Case Colt Ingersoll Tractors banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I'm adding a loader to my 4020 PS. My original plan, which I have substantially piped in, is to install a 2 spool valve with power beyond between the factory PS splitter valve and the TCV. Like so:

Font Slope Parallel Technology Schematic


I have found by experimentation that this method will definitely not work. If I use the loader valve at all while I'm driving, the rear wheels instantly lock up. That is uworkable to the point of being unsafe.

So I'm going to have to do something else. My next plan is to give the loader valve its own circuit by means of a priority splitter valve immediately after the factory PS splitter valve. Like this:
Slope Font Rectangle Parallel Technology

I'll adjust it to ensure that the TCV always receives around 6-8gpm of flow, arrived at by trial and error. The loader would get the balance.

The downside is that I only have about 8.5gpm of flow available at the point that the splitter will be installed. This may make both the TCV and the loader speed a little anemic.

Using this splitter method, I guess the only way to truly do it right is to replace the factory pump with more like 13 or 14gpm. The 20HP engine can handle it, and that would give enough flow to do everything.

But for now I'm going to install the adjustable splitter somewhere easily accessible, so that I can easily find the best balance of flow between TCV and laoder valve, and when the loader is detached I can just adjust all the flow through to the TCV.

I'll report back to this thread once I've had a chance to see how it works.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
I can't say what is the best way. In my experience, on a loader I use to have, I split the flow from the pump 50/50. Loader and TCV were therefore independent. You would think the speed would be anemic, but when your in tight quarters and digging in the dirt, the speed was fine. So one leg went to the TCV and one leg went to a selector valve. The selector could divert flow to the loader or back to the TCV. So I either had 50/50 loader/TCV or 100 percent TCV. I'd say it worked pretty good. Once the loader was in the air, and I was travelling cross country, I would hit the selector, and go 100%, it was like engaging the super charger. I could dump the load without re-engaging the selector. Another bonus, was when backing a trailer, I could select 50/50 and back at half speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I can't say what is the best way. In my experience, on a loader I use to have, I split the flow from the pump 50/50. Loader and TCV were therefore independent. You would think the speed would be anemic, but when your in tight quarters and digging in the dirt, the speed was fine. So one leg went to the TCV and one leg went to a selector valve. The selector could divert flow to the loader or back to the TCV. So I either had 50/50 loader/TCV or 100 percent TCV. I'd say it worked pretty good. Once the loader was in the air, and I was travelling cross country, I would hit the selector, and go 100%, it was like engaging the super charger. I could dump the load without re-engaging the selector. Another bonus, was when backing a trailer, I could select 50/50 and back at half speed.
That's a great idea. I've come to understand that putting a power beyond valve ahead of the TCV is a terrible idea. I'll do a full write-up of it later, but the short version is, "using the loader valve while you're traveling causes the the rear wheels to instantly lock up". That's unworkable and even dangerous in my opinion.

So I'm going to try the priority flow divider route and see how it goes.

I'll write it up fully once I've learned more.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I know you can get diverter valves where you can adjust the divert percentage and if you upsize your pump to say a 14gpm, you could divert the flow in a way that the TCV still sees the normal 8gpm at all times but you'll be sending 6gpm to your loader valve which I think would be more than enough to run your loader (correct me if I'm wrong). That way your travel will be identical to the tractor without the loader at all. My big concern here would be space though, that's a ton of hydro lines and extra crud crammed into an already tight space. I'm interested to see how the packaging woks out on this one.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
4,185 Posts
If you are gonna add a loader, [or any other mounted attachment for that matter], always look at what the factory did. Then look for any resultant weak spots that showed up over time] in their design. That will give you a good starting plan. I'd start by cutting off the tower and building from the frame up a tower mostly copying the factory one which will give you more room for hydraulics, the joystick valve, power steering and proper support for the loader arms. Build it right and build it once.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
I know you can get diverter valves where you can adjust the divert percentage and if you upsize your pump to say a 14gpm, you could divert the flow in a way that the TCV still sees the normal 8gpm at all times but you'll be sending 6gpm to your loader valve which I think would be more than enough to run your loader (correct me if I'm wrong). That way your travel will be identical to the tractor without the loader at all. My big concern here would be space though, that's a ton of hydro lines and extra crud crammed into an already tight space. I'm interested to see how the packaging woks out on this one.
Very perceptive on multiple counts. I am going with an adjustable flow divider, as you mentioned. My pump puts out 11.2 gpm, and about 2.25 is split out to go to power steering.

