questions for you hydraulic experts please!!!

[HCJtractor]

I didn't know what a cultipacker was so I googled it and came up with this, it may give you an idea and not have to buy hydraulics.
Tuffline Cultipacker in Product Review Forum & Field Testing Forum

Thanks for sharing that. I had seen a picture of that and several other ones similar. That's pretty similar to what I envision. The ratchet jack was what I originally planned to use until I learned about a 12V power pack. The Tuf line looks very well thought out and my design will work exactly the same. I have several problems with it however . first is the price, almost $2000. It weighs about 750 lbs which is actually light for a packer. It takes a lot of weight to break up dirt clods especially in the South where red clay is present. I also would be reluctant to put the strain on my ATV, pulling something that is heavier than it is, although I know lots of people pull stuff with their ATVs. It has a 50" width. Mine will have a 90" and double the weight. I also think I can make it cheaper as I already have the wheel assemblies that are really beefy, and I can buy 25 packer wheels for about a grand. Plus I get to have the fun of building something with my welder! But you are right that it is very similar to what I am planning. Another one that I like even more is one made by Brillion, who makes Ag cultipackers. They make a hydraulically activated one that is a little different in design, but it costs many thousands. If I could afford it, it would be the one to have. Thanks again for showing that one. I had never seen pictures that showed it so clearly and it gives me hope that mine will work in the same manner.

[HCJtractor]

Now I am confused again! Called Surplus Center to order my hydraulic cylinders and power pack, planning to plumb it exactly as shown in the diagram, with a single action pump and double action cylinders with the slave acting as a single action with a port plugged with a breather and the master dumping its return port to the slave. This brought some confusion to the tech support guy, even when I told him this was the way it had worked for years as designed. (I assume) He says some double cylinders that are used as single, since there is no fluid on the back side, will fail because the seals roll, so he could guarantee this would work. Said no way to know which cylinders would work and which would fail. He asked what cylinders were on it, and they were "Sioux" which don't exist anymore. He suggested instead, using a "rotary divider" item 9-5120-10, that divides the flow and ensures sychronization of the cylinders. Of course it adds another 300 bucks! I guess on the bright side, it simplifies the plumbing, and I would get a double action power pack which I guess is more common and useful in other applications. And both cylinders would be the same. What cha think? As usual, my projects seems to just get more complicated the further I get into them. I kinda hate to go with my original plan if a cylinder fails and then I would have a mass of worthless plumbing and a single action power pack that I could not use. Despite the added cost, a "divider" may be a more surefire solution. Anybody have an opinion??

[J_J]

Could you use something like this pump and controller

Surplus Center - 12 VDC 1.0 GPM 2000 PSI SPX DA POWER PACK

Drawing http://www.surpluscenter.com/Drawing/DR9-7550.pdf

Wiring http://www.surpluscenter.com/Wire/W9-7550.jpg

Surplus Center - REMOTE CONTROL ASSEMBLY FOR 9-7550

Couple of cylinders, hoses, battery.

[olde man]

my opinion is that you ran into a heck of a salesman, he could have also sold you a sync. valve instead of the flow divider probably a little cheaper. as you can see by now there are a myriad of ways to get a simple job done. you have gone from converting existing components to simple alternatives to complicated alternatives. i walked around the farm today i saw a ratchet lift working a swing axle on a brush hog the easiest to make and maintain, working probably with less effort than the hand pump you were asking about, cultipacker with 1 s/a cylinder working a swing axle, batwing 3 s/a cylinders, 10' mower 1 s/a cylinder, 5 bottom plow 1 s/a cylinder, haybine 1 s/a cylinder, bailer 3 s/a and 1 d/a cylinder. disc mower 1 s/a cylinder. you have had the time and attention of alot of good Knowledgeable people with a lot of good suggestions.

[HCJtractor]

my opinion is that you ran into a heck of a salesman, he could have also sold you a sync. valve instead of the flow divider probably a little cheaper. as you can see by now there are a myriad of ways to get a simple job done. you have gone from converting existing components to simple alternatives to complicated alternatives. i walked around the farm today i saw a ratchet lift working a swing axle on a brush hog the easiest to make and maintain, working probably with less effort than the hand pump you were asking about, cultipacker with 1 s/a cylinder working a swing axle, batwing 3 s/a cylinders, 10' mower 1 s/a cylinder, 5 bottom plow 1 s/a cylinder, haybine 1 s/a cylinder, bailer 3 s/a and 1 d/a cylinder. disc mower 1 s/a cylinder. you have had the time and attention of alot of good Knowledgeable people with a lot of good suggestions.

I know I have tossed around lots of ideas, and have been fortunate to have gotten some good advice. Originally the ratchet device seemed promising but since I have two entirely separate assemblies, I would have had to link them and change mounting points for the cylinder, etc. So since I would rather keep things as original, it was back to synchronizing two cylinders. I studied this online and saw many ways to do this, one of which was like the original design with two different sized cylinders that were relying of cylinder volume for coordination. Just seems this would be a gamble, especially considering it would necessitate a SA pump. So the flow divider seems a commonly used solution, and it actually simplifies the plumbing and seems to be a solution would work as designed. Luckily, I found a flow divider on EBay for less than 1/2 price, so its affordable. It also makes cylinder selection easy, routung lines simple, and allows me to use the mechanical linkages without modification.

[olde man]

i'm glad you chose a direction to head the only thing that puzzled me after i noticed you were willing to stray from original parts was why two cylinders i thought you would fab a swing axle, connecting your separate wheel mounts, and use 1 cylinder. our batwing weighs 5000 + lbs. and that is how it is rigged. it sounds like you got everything worked out now good luck