. Chapter 5 deals with pressure con-
trol and the analysis of the intended valve in this work. The outcomes
of chapters 4 and 5 are linked together in chapter 6, where the closed-
centre power steering system is analysed and evaluated. How the test
rig is used for hardware-in-the-loop simulation is dealt with in chapter
7. Chapter 8 presents the most important results from chapter 6 and 7.
The thesis ends with discussion, conclusions and outlook in chapters 9,
10 and 11.

5
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

6
 2
The steering system

The steering system has the purpose of giving the driver a tool to control
the direction of motion of the vehicle. An interpretation of the driver-
steering system/vehicle by [12] is a closed loop system where the driver
wants to control the direction of the vehicle. The reference input to the
system is the direction of the vehicle and one feedback channel is the
actual direction, which is a visual channel. The direction is changed by
the driver through the steering system by controlling the steering wheel
angle. The torque required by the driver is another feedback channel
provided by the steering system. This channel gives important informa-
tion about the road conditions. The steering system affects the direc-
tion of the vehicle, which in turn provides yet another feedback channel,
namely the lateral acceleration, which is felt by the driver. Historically,
as the front axle load increased, tyres grew larger and front wheel drive
was introduced, power steering was introduced to meet demands for
low steering wheel torque and comfort. Traditionally, this is done by
hydraulic means, referred to as HPAS. In recent years, EPAS has also
been introduced, where an electric motor assists the driver. However,
for heavy vehicles and some premium cars HPAS is still in use due to the
power requirement casued by high front axle loads. This work focuses
only on HPAS.
There are two types of steering system arrangement: the rack-and-
pinion and the worm gear steering box. The rack-and-pinion system is
mostly found in lighter vehicles and passenger cars while the worm gear
steering box is found in heavy vehicles. The rack-and-pinion steering
system is lighter, more compact, has higher efficiency and gives the driver
a more accurate feeling of the tyre-ground interaction,[26] and [27]. The

7
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

most common worm gear today is the recirculating ball screw, [28], that
utilizes a closed helical channel inside the gear where balls rotate and
move. In this way the friction is kept to a minimum. Regardless of the
arrangement the principal function is the same. A schematic figure of
the rack-and-pinion steering system is shown in Fig. 2.1.

Constant
flow
pump
Column

Open-centre
Torsion bar valve

Assistance cylinder

Figure 2.1 Schematic picture of a rack-and-pinion steering system.

2.1 Hydraulic power assisted steering

A detailed analysis of the HPAS can be found [12]. The hydraulic sys-
tem is parallel to the mechanical system. There is a legal requirement
that the vehicle is steerable in case of hydraulic loss, but the mechanical
connection also ensures the haptic feedback from the tyre-road interac-
tion to the driver. The main components of the hydraulic system are
a constant flow pump and a rotational open-centre valve. The valve is
actuated by a torsion bar attached to the spool at the upper end and
to the pinion at the lower end, where the valve body is also attached.
The valve consists of several parallel control edges, making up several

8
 The steering system

parallel-connected Wheatstone bridges. These are preferably described

as one lumped Wheatstone bridge. At centre position, the valve is fully
open. The valve is activated by the twisting of the torsion bar, which
occurs when the driver applies a torque to the steering wheel. When
twisted, the control edges close on one side, thus increasing the pressure
on that side, and open on the other side. The purpose of the hydraulic
system is thus to control the differential pressure in the assistance cylin-
der. The steering system itself is actually a position servo where the
twist of the torsion bar corresponds to the control error. A perfect po-
sition controller would therefore not provide any feedback to the driver.
A schematic of the hydraulic system is shown in Fig. 2.2. The pump
is usually driven by the engine and the flow control function is only
effective above a certain rotational speed. Due to the open-centre char-
acteristic the pressure build up characteristic is dependent on the pump
flow. The pump flow is therefore dimensioned for a very low rotational
engine speed in order to ensure assistance even at low velocities, such as
during parking manoeuvres. This means that at high velocities, when
the need for assistance is usually low, the pump flow is very high and ex-
cessive flow is surplussed to tank. This is of course a waste of energy and
one of the main reasons for the low energy efficiency of the traditional
HPAS.
The steering system is usually characterized as the assistance pressure
vs. the torsion bar torque. This is called the boost curve and a typical
boost curve is shown in Fig. 2.3. The shape of the curve depends on the
geometry of the valve and the pump flow. Different driving scenarios
can be identified from the boost curve. During parking manoeuvres, a
high level of assistance is needed while during high speed manoeuvres a
little assistance is needed. The compromise with the boost curve is that
a high level of assistance also means less feedback to the driver, where
road disturbances are suppressed. This is usually not a problem during
parking, while at high speed the driver wants more information from the
road, which is achieved with low assistance.

9
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Vs
qp qs

A1 A2
ql

A1
A2

Figure 2.2 A schematic of the hydraulic system. The valve is seen as

a lumped Wheatstone bridge.

150 Assistance pressure [bar]

130
Parking
110

90

70

50

30
On-centre

-10 -5 5 10
Torsion bar
torque [Nm]

Figure 2.3 A typical boost curve. Values represent a heavy vehicle.

Phenomenona such as hydraulic lag and chattering were studied by [12].

Hydraulic lag has both a static and a dynamic part. The static lag is
when the pump flow is not sufficient, i.e. the assistance cylinder’s piston
moves faster than the delivered flow, causing the assistance pressure to

10
 The steering system

drop. Chattering is an instability problem. Since the steering system is

a position servo, it constitutes a closed loop, which can become unstable
if the loop gain is too high. The loop gain is defined by the boost curve,
which can generate too high gain due to geometric tolerances. Another
cause of too high gain is when the piston moves towards the direction of
the assistance pressure. When moving in the same direction the pressure
decreases, but when moving towards the direction of the assistance, the
pressure increases and a higher gain is produced.

11
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

12
 3
Test rig

The test rig used in this work has been developed for several reasons.
First of all, the test rig is used to support the development of a simulation
model of the steering system. With a test rig available it is much easier to
measure all necessary states and perform tests, which would be difficult
to do when installed in a vehicle. The test rig also provides a clear
boundary of the system studied. The other purpose of the test rig is
to evaluate different closed-centre actuators with hardware-in-the-loop
simulation, described in chapter 7. The present chapter describes the
hardware of the test rig and the measurements performed for system
modelling. A layout of the test rig and the interaction between the
hardware and the software is shown in Fig. 3.1. The rack-and-pinion
with steering wheel and column constitutes the hardware. A vehicle
model is implemented in the software. To evaluate actuator concepts, a
model of the concept studied is also implemented in the software.

13
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Original
system
Force
Load cylinder sensor

Servo valve
pack

Actuator model
Vehicle-tyre
model

Figure 3.1 A schematic of the test rig. A model of the actuator under
study, as well as a vehicle model, are implemented in the software.

3.1 Hardware description

The test rig is built up around a rack-and-pinion steering system. A
fixed displacement pump is driven by an electric motor. Sensors are
used to measure the pump pressure as well as the chamber pressures.
To measure the torque applied by the driver, strain gauges are attached
directly to the torsion bar. This means that the actual torsion bar torque
is measured instead of the steering wheel torque and an additional tor-
sion bar is not needed. Since the torsion bar torque is linear to the twist
of the torsion bar, hence the twist of the open-centre valve, the meas-
urement of the torque gives a direct measure of the valve actuation. The
steering wheel angle and rack position are measured with potentiome-

14
 Test rig

ters. A weight of 20 kg is attached to one end of the rack to give the

system the right inertia. At the other end of the rack, a load cylinder is
attached to generate the load experienced by the steering system due to
the tyre-ground interaction. Between the load cylinder and the rack, a
force sensor measures the force applied by the load cylinder and is used
in a closed loop controller. Parallel to the original system, four high per-
formance servo valves from Moog (bandwidth is approx. 250 Hz at 10%
stroke) control the meter-in and meter-out flow to each chamber of the
assistance cylinder. These valves are over-dimensioned for the applica-
tion, but the result is that they work with very small movements, which
should be beneficial from a performance point of view. A Moog servo
valve is also used with the load cylinder. All servo valves use an external
supply system of 200 bar. Argus valves are used to switch between the
original system and the servo valve system. The reason for keeping the
original system is to always have the reference system available for a
qualitative comparison between the open-centre and closed-centre sys-
tems. The test rig is shown in Fig. 3.2 and a closer view of the servo
valve pack is shown in Fig. 3.3.

Rack Pump

Load cylinder

Figure 3.2 The test rig constituted of a rack-and-pinion steering sys-

tem.

15
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Servo valve
pack

Figure 3.3 Four servo valves from Moog control the meter-in and
meter-out flow of each chamber of the assistance cylinder.

3.2 Test rig measurements

Several tests have been conducted to derive parameters for the model.
Subparts of the steering system were tested separately. Each test is
further explained in the following subsections.

Boost curve
The boost curve is measured by clamping the rack. A steering wheel
torque is applied slowly in both directions. Pump and cylinder pressures
are recorded together with the torsion bar torque. The measured boost
curve is shown in Fig. 3.4.
From the boost curve the opening areas of the valve can be calculated
using equations 4.7 and 4.8, shown in Fig. 3.5.

16
 Test rig

100

90

80
Assistance pressure [bar]

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
Torsionbar torque [Nm]

Figure 3.4 The measured boost curve of the test rig shows differential
cylinder pressure vs. torsion bar torque.

−6
x 10
4

3.5

3
Area openings [m2]

2.5

1.5

0.5
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
Torsion bar torque [Nm]

Figure 3.5 The calculated opening areas of the open-centre valve.

Rack friction
This test measures the pressure-dependent friction of the rack. Accord-
ing to [29], it is the pressure-dependent friction that is the most dominant

17
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

friction. The column is disconnected from the input shaft of the valve.
The load cylinder is run as a position controller with a sinusoidal input
with an amplitude of 0.004 m and 0.5 rad/s. Both the force required
to drive the rack and the rack position are registered. The servo valves
are controlled to maintain a constant pressure in both chambers. Each
measurement is made for 5, 10, 20, 40, 60 and 80 bar in each cham-
ber. The results of the measurements can be seen in Fig. 3.6 and the
increased amplitude of the hysteresis curve with increased pressure is
clearly visible. A linear relation between the friction and the sum of the
cylinder pressures is then assumed in the model.

800
5 bar
10 bar
600
20 bar
40 bar
400 60 bar
80 bar
200
RackForce [N]

−200

−400

−600

−800
−5 0 5
RackPos [m] −3
x 10

Figure 3.6 The figure shows the rack force vs. the rack position for
different chamber pressures.

Column friction
The column friction is measured by again using the load cylinder as a
position servo with a sinusoidal input with an amplitude of 0.004 m and
0.5 rad/s. The steering column is attached to the valve and the steering
wheel is free. The torsion bar torque then gives an indication of the
friction in the upper inertia. The chamber pressures are held at 10 bar.
It turned out that at zero pressure the result is very oscillative, probably
due to the friction in the rack. Figure 3.7 shows the torsion bar torque

18
 Test rig

vs. the steering wheel angle. The result is still quite oscillative but the
amplitude of the hysteresis curve is still clear around 0.3 Nm.

