# eliminating I-beam twist.....



## isaaccarlson (Feb 25, 2010)

how do you guys do it. I just want to see some different ways to do it.


----------



## Boogieman142 (Feb 25, 2010)

use a big enough beam and box in the ends.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 25, 2010)

*its a 4x10 beam....would boxing really help?*

Just to be clear, I am talking about the whole beam twisting from one end to the other. Not just the top tilting.


----------



## jbighump (Feb 25, 2010)

boxing the ends definitly would not hurt,if i recall the strongest beams are square in height and width such as 6x6 or 8x8.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 25, 2010)

*I don't have a bigger beam....this was all I had.*

I just need to stiffen it up a little.


----------



## Boogieman142 (Feb 25, 2010)

box in as much as you can and add plating to the center web if possible


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 25, 2010)

*Add plating vertically or horizontally or just thicken it up???*

I just don't want to break my only splitter that I have been working so hard to build.


----------



## Boogieman142 (Feb 25, 2010)

the center webbing, if you put it on the top plate it may affect your slider


----------



## kevin j (Feb 25, 2010)

You mean torsion, twisting along the beam long axis by pushing the top of the fixed wedge left or right and 'winding up ' the beam?


Adding vertical gussets will stiffeh the flanges but not affect torsion at all.
Adding plating to the sides of the center web won't do much either, for the weight of steel added. 

Adding metal doesn’t do much to strengthen when it is an open section in torsion (rotating along the long axis of the beam, by the top of wedge trying to twist the beam) 
You need to get to a closed box section to stiffen it. Adding plating from outer edge of top flange to outer edge of bottom flange, great. That boxes it into a closed section. Moving that flat in a couple inches allows the slider to grab the flanges, but still make it a closed box section. That should go full length not just by the wedge. Part length will help, as it carries the stresses out into the flanges more, but full length would be best. Else it twists in the remaining open section.

To illustrate the difference between open and closed sections, try this experiment: 
-Take a piece or printer paper. Hold the 8-1/2 inch ends, one in each hand. Twist back and forth, along the long direction to simulate torsion of the 11 inch long ‘beam’ model. Easy to twist.
-Roll the paper into a tube, maybe 2-1/2 inches in diameter and twist it again. No change, still easy to twist.
-Roll it into a one inch diameter tube. Twist again. Still easy to twist in torsion.

This sort of illustrates an open section is weak in torsion. Really doesn’t matter how a given amount of metal is shaped. Using thicker paper will help some, like your added flat to the web, but only a small amount. 

-Now, put three short pieces of scotch tape on the seam along the outside of the coiled up one inch tube. The tube is made into a closed section with a few ‘paper tack welds’ that resist shearing. Twist again. Much stiffer in deflection and stronger.
-Try the 2-1/2 inch diameter version, with tape ‘welds’. It will be much stiffer than the open section 2.5 inch, and stiffer than the closed section 1 inch diameter. 

So, for something in torsion, getting a closed section of the largest size possible gives the stiffest construction. Not necessarily strongest, but the most rigid. The difference between stiffness and strength is another topic.

k


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 26, 2010)

*thank you for that wonderful explanation....*

it confirms what I was thinking. I need to box the entire thing. Kinda hard to do considering my slider shoes almost touch the web......I could at least do the ends and middle......


----------



## howellhandmade (Feb 26, 2010)

isaaccarlson said:


> it confirms what I was thinking. I need to box the entire thing. Kinda hard to do considering my slider shoes almost touch the web......I could at least do the ends and middle......



Sure. Reducing the length of the twisty bit will reduce torsion. Can you box the whole thing and add a wider (maybe even thicker) top plate for your sliders to grab? Probably awkward if you've already made the sliding assembly . . .

Jack


----------



## TBrown (Feb 26, 2010)

I was worried that that beam was too tall. What can be done is to add two piecs of 1/4" x 10" x length of beam to each side of the beam. Have the bottom edge of each piece out at the edge of the bottom flange and the top in at the top of the web just below the slider. This will make the beam look like a triangle with a top flange from the end. Then box under the wedge and under the back cylinder mount. This should stiffen if up alot. You'll be able to step up to a 5 inch cylinder if it is done right.


