Toughest Material To Move With FEL

[BeeferMan]

toughest thing to get a bucket full of is manure with hay mixed in...

 

[archerm3]

I guess you haven't been too many places where people really use tractors...I've seen cracked frame rails on 4440 JD's, busted front axles on about any color...loaders when used hard, and used alot take their toll eventually. I know the mid hp Ford SOS's had somewhat of a tendancy to spit if used alot

Explain how this is possible for the fulcrum to LOOSE contact with the ground when the loader is loaded? This is what is happening when you put a load in your loader right? If we agree that the fulcrum is the rear axle, how could loading the bucket possible remove weight from the pivot point? The most stress is on the front, and even if you put a counter weight on the rear, the most stress continues to be on the front axle, you've just got a buddy on the back of your teeter totter to help keep your tail on the ground. Here's an experiment you can try at home. You'll need 2-5 gallon buckets of water, and 2 bathroom scales. Place both scales in a position where you can place 1 foot on each. Do so and record the weights for each. Now pick up 1 bucket in 1 hand and hold out to the side, for this example we'll say that's your left hand. Note the change in weights and record. Now pick up the other bucket in the other hand, and hold out to the opposite side, in this experiment, your right. Note the change in weights. While I haven't personally done this, I believe the hypothesis will prove true...you're not reducing any weight on your left (the loader) by carrying some weight with your right (the rear of the tractor), but you're going to keep your machine more balanced. I'll give you balance and stability, but will disagree that you're reducing any weight on the front axle by carrying a counter balance. The loader is effectively a big lever, with the tipping point on the front axle, and hooked under the mid point of the tractor. Another test...go scoop a big bucket of dirt or rock with your loader, note the amount of squat in the front tires and the steering effort required with that load. Now go hook on your ballast box and get a similar bucket, does the impact to the front tires or the steering effort change? I'd bet not

Im sorry, i just had to respond to this post.....

Yes, go ahead and do YOUR exercise that you think works....if you havent even done it, you can't possibly understand that you have the physics of this problem wrong...

your hypothesis will be wrong....

if you weigh 200 lbs, pick up 100 lbs and hold it in one hand out to one side and see if you can get ANY weight reading on your opposite leg...provided you keep your spine straight, which I don't think you can...as a human you can shift your weight back and forth at will between each leg...

so really, try your experient with a sawhorse and a long board clamped to the top..

and by all means, try it, don't just assume it.

Im here to tell you that there is 'some' weight that you could add to the 3ph which would make a fully loaded loader bucketed tractor lift it's front wheel off the ground, and there would be NO weight on the front axle then.

As a side note, an amused observer, me, observes the futility and fallacy of people who put sand bags in their vehicles over the rear axle instead of at the rearmost portion of the trunk, to improve weight on the rear axle in the winter....lol...physics class isn't for everyone..

 

[archerm3]

I've got 3 sets of wheel weights already on my tractor, I prefer iron to CaCL, at least I can see the rust if it occurs that way. But I still disagree that adding rear ballast will reduce weight on the front axle. I have weight on my rear axle to offset the weight of the loader, but I run a higher risk of overloading my front. In no way can this added weight lower the amount of weight my front axle carries during loader operation that I can see. Not until you lift the load pretty high into the air does alot of weight shift to the rear axle...if my view of geometry isn't failing me, and at that point, it is the loader that is transfering weight to the rear, not the ballast box. Maybe someone can draw a picture that explains how it is possible. Does rear weight help? Absolutely, it does several things, it adds stability to keep the rear wheels down on the ground, and by doing that, it lets the rear wheels pull to move the tractor rather than asking the front axle in the case of a FWA. In my case I only have a 2wd tractor, so rear weight lets me move with a load.

but it does...any weight behind the rear axle centerline will do this...

BTW, those wheel weights are less effective than any weight suspended further behind the rear axle. Your missing the simple concept of leverage...if I had a long enough pole to weld onto the tractor frame, sticking out the rear, I could get the fully loaded bucket and front axle to lift off the ground by attaching a one pound weight.

 

[archerm3]

nwbearcat,

I often find it helpful when analyzing a system to think of things in the extreme. Imagine a small 2,000 lb. tractor with a FEL without anything in the bucket. We'll assume the weight is split 50/50 between the front and rear axles (1,000 lbs. carried on each axle).

Now fill the bucket with a dense material (ie concrete) to the point where the rear tires just being to come off the ground. Now the front axle is carrying all of the weight of the tractor (2,000 lbs.) plus the weight of the dense material in the bucket. This is easy to follow and makes sense, right?

Now take that same fully loaded tractor and add a ballast box to the 3-point hitch, spaced 5' behind the rear axle. Now add a huge (say 5-10,000 lb.) weight to the ballast box until the front axle of the tractor comes off of the ground. Now does the concept make sense? It's complicated because it is a 2-fulcrum system in which one or both fulcrum points can react part of the load.

Now as the weight in the ballast box is slowly reduced, pound by pound, the load carried by the front axle begins to increase from zero. At some point the manufacturer determines some amount of weight to be best for overall durability of the system, this is the idea of a counterweight.

Now I will say that tractor manufactures typically recommend some amount weight to be added to the rear of the tractor, but they don't specify how far behind the rear axle this weight should be. The distance the weight is from the rear axle has a huge effect on how beneficial this ballast actually is.

Also, you are correct that adding ballast can increase the stress induced into the tractor frame. The added loads (loader bucket and ballast) are both outside of the reaction points where the load is carried to the ground (front and rear axles). This creates a large bending load near the center of the tractor/frame.

Hope this helps,

Josh

excellent way to put it...much better than I did.

 

[gwdixon]

Been watching as this tread migrated to ballast. Interesting. Maybe another viewpoint is possible but Josh and archerm have the mathematical concept of examining an issue at the extreme and then moving back to the actual. Anyway...

Vector analysis solves the debate. Consider the rear axle a fulcrum and the rear ballast box the weight vector. At one foot to the rear of the axle a 400 pound ballast would exert 400 ft-lbs of downward force. The same box at 2 feet would exert 800 ft-lbs of force. Eventually, by adding weight, adding length from the fulcrum, or both the weight in front of the rear axle (engine, FEL, front axle) would be neutralized and the front axle would lift off of the ground.

On the other hand, sometimes the front needs weight like when plowing. My FEL has a QA so weights were set up on a frame to attach to the QA. There are five 60 lb. weights at 5 feet from the front axle. This gives as much downforce on the front axle as 1500 pounds of weight located at the usual place about a foot ahead of the front axle when mounted to the tractor's frame.

Hope this helps someone.

 

[nwbearcat]

As I think more and more about this...I'm thinking our perspectives are different and may be altering our view of the situation. I utilize full sized 75+ hp tractors, and as they sit, they already have enough rear weight to do most work required of them, moving 2K# hay bales, buckets of dirt, rock, etc. Alot of that has to do with the frame length and the existing weight of the rear end. The Physics are the same, but the loads you're encountering are much more extreme to the equipment used that what we're seeing. I see now that you're thinking about utilizing all of the smaller tractors that frankly don't have as much stuff in their shorts. So if you are at the point where you are spending a good deal of time balancing the weight of the loader on the front axle and lifting the rear off the ground, then yes, you can move at least part of the weight of the tractor back to the rear axle. However, I make it a habit not to lift the rear of our 4440 off the ground any more than needed...in fact, I'm not sure I've ever accomplished that... Even with a larger tractor is it possible to offset the weight to the rear, just not as big of a deal to me as we're not lifting the rear off the ground now.

The other part that I was trying to point out that, you're still carrying around a significant amount of weight on the front axle, unless you have your really long pole and 1# weight to offset that load.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ctor-ballasting-weight-distribution-free.html

Are my wheel weights less than optimal for offsetting loader work? Sure, but also need the weight for plowing, and other work, tough to haul a ballast box around when 3pt is needed for other work.

Do I haul sand bags around? Yep, Are they in the back of the bed? nope, unhandy to haul other stuff that way, I just toss in several more into the front of the bed of the 4wd and go, some of that weight is carried by the front axle then also, which isn't a bad thing there, I like to steer once in a while.

In other news, I did happen across this post from some time back...the scenario that I see missing is the calculation that includes loaded loader + counter weight that would show the % distribution and the total load on the axles.

 

[Iplayfarmer]

Tell this poor critter that adding weight can't make the front lighter...

 

[SPYDERLK]

Im sorry, i just had to respond to this post.....

Yes, go ahead and do YOUR exercise that you think works....if you havent even done it, you can't possibly understand that you have the physics of this problem wrong...

your hypothesis will be wrong....
[snip]
As a side note, an amused observer, me, observes the futility and fallacy of people who put sand bags in their vehicles over the rear axle instead of at the rearmost portion of the trunk, to improve weight on the rear axle in the winter....lol...physics class isn't for everyone..

The good value of the [clipped] part of your post to refute nwbearcat aside, you are missing something in your side note. ... The sand bag position is safer over the rear axle. It gives added drive traction weight w/o subtracting steering traction. - - Now, in the specific condition where youre just trying to make it up that hill, move the weight [temporarily] back to the rearmost point of the vehicle.
larry

 

[deepNdirt]

not sure if this one has been mentioned? But so far the most difficult thing I have found to try loading/moving is leaves, back in late fall last year with my leaf blower I blew up a large mountain of leafs and thought I could move them to my garden by way of FEL, however it was a loosing battle because I could never get a full load and by the time I got them to where I was taken them I would loose 20% of them, I then tried packing the bucket down to get more inside, even though this helped it would mean I had to get off the tractor each time and rake and pack the leaves to inside the bucked etc,etc, was simply too much work for such little accomplishment, so I then did as I have done many times before, .... rake them onto a large tarp and dragged it with the tractor, :thumbsup: so much for the convenience of having a FEL for this purpose

 

[Egon]

The sand bag position is safer over the rear axle. It gives added drive traction weight w/o subtracting steering traction

Ah- that sandbag should be midway between the back and front wheels. Polar moment of inertia!:laughing: