2015 Tire Fluid Question

[arrow]

True a ballast box does put added weight on the tractor(axles) But so does a backhoe.Most major brand tractors offer backhoes. Ballasting the tires puts extra strain on the whole drive system! Think about it. How much torque force is required to turn a 50lb tire verses a 200lb tire. How about inertia? Think of the brake force required to stop a ballasted tire! Remember, a rotating object gains Mass. :thumbsup:

First off, the amount of torque required to move a stationary object is associated with it's power supply. A tractor engine puts out a certain amount of torque and that's it. Whether the tractor weighs 1000 or 5000 ills, the torque quotient is established by it's engine and gear train. The engine s designed to put out so much torque and a tractor is designed to do work. Engineers of such things balance these ratios to stay in proper realms of longevity, durability and work output capabilities.

There is a standoff to costs involved with wear vs. efficiency. A heavier machine created by loaded tires will provide more force, have less slippage and use less fuel and thus do more work, Yes, more weight requires more energy to get going but it also creates more efficiency for most tractor work related endeavors..

 

[Jabonee]

Well said arrow. You highlighted my points. Those margins are smaller that one would think. :thumbsup:

 

[Glrret]

I have a related question; Do loaded tires really add that much stability to the tractor? What I'm referring to is lowering the center of gravity and this lessening the chance of a rollover on marginal terrain or lifting with the FEL.

 

[MMagis]

Depends on the tire size and your definition of “that much”. But yes, it does lower the center of gravity.

 

[MMagis]

Edit: Sorry for the double posts. Not sure why it's happening, and now it won't even let me delete the duplicates.

 

[oldpilgrim]

Do loaded tires really add that much stability to the tractor?

yes...

 

[oldpilgrim]

Do loaded tires really add that much stability to the tractor?

yes...

 

[s219]

The fluid is only standing on the ground when the tractor is stopped. As the wheel moves forward the fluid moves backwards. Theres physics involved. Newtons laws of motion. On inicial movement of the tire the fluid moves aft almost 90 degrees. Then varies as speed changes. :thumbsup:

Good gracious, you completely massacred the physics there. Where the fluid contacts the tire it moves with the tire due to friction (boundary layer). So the fluid is strongly influenced to rotate with the tire. I doubt it moves uniformly, but all around the edges it is moving with the tire. That means the fluid in between is tending to do the same.

 

[Jabonee]

Good gracious, you completely massacred the physics there. Where the fluid contacts the tire it moves with the tire due to friction (boundary layer).Correct!:thumbsup: So the fluid is strongly influenced to rotate with the tire.Yes,aft and varies with tire RPM. I doubt it moves uniformly,Yes it does.Its something to see.( I have a great video of it from my days at JD Horicon test facility when we were crunching the 1070 brake and clutch issues.:confused2: but all around the edges it is moving with the tire. That means the fluid in between is tending to do the same.

All I'm trying to say is,physics aside, All the tractors I've see over the last 30 years you could see a difference in the final drive components between ballasted and unballasted tires.Arrow posted it best. the engineers design the drive train to a certain tolerance band in ware and durability. Ballasting tires in my experience moves the trend from the middle.

 

[MMagis]

If that’s the case (though I don’t agree and have never heard of anyone having an issue in my last 30 years), then it doesn’t make sense to suggest a ballast box in place of loading the tires. 3pt ballast is going to be much harder on the tractor components.

 

[MMagis]

If that's the case (though I don't agree and have never heard of anyone having an issue in my last 30 years), then it doesn't make sense to suggest a ballast box in place of loading the tires. 3pt ballast is going to be much harder on the tractor components.

 

[Jabonee]

If that痴 the case (though I don稚 agree and have never heard of anyone having an issue in my last 30 years), then it doesn稚 make sense to suggest a ballast box in place of loading the tires. 3pt ballast is going to be much harder on the tractor components.

I'm sorry your having a hard time understanding what I'm saying. A ballast box or any 3pt attachment is considered by the engineers when designing the tractor. Its not about the weight of the tractor. Its the torque force that has to be increased by the drive train to start ballasted tires rotating. I wish I could share the JD 1070 testing data with all of you but I'm bound by a non disclosure contract. Its kind of like the airplane on the tred mill. The mill is going backwards @ 50 MPH the plane has to be moving forward at 50MPH to take off. The plane throttles up to full power. Does the plane move forward and take off?:confused3:

 

[MMagis]

Its not about the weight of the tractor. Its the torque force that has to be increased by the drive train to start ballasted tires rotating.

So you're saying the torque force doesn't have to be increased with 3pt ballast?
No.

 

[MMagis]

Its not about the weight of the tractor. Its the torque force that has to be increased by the drive train to start ballasted tires rotating.

So you're saying the torque force doesn't have to be increased with 3pt ballast?
No.

 

[arrow]

All I'm trying to say is,physics aside, All the tractors I've see over the last 30 years you could see a difference in the final drive components between ballasted and unballasted tires.Arrow posted it best. the engineers design the drive train to a certain tolerance band in ware and durability. Ballasting tires in my experience moves the trend from the middle.

I think what one does with a tractor has more to do with degradation forces than loaded tire weight. "Middle" is always going to be on a moving scale as a result. Short of a tractor just coming off the assembly line and just standing there, I do not think "middle" can ever remain constant once it starts working. But tractors are designed for this thus making "middle" variable (or at least with wider spectrum) in my opinion depending on how the tractor is outfitted with certain implements.

We've done things to tractors that require "adaptations" to it's weighting. The mere fact of putting a fel on a tractor is an example and probably does more to assault the integrity of a tractor than anything else. Yet some find the fel indispensable and a tractor worthless without one.

It's a balance point. I'd much rather get 10 years out of a tractor than twenty if I had to guard it from doing the work I needed it to do. It is my belief that loaded tires are the most innocuous weighting to be done to a tractor. Why? Because loaded tires are considered "unsprung weight" and as a result, have less degradation impact than greater weight transfers such as 3 pt ballasting provides.

 

[Jabonee]

So you're saying the torque force doesn't have to be increased with 3pt ballast?
No.

Yes, but by design its still in the middle or close to the ware band. Ballasted tire move it toward the ware side of the tolerance.

 

[Jabonee]

I think what one does with a tractor has more to do with degradation forces than loaded tire weight. "Middle" is always going to be on a moving scale as a result. Short of a tractor just coming off the assembly line and just standing there, I do not think "middle" can ever remain constant once it starts working. But tractors are designed for this thus making "middle" variable (or at least with wider spectrum) in my opinion depending on how the tractor is outfitted with certain implements.

We've done things to tractors that require "adaptations" to it's weighting. The mere fact of putting a fel on a tractor is an example and probably does more to assault the integrity of a tractor than anything else. Yet some find the fel indispensable and a tractor worthless without one.

It's a balance point. I'd much rather get 10 years out of a tractor than twenty if I had to guard it from doing the work I needed it to do. It is my belief that loaded tires are the most innocuous weighting to be done to a tractor. Why? Because loaded tires are considered "unsprung weight" and as a result, have less degradation impact than greater weight transfers such as 3 pt ballasting provides.

Well I just found out one of the engineers I worked with at JD is a regular poster on TBN. He's been following this thread. He was reminding me of my disclosure contract. He has a message for Arrow. "Take it out of the class room now and think of it in dynamic applied terms"

 

[ch1ch2]

I understand his comment about the torque on the tires.
With a race care, the weight of the tires and wheels vs the weight elsewhere. It takes more torque to spin the tires. 1lb of wt on the tires/wheels can be equal to 40 to 50 lbs on the chassis.
But, I think in this case the theory is being misapplied.

 

[Deere Dude]

Paraphrased from my JD 3720 owners manual;

Add fluid and tires, throw about 1000# of ballast on the back and while you are at it put a bunch of weights on the rear wheels. I did it all except the wheel weights. I hardly believe JD would build something that would crap out from sticking to the conservative recommendations.

The two different but identical tractors in the orchard I would guess had different drivers. If driven responsibly nothing should happen but I am sure I could tear up a tractor prematurely even with manufacturers suggested added weight.

I have a tractor that needed wheel extensions and weight to make easy and comfortable driving without a pucker factor.

 

[oldpilgrim]

It is my belief that loaded tires are the most innocuous weighting to be done to a tractor. Why? Because loaded tires are considered "unsprung weight" and as a result, have less degradation impact than greater weight transfers such as 3 pt ballasting provides.

well said.