Splitfire type logsplitter

[Wayne County Hose]

Originally Posted by SPYDERLK

As you know, a properly designed splitter puts no bending forces on the cyl rod.
larry

Theoretically speaking, yes. Real world speaking, fat chance. I replace more rods on log splitters than all other cylinders combined. I haven't replaced a rod yet on one of these 2 way splitters.

[picknfred]

Hi Jim

Thank for the heads up! what model is your splitfire?,,appparently because there is almost no bending of the rod they can use a smaller dia. therefore utilizing more retracting force..

Fred

[woodchuckcanuck]

Its a 255.

[sizzami]

I used one of those two way jobs , I thought it was someones idea of a joke , I have never replaced a cylinder rod on one of my splitters, most peoples trouble is they try to make the whole thing too tight and end up with a bent beam flange.

[woodchuckcanuck]

Originally Posted by sizzami

...most peoples trouble is they try to make the whole thing too tight and end up with a bent beam flange.

Well that's what you get when you try to shaft something that is too tight, you end up with a bent rod.

[SPYDERLK]

Originally Posted by woodchuckcanuck

There's some truth to that however I believe with the Splitfire design, that's not an issue. The distance between the ram and that lowest contact point of the wood is only a bit more than the thickness of the square tubing that the ram sits in. The one I have will split no problem, no matter the wood.

I dont understand that. The radius of the cyl must be in there somewhere. Force is applied along the centerline/axis of the cyl.
larry

[woodchuckcanuck]

Originally Posted by SPYDERLK

I dont understand that. The radius of the cyl must be in there somewhere. Force is applied along the centerline/axis of the cyl.
larry

The distance I am referring to is from the wedge to the outside diameter of the rod.

[J_J]

The sliding tube on that splitter is what is pushing the blade. The cylinder is located inside of the inside tube. I don't think there is no way the cylinder could bend a cylinder rod.

On the 4 in cyl at 3000 psi, and 2 in shaft, the push stroke is 18 ton, and the return stroke is 14 ton. both will get the job done.

Northern Tools has a similar splitter, even a 3pt.

Those log splitter cylinders that pushes the wedge is probably the only cylinders that bend rods.

[SPYDERLK]

Originally Posted by Wayne County Hose

Theoretically speaking, yes. Real world speaking, fat chance. I replace more rods on log splitters than all other cylinders combined. I haven't replaced a rod yet on one of these 2 way splitters.

Originally Posted by SPYDERLK

As you know, a properly designed splitter puts no bending forces on the cyl rod. The cyl floats on 2 // pins. Unless the cyl hits against something as the rail bows there will be no bending forces other than those attributed to ram straightness issues or off center eyes. The problem I see with 2 way splitters is that the point where force is applied to the log is several inches above the place where the ram drives the wedge. This causes high back or front cocking force on the wedge assembly.
larry

I have highlited some key words you may have missed. The common non proper design on splitters has the cyl bolted to the top of the rail or else close enuf that the cyl body touches it when the beam bows under splitting forces. This binds and bows the rod too, causing scoring and seal problems and predisposing the rod to bending. The rod is also out in the open where it can get dinged. It is no wonder you are called on to replace a lot of these. The problem of improper design remains as the cause of bending.

The cyl inside the beam in 2 way splitters is suspended from just 2 pivot points, as it should be on all splitters. The cocking force on the wedge assembly is greater than the other design because force is applied several inches lower than where the log is. This cocking force is not a factor in rod bending because of the pivots. It just wears more on the guides of the wedge assembly.
larry

[Wayne County Hose]

Originally Posted by SPYDERLK

I have highlited some key words you may have missed. The common non proper design on splitters has the cyl bolted to the top of the rail or else close enuf that the cyl body touches it when the beam bows under splitting forces. This binds and bows the rod too, causing scoring and seal problems and predisposing the rod to bending. The rod is also out in the open where it can get dinged. It is no wonder you are called on to replace a lot of these. The problem of improper design remains as the cause of bending.

The cyl inside the beam in 2 way splitters is suspended from just 2 pivot points, as it should be on all splitters. The cocking force on the wedge assembly is greater than the other design because force is applied several inches lower than where the log is. This cocking force is not a factor in rod bending because of the pivots. It just wears more on the guides of the wedge assembly.
larry

Larry,

I didn't miss anything, I'm not stupid. I am not an engineer, but I slept at a Holiday Inn last night. I know how these forces work. I also know that the greatest engineering minds on our planet can not design anything "proper" enough that a sufficiently talented moron can not overcome and break. I don't deal with pencil and paper, I deal with steel and wrenches.

Andy