PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 21, 2026JFPS International Journal of Fluid Power System0 citationsOpen Access

Comparative Analysis of Articulated Steering Efficiency: Conventional Orbital Steering vs. Electro-Hydrostatic in a Wheel Loader

View Full Paper
VSVinay Partap SinghEOEmil Nørregård OlesenHPHenrik C. PEDERSEN

Key Points

  • This research aims to compare the energy efficiency of conventional orbital steering and electro-hydrostatic steering systems in wheel loaders.
  • Experimental assessment of hydraulic power consumption for conventional OSP.
  • Calculation of power delivered by load-sensing hydrostatic pump in OSP.
  • Simulation model used to analyze EHS system performance.
  • Examination of losses during steering maneuvers for both systems.
  • Efficiency of the OSP system remained around 40%.
  • Efficiency of the EHS system ranged from 69.4% to 81.3%.
  • EHS system delivered similar dynamic steering performance with considerably higher efficiency.

Abstract

This paper investigates the energy efficiency of an articulated steering system in a wheel loader, focusing on a comparative study between conventional Orbital Steering Unit (OSP) and a proposed Electro-Hydrostatic Steering (EHS) system. The conventional OSP on a large wheel loader serves as the benchmark for evaluating the hydraulic power consumption during different steering manoeuvres. For the conventional steering the power delivered by the load-sensing hydrostatic pump is calculated from the experimental data and losses in the OSP unit are calculated. Whereas, for the EHS the mechanical power needed to operate the fixed displacement pump is considered as input and losses are calculated for performing the same steering profile while delivering similar dynamic steering performance, using the simulation model. It has been found that in the OSP steering system the efficiency remained at around 40%, whereas in the EHS system it ranges from 69.4% to 81.3%.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Singh et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69994ba9873532290d01fd3ahttps://doi.org/10.5739/jfpsij.19.90
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper