3 point log splitter for tractor.

[jkim13]

The picture you posted shows what I am talking about. That BH can never be lifted by the 3PH.

View attachment 995121

The top bar (Kubota calls that a "mast") goes to the immovable upper mounting point of the 3PH on the tractor. It is braced to the normally movable lower links of the tractor's 3PH. Because of the braces, the upper link cannot rotate and therefore the lower links can never be raised, no matter how much lifting capacity the tractor has.

Of course, the braces have to be set to suit the tractor. There are usually multiple holes in the mast and braces to allow adjustment to a particular machine. From the downward slope on the mast in your picture, I would guess that BH was set up for a tallish tractor. A smaller tractor, lower to the ground, would have the mast held at a more horizontal angle.

Of course, even if the angles were right for the particular tractor, if it was too heavy then the tractor would be trying to do a wheelie when you drove. But that's a function of the tractor's weight, not lifting capacity.

Anyway, it's all water under the bridge now. If it didn't work for you then it doesn't really matter why. I was just curious if your BH had some unusual mount that I'd never seen before.

Wow.... You are totally misunderstanding what I am talking about..
I am not talking about built-in backhoe like this.

There is no need to lift. Right?

But this 3 point hitch.

Let me ask you a simple question.
How do you transport a backhoe once attached to the 3 point hitch on the tractor?
It must be lifted by a 3 point hitch. correct?
That is what I am talking about.
Jkk

 

[sean donato]

Wow.... You are totally misunderstanding what I am talking about..
I am not talking about built-in backhoe like this.
View attachment 995143
There is no need to lift. Right?

But this 3 point hitch.
View attachment 995144
Let me ask you a simple question.
How do you transport a backhoe once attached to the 3 point hitch on the tractor?
It must be lifted by a 3 point hitch. correct?
That is what I am talking about.
Jkk

No it isn't lifted. It sits high enough off the ground to move where ever you want it to. The only thing you pick up or down to move the tractor is the out riggers.

 

[torch]

Let me ask you a simple question.
How do you transport a backhoe once attached to the 3 point hitch on the tractor?
It must be lifted by a 3 point hitch. correct?
That is what I am talking about.
Jkk

I have as 3ph mounted backhoe. I know the difference between a frame-mounted BH and a 3PH mounted BH. I transport it by stowing the boom, dipper and bucket, raising the stabilizers, raising the FEL bucket and driving away.

Yes, one of the features of a 3PH is the ability to lift and lower certain implements. I raise and lower my snowblower, I raise and lower my rototiller, I raise and lower my land plane. Etc.

But a 3PH can only lift -- it relies on weight (or ground engagement) to lower the implement. If the 3PH BH was left to float like that, deploying the outriggers would just lift the BH, not the tractor and the assembly would not be stable. By locking the 3PH lower (lifting) links to the top (stationary) link with braces, the whole tractor/BH assembly is locked together. Not quite as firmly as a frame mounted BH, perhaps, but much more firmly than just letting the BH float.

I have never seen a 3PH backhoe that was attached otherwise. I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I don't know of any. All the ones I have ever seen, including the one in the picture you posted and the one on the back of my tractor, are braced to be immobile.

Here is my 3PH backhoe. Note the diagonal braces locking the mast rigidly (I have only seen the additional cantilever brace below the lower arms on Kubota brand BHs):

Here is a closeup of the 3PH mounting of my BH (the big orange thing between the lower lift arms is a PTO pump).

 

[jkim13]

I have as 3ph mounted backhoe. I know the difference between a frame-mounted BH and a 3PH mounted BH. I transport it by stowing the boom, dipper and bucket, raising the stabilizers, raising the FEL bucket and driving away.

Yes, one of the features of a 3PH is the ability to lift and lower certain implements. I raise and lower my snowblower, I raise and lower my rototiller, I raise and lower my land plane. Etc.

But a 3PH can only lift -- it relies on weight (or ground engagement) to lower the implement. If the 3PH BH was left to float like that, deploying the outriggers would just lift the BH, not the tractor and the assembly would not be stable. By locking the 3PH lower (lifting) links to the top (stationary) link with braces, the whole tractor/BH assembly is locked together. Not quite as firmly as a frame mounted BH, perhaps, but much more firmly than just letting the BH float.

I have never seen a 3PH backhoe that was attached otherwise. I'm not saying they don't exist, just that I don't know of any. All the ones I have ever seen, including the one in the picture you posted and the one on the back of my tractor, are braced to be immobile.

Here is my 3PH backhoe. Note the diagonal braces locking the mast rigidly (I have only seen the additional cantilever brace below the lower arms on Kubota brand BHs):

"Yes, one of the features of a 3PH is the ability to lift and lower certain implements. I raise and lower my snowblower, I raise and lower my rototiller, I raise and lower my land plane. Etc."


We are getting a lot closer to understanding each other.

Your BH is much more modern like almost built-in but made easy to detach when needed from the tractor.
Back to 50-60 years ago, it wasn't available like yours

My old backhoe was strictly a 3 point backhoe(wish I had the pictures for it) like other attachments you meant.

All other functionality like lowering the stabilizers and digging the ground are coming from the hydraulic control valves once connected to the tractor hydraulic ports.
Again, my tractor 3 point hitch wasn't available to raise(lift) the backhoe easily due to it being too heavy.
Jkk

 

[fields_mj]

Actually I operated the splitter for the first time with my tractor and the running time is about 1 hour.
I really don't know exactly how much fuel consumption between the stand alone splitter and this 3 point.
But feeling like it is the same or less consumption.
IMO
Jkk

I'd estimate that worse case, the two are about equal. Beyond that it probably depends on how many gpm your tractor's pump puts out which varies a fair amount from one brand/model to another.

I have a MTD splitter with a 6.5hp Briggs. I can run it about 2 hours on a tank of fuel, but not sure how big the tank is. Seems like I go through about 5 gal of gas/season which means that I'm splitting about 4 cords of mostly hickory. I run it at idle a lot, and only run the throttle up when needed. It keeps up with me just fine

My 29hp Ford 1710 (diesel) will bush hog for about 8 hrs on 5 gal of fuel. Back the throttle down to a little over idle, and it would probably run for more than 24 hrs. I only have about 1.5 acres, so aside from bush hogging my food plots, it seems like 5 gal of fuel will last me an entire year of moving logs, tilling garden, land scaping, plowing snow (1/4 mile of road plus 8 drive ways on the RARE occasion that we actually get snow).

 

[ericm979]

If you're running the three point splitter off the tractor's hydraulics, you will need to run the tractor engine at full speed in order to get full flow. However the hydraulic pump will not be using the tractor engine's full power so the governor will not be giving it all the fuel needed for full power. It's still more than running the engine at idle due to internal friction and pumping losses.

Personally I'd rather maintain another engine than run a slower three point splitter off my tractor.

 

[Piotr Pakuła]

A 50 km tractor and its pump are enough for an ordinary distributor. But when we have a more powerful tractor, it would be good to use an external gear pump on the PTO shaft

 

[torch]

The OP did say he had a second pump that was originally installed to supply a backhoe. The flow rate may not be too bad.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

If you're running the three point splitter off the tractor's hydraulics, you will need to run the tractor engine at full speed in order to get full flow. However the hydraulic pump will not be using the tractor engine's full power so the governor will not be giving it all the fuel needed for full power. It's still more than running the engine at idle due to internal friction and pumping losses.

Personally I'd rather maintain another engine than run a slower three point splitter off my tractor.

This isn't true, most if not all modern tractors reach MAX hydraulic flow at way less than full/max rpm.

SR

 

[Sawyer Rob]

We love our 3 point splitter!

It splits plenty fast with the diesel purring at 1200 rpm's, and it just sits there and slooowly sips fuel!

SR

 

[torch]

This isn't true, most if not all modern tractors reach MAX hydraulic flow at way less than full/max rpm.

SR

Max pressure, yes. Flow is rpm dependent if the lines are sized appropriately. Small positive displacement hydraulic pumps are generally rated in cubic centimeters per revolution, so more revolutions per minute = more cc per minute.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

Max pressure, yes. Flow is rpm dependent if the lines are sized appropriately. Small positive displacement hydraulic pumps are generally rated in cubic centimeters per revolution, so more revolutions per minute = more cc per minute.

Of all the tractors I own, you can't notice any more flow/speed at the cylinder long before you get to max RPM, so I won't argue that there isn't more, but I will argue that what little extra flow there is, it isn't needed or noticed.

Not one of my tractors flow speeds up much, beyond half throttle.

SR

 

[sean donato]

Of all the tractors I own, you can't notice any more flow/speed at the cylinder long before you get to max RPM, so I won't argue that there isn't more, but I will argue that what little extra flow there is, it isn't needed or noticed.

Not one of my tractors flow speeds up much, beyond half throttle.

SR

That is dependent on closed center or open center hydraulic pumps. Open center (traditional) pumps flow a fixed amount of oil at a given rotation. The faster you spin them the more oil they put out. Unless there is a flow control in place the volume of oil will increase with rpm until you hit design limits.
Most closed center pumps have a variable swash plate in them that flow can be controlled independent from rpm to a certain extent.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

That is dependent on closed center or open center hydraulic pumps. Open center (traditional) pumps flow a fixed amount of oil at a given rotation. The faster you spin them the more oil they put out. Unless there is a flow control in place the volume of oil will increase with rpm until you hit design limits.

All of mine are open center.

 

[sean donato]

Then there is no way the flow doesn't increase with rpm. They use a fixed displacement pump. Either there's a flow valve somewhere in the system, or power beyond being used. The off chance there can also be a restriction in the system that limits flow, and raises pressure, but thay would be poor design and heat the fluid pretty quickly.

 

[Captain Bruce]

We built a splitter 30 yrs. ago, and it works as designed, right now. It is vertical, or horizontal, and attaches to the 3-pt. Ford 5000 tractor totes it into the bush. We skid the larger wood right to the split clearing.
The entire splitting bee has 6=8 wagons staged. Each gets hand stacked. The smaller logs get loaded and cut smaller at the yard of their destination. 8' bed = 8' logs.

2 wagons get connected to our splitter/3- pt., and off we go. There is nothing like a wood-cutting bee.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

Then there is no way the flow doesn't increase with rpm. They use a fixed displacement pump. Either there's a flow valve somewhere in the system, or power beyond being used. The off chance there can also be a restriction in the system that limits flow, and raises pressure, but thay would be poor design and heat the fluid pretty quickly.

Like I already said, it may increase the flow, but it's not a noticeably amount at the cylinder, so why run the engine wide open for so little gain?

To say that you have to run a tractor wide open to get a decent cylinder speed with a 3 point splitter, on anything but a really small tractor, just isn't true,

SR

 

[sean donato]

Like I already said, it may increase the flow, but it's not a noticeably amount at the cylinder, so why run the engine wide open for so little gain?

To say that you have to run a tractor wide open to get a decent cylinder speed with a 3 point splitter, on anything but a really small tractor, just isn't true,

SR

You clearly don't understand what's being said. Rpm and flow are directly proportional. Ah half engine rpm, your getting half the flow of the pump. Period. There's no barely more flow at double the rpm. Clearly there's something wrong with your hydraulic systems, or some variable that you don't know about that limits flow.

https://www.fluidpowerworld.com/a-review-of-hydraulic-fixed-displacement-pumps/
Your why rev the engine so hard is simply answered by what I've been saying, a good sound fixed displacement pump has to continue to flow x amount of fluid for x rpm. And you do realize that reving an engine doesn't put that much more fuel to it just to rev? The fuel consumption is load dependant, controlled via the govenor. I'll take the minimal extra fuel use to get full flow out of a pump.

 

[ValleyForge]

You clearly don't understand what's being said. Rpm and flow are directly proportional. Ah half engine rpm, your getting half the flow of the pump. Period. There's no barely more flow at double the rpm. Clearly there's something wrong with your hydraulic systems, or some variable that you don't know about that limits flow.

https://www.fluidpowerworld.com/a-review-of-hydraulic-fixed-displacement-pumps/
Your why rev the engine so hard is simply answered by what I've been saying, a good sound fixed displacement pump has to continue to flow x amount of fluid for x rpm. And you do realize that reving an engine doesn't put that much more fuel to it just to rev? The fuel consumption is load dependant, controlled via the govenor. I'll take the minimal extra fuel use to get full flow out of a pump.

Here is a good graph to describe what you’re talking about…

 

[Sawyer Rob]

You clearly don't understand what's being said. Rpm and flow are directly proportional. Ah half engine rpm, your getting half the flow of the pump. Period. There's no barely more flow at double the rpm. Clearly there's something wrong with your hydraulic systems, or some variable that you don't know about that limits flow.

I clearly DO understand.

My point is, the flow is plenty at half throttle or even less, so why did a poster in this thread say you had to run the diesel wide open with a 3 point splitter? I countered with, that isn't true, and it isn't.

BTW, if there's something wrong with my tractors hydraulics, it would be tractors, as I have several and none of them need to be run wide open to get decent speed with a 3 point splitter!

One more thing, I have two 3 point splitters, one runs off the tractors hydraulics and the other runs off the tractors pto with it's own pump. (that also doesn't need to be run wide open to get decent speed!!)

SR