Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

CFD analysis of pressure loss during flow by hydraulic directional control

valve constructed from logic valves
E. Lisowski a,⇑, J. Rajda b
a
Cracow University of Technology, al. Jana Pawła II 37, 31-864 Kraków, Poland
b
PONAR Wadowice S.A., ul. Wojska Polskiego 29, 34-100 Wadowice, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The aim of this paper is to investigate the reduction of flow resistance in a hydraulic system. The under-
Received 7 December 2011 taken matter is focused on a spool type directional control valve with pilot operated check valves. In the
Received in revised form 15 August 2012 paper there is a proposition of replacing a 4-way directional control valve with pilot operated check
Accepted 16 August 2012
valves by suitable unit consisting of logic valves. Therefore, a body of new directional control valve has
Available online 17 October 2012
been designed. Four logic valves are mounted on the body and closed with a cover on which electromag-
netic pilot valve is assembled. The hydraulic ports of the body are in accordance with the standard ISO
Keywords:
4401 – 08-07-0-94, so the proposed new directional control valve can be applied alternatively to a direc-
Directional control valve
Logic valve
tional spool valve. An important task given during the work is to create the systems of flow paths inside
Computational Fluid Dynamics the body, which are assumed to be performed with simple technologies like: drilling, boring and milling.
The system of the designed flow paths is verified by CFD analysis with the use of ANSYS/FLUENT program
on three-dimensional model. Obtained results are compared with the results of the characteristics given
in catalogues and coming from experimental research of the prototype. The difference in pressure loss
during flow for the logic valve taken from CFD calculation and the catalogue do not exceed 5%. Presented
in the paper directional control valve may operate for volumetric flow rate up to 450 dm3/min and the
pressure up to 42 MPa. In the proposed solution, although simple technologies of making flow paths were
applied, the pressure losses were reduced over 35%. The developed solution is close to a standard direc-
tional spool valve and can be assembled on an identical sub-plate.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction proposition of equivalent solution by the usage of logic valves.

There is a tendency for reduction energy consumption of work-
ing machines by minimizing pressure losses on hydraulic drive
systems. Significant losses of pressure usually appear in the areas
of changes in cross sections, changes of the flow direction, and in
the places where the swirls are formed. Such areas exist in hydrau-
lic valves, particularly in directional control valves. The problem of
losses evaluation in such components is a complex matter. In order
to analyze the flow in these type of elements the CFD systems are
very useful. To obtain effective solution some authors apply mod-
els with different level of simplification in CFD analysis of hydrau-
lic valves. The easiest approach is using 2D models [1–3] or
axisymmetrical [4–6]. In case of flow in complex geometry in order
to simulate flow phenomena it is necessary to apply three dimen-
sional models [6–9].
During the work, the possibility of pressure loss reduction in
directional control valve was investigated. As a result there was a
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: lisowski@mech.pk.edu.pl (E. Lisowski), janusz.rajda@ponar-
wadowice.pl (J. Rajda).
There is assumption, that the way of assembly of the new direc-
tional control valve to mounting plate will be identical to direc-
tional spool valve, that is by the usage of a manifold with
standard ports. There is also assumption, that the construction of
the body of directional control valve will be produced by the usage
of simple machining (drilling, boring or milling). In the work the
solution of new directional control valve with logic valves was pre-
sented. The design was prepared in Solid Edge software. Pressure
losses were evaluated by using ANSYS/FLUENT package and the
simulation results were verified [10].
2. Hydraulic system
The subject of the study is a typical hydraulic system illustrated
on Fig. 1, with hydraulic cylinder as a working element. In this sys-
tem the electromagnetic directional control valve (1) controls the
main spool of directional control valve (2). Backflow from cylinders
is secured by pilot operated check valves (3).
The hydraulic system is designed for volumetric flow rate up to
450 dm3/min and working pressure up to 35 MPa. In the system
the following components are used: directional control valve

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.08.015
286 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291

Nomenclature

A, B actuator ports PA flow path P–A

P pressure port PB flow path P–B
T return port A1, A2, A3 control area of logic valve
X pressure port for the pilot valve Q volumetric flow rate
Y return port for the pilot valve p pressure of working liquid
AT flow path A–T Dp pressure loss
BT flow path B–T CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics

Fig. 3. Double check valve, pilot operated Z2S22 [11] in standard [14].

Fig. 1. Hydraulic system diagram: (1) electromagnetic directional valve (pilot

stage), (2) directional spool valve (main stage), (3) pilot operated check valves, (4)
hydraulic cylinder, and (5) power unit.

Fig. 4. Losses of pressure in directional control valve WEH22 at viscosity of

hydraulic liquid 41 mm2/s: (1) path AT, (2) PA and PB path, and (3) BT path.

Comparison of Figs. 4 and 5 shows that the loss of pressure for

flow path BT (at Q = 450 dm3/min) goes up to 2.55 MPa (reaches
the rate over two times higher than the loss for flow through direc-
tional spool valve only). A question has been asked: how much will
the pressure losses reduce when the unit of directional control
spool valve WEH22 with double pilot operated check valve
Z2S22 is replaced by logic type of directional control valve? The
pressure loss in logic valve for example: URZS25 [15] (Fig. 7) are
smaller, if we compare with a single flow path of directional valve.
Furthermore, when piloting system is leak tight, there is no need
for application of check valves pilot operated because the logic
valves are poppet type.
Fig. 2. Directional control valve, electro-hydraulically operated type WEH22 [13] in
standard [14].

3. Logic valves

WEH22 (Fig. 2) and pilot operated check valve Z2S22 (Fig. 3) –
according to catalogues [11–13]. For volumetric flow rate
450 dm3/min the losses of pressure in directional control valve
WEH22 reach values from 0.79 MPa to 1.15 MPa (Fig. 4). The big-
gest value of pressure loss occurs on flow path BT. If we take into
consideration the losses of pressure resulted from the flow through
pilot operated check valve, then total losses of pressure will reach
values as on Fig. 5.
Logic valves (Fig. 6) are Fig. oat>built as 2/2 way cartridge valve.
They are composed of the cartridge insert and the cover (4) with
control holes. The cartridge insert consist of the bushing (1), the
spring (3) and the poppet (2). The poppet is pressed down to valve
seat by means of the spring (3). The valve allows for flow from A to
B or reversely from B to A. The valve poppet has three important
areas for its operation. The annular area A2 is 7% or 50% of area
A1. The area ratio A1:A2 is therefore either 14.3:1 or 2:1. The area
 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291 287

Fig. 7. Pressure loss of logic valve URZS25 [15], at viscosity of hydraulic liquid
Fig. 5. Total losses of pressure in flow by directional spool valve WEH22 and pilot
41 mm2/s: Dpmax = 0.55 MPa at Q = 450 dm3/min.
operated check valve Z2S22 at viscosity of hydraulic liquid 41 mm2/s: (1) path AT,
(2) PA and PB path, and (3) BT path.

A3 is A1 + A2 and can be either 107% or 150% of area A1. The valve

opens in both flow directions if surface A3 is not affected by pres-
sure (port X is unpressurised) and pressure force affecting the ade-
quate surfaces A1 and A2 exceeds force of the spring (3). If surface
A3 is affected by control pressure the valve poppet is pressed down
to its seat, irrespectively of the spring (3) force. The valve may be
opened by unloading surface A3 (connecting the chamber X to re-
turn line) or by appropriately high pressure on port A or B.
The resistance of flow by logic valve is lower compared with the
resistances of flow by directional spool valve and significantly low-
er when compared when the flow resistances of unit: directional
spool valve and pilot operated check valves. Taking into consider-
ation the reduction of pressure losses in the hydraulic unit, it Fig. 8. Schematic diagram of directional control valve logic type performing the
seems that research conduction on the using of logic valves in function of directional spool valve WEH22 with the valve Z2S22 in standard [14]:
hydraulic system is purposeful. (1) directional control valve (pilot valve), (2–5) logic valves.

control valve (Fig. 8) can be mounted on the same sub-plate as a

4. Logic valve model
standard directional control valve. The logic valves are placed in
parallel in one surface in body (Fig. 10), what simplified the creat-
In order to build directional control valve logic type, realizing
ing inlet and outlet ports to the sub-plate and enabled to maintain
the functions as on Fig. 1, there is a proposition for usage of four
the similar overall dimensions like for the directional spool valve
logic valves with area ratio A2:A1 = 50%, which is presented on
WEH22. The outlet and inlet paths to the logic valves are mostly
Fig. 8.
designed as simple bores.
The model of four logic valves has been created in form of brick
applying Solid Edge software. Relevant assembly cavities have
been designed in the body and adequate flow paths. One common 4.1. CFD flow simulation in directional control valve logic type
cover for four logic valves has been provided in the design. It forms
both mounting plate for pilot valve (1), and enables to bring pilot There might be used various flow models in simulation of flow
flow to the logic valves (2–5). The prepared design of directional for directional control valve [16]. Literature [8,16,17] shows that in
control valve has been presented on Fig. 9 in the form of overall similar analysis with hydraulic oil as working medium model k  e
view and in section on Fig. 10. The new-built model of directional generally was used. Therefore for simulation research available in

Fig. 6. Design of logic valve: (1) body, (2) poppet, (3) spring, and (4) cover.
288 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291

Fig. 9. Directional valves: on the left 3D model of directional control valve logic type, on the right directional control spool valve WEH22.

Fig. 12. Grid for model of BT flow path.

Fig. 10. Directional control valve logic type: (1) logic valve open, (2) logic valve
closed, (3) pilot valve, and (4) body.
ANSYS/FLUENT standard model of turbulence k  e has been cho-
sen [16,17]. The turbulence kinetic energy k and its rate of dissipa-
tion e are obtained from the following transport equations:
  
@ @ @ lt @k
ðqkÞ þ ðqkui Þ ¼ lþ þ Gk þ Gb  qe  Y M þ Sk
@t @xi @xj rk @xj
ð1Þ
  
@ @ @ lt @ e e
ðqeÞ þ ðqeui Þ ¼ lþ þ C 1e ðGk þ C 3e Gb Þ
@t @xi @xj re @xj k
e2
 C 2e q þ Se ð2Þ
k
In these equations, Gk represents the generation of turbulence ki-
netic energy due to the mean velocity gradients, calculated as de-
scribed in modelling turbulent production in the k  e models. Gb
is the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to buoyancy, cal-
culated as described in effects of buoyancy on turbulence in the
k  e models. YM represents the contribution of the fluctuating dila-
tation in compressible turbulence to the overall dissipation rate,
calculated as described in effects of compressibility on turbulence
in the k  e models. C1e, C2e and C3e are constants. Sk and Se are
the turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and e, respectively. Sk and Se
are user-defined source terms. The turbulent (or eddy) viscosity,
lt, is computed by combining k and e as follows:
2
k
lt ¼ qC l ð3Þ
Fig. 11. Grid model of PA flow path. e
 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291 289

Fig. 13. Distribution of pressure on walls of the PA path.

where Cl is a constant.
Model constants: the model constants have the following de-
fault values [16,17]: C1e = 1.44, C2e = 1.92, C3e = 1, Cl = 0.09,
Sk = 1.0, Se = 1.3.

4.2. Geometric model and discerte model (grid)

Geometric models of four flow paths have been created from 3D

model of directional valve, that is: PA, PB, AT and BT. Each of these
has different geometry and different total length. For example: on
Fig. 11 the flow path PA has been depicted, which is the shortest,
while on Fig. 12 the model of path BT, which is the longest. While
generating grid the following requirements for cells dimensions
have been defined: 3 inner wall layers along walls have been as-
Fig. 14. Velocity distribution along streamline for PA path.
sumed, the grid in the places of complex geometry has been
refined.
Grid information for flow path PA: minimum size 0.09 mm,
average size 2 mm, maximum size 6 mm, number of cells
634,110, tetrahedral 472,198, wedges 161,857, pyramids 55. The
grid for model of flow path BT (Fig. 12) has been generated apply-
ing the same requirements. For path BT, the model contained
653,966 cells.

4.3. Boundary conditions and results

The calculation has been conducted for four values of inlet

velocity of hydraulic liquid: 4, 8, 12 and 16 m/s (Velocity Inlet).
For outlet boundary condition type Pressure Outlet has been as-
sumed – constant pressure on outlet p = 0.1 MPa. Intensity of tur-
bulence has been assumed for calculation on the value of 2% for
the length of scale 2 mm.
Remaining assumptions:
Fig. 15. Distribution of pressure on walls of BT path.
 no slip on walls,
 the liquid is incompressible (hydraulic oil),
 the liquid properties are constant,
 the model is in conditions of thermal equilibrium, Streamlines allowed for evaluation of stream swirl places. For
 viscosity of hydraulic liquid is 41 mm2/s. example on Fig. 13 distribution of pressure on the walls has been
depicted for flow path PA, and on Fig. 15 for flow path BT. As a re-
As a result of conducted simulations for each of the analyzed sult of analysis of these drawings in the case of flow path BT it was
flow paths distribution of pressure on the walls of channels and found that, there were more significant pressure losses, than in
velocity in the designated intersections have been received. case of flow path PA.
290 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291
Fig. 16. Velocity distribution on the plane of logic valve BT path.
Fig. 17. Velocity distribution along streamline for BT path.
Fig. 18. Comparison of pressure losses on logic valve: (1) experimental research
and (2) result from CFD simulation (the difference is smaller than 5%).
On Fig. 16 the distribution of hydraulic liquid velocity has been
depicted in plain of logic valve hole. The logic valve has four inlet
ports. As results from Fig. 16, the flow is realized mainly by the
hole joined directly to return port T. It can be also noticed in anal-
ysis of the streamlines (Figs. 14 and 17).
4.4. Pressure losses
Evaluating the way of pressure losses of hydraulic valves is de-
fined in ISO standard [18]. It allows to compare the solutions from
Fig. 19. Pressure losses in directional control valve logic type: (1) PA path and (2) BT
path (pressure losses max 0.93 MPa and 1.67 MPa).
different manufacturers. The same way of evaluating pressure
losses was used in CFD simulation. For four values of liquid velocity
at valve inlet (4, 8, 12, 16 m/s) were conducted simulations and as
a results pressure losses have been obtained. The calculation of
pressure losses has been conducted on the single logic valve. The
pressure losses were calculated as a difference of average pressure
on outlet and inlet. Fig. 18 presents comparison of characteristic of
pressure losses for valve obtained by CFD methods (curve 2) and
catalogue characteristic (curve 1) [15]. Differences are very small
and do not exceed 5%.
The pressure losses of proposed design of control valve obtained
with CFD method have been presented on Fig. 19 for flow paths PA
and BT. If we compare these characteristics with Fig. 5 (directional
spool valve and pilot operated check valves), then it is clearly vis-
ible, that the proposed solution of directional control valve logic
type allowed to significant reduction of pressure losses. For flow
path PA about 61%, while for flow path BT 35%.
5. Experimental research
A prototype of directional control valve logic type has been pre-
pared based on model presented on Figs. 9 and 10. It was used on
experimental test stand presented on Fig. 20.
The stand allowed to set constant volumetric flow rates Q = 111,
215, 306, 430 dm3/min. The experimental conditions were in con-
formity with ISO standard [18]. Results from the experimental re-
search (Fig. 21) have been approximated with polynomial curves 3
and 4. Curves 1 and 3 refer to pressure loss on flow path PA, curves
2 and 4 – on flow path BT. The results obtained from the experi-
mental research are closed to those from CFD model. Difference
 E. Lisowski, J. Rajda / Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013) 285–291
Fig. 20. Prototype of directional control valve logic type at experimental stand.
