Making My Blade Power Angle

[LD1]

When I added power angle to my 6' Meyers plow on my Kubota, I used a 2X8 cylinder. I can sweep the angle from one side to the other with any amount of snow piled up in front, and my blade is about 24 inches high.

You won't need anything more than that. Bigger is more expensive and harder to fit in the space you have.

Huge difference between a snowplow and a rear blade.

If the rear blade is going to see dirt, even 1% of the time as the op suggests, a 2" cylinder is NOT going to be enough.

And a snowplow is NOT rigid like a blade. It has trip srpings to absorb/cushion things like curbs, or catching sod at the edge of the drive.

 

[wvpolekat]

WVPOLECAT, Where in Buckhannon do you live? I live out on old 33 goiong toward weston. Near the stockyards. Just noticed your from Buckhannon.

I live out Brushy Fork, past Stony Run.

My father's blade has 3 adjustment holes each way. I won't use the ones that angle the blade the most because they put it so close to the tires. Have you checked clearance, 55 degrees is a lot of angle.

Why so much difference between the two swing angles?

I can spin my blade 360 degrees without hitting the tires, so clearance isn't an issue.

The biggest reason for the difference is where the cylinder mounts to the blade. When you turn the blade around, it ends up further from the cylinder mount. Hard to put into words.

Not sure I entirly understand why you need the swivel eye cylinders.

The blade rotates on the 3ph frame on a 6" or so tube. The blade and "locking plate" where the pin goes and the cylinder would mount move up and down about 1/2" between when it is resting on the ground and hanging in the air. It has been like this since new and doesn't effect normal operation, but if I cylinder were mounted, it would pull it down that 1/2" when the blade was lifted, which I believe would make the cylinder unhappy and put a lot of stress on the mounts.

At the end of the day, I see me doing very little dirt work with it, and if I do, I can still drop the pin in and lock out the hydraulics. I am doing this to make snow clearing easier, and I just can't justify basically doubling the cost of the project for a worst case scenario. My road and drive are both well above the surrounding ground, so the likelyhood of my catching on something is fairly small.

A cushion valve would add $65 to the project and protect the cylinder, mounts and hoses. I would worry as much if not more about the mounts breaking more than bursting a hose. If it kicks in, it's time to drop the pin in. Pretty easy solution and keeps me from having to purchase and find space for a 2x larger cylinder and associated mounts.

 

[cmhyland]

While a Rear Blade may build up large forces on a cylinder ... I've hit rocks plowing at high speed... the kind of speed you'd never see moving dirt with a rear blade and had no problems but, I've looked at Landprides 96 inch power angle rear blade and it uses a 3.5
x1.5 cylinder... So I stand corrected...

 

[LD1]

I live out Brushy Fork, past Stony Run.



I can spin my blade 360 degrees without hitting the tires, so clearance isn't an issue.

The biggest reason for the difference is where the cylinder mounts to the blade. When you turn the blade around, it ends up further from the cylinder mount. Hard to put into words.



The blade rotates on the 3ph frame on a 6" or so tube. The blade and "locking plate" where the pin goes and the cylinder would mount move up and down about 1/2" between when it is resting on the ground and hanging in the air. It has been like this since new and doesn't effect normal operation, but if I cylinder were mounted, it would pull it down that 1/2" when the blade was lifted, which I believe would make the cylinder unhappy and put a lot of stress on the mounts.

At the end of the day, I see me doing very little dirt work with it, and if I do, I can still drop the pin in and lock out the hydraulics. I am doing this to make snow clearing easier, and I just can't justify basically doubling the cost of the project for a worst case scenario. My road and drive are both well above the surrounding ground, so the likelyhood of my catching on something is fairly small.

A cushion valve would add $65 to the project and protect the cylinder, mounts and hoses. I would worry as much if not more about the mounts breaking more than bursting a hose. If it kicks in, it's time to drop the pin in. Pretty easy solution and keeps me from having to purchase and find space for a 2x larger cylinder and associated mounts.

Hey, its your project and your money. But a $96 cylinder and a $65 cushion valve is $160. So you are only saving ~$16 by doing that vs just going with the 3" cylinder and being done with it. ANd it will be a less complicated to plumb in IMO.

But how much are you really going to save if you find out the hard way that the 1.5" cylinder is not big enough????

 

[wvpolekat]

But how much are you really going to save if you find out the hard way that the 1.5" cylinder is not big enough????

Good point. Just trying to rationalize a way to do this without putting a big honkin *** cylinder on it.

I am going to have to do some figuring on the mounts as well. My original plan was to just weld a 1" pin vertically and drop the cylinder over it. But, I suspect that won't cut it with the forces we are talking.

Let me get my notepad out and do some doodling. The mount pins will obviously have to be vertical, so I will have to come up with an arrangement where I can get to both top and bottom and have enough support to not rip it off of there.

I think I can come up with something. May have to find a local machine shop to bore the holes so they line up and such. No drill press here.

Would reinforcement be required around the holes if I went with say 3/8 plate for the bracket? That would mean a total of 7/8" of material in contact with the pin.

 

[LD1]

Good point. Just trying to rationalize a way to do this without putting a big honkin *** cylinder on it.

I am going to have to do some figuring on the mounts as well. My original plan was to just weld a 1" pin vertically and drop the cylinder over it. But, I suspect that won't cut it with the forces we are talking.

Let me get my notepad out and do some doodling. The mount pins will obviously have to be vertical, so I will have to come up with an arrangement where I can get to both top and bottom and have enough support to not rip it off of there.

I think I can come up with something. May have to find a local machine shop to bore the holes so they line up and such. No drill press here.

Would reinforcement be required around the holes if I went with say 3/8 plate for the bracket? That would mean a total of 7/8" of material in contact with the pin.

3/8" plate on both ends should be pleanty even for a 3" cylinder. And a 3" cylinder really isnt that big. I would personally suggest looking at the way chilly807 did his in the like I posted.

 

[wvpolekat]

3/8" plate on both ends should be pleanty even for a 3" cylinder. And a 3" cylinder really isnt that big. I would personally suggest looking at the way chilly807 did his in the like I posted.

I will need to take a picture of mine, but it is made different and wont require the post. I can attach directly to the indexing plate.

 

[Baby Grand]

Good point. Just trying to rationalize a way to do this without putting a big honkin *** cylinder on it.

QUOTE]

I have been dithering over this idea myself. Very frustrating.

First thought I had: if you look at the existing adjustment (lock pin & holes) you should be able to back into the "designed-to" load by calculating the shear capacity of either the pin or the plate with the holes in it.

Second thought: use whatever size cylinder you need to move the blade and use a separate solenoid or hydraulically actuated lock pin to secure it for loaded use. This makes the cylinder size independent of operating loads. Not an ideal solution, but might take some of the risk (and cost) out of spec-ing the cylinder. It might be possible to rig it so the lock pin releases anytime the cylinder actuates, simplifying operation and reducing the chance of overloading the cylinder or pinned joint.

-Jim

 

[nspec]

While I don't doubt there is quite a bit of force on the hydraulic cylinder, I think we are all discounting the fact that a lot of the force gets absorbed by the kingpin before it actually gets to the cylinder. Look at the length and size of the loader and backhoe cylinders on some of the small tractors - they're tiny!

I think the hydraulic lock pin is an excellent idea, but I would try to make a mechanical locking pin with a linkage and a rod that you could pull from the tractor seat. That would be really slick. You could leave it unlocked most of the time and lock it up for heavy work.

We used to have a large New Holland corn chopper that had a linkage you would release to 'open up' the hitch from the road/transport to the field position. I think the baler was like this too. The linkage was spring loaded to keep it locked, and you pulled a piece of baling twine that was routed up the hitch (through support eyes) parallel to the hydraulic hoses and the pto shafting. We would be able to reach out the back window of the tractor - full size tractor - like 150 hp, so it'll work on the small ones just fine.

 

[LD1]

While I don't doubt there is quite a bit of force on the hydraulic cylinder, I think we are all discounting the fact that a lot of the force gets absorbed by the kingpin before it actually gets to the cylinder. Look at the length and size of the loader and backhoe cylinders on some of the small tractors - they're tiny!

Their is going to be almost NO force absorbed by the kingpin. If it were not for the cylinder, their would be NOTHING stopping the blade from spinning if one side has more resistance than the other.

Loader and backhoe cylinders are a different geometry. With a backhoe, their is nothing acting back on the cylinder (Tractor is not pulling aginst the cylinder). And with a loader, their are two cylinders in each circuit, not one. And in the case of the lift cylinders, if you are digging with the FEL, their are two forces. One pushing back on the tractor trying to collapse the cylinders, and a downward force. That is why the front end of the tractor will raise into the air.

In the curl circuit, if you have the bucket dumped and are backdragging, this is similar to the blade situation. Cutting edge in direct contact with the ground, tractor applying force, and the only thing keeping the bucket from curling back up is the cylinders. I am probabally not the only member on here who has blown a curl hose doing this exact same thing. And thats with TWO cylinders @ 1.77" EACH.

It really is not that hard to figure out. Unless the OP has a VERY SMALL tractor like a BX kubota or similar SCUT, a 1.5" or 2" cylinder simply isnt going to work. But hey, if you want to find out the hard way, go for it. But I am one that can learn from someone elses mistake and not repete their failure. Chilly807 in the link I gave already tried this with a 2" cylinder. He overextended the cylinder and bent the rod. And he only has a L3400 like myself. Which is on the smaller/lighter side of a CUT.