Dump trailer angle of the dangle

[CDN Farm Boy]

Anyone see anything NO GO about this?

[/IMG]

Artisan, your post finally convinced me to sign up.

While the geometry of this design says it will work, I wouldn't do it that way. Keep the cyl mounted in the direction of your original design. The direction of force from the cyl is away from the pin rather than towards it. In effect, most of the force will be trying to rip the mounts apart rather than dumping the load. You definately want the longer cyl of the second design (use the longest that you can fit) but keep the base of the cyl as far as you reasonably can from the hinge.

Another option, especially with the beef of your wagon frame is to use 2 cyl and mount them outboard on each side of the box. THis will greatly improve the starting angle. Look at one of the big articulated rock trucks as example.

 

[npalen]

The starting angle of the cylinder is important but not as important as the length of the lever arm. To get the length of the lever arm, extend the cylinder centerline (line of force) past the pivot point. Then measure the distance from the pivot point perpendicular to the cylinder centerline. using, say, a 4" diameter cylinder gives 12.56 (pi times radius squared) times the hydraulic pressure so at 1000 psi the cylinder generates 12560 lbs of force. If the length of the lever arm measured above is 12", for speaking purposes, a torque of 12,560 foot pounds of torque would be generated to lift the load.
If you had a box length of 10' and a 2000 lb load was centered front to back the load would require 10,000 foot lbs of torque (5' x2000) Adding a contingency factor of 10% for friction would require 11,000 foot lbs of torque. This is an oversimplication since other factors such as length of cylinder stroke and required dump angle all enter into the "equation".

 

[amazincaucasian]

Take a flat sheet of steel and shovel the stickiest material you think you'll haul on it. You can prolly figger out the rest

 

[MJPetersen]

You measured the angle wrong. The base line is between the pin on the box and the hinge pin between the box and frame. The second line is the line of the cylinder. In your case the angle is much less than 12 degrees--more like 7 or 8 degrees.

Mike

 

[Artisan]

You measured the angle wrong. The base line is between the pin on the box and the hinge pin between the box and frame. The second line is the line of the cylinder. In your case the angle is much less than 12 degrees--more like 7 or 8 degrees.

Mike

Holy Geometery Batman...:batman: I think Mike is right! BLAST!
Back To the BatCave!

I do not think that is enough angle on the dangle then...hmmmmmm.......

 

[Renze]

The major disadvantage of these lying cylinder setups is that the biggest force is created when the dumpbed is allmost upright, in other words where you dont need much. In the above picture, the distance from the lower cylinder pivot to the yellow line (perpendicular to the yellow line) is the working line, your lever on which the cylinder acts. You need a big cylinder to lift it out of this dead angle, and you need a lot of oil to pump (slow) to put the bucket upright with a cylinder big enough to get it started from the dead angle. Also it puts a lot of undue stress on your trailer frame.
Here in Holland we used to make dump trailers with 3 or 4 stage telescopic cylinders, they arent that expensive. Due to the nature of a telescopic cylinder (the last stage has the smallest diameter piston, which means less force, more speed) you get the best cycle times with a given hydraulic pump.

 

[MJPetersen]

Here in Holland we used to make dump trailers with 3 or 4 stage telescopic cylinders, they arent that expensive. Due to the nature of a telescopic cylinder (the last stage has the smallest diameter piston, which means less force, more speed) you get the best cycle times with a given hydraulic pump.

This is what I used in my dump trailer. I found it in the scrap yard and was able to get it for the price of scrap. It is not in ideal condition, but it works for me.

Renze, the problem with most of the trailers that use these telescoping cylinders is that they are mounted high to allow the cylinder to stick about straight down.
However, they also can side dump too. I know that for my dump trailer I was trying to keep it as low as possible so that I could feel comfortable carrying my mini ex in it. The other thing with the ones that I have seen produced here with the telescoping cylinders is that they do not have a very high dump angle.

Mike

 

[Don87]

Artisan,

Don't forget to figure in the oil capacity of the cylinder you use. As Renze posted above, "You need a big cylinder to lift it out of this dead angle, and you need a lot of oil to pump (slow) to put the bucket upright with a cylinder big enough to get it started from the dead angle".

The BX, only has a 2.5 to 3 gallon total oil capacity. Be careful not to starve the tranny of oil.

 

[swick1]

If you need more capacity why not plumb your remotes to a double headed pump and drive one head with the remotes. The other head could pump between a reservoir and the cylinder on the trailer.

 

[Artisan]

Well....certainly a lot to take into consideration here.
A triple cylinder or any cylinder(s) mounted anywhere but
where I have been toying w/ them it not in the cards for
I seek to make this platform / use the platform
for multiple uses, which could include logs hanging over
the front and rear. I may have to make the platform out
of a taller material to gain the necessary "angle of the dangle".

Indeed I have had the starvation of oil issue in my mind,
I have not been dwelling on that issue till I hammer out
the geometry, and cylinder size. I am just gonna tak emy time
on this one and really try to get it right. The base trailer is
so cool and tough, I don't want to just start willy nilly
and have a blob.

THANX SWICK! Now I gotta figure out how a DoubleHeadedPump
works! :duh:

( I so appreicate talll the replys...thank you all)

 

[Artisan]

I was considering a side / rear dump Mike. But I nixed it
because of the ground clearance issue. Mike do you have
a link to the hardware used at the corners of your
trailer please?

 

[Artisan]

BLAST! Mikes trailer is so darn cool. This was my original
idea that I nixed, but after seeing it, I lust after yee! That
really has a utility to it and I like that...

I just went looking at cylinders and fell upon Bailynets site.
They sure do have a great list to shop from, and learn HERE.

 

[MJPetersen]

That was not my trailer--it is a trailer that is for sale here on a site similar to ebay. It is pretty cool and utilitarian, but to get it you would have to build the trailer higher than I wanted my trailer to be. Also, because the sides and ends fold down it is not as strong as one that is all welded together. It all depends what you like.

The one that I pictured earlier has round balls at each corner and special sockets to fit them. I do not know where you would buy those. However, there is another trailer for sale here also that is similar, but a little bit smaller. Its construction is such that the 2 way movements is achieved with simple elements. I include pictures to aid your fantasy.

One thing to note is that the cylinder has to have a ball or some sort of construction so that it can pivot in 2 directions. My cylinder had this at both ends and I made the sockets to fit on my lathe.

Here is the link to where they are on sale.

Mike

I forgot to add to buy one here costs about $1200.

 

[Artisan]

NICE! Thank you Mike...Very cool, inspiring it is. Looks like the
"balls" in the first pic are just trailer hitch balls.


Things that make me go hmmmmmm.

 

[Artisan]

Well, now I have to learn MORE! HA!

Where to find ready made, non-custom, telescoping hydraulic
cylinders that are maybe 48" EXTENDED. ???

Mike is there anyway to find the Original Manufacturer of the
traielrs in the second set of pictures?

 

[brinet]

I think what you are looking for is here

http://www.baumhydraulics.com/calculators/cyl_calc_ang.htm

There are other calculators as well.

 

[LD1]

Wow, sorry I am late to the thread artisan. Now where to start...

You mention telescoping cylinder. Those EAT ground clearence. So.....if you can come up with a geometry that is acceptable, then by all means. But Those cylinders arent cheap either. Upwards of a grand each:confused2:

I'll start with this http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/projects/158521-turning-1985-dodge-into-real.html
It covers some of the math involved.

Mike was right about your angle. The effective angle is between the cylinder-bed & bed-frame pivots.

So...in your first example using a 12" cylinder, you angle actually would have been a little better than 12*. But by turning the cylinder around like you did in the second drawing with the 24" cylinder, your effective angle is actually worse than appears.

I actually like the first design better than the second because of the direction the cylinder is pointing, BUT...you have a lot of bed overhanging forward of the lift point once it starts to raise, and would have to be built really strong. If thats not a problem, then yes a 12" cylinder would work. Lets walk through some math now...

A 4"x12" cylinder @ your Bx's 2400psi will make ~30,000lbs of force. Given a 12 degree mounting angle, thats about 6000lbs of vertical force to initiate the dump cycle. Since it looks like the cylinder is mounted to the bed about 2/3rds back from the front, figuring a load in the center, you are further reduced in capacity by 33%, or down to 2 tons of dump force now. Not bad right.

But keep in mind those axles you said look big, those are going to be seeing 15 TONS of force RIGHT in the middle of the span. NOT good.

 

[LD1]

Part 2:

Is there any way you can locate the cylinders farther forward so that they are pushing around the center of the bed?? And use two of them so you dont need something super-strong to span the width of the bed. (similar to how I did my dump truck in that link). Only you could locate the cylinders on the INSIDE of the frame rail.

By moving farther forward, and compensating with a longer stroke cylinder, you can downsize in cylinder diameter, and share the lower force over two mounts instead of one.

Just a quick example...

If you use 2 .5"x30" cylinders mounted @ 12 degrees and the pusher is smack dab in the middle of an 8' bed (I dont know how long you are actually planning), you will get a dump angle of about 48.5 degrees, and a force of ~4000lbs and each mount seeing about 9500lbs of force.

You can play with different mount angles, length of cylinders, and mounting locations. In the above example, if you move the cylinders rearward a few inches, you will gain angle but loose force. And vice versa if you move them forward. If you lower the base mount (better angle) you will gain more force but not give up much dump angle.

edit: what ARE the dimensions of the trailer going to be??

 

[MJPetersen]

I thought that you would like those orange ones.

The "balls" in the first trailer probably are 50 mm (2 in) but they have holes drilled though in the middle so that they can be pinned in place for dumping which ever way you desire. That is the dimension that the balls on my cylinder are.

If you want the option of being able to dump to the side then you have to locate the cylinder in the middle of the bed and vertical.

I do not know the company name of the trailer, but it is a small Polish metal fabrication shop. It is being sold by several different tractor sales firms. The pivots in the second trailer are pretty simple and easily fabricated.

Mike

 

[Artisan]

snip
Here in Holland we used to make dump trailers with 3 or 4 stage telescopic cylinders, they arent that expensive. Due to the nature of a telescopic cylinder (the last stage has the smallest diameter piston, which means less force, more speed) you get the best cycle times with a given hydraulic pump.

Renze might you have a link for me, regarding these
3&4 stage inexpensive cylinders please?