Toughest Material To Move With FEL

[Egon]

I had trouble with air.

Carrying around a bucket of cold air is easy but for hot air you gotta keep the bucket in the full dump position! Done right that hot air even loads itself!:thumbsup: he-he

If a fellow is real curious about the reaction of the front/rear tires with/without ballast and a full loader draw a diagram with distances and arbitrary weights at the loader, front tire and rear ballast points. Then figure out the reaction at the rear tire position with/without ballast. [ Pick an arbitrary pivot point in front of or behind the tractor and use the distances from that point for you calculations. The vertical loads must come out to zero in the end; ie the weights are negative and the tire loads are positive ]

Might answer a few questions the simple way rather than talking loud to express an opinion of dubious veracity!:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[nwbearcat]

Not much use responding to your post...do what ever you want.
But do some research on the web about ballasting your tractor.

I've got 3 sets of wheel weights already on my tractor, I prefer iron to CaCL, at least I can see the rust if it occurs that way. But I still disagree that adding rear ballast will reduce weight on the front axle. I have weight on my rear axle to offset the weight of the loader, but I run a higher risk of overloading my front. In no way can this added weight lower the amount of weight my front axle carries during loader operation that I can see. Not until you lift the load pretty high into the air does alot of weight shift to the rear axle...if my view of geometry isn't failing me, and at that point, it is the loader that is transfering weight to the rear, not the ballast box. Maybe someone can draw a picture that explains how it is possible. Does rear weight help? Absolutely, it does several things, it adds stability to keep the rear wheels down on the ground, and by doing that, it lets the rear wheels pull to move the tractor rather than asking the front axle in the case of a FWA. In my case I only have a 2wd tractor, so rear weight lets me move with a load.

 

[rd_macgregor]

Before I got a tooth bar, I found the hardest things to load/move with a plain FEL bucket were (1) mixed manure/hay/straw, (2) hard-packed rocky ground/dirt, (3) brush/branches/trimmings, (4) anything frozen.
For the last of these, I now not only have a tooth bar, but also a grapple rake.
BOB

 

[Josh61513]

nwbearcat,

I often find it helpful when analyzing a system to think of things in the extreme. Imagine a small 2,000 lb. tractor with a FEL without anything in the bucket. We'll assume the weight is split 50/50 between the front and rear axles (1,000 lbs. carried on each axle).

Now fill the bucket with a dense material (ie concrete) to the point where the rear tires just being to come off the ground. Now the front axle is carrying all of the weight of the tractor (2,000 lbs.) plus the weight of the dense material in the bucket. This is easy to follow and makes sense, right?

Now take that same fully loaded tractor and add a ballast box to the 3-point hitch, spaced 5' behind the rear axle. Now add a huge (say 5-10,000 lb.) weight to the ballast box until the front axle of the tractor comes off of the ground. Now does the concept make sense? It's complicated because it is a 2-fulcrum system in which one or both fulcrum points can react part of the load.

Now as the weight in the ballast box is slowly reduced, pound by pound, the load carried by the front axle begins to increase from zero. At some point the manufacturer determines some amount of weight to be best for overall durability of the system, this is the idea of a counterweight.

Now I will say that tractor manufactures typically recommend some amount weight to be added to the rear of the tractor, but they don't specify how far behind the rear axle this weight should be. The distance the weight is from the rear axle has a huge effect on how beneficial this ballast actually is.

Also, you are correct that adding ballast can increase the stress induced into the tractor frame. The added loads (loader bucket and ballast) are both outside of the reaction points where the load is carried to the ground (front and rear axles). This creates a large bending load near the center of the tractor/frame.

Hope this helps,

Josh

 

[TomWhite]

Water!:laughing:

or feathers. They just keep being blown out.

 

[Iplayfarmer]

The toughest material to move with a FEL, no matter what you're moving, is that last bucket full.

 

[Reg]

I've got 3 sets of wheel weights already on my tractor, I prefer iron to CaCL, at least I can see the rust if it occurs that way. But I still disagree that adding rear ballast will reduce weight on the front axle. I have weight on my rear axle to offset the weight of the loader, but I run a higher risk of overloading my front. In no way can this added weight lower the amount of weight my front axle carries during loader operation that I can see. Not until you lift the load pretty high into the air does alot of weight shift to the rear axle...if my view of geometry isn't failing me, and at that point, it is the loader that is transfering weight to the rear, not the ballast box. Maybe someone can draw a picture that explains how it is possible. Does rear weight help? Absolutely, it does several things, it adds stability to keep the rear wheels down on the ground, and by doing that, it lets the rear wheels pull to move the tractor rather than asking the front axle in the case of a FWA. In my case I only have a 2wd tractor, so rear weight lets me move with a load.

Yes, I can draw that for you.
Picture #1 is a teeter-totter with the front axle as the pivot point, the loaded bucket in front and whatever ballast you want at the back; fat guy in the seat, loaded tires, rototiller, whatever.
This is the "It won't do front wheel stands, but Oh dear, I think the front axle can't take it" diagram.

Picture #2 is very similar but the REAR axle is the pivot point and for this purpose the fat guy in the seat, wheel weights or filled tires don't count because they are in essence AT the pivot and have no turning moment about it.
HOWEVER anything behind that pivot DOES counter balance anything in front of it (balance beams are just LIKE that, by their very nature), so Yeah, it unloads the front axle.

q.e.d. or somesuch

 

[Reg]

It is my OPINION (FWIW) that front axles SHOULD be able to carry across reasonably rough ground whatever the loader can lift, without undue wear or premature failure.
QUOTE]

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

However, if you take a look at the weight rating of R1s, you will see it is very easy to overload those tires. I think that is where weight behind the rear axle really helps.

I was looking at a Kubota M7040 the other day. It had R1s on it and the front tire rating was 1800 lbs. That is 3600 pounds for both tires. That tractor is approximately 5k lbs. without the loader. I would guess the loader is close to 2k lbs. Not sure how much of that weight is on the front, but that does not leave much for the bucket.

I think we're about to dive off on yet another tangent.
SOMEwhere it has to be acknowledged that R1s and fully loaded FEL buckets are NOT a good mix.

I've been wrong before, but methinks R4s are more suited for loader work.
In fact as "industrial" tires I would guess that to be their purpose.
I think of R1s as "agricultural tires".
ymmv, etc.

Anyway, not wanting to argue about it, but if you have the chance to check out same/similar M7040 with R4s on it - I would be curious to know what their load rating is.
I will be suitably embarrassed if it is less than or equal to (-:

 

[Reg]

R1 and R4 sample load ratings;
These are the OEM sizes for the front of the Kukje/Branson 38, 42, 47 HP Cat 1 tractors.
FWIW, etc.

8-16 R1 "Ag" tires 6 ply, max inflation pressure 28 psi load rating 1360
ref; Titanｮ Tire catalog
12-16.5 R4 "Industrial" tires 6 ply (lightest listed) max inflation pressure 40 psi load rating 4220
ref; Titanｮ Tire catalog

So, a factor of a little over 3
I admit to being a little surprised - I wonder if those tractors can take 8,000 lbs on the front axle (-:

I do SEE the rationale for rear ballast if R1s are on the front and the loader is being used to it's max., but I think that a more reasonable approach would be to put R4s on if the tractor is to be used for medium/heavy loader work.
My rule would be ONLY light loads if R1s are on the front.
The loaders can lift about 2500, so with that ahead of the axle and a whole lot of other weight behind the front axle it would be very easy to overload the R1 tires.
Those tractors are 4,000 lbs, their loaders are 1300, add a max capacity load; If it just/almost gets it off the ground as the back tires start to lift - 7800 all balanced on the front axle, it could happen~
Oh, I forgot the fat guy on the seat - NOW you've got the full 8,000 with a (very) few hundred for margin (-:

 

[magicheater]

Before I got a tooth bar, I found the hardest things to load/move with a plain FEL bucket were (1) mixed manure/hay/straw, (2) hard-packed rocky ground/dirt, (3) brush/branches/trimmings, (4) anything frozen.
For the last of these, I now not only have a tooth bar, but also a grapple rake.
BOB

I just have my Loader Buddy! You forgot to mention rocks!