----------



## mga (Feb 26, 2010)

wouldn't an "I" beam be more apt to twisting than an "H" beam?

since "H" beams, or also known as "W" wide flange are used more for column structures, they're designed to accept a slight twist, whereas "I" beams are used mostly in a horizontal position and are designed to resist downward pressure.

the "I" beam generally has a narrower top and bottom, but has a thick web.

the "H" beam has wide flats which will resist twisting.

the material compositions are designed for each use.

so, and i could be wrong, i'm trying to go by memory, the best beam to use for a log splitter would be the "H" beam because the steel composition will allow some twisting without damage to the beam.


----------



## HitchC&L (Feb 26, 2010)

mga said:


> wouldn't an "I" beam be more apt to twisting than an "H" beam?



Yes, the moment of inertia of the beam is directly tied into the width and height of the beam (height is the real determining factor, with width being only a small factor)

The "H" beam you are describing is known as a "W" section, or wide flange, because obviously the width of the flange

The "I" beam that he is describing is very stong placed vertically, but the strength is very low side to side, hence why he is getting the twisting.

If the beam was wider, it would be much stronger along its weak axis (side to side) and it would resist the twisting much more.

If you can still go in and add more steel to your beam, the most effective thing you can do is add wider steel to the flanges. Weld a plate along the top and bottom, something like 8" wide, that will strengthen it up quite a bit.

Also boxing the ends will help a bit, but if you dont widen the beam, you are just starting with a weaker beam.

"I" beams are rarely used in much anymore, everything is a "W" section. Columns, beams, girders, etc


----------



## mga (Feb 26, 2010)

you must be a millwright?


----------



## Butch(OH) (Feb 26, 2010)

Be easier to make the suggest the correct fix if i was to see the thing working. Seen splitters with beams so light that there is no fix but here is a short list. Placing the forces as close to the beam as you can helps a lot. Lower the cylinder mountings as far as you can but make sure no part of the cylinder touches the beam under stress except the pins, this is what bends rods. Shorten the wedge height. Boxing in the sides also helps but may not be easy depending on your gib design. You can add external, meaning outside the beam stiffeners. My splitter has a piece of bar steel 1" thick by 8" welded (on edge) to the underside that took a lot of the bow out of it. Lowering the operating pressure works but is last resort. If it flexes much, it will break, that is a rule you cannot escape. Sometimes a person just has to bite the bullet and start over with the correct parts.


----------



## Butch(OH) (Feb 26, 2010)

mga said:


> you must be a millwright?



We call'em Millwrongs around here, LOL


----------



## mga (Feb 26, 2010)

another point of physics to consider is the height of your ram/push plate on the beam. the higher it is, the more bow flex it's going to exert on the beam. 


a low ram/push plate reduces it.


----------



## kevin j (Feb 26, 2010)

We need some pics and definitions. If the issue is bending, adding steel to the flanges helps a lot. Increases the 'I & S' factors and reduces stress and deflection.

If it is sidways bending, widers flanges (W instead of I) stiffen it in bending in the lateral direction. Again, larger I & S factors with wider beams.

But if it is truly torsion, then adding steel to the flanges or web won't help much. Yes, some improvement, but very little in terms of the steel and weight added. It needs to be boxed and turned into a closed section.
Torsional stress and rigidity are related to the 'J' factor in the steel books.

Try the rolled paper demo and you will see dramatic demonstration.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 26, 2010)

*so it would look something like this from the end?*

View attachment 127004


----------



## PLAYINWOOD (Feb 26, 2010)

Why wouldn't you just weld 1/8 plate down both sides if your "I" beam,full width.Stitch weld not complete beads.

The bolt heads I work with call it fish plating.

This takes all the torsional twist out of an I beam.


I'm just a mill wrong though


----------



## cmsmoke (Feb 26, 2010)

That method will help the torsoinal and bending issues. If all you have is a 4X10, running the angled plates the full length and the vertical plates behind the slides is about as much as you can do. Cap the ends as well. This is still not gauranteed to hold up, because without knowing the web and flange thicknesses of the beam or the weight per foot, length of the beam, thickness of the plates, center of the cylinder to the beam measurement and amount of tonnage your splitter will make, any kind of an answer is only a guess. You are on the right track with your design to do everything you can to make what you have work.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 26, 2010)

*I was thinking maybe something like this to save metal...*

The red is 1/4" plate and the blue represents welding. The diagonals will attach to the web and the outer edge of the flange.
View attachment 127030


----------



## cmsmoke (Feb 26, 2010)

Do the other side opposite to help eliminate stress at th open ends of the "vees". A few placed flange to flange at the cylinder will help to shorten the bending moment. Solid plates would be better, but the way you are triangulating everything is very good also.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 26, 2010)

*I was planning on doing just that but did not put them in the pic.*

(solid plates would be around $140) The back of the beam will be plated on the end and possibly boxed. I will likely not have enough 1/4" to do it all. The forces seen on some of the braces will be small so I might just use some 1 1/2" thin wall square tubing I have laying around. I will see how far the old beam can get me and go from there.....I will be cutting the web apart from the flanges tomorrow and will cut that up to use for flange-to-flange braces. Will post pics.


