Chipper What happens if I hook up too much HP to a Woodland Mills Chipper?

[jonsstihl]

again it is those extremes making it easier to visualise.

 

[Tractor Time with Tim]

Sounds like opportunity for a test video.........for TTWT......

have you checked in here lately Tim....????...

Hey YLee! I search for TTWT periodically.


To answer the question, it really isn’t a good idea to use too much tractor on a PTO implement. The shaft itself has a HP rating. Of course, a shear bolt or slip clutch can help, but most slip clutches are set too tight to really help, and when they slip repeatedly, folks will tighten them. Same thing for a shear bolt. The temptation is high to use a harder bolt to allow more power to the machine.

Having said all of that, if the user is careful, I’m sure he can get by without issue.

Tim

 

[justman777]

An end to the argument. Instead of using a chipper, just go with the more economical route of burning whatever it is you were chipping. Problem solved! :laughing:

Seriously, I'd love to have a chipper, but my finance committee says I have too many toys already. I'm like "Whaaaaaaaaattttt????"

 

[Sawyer Rob]

Nothing vague about the post. When the shear pins rating is exceeded it breaks. It really doesn稚 matter what the HP is.

I never used the word "vague"...

SR

 

[Egon]

I never used the word "vague"...

SR

So, General !

 

[workinonit]

Nothing.

 

[PEJ5]

Before I sold it (for what I paid for it), I ran one of those Chinese chipper on the back of my M9000 Kubota which is 82 PTO horses and the chipper was rated for 30 PTO input maximum. I just added a Weasler slip clutch to the chipper input and set it to slip at a moderate input. 3 years and never an issue. I did have to add extension legs to the chipper body as it sat too low for the M9's output stub as it was built for a compact tractor.

Steelkilt. This is one thing to consider...the angle of the PTO shaft joints. My snowblower manual contains a chart showing PTO shaft life relative to angle. You may need to modify the chipper base to sit higher. Love my WC-68.

 

[4570Man]

I often use the 10,000 pounds of ballast weight on the 3 point when I am trying to demonstrate to an "unbeliever" that putting weight on the 3pt. REALLY DOES unload and take weight off of the front axle. This concept will still be debated by some people that cannot wrap their head around the concept that a tractor is a teeter totter with two fulcrum points. The front axle and the rear axle.

So put 10,000 pounds of weight behind the rear axle and tell me the front axle won't lift skyward. But if you just put a 1000 pounds out back, many will erroneously debate that it doesn't remove even a pound of pressure on the front axle. They cannot see it, but the 10,000 pound example will usually get them to thinking. Another absurd example is to put a 100 foot boom pole on the 3 point and then put 100 pounds of weight at the end of the 100 foot boom pole. Think about that one for a bit. Yes, using absurdity to explain the logical, can work to enlighten.

That’s a lopsided argument. The backhoe on my M59 is the heaviest reasonable ballast you’d come across and heavier than most. If I remove the backhoe and attempt to lift a load the hydraulics easily just flips the tractor. The entire weight is riding on the front axle but it’s a lot less than with the backhoe. If I put the backhoe back on it definitely lightens the front axle load by a lot. Enough so that it’s prone to sliding sideways without additional front load. The hydraulics aren’t strong enough to straight up lift the back end up like that but it’s close. Now you’ve got a 10,000 pound machine plus the 4000 pound load riding on the front axle where it was probably only half that much in the previous test. Point being that for 3 point ballast to actually “save” the front axle it would take a ridiculous amount of it. Now if you claimed it helped the front axle by increasing the traction on the back axle you’d have a good point. With the backhoe on the M59 I can usually work on 2wd. With the backhoe off it’s useless in 2wd. My L3800 can still tip itself forward with loaded tires and a 500 pound BB. So that’s not enough ballast to help the axel. The point that’s a often overlooked in these ballast arguments is yes the ballast removes weight from the front axle while measured with light load on the FEL but any amount of ballast short of a ridiculous amount is going to significantly increase the front axel loading potential.

 

[k0ua]

If you would put about 1100 lbs on the 3 pt then you would not be able to tilt the tractor forward no matter how much weight you put in the bucket. Your 500 lbs and loaded tires is not near enough for that sized tractor. Even if you put 100, 000 lbs (probably need gold or platinum here) in the bucket your tractor would not tip forward because the relief valve would open and you would never get the bucket off of the ground. Same thing as hooking the lip of your bucket under a rock down low, your tractor cannot raise the rears because you have proper ballast on the 3pt and the relief valve opens. You have proved to yourself that your rear ballast is inadequate to the task of keeping the rear tires on the ground. If your tractor raised the rears in any situation of front end loading, then by definition your don't have enough rear ballast.

 

[DieselBound]

And THE answer IS: "Here, hold my beer!" :laughing:

If one puts 20 amps to an electrical circuit protected by a 10 amp fuse vs putting 40 amps to an electrical circuit protected by a 10 amp fuse, and?