My FEL is bleeding down

   / My FEL is bleeding down #71  
What do you think is in the rod side of the cyl after the base end fluid has leaked past the valve spools and lowered the loader to the ground.

Would the cyl even retract without a load on it.

Could it be pressure pushing the fluid past the valve spools?


Could it be nothing but air sucked in past the gland seal.

Could it be fluid sucked past the valve spool.

Could it be a combination of both?

If you have pressure on the base side and suction on the rod side, could fluid get by worn seals?

The devil made me do it.
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #72  
What do you think is in the rod side of the cyl after the base end fluid has leaked past the valve spools and lowered the loader to the ground.Could be air or oil or both. base end valve spool is leaking allowing fluid to escape the base end, the rod side has to fill with something. IF the rod side valve spool is bad, it can suck in oil. If piston seals are bad, it will suck oil from the base end. (but since there is less room than the base end, the extra oil from the base end still has to go past the valve, otherwise it still wouldnt move). Or if the rod end spool is good and seals are good, it can suck air from the gland seal and mix with the oil that is already on that side of the piston, if there is any

Would the cyl even retract without a load on it. If by no load you just mean a bare cylinder (like a logsplitter just sitting there) then no it likely wouldnt move. But if by no load you simply mean no load in the loader (but still the load of the frame and empty bucket) then yes it can move

Could it be pressure pushing the fluid past the valve spools? Probably. It is unlikely that there would be much if any flow through a tiny clearance if there isnt at least some pressure. Just an empty loader frame and bucket in a static condition is ~500PSI on the lines.


Could it be nothing but air sucked in past the gland seal.Could be. See my first response

Could it be fluid sucked past the valve spool.See first response

Could it be a combination of both?See first response

If you have pressure on the base side and suction on the rod side, could fluid get by worn seals?Sure could. But see my first response. There is less room on the rod side. You cannot put a quart of fluid into a pint space without the excess going somewhere. That somewhere being a leaking spool or external leak. To keep it simple, lets say the volume difference is 2:1. If the cylinder collapses enough to expel 2 oz of fluid from the base end, it only created a 1oz void on the rod side. If the spool base end spool is leaking, 1 oz can return to tank there, and 1 oz past the piston seals. If the rod end spool is leaking, all 2 oz will leak past the piston but 1oz will exit out the rod port and past the rod spool. If neither spool is leaking, and no leaks outside the cylinder, then you cannot put 2oz of oil in a 1oz space, you cannot even put 2 drops of oil in a 1 drop space. Thus no leak down if the spools are good.

The devil made me do it.

5 letters
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #73  
What is 5 letters?

I think we can all agree that all loader leak down is caused by both cyl seals and spool leakage.

It would be rare to find a leak free cyl or spool in any hyd system.

I believe I have always said that both were a factor in loader leak down.

My original question was about very few people replacing their valves because of loader creep, and the least expensive repair would be the cyl seals.

If you can push fluid past the seals, then the seals should be replaced.

As far as replacing the valve, I would say to replace the valve when you can not tolerate the leak down, and need the loaders ability to lift the stated load.

I would also say that if the pump and the loader hyd system can maintain the relief pressure, then it is doing it's job.

Most people want what they pay for.

Today we learn, and tomorrow, we learn more.
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #74  
JJ,
Without trying to complicate things with more rhetoric, Would you press tell me if you agree or disagree with this:

1) Take a standard double acting cylinder with piston seals completely removed, put it at 1/2 stroke (both sides full of oil)

2) Cap both ports

3) Put a compression load on it.

The cylinder will not drift.

Do you agree, or disagree?
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #75  
Arlen, I think it might have been me that you converted awhile back, possibly in the following thread, at post #154: http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/attachments/320824-hydraulic-top-link-drawbacks-16.html I was grateful to you and dkrug back then for the education that led to my Eureka moment. :thumbsup:

What I had been missing then, and what I think several members aren't fully focusing on now in this thread despite LD1, Arlen and others saying it in several posts, is the fact that (1) we are assuming that the hydraulic cylinder being discussed is completely filled with oil (which is virtually incompressible), on both sides of the piston, and is sealed from outside leaks, and (2) whatever portion of the rod that is inside the sealed cylinder at any given time (during retraction, extension or not moving at all) must displace an equal volume of hydraulic fluid. When the rod is forced into a double-acting cylinder during retraction, an exact equivalent volume of oil has to be able to exit the cylinder, either through a port into the rest of the closed system (e.g. via a leaky spool valve to the reservoir), or out of the system altogether through a leaky rod gland seal or leaky port fitting or quick disconnect. If the oil can't escape the cylinder in some way, the rod can absolutely go no farther into the cylinder. By the same token, under the same conditions, i.e., no leaks other than past the piston seals, the rod cannot be pulled farther out of the cylinder (as when the weight of a suspended implement or attachment is trying to pull the cylinder into extension). It is not enough that the oil can move past the piston itself from one end of the cylinder to the other via a leaky or non-existent piston seal. Where the weight of the implement or attachment (like the OP's FEL) is pulling on the rod for long periods of time and there is a leak in the piston seals, extension can indeed occur without oil leaving the cylinder, but in the absence of a leaky spool valve, that is logically due to air leaking in past the gland seal to fill the void created within the cylinder as part of the rod gradually exits and pulls a vacuum. Of course, once air is inside the cylinder, it can be compressed, unlike oil.


The syringe example that a poster gave is a very different situation. The rod of the plunger ("piston") of a syringe does not have a gland seal, as the syringe is open to the air at the top. So if the piston seal leaks as it is compressed, the water or other fluid can easily flow around the piston to the top of the syringe. Only if we added a gland seal to the syringe, and then filled the syringe completely with fluid on both sides of the plunger (i.e., no air whatever, which is compressible) would we simulate what happens in a hydraulic cylinder with no external leaks. The example someone else gave of a ball bearing in a sealed, oil-filled tube being able to roll back and forth is even more inapposite. There, there is no rod attached to the ball bearing "piston". So there is no structural part of the device trying to move into or out of the closed cylinder that could displace any of the oil.

The posts in this thread by J_J have caused me to expend the most brain power rethinking all of this because of J_J's encyclopedic knowledge of tractor hydraulics evidenced in many other threads I've seen that he's contributed to. Where I come out on this is that, while I don't doubt for a moment what he and others have observed in actual practice in terms of "cylinder leak down" and remediation, I have to believe that there is leakage somewhere else in those instances beyond simple movement of oil past the piston seals from one end of the cylinder to the other. To me the principle that LD1 and Arlen are presenting here is as irrefutable as the basic principle in physics that speed = distance/time. Well, yes, Einstein did show that even that isn't as simple as everyone once thought. :laughing:

I haven't said anything in this post that hasn't been said earlier in this thread, but maybe stating it this way will help somebody. It's the thought process that brought me into the believers' camp. :)

Thank You:thumbsup:
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #76  
I would also like to say, that we are not implying that there is never a need to replace cylinder seals. If cylinder seals are leaking, they need to be fixed. If the spool is leaking beyond an acceptable limit, it needs to be fixed.
What we are saying is that one needs to understand the physics of cylinder leakdown, in order to isolate the real problem effectively...and fix it.
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #77  
What is 5 letters?A post must have a minimum of 5 letters or you cannot post it. Typing within your quote in a different color like this doesnt count. Needs letters outside the quote tags.

