Grapple designs?

[davesisk]

Now that I've gotten (or think I've gotten) the selector valve, fittings, hoses, cylinder, etc., figured out and either ordered or already in my hot little hands, my next order of figurin' is to determine exactly what type of grapple would work best for my needs. My biggest need is to be able to pick up tree branches and small trunks easily and move them. I'm continuing to cut down small to mid-size trees at my house, piling up the branches, and will rent a chipper/shredder for a weekend when I get a big enough stack to turn into mulch.

I guess three basic designs come to mind:

1) The grapple bucket type like this: PT's Grapple Bucket. Essentially, I would just build a frame with large tines to attach to my current light material bucket. My biggest concerns here are a) when would it get in the way? and b) would this work best? If you remember the mechanically-actuated grapple I slapped together over xmas, the problem I had (in addition to my design error... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif) was that trying to pick up a stack of brush didn't work well because the bucket pushed it away rather than getting under it. Of course, with a jaw that's independently hydraulicly operated rather than being tied to the curl/uncurl motion of the bucket, I can point the bucket straight down and kind of pick it up from the top (assuming it's not too tall of a stack, which sometimes it will be). I'd still expect the bucket to push the pile away when trying to pick up stuff from the side, though.

2) Root grapple: something that looks like this, but smaller and lighter... Root grapple on Ebay Right off, I'm thinking this would be pretty hard to imitate, and would end up being pretty heavy (I don't want a grapple that weighs 500 lbs because then I can only pickup 100 lbs of brush!) Supposedly, this type allows you to more easily "get under" a pile o' brush. Has anyone used something similar, and can you compare it to a grapple bucket in terms of effectiveness?

3) Pallet forks w/ top jaw. I'll try to give you a mental image...imagine the PT pallet fork attachment (or something very similar) with two "forks" on a pivot point about 2 feet up on the back. Something like this 3PH carry-all but with two additional arms up top that close down just between the two fixed horizontal arms. This would be simple to build and would probably be lighter-weight. I'm just wondering how effective it would be at "getting under" a pile of brush?

If anyone has ideas, opinions, or experiences, please do share them!

Thx!
Dave

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

Someday, if it ever stops raining, Hans will have an opportunity to try picking up mouthsful from the top. I don't know if he has any cleanup project among the current overload of tasks.
LINK

 

[Schultz]

I saw a farmer clearing an area that has now become a subdivision. To move the brush & trees into big piles he used a hook on pallet fork attachment on the FEL of his backhoe tractor. It seemed effective, he sure made some big brush & tree piles

In a previous discussion, I thought what MossRoad named a grapple overbite (tines would go below the bucket a few inches when fully closed) might be of benefit. The overbite tines could be used as rakers or ground rippers when backing up. Possibly allowing an easier dig with the bucket going forward.

 

[davesisk]

He he...Hans mammoth grapple certainly seems to support the simpler-to-build design #3 might be the right choice, eh?

Dave

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

Dave:
It may not be obvious from the pictures, but the tongs on Hans's grapple are trailer springs, which are next to free in junk yards, and cheap even new. They have bushings which make easy pivots for movable teeth for grapple bucket or forks. Pre-drilled brackets and bolts are available at Northern or any trailer place. Might save a bit of head scratching and fabrication even if Hans's grapple isn't for you.

 

[davesisk]

Trailer springs, eh? What an interesting idea....hmmm....

Thx Charlie!

Man, the more I think about this, the more I think I like it. The trailer springs will flex without bending (to a point)...that was why I made the original mechanical grapple attachment with steel rods...in the hopes that it would flex a little. Of course, I ended up bending the crap out of it due to my design error...I'm liking the trailer springs idea...I wonder if the steel alloy is weldable?

Dave

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

<font color="red"> I wonder if the steel alloy is weldable?
</font>

It welds fine, and if you heat the welded area with a torch and quench it fast, most of the spring temper is saved -- at least that's what my metalworking brother tells me.

 

[Sedgewood]

davesisk: <font color="red">3) Pallet forks w/ top jaw </font>

I've been thinking along this line myself. I moved a lot of brush last year with the forks by sliding the forks under the pile as far as it would go (slides under very nicely btw, in answer to another post), picking up the pile, and binding it fast with a tie down strap. I could this way move all the forks could lift, in fact the problem became navigation - the bundle completely blocked my line of sight. So the thiought was that somewhat smaller piles clamped with a third, upside down fork/thumb would save the strapping time. Also longer forks would help, mine are 42 inch. My guess is it doesn't take a lot of squeeze - just enough to keep the pile from shaking itself to pieces - possibly the 75 lbs or so weight of a fork itself would be enough to do it. If so that would save the trouble of fabricating a cylinder to clamp it - just flip it up to load, flip it down to clamp. One thing that happened with carrying brush piles is that small stuff tended to fall out of the bottom of the pile. Perhaps 3 or 4 tines would be better than two.

Yesterday I stuck a thumb on the minihoe to test to see how useful that would be for picking up rocks, logs, stumps, etc. I made it up quickly from stuff I had around which turned out to be too flimsy (not unexpectedly) but it worked beautifully. It will easily grip anything the arms can lift and run away with it. In fact on rotting stuff you have to be careful not to crush it - the grip is very strong. Great for reaching in between trees or behind that favorite bush to pluck out a rock or something that is not accessable to a bucket. This ones a keeper - not to find materials for a much stronger version. I have it rigged so the bucket curls right around it and I think I can refine the angle so it can stay on while digging with the bucket. Charlie says his actually helps him dig. I see a joystick button in my future too.

Also I have gathered up most of what I need, except the cylinder etc, to add a PT style grapple to my small bucket using "C" shaped cultivator tines which just happen to be the right size to curl nicely from the top of the bucket down to the teeth. See attachment. Right now I'm undecided whether to carry on with this project or to do something with the forks instead.

Sedgewood

 

[Sedgewood]

<font color="red"> This ones a keeper - not to find materials for a much stronger version. </font>

It turned out I had some square tubing kicking around that was just right for the next version. Tuesday I got it finished and gave it a pretty good workout. I started by ripping up out few little thornapples then grabbed a small white rock that wouldn't budge. So I dug around and worried it a bit and in 5 minutes I had that darned iceberg outa there. Impressed I was!

Sedgewood

 

[Sedgewood]

Then out with a few more thornapples, which I found came out easier if I grabbed on high up and wiggled and pulled and tugged.