PTO Log Splitter Project

   / PTO Log Splitter Project #31  
^^

Why did you choose the 3000 rpm pump over, say, a Prince PTO pump? For it's two stages? The only disadvantage I see of using a PTO pump is that they seem to only produce around 2000 psi which would necessitate a 6 inch ram to get the same 27 tons.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project
  • Thread Starter
#32  
cp:

It is actually is rated to run at up to 4000rpm, but the main reason was its output, 28 gpm --and that it can handle hydraulic system pressures up to 3000psi.

If I run the system with reliefs set at 2750, I can generate about 54,000# (27 tons) ramforce and still get an average cycle time (depends on how much of the cycle is at over 750 psi) under 10sec.

I looked at the Prince PTO pumps but wasn't satisfied with either their output or operating pressure; also, the two stage pump seems much more efficient for a splitter operation where, with a big cylinder, most of the time you can operate at fairly low pressure and want high pump output but, when you hit a knot or twist, you want to be able to get very high ram force for a short distance and can afford to trade speed in order to do so.

To get high output even at high pressure, you would need a considerably higher hp power source; more than my PTO hp.

So I think that the advantages of using the two stage pump are significant. The only problem is that you then have to create a power transfer system that takes the rpm at your PTO (540, for most CUTs) and ramps it up to the 3500 or so at which you want to turn the pump. Not too difficult to do with an increasing gearbox and some pulleys.

Hope this helps.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project #33  
I must be some kind of nut to be so interested in your project. I don't even heat with wood.

FWIW, I cranked some deflection calculations on your 8x58 beam... depending on how high you mount the ram above the beam, the beam could bend as little as .070" at full tilt, with tensile stress in the under 20ksi range. (I was bored at work.)

When I build mine (which will probably be never as the rate I'm going) I think I might substitute a 12x31 beam...it has all the stiffness of the 8x58 in the direction that matters but would weigh (and hopefully sell for) quite a bit less. 186 lbs vs. 348, to be exact.

For those who are wondering, I-beams are specified by their height followed by a weight-per-lineal-foot. Thus an 8x58 means an 8" tall I-beam that weighs 58 lbs per foot of length.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project
  • Thread Starter
#34  
Interesting, CP. I am using an H Beam. Does that make a difference? I had the impression that H beams were stronger. I am assuming that the web is the same, but the flanges are wider (the flanges on mine are as wide across as the web is high). Would your calculations be the same for the H beam? Is my intuition correct that the H-beam should provide more resistence to side to side deflection? If there is a net site that can be used in making calculations, I would be most interested in it.

Looks like I'll get at least a full day in this weekend. Should have the rest of the gussets, and possibly the end plates in. BTW, were your calculations just for the beam or did they take into account the gussets and end plates?

BTW, I don't mean to impose with all these questions and if answers require any effort, please feel free to entirely ignore them. I'm reasonably confident that this design, which is significantly beefier than the 6x6 suggested in the plans that I am adapting from, should be strong enough for the application, as well as much stronger than what is available for purchase even at prices considerably higher than what the materials are costing me.

Incidentally, I can understand the fascination of this kind of project. I don't depend on wood for heat, although we are increasingly supplementing the natural gas system in our home with wood heat, particularly in the coldest periods.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project #35  
MadDog I can't resist giving you a couple of other thoughts, probably you've got 'em in mind. 1 is to weld or thread a couple of sharpened points onto the ram face so a log doesn't slip off sideways if the grain is gnarly. I use them sometimes to set a piece in at a slight diagonal to get past a knot or crotch.
2 I'd try when figuring your lift table geometry to end up with the table flush to the beam, close to the beam, and tilted up slightly. Mine's tipped up too much, so you can't leave unsplit pieces on it easily - they slide down into the way of the work piece . I'd say 1" in 1' is about right. If I recall the way your splitter is laid out the lift table is on your side of the beam. Mine's on the back side from me, so reaching over is a pain when the log is heavy. You'll want a good catch table on the far side so you don't have to lift the partial split pieces again.
3 I recommend making the lift table top of some grating that lets dirt + bark fall through but isn't smooth - you want some resistance to sliding when you're turning or positioning a log on the table.
4 My beam is 8x8 H beam and actually does flex a little with a difficult split. No harm done, I'd say. I don't know the weight of the steel. My cylinder is 4x36.
Guess that's about 8 cents worth.
Jim
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project #36  
I am not a structural engineer so there may be such a thing as an "H" beam but I am not acquainted with it. However, I suspect your "H" beam is masquerading as none other than my "I" beam. Rotate your "H" 90 degrees until one of the flanges is on top and the other on the bottom. Voila--the "H" becomes an "I".

A 8x58 I beam has flange width of 8.22 inches versus 8.75 height with flange thickness of .81" and web thickness of .51". I am pretty sure this is the beam you have. The key characteristic that determines stress and deflection is something called "moment of inertia". For the 8x58, in the strongest direction, it is 227. In the perpendicular direction, it is only 75, so it makes a three-fold difference in strength by choosing how you load the beam. In other words, using it as an H would be 1/3rd as strong as using it as an I. Having said that, it still may be PLENTY strong as you plan to use it and there may be advantages to doing it that way.

I did NOT take into account the end plates--I am not that smart. I don't think they'd make much difference anyway because their function is really just something to get the load into the beam.

It is hard to find sites or even examples in books that match exactly what you're doing. Essentially, we are looking at the stresses and deformations that occur in the throat section of a "C" clamp. The beam (the "throat" of the C-clamp) has to hold the 54k tensile stress plus the bending stress caused by the fact that the 54k is not acting through the center of the beam.

Tensile stress from the 54k is just that force divided by the cross sectional area of the beam (16.953 sq inches) So, tensile stress from the 54k load is:

54,000lb/(16.953) = 3185 psi and it acts uniformly on both flanges and the web.

Max stress from bending moment is calculated using the formula

S = (M*c)/I

where
M= bending moment (54,000 x 7" (I assumed a value of 7"))
c = max distance from neutral axis (8.75/2)
I = moment of inertia in loaded axis (227)

For the 8x58,
S = (54000*7*4.375)/227
S = 7317 psi

Total stress in the tension side of the beam adds these two stresses together:

S = 3185 + 7317 = 10,502 psi

The stress in the opposite side of the beam will be less because the bending stress is compressive and the tensile stress subtracts from it:

S = 7317-3185 =4132 psi in compression

Wait a minute---that doesn't agree with what I posted earlier. I either have a faulty memory or made a mistake. I like these values better--they are even less, which means the deflection will be less, too.

Deflection is a slightly tougher cat to skin. Even harder to explain without the benefit of a chalkboard. So without further adieu, I will just throw out the following equation as the one that I used in this case. It is NOT the right equation, but the best I could find:

v = (M * x^2)/(2xExI)

where
v= deflection in inches
x= distance along beam where deflection is measured
M= moment in inch-pounds
E= modulus of elasticity for steel (30,000,000 psi)
I= moment of inertia for this beam (227 inches^4)

Plugging in the numbers gives a max deflection of .035 for middle of the 6 ft long I beam. If you want the values for using the beam sideways, then just substitute 75 for 227 in the equations.

Bear in mind these deflection numbers are probably garbage because I'm not using the exact equation. If you search on "beam equations" or similar you will probably find all kinds of sites (usually schools) that have them. You will need to know the values of E, I, and dimensions I've given above for whatever beam you're interested in. They're called 'W' I-beams--those values ought to be out there, too.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project #37  
A "H" beam has flat parallel sides. A I beam has parallel sides that get thicker closer to the center rib.
Attached is a H Beam.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project #39  
It may be just a nomenclature thing. The tables list them as "S" and "W" I-beams; "S" meaning standard and "W" meaning wide flange. I have never seen a table list an "H" beam.
 
   / PTO Log Splitter Project
  • Thread Starter
#40  
Thanks, guys, for much helpful information.

jimmy: I am planning on having the lift at about the level of the beam, although the pivot hinge will be a couple of inches out from the outside of the upper flange in order to avoid interference with the ram's base plate,push plate and slide assembly which extends about an inch beyond the outer edge of the upper flange and then down to its underside.

I'm planning to use expanded steel for the bed of the lift, for precisely your reasons.

I hadn't thought of the sharpened points; that's a great idea.

cp: the beam you used is the same as mine and is what I have been calling an "H" beam although I think the precise terminology is "wide flange" beam. At any rate, same specs as you listed. Doesn't sound like I have much to worry about on flex, albeit I will be using it with the ram mounted on top of upper flange, which I gather is the weaker direction.

I finished the dolly this morning before spending the rest of the day working at in-laws condo. Tomorrow, I'll get the two remaining gussets in and possibly the end plates.

Thanks again for all of the very helpful information and suggestions.
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

LOT LOCATIONS (A51222)
LOT LOCATIONS (A51222)
2020 KUBOTA RTV X1100C UTV (A51406)
2020 KUBOTA RTV...
1999 FONTAINE 48X102 FLATBED TRAILER (A51222)
1999 FONTAINE...
2013 Ford E-250 Cargo Van (A50323)
2013 Ford E-250...
2000 John Deere 1860, 30ft Wide, Gandy Box, Wing Fold, 7.5in Spacing (A52128)
2000 John Deere...
2021 Western Star 4700SF Tri Axle Dump (A47384)
2021 Western Star...
 
Top