Why use a manifold?

[ollien]

Probably a stupid question but heregoesit.

Today, I learned what a manifold was. In the past,my team just wired our solenoids in series using T fittings, like this

Compressor --- Release Valve --- Pressure Switch ------------ T ------ T
                                                          Solenoid     Solenoid
                                                                 |       |         
                                                         Cylinders       Cylinders

Is there any advantage to using a manifold such as these, other than space savings?

[Lil' Lavery]

Fewer connections means fewer chances of leaks in your pneumatic system. This is especially important on any portions of your pressure system connected to your storage. Plumbing your system in series allows for any leaks on the storage side to drain all your remaining reserve air. Using a manifold mitigates the risk of that happening.

There are also weight, size/space, and aesthetic considerations.

[ollien]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Fewer connections means fewer chances of leaks in your pneumatic system. This is especially important on any portions of your pressure system connected to your storage. Plumbing your system in series allows for any leaks on the storage side to drain all your remaining reserve air. Using a manifold mitigates the risk of that happening.

There are also weight, size/space, and aesthetic considerations.

Ah. That makes sense. So basically the manifold ITSELF doesn't provide any advantages/disadvantages, but the tubing runs that go along with it do, correct?

[Chris Fultz]

We use manifolds for a few reasons -

1. Cleaner installation. They are easy to install and mount near the pressure regulating valve.

2. Flexibility with design. We usually decide how many solenoids we will need, and then add one more solenoid than that. As the design develops, we have that extra solenoid readily available to connect to if we add another actuator.

3. Simplified tube routing. A single input line at the manifold.

4. Failures. If a solenoid fails, it is easy to connect the needed lines to the spare solenoid and quickly get back in play.

The negatives are that they are a little heavier, and can be expensive. However, they last several years and can be re-used.

[FrankJ]

Automation Direct sales manifolds for their valves that is cost competitive with the additional plumbing that singles require. A lot easier to mount one manifold than multiple individual valves.

One reason not to use a manifold is if you trying to minimize pressure losses to a high flow device like a shooter cylinder. Then you want to mount the vavle close to the device and minimize your tubing length. (You could use bigger tubing, but you wouldn't pass robot inspection.)

[ollien]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

One reason not to use a manifold is if you trying to minimize pressure losses to a high flow device like a shooter cylinder. Then you want to mount the vavle close to the device and minimize your tubing length. (You could use bigger tubing, but you wouldn't pass robot inspection.)

Why would the manifold result in worse performance for the shooter?

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by ollien

Why would the manifold result in worse performance for the shooter?

You have a single oriface for air to enter all solenoids, acting as a combined flow limit.

If on separate manifolds the flow limit is decreased (assuming logical tube sizes, tank attachment and layout).

[ollien]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

You have a single oriface for air to enter all solenoids, acting as a combined flow limit.

If on separate manifolds the flow limit is decreased (assuming logical tube sizes, tank attachment and layout).

The first part makes sense, but are you saying that if you separate the shooter from the manifold you'll have fewer restrictions? Do manifolds have a cv rating?

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

You have a single oriface for air to enter all solenoids, acting as a combined flow limit.

If on separate manifolds the flow limit is decreased (assuming logical tube sizes, tank attachment and layout).

Taken to the extreme you mount the valve directly to the port on the side of the cylinder that needs the most speed. Run supply tubing directly back to the working pressure regulator locating the component for the shortest runs and bends possible. This will not take you from worst to first, but might help when you are battling your arch rival on Einstein for the fraction of advantage. (Of which we have not have had that pleasure yet)

[IndySam]

Air flowing through tubing offers resistance. If you want quick response like on a shooter or kicker, you want as little tube as possible.

The other reason is to reduce air load. The longer the tube the more air you waste but with no limits on storage this isn't as important as it once was.

[GeeTwo]

Based on some number crunching I did during build this year, it appeared that the fastest cylinder performance would be to have a large tank (at least twice and preferably three times as large as the cylinder capacity) on the working pressure side of the regulator, then feeding directly from the tank to the solenoid valve to the cylinder. We did not get to test this, as it turned out the valves we were using had much too low a cv for this to make a difference.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Based on some number crunching I did during build this year, it appeared that the fastest cylinder performance would be to have a large tank (at least twice and preferably three times as large as the cylinder capacity) on the working pressure side of the regulator, then feeding directly from the tank to the solenoid valve to the cylinder. We did not get to test this, as it turned out the valves we were using had much too low a cv for this to make a difference.

I can tell you from experience this is true. This is how we plumed our soccer ball kicker on our Breakaway bot and it made a big difference.

[ollien]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Based on some number crunching I did during build this year, it appeared that the fastest cylinder performance would be to have a large tank (at least twice and preferably three times as large as the cylinder capacity) on the working pressure side of the regulator, then feeding directly from the tank to the solenoid valve to the cylinder. We did not get to test this, as it turned out the valves we were using had much too low a cv for this to make a difference.

Is there a reason for this? I had heard this once our season ended and I was annoyed that we hadn't tried it to fix our shooter.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Chris Fultz

...can be expensive. However, they last several years and can be re-used.

Chris covered all of my team's reasons. I just wanted to +1 his last comment. Although we did not end up using pneumatics in 2016, they were a key part of our development strategy in several previous years. We started using the manifold pictured here on our 2014 competition robot, and have re-used it several times -- on our 2015 competition robot and on a few off-season projects.

[Jon Stratis]

I'll add one thing I've seen in inspection... fill all slots on the manifold appropriately! Solenoids attach to them at the top with a rubber gasket to ensure a good seal. If you aren't using one of those slots, either put a solenoid in there anyways (It's always good to have a backup, if you can afford the weight) or put in an appropriate cap that's designed and sold for that use. I've seen teams block unused ports with epoxy or hot glue before, which just means that manifold is coming off the robot when the inspector sees it!