Homemade quick attach

[RBA50]

Puckgrinder. About that carbide hole saw. Did you find one that has a pilot drill bit in it, or was it pilotless? I'v never seen one for steel that had a pilot bit, only for ones that worked with electro magnetic base drills. (also on my list) With out some sort of a pilot, its a miserable living h#%l keeping the hole saw from walking, even in a drill press. Curious minds need to know, Im funny that way. Steve

Years ago when I worked maintenance for a forklift company, we had to drill holes in the concrete floor at different times. We used a core drill, which is basically a pilotless hole saw for concrete in a big rotary hammer. To keep it where we needed it, we would make a drill guide from a 2x4 or similar by drilling a hole that matched the core drill, then we put the 2 by on the floor with the hole centered where we needed it, and stood on it while we got the drill started. Worked like a charm. Same idea could be used for pilotless holesaws on the drill press, or even a hand held drill. Use a couple clamps to hold the guide in place.

 

[PILOON]

Years ago when I worked maintenance for a forklift company, we had to drill holes in the concrete floor at different times. We used a core drill, which is basically a pilotless hole saw for concrete in a big rotary hammer. To keep it where we needed it, we would make a drill guide from a 2x4 or similar by drilling a hole that matched the core drill, then we put the 2 by on the floor with the hole centered where we needed it, and stood on it while we got the drill started. Worked like a charm. Same idea could be used for pilotless holesaws on the drill press, or even a hand held drill. Use a couple clamps to hold the guide in place.

I used that method often when I needed to enlarge a hole in wood. Pilot drill the required size in scrap piece and then tack the guide in place over the smaller hole. Works great!

 

[joshuabardwell]

I am thinking of building one of these for my tractor. Can anybody help me understand the need for the cross-bar between the two pieces? Obviously, it adds rigidity, but I'm not sure why it's necessary, given that the two pieces will be attached to the bucket, which should provide all the rigidity that is needed--no? And, of course, when the bucket is off, there is no stress at all on the QA pieces.

 

[k0ua]

I am thinking of building one of these for my tractor. Can anybody help me understand the need for the cross-bar between the two pieces? Obviously, it adds rigidity, but I'm not sure why it's necessary, given that the two pieces will be attached to the bucket, which should provide all the rigidity that is needed--no? And, of course, when the bucket is off, there is no stress at all on the QA pieces.

Joshua, I think it is to prevent twisting..as in torque tube. They do twist sometimes anyway, but I believe that is the purpose, to help keep them in alignment.

James K0UA

 

[puckgrinder85]

I am thinking of building one of these for my tractor. Can anybody help me understand the need for the cross-bar between the two pieces? Obviously, it adds rigidity, but I'm not sure why it's necessary, given that the two pieces will be attached to the bucket, which should provide all the rigidity that is needed--no? And, of course, when the bucket is off, there is no stress at all on the QA pieces.

You need something to straddle both connection points because the hydraulics wont be synchronized, the hyd. pressure doesnt care where it goes it takes the easiest path it wants to. The arm with the least resistance will move and the other will stay staitionary untill you hit it up against the bucket or something solid, then the other will move, defeats the purpose all together of doing something like this. You dont need much of a piece of metal in there to do this, its not a real supporting member in the build, I just used 1 1/4 square tube because it just looks better. As you said once the bucket is hooked up it does the same thing and takes the strain. All the piece does is keep the two curl cylinder at the same extention untill the bucket is hooked, after that its pretty much just there, but you really need it before you hook the bucket unless you're arms curl and dump evenly which I doubt they will at all times.

Think of hydraulic brakes, if you blow a brake line in the front left, the front right isnt going to apply, thank god they split the hydraulic systems so at least the rear brakes were to work in this situation.

 

[DK35vince]

I am thinking of building one of these for my tractor. Can anybody help me understand the need for the cross-bar between the two pieces? Obviously, it adds rigidity, but I'm not sure why it's necessary, given that the two pieces will be attached to the bucket, which should provide all the rigidity that is needed--no? And, of course, when the bucket is off, there is no stress at all on the QA pieces.

The torqe tube keeps the cylinders syncronized when the bucket is detached.
Without the torge tube in place, the cylinders will be uneven when trying to re-attach the next implement. Making hookup very difficult

 

[joshuabardwell]

Got it. I understand the reason for the cross-bar now. So, really, pretty much any tubing should be okay--it doesn't have to be particularly strong? Just strong enough to equalize the pressure in the hydraulic system. 1/8" thick by 1" or something?

As I'm thinking about a shopping list for the scrap yard, here's what I've got so far:

1/4" thick by... I don't know... 2" wide flat stock, 8 pieces approx. 12" long each for the side-plates (four for the loader, four for the bucket), plus maybe another 24" at most for the walls of the upper "U" section, so maybe 10' total length.

DOM tubing, 1" ID (or whatever closely matches the pins on the loader), maybe 6" each, x4 on the loader and 4 on the bucket, so total length 48". I see that Steve used 3/8" thickness pipe. Should I then use 3/8" thickness flat stock for the walls of the upper U section on the loader bracket? Is 3/8" a recommended size, or is that just what Steve had laying around? In short, what thickness DOM tubing to use, and should the flat stock on the walls of the upper U section match that thickness?

Ultimately, I will need to get either pins or grade 8 bolts for the bucket, but I'm okay with putting that off for now.

Is that it? Just some flat stock and DOM tubing? Seems like I must be forgetting something. Oh right--the cross-tube. So, maybe 1/8" thick by 1" or 2" diameter square or round tube?

 

[puckgrinder85]

Just about all the cross bar does is that, once the bucket is hooked up it becomes the structural piece. A hefty piece isnt necessary. 1/8 x 1" flatstock might be a little flimsy because the distance between loader arms is pretty substantial. I'd go with round tubing or square.

The metal I used was 1/4 flat plate ( had a large plate sitting around, probably 4 sqft)
3' of DOM tubing (ID size the matched my pins, great fit BTW. 1/4 wall thickness PLENTY heavy!) Have like 12" left of this stuff for future use.
The cross tube was 1 1/2? square tubing.

That was about it..

To make the hook shape I did what steve suggested and cut a piece of DOM tubing in half and that made my two cradle pieces, one for each side. I tacked that in place and then just made custom filler pieces that matched the wall thickness of DOM tubing, which happened to be 1/4" which the whole project is made from. I welded it all up and ground it down to make it nice and smooth and easy to catch the bucket pins. I ended up beveling the edges of the hole for the hook shape to guide the pin down into the DOM cradle piece. I found the DOM is held to pretty good standards and my pins fit great as long as all the edges you cut are chamfered after. If you dont chamfer them, the pin isnt going in! Grade 8 bolts that size sound expensive. I used cat 3 3-point top link pins for my upper pins (1.25 inch diameter) and the lower ones I just found in the store.


Btw- I did this project because:

A) converting my tractor to a SSQA was quite pricey (800$ for the QA adaptor and then 100$ per plate, I'd have 1000$ in making it a quick attach)
B) I'd have to convert 2 buckets over to the quick attach plate, again more time for me to cut up my new bucket and older one.
C) Im only adding pallet forks as my last attachment so the whole SSQA thing didnt make sense to me after this point. SSQA isnt saving me money in the end.


If you can get yours setup for the SSQA relatively cheap then that would definatly be the way to go, it just wasnt in the cards for me, so this project will suffice for sure. Takes me about 45-50 seconds to drop a bucket, not really any slower than an SSQA, just dont have the attachment options.

 

[Steve in MT]

Joshuabardwell,
I used 1/4 by 2-1/2 flat bar and that gave me about a 3/8" or so over lap for a good weld area, I think 2" would be too narrow. I bought a section of heavy wall pipe (I think about 3/8 thick) for the lower pin pivots. I would have used 1/4" if the machine shop that I got from would have had it in stock. Called DOM??? Normal pipe wont work as its measured OD, not ID, which is what you need to match your pin size.For the upper pin locations, I took one piece of the DOM, cut it to length and then cut it down the middle so that I had two "U" shaped pieces. These were then used as the bottom part of the 2 upper "Cradels" so to speak. I wish that I had taken more pix durring the build, but didnt. Does this help any?
Steve

 

[puckgrinder85]

Also when you weld do it in short areas, dont concentrate too much heat into that 1/4 as mine warped 7 ways to ****. Luckily it wasnt that bad and I got it back into shape.

 

[joshuabardwell]

I would have used 1/4" if the machine shop that I got from would have had it in stock. Called DOM??? Normal pipe wont work as its measured OD, not ID, which is what you need to match your pin size.

That helps a lot, Steve. I will try to source 1/4" thick tubing. Your idea of cutting the tubing in half to make the cradles is a real lifesaver for me on this project, as I don't have a brake or anything like that to bend flat stock.

 

[SSdoxie]

Regarding the torque tube: I agree with what has been said for the pupose of it. It is to keep the bucket cylinders tied together, moving in unison when no bucket is attached. But there are stresses applied to it when it is attached and needs to be able to withstand the stress and/or spring back into place.
Example: Without a QA (normal pin on bucket) you go into a dirt pile and unknowingly hook right front corner of bucket under a heavy rock or tree root. Try to curl the bucket. The right side will stall first while the left cylinder still moves some applying some twist to the bucket. The bucket is built to flex some and spring back into shape when this happens. Now picture a tube tying the cylinders together, the same twist pressure is being applied so the torque tube either has to be strong enough to stop the twist or be able to spring back to oringinal shape.
Not to pick on any company or builder but here is the latest example of this type failure posted here on TBN. http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/parts-repairs/265330-can-straightened-frame-machine.html. I have also seen posts like this in other Brand Name forums, even some of the major brand name design engineers that are relatively new to the QA system do not realize, or think about this possiblity.

 

[puckgrinder85]

I agree with what you say to an extent, the example you gave on that other thread doesnt add up though and raises more questions to me than what it answers. I can see tweaking the rod and not having it hook up as easily, but from the other thread I dont see the whole story on what happened, either he bent his bucket and quick attach setup (seems unlikely and would take some major abuse), or he didnt have it hooked up properly or something else failed allowing the connection to fall out of place and therefore bending the QA piece. Like I said with the pictures it just doesnt seem like he's telling the whole story, maybe to save face I dunno. I just dont see how it got bent that far out of whack while still being attached to a solid bucket.


ps- keep in mind the tube used in my setup is like 43" inches long so if there is a minor twist I think it can handle that easily given the length of it without any irrepairable damage.

 

[Baby Grand]

I agree with what you say to an extent, the example you gave on that other thread doesnt add up though and raises more questions to me than what it answers. I can see tweaking the rod and not having it hook up as easily, but from the other thread I dont see the whole story on what happened, either he bent his bucket and quick attach setup (seems unlikely and would take some major abuse), or he didnt have it hooked up properly or something else failed allowing the connection to fall out of place and therefore bending the QA piece. Like I said with the pictures it just doesnt seem like he's telling the whole story, maybe to save face I dunno. I just dont see how it got bent that far out of whack while still being attached to a solid bucket.


ps- keep in mind the tube used in my setup is like 43" inches long so if there is a minor twist I think it can handle that easily given the length of it without any irrepairable damage.

I could see how it happened. Say, for instance, you attach a bucket, but one of the QA sides doesn't latch securely. Then you go pick up a load in the bucket. The loose QA side releases, so only one cylinder is holding the load. The uneven loading twists the torque "ell" as the still attached side moves with the force of the cylinder. That's why I will go with a torque "tube" (closed section) of sufficient cross section, rather than an "ell" (open section), when I build mine. It's the polar moment of inertia of the torque member that's either you friend or enemy in this situation.

My real reason for wanting a QA bucket with a torque tube is that the first time I unpinned my pin-on bucket, I made the mistake of bumping the FEL joystick. This caused the cylinder with the least internal resistance to move, while the other one stayed put. Later, trying to pin the bucket back on, I couldn't align the holes on the FEL with the holes on the bucket. Took a lot of time and profane language to get those pins back in.

 

[joshuabardwell]

I guess I'm a little unclear now on just how strong and/or flexible the torque tube needs to be. If all it was going to do was keep the loader arms aligned when the bucket was off, then it would only need to be strong enough to equalize the pressure in the hydraulic system. But if it's going to have to flex while the bucket is working, that will probably involve more force. Also, I'm not really sure whether it should be something very stiff, or more springy, to flex and return to true. I know that one poster here used some 1" solid square stock, but I got the impression that was just what he had laying around, not that it is specifically recommended. What do y'all think I should use?

 

[Chilly807]

Let me put it this way, there's not much that's going to stand up to a twisting motion driven by 2500 psi of hydraulic pressure applied to a 2" cylinder over a span of 40+ inches. So since it doesn't have to be super-strong, build it out of something reasonable, say 1.5 or 2 inch round or square tube with a minimum 1/8 wall thickness and you should be fine. The bucket or whatever implement you have will take all the stress anyway, and it's really only there to ensure the individual ends stay in sync when the implement is removed. Material that has some spring to it would be ideal, but mild steel will be fine too.

I'd use 2 inch square tube with 1/4 wall, but I tend to overbuild things.

If I remember correctly, when I removed my pin on bucket I could manually push in one curl cylinder and watch the other extend, so there's not a lot of opposing force there anyway.

Sean

 

[joshuabardwell]

Let me put it this way, there's not much that's going to stand up to a twisting motion driven by 2500 psi of hydraulic pressure applied to a 2" cylinder over a span of 40+ inches. So since it doesn't have to be super-strong, build it out of something reasonable, say 1.5 or 2 inch round or square tube with a minimum 1/8 wall thickness and you should be fine. The bucket or whatever implement you have will take all the stress anyway, and it's really only there to ensure the individual ends stay in sync when the implement is removed.

Sure, sure. That's kind of what I was thinking. Thanks.

 

[puckgrinder85]

I could see how it happened. Say, for instance, you attach a bucket, but one of the QA sides doesn't latch securely. Then you go pick up a load in the bucket. The loose QA side releases, so only one cylinder is holding the load. The uneven loading twists the torque "ell" as the still attached side moves with the force of the cylinder. That's why I will go with a torque "tube" (closed section) of sufficient cross section, rather than an "ell" (open section), when I build mine. It's the polar moment of inertia of the torque member that's either you friend or enemy in this situation.

Right, I agree I see how it could have happened too but from what I read he didnt put that in his post, the whole story doesnt seem to be there for whatever reason, maybe it wasnt relevant at that point because the damage was done, I just think there is more to it than whats in the post. The angle iron piece for that application probably is sufficient given what it does but obviously not enough for a mishap which is the reason that thread exists to begin with.

I guess I'm a little unclear now on just how strong and/or flexible the torque tube needs to be. If all it was going to do was keep the loader arms aligned when the bucket was off, then it would only need to be strong enough to equalize the pressure in the hydraulic system. But if it's going to have to flex while the bucket is working, that will probably involve more force. Also, I'm not really sure whether it should be something very stiff, or more springy, to flex and return to true. I know that one poster here used some 1" solid square stock, but I got the impression that was just what he had laying around, not that it is specifically recommended. What do y'all think I should use?

I think you're over thinking it. What is your loader capacity? Mines rated at like 1000lbs give or take. I've curled my 200lb bucket off the ground with one side attached and the other not by accident and im using 1.5 inch square i do believe with I thought was a 3/16 wallk thickness. In that instance it was strong enough and I had no issues, the lower pins obviously wouldnt go in due to my error so it wasnt as if I was going to dig a hole with my bucket unlatched thats for sure. I think it should be strong enough to at least lift your bucket unevenly because that is likely to happen.



ps- keep in mind if you have a smaller loader like me you dont really want to overbuild it to the extreme and take away your lift capacity.. I'm happy the way mine turned out, it doesnt seem to affect it much with the bucket a few inches farther out and I tried to keep the hitch as light as I could but strong where I needed it to be. I think mine weighs maybe 35 lbs or so.

 

[Chilly807]

I agree with what you say to an extent, the example you gave on that other thread doesnt add up though and raises more questions to me than what it answers. I can see tweaking the rod and not having it hook up as easily, but from the other thread I dont see the whole story on what happened, either he bent his bucket and quick attach setup (seems unlikely and would take some major abuse), or he didnt have it hooked up properly or something else failed allowing the connection to fall out of place and therefore bending the QA piece. Like I said with the pictures it just doesnt seem like he's telling the whole story, maybe to save face I dunno. I just dont see how it got bent that far out of whack while still being attached to a solid bucket.


ps- keep in mind the tube used in my setup is like 43" inches long so if there is a minor twist I think it can handle that easily given the length of it without any irrepairable damage.

After reading the thread starter, I think he might have tried lifting the log without the bucket in place, just a couple chains looped through the cradles.

Sean

 

[joshuabardwell]

After reading the thread starter, I think he might have tried lifting the log without the bucket in place, just a couple chains looped through the cradles.

That'll do it!