That leaves around 9gpm heading into the new flow divider, which I'm hopeful will be adequate. The divider valve is very simple to adjust, so I figure I'll have one "happy medium" setting for when the loader is attached, and divert all the flow to the TCV when the loader is detached.

As for where to put things, you're right that's a challenge. I've already located the new spool valve on the right hand fender and piped it in with hard lines. I'm emulating a commercial design and leaving the loader valve permanently attached to the fender whether the loader is detached or not. It's not amazing, but it's perfectly usable and I think it looks ok.

Plant Automotive tire Motor vehicle Wood Wheel


But the divider valve is huge! It's about as big as the spool valve. It has to go in the line on the far left and output into the far left spool valve port as well as into the line on the far right.

Shoe Plant Motor vehicle Chainsaw Wood


So yeah. That's going to be a challenge. I haven't quite decided where and how to go about that in a way that's reachable to be adjusted and doesn't look just awful.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Very perceptive on multiple counts. I am going with an adjustable flow divider, as you mentioned. My pump puts out 11.2 gpm, and about 2.25 is split out to go to power steering.

That leaves around 9gpm heading into the new flow divider, which I'm hopeful will be adequate. The divider valve is very simple to adjust, so I figure I'll have one "happy medium" setting for when the loader is attached, and divert all the flow to the TCV when the loader is detached.

As for where to put things, you're right that's a challenge. I've already located the new spool valve on the right hand fender and piped it in with hard lines. I'm emulating a commercial design and leaving the loader valve permanently attached to the fender whether the loader is detached or not. It's not amazing, but it's perfectly usable and I think it looks ok.

View attachment 124375

But the divider valve is huge! It's about as big as the spool valve. It has to go in the line on the far left and output into the far left spool valve port as well as into the line on the far right.

View attachment 124376

So yeah. That's going to be a challenge. I haven't quite decided where and how to go about that in a way that's reachable to be adjusted and doesn't look just awful.

Bob
I love the detail here. Those hardlines look great, I hope I can do hardlines when I get to that point on mine, I would assume it takes a special "touch" to get them right. Plus this is the exact reason I'm hacking up other sections of my tractor to add space for more extra nonsense like this! lol

Also, that diverter valve is absolutely massive and actually I think is the same one I will plan on using in the future should I decide to use one. For the loader, even just 3 gpm is perfectly fine so long as you use a smaller bore like a 1.5" or 2". I did some calculations and a 2" bore with a 20" stroke would give you a travel time of about 5 seconds which is fine for me. Here is a calculator I've found that I use for these calculations: Hydraulic Cylinder Speed Calculator

Lift power is obviously less on the smaller bores but you'll be limited by the strength and weight of the tractor before you even touch the max lift capacity of a 2" bore cylinder I would think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Thanks for the kind words! Yes, hard lines are like herding cats. Super strong, picky, angry cats. :)

But they are more economical than hoses, and I think they look a lot better when they're done. And they'll outlast hoses. So in the end, I think they're worth it.

Having said that, doing this reconfiguration would sure be easier if I wasn't trying to redo hard lines.
So my advice would be, "figure out what you really want to do before you begin!" Naturally, I'm doing it the hard way.

I hadn't seen that calculator, I have to go plug in my figures and see what it says. I'm using 2-in diameter cylinders with 16-in throw for everything. In the drawings I did, I didn't really have room for anything beyond 16. And I've seen a couple pictures where these smaller cylinder rods have actually folded over on full extension. So I'm a little more comfortable having only 16 in sticking out there instead of 20.

