Farmall Cub

Round 2 worked well but I wanted a simpler design
I like this design but requires drilling and a 5/8 tap which some folks may not have.

http://www.farmallcub.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=73204

So round 3:

3/8 to 5/8 coupler from McMaster Carr, 5/8 stud, 3/8 grade 8 rod, 3/4 inch DOM tube, nut, washer, and you have a no drill, no bend, no weld, no tap engine brace....a No Nuthin brace.

5/8 stud into the bolster, 3/8 to 5/8 coupler tightened to hold the bolster. grind a flat on one end of a 3/8 rod. Fit the 3/4 tube, grinding, test, grind some more, test, and so on until it is a hammer tight fit between the rear engine mount and the coupler. Screw the 3/8 rod through the rear engine mount, the 3/4 tube, and into the 3/8 side of the coupler. Nut and washer on the rear side holds all together. No bends to flex, no welds to make. Simple design.

stud




coupler



All thread rod test fit



grind end of rod to fit a wrench



Tighten nut



All done





Time left over to clean up some of that junk pile!



]

Clever.

thats a neat little digger, looks like it would be good for digging a basement under my house.

I hate to sound uninformed, but what is a "DOM tube"?

thiggy wrote:I hate to sound uninformed, but what is a "DOM tube"?

http://www.stockcarsteel.com/dom-steel- ... r-mandrel/

Mr. Landreo. Thank you for the inspiration to get me out to the shop to accomplish something productive today.

I wholeheartedly give you credit for the thought, I simplified your design slightly to save the McMaster Carr expense.

I don't know if this will be as sturdy as your design as it is a pusher instead of a puller, however I'll give it a test run this winter.

I substituted the DOM tubing with a length of 3/4" iron pipe I had on hand. The pipe needs to be threaded on one end. One 1" to 3/4" pipe reducing coupling completes the bill of materials.

The pipe was marked to be cut to clear the rear engine bolt while turned into the coupling as far as possible while the coupling was held over the front bolster bolt head.

Two pipe wrenches were used to unscrew the pipe from the coupling extending the length of the device until tight. The alignment isn't dead nuts on center so I may need to tighten it if it wears in. I'll hold off on the paint until that time.
The amount of bolt head overlap inside the pipe and coupling will prevent the brace from dropping out completely if it should become loose. However I would like to see it loosen slightly, indicating that it is absorbing impact thus becoming shorter.

I'll revisit this link later this winter after I have moved some snow and report back on the effectiveness of the brace.

It looks great, was easy to do, clears the filter drain, and only needs a coat of paint to blend in like it never happened.

Mr. Landreo, your device does have the one up on aesthetics. If a 3/4" coupling would have slid completely over the bolster bolt head, this one would look a little more streamlined instead of like a plumbing job, however I'm all about function over fashion.

Painted it anyway. I can touch up the scratches when I tighten it.

Every crackeded block I have seen has been damaged under tension, not compression. Two slight changes should be made to Landreo's brace:
1) The DOM should be a little shorter so the brace pulls the block together rather than giving it the initial push apart.
2) The 3/8 all-thread should be a bit longer so the nut doesn't have to try to grip the ground off threads.
It is also worth repeating that the 3/8 all-thread needs to be grade 8 (as mentioned in the original post). Common all-thread would be little more than decoration.

The pipe brace does nothing to help the block in tension.

Jim Becker wrote:Every crackeded block I have seen has been damaged under tension, not compression.

Thankfully I have never damaged a block, the added brace a small insurance policy to avoid doing so in the future.

I am trying hard to digest your information, however since I have never broken a block, perhaps I have misunderstood the tension issue or more specifically, which way the force is applied causing them to break.

My objective was to protect the crack prone area from rearward movement created by a shock load from the front by bridging the gap from front to rear.

I wasn't actually looking to add tension in either direction but to hold the front casting as rigidly stationary as possible, similar to a fixed side plate or frame rail running front to rear.

Any additional information at your convenience would be greatly appreciated.

Picture this. Somebody gets their Cub stuck in the mud. They go get the big tractor to pull it out, which they do by wrapping a chain around the front axle and giving it a yank. That isn't the only way people break them, but most broken blocks match the expected damage from that scenario.

The late George Willer told me do not put a loader on your Cub if you don't want a cracked ear, by that I assume the excessive load on the front would also be a problem, Rick's support braces does address that somewhat.

Jim Becker wrote:

I belive I follow you now. Tension and compression meaning forces from both fore
and aft pressures.

If I've understood that to be correct, the Landreo brace acts as a dual direction device protecting the flange from both forward and rearward deflection whereas the one I whipped up only protects in one direction which would be from frontal impact.

Does that sound about right or am I still misinterpreting the bracing concept?

lazyuniondriver wrote:Does that sound about right . . . ?

Exactly.

Jim Becker wrote:

lazyuniondriver wrote:Does that sound about right . . . ?

Exactly.

Perfect, I appreciate the forewarning.

All good coments. I had to redo the initial post 4 time because of internet outages. By the last time I neglected to comment on the length of the 3/8 rod. I cut it short but should be slightly longer so the nut is on all threads rather on the flats.

Looking at the forces I assume pushing towards the rear would spread the force over the whole face of the engine mounts, pulling the bolster forward puts the force in only two places, the 5/8 bolts. I am assuming the pulling forward would be more likely to break the engine mount. Same idea for a loader, the loader weight will twist the bolster on the horizontal axis and again require that that twist be contained over a small area, i.e. the 5/8 bolts.
I agree with Jim Becker, tension on the brace is the important part for most breaks but you may as well cover compression as well.

The link above for engine brace #2 showes a stronger brace but requires more work. I wanted a simple design that anyone could make but was still reasonably strong.

I view things like this as open source software, anyone can look at my design, modify, post back with the results, make it better.