0.6

0.4

0.2
Torsion bar torque [N]

−0.2

−0.4

−0.6

−0.8
−30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30 40
Steering wheel angle [deg]

Figure 3.7 The figure shows the torsion bar torque vs. the steering
wheel angle with a freely rotating steering wheel.

Column and torsion bar stiffness

The column stiffness is determined by measuring the torsion bar torque
and steering wheel angle with the rack clamped. This gives the total
stiffness of the upper inertia, i.e. the torsion bar and steering wheel
column. The result is shown in Fig. 3.8. The inclination of the curve
gives the stiffness and is set to 1.06 Nm/deg.

19
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

10

6
Steering wheel torque [Nm]

−2

−4

−6

−8
−8 −6 −4 −2 0 2 4 6 8
Steering wheel angle [deg]

Figure 3.8 The figure shows the torsion bar torque vs. the steering
wheel angle with the rack clamped.

Steering wheel and column inertia

The inertia of the upper system, i.e. the steering wheel and column, is
measured by clamping the rack and applying a torque at the steering
wheel. When the torque is suddenly released, the steering wheel will
excite free oscillations according to:
s
KT
f= (3.1)
Jsw

The result is shown in Fig. 3.9. The frequency is 5.15 Hz. Since the
stiffness KT is known, the inertia can be calculated to 0.058 kgm2 . The
damping coefficient is tuned to get a sufficient result from simulations
of the same test case compared to the measurements. A damping of
0.06 was achieved in this way. What should be mentioned is that the
damping is nonlinear, especially for higher steering wheel velocities, but
is assumed to be linear within the operating range of this work. The
same applies for the damping of the rack.

20
 Test rig

15

10
Steering wheel torque [Nm]

−5

−10
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]

Figure 3.9 The figure shows the free oscillations of the steering wheel.

System test
The whole system is tested by manually applying a steering wheel angle
with increased velocity. The vehicle model is used and set to run at 70
kph. The steering wheel angle is limited to ±30° since only on-centre
driving is studied. Figure 3.10 shows the measured steering wheel angle
and Fig 3.11 shows the torsion bar torque. A steering wheel angle ve-
locity of 400°/s was reached and a pump pressure of ∼40 bar. The oil
temperature is maintained between 40 and 45℃. These measurements
are later used in section 4.5 to validate the model by comparing simu-
lated and measured results.

21
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

30

20
Steering wheel angle [deg]

10

−10

−20

−30
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]

Figure 3.10 Measured steering wheel angle of the complete system.

2
Torsion bar torque [Nm]

−1

−2

−3
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]

Figure 3.11 Measured torsion bar torque of the complete system.

22
 4
Modelling of the
steering system

This chapter describes the modelling of the steering system as it has

been used in this work. A model can be useful in many ways but the
main purpose here is to provide means to evaluate different actuator
concepts. First, the system of equations is stated. These are used to
derive a linear model of the steering system. The linear model gives
a lot of information about parameters affecting system properties and
helps understanding of the system. The nonlinear model is then used
in a simulation environment. This model covers aspects not seen from
a linear analysis and a complete driving cycle can be studied. For a
consistent way of working and to be able to quantitatively compare con-
cepts and the original system, the derived model represents the steering
system used in the test rig. As described in chapter 3, measurements
were conducted to find model parameters. The model is divided into
different submodels, as can be seen in Fig. 4.1. The driver commu-
nicates with the mechanical submodel by applying a torque in order to
follow a certain steering wheel angle. The mechanical submodel commu-
nicates in turn with the hydraulic and vehicle submodels. The hydraulic
submodel takes the torsion bar twist and piston velocity as inputs and
generates the cylinder pressures fed to the mechanical submodel. The
vehicle submodel takes the road wheel angle as input and calculates the
corresponding forces from the tyre-ground interaction.

23
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Vehicle

θrw F

Tsw ∆TT B
θswref Mechanical vp Hydraulic
Driver
θsw subsystem pr , pl subsystem

Figure 4.1 The structure of the simulation model showing the inter-
action between the different submodels.

4.1 Mechanical modelling

The mechanical subsystem can be modelled as a 2 DoF system or even
up to a 5 DoF system where every inertia in the system is considered.
Pfeffer [29], [30] derives a 5 DoF model with the purpose of studying the
steering wheel torque. However, he also derives a 2 DoF model for the
same purpose and also shows that the two models perform in a similar
fashion. A 2 DoF model is also used to study the power consumption of
an HPAS system, [15]. Baxter [31] also uses a simple model and ignores
friction to derive expressions for steering gear feel and stiffness. Post [32]
measures the friction and stiffnesses of a rack and pinion steering gear
and a recirculating ball screw steering gear, and models the systems with
both a high degree of freedom model and a 2 DoF model implemented
with a vehicle model. He showed the importance of including nonlinear
effects, such as friction, stiffness and boost curve, in order to predict the
behaviour of the system. Neureder [33] studied steering wheel nibble
(vibrations in the steering wheel) and derived a simple model of the
steering system. Rösth [12] derived both a 2 DoF model of a passenger
car steering system and a 3 DoF model of a truck steering system, both
models with pressure- and speed-dependent friction. Linear models were
derived to study chattering [34], and a nonlinear model to study catch-
up [35]. The same approach to model the mechanical subsystem is also
used for EPAS systems, as shown by Badawy et al. [36], where they

24
 Modelling of the steering system

modelled a column-assisted EPAS and compared a higher and lower

degree model to show similar results. Ueda et al. [37] investigated how
changes in friction in different parts of the steering system affect the
system characteristics. They used a 4 DoF model for this. In the early
paper by Segel [38], the author derives a simplified model in order to
predict the behaviour of the vehicle. The steering system is modelled
with 2 DoF with Coulomb friction together with a 3 DoF linear vehicle
model. The operating range where the steering system is studied in this
work is similar to as e.g. [29], and it should therefore be sufficient to use
a 2 DoF model for the purpose of evaluating different actuator concepts.
In order to predict the behaviour of the steering system, it is im-
portant to incorporate a friction model. The rack friction is strongly
pressure-dependent, but friction also comes from the yoke, mesh, steer-
ing valve sealings and steering column. One way would be to implement
a Coulomb friction. As long ago as 1966, Segel [38] stressed the impor-
tance of including friction and found that without a certain amount of
Coulomb friction in the steering system, the vehicle would be unstable
(for studies of a pure mechanical steering system). However, investiga-
tions by Neureder [33] suggest that the friction in the steering system
behaves differently than a Coulomb friction. He found that cars ex-
hibit nibble even at low-level forces, which contradicts the behaviour
of Coulomb friction. Ueda et al. [37] also investigated friction and
suggested a spring/friction model to best describe its behaviour. This
means that the friction force behaves like a spring until a certain level
where the force remains constant. Pfeffer [29] used the same approach
and further developed the model. The equations of motion describing
the steering system are expressed as:

Jsw θ̈sw = Td − KT (θsw − xrw RT ) − bsw θ̇sw (4.1)

Mrw ẍrw = PL Ap + KT (θsw − xrw RT ) Rt − brw ẋrw − Crw (4.2)

θsw represents the steering wheel angle and xrw represents the position of
the rack. The friction is modelled as an exponential spring with limited
force and hysteresis, according to [29]. Figure 4.2 shows a representation
of the friction model.

25
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

FESF

Flim

−Flim

Figure 4.2 The representation of the friction model according to [29].

4.2 Hydraulic modelling

The hydraulic subsystem is based on the Wheatstone bridge representa-

tion seen in Fig. 2.2. It is assumed that opposite orifices in the bridge
are equal in size. The model thus considers the flow equation for the
four orifices and the continuity equation for each cylinder chamber and
the volume between the pump and the valve. An extensive model of the
hydraulic system was derived by [12]. The pump flow qs and load flow
ql can be described by

s s
ps − pL ps + pL
qs = C q A1 + C q A2 (4.3)
ρ ρ
s s
ps − pL ps + pL
ql = C q A1 − C q A2 (4.4)
ρ ρ

where A1 = A [Tsw ] and A2 = A [−Tsw ]. From these equations the load

pressure pL and the pump pressure ps can be derived as

26
 Modelling of the steering system

2 2 !
ρq 2 1−q 1+q
 
pL (Tsw , q) = s2 − (4.5)
8Cq A [Tsw ] A [−Tsw ]
2 2 !
ρq 2 1−q 1+q
 
ps (Tsw , q) = s2 + (4.6)
8Cq A [Tsw ] A [−Tsw ]

where q = qqLs . The load pressure is shown in Fig. 4.3 for both a positive
and a negative load flow, which describes the static characteristic of the
valve. Finally, the opening areas can be derived as

s
qp ρ
A2 (Tsw ) = (4.7)
2Cq ps (Tsw ) + pL (Tsw )
s
qp ρ
A1 (Tsw ) = (4.8)
2Cq ps (Tsw ) − pL (Tsw )

250

200
Assistance pressure [bar]

150

100

50

0 1 2 3 4 5
Load flow [l/min]

Figure 4.3 The static characteristics of the open-centre valve. The

curves with square markers are for positive load flow. The curves with
diamond markers are for negative load flow.

27
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

4.3 Linear modelling

The linearised and Laplace transformed flow equations are defined as
(capital letters are used for linearised variables):

∂qs ∂qs ∂qs

Qs = Tsw + Ps + Pl (4.9)
∂Tsw ∂Ps ∂Pl
∂ql ∂ql ∂ql
Ql = Tsw + Ps + Pl (4.10)
∂Tsw ∂Ps ∂Pl

where the partial derivatives become:

s s
∂qs Ps − Pl Ps + Pl
= C q w1 + Cq w2 = Kq2
∂Tsw ρ ρ
∂qs Cq Tsw w1 Cq Tsw w2
= q + q = Kc1
∂Ps 2 P s −P l
ρ 2 Ps +Pl ρ
ρ ρ
∂qs Cq Tsw w1 Cq Tsw w2
=− q + q = Kc2
∂Pl P s −P
2 Ps +P
2 ρ ρ ρ ρ
l l

s s
∂ql Ps − Pl Ps + Pl
= C q w1 − C q w2 = Kq1
∂Tsw ρ ρ
∂ql Cq Tsw w1 Cq Tsw w2
= q − q = −Kc2
∂Ps 2 Ps −Pl ρ 2 Ps +Pl ρ
ρ ρ
∂ql Cq Tsw w1 Cq Tsw w2
=− q − q = −Kc1
∂Pl 2 Ps −P l
ρ 2 Ps +Pl
ρ
ρ ρ

The linearised equations of the hydraulic system now become:

Qs = Kq2 Tsw + Kc1 Ps + Kc2 Pl (4.11)

Ql = Kq1 Tsw − Kc2 Ps − Kc1 Pl (4.12)
Vs
Qp − Qs = Ps s (4.13)
β
V0
Ql = Ap Xp s + Pl s (4.14)
β
Vp1 Vp2
where V0 = Vp1 +Vp2

28
 Modelling of the steering system

The above equations now give the expression for the load pressure:
Vs
Kc1 1+ Kc1 β s
PL = 2 2 s2 2δ0
·
Kc1 − Kc2 + ω0 s + 1
ω02
Vs
 
