3 point log splitter questions

[PineRidge]

Yesterday the wife and I drove out to our local TSC store for some items that we needed. As I was entering the store I noticed that they had a large display of log splitters set up just outside so I slowed to take a look for myself. Don't have a need for one but I like to look at the machinery.

I quickly struck up a conversation with a gent by the name of Len. Seems he was interested in a 3-point log splitter that he wanted to match to a new 60 HP Kubota that he had just ordered. He wanted the best splitter that he could purchase for his Kubota without the hassle of needing to maintain another gasoline engine to run it.

We looked at the information provided with the log splitter and it stated that the performance of the splitter was subject to the hydraulic pump pressure of the tractor to which it was mated. There was no mention whatsoever of gpm needed for proper operation. It would seem to me that an even more important part of figuring the speed of the cycle time as well as the rated tonnage of the ram itself might be more critical to gallons per minute produced by the hydraulic pump of the tractor running it as opposed to the actual pump pressure. Am I wrong here, as this information supplied was confusing to the both of us.

 

[Soundguy]

Yep.. gpm will be a big factor on cycle time.. and psi will be a factor of strength of the splitter. A high gpm pump that develops very low psi may not work for a log splitter.. however a high psi pump with a low GPM would worrk.. if you waited long enough.

The factory remotes on a new utility sized tractor ought to be fairly decent... however.. lots of times people are only running lift cyls with them..e tc.

Soundguy

 

[dmp437]

Total displacement of the TSC unit is 1.3 gallons, so the GPM of the pump affects the speed. Speed is also effected by the size of the lines and the fittings that are used. Pressure developed by the splitter is based on the bore of the cylinder (4" in the case of the TSC unit) and the pressure developed by the pump (2750 PSI in the case of my JD).
Cycle time depends on GPM, PSI of the pump, and the shape of the wedge. With the TSC unit I rarely have to go full stroke, most of the time half stroke is adequate.

 

[Dargo]

I was going to make a joke of your remark that a "half stroke is adequate...", but I won't go there. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif Anyway, I found out that sometimes it is important to look up the characteristics of wood before you attempt to split it. I had a Catalpa tree fall over in a storm. I thought I'd cut it up and use it for firewood rather than "waste" the tree. Mistake. Catalpa must be Indian language for "does not split". /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif I had to use a full stroke with the splitter and the last two inches of the logs would still hold together! I had to use a sledge hammer to knock the piece off of the wedge, then a chain saw to finish the "split". After about 1/2 hour and 3 logs later, I used my FEL. That is, I used my FEL to carry the rest of the wood into the woods and dumped it! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[paparammer]

Am I missing something here? Just retract the ram, put another log on the splitter and let the beginning of the second push the end of the first past the wedge.

 

[bczoom]

With the new horizontal/vertical splitters, it normally can't be done. Not enough room to fit 2 logs in and get by the framework/valve at the end of the cylinder. The horizontal only style could do that approach.

 

[PineRidge]

I figured that gpm and psi were the two factors that needed to be considered. I just didn't understand that the only mention in the Huskee splitter literature was psi. Even the sales rep at TSC wasn't sure which to recommend.

I just pulled out my New Holland sales literature and it lists pump gpm rates for models TC-18 through TC-45 but there is no mention of pump psi whatsoever so again I would think that gpm might be an even more important factor than psi.

 

[Dargo]

I cut my logs the max length that will fit in my wood burner. That happens to be close to the length that will fit in the splitter. Therefore, no room for a 2nd log. If you think I'm kidding about Catalpa logs, go find one and try to split it. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif I'm convinced the best way to split Catalpa would be with a chainsaw! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Ha, I just found a guide on splitting wood. It lists Oak as fairly easy to split, Hickory as easy to split, Ash as easy to split, Catalpa as "does not split". /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif Figures!

 

[CTyler]

Zoom...................woosh....... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Clue....
A line from Mike Meyers...."You may be a cunning linguist but I am a master debater."

 

[dmp437]

GPM determines speed. PSI determines force. The NH info only listing GPM and no pressure info is an oversite. The JD website lists both GPM and pressure, which they list at a maximum system pressure of 2500 PSI. NH's maximum pressure is probably very similiar.
Force, as in the "Ton Rating" of the splitter is found by multipling gauge pressure (PSIG) by the area of the piston. GPM has no effect.
Speed, as in cycle time, is determined by volume of the incoming fluid (in cubic inches per minute) divided by the cross sectional area of the cavity into which it is flowing.

 

[Dargo]

It might be different for you, but I first wanted a 3 pt. splitter since I had a tractor and lots of implements. However, after borrowing the little self contained splitter that has it's own engine and pump etc., I believe that it is easier to use the stand alone splitter.

Besides the hassle of hooking up a 3 pt. splitter to the tractor, having to insure the proper line pressures and volumes etc. and tying up the tractor, it just seems easier for me to hook up the stand alone splitter to my RTV and split away. It works great and it cost me right around a thousand bucks. It is a 26 ton splitter. I've seen many larger splitters, but so far, I've never put anything in my splitter that it wouldn't split. I've come to the conclusion that if it is going to be too big for my splitter to split; it likely is too big for me to get it to my splitter. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

There again, I've not used a 3 pt. splitter, so my observations are admittedly one sided. Oh well, it works well and seems easy enough to use. Good luck with whatever you get!

 

[bczoom]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Ha, I just found a guide on splitting wood. It lists Oak as fairly easy to split, Hickory as easy to split, Ash as easy to split, Catalpa as "does not split". /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif Figures! )</font>

Can you give us a link to this guide?
I'll agree on Oak but Ash??? Haven't split any in awhile but if I recall correctly, yea, it splits easy but it's so stringy you have to go all the way through the log.

 

[rambler]

Sounds like elm wood around here. There is a really bad elm, called Rock Elm I believe, has a nickname but maybe I best not say it here - guys do it standing - that is nothing but strings, it is _the_ test if you have a good splitter or not.

--->Paul

 

[PineRidge]

Dargo the splitter wasn't for me, and the old boy looking at it said he already had more than a few gasoline engines that he had to maintain. He was trying to squeeze by without adding more maintenance then he absolutely had to. I guess he figured the Kubota hydraulics could handle it and I'm betting that he was right. My whole point to this post was merely the fact that the sales literature on the splitter mentioned psi required and failed to mention the gpm needed. Just think it might have been spelled out a little clearer, and it made me start asking questions as a result.

 

[Jim_Fisher]

Pineridge,

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( My whole point to this post was merely the fact that the sales literature on the splitter mentioned psi required and failed to mention the gpm needed. Just think it might have been spelled out a little clearer, and it made me start asking questions as a result. )</font>

I agree. The literature for stand alone splitters usually provides a cycle time along with the splitting force.

TSC is not the only supplier that is guilty of this. I purchased a three point splitter this summer and a chart listing cycle times at various GPM would have been useful.

Keep in mind, also, that the splitter valve has a built in relief to prevent damage to the splitter, so PSI in excess of the relief setting is not going to increase the splitting force.

Here is a link to the Surplus Center hydraulics calculator which takes the drudgery out of calculating cycle times.

 

[GEB]

I just went through this also, I wanted a 3pt spliter.
Thing is no one at TSC could tell anything about the one they had.
Like how fast,and force?
I to thought that doing away with another gas powerd
machine would be the way to go.
Anyway I eneded up just gettin the 22ton 6.5hp.
Been using my dads 20ton 5hp for a few years, and it has
never let us down, so my new one should do just fine.
And if I do spit somewhere other than home, it's not
a must to load my tractor up also.

 

[MarkV]

I have a 3pt Bush Hog splitter (Bush Hog no longer makes splitters) and my tractors hydraulic pump capacity is 8.5 gal/min. The splitter does a good job but is a bit slow on cycle times, which is OK because my cycle times slow a bit more each year also. This splitter is a horizontal model and required too much bending to be comfortable working off the tractor for me. I finally built a stand and added some longer hoses so I could pull the tractor up, plug in the hoses and split until I was tired of it. With a carry all on the back of the tractor for unsplit rounds it is an easy lift to the splitter. The split wood goes to a pallet that can be moved by the loader with forks for stacking.

PineRidge, I looked at my Bush Hog manual and they don’t really give any information about psi or flow and how it relates to power or cycle times either. Sure seems like something that should be included in the specs for a splitter.

MarkV