using a pressure guage as a scale.

[LD1]

LD, I think it was you that showed the math on grapple "lid" closing pressure. Is there a big swing in capacity of a loader through out it's motion if any? Beyond the load's position in distance from the loaders point of rotation, it's force will remain the same correct?

No there is a big swing.

Remember cylinder on an angle thing.

The higher you raise the loader, the more acute the angle becomes.

Thats why you see many loaders give a rating for lift force at ground level, (sometimes called breakout force), some will give a midpoint capacity (usually at 59"), then a lift to max height.

If you have your kubota loader manual for your M9540, they plot it all out on a nice curve.

This is my LA844 loader. The higher you go the less force you have. And if you recall there are many times members on here are lifting a pallet or something that is pushing the limits of their loader, and they can only lift it 3 or 4' then it stops. This lift/height curve explains that

 

[LD1]

You can see in that graph that I can lift twice as much at ground level than I can to max height.

Thats why I dont understand why so many people get hung up on what a loader can lift to max height. Because how often are we in the upper half of that graph.

When comparing two loaders, there is a whole lot more to it than simply what it can lift to max height. One loader may lift higher, therefore might look on paper to the average shopper that it is a weaker loader. When in reality at any point on the curve of lift height it might be the stronger loader, it just lifts higher, so ultimatly has a lower capacity at "its" max height.

Kinda like talking about torque and HP and peak numbers are only a part, and that "area under the curve" is more important.

 

[Tractor Seabee]

Will the gauge break if I stop it to fast on the way down and cause a spike in the pressure? Any ideas will be a help.

Haven't had time to read the whole thread yet; but a simple precaution is to put a snubber ahead of the gauge and use an oil filled gauge. That's if you go ahead with some solution to this.

Ron

 

[Rustyiron]

You can see in that graph that .........

Thanks Bud! :thumbsup:

 

[SPYDERLK]

A gauge left in the cylinder line is going to see a lot of activity and may finally fail. This will drop your load fairly fast if you dont use a critical orifice to limit flow to the gauge. It can be verry small because only a few drops flow in and out of the bourdon tube during measurement. I used a screw threaded into the input hole of the gauge. The oil follows the clearance in the thread helix. It will only flow a few drops per second. It has never clogged.

 

[aczlan]

A gauge left in the cylinder line is going to see a lot of activity and may finally fail. This will drop your load fairly fast if you dont use a critical orifice to limit flow to the gauge. It can be verry small because only a few drops flow in and out of the bourdon tube during measurement. I used a screw threaded into the input hole of the gauge. The oil follows the clearance in the thread helix. It will only flow a few drops per second. It has never clogged.

Good point, I have a gauge on the pressure input line to the loader valve on our L3830, IIRC, its a 5000PSI valve, I dont think it has ever hit that, the most I have seen is about 2500PSI. I should probbaly do something like that though.

Aaron Z

 

[LD1]

Gauges operate in dynamic systems everyday.

Sure, it's another point of failure.

But you are more likely to blow a hose and drop the load than the gauge

 

[SPYDERLK]

LD, I think it was you that showed the math on grapple "lid" closing pressure. Is there a big swing in capacity of a loader through out it's motion if any? Beyond the load's position in distance from the loaders point of rotation, it's force will remain the same correct?

No there is a big swing.

Remember cylinder on an angle thing.

The higher you raise the loader, the more acute the angle becomes.

Thats why you see many loaders give a rating for lift force at ground level, (sometimes called breakout force), some will give a midpoint capacity (usually at 59"), then a lift to max height.

If you have your kubota loader manual for your M9540, they plot it all out on a nice curve.

This is my LA844 loader. The higher you go the less force you have. And if you recall there are many times members on here are lifting a pallet or something that is pushing the limits of their loader, and they can only lift it 3 or 4' then it stops. This lift/height curve explains that

I was curious about this because my experience at gut level indicated a much less pronounced effect on my ML275 loader. Im dealing with some stumps right now so I had good opportunity to test it yesterday.

I managed to get a ~ 1T stump in my bucket and raised it from ground to full height. 1100psi was good for a few feet, and then I had to use escalating pressure up to 1400psi to attain the 11' max height.​

On the surface this indicates an 11/14 force maintenance in contrast to ~1/2 in the graphs.

In conjunction with this real world scenario it has to be noted that the load point relative to the pins had to be changed a bit with height to prevent the stump from tipping back out of the bucket and killing me. This rotation uncurl of the bucket and rotation upward of the arms factor to change the lift point a little​

I think not a significant factor, but of course the best test would be to suspend the load or use a force gauge on a vertical tensile line. One loses test range and the other requires a nice force gauge and a good anchor point.

LD1, I would be interested in what your loader shows in a similar real world test. I know youll counterweight and be careful to watch bucket orientation while multitasking. Thats what makes it especially dangerous - the extra task. Im used to raising stumps to full height and dropping them to dislodge dirt. Watching a gauge concurrently is a distraction that is and should be scary.​

A set of forks with a log on would be ideal.

 

[LD1]

I was curious about this because my experience at gut level indicated a much less pronounced effect on my ML275 loader. Im dealing with some stumps right now so I had good opportunity to test it yesterday.

I managed to get a ~ 1T stump in my bucket and raised it from ground to full height. 1100psi was good for a few feet, and then I had to use escalating pressure up to 1400psi to attain the 11' max height.​

On the surface this indicates an 11/14 force maintenance in contrast to ~1/2 in the graphs.

In conjunction with this real world scenario it has to be noted that the load point relative to the pins had to be changed a bit with height to prevent the stump from tipping back out of the bucket and killing me. This rotation uncurl of the bucket and rotation upward of the arms factor to change the lift point a little​

I think not a significant factor, but of course the best test would be to suspend the load or use a force gauge on a vertical tensile line. One loses test range and the other requires a nice force gauge and a good anchor point.

LD1, I would be interested in what your loader shows in a similar real world test. I know youll counterweight and be careful to watch bucket orientation while multitasking. Thats what makes it especially dangerous - the extra task. Im used to raising stumps to full height and dropping them to dislodge dirt. Watching a gauge concurrently is a distraction that is and should be scary.​

A set of forks with a log on would be ideal.

Different loader. But I assume you have a gauge tee'd into the lift circuit similar to how I had the one on my old L3400?

Because if this is the case, you are overlooking a very critical part of the calculation....

The pressure required to lift the dead weight of the loader itself.

On my old L3400, it was 600psi just to carry the arms and empty bucket.

So in your scenerio....if a similar 600psi is just the dead weight of the loader.....taking that out.....it took you ~500psi to lift the stump down low, and 800psi to full height.

5/8ths is a lot closer to what a typical graph indicates as opposed to the 11/14ths you observed on the surface of things.

 

[mike69440]

I have l some limited experience with Both Kubota and Mahindra Loaders. Kubota 364, 514, 723 & my own TL-1000, Mahindra tractors My Max 28, Neigbor's 2555, and a 5000 series utility tractor while haying.

Kubota Loaders seem to do well for their spec at ground level. Mahindra I think goes for the big numbers in their specs, but performance at ground level is no much more than Kuboa. Again limited experience.