Fig. 21. Comparison of experimental results with CFD analysis: (1) CFD analysis for
flow path PA, (2) CFD analysis for flow path BT (3) experimental results for flow path
PA, and (4) experimental results for flow path BT.
of pressure losses in the range of flow up to 430 dm3/min does not
exceed 5%.
6. Conclusions
The paper concerns the proposition of replacement of direc-
tional spool valve by logic valves built in the body mounted on
the sub-plate complying with standard ISO [14] as used for direc-
tional spool valves. In this way the possibility of change of these
components has been obtained. The proposed solution has been
verified by experimental test on prepared test stand. CFD analysis
with the usage ANSYS/FLUENT showed, that proposed solution of
291
using in hydraulic system logic type directional valve, instead of
directional spool valve, allows for significant reduction of pressure
losses. It was from 35% up to 61% in analyzed hydraulic system.
The proposed logic type directional control valve did not need to
apply a body with complex flow paths. The needed flow path can
be performed by simple machining process like: drilling, boring
and milling. Furthermore, it can be noticed that logic type direc-
tional control valve can be used for other needs, for example:
 lower switching time,
 work in higher pressures.
Application of ANSYS/FLUENT program enabled to obtain char-
acteristics of pressure losses with deviation about 5%, in compari-
son to experimental test.
References
[1] Vescovo GD, Lippolis A. Three-dimensional analysis of flow forces on
directional control valves. Int J Fluid Power 2003;4(2):15–24.
[2] Vescovo GD, Lippolis A. Optimization of flow through a pneumatic control
valve using CFD analysis and experimental validation. Fluid Power
2007;1:31–41.
[3] Pan X, Wang G, Lu Z. Flow field simulation and a flow model of servo-valve
spool valve orifice. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52(10):3249–56. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2011.05.010.
[4] Amirante R, Moscatelli P, Catalano L. Evaluation of the flow forces on a direct
(single stage) proportional valve by means of a computational fluid dynamic
analysis. Energy Convers Manage 2007;48(3):942–53. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2006.08.024.
[5] Amirante R, Vescovo GD, Lippolis A. Evaluation of the flow forces on an open
centre directional control valve by means of a computational fluid dynamic
analysis. Energy Convers Manage 2006;47(13–14):1748–60. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2005.10.005.
[6] Lisowski E, Momeni H. CFD analysis of pilot operated relief valve. In:
Proceedings of 5th FPNI-PhD symposium, Kraków; 2008. p. 493–500.
[7] Domagala M, Lisowski E. Optimization hydraulic components using fluid-solid
interaction simulation. In: Proceedings of 4th FPNI-PhD symposium, Florida –
Sarassota; 2006. p. 151–9.
[8] Domagala M. CFD analysis of a flow control valve. In: Proceedings of 5th FPNI-
PhD symposium, Kraków; 2008. p. 445–50.
[9] Lisowski E, Domagala M. Determination of static characteristic of direct acting
relief valve. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on
computational methods in fluid power technology, Melbourne; 2003. p.
211–20.
[10] ANSYS/Fluent: users guide, 13th ed.; 2011.
[11] Bosch Rexroth. Catalogue: check valve pilot operated re 21564/07.10; 2010.
[12] Bosch-Rexroth. Catalogue: 3/2, 4/2 and 4/3 directional valves, internally pilot
operated, externally pilot operated re 24751/08.08; 2010.
[13] PONAR Wadowice. Catalogue: directional spool valve; 2001.
[14] ISO 4401:2005 Hydraulic fluid power – four-port directional control valves –
mounting surfaces; 2005.
[15] PONAR Wadowice. Catalogue: 2/2 – way catridge valve; 2010.
[16] Launder BE, Spalding DB. The numerical computation of turbulent flows.
Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1990:269–89.
[17] Launder BE, Spalding DB. Lectures in mathematical models of
turbulence. London (England): Academic Press; 1972.
[18] ISO 6403:1988 Hydraulic fluid power – valves controlling flow and pressure –
test methods.