I think we can all agree that all loader leak down is caused by both cyl seals and spool leakage.The spool leaking is a must. The seals arent. A leaking spool by itself will allow drift. Leaking seals WITHOUT a leaking spool will NOT allow drift. So no, I do not agree with "both", all both "can" be the cause

It would be rare to find a leak free cyl or spool in any hyd system.Agreed. The question the becomes what is an acceptable rate of leak

I believe I have always said that both were a factor in loader leak down.Without digging up all the old posts, I dont remember that. I know you are always quick to cite the seals though. And "both" are not always a factor. It can either be 1. The valve, OR 2. BOTH, but can NEVER be just the seals without an external leak

My original question was about very few people replacing their valves because of loader creep, and the least expensive repair would be the cyl seals. Just because it is cheaper dont make it the right one. It is very easy to test the seals and valve on the tractor, and isolate if one or both are a problem. And while seals may be cheap, it is a PITA and time consuming if there isnt anything wrong. A set of brakepads are cheaper than a wheelbearing. But if your pads are good and wheelbearing is shot, why change the pads?

If you can push fluid past the seals, then the seals should be replaced.Agreed. But loader leak down is not how you gauge oil pushing past the seals. Removing the rod hose and placing in a bucket and putting a load on the cylinder is how you test that

As far as replacing the valve, I would say to replace the valve when you can not tolerate the leak down, and need the loaders ability to lift the stated load. A valve that allows the loader to leak down a little in the neutral position will have little effect on "power" So, leakdown untolerable, yes replace the valve. IF the power is low (and pressure within spec), then its time to test the seals

I would also say that if the pump and the loader hyd system can maintain the relief pressure, then it is doing it's job. While in operation, yes. It only takes a small seepage past the spool for loader drift. So you may have drift that is too excessive, but still be quite able to maintain relief pressure (power). So that is not an accurate way to determine the condition of everything.

Most people want what they pay for.

Today we learn, and tomorrow, we learn more.

I have nothing else to say, but am typing here so I can post this reply
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #79  
I have nothing else to say, but am typing here so I can post this reply

OK, I think this discussion has run it's course. I will await JJ's reply to my question, and may respond to it. Otherwise, I think it's time to move on....The non believers are late to their "Flat Earth Society" meeting:drink:
 
   / My FEL is bleeding down #80  
I think we can all agree that all loader leak down is (often) caused by both cyl seals and spool leakage.

I believe I have always said that both were a factor in loader leak down.

My original question was about very few people replacing their valves because of loader creep, and the least expensive repair would be the cyl seals.

If you can push fluid past the seals, then the seals should be replaced.

The spool is 'locked' in neutral position and the pump will hardly keep either side of a cyl filled when there, as pressure in an open center system isn't directed to either side of the piston. I agree that cyl seal leakage will be thwarted by the well-expained 'locked cy'l condition, but ... spool leakage (drain to tank) only has to accomodate the difference in volume either side of the piston vs the cyls volume at either end. (accounting for rod displacement by flow or vacuum, depending, and measurable at the valve) I'm sure this is what one side of the issue is contending, not just the simplest black & white thing

A leaking valve can easily disguise a leaky piston seal, and thus the confusion (w/some valve leakage). We tend to live with a bit of spool leakage, esp on older and well-used equipment. Back to what J_J says about both cyls & spools leaking. A quick drop could be blamed on either or both. If in doubt I might fix seals first 'cuz they're cheaper than valves, esp if a fast drop went to as little as that common 1"/hr,( if only after doing so.) btw, my old '98 a current '13 NH's would/will drop 1/2" - 1" /hr whether running or not. My JD's joystick (no cab there, guys :rolleyes:) must not have been used much by the PO, if at all. (frame holes were capped) The big Allied's beefy 7" QA bucket might drop an inch/week when sitting. (Yah, that's a rare one .;))

Flame suit, "ON!"
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

(10) 2 PLUG VALVES (A52472)
(10) 2 PLUG VALVES...
UNUSED AGT SAII100 QUICK ATTACH PALLET FORKS (A51244)
UNUSED AGT SAII100...
UNUSED AGT SAII100 QUICK ATTACH PALLET FORKS (A51244)
UNUSED AGT SAII100...
4' DISC HARROW (A51243)
4' DISC HARROW...
LOT LOCATIONS (A52141)
LOT LOCATIONS (A52141)
NEW HOLLAND TS6.130 TRACTOR (A51406)
NEW HOLLAND...
 
Top