And I'm sure you're right about cylinder force. As long as you're not trying to confine yourself to the 700 PSI that the Case mid-lift circuit operates at, then the cylinders themselves can exert substantially more force than anything this application will ever demand. At 2000 PSI, a pair of 2-in cylinders exert 25,000 lbs on the push stroke. I think that's plenty. 🙂

I intend to dial in my relief valve for the loader a little above the point of picking up a thousand pounds payload in the bucket. I'm guessing that's not going to exceed 1500 psi. But we'll see. Thanks for your input!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Sitting here staring at this picture, I think I've decided what I'm going to do with the diverter valve. I'm going to pick up the loader valve 2 and 1/2 in or so and put the dividing valve underneath.

I'll bolt the dividing valve straight to the fender and build a little cover/shell out of quarter inch plate and bolt it over top of the dividing valve. Then bolt the loader valve down into that shell.

The adjustment knob will be facing the operator. The divider inlet will be right where the relevant hard line currently is, so that'll be an easy straight-on connection. The two divider outlets will face outboard and to the rear of the tractor where that current far right valve outlet is at now. So that hard line on the far right will require very little adjustment to get hooked up. But I'll have to make an entire new line to curl around underneath the frontward part of the loader valve and loop back around and up into it. Bends that tight are very difficult to make with the my available tools, so I'll probably make judicious use of multiple fittings to get the job done.

In the end I think it'll meet all my design goals: sturdy, easy to reach, easy to operate. And doesn't look utterly awful.

This conversation has been very helpful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
I like the idea of using a second priority valve for the loader circuit.. when your using the loader your not doing fast ground work anyway if that does make a noticeable difference. Just a thought but why not use the mid lift circuit? The loaders lift circuit relief setting is around 1200 psi. The tcv is the same and the garden tractors it just has a a different relief spring. The same hh-34 rear 3 point is used. The only thing I'd question would be the mid lift cylinder. I don't know how much that can handle. I've increased my lift circuit on my 4020 to 700 from the 575 it was at and no ill effects on the mid lift. Just thinking this may simply some plumbing. Thoughts??

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
How would you split out the mid lift oil flow? I've heard of people essentially locking open their mid lift valve and then putting additional valves to redirect the flow from there to whatever extra functions they're after. Basically using that section of the TCV as a splitter. That doesn't appeal to me. A lot of work, too little flow, too little pressure.

Is there a different way I'm not getting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
Maybe I'm missing something it seems the 'right'(whatever that is) way would be to simply install a Case/Ingersol loader valve. Not a cheap valve, but it does provide the needed functions in one compact package.

I have a 'used to be 644' that I've been working on forever it seems. Front axle work, steering parts etc. Replaced the rear axles, and axle bushings/bearing with LBH high flotation parts, wheels from a Sears/craftman 12x12s and 26x12-12 ATV tires. Still debating on the engine and working on other projects mostly.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
4,185 Posts
Atv tires wouldn't be my first choice on a loader, especially a light one like a Case. Reason is , they have too much "suspension. Since the [lightly loaded] rear tires are your stability especially when the loader is raised, balloon tires will tend to squish and bounce when moving causing the loader to rock from side to side unnervingly. Air them up hard enough to stop this and your traction becomes next to useless. It took me quite a while to get used to radial tires on a regular farm loader and the amount of give they had, but it is also 12 000 pounds and and quite stable once you get used to the amount of "suspension" in the tires. I sure wouldn't want that "ocean motion" on one of our 1200 pound Cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
I ran those tires on the back of my JD455 w/loader for about 4 years. No issues at all as long as there is plenty of weight on the back to keep the contact patch flat. These are 6PR, much different that the 2PR you seem to have experienced.

Atv tires wouldn't be my first choice on a loader, especially a light one like a Case. Reason is , they have too much "suspension. Since the [lightly loaded] rear tires are your stability especially when the loader is raised, balloon tires will tend to squish and bounce when moving causing the loader to rock from side to side unnervingly. Air them up hard enough to stop this and your traction becomes next to useless. It took me quite a while to get used to radial tires on a regular farm loader and the amount of give they had, but it is also 12 000 pounds and and quite stable once you get used to the amount of "suspension" in the tires. I sure wouldn't want that "ocean motion" on one of our 1200 pound Cases.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top