I know us case... guys are into axles driven by hydraulic motors. I'm wondering if anyone has setup a drive motor for each wheel and if so how has that worked out for them? Part of the motivation is looking at different ways to handle steering other than articulated or brake/skid. Also getting traction in some undeveloped places. Now before you say go get a zero turn I'm looking to setup a tractor.. not a mower. 4 wheels driven as a minimum.
anyone seen a tractor with hydro motors for each tire?
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
What you are talking about are commonly referred to as "wheel motors". I happen to own an All-Wheel-Drive Champion grader. The four rear wheels are driven in the conventional manner used by Champion and other brands but the front wheels are mounted on wheel motors that are driven by a separate hydrostatic drive system.
The AWD system can be turned on or off at the flick of a switch. The grader steers in the conventional manner using a steering wheel rotating a steering pump that provides fluid to the two steering cylinders that make the front wheels turn left or right. While I agree that there are merits to the design, the cost is very high if new components are sourced. The most ideal system would consist of 4 individual hydrostatic pumps driving the four individual wheel motors. HP demand would be high. The pump drive would be complex. There would be three hoses going to each motor because these motors usually require a case drain line. The reservoir would have to be large and so would the oil cooler.
A steering wheel would still be needed whether you went with articulation or a front axle. Controlling all four pumps would interesting from a differential aspect. I can't say how you would go about that.
I do not know of anyone who has embarked on such a project.
The AWD system can be turned on or off at the flick of a switch. The grader steers in the conventional manner using a steering wheel rotating a steering pump that provides fluid to the two steering cylinders that make the front wheels turn left or right. While I agree that there are merits to the design, the cost is very high if new components are sourced. The most ideal system would consist of 4 individual hydrostatic pumps driving the four individual wheel motors. HP demand would be high. The pump drive would be complex. There would be three hoses going to each motor because these motors usually require a case drain line. The reservoir would have to be large and so would the oil cooler.
A steering wheel would still be needed whether you went with articulation or a front axle. Controlling all four pumps would interesting from a differential aspect. I can't say how you would go about that.
I do not know of anyone who has embarked on such a project.
Driving each wheel separately certainly could be done, but, there would need to be a serious plan if you wanted it to really be worthwhile. Even then, I gotta ask what "worth" one might actually get if the goal is simply to power the existing two rear wheels (I realize you hinted at perhaps more).
Some of the concerns I would have would come down to adequate speed control methods. Obviously, if you are driving along on a non-slippery surface with one wheel attempting to turn at a higher rpm without a differential involved, your going to feel it in the steering. I assure you that your differential spiders turn more than a guy would think under most conditions. Even small psi differences in the two tires will cause this.
They make these units not too far from me http://www.millerstn.com/products/nitro-4000-series.php
My neighbor works there and I know these are driven by 4 individual wheel motors. I also know that the hydraulic control of the motors is rather sophisticated to keep the machine stable on the road at higher speeds and also control wheel spin in the fields. Not sure a fellow would have room to fully accomplish something that would be successful if you wanted to maintain similar speeds to what a typical case travels at currently.
Mechanically it wouldn't be too difficult, cast away the original axle, pick some properly sized wheel motors and get them mounted up. I dont think this would work if you did it with used components. I think you would have to have brand new matching motors to avoid as much mismatched speed differences as possible. We all know how different existing used Case drive motors act after they have some years on them. Same goes here.
Of course you would also want to do the math to see if your going to forego any "gearbox", which if you do, you would have to make a compromise between capability and existing horsepower. Essentially, the currently available horsepower is why the tractors have a two speed axle. I bet you would need at minimum, double the horsepower they use now to cover the same range of capability if you were to direct drive the wheels, and I am not counting any PTO usage. I'm guessing here, but I dont think I'm dreaming in technicolor here.
I like the idea of two drive motors, but only in the realm of creating a small Case GT sized example of a crawler where travel speeds verses traction become a much more controllable experiment. The results of that would be as predictable as the many small track based trenchers that have been successfully used over the years.
If your main goal comes down to controllable traction and elimination of wheel spin, I dont think you need to look outside the window of just adding individual brakes to the existing Case rear axle. Its plenty tough to handle this and has been successfully done by one of the group members (rascal beat me to it!). Someday my 449 project tractor will have dual brakes.... Very similarly done to the fellow members method.
I could be missing your goals completely here.... you really could be planning two rear drive wheels and swivel casters up front, but it did not sound like that. For more overall "traction", I rather like plumbing in disconnects on the existing drive circuits so you could parallel in a 3 point mounted "second rear axle". That will do wonders for traction, but might affect your hopes for great steering !
Some of the concerns I would have would come down to adequate speed control methods. Obviously, if you are driving along on a non-slippery surface with one wheel attempting to turn at a higher rpm without a differential involved, your going to feel it in the steering. I assure you that your differential spiders turn more than a guy would think under most conditions. Even small psi differences in the two tires will cause this.
They make these units not too far from me http://www.millerstn.com/products/nitro-4000-series.php
My neighbor works there and I know these are driven by 4 individual wheel motors. I also know that the hydraulic control of the motors is rather sophisticated to keep the machine stable on the road at higher speeds and also control wheel spin in the fields. Not sure a fellow would have room to fully accomplish something that would be successful if you wanted to maintain similar speeds to what a typical case travels at currently.
Mechanically it wouldn't be too difficult, cast away the original axle, pick some properly sized wheel motors and get them mounted up. I dont think this would work if you did it with used components. I think you would have to have brand new matching motors to avoid as much mismatched speed differences as possible. We all know how different existing used Case drive motors act after they have some years on them. Same goes here.
Of course you would also want to do the math to see if your going to forego any "gearbox", which if you do, you would have to make a compromise between capability and existing horsepower. Essentially, the currently available horsepower is why the tractors have a two speed axle. I bet you would need at minimum, double the horsepower they use now to cover the same range of capability if you were to direct drive the wheels, and I am not counting any PTO usage. I'm guessing here, but I dont think I'm dreaming in technicolor here.
I like the idea of two drive motors, but only in the realm of creating a small Case GT sized example of a crawler where travel speeds verses traction become a much more controllable experiment. The results of that would be as predictable as the many small track based trenchers that have been successfully used over the years.
If your main goal comes down to controllable traction and elimination of wheel spin, I dont think you need to look outside the window of just adding individual brakes to the existing Case rear axle. Its plenty tough to handle this and has been successfully done by one of the group members (rascal beat me to it!). Someday my 449 project tractor will have dual brakes.... Very similarly done to the fellow members method.
I could be missing your goals completely here.... you really could be planning two rear drive wheels and swivel casters up front, but it did not sound like that. For more overall "traction", I rather like plumbing in disconnects on the existing drive circuits so you could parallel in a 3 point mounted "second rear axle". That will do wonders for traction, but might affect your hopes for great steering !
I'd really like to come up with some form of a micro forwarder with boom and am attempting to come up with a few different options for driving the thing. mechanical, driven, bogie etc etc. There will have to be a few axles at least unless i make it really dinky and want to pick up sticks... 100 series platform forwarder.... haha
Been inspired by some of Alstor's 8x8s
Been inspired by some of Alstor's 8x8s
Certainly you could do an 8 x 8 articulated and be able to turn very well....., but you would need to float at least one axle on each end so they would all stay in contact with the ground.
That whole forwarder world is pretty neat. It would be an excellent project using Case GT parts, especially if the original Case GT look and feel was maintained. I'd opt for single 200 series axles on both ends as a traditional articulated, but add a 200 series axle out back on a short 4 link attachment method. You might even find a way to use hydraulics and springs to allow you at adjust down pressure on the rearmost axle for when that boom is loaded.
I'd stick with the 5 bolt axles because you can find/adapt your way a little easier into the massive looking wheels you'd want. Drive all the axles with 400 motors right away to increase available power because your going to need it !
I'd use multiple pumps, a larger one obviously for auxiliary hydraulics, but cutting the motion drive pump volume by at least half of original so you get a lower low gear. I dont think you really want a scale forwarder to run the speeds that most 224's run unless you end up with a rather long wheelbase. Most traditional wheelbased articulateds do seem to have squirmy issues at road speeds, especially when they get a little worn (we have all followed a well used payloader down the road), so, steering action and reaction might not come around on the first attempt.
Send pictures next week when you finish it up ! LOL !
That whole forwarder world is pretty neat. It would be an excellent project using Case GT parts, especially if the original Case GT look and feel was maintained. I'd opt for single 200 series axles on both ends as a traditional articulated, but add a 200 series axle out back on a short 4 link attachment method. You might even find a way to use hydraulics and springs to allow you at adjust down pressure on the rearmost axle for when that boom is loaded.
I'd stick with the 5 bolt axles because you can find/adapt your way a little easier into the massive looking wheels you'd want. Drive all the axles with 400 motors right away to increase available power because your going to need it !
I'd use multiple pumps, a larger one obviously for auxiliary hydraulics, but cutting the motion drive pump volume by at least half of original so you get a lower low gear. I dont think you really want a scale forwarder to run the speeds that most 224's run unless you end up with a rather long wheelbase. Most traditional wheelbased articulateds do seem to have squirmy issues at road speeds, especially when they get a little worn (we have all followed a well used payloader down the road), so, steering action and reaction might not come around on the first attempt.
Send pictures next week when you finish it up ! LOL !
would be ideal if i could yank the drive motor off and pop it on an axle that allowed me to mechanically link it to the case axle housing.
trailer and boom slick articulated connetion tractor
case/other/motor-------hyrdrolines------case/other/motor
otherwise I could use a couple dummy axles paired along with my series run case axles and link them with some sort of chain/track
will look into floating and springs....
another question to challenge the power of our case drive motors is how many axles could one motor drive if mechanically linked?
theres always the chain driven method using a motor per side like on those 8 wheel atv-utv things. Would want new motors that match then
trailer and boom slick articulated connetion tractor
case/other/motor-------hyrdrolines------case/other/motor
otherwise I could use a couple dummy axles paired along with my series run case axles and link them with some sort of chain/track
will look into floating and springs....
another question to challenge the power of our case drive motors is how many axles could one motor drive if mechanically linked?
theres always the chain driven method using a motor per side like on those 8 wheel atv-utv things. Would want new motors that match then
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Case Colt Ingersoll Tractors
A forum community dedicated to Colt, Case and Ingersoll tractors owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Join now to ask and comment!