1+   s
K Kc2
Kc1 + q2
!
 Kq1
β Kq2 Kc2 
Kq1 1 + Tsw − Ap Xp s
 
 Vs Kq1 Kc1
1+ Kc1 β s
 

GKc

≈ GKq Kq Tsw − Ap Xp s (4.15)
Kc
where
s
2 − K2
Kc1 c2
ω0 = β
V0 Vs
1 Kc1 V0 + Vs
δ0 = q √
2 K2 − K2 V0 Vs
c1 c2
2 − K2
Kc1 c2
Kc =
Kc1
!
Kq2 Kc2
Kq = Kq1 1 +
Kq1 Kc1

Ignoring the dynamics, Eq. 4.15 represents the static boost curve on
a linear form, and will have different gains depending on the operating
point, such as torque level and load flow. The complete steering system
is now described with the following set of equations:

Jsw θsw s2 = Td − KT (θsw − RT Xrw ) − brw θsw s (4.16)

2
Mrw Xrw s = PL Ap + KT (θsw − RT Xrw ) RT
− Crw Xrw − brw Xrw s (4.17)
GK c

P L Ap = GKq Kq Tsw − Ap Xp s Ap (4.18)
Kc
These equations can be formed into the block diagram shown in Fig.
4.4, which helps to analyse the system. From the block diagram the
position servo control loop clearly appears. The driver applies a torque
on the steering wheel which generates an angle. This angle is input
to the control loop, i.e. the reference value. This is compared to the

29
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

corresponding angle from the rack position. The error is the twisting of
the torsion bar, which is input to the valve. The purpose of the hydraulic
system is also clear, namely to control the assistance pressure. This is
also affected by the movement of the rack. The pressure generates a
force, which together with the equivalent steering wheel torque pushes
the rack.
Td

θsw
1
Jsw s2 +bsw s+KT

KT RT KT RT

Xrw
Kq GKq GKc 1
KT Ap
Kc Mrw s2 +brw s+Crw +KT R2
T
PL

Ap s

RT

Figure 4.4 A block diagram representation of the linearised model of

the open-centre steering system.

The closed loop transfer function from a steering wheel angle input to a
rack displacement is defined as
Rt Xrw KT R2 +GK GK ApKT Kq RT /Kc
=  A2
T
 c q GK GK Ap Kq KT RT
(4.19)
θsw Mrw s2 + brw +
p
GK
c
s+Crw +KT R2 +
c q
Kc T Kc

It is interesting to study the pressure built up by the open-centre

valve since any actuator concept will replace this function. Figure 4.5
shows the pressure built up for different torsion bar torque inputs (from
minimum to maximum torque) and zero load flow, i.e. when the rack is
standing still. The pressure is built up fast at very low torque input but
becomes rather slow as soon as the torque increases. Since the system
is highly nonlinear the results vary with operating point. However, the
result in Fig. 4.5 gives an indication of the behaviour of the valve.
The frequency response from a steering wheel angle input to a rack
displacement (or road wheel angle) is shown Fig. 4.6 for the loop gain
frequency response (open loop) and in Fig. 4.7 for the closed loop sys-
tem. As mentioned previously the response is very much dependent on

30
 Modelling of the steering system

140

Amplitude [dB]
130

120

110
Increased torque
100
−1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10

−20
Phase [deg]

−40

−60 Increased torque

−80
−1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.5 Transfer function from a torque input to load pressure for
zero load flow. The upper plot shows the amplitude curve and the lower
plot shows the phase curve.

the operating point. It is also dependent on the amplitude and direc-

tion of the flow. There are also unknown external parameters affecting
the result. These are the stiffness and damping of the lower inertia and
are dependent on the tyre-ground interaction. However, studying the
frequency response of both the open loop and closed loop systems gives
an indication of the system’s behaviour, and same conditions will be
used also for the closed-centre system. Though the valve is slow at high
torque levels the higher boost gain compensates for that in the closed
loop system. The frequency response of the steering system will later
be compared to the frequency response of the closed-centre steering in
section 6.3.

31
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

20

Amplitude [dB]
0

−20 Increased torque

−1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10

−50
Phase [deg]

−100

−150
Increased torque

−200
−1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.6 The loop gain frequency response (open loop) of the steer-
ing system for zero load flow from a steering wheel angle input to a rack
displacement.

0
Amplitude [dB]

−10

Increased torque
−20

−1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10

0
Phase [deg]

−5

−10
Increased torque
−15

−20
−1 0 1
10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 4.7 The frequency response of the closed loop system for zero
load flow from a steering wheel angle input to a rack displacement.

4.4 Simulation
The simulation model is structured as shown in Fig. 4.1. The mechanical
model is implemented with the friction models as described in section
4.1. One element is used for friction in the column with a constant value

32
 Modelling of the steering system

according to measurements described in section 3.2. Another friction

element is used as a pressure-dependent friction at the rack. A linear
pressure dependency is assumed. The hydraulic model is implemented
using subcomponents for the four orifices and three volume components.
The pump is not considered in this work and is therefore set to deliver
a constant flow. The vehicle model is not considered either and an
arbitrary passenger car is therefore modelled. It is necessary though to
provide realistic forces on the steering rack. Low lateral accelerations
are considered, which is sufficient when studying on-centre handling. A
bicycle model, which is found in [26], is therefore used. The driver model
in this case is a lead-lag controller set to follow a specific steering wheel
angle. The output from the driver is a torque applied on the steering
system. Different steering systems can therefore be compared in terms
of steering wheel torque. Any differences between two systems will be
detected since the steering wheel torque will have to change in order to
follow the same steering wheel angle.

4.5 Validation of steering system model

The complete model is validated by comparing simulated results with
measured results from the test run of the complete system in section 3.2.
The models used are the driver model, the open-centre valve model, and
the steering system model. The driver model is fed with the measured
steering wheel angle as reference value and the measured rack force is
applied to the steering system model. Figure 4.8 shows a comparison
between the simulated and measured steering wheel angle, which shows
the performance of the driver controller. The driver model is able to
follow the reference with very good result. Figure 4.9 shows a compar-
ison between the simulated and measured torsion bar torque, which is
the most important indication that the model is accurate enough to be
used in the evaluation process of different actuators. Figure 4.10 shows a
comparison between the simulated and the measured rack position. Fig-
ure 4.11 shows a comparison between the simulated and the measured
pump pressure. Figure 4.12 shows a comparison between the simulated
and the measured pressure differences, i.e. the assistance pressure. All
figures indicate that the model performs sufficiently well for the given
driving cycle.

33
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

30

20
Steering wheel angle [deg]

10

0
30

−10

−20

−30
35 36
−30
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]

Figure 4.8 Comparison between simulated (dashed) and measured

(solid) steering wheel angle.
Torsionbar torque [Nm]

3
2
1
0
−1
−2
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
Torsionbar torque [Nm]

−2

35 36 37 38 39 40
Time [s]

Figure 4.9 Comparison between simulated (dashed) and measured

(solid) torsion bar torque.

34
 Modelling of the steering system

−3
x 10
Rack position [m] 4

−2

−4
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
−3
x 10
4
Rack position [m]

−2

−4
35 36 37 38 39 40
Time [s]

Figure 4.10 Comparison between simulated (dashed) and measured

(solid) rack position.
Pump pressure [bar]

30

20

10

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]

60
Pump pressure [bar]

50
40
30
20
10
35 36 37 38 39 40
Time [s]

Figure 4.11 Comparison between simulated (dashed) and measured

(solid) pump pressure.

35
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Pressure difference [bar]

20

−20

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
Pressure difference [bar]

50

−50
35 36 37 38 39 40
Time [s]

Figure 4.12 Comparison between simulated (dashed) and measured

(solid) pressure differences between left and right chamber of the assistance
cylinder.

36
 5
Pressure control
This chapter describes the self-regulated pressure control valve intended
for use as a possible actuator in the steering system as well as the analy-
sis performed to investigate the performance and suitability of the valve.
The methodological approach is to derive a mathematical model of the
valve. The model is in turn used in a linear analysis of the valve, reveal-
ing important aspects of the performance. The model is also used in a
simulation environment together with the derived model of the steering
system explained in chapter 4.
Pressure control takes place in most systems, simply for safety reasons.
The pressure must not exceed certain limits. There are also system
configurations that are based on a controlled pressure. One way to do
this is by means of a valve-controlled system, such as pressure relief
valves or pressure-reducing valves. The valve under study in this work,
shown in Fig. 5.1, is in practice a combination of both types. If the
pressure is too low in the controlled volume, the valve opens to supply
pressure to fill up the volume until it reaches the target pressure. If
the pressure is instead too high, the valve opens to tank in order to
reduce the pressure in the controlled volume. The controlled pressure
is sensed by the valve and compared to the target pressure. The valve
is therefore self-regulated. The target pressure is set by an electronic
signal and corresponds to the force applied on the spool by a solenoid.
The solenoid is not part of the analysis at this point. A restrictor is
placed between the load volume and the control chamber to increase
damping, which will be shown in the following analysis. To provide a
smooth opening the opening area consists of four holes drilled in the
valve body.

37
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

x
ps pl pt

F
Ac

Acr
Figure 5.1 A schematic of the pressure control valve.

5.1 Mathematical modelling of the pressure control

valve
The outlined equations describing the behaviour of the valve are based
on the analysis by [39] and [40]. Other analyses of pressure controlled
systems can be found in [41], where a two-stage pressure relief valve is
analysed and in [42], where a pressure controlled pump is analysed. The
equations consider both flow directions.
Equation of motion

mv x¨v = F − pc Ac − f0 − Kxv − bv − fs (5.1)

F = Pref Ac + f0

Load flow
s
2
qvs = Cq As (xv ) (ps − pl ) − qc (5.2)
ρ
s
2
qvt = Cq At (−xv ) p l + qc (5.3)
ρ

Load volume
Vcyl
qvs − qvt = Ap ẋp + ṗl (5.4)
β

38
 Pressure control

Control chamber
Vc
qc = −Ac vv + ṗc (5.5)
β
s
2
qc = Cq Acr (pl − pc ) (5.6)
ρ

Flow forces
fs = |2Cq As (xv )(ps − pl )cos(δ)| − |2Cq At (−xv )(ps − pl )cos(δ)| (5.7)

5.1.1 Static characteristic

The static characteristic is important since it gives the control accu-
racy of the valve. Ideally, the pressure should not change with the flow
through the valve. However, as will be seen from the dynamic analysis
later on, there is a compromise between control accuracy and the stabil-
ity of the valve. The static equations describing the valve for a positive
spool displacement, meaning that the load side is open to supply, are
the following.

s
2
qv = Cq wxv (ps − pl ) (5.8)
ρ
pref Ac − pl Ac − Kxv − Kf (ps − pl )xv = 0 (5.9)
These can be rearranged into

Ac (pref − pl )
⇒ xv = (5.10)
K + Kf (ps − pl )
K0 Ac (pref − pl ) √
⇒ qv = ps − pl (5.11)
Ke
where
s
2
K0 = Cq w
ρ
Kf = 2Cq wcos(δ)
Ke = K + Kf (ps − pl )

39
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Differentiating the flow gives the characteristic

∂qv K0 Ac √ pref − pl Kf (pref − pl )

 
= ps − pl −1 − +
∂pl Ke 2(ps − pl ) Ke
√
K0 Ac ps − pl Ac Kq 1
≈− =− =− (5.12)
Ke Ke Rv
Ke
⇒ Rv = − (5.13)
Ac Kq

q
where Kq = Cq w ρ2 (ps − pl ). The static characteristic is denoted Rv
and corresponds to the incline of the pressure-flow curve. The character-
istic is very dependent on the operating point. The static characteristic
of a negative spool displacement can be derived in the same way.

