Snow wing

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> I think that the float chain would bother me, but I don't know how I would change it right off. </font>

Jerry,

Here is one way and what I probably would do in Steve's application.

I would get a couple Hydraulic rated tee's and put them on the cylinder connectioins, and hook a hydraulic rated ball valve up so it is connected between the two cylinder ports. Valves rated for such service are avaiable for under $20.

The normal hose hookup would remain the same, but the addition of the ball valve would give a float option when the valve was opened. When the ball valve was closed it would have no affect on the operation and the system would work just as it does now.

If desired, the ball valve could be located remoted from the cylinder, where it would be easy to reach from the tractor seat.

Not sure if Steve needs or wants cylinder float in place of the float chain, but it looks to me it could be done effectively and cheaply if desired. Not quite as nicely as having a float detent on the control valve, but just as functional I would suspect.

I have not done this myself yet, but I see no reason why it would not work.

Just a thought... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[JimR]

Indeed a very nice setup. That sure would open up a driveway pretty easily. I too would like to see a rear picture to see how you hooked it up.

 

[beenthere]

Great job. Over the years of plowing snow off the drive, and wanting to do the same as you have done, I envy you with this side wing and may get motivated to do similar. However, my recent plow is a 7' western, and it has more width for getting the snow back where I need it. At least it doesn't fall back under the rear wheel when I plow.

About the 'float', I recall running a wing plow during a big storm about 15 years ago, and it was after re-stringing the cable that controlled the wing. Turned out we couldn't get all the slack out of the cable (it was an emergency replacement and too big for the pulleys) and that slack caused some difficult control problems. Being able to hold the wing in position turned out to be important.
This wing was on a large OshKosh truck with a big V-plow on front and the wing. I could get the wing down into the snow drifts by pulling it down to a point where it would then 'dive' into the snow drift and cause great concern to the driver. He would say "you're going to tip us over doing that!". So I would try to hold the wing up so it couldn't dive, but it would then just float on the snow drifts, and not cut in. Seemed it was either floating or diving, because of the slack. The driver attributed it to the 'rooky' wing man, but the next day when the regular wing man was on board, they learned real fast what I was having to put up with. The correct cable with no slack was the answer.
You may not have that much free travel nor have that problem, but Henro's solution sounds like a good design to have too.
There is a commercial outfit that makes a sidewing for pickup-type plows. Suspect they operate similar to the way yours operates. Nice job. Thanks for posting.

 

[Steve_Miller]

It doesn't go up all that far, maybe 45 degrees, will try and post picture later.

Steve

 

[Steve_Miller]

Henro,

I thought of what you said a year or two ago, but from my past experience with something similar it wouldn't work. This is if we are talking about the same setup. If you tie the two ends of a cylinder together you don't get a floating motion because of the two different displacements, hence since hydraulic fluid will virtually not compress you will get hardly any movement with this setup. Please correct me if i'm wrong. (i have my share of dumb moments). Here is another shot with the wing up.

Steve

 

[Steve_Miller]

One more where it connects to 3PH. For anyone wondering I had no problems that I could find by connecting to the three point hitch arm. When I sold my old B7200 I checked the 3pH for wear and I didn't consider it excessive, considering it was 18 years old. Then again this only gets used a dozen or so times a year. This is the first year for the springs though, as I was throwing an old chair in the dumpster at work a couple of weeks ago I noticed the spring was quite heavy and the thought just popped into my mind, I can use this on my wing. Funny how the brain works sometimes, its usually not this productive though.

Steve

Steve

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> I thought of what you said a year or two ago, but from my past experience with something similar it wouldn't work. </font>

Steve,

One of my remotes has float, just like a loader does. When in the float position, what happens is that both ends of the cylinder are connected together, independent of the hydraulic suppy side.

A valve hooked between the cylinder ports would have the same effect. Nothing is compressed...what happens is that fluid is free to flow from one side of the cylinder to the other, and will do so according to which way the cylinder rod is being pushed/pulled.

So I am sure enough that things work this way that I would bet on it...and I am not a betting man... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

If float would be desirable when float is not available as part of the control valve, I have no doubt that such a setup would work.

Another way to look at it is like this. Take a cylinder, with no hoses connected to it. Pull the rod out and push it back in. Can this be done? Yes. Now hook a valve between the cylincer ports, with the valve open. Can the cylinder rod still be pushed in and out? Yes. Next fill the cylinder and hoses with hydraulic fluid. Can the cylinder rod still be pulled out and pushed in? Yes, but maybe with a little more effort than when only air was in there, but still yes.

So shunting a cylinder with a manual valve will provide float when the manual valve is opened...perhaps cumbersome...but it should work.

Now I have not done this myself (yet) so I can't report absolute certainty in what I say. Still, there is no doubt in this mind... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[keeney]

RE: <font color="green"> "One of my remotes has float, just like a loader does. When in the float position, what happens is that both ends of the cylinder are connected together, independent of the hydraulic suppy side.

A valve hooked between the cylinder ports would have the same effect. Nothing is compressed...what happens is that fluid is free to flow from one side of the cylinder to the other, and will do so according to which way the cylinder rod is being pushed/pulled.

So I am sure enough that things work this way that I would bet on it...and I am not a betting man... " </font>

The other poster is correct - simply connecting the two sides together will not provide float in the retraction direction where the side of the cylinder without the rod trys to expel more fluid than will fit into the side with the rod.

On a valve block with float, the two sides are also connected to the return line as well. Any oil from the larger side of the cylinder is freely pushed back to the resevoir.

So, about that $100 bet ... /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

- Rick

 

[Steve_Miller]

Henro,

<font color="orange"> One of my remotes has float, just like a loader does. When in the float position, what happens is that both ends of the cylinder are connected together, independent of the hydraulic suppy side.
</font>
I don't want to doubt you but, i think the float position ties the two ports to the return side of your hydraulic system doesn't it? This is where some people get air in their system if the float takes place for to long a period, but thats a conversation for some other time.
I just got back from taking the dogs for a walk and I thought of another way to create a float. Float this one (excuse the pun), if I put a screened breather plug in the extend end of the cylinder I would have a float when I select the extend function as the retract would be returned to tank and the extend would just suck in or exhaust air depending on the direction it was travelling and when I retract, it would have a pressure flow to lift the plow and the extend is vented. This way I would only need one hose as well. Did I explain it clear enough?

Steve

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue">The other poster is correct - simply connecting the two sides together will not provide float in the retraction direction where the side of the cylinder without the rod trys to expel more fluid than will fit into the side with the rod. </font>

This is very intersting and one of the reasons TBN is such a great place!!!

Yes, it looks like my logic is flawed! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Man I love this place! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I thought I remembered the diagram for my prince control valve as showing float as being a connection between the cylinder ports on the cylinder side of the valve, but now I see how that would probably not work. Thanks to you guys' help, or course!

Now what I hear you saying is that because the cylinder essentially has two different volumns (due to the cylinder rod being in one half, that there is a physical impossibility involved with getting float by connecting two cylinder ports together with a ball valve, right?

This seem reasonable at first glance. And on second glance seems impossible almost for certain.

The root reason being that there are two volumes involved, and both change with the movement of the cylinder rod. When the cylinder rod moves into the cylinder, the fluid flowing out of the end of the cylinder has to be greater than the amount of space that is made available on the rod end of the cylinder when the rod moves inward.

Unless there is somewhere for that excess fluid to go, the cylinder will lock up I would guess.

Now in the other direction, maybe there would be some movement due to the larger end pulling a vacuum?

I'm convinced. My suggestion won't work.

Now I have to think about what affect float on a top or tilt cylinder, that is being excersized a lot while in the float position, might be. Looks like there may be an opportunity to suck air into the cylinder if float returns both sides of a cylinder to tank...

Sure glad we did not put that money on the table! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Had we got to that point I would have paid and proved to myself again why I am not a betting man... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif