Will a JD310 run an irrigation pump?

[rScotty]

After buying a pair of 30' hydraulic lines at just under $500 for my backhoe thumb, might want to price out what those lines to the submerged pump will $$ run as well.

Luckily the 310 has aux hydraulics out to the extendahoe bucket. So ten more feet should do it.
This system won't be cheap, just inexpensive compared to a house.

Wouldn’t it be a lot easier to get a readily available PTO pump and use it on your M59?

The M59 would be a decent second choice, but only has a fraction of the hydraulic flow as the 310. And a couple of other things...Good as the M59 is, the 310 is just flat better at everything except being handy.

And here is the real - very sad - reason..... if I had to replace the 310, I could buy one tomorrow at the yellow JD dealer. New M59s are no longer available.
rScotty

 

[Engineer42]

 

[rScotty]

View attachment 874185

Thanks. I'm going to contact them and see if they make the same pump but with lower particle size handling and higher output pressure. I don't see any reason why not to filter to half inch max solids.

The pump can be 2, 3, or 4" outlet diameter - I'll run it directly to a manifold and then separate into 2" lines that will be about 100 psi at the manifold
I'm comparing single & double jacket flat fire hose, 2" diameter.
rScotty

 

[Engineer42]

look at 1 3/4". Easier to handle with a comparable flow rate

 

[WinterDeere]

Lots of flow at rated speed of 38 gallons a minute

It's going to come down to what sort of pressure it can maintain at the pump, at asssumed 38 GPM flow rate. Line pressure drop is real, and tractordata doesn't even give the pressure/flow curve for the tractor itself. When a tractor's hydraulics are rated 38 gpm and 2500 psi static pressure, that's not a guaranteed simultaneous condition. Moreover, even if it is, after going thru valving, lines, and fittings between tractor pump and pond pump, there's going to be substantial drop.

Having said all that, he may still have sufficient capacity to make the desired 9 hp output from the pond pump. But don't assume, do the math. HP = (GPM * PSI)/1714 is easy enough, if you know the input numbers. Knowing GPM cannot change throughout a series-connected system, all you really need to do is install a pair of tee's at the pond pump, and measure pressure drop across it while running.

There is the complicating factor of pressure relief / regulator in the tractor, but that's not so easy to account for. Basically, if the only open port for the tractor hydraulic pump is a small line set out to the pond pump, it's likely the tractor will be diverting some of the flow thru the regulator. That means he will see nowhere near 38 gpm at the pond pump, but that's not as easy to measure.

The advantage of rear mechanical PTO is you know exactly how much horsepower you can deliver there. No question, and we know it's much higher than you can deliver through hydraulics.

 

[rScotty]

look at 1 3/4". Easier to handle with a comparable flow rate

I haven't found any pump that size. There isn't anything in a hydraulic drive submersible in 1 3/4" outlet size.
One company makes a 2", but most are 3" to 4 " camlock out.
I will go 4" if I can, or 3" if I must.
Lateral hoses look to be 2" flat double jacket. 250 psi type. Or whatever is standard.

I'm getting closer to deciding on a pump.
Some are poly housing and some are alum or steel.
Several companies make a pretty similar pump.

 

[rScotty]

It's going to come down to what sort of pressure it can maintain at the pump, at asssumed 38 GPM flow rate. Line pressure drop is real, and tractordata doesn't even give the pressure/flow curve for the tractor itself. When a tractor's hydraulics are rated 38 gpm and 2500 psi static pressure, that's not a guaranteed simultaneous condition. Moreover, even if it is, after going thru valving, lines, and fittings between tractor pump and pond pump, there's going to be substantial drop.

Having said all that, he may still have sufficient capacity to make the desired 9 hp output from the pond pump. But don't assume, do the math. HP = (GPM * PSI)/1714 is easy enough, if you know the input numbers. Knowing GPM cannot change throughout a series-connected system, all you really need to do is install a pair of tee's at the pond pump, and measure pressure drop across it while running.

There is the complicating factor of pressure relief / regulator in the tractor, but that's not so easy to account for. Basically, if the only open port for the tractor hydraulic pump is a small line set out to the pond pump, it's likely the tractor will be diverting some of the flow thru the regulator. That means he will see nowhere near 38 gpm at the pond pump, but that's not as easy to measure.

The advantage of rear mechanical PTO is you know exactly how much horsepower you can deliver there. No question, and we know it's much higher than you can deliver through hydraulics.

 

[rScotty]

These hydraulically driven submersible pumps all seem to use a hydraulic motor in the 8 to 12 gpm flow range and 1000 to 2000 psi.... 1500 psi nominal. For semi-portable pumps, that seems to be enough input power. Get any larger than that, the output flow becomes diffcult to handle.

The JD310 has a control knob to select the proper auxiliary hydraulic flow rate. I am always amazed at how well the TLBs are built and designed.

The industrial and commercial equipment world seems to use hydraulic motors rather than PTO shafts.
Coming from a tractor background, it took me a while to begin to understand the advantages of hydraulic motors for providing power at a distance. The tractor world accepts a lot of compromises in favor of economy.