Tractor side QA mechanism

[dynasim]

I am pursuing the installation of a standard QA system on my NH TC45 tractor. The implement side attachment plates are readily available, cheap, and space efficient. The tractor side attachements are not.

Because they are out of my price range currently, or extend the bucket significantly, and I want some fab practice, I am going to make my own.

One question I have is that tractor side QA systems that I have looked at have a torque tube, or equivelant, going between the two sides. It is my impression(and true for my equipment) that the attachements themselves are stiff enough that the torque tube does not add any strength. In fact, there are several post here that indicate that mistakes caused that tube to bend, preventing the QA system from reattaching to implements.

Therefore, I would like to not utilize a torque tube, and allow the two sides to move independently( as they now do without QA). Does anybody see a problem with doing that, and can the people who have this system think about the attachments, and tell me if I will have a problem.

Thanks for you help.
Chris

 

[wushaw]

Good question, it would be less weight.

 

[RickB]

The two halves will move independently based on the cylinder/linkage with the least resistence. Unless you diligently leave the bucket cylinders completely stationary whenever there is no attachment on the QA device, it will be a bear to get attached to a bucket or whatever. I had the displeasure of operatong a Deere 5520 that had a 541 loader with pins missing between the coupler halves. It was a real d@#kache.

If you are at square one with this project, look into the 'Euro' style coupler being seen more and more. I am beginning to be a big fan of this style. I believe attachments for this coupler will be more available as time goes on.

 

[scarlo101]

Hi all
I am also in the process of building a FEL using QA bucket and forks. I have also asked myself the same questions about the tube connecting the 2 sides. Rick, I cannot find any info on the euro style coupler. Can you provide more info. thx

 

[dynasim]

RickB,

Is it true that if you approach an implement to hook up to it, the extended connector will push the retracted connector out(by hydraulics) once the extended connector comes in contact with the implement? I may be missing something.

If hooking up were the only issue, I would do a workaround. I am more concerned about whether most implements are stiff enough by themselves to not need that bracing.

Do most implements have their own "torque tube"?

Thanks for you comments, as always.

Chris

 

[Farmerford]

Chris:

Several years ago I built QA's for Kubota B2400 and B2900 because neither offered one when purchased. Since the regular loader attachment did not incorporate a torque tube, I assumed that the attachments themselves were sufficiently rigid. I had no problems with the attachments twisting, which indicates that I was correct.

However, like RickB, I spent a lot of time lining up the arms when attaching to a different implement. Unless the implement were quite heavy, it would slide when pushed by the "out" contact so the "in" contact never lined up. After a bit of that I added torque tubes to both machines just to avoid the hassle.

 

[mwb]

I am working on a homebrew QA (tractor side) and I know why you want to eliminate the torque tube (at least I can only think of one good reason). i am guessing that the torque tube will interfer with whatever you have planned for releasing the bottom catch pin?

The only other reasons I can think of is weight reduction (which would be minimal anyway) or your bucket has a structural section across the back (Kubota's have an angle welded across the back) and it would interfer with the torque tube.

I think most loader attachments are torsionally very strong and you would be ok to eliminate the TT. I would not do that for reasons already stated PLUS the torque tube also acts as a "spreader" keeping your cylinder ends apart. If you delete the torque tube then the tops of the QA can flop side to side. If you mount your bucket with them crooked then you subject the pins and cylinder to side loads. This could be helped or minimised by modifying the bucket, forks, etc but it would become a PITA.

I have been working on my design for a while, I had hoped to finish it this Holiday Season but three kids, wife... I posted a pdf of my drawing here

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/build-yourself/111086-fel-quick-attachment.html

Cheers,
Mike

 

[Spudland_Dave]

I would say you are correct in that the Torque Tube is NOT required...Alot of skid-steers dont have the tube, my Factory Deere SS QA does not have a torque tube...

As for aligningment of the "Paddles" the little silver tube in the pic is considered a "Timing Rod" and is nothing more then a small piece of pipe which holds the 2 paddles close enough to each other that you can retract/extend the bucket cylinders and keep em close enough to attach implements with no issues.

 

[mwb]

I would say you are correct in that the Torque Tube is NOT required...Alot of skid-steers dont have the tube, my Factory Deere SS QA does not have a torque tube...

As for aligningment of the "Paddles" the little silver tube in the pic is considered a "Timing Rod" and is nothing more then a small piece of pipe which holds the 2 paddles close enough to each other that you can retract/extend the bucket cylinders and keep em close enough to attach implements with no issues.

That is one beautiful tractor!

There has to be more to that than just a pipe; what happens if you only hook one side in and curl? Maybe that is a solid rod (stressproof,etc)? Does the tube allow twisting (i.e. springs at ends)?
Does your loader have a flow divider for each side? Maybe JD uses that to "balance" an unbalanced load when oop's happen. Could you try torquing one side a little and see how it responds? Maybe a closeup pic of the backside (of the QA) would be interesting.

 

[kennyd]

That is one beautiful tractor!

There has to be more to that than just a pipe; what happens if you only hook one side in and curl? Maybe that is a solid rod (stressproof,etc)? Does the tube allow twisting (i.e. springs at ends)?
Does your loader have a flow divider for each side? Maybe JD uses that to "balance" an unbalanced load when oop's happen. Could you try torquing one side a little and see how it responds? Maybe a closeup pic of the backside (of the QA) would be interesting.

Here is a picture that may help... It's a solid rod with 1/4" pins (#9) that tie the two sides together. I can tell you from personal experience that when one of the pins shear off, then it's a PITA to try to hook the bucket up. The shoes have a mind of there own unless they are tied together.