Slopes and tractor tilt

[RoyJackson]

Who did you work for as a tech writer? You're absolutely right! Engineering has it's own language and it specialized depending on the specific technical area. psychology is also useful for dealing with engineers!

Couple of companies as a consultant/contracted QE.
Although I've worked aerospace, I was referring to the engineering types in the automotive industry (tier II and tier III suppliers) as well as some industry specs (ever read ASTM/ASME specs? Some are clear as mud...ISO and DIN specs are worse). They had to be interpreted and translated into something usable on the production floor (by folks who normally don't have a technical background).

Psychology is a great course...unless you're a hypochondriac

 

[RoyJackson]

Please don't use any more big words, I can't keep up.:laughing:

I'm trying, TripleR...but all this tech talk and theory is givin' me a woody...

 

[TripleR]

Well, you guys are way out of my league, so I will leave you to it.

I do enjoy reading on the subject though. Nebrasksparks has had some pretty good posts on this, but he hasn't posted in a while.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Putting a balanced load in the bucket (balanced laterally) and carrying it low can be stabilizing (relative to the no load in bucket case) IF it lowers the verticle height of the cg. If a load, (like a big rock) is carried in the bucket and shifts to the downhill side of the bucket, the cg will shift to the down hill side proportionately and reduce the stability reealtive to the centered load case.

Forget about the front axle helping you very much. It can't do any good until it hits something on the tractor structure to stop its rotation. By then, the rear wheel is off the ground and you're in the roll.

The reason it isnt is that it unloads the rears. The tractor will more readily go onto 3 wheels on lesser slopes. Being "more stable [or more recoverable] on three wheels" does not equate to more stable because the instability is just manifesting sooner with the front load.
larry

 

[RoyJackson]

I do enjoy reading on the subject though. Nebrasksparks has had some pretty good posts on this, but he hasn't posted in a while.

Actually, so do I...but I reckon I don't take forum discussions as seriously as some others do. That statements refers to internet forums in general, not TBN specifically. The exception is safety though...I do take safety quite seriously.
But it is fun visualizing some the concepts discussed. All have been interesting...including some that I, obviously, disagree with. Those haven't been persuasive enough to change my theory, however. Reckon mine haven't been as persuasive as I thought they would be.

But since no one here has the resources to prove their theories (unless they have access to a computer with some rather sophisticated software installed), they'll remain interesting bits of information we can consider as we traverse a slope.

This might be a good time to review those Nebraska testing videos that are posted in the Safety Forum. Maybe we can see some of the forces in motion from the comfort of our office chairs...

 

[North Country]

The reason it isnt is that it unloads the rears. The tractor will more readily go onto 3 wheels on lesser slopes. Being "more stable [or more recoverable] on three wheels" does not equate to more stable because the instability is just manifesting sooner with the front load.
larry

Yes. For us engineering types, you're moving the cg down a little and forward a lot. And yes, "a little" and "a lot" are official engineering terms.

It's easy to forget you're driving a triangle when you can see the front wheels right from the driver's seat.

We got some rain overnight; the pictures may not come today. But I really like the idea; I'm sure we'll all learn a lot.

 

[RoyJackson]

Yes. For us engineering types, you're moving the cg down a little and forward a lot. And yes, "a little" and "a lot" are official engineering terms.

It's easy to forget you're driving a triangle when you can see the front wheels right from the driver's seat.

We got some rain overnight; the pictures may not come today. But I really like the idea; I'm sure we'll all learn a lot.

Yeah, but then you need to quantify how much is "a little" and "a lot". Those are relative terms...but relative to what? (Ahhhhh...a whole new discussion...might even get into philosophy on this one!)

It's still wet here too...I'll make the determination about running across the slope this afternoon...

 

[TripleR]

Actually, so do I...but I reckon I don't take forum discussions as seriously as some others do. That statements refers to internet forums in general, not TBN specifically. The exception is safety though...I do take safety quite seriously.
But it is fun visualizing some the concepts discussed. All have been interesting...including some that I, obviously, disagree with. Those haven't been persuasive enough to change my theory, however. Reckon mine haven't been as persuasive as I thought they would be.

But since no one here has the resources to prove their theories (unless they have access to a computer with some rather sophisticated software installed), they'll remain interesting bits of information we can consider as we traverse a slope.

This might be a good time to review those Nebraska testing videos that are posted in the Safety Forum. Maybe we can see some of the forces in motion from the comfort of our office chairs...

I don't know enough to even have a theory, so I tend to get lost. I depend on my experience operating different tractors for quite a few years and never having had a roll over.

If I ever have occasion to drive a tractor on a book cover, I will probable pay closer attention.

 

[RoyJackson]

We got some rain overnight; the pictures may not come today. But I really like the idea; I'm sure we'll all learn a lot.

It's dry enough now, but by this time, I had a list of chores from the wifey...Monday looks good for mowing.

 

[North Country]

Same. We've been adding dirt to the new raised beds since 11am. I just finally made that wonderful "psshht" sound.

:drink: