Will a JD310 run an irrigation pump?

[rScotty]

This is for a fire protection sprinklers I'm thinking of building here.

I'm wondering if there is a way to use our JD310 loader/backhoe to run an irrigation pump. I'd like to pull water from an creek up about 20 feet lift and then push 150 GPM at 90psi.

Lots of PTO pumps will do that or more. I wonder if there is a PTO kit for the JD310S series?

Our 310 has an optional remote single flow hydraulics for a concrete breaker or auger - both on the QA for the backhoe bucket. Lots of hydraulic power there, but both intended uses are intermittant.
Does anyone know if it is reasonable to that would run irrigation all day?

Thanks,
rScotty

 

[hosspuller]

no

 

[rScotty]

no

That's sad if true. Not having a PTO seems an oversight & I was hoping there was a way around that. The 310SG has lots of HP even at a fast idle.

Our old 32 hp John Deere spent years irrigating 40 acres of corn. It ran 24/7 during the summer - just needed oil, water, and fuel.

I could use it for this project and might yet. What is stopping me is the 530 is a gasser, and I'd rather go diesel for this fire protection setup.

rScotty

 

[4570Man]

I’d guess a rear pto is a no. What about a hookup on the front of the engine?

 

[hosspuller]

Fire protection needs to be reliable. Ever notice that electric fire pumps don't have overload protection? When it runs, the pump has to run even to destruction if it saves the building.

Trying to run a fire pump from aux hydraulic circuit isn't a good use.

A make shift fire pump power is a poor design.

 

[rScotty]

Ok. I talked with the local commercial equipment dealer today and he says he'd never heard of a 310 being used that way... but agrees that since our 310 has the standard auxiliary hydrualics, why not dangle a submergible hydraulically-driven trash pump from the backhoe boom? See if it works? He was concerned about long term, but mentioned that people ran those aux hydraulics all day long on various implements just by keeping an eye on the hyd. temperature.

Driving at half the 310's rated hydraulic flow would do what we want. Basically we are looking for 200 GPM @ 100 psi. That's pretty easy work for the 310, so the machine's hydraulic cooling should take care of it.

Now... who has info on hydraulic-driven trash pumps? I may move this question up to the hydraulics Forum.
rScotty

 

[WinterDeere]

I'm wondering if there is a way to use our JD310 loader/backhoe to run an irrigation pump. I'd like to pull water from an creek up about 20 feet lift and then push 150 GPM at 90psi.

Ignoring efficiency / heating, 20 feet = 8.66 psi, so you need to build roughly 100 psi pump differential to have 90 psi at the nozzle. Using HP = (GPM * PSI) / 1714, this is only 8.63 hp output from pump. I'm not sure what your pump efficiency is, but if you have a specific pump in mind, we can simply convert pressure to dynamic head (0.433 psi per foot), and work off that.

 

[rScotty]

Ignoring efficiency / heating, 20 feet = 8.66 psi, so you need to build roughly 100 psi pump differential to have 90 psi at the nozzle. Using HP = (GPM * PSI) / 1714, this is only 8.63 hp output from pump. I'm not sure what your pump efficiency is, but if you have a specific pump in mind, we can simply convert pressure to dynamic head (0.433 psi per foot), and work off that.

So it seems like it should work. Those numbers are easy work for the 310. Submerging the pump should help with heat. I'm trying to see if the local JD dealer has enough interest to push some equipment our way that we can use for testing.
The dealer does nothing small, so I've upped the flow to 100 psi at 200 GPM. Nice round numbers.

An unknown is just how the 310 is set up for continuous aux hyd duty.

Something interesting I just found out is that the 310 aux hyd has an adjustment via a knob on the valve stack. Output can be varied from 9 to 25 GPM in six steps. No, I don't know how it is varied. Probably diversion rather than choking.
So far I also do not have figures for aux psi, engine RPM, heat, or fuel consumption
But that's OK. Nobody has offered a pump, either.... but I bet they will.
rScotty

 

[WinterDeere]

It may work. The 8.63 hp number is accurate for required pump output, I just don't know the efficiency, which is what would be needed to calculate pump input power requirement.

However, you may have misinterpreted my comment about heat. Heat is the byproduct of efficiency, so if you know one you know the other. Putting the pump under water would indeed keep it cooler, but shouldn't have any primary effect on heat output or efficiency. In other words, water has a better ability than air to wick the heat away and keep temperature down, but it does not change the amount of heat produced = efficiency.

 

[rScotty]

It may work. The 8.63 hp number is accurate for required pump output, I just don't know the efficiency, which is what would be needed to calculate pump input power requirement.

However, you may have misinterpreted my comment about heat. Heat is the byproduct of efficiency, so if you know one you know the other. Putting the pump under water would indeed keep it cooler, but shouldn't have any primary effect on heat output or efficiency. In other words, water has a better ability than air to wick the heat away and keep temperature down, but it does not change the amount of heat produced = efficiency.

Efficiency is a chimera.
I think the concern here is with how much the pump doesn't heat the creek rather than how much it does.
rScotty