----------



## TBrown (Feb 27, 2010)

*steel would be less than $140*

two pieces of steel 1/4" x 10" x 8' would weigh 136 pounds. I know where you should be able to get some for around 40 cents a pound. I think it would be better to just solid plate the sides and then box the ends in also.




isaaccarlson said:


> (solid plates would be around $140) The back of the beam will be plated on the end and possibly boxed. I will likely not have enough 1/4" to do it all. The forces seen on some of the braces will be small so I might just use some 1 1/2" thin wall square tubing I have laying around. I will see how far the old beam can get me and go from there.....I will be cutting the web apart from the flanges tomorrow and will cut that up to use for flange-to-flange braces. Will post pics.


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 27, 2010)

*I just split some KNOTTY wood....*

I beefed it up some this morning with some steel scraps another friend had that were EXACTLY the right size and already cut. I plated the rear and boxed the front and put two pieces of angle in the center and there is almost NO twist. It is solid. Rides down the road better too! I got a vid of it splitting a VERY KNOTTY HARD popple round. The vid is uploading now.....just hold on to your panties.....


----------



## DeAvilaTree (Feb 27, 2010)

how about running a piece of 3/8" angle iron down the center of the web on both sides, making a weld every 2" top and bottom, under your guides of your slider


----------



## ms310 (Feb 27, 2010)

cut the small beam off get a bigger beam and redo


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 27, 2010)

*The big vid is almost done uploading...*

here is a vid of the slow idle....the rattle is the muffler baffle. I don't think it will idle this slow anymore though....the muffler has been opened up and the governor has been modified....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6J1FOR9g_g
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/k6J1FOR9g_g&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/k6J1FOR9g_g&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 27, 2010)

*Here is the vid of the splitter doing its job.*

Sorry for the huge size....we are only able to record in HD. This was very hard popple. Many of you might not think popple can be hard, but this is. I can cut elm, oak, maple, and popple in half sideways so it does not lack power. It also helps to have a blade vs. a wedge. Wait till the end and you can see how many knots were cut in half and how curly the wood was. PAY ATTENTION TO THE WHEEL....WEIRD!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-zBZQLKJeI
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P-zBZQLKJeI&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P-zBZQLKJeI&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


----------



## isaaccarlson (Feb 27, 2010)

*The piece that I split was only half the round...*

The other half was already split and on the pile. The tire starts undulating and wriggling. kinda freaky.... I am very happy with this splitter. I am going to try some of the big maple next.


----------



## e.higgins (Dec 17, 2011)

isaaccarlson said:


> how do you guys do it. I just want to see some different ways to do it.



Rectangular steel tubing is ideal for log splitter beams.

One manufacturer employs rectangular tubing View attachment 211876
in its log splitters.
The tubing is 2"x6", the wall thickness is not apparent. Calculating the moment of inertia for 0.25" wall thickness, the beam structure could support 25 tons center load with a deflection of only 0.01 inch.

One interesting design feature is the beam structure for the splitting bed is the length is only that required for the log length plus the wedge and pusher lengths.
The hydraulic cylinder is flange mounted which subtracts its length from the splitting bed's beam dimension which lessens the necessity for a larger beam to resist bending forces.

Another advantage is that a hydraulic fluid reservoir could be incorporated into the beam (or beam in a single piece of tubing design).


----------



## Only2cylinders (Jan 12, 2012)

*Stiffing the I beam*

Hey guys,
I am new to this so please take this with a grain of salt. I see discussion about increasing torsional stiffness of the I beam. 
If a guy was to split (cut) a cylinder (pipe) in half, along the length, weld along the beam, I would think the torsional stiffness would be increased. 
Selecting (finding) the proper diameter tube may not affect the pusher guides.
Or maybe use two c channels?
Sorry for the crude drawings, in a hurry to burn some rods
Thanks
Only2cylinders

View attachment 216849


----------