Ac (pref − pl )
⇒ xv = − (5.14)
K + Kf pl
K0 Ac (pref − pl ) √
⇒ qv = − pl (5.15)
Ke

where Ke = K + Kf pl . The static characteristic is then

Ke
Rv = (5.16)
Ac K q
q
where Kq = Cq w ρ2 (pl ). From the static characteristic in both cases it
can be seen that in one direction the valve works as a pressure-reducing
valve, while in the other direction it works as a pressure relief valve.

5.1.2 Linearisation of the pressure control valve

All equations describing the valve are linearised and transformed into
the Laplace domain. The following equations are valid for a positive
spool displacement (captital letters indicate linearised variables).

40
 Pressure control

Equation of motion

Mv Xv s2 = Pref Ac − Pc Ac − KXv − Bv Xv s
− Kf (ps − pl0 )Xv − Kf xv0 (Ps − Pl )
Kf = 2Cq wcos(δ)
Ke = K + Kf (ps − pl0 )
⇒ Mv Xv s2 = Pref Ac − Pc Ac − Ke Xv − Bv Xv s (5.17)

The term Kf xv0 is small in the context and is therefore ignored.

Load flow

Qv = Kq Xv + Kc (Ps − Pl ) − Qc (5.18)
s
∂ql 2
Kq = = Cq w (ps − pl0 ) (5.19)
∂xv ρ
q
∂ql Cq wxv0 ρ2 qv0
Kc = = √ = (5.20)
∂(pl − ps ) 2 ps − pl0 2(ps − pl0 )

Load volume
Vcyl
Qv = Ap Xp s + Pl s (5.21)
β
Control chamber
Vc
Qc = −Ac Xv s + Pc s (5.22)
β
Qc = K1 (Pl − Pc ) (5.23)

By rearranging the equations above a block diagram describing the sys-

tem dynamics can be derived.

Ac Pref − Pc
Xv = (5.24)
Kc Mv s2 + Bv s + Ke
Ac
K1 Xv s + Pl
Pc = Vc
(5.25)
1+ K1 β s
! !
Vc Vc Ac
 
(Kc Ps − Ql ) 1 + s +Kq 1 + + s Xv
K1 β K1 β Kq
Vcyl Vc
  
= Kc Pl 1 + s 1+ s (5.26)
Kc β K1 β

41
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Equations 5.24, 5.25 and 5.26 forms the block diagram in Fig. 5.2, with
following definitions

K1 β
ωc =
Vcr
s
Ke
ωm =
Mv
s
Bv 1
δm =
2 Ke m
Kc β
ωs =
Vcyl
Ql = Ap Xp s

Ql − Kc Ps

1
1+ s
ωc

Pref P1 1 Xv
1 Pl
Ac s2 + 2δm +1 1 A


2
Kq 1+ ωc
+ Kc s Kc 1+ s 1+ s
Ke ωm ωm q ωc ωs

Ac
s
K1
1+ s
ωc

1
1+ s
ωc

Figure 5.2 The block diagram representation of the self-regulated

pressure control valve.

The derived block diagram is a general model of the valve. By design-

ing the restrictor in different ways, a different characteristic is achieved.
This was studied by both [39] and [40]. One way is to have no restrictor,
or a very large one. The result of this is a very fast valve but difficult
to combine with a good static characteristic. Another way is to de-
sign the restrictor in such a way that an increased damping is achieved.
The approach here is to assume that the damping is difficult to control
and the restrictor is therefore designed to generate the desired damping.
The inner loop due to the volume change within the control chamber is

42
 Pressure control

expressed as
 
Ac s
Xv Ke 1+ ωc
=   (5.27)
P1 s s2 2δm s
1+ ωc 2
ωm
+ ωm s +1 + ωv

where ωv = KA1 K e
2 . If the restrictor is small enough, oil will be entrapped
c
inside the control chamber, and the mechanical frequency will thus be
replaced by a hydraulic frequency. The criteria for the restrictor is the
following (see [40]) s
Vcr
K1 ≤ 2Ac (5.28)
βm
The loop can then be factorised into the following expression
 
Ac s
Xv Ke 1+ ωc
=   (5.29)
P1 s s2 2δh
1+ ωv 2
ωh
+ ωh s +1

2
q
Kh Ac β ωc
where ωh = Mv , Kh = Vc , δh = 2ωh . Both ωh and ωc are very
large and can therefore be ignored in the following analysis. The block
diagram of the valve can thus be simplified into Fig. 5.3.
Ql − Kc Ps

Pref 1 Xv 1 Pl
Ac 1+ ωsv Kq Kc (1+ ωss )
Ke

Figure 5.3 A simplified block diagram representation of the pressure

control valve with a restrictor.

From the block diagram in Fig. 5.3 the loop gain is defined as

Kv
Go (s) =    (5.30)
s s
1+ ωv 1+ ωs
Ac Kq
Kv =
Ke Kc

43
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Regarding stability, the gain margin is usually not an issue for this de-
sign, but it is rather the phase margin that controls the stability criteria.
The closed loop of the valve can also be defined from the block diagram.

Ks
Gc (s) = s2 2δ0
(5.31)
ω02
+ ω0 s +1
q
ω0 = (Kv + 1) ωv ωs (5.32)
ωv + ωs
δ0 = (5.33)
2ω0
Kv
Ks = (5.34)
1 + Kv
Here, ω0 is the resonance seen by the valve and δ0 its corresponding
damping. The closed loop gain is Ks . A good valve design implies that
Kv >> 1 and therefore Ks ≈ 1. This is, however, not necessary the case
in this work, where the design depends on other factors. The results
from the analysis are further used to design the valve and corresponding
controller in chapter 6.

44
 6
Closed-centre
power steering
system

The idea behind closed-centre power steering in this work is to replace

the open-centre valve with two electronically controlled pressure control
valves, described in chapter 5, that independently control the pressure in
each chamber of the assistance cylinder. How they should be installed in
the steering gear in practice or how any failure modes should be handled
is not part of this work at this point. The same applies for the supply
system. At this point it is assumed that the supply system can deliver
a constant pressure and a sufficient flow. A schematic of the conceptual
steering system with closed-centre valves is shown in Fig. 6.1. It is
assumed that the torsion bar torque, or the steering wheel torque, can
be measured, as well as the chamber pressures. These signals are fed to
the controller and the control signals are the respective reference pressure
to each valve. The idea in this work is to evaluate if the closed-centre
system can reach the same performance as the open-centre system. For
this reason, a static model of the open-centre valve is used as a reference.
This model also considers the change in pressure with flow. This means
that the closed-centre valve should have the same static characteristic
as the open-centre valve. The dynamic performance is contributed by
the dynamic characteristic of the closed-centre valve. This will of course
differ compared to the original system. The effect of this is evaluated
later. An overview of the system architecture is shown in Fig. 6.2. The

45
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

first part of this chapter describes the design of the valve (section 6.1).
In section 6.2 a controller is designed for the pressure control valve in
order to generate the right static and dynamic characteristics. Finally,
section 6.3 puts together the valve model and the model of the steering
system from chapter 4 for an evaluation of the closed-centre concept
through simulation.

ul ur

Controller
Tq
pl pr

Figure 6.1 A schematic of the closed-centre steering system with indi-

vidual pressure control.

Reference Cylinder
Static pressures
Pressure pressures Steering
boost curve control system
valves

Torsion bar torque

Piston velocity

Figure 6.2 Overview of the closed-centre system.

46
 Closed-centre power steering system

6.1 Valve design by optimisation

The important parameters affecting the valve performance can be seen

from the static and linear analyses in chapter 5. These are the pressure
area, spring stiffness, opening area, and damping orifice. The damping
orifice is however restricted in size from the relation in 5.28. Arguably,
a fast valve is desired in most systems, as is also the aim here. However,
even though the solenoid design is not part of this work, it is assumed
that a small solenoid is also fast (and cheap). A small solenoid can only
apply a small force on the spool and therefore it is desired to keep the
drive force small and at the same time design the valve to be as fast as
possible. The valve is therefore designed with the help of an optimisation
routine. The optimisation routine used in this work is the Complex-RF
method [43], which is a further development of the original Complex
method [44]. The multi-objective problem can be formulated as

6
X
min F (x) = e1 k1 f1 (x) + e2 k2 f2 (x) + peni (6.1)
i=1
f1 (x) = τ (at pl (t = ∞)) (6.2)
f2 (x) = max(F1 , F2 , F3 , F3 ) (6.3)
xlower < x < xupper
F1 = F at 5 bar, ql = −5 l/min
F2 = F at 5 bar, ql = 5 l/min
F3 = F at 100 bar, ql = −5 l/min
F4 = F at 100 bar, ql = 1.1 l/min
pen1 = pl (t = 0.5) > 90 bar
pen2 = max(pl ) < 105 bar
pen3 = pref − pl < 1 bar at 5 bar, ql = −5 l/min
pen4 = pref − pl < 1 bar at 5 bar, ql = 5 l/min
pen5 = pref − pl < 1 bar at 100 bar, ql = −5 l/min
pen6 = pref − pl < 1 bar at 100 bar, ql = 1.1 l/min

The weight functions are defined as

47
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

e2 = e−3.5j (6.4)
e1 = 1 − e2 (6.5)
j = 0..1

The parameters k1 and k2 are normalising factors since the objectives

f1 and f2 are in different ranges. A simulation model of the valve is
used in order to find the objective values. The objective f1 is the time
it takes to reach 90% of the final value when a step is applied to the
valve. In this case, the final value is 100 bar. The objective f2 is the
maximum force required by a solenoid to drive the valve. Four extreme
points are checked and these points are easily described by Fig. 6.3.
The figure shows the static characteristic of the open-centre valve. In
an attempt to try and mark the operating range, a constant power curve
is added to Fig. 6.3 (the dashed curve). This can of course be tweaked
and the chosen curve is an example. The circles mark the points where
the forces F1 to F4 are checked. Several penalties are added to keep
the valve design within certain boundaries. A penalty is added if the
pressure never reaches the final value within the simulation time set,
in this case within 0.5 seconds. This is to avoid extremely slow valve
designs. A penalty is also added if the valve generates an overshoot of
5 bar after a step is applied. In order to make the valve actually follow
the static characteristic of the open-centre valve, a simple controller is
used. This is not the final controller that will be described in section
6.2. To ensure the valve design is feasible a penalty is also added if the
pressure deviates too much from the reference pressure at the marked
points (circles) in Fig. 6.3. The design parameters are

x(1) = dc
x(2) = K
x(3) = da
x(4) = f0

48
 Closed-centre power steering system

150

Assistance pressure [bar]

100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Load flow [l/min]

Figure 6.3 The static characteristic of the open-centre valve. The

dashed line marks the operating range and the circles mark the extreme
points which are used in the optimisation of the valve design.

The results of the optimisation are shown in Fig. 6.4. Here the required
solenoid force for a certain response of the valve is easily seen. The
chosen design is marked in the figure.

70

60

50
Force [N]

40

30

20

10
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
τ [s]

Figure 6.4 Optimisation result showing the Pareto front with drive
force against valve response measured as time to reach 90% of the final
value for a step input. The chosen design is marked with diamond.

49
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

6.1.1 Characteristics of the valve design

From the chosen design the valve characteristic is examined. In Fig. 6.5
the static characteristic is shown for both the pressure-reducing function
and the pressure relief function. Compared to the open-centre valve it
has a steeper characteristic at low pressure but a better characteristic
at high pressure.

120

100
Assistance pressure [bar]

80

60

40

20

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Load flow [l/min]

Figure 6.5 The static characteristic of the chosen design of the pressure
control valve. The curves with a negative slope mark the characteristic for
the pressure-reducing function. The curves with a positive slope mark the
characteristic of the pressure relief function.

The chosen design is checked for stability by studying the loop gain of
Eq. 5.30. Since the loop gain varies with operating point, the point
which gives the highest gain is studied. The cylinder is assumed to be
in centre position, which is the case for on-centre driving. Figure 6.6
shows the result and it can be seen that the phase margin would set the
limitation, but the valve is far from reaching any stability margins. The
reason is that the valve is designed to require a low drive force and not
only take performance into consideration.

50
 Closed-centre power steering system

50

Amplitude [dB]
0

−50

−100
−1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10

0
Phase [deg]

−50

−100

−150

−1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 6.6 The loop gain frequency response for the pressure control
valve at highest gain.

Figure 6.7 shows the performance of the valve for a step input from the
simulation model. For a large step the valve reaches 90% of the final
value within 5 ms and for a small step it reaches the final value within
6 ms.

100

90

80

70
Pressure [bar]

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
Time [s]

Figure 6.7 Step responses of the pressure control valve for the chosen
design.

51
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

6.2 Controller design

Ac Kq
Ke Ql

Pref Ac 1 Xv 1 Pl
Gcntrl Ke 1+ ωsv Kq Kc (1+ ωss )

Figure 6.8 The block diagram with controller and valve.

Since the closed-centre valve should follow the static characteristic of

the open-centre valve, an integrating controller is needed. An integrator
in the controller may lead to an overshoot. This can affect the amplitude
margin of the steering system loop and in the worst case lead to insta-
bility. This is something that must be compensated for in the controller.
The controller is also set to compensate for varying system dynamics,
thus generating a more predictable behaviour. The proposed controller
is shown in Eq. 6.6 with the layout in Fig. 6.8 which shows the whole
system with controller and valve.

!
s 2δ0 1
Gcntrl (s) = ωk2 2

2 + + (6.6)
s + kωk ω0 s s + kωk2
2



s + kωk ω0

The controller is in practice a PID controller with varying control pa-

rameters calculated from 5.32 and 5.33. What the controller does is to
compensate for the valve dynamics and add an integrator and a low pass
filter. The resulting loop gain is of the same order as the valve. The
loop gain of the system is then

1
Gocntrl (s) = Ks   (6.7)
s
s k+ ωk2

Finally, the closed loop of the system with controller is expressed as,
with Ks assumed to be equal to one,

1 1
Gccntrl (s) = s2
= s2 2δcntrl
(6.8)
ωk2
+ ks + 1 2
ωcntrl
+ ωcntrl +1

52
 Closed-centre power steering system

where ωcntrl = ωk and k = 2δωcntrl . In this way the desired resonance and
cntrl

damping of the closed loop can be adjusted by changing ωk and k. ωk

can be set to change with the pressure level to better resemble the open-
centre valve dynamic characteristic, but is not done here. The results
from simulation of the controller and valve can be found in section 8.1.
In Fig. 5.3 there is a disturbance from both a change in load flow and
variations in supply pressure. The variations in the supply pressure are
ignored but the disturbance from the load flow is compensated for by
estimating the load flow from the steering wheel velocity and using it as
a feed forward with the control signal as in Eq. 6.9. Both the controller
and the flow compensator contain estimated values such as Kq , Kc and
Ke that both vary with pressure and spool displacement. Only the
pressure is measured and therefore used when calculating those valve
parameters for the controller. The spool displacement is set to some
value and adjusted to obtain the desired valve performance. For the
flow compensator the estimated flow is also used.

Ke
e = Gcntrl (s) (Pref − Pl ) + Ql (6.9)
Ac Kq
From the block diagram in Fig. 6.8 the resulting pressure can be derived
as

  
1 1

1− 1+ ωs
Go Gcntrl  Kc 1+ ωs v 
s
P = Pref −   Ql (6.10)
1 + Go (1 + Gcntrl )  1 + G (1 + G
o cntrl )


In the steering system it is the assistance pressure, i.e. the pressure

difference between the two cylinder chambers, that is of importance. It
can be defined as

Go Gcntrl
PL = P1 − P2 = Pref
1 + Go (1 + Gcntrl )
| {z }
Gref
 
   
1 1 1
1 − 1s
 Kc 1+ s
1 − 1+ ωs
 
Kc 1+ ωs 1+ ω 
ωs v s v
− +  Ql (6.11)
 
 1 + Go (1 + Gcntrl ) 1 + G o (1 + G cntrl ) 
| {z } | {z }
right, = GQ1 left, = GQ2

53
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

The transfer functions GQ1 and GQ2 describe the pressure change due to
a flow disturbance in both chambers. The valve properties are different
since they are dependent on the operating conditions, and the pressure
drop is different for the two chambers.

6.3 Closed-centre system evaluation

The evaluation of the designed concept is evaluated through simulation
of the complete system. The approach is to use the validated model of
the steering system in chapter 4 and the model of the valve. A layout of
the complete simulation model is shown in Fig. 6.9. The reference for
the pressure control valves is the static boost curve with compensation
for the load flow. The pressure control valves control the pressure in each
chamber that is connected to the steering rack. A driver model is used
to follow a steering wheel angle of ± 30° and an increasing frequency up
to 2 Hz. A steering wheel angle velocity of 400°/s is reached. The same
driver input is also used for a model of the steering system with the
open-centre valve. By comparing the driver’s torque for both systems
an indication of the performance of the closed-centre system is achieved.
The results of the comparison are presented in section 8.2.
To evaluate the closed-centre system also for high pressure levels, a
spring load is used instead of the vehicle model which can be seen as
a tyre working within the non-slip region during dry park manoeuvres.
The same input is used and the results are shown in section 8.2. For
reasons described below, a lower controller gain is used for this case.

Pressure
Flow Volume Pressure
control
valve
Road
Static wheel
plref Steering angle ay
boost prref system Vehicle vy
curve Ω
Pressure
Flow
control Volume
Pressure
valve
Torsion bar torque, flow

Figure 6.9 The layout of the simulation model of the closed-centre

steering system.

54
 Closed-centre power steering system

The first part of the evaluation is, however, to use the previous linear
models of the steering system and the valve in order to examine the effect
the valves have on the steering system properties. The static boost curve
is in linear form described by
1
Pref = (KqOC (θsw − RT Xrw ) KT − Ap Xrw s) (6.12)
KcOC
Equation 6.11, 6.12, 4.16 and 4.17 can now form the block diagram
shown in Fig. 6.10.
Td

θsw
Gsw

KT RT

KT RT
GQ1 Ap s

Pref Xrw
Kq
KT OC Gref Ap Grw
Kc
OC

GQ2 Ap s

Ap s
Kc
OC

RT

Figure 6.10 A block diagram representation of the steering system

loop with the pressure control valves.

From the block diagram, the closed loop transfer function from a steering
wheel angle input to rack displacement can be defined as

Rt Xrw
=
θsw
KT R2 +Gref ApKT Kq R /Kc
  T
Gref
 OC T OC
Gref Ap Kq K R
(6.13)
Mrw s2 + brw + GQ +GQ + A2 s+C +K R 2 OC T T
1 2 KcOC p rw T T+ Kc
OC

What is seen from Eq. 6.13, compared to the open-centre system, Eq.
4.19, is that the pressure control valves contribute with additional damp-
ing, but this is purely a dynamic effect and has no influence during
steady-state manoeuvres due to the integrating behaviour of the press-
ure control loop. To better understand the effect the pressure control

55
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

valves have on the steering system control loop, the loop gain frequency
response and the closed loop response can be studied, shown in Fig.
6.11 and 6.12, respectively. Due to the additional lag introduced by the
pressure control valves compared to the open-centre valve, a fast valve is
needed for low torque levels to avoid too much phase shift in the steering
system control loop. This might in turn lead to instability problems for
high torque levels, where the faster valve reduces the gain margin to
such an extent where instability might occur. This could be solved by
varying the gain of the valve controller, but is of course a compromise
between steering feel and stability issues. It is, however, reasonable to
believe that at high torque levels, the steering feel is of less importance.

50
Amplitude [dB]

−50 Increased torque

−100
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10

−100
Phase [deg]

Increased torque
−200

−300

−400
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 6.11 The loop gain frequency response (open loop) of the steer-
ing system with pressure control valves for zero load flow from a steering
wheel angle input to a rack displacement.

56
 Closed-centre power steering system

0
Amplitude [dB]

−20

−40
Increased torque

−60
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10

0
Phase [deg]

−5
Increased torque
−10

−15
0 1
10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 6.12 The closed loop frequency response of the steering system
with pressure control valves for zero load flow from a steering wheel angle
input to a rack displacement.

57
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

58
 7
Hardware-in-the-
loop
simulation
Building a test rig of the steering system for hardware-in-the-loop
simulation has many advantages [45], [46]. First and foremost, with
a test rig containing parts of the real hardware a more realistic environ-
ment can be created where any conceptual actuator can be evaluated.
Here, possible issues can arise that have been overseen in the simula-
tion of the system. By having a test driver compare the original system
with a conceptual closed-centre system a qualitative judgement provides
valuable information regarding the performance of the system. After all,
steering feel is very subjective, yet important. In this work, the test rig
is partly used for a proof of concept. The aim was to develop a generic
test rig for closed-centre systems. The servo valves are used to control
the assistance pressure. If this is done according to an implemented
model of the conceptual actuator, that lies in the software, the servo
valve performance should reflect the behaviour of the concept. The ac-
tuator under study in this case is the original open-centre valve for an
evaluation of the test rig itself. Two controllers were developed for the
test rig. One is the force controller that takes the reference force from a
vehicle model and compares it to the measured force between the load
cylinder and the rack. The other controller is to control the pressure in
each chamber of the assistance cylinder.

59
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

7.1 Force control

Load cylinder Rack

Force
sensor

Fref
Controller

Constant
pressure

Figure 7.1 A layout of the force controller. A force sensor measures

the force applied by the load cylinder on the rack. A servo valve with
constant pressure is used to control the force.

A layout of the force controller is shown in Fig. 7.1. The approach is

to use a linear model of the system and design a lag-controller, which is
then verified in the test rig. The system studied is the load cylinder with
its servo valve and an external force, corresponding to the force applied
by the load cylinder on the steering rack. The governing equations of
this system on linear form are the following:

M Xp s2 = PL Ap − Bv Xp s − F (7.1)
Vt
Kq Xv + Kc (Ps − PL ) = Ap Xp s + PL s (7.2)
4βe
1
Xv = Gcntrl (s) (Fref − F ) s2 2δv
(7.3)
ωv2
+ ωv s +1
For the purpose of the linear analysis the mass and friction are ignored.
The valve is assumed to have a second order dynamic. The chosen
controller is a lead-filter, [47], as shown in Eq. 7.4 and the resulting
performance is shown in Fig. 7.2. Some discrepancy is noted when the
piston changes direction. This is probably due to the internal friction of
the cylinder.
1 + τI s
Gf c = Kp0 (7.4)
γ + τI s

60
 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation

3000

2000

1000
Rack force [N]

1000
−1000

−2000
−1000

8 10
−3000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]

Figure 7.2 Comparison between reference force (dashed) and measured

force (solid).

7.2 Pressure control with servo valves

The approach for control of the servo valves is similar to the one pre-
sented in chapter 6. A static boost curve is used as reference and the
dynamic characteristic is contributed by the servo valve control loop.
The analysis and control structure differs, however, since another type
of valve used is in the test rig than designed in chapter 6. From the
linear analysis of the open-centre steering system it was seen that the
dynamic effect of the valve has no influence for low frequency input and
low torque levels. This region corresponds to on-centre driving and the
operating range of the test rig is therefore limited to this range. Since
the steering wheel angle is applied to the test rig manually, there will
most likely be a difference each test run. A direct comparison between
the original system and the system with servo valves can not be made.
The comparison is instead performed on a qualitative basis. This, how-
ever, is not within the scope of the work. A model-based approach is
instead used to verify the test rig. A simulation model of the steering
system with servo valves is derived. By studying the difference in steer-

61
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

ing wheel torque between the open-centre system and the servo valve
system for a certain difference between the reference pressure and the
actual pressure for the servo valve system, an indication of the required
performance is achieved. A linear analysis of the closed-centre system
with servo valves is first performed to gain a better understanding of the
effect valve and controller properties have on the system performance.
The meter-in and meter-out valves are controlled simultaneously for each
chamber and both valves will affect the pressure built-up. The analysis
of the pressure built-up can be simplified into Fig. 7.3.
Xv1 Xv2

V, β, P
qin qout
Ps

Figure 7.3 A simplified analysis of the pressure control of one chamber

with servo valves.

The flow and continuity equations for the volume are expressed as (al-
ready linearised and Laplace transformed, capital letters indicate lin-
earised variables)

Qin = Kq1 Xv1 + Kc1 (Ps − P ) (7.5)

Qout = Kq2 Xv2 + Kc2 (P ) (7.6)
V
Qin − Qout = Ap Xp s + Pa s (7.7)
β
Since one valve closes and the other opens with the same amount it is
valid to define the spool displacements as

Xv2 = −Xv1 = −Xv

Equations 7.5 to 7.7 can now be formed into

V
(Kq1 + Kq2 ) Xv + Kc1 Ps − Ap Xp s = (Kc1 + Kc2 ) Pa + Pa s
β
⇒ Kq Xv + Ql = (Kc + Cs s) Pa (7.8)

62
 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation

The controller needs to be of integrator type in order to follow the static

characteristic of the boost curve. To compensate for some of the lag
introduced by the valve and increase the damping somewhat, a lead
filter is added. The suggested controller is based on the controller found
in [46].
!
Kp0 K̂c
Gctrl = 1+ (1 + Td s) (7.9)
K̂q Cs s

K̂q and K̂c are the estimated flow gain and flow-pressure coefficient,
respectively. For simplicity, K̂q and K̂c are assumed to be perfectly
estimated in the continued analysis and the valve is assumed to have a
second order dynamic. A block diagram describing the pressure control
loop based on Eq. 7.8 and 7.9 can be formed as shown in Fig. 7.4.

Ql

Pref 1 1 P
s2 2δv
Gcntrl 2 + ωv
ωv
s+1 Kc +Cs s

Figure 7.4 A block diagram representation of the pressure control loop

with servo valves.

With accurate estimation of the valve properties the open loop from the
block diagram is expressed as

Kp0
Go (s) =   (1 + Td s) (7.10)
s2 2δv
Cs s ωv2
+ ωv s +1

From the block diagram in Fig. 7.4 the pressure can also be defined.

Go 1
P = Pref − Ql (7.11)
1 + Go (Kc + Cs s) (1 + Go )

What is of more interest is the transfer function for the assistance press-
ure PL .

63
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Go
PL = Pright − Plef t = Pref
1 + Go
| {z }
Gc
 
 
 1 1 
−
 +  Ql (7.12)
|(Kc + Cs{z
s) (1 + Go ) (Kc + Cs s) (1 + Go ) 
} | {z }
right chamber, = Gq1 left chamber, = Gq2

The reference pressure is the static boost curve and with the open-centre
valve parameters it is expressed as

1
Pref = (KqOC (θsw − RT Xrw ) KT − Ap Xrw s) (7.13)
KcOC

With Eq. 7.12 and 7.13, and the equations for the steering system, Eq.
4.16 and 4.17, a block diagram can be formed, as shown in Fig. 7.5.
Td

θsw
Gsw

KT R T

KT RT
Gq1 Ap s

Pref Xrw
Kq
KT OC Gc Ap Grw
Kc
OC

Gq2 Ap s

Ap s
Kc
OC

RT

Figure 7.5 A block diagram representation of the steering system loop

with servo valves.

The block diagram is similar to Fig. 6.10, where the pressure control
valves are used. The closed loop transfer function from a steering wheel
angle input to rack displacement can again be defined as

64
 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation

Rt Xrw
=
θsw
KT R2 +Gc ApKT Kq R /Kc
  T   OC T OC (7.14)
Gc Gc Ap Kq K R
Mrw s2 + brw + Gq1 +Gq2 + A2 s+Crw +KT R2 + OC T T
Kc p T Kc
OC OC

What is seen from Eq. 7.14, is a similar behaviour as in the case with
pressure control valves. The loop gain frequency response and closed
loop response of the steering system control loop are shown in Fig. 7.6
and 7.7, respectively.

50
Amplitude [dB]

−50 Increased torque

−100
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10

−100
Phase [deg]

−200

−300

−400
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 7.6 The loop gain frequency response (open loop) of the steer-
ing system with servo valves for zero load flow from a steering wheel angle
input to a rack displacement.

65
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Amplitude [dB]
−20

−40 Increased torque

−60
1 2 3
10 10 10

0
Phase [deg]

−10

−20
Increased torque

−30
1
10
Frequency [Hz]

Figure 7.7 The closed loop frequency response of the steering system
with servo valves for zero load flow from a steering wheel angle input to a
rack displacement.

The loop gain shows an increased phase shift compared to the original
system shown in Fig. 4.6, but again, the concern is rather the reduced
gain margin for high torque levels. For the closed loop response, this
system shows a slightly different behaviour to the original system shown
in Fig. 4.7. There is an additional phase lag and a slight overshoot in
the amplitude. How this behaviour affects the steering feel can only be
evaluated by running the test rig. There are also nonlinear effects in the
actual system, that are ignored for the linear analysis, that also might
influence the behaviour of the system. The results from Fig. 7.6 and
7.7 should therefore only be seen as guidance when tuning the controller
and is a valuable tool when investigating the behaviour of the system.
To improve the steering feel for low torque levels, there is a margin to
increase the gain without causing any instability problems. The test
rig is also limited to on-centre driving, i.e. low torque levels, and the
reduced gain margin at high torque levels is therefore not an issue. The
case with servo valves has shown more phase shift than the case with
self-regulated pressure control valves due to slower valves. The test
rig should therefore provide valuable knowledge regarding closed-centre
steering systems and its steering feel and provide a hindsight whether a
closed-centre steering system is a feasible solution.
In the test rig, the final controller is implemented as lead-lag filter as

66
 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation

in Eq. 7.15.
V
Kp0 β K̂c
s+1 Td s + 1
Gctrl = V
(7.15)
K̂q s+γ αTd s + 1
β K̂c

From simulations and running the test rig it turned out that K̂c could
be set to a constant value due to very small variations. Kp0 is chosen
to obtain a good response and Td and α are tuned in the test rig. The
reference model works around low pressure levels, especially for on-centre
driving. This creates a difficulty for the closed-centre valves since they
lose performance with such a low pressure drop. To overcome this, the
pressure in each chamber is raised by 50 bar. This will not affect the
pressure difference over the assistance cylinder but merely the friction
level. The friction is nevertheless an unknown factor and should not be
regarded when evaluating the actuator performance. It also turned out
that the servo valve is very nonlinear around the zero spool position and
due to the oversize of the valves they will work with very small spool
displacements. This created difficulties when controlling the pressure.
The valve spools are therefore shifted to work around a small opening
position where their behaviour is more linear. This has no other effect
for the scope of this work than to improve the response of the control
loop.
For the simulation model a sinusoidal input in steering wheel angle
with an amplitude of 20 deg and an increasing frequency up to 2 Hz
is used. The simulation results are shown below. Figure 7.8 shows
the comparison between the reference pressure and actual pressure of
the servo valves. Some discrepancy exists for higher frequency input.
More interesting, is however, to compare the pressure from the servo
valve system with that of the open-centre system, as in Fig. 7.9. Here
the discrepancy is much lower, which resulted in the difference between
the steering wheel torque for both systems shown in Fig. 7.10. The
difference is very low and exists only during movement of the steering
wheel. If the test rig can reach similar performance, the conclusion is
that the test rig can be used to evaluate different actuator concepts.
The results from the test rig are shown in section 8.3.

67
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Cylinder pressure difference

25

20

15

10
Pressure [bar]

−5
20
−10

−15

−20
15
8 10
−25
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s]

Figure 7.8 Comparison of simulated data between reference pressure

(dashed) and actual pressure (solid) for the servo valve system.

Cylinder pressure difference

25

20

15

10
Pressure [bar]

−5
20
−10

−15

−20
15
8 10
−25
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s]

Figure 7.9 Comparison of simulated data between the open-centre

valve system (dashed) and the servo valve system (solid).

68
 Hardware-in-the-loop simulation

Difference in torsion bar torque

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1
Torque [Nm]

0.05

−0.05

−0.1

−0.15

−0.2

−0.25

0 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s]

Figure 7.10 Simulated steering wheel torque difference between the

open-centre system and the servo valve system.

69
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

70
 8
Results
This chapter presents the most important results from the final design
of the pressure control valve with additional controller as well as results
from the test rig with closed-centre steering.

8.1 Results from controller design

The results in Fig. 8.1 show the performance of the valve and additional
controller compared to the open-centre valve for a step input. The input
corresponds to a step in torsion bar torque with an amplitude of 2 Nm.
This is the most interesting and important area since it corresponds to
on-centre driving where deviations in steering system characteristics are
most apparent. It is also this region where the open-centre valve has its
best performance, as was seen from the analysis in section 4.3.

71
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

16

14

12
Pressure [bar]

10

4
0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22 0.24
Time [s]

Figure 8.1 Step respons of the pressure control valve with the con-
troller from the simulation model. The dashed curve shows the open-centre
valve and the solid curve the closed-centre valve.

8.2 Results from closed-centre steering system

simulation
The following figures present the results from simulation of the complete
closed-centre steering system as described in section 6.3. Figure 8.2
shows a comparison of the assistance pressure between the open-centre
valve and the closed-centre valve. The figure shows also the difference
in pressure between the two systems, and it reaches 1 bar at maximum
for the given steering cycle. Figure 8.3 shows the comparison of the
steering wheel torque, i.e. the torque applied by the driver, between the
open-centre system and the closed-centre system. The torque fed back
to the driver is the channel of information through which the driver can
appreciate differences in the steering system. To what extent a driver
can appreciate a difference in torque level is subjective and it can be
assumed that a certain level of torque difference is acceptable and not
noticeable by a driver. However, the difference in Fig. 8.3 between the
two systems is small, as can be seen from Fig. 8.4. The figure shows both
the torque error in time and against the steering wheel angle velocity.
Only for higher frequency input does the torque error increase. Finally,

72
 Results

Fig. 8.5 shows a comparison between the two systems of the pressure
in each chamber of the assistance cylinder. The figure also shows the
difference in pressure between the two systems.

40
Pressure [bar]

20

−20

−40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

1
Pressure [bar]

0.5

−0.5

−1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

Figure 8.2 Comparison of the assistance pressure between the open-

centre valve (dashed) and the closed-centre valve (solid) in the upper plot.
The lower plot shows the difference in pressure between the two systems.

73
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

3
Steering wheel torque [Nm]

−1

−2

−3

−4

−5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

Figure 8.3 Comparison of the steering wheel torque between the open-
centre system and the closed-centre system.
Steering wheel torque [Nm]

0.1

0.05

−0.05

−0.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

0.1
Torque error [Nm]

0.05

−0.05

−0.1
−400 −300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300 400
Steering wheel angle velocity [deg/s]

Figure 8.4 Difference in steering wheel torque between the open-centre

system and the closed-centre system. The upper figure shows the torque
difference in time and the lower figure shows the torque difference against
the steering wheel angle velocity.

74
 Results

40
1
Pressure [bar]

Pressure [bar]
30

20 0

10
−1
0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]

40
1
Pressure [bar]

Pressure [bar]
30

20 0

10
−1
0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
Time [s] Time [s]

Figure 8.5 Comparison of the pressure in the left chamber (upper

left plot) and the right chamber (lower left plot) between the open-centre
valve (dashed) and the closed-centre valve (solid). The right plots show
the respective difference in pressure between the two systems.

Dry Park
Figure 8.6 shows the comparison between the open-centre system and
closed-centre system for the spring load seen as a dry park case. Some
discrepancy can be seen around the low pressure area where the open-
centre valve is faster and around the high pressure area where the open-
centre valve is slower than the closed-centre valve.

75
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

80

60

40
Pressure [bar]

20

0
80
−20

−40

−60
0
−80 9.8 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

Figure 8.6 Comparison of the load pressure between the open-centre

valve (dashed) and the closed-centre valve (solid).

8.3 Results from closed-centre steering in the test

rig
8.3.1 Step response
In order to tune control parameters and verify the performance of the
servo valves a step response is conducted for each chamber with the rack
in a locked position. The result for a step from 50 bar to 100 bar and
from 100 bar to 50 bar are shown in Fig. 8.7. The controller reaches
63% of its final value in 8-9 ms in both directions.

76
 Results

Cylinder pressures Cylinder pressures

110 110
Pref

100 P1 100
P2
90 90
Pressure [bar]

Pressure [bar]
80 80

70 70

60 60

50 50

40 40
3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 7.6 7.7 7.8
Time [s] Time [s]

Figure 8.7 Step responses of the pressure controller from test rig.

8.3.2 On-centre driving

The software vehicle speed is set to a constant value of 70 kph. Figure
8.8 shows the pressure difference in the assistance cylinder. The servo
valves are able to follow the reference pressure satisfactorily. The jerks
in reference pressure are a result of the measured torsion bar torque and
are filtered out by the servo valves.

77
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

Cylinder pressures

20 Plref
Pl
15

10
Pressure [bar]

0
16
−5

−10

−15

−20 −1585 88
80 85 90 95 100
Time [s]

Figure 8.8 Measured cylinder pressures from the test rig.

78
 9
Discussion
The aim of this work was to investigate the possibility to use an elec-
tronically controlled self-regulated pressure control valve as actuator in a
power steering system. A model-based approach was used where a model
of the valve was derived for in-depth analysis of its behaviour. A model
of the steering system is also derived and validated against measure-
ments from a test rig. The validated model of the steering system gives
confidence to the simulation results of the complete closed-centre steer-
ing system. These two models are put together for a complete simulation
of the closed-centre steering system. In many cases the simulation model
has been used to gain knowledge of the system.
Many parts of the work should be seen as suggestions for a method-
ological approach rather than quantitative results. The valve has been
designed with the help of an optimisation routine, which uses outer
boundaries that will affect the outcome of the optimisation. These
boundaries are primarily connected to the operating range of the steer-
ing system. This is a subjective matter. The operating range might
differ for different cases, different vehicles, etc. The final valve is also
set to follow the static behaviour of the open-centre valve used in the
test rig. This also has an effect on the optimisation result. The optimi-
sation generated a clear Pareto front where the maximum response of
the valve is given for any available drive force. The exact requirement
regarding the valve performance is difficult to predict beforehand. The
controller can increase the performance as well. One approach is to make
a comparison against the open-centre valve, which is fast at low pressure
levels, and slow at high levels. It would, however, be more accurate to
ask the question; what performance is needed from a steering feel point

79
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

of view? Once again, this is a highly subjective matter. It is not stated

that the performance of the open-centre valve is what is needed. An
oversized valve might be generated. The approach has therefore been
to choose a valve design with a good compromise between performance
and drive force and evaluate it in the simulation environment.
What has been excluded from the valve design at this point is the
solenoid. The solenoid would contribute both by increasing the total
mass of the moving part of the valve, i.e. the spool and core, and also a
time lag from an input signal to a force. It has been assumed that if the
required drive force is kept low, a small solenoid would be sufficient and
therefore also fast. There is also a hysteresis effect from the solenoid
but since an integrating controller is used the effect should not give any
issues. The next step in the work would be to actually add a model of
a solenoid to the valve and study the effects, especially the effects the
time lag and increased mass of the moving part have.
During the process of developing and evaluating the closed-centre sys-
tem, it has been clear that the open-centre system has a very good char-
acteristic. It has very little time lag and the response is direct. Since
the actuation of the valve is controlled by the twisting of the torsion
bar, which is controlled by the driver, a change in flow will immediately
take place and affect the pressure rate. In a closed-centre system the
valve has to react first, i.e. the spool has to begin moving first before
the flow can change. The complete closed-centre system has been very
sensitive to any overshoot of the pressure and a very smooth control of
the pressure was necessary to avoid torque ripples. The reason for this
is probably due to the fact that the boost gain (which is derived from
the test rig) is very high. The boost gain corresponds to the slope of the
boost curve. An overshoot of the pressure could momentarily raise the
boost gain and force the system towards instability. There is probably
also a lack of damping in the system. The system studied is in prac-
tice the test rig which is only constituted by the rack and pinion. Any
friction from the suspension and wheel assembly is therefore missing.
The tyre model is also fairly simple and a linear behaviour is assumed.
Another boost curve would lead to other requirements of the valve. The
linear analysis of the closed-centre valves in the steering system control
loop, showed that a fast valve is probably needed at low torque levels
in order to avoid too much phase shift, which might affect the steering
feel. As mentioned, the studied valve has a greater phase shift compared
to the open-centre valve. At high torque levels, a faster valve than the

80
 Discussion

original valve, reduces the gain margin which might lead to instability
problems. There is, thus, a compromise between steering feel and insta-
bility issues. It is, however, justified to believe that the steering feel is
of less importance for high torque levels, which only take place during
parking manoeuvres.
The analysis of the steering system is limited to on-centre driving. It
is during on-centre driving where the steering feel is most evident and
the behaviour of the closed-centre system is important here. Small rack
displacements are therefore assumed and the performance of the closed-
centre valve at lock-to-lock (the rack is at the end position) where the
chamber volumes are very small has not yet been studied. The volume
has a substantial effect on both performance and stability of the valve
and the gain would probably need to be adjusted accordingly.
The results from simulation of the closed-centre steering system are
promising. The pressure control valves are able to follow the reference
but more importantly the dynamic behaviour allows the closed-centre
system to have a similar characteristic to the open-centre system. This
is seen from the comparison between the steering wheel torque from
the open-centre system and the closed-centre system. The difference in
torque is very small in both systems, even if some discrepancy exists for
higher frequency input. This is a dynamic effect, since an integrating
controller is used and no static error exists, and how a driver would
appreciate the difference is a relative question. Would a driver accept a
closed-centre steering system?
The external valve controller relies on additional pressure sensors but
guarantees a predictable static behaviour. The controller also compen-
sates for the valve dynamics and this means that the valve properties
must be known. Valve properties would in reality have a certain toler-
ance that might affect the performance of the controller. A sensitivity
analysis would answer this question. Further, the valve properties de-
pend on both pressure and spool displacement. The spool displacement
is not measured and the valve properties are only varied with pressure.
Measuring the spool position might improve the controller and is some-
thing that could be investigated further, as well as how a displacement
sensor might be installed.
The results from the test rig show that the servo valves are capable
of following the reference value with good results. The critical region is
around zero assistance pressure, where the servo valves are slower than
the open-centre valve. From the simulation, however, it is seen that

81
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

this should have little affect on the steering wheel torque. This could
not be verified in the test rig since it would require measurement of the
steering wheel torque and that the same input is always applied. One
way to overcome this issue would be to use an electric motor to apply
the steering wheel angle with high accuracy. For higher pressure, the
servo valves would eventually be faster than the open-centre valve, also
causing a discrepancy in steering wheel torque. The effect of having
a valve with a different dynamic characteristic than the open-centre
valve on steering feel is a possible subject for further study. There is
also an issue in using the measured torsion bar torque as input. Any
twisty moves or noise would be amplified in the pressure control loop and
might cause problems. Filtering the signal, on the other hand, might
give too much phase shift of the steering system loop and eventually
lead to an unstable system, as well as affecting the steering feel. The
jerky behaviour of the reference pressure around low pressure region is
probably due to friction in the load cylinder. This is sensed by the
torsion bar torque sensor and fed to the pressure control loop. In this
case, the servo valves act as a filter for this behaviour. The friction in the
load cylinder is sensed in the steering wheel. Nevertheless, the friction
is the same for the reference system and should not be considered here.
It is of interest to discuss whether such a valve would also work for
heavy vehicles. The conditions are different. A higher load flow is re-
quired, which might necessitate a higher drive force, but this depends
on the intended operating range. Cylinder volumes are larger, though,
which would mean that a slower valve is acceptable.

82
 10
Conclusions
What can be concluded from this work is that a self-regulating pressure
control valve can perform sufficiently close to the open-centre valve.
Simulation results have proven that the difference in steering wheel
torque during on-centre driving between the two systems is very low
and should be negligible. The method used to design and evaluate the
concept has also been proven to work. The test rig has also shown
that a closed-centre system is a feasible solution, although an experi-
enced driver should make such a judgement regarding the steering feel.
With slower servo valves in the test rig than the designed self-regulating
pressure control valves, the test rig consitutes a proof that also the faster
actuator is a feasible solution, regarding on-centre driving.

83
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

84
 11
Outlook

The work in this thesis is highly motivated by the industry. There

is a clear trend within the vehicle industry, both for passenger cars
and heavy vehicles, to implement more active safety functions but also
to strive towards autonomous vehicles. This will also incorporate the
steering system and the need for an active steering system, which can
be controlled by an external signal. Since heavy vehicles must rely on
hydraulic power to turn the wheels due to the power requirement, find-
ing a solution that enables active steering for a hydraulic power steering
system is motivated. Existing solutions on the market make use of the
open-centre system already installed in the vehicle. Although this re-
solves the problem with active steering, it still has the disadvantage of
poor energy efficiency. A closed-centre system with electronically con-
trolled valves would overcome this issue as well. Even if this work so
far has shown that a closed-centre solution can perform as well as the
open-centre system, more research is needed to fully understand all the
effects and derive a concept that could be installed in a vehicle. Dif-
ferent concepts will be studied to see what solution fits different vehicle
types best. One is a two-stage valve that would generate a much bet-
ter static characteristic than the single-stage valve studied in this work.
The benefit would be a wider operating range and use in larger vehicles.
It would also be interesting to study the possibility to exclude the press-
ure sensors. The pressure sensors guarantee the accuracy of the valves
but come with additional cost and fault modes. A valve solution that
would work without the sensors would perhaps be cheaper and more
fault tolerant but with a higher requirement on the valve itself. The
next step will also involve how the closed-centre valves should be in-

85
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

stalled in a vehicle and also how to handle different failure modes. The
supply system has so far only been considered to be able to deliver a
constant pressure and sufficient flow. This must of course be studied
further and is an important aspect from packaging perspectives. The
energy consumption of the closed-centre system is of most importance
when motivating the solution compared to open-centre based solutions
and further work is needed in this area as well. The passenger car indus-
try has moved towards pure electric power steering systems with lower
energy consumption and electronic control of the actuator. However,
a comparison between a closed-centre solution and an EPAS system is
still of interest when considering energy consumption and the high power
density of hydraulic systems. Further work is still possible with the test
rig to improve both the performance and the steering feel of the rig,
i.e. to handle nonlinear effects such as friction in the load cylinder, but
also how to incorporate the test rig in the evaluation process of different
actuator concepts.

86
 Bibliography

[1] Andreas Eidehall. “Tracking and threat assessment for automotive

collision avoidance”. PhD thesis. Linköping University, 2007.
[2] Matthias Schorn et al. “Nonlinear Trajectory Control for Auto-
matic Steering of a Collision Avoiding Vehicle”. In: American Con-
trol Conference. 14 - 16 June 2006.
[3] N. Minoiu Enache et al. “Driver steering assistance for lane de-
parture avoidance”. In: Control Engineering Practice 17 (2009),
pp. 624–651.
[4] Gábor Kovács et al. “Lane-Departure Detection and Control Sys-
tem for Commercial Vehicles”. In: IEEE International Conference
on Intelligent Vehicles. 1998.
[5] J. Ackermann, T. Bünte, and D. Odenthal. “Advantages of ac-
tive steering for vehicle dynamics control”. In: 32nd International
Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation. 1999.
[6] Jürgen Ackermann. “Active Steering for Better Safety, Handling
and Comfort”. In: Proceedings of Advances in Vehicle Control and
Safety. 1998.
[7] Roy McCann and Son Nguyen. “Jackknife Avoidance in Large
Trucks Using Active Front Steering”. In: SAE Paper 2004-01-
2639. 2004.
[8] Philip Koehn and Michael Eckrich. “Active Steering - The BMW
Approach Towards Modern Steering Technology”. In: Steering and
Suspension Technology Symposium. 2004-01-1105. Detroit, Michi-
gan, USA, 2004.

87
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

[9] Wolfgang Reinelt et al. “Active Front Steering (Part 2): Safety
and Functionality”. In: SAE World Congress. SAE number 2004-
01-1101. Detroit, MI, USA, 2004.
[10] Meihua Tai, Pushkar Hingwe, and Masayoshi Tomizuka. “Model-
ing and Control of Steering System of Heavy Vehicles for Au-
tomated Highway Systems”. In: IEEE/ASME Transactions on
Mechatronics 9 (Dec. 2004), pp. 609–618.
[11] Jürgen Guldner et al. Robost control design for automatic steering
based on feedback of front and tail lateral displacement.
[12] Marcus Rösth. “Hydraulic Power Steering System Design in Road
Vehicles; Analysis, Testing and Enhanced Functionality”. PhD
thesis. Division of Fluid and Mechanical Engineering Systems,
Linköping University, 2007.
[13] A. Bootz. “Evolutionary Energy Saving Concepts for Hydraulic
Power Steering Systems”. In: 5th International Fluid Power Con-
ference. 2006.
[14] James E. Forbes, Steven M. Baird, and Thomas W. Weisger-
ber. “Electrohydraulic Power Steering - An Advanced System for
Unique Applications”. In: International Congress and Exposition.
870574. Detroit, Michigan, USA, 23-27 February 1987.
[15] Peter E. Pfeffer et al. “Energy Consumption of Electro-Hydraulic
Steering Systems”. In: SAE 2005 World Congress & Exhibition.
Apr. 2005.
[16] Yoshiharu Inaguma, Keiji Suzuki, and Kyousuke Haga. “An En-
ergy Saving Technique in an Electro-Hydraulic Power Steering
(EHPS) System”. In: SAE Paper 960934. 1996.
[17] Jochen Gessat. “Electrically Powered Hydraulic Steering Systems
for Light Commercial VehiclesS”. In: SAE 2007 Commercial Ve-
hicle Engineering Congress and Exhibition. 2007-01-4197. 2007.
[18] S. Müller, A. Kugi, and W. Kemmetmüller. “Analysis of a closed-
center hydraulic power steering system for full steer-by-wire func-
tionality and low fuel consumption”. In: The Ninth Scandinavian
International Conference on Fluid Power, SICFP’052. 2005.

88
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[19] Wolfgang Kemmetmüller, Steffen Müller, and Andreas Kugi.

“Mathematical Modeling and Nonlinear Controller Design for a
Novel Electrohydraulic Power-Steering System”. In: IEEE/ASME
Transactions on Mechatronics 12.1 (Feb. 2007), pp. 85–97.
[20] Wolfgang Kemmetmüller, Andreas Kugi, and Steffen Müller.
“Modeling and Nonlinear Control of an Electrohydraulic Closed-
Center Power-Steering System”. In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, and the Europeand Control
Conference 2005. Seville, Spain, Dec. 2005.
[21] Wentao Yu and William Szabela. “Energetic Efficiency Analysis
and Performance Evaluation for a Closed Center Steering Sys-
tem”. In: SAE 2007 Commercial Vehicle Engineering Congress &
Exhibition. 2007-01-4217. 2007.
[22] Urs Wiesel et al. “A method for evaluating the fuel saving po-
tential of different hybrid steering system configurations in heavy
vehicles”. In: VDI-Berichte 2068. 2009.
[23] M. Rösth, J. Pohl, and J.-O. Palmberg. “Active Pinion - Cost
Effective Solution for Enabling Steering Intervention in Road Ve-
hicles”. In: The Bath Workshop on Power Transmission & Motion
Control, PTMC’03. Bath, United Kingdom, Sept. 2003.
[24] Willy Klier, Gerd Reimann, and Wolfgang Reinelt. “Concept and
Functionality of the Active Front Steering System”. In: Con-
vergence International Congress & Exposition On Transportation
Electronics. 2004-10-18. 2004.
[25] Steffen Müller. “Zukünftige verbrauchsarme Servolenkungen für
volle Steer-by-Wire-Funktionalität”. In: ATZ - Automobiltechnis-
che Zeitschrift 106 (2004), pp. 310–318.
[26] Thomas D. Gillespie. Fundamentals of vehicle dynamics. Society
of Automotive Engineers, 1992.
[27] Giancarlo Genta and Lorenzo Morello. The Automotive Chassis
Volume 1: Component Design. Springer, 2009.
[28] Richard Stone and Jeffrey K. Ball. Automotive Engineering Fun-
damentals. SAE International, 2004.
[29] Peter E. Pfeffer. “Interaction of Vehicle and Steering System Re-
garding On-Center Handling”. PhD thesis. Deparment of Mechan-
ical Engineering, University of Bath, 2006.

89
Pressure Control in Hydraulic Power Steering Systems

[30] Peter E. Pfeffer et al. “Modelling of a Hydraulic Steering System”.

In: Fisita World Automotive Congress. 2006.
[31] John Baxter. “Analysis of Stiffness and Feel for a Power-Assisted
Rack and Pinion Steering Gear”. In: SAE Technical Paper 880706.
1988.
[32] J.W. Post and E.H. Law. “Modeling, Characterization and
Simulation of Automobile Power Steering Systems for the Pre-
diction of On-Center Handling”. In: International Congress &
Exposition. Feb. 1996.
[33] U. Neureder. “Investigation into Steering Wheel Nibble”. In: In-
stitution of Mechanical Engineers, Journal of Automobile Engi-
neering 216 (2002), pp. 297–277.
[34] M. Rösth and J.-O. Palmberg. “Robust design of power steer-
ing system with emphasis on chattering phenomena”. In: The
10th Scandinavian International Conference on Fluid Power,
SICFP’07. 2007.
[35] M. Rösth and J.-O. Palmberg. “Modeling and Validation of
Power Steering Systems with Emphasis on Catch-up Effect”. In:
The 9th Scandinavian International Conference on Fluid Power,
SICFP’05. 2005.
[36] Aly Badawy et al. “Modeling and Analysis of an Electric Power
Steering System”. In: SAE International Congress and Exposi-
tion, Steering and Suspension Technology Symposium. 1999-01-
0399. Detroit, Michigan, Mar. 1999.
[37] Etsuhiro Ueda et al. “The Development of Detailed Steering
Model for On-Center Handling Simulation”. In: International
Symposium on Advanced Vehicle Control (AVEC). 2002, pp. 657–
662.
[38] Leonard Segel. “On the Lateral Stability and Control of the Auto-
mobile as Inluenced by the Dynamics of the Steering System”. In:
ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry (1966), pp. 283–295.
[39] Herbert E. Merritt. Hydraulic Control Systems. John Wiley &
Sons, USA, 1967.
[40] Jan-Ove Palmberg. Tryckstyrning (in Swedish). Tech. rep. Divi-
sion of fluid and mechanical engineering systems, Linköping Uni-
versity, 1983.

90
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[41] Jan-Ove Palmberg, Bo Andersson, and Christer Malmros. “Analy-

sis and synthesis of hydraulic pressure regulators”. In: Applied
Control & Identification, IASTED. Copenhagen, Denmark, 1983.
[42] Jan-Ove Palmberg and Ding Kang-Zhi. “Modelling and simula-
tion of pressure-controlled pumps”. In: International Journal of
Modelling & Simulation 7 (1987).
[43] P. Krus and J. Andersson. “Optimizing optimization for design
optimization”. In: Proceedings of DETC’2003, ASME Design Au-
tomation Conference. Chicago, 2003.
[44] M.J. Box. “A new method of constrained optimization and a com-
parison with other methods”. In: The Computer Journal 8 (1965),
pp. 42–52.
[45] Mikael Sannelius. “On Complex Hydrostatic Transmissions”. PhD
thesis. Linköping University, 1999.
[46] Christer Ramdén. “Experimental methods in valve characteristic
assessment”. PhD thesis. Linköping University, 1999.
[47] Torkel Glad and Lennart Ljung. Reglerteknik. Studentlitteratur,
2006.

91