is it OK to use cub's hydraulics to run log splitter?

[Rick Prentice]

using a POWER BEYOND valve, specifically

Are you sure about that Matt I'd like to see a schematic of how you'd plumb things up and still keep the T/C funtional. My understanding about a power beyond valve is to protect it from blowouts while you're working the orignal valve(the original valve in this case would be the T/C internal cylinder) I'm not saying you're wrong, just that showing how to route everything and add the cooling feature with an added tank would be helpful for those confused with hydraulics.

Thanks,
Rick

[Jim Becker]

It will work. That is the way IH plumbed the 1000 loader. The manual shows how to connect, but may not be totally clear. You need a bypass block. Pressure from the TC manifold goes to the remote valve inlet. The output from the valve (where flow goes in neutral) goes to the bypass block. The dump from the valve (return flow from the remote cylinder) goes into the top of the auxiliary tank. A line from the bottom of the auxiliary tank goes into the Touch-Control filler. The auxiliary tank (and anything added in series with it) are under low pressure and provide cooling but won't have any flow if the remote cylinder isn't being used.

[beaconlight]

A Lickety Splitter (yes that is the brand of mine) after a couple of hours splitting Hickory has a 5 gallon than of fluid hatter than Rudies he with a couple of hockey sticks. You will definately need an external tank to supply enough fluid for the ram.
My splitter has a mechanical cam such that it locks in split once you operate to that and an end of thrust release. The original Kohler engine had a link to the throttle so that on return the engine idled and ran full bore on split. I haven't come up with a way of duplicating that with the 10 HP Techumsa I replaced it with. By the time I pick up the next piece the ram has returned to normalso it really doesn't matter. For the heavy stuff, Hickory gets heavy quick, I use a grapple on a chain on the three point back hoe. Pick it, split it, Pick it again for each piece is still too heavy for an oil coot.

[Rick Prentice]

but won't have any flow if the remote cylinder isn't being used.

That's says it all. The real reason for the power beyond was designed to strengthen the new remote valve, but by doing so, they needed a way to release the trapped fluid on the opposite side of the working 2 way curcuit. That brings up the question of where the heat is really generated from. If it's all at the pump and you don't have any resrictions elsewhere in the system, you're only gaining some addition cooling when you're using the remote(newly added) valve. When you're not using the remote valve, no fluid passes through the added tank. I know you're probably saying-"if you're not working the remote system, you're not generating any heat and don't need the extra cooling"

I have all the parts to make a quick cub powered splitter (Kit), so I guess it's time to throw one together and monitor things and see if some of these guesses are valid. We'll see if the cub can handle things all on it's own, or a bigger better splitter should be built like some have suggested .

Rick

[dirt devil]

It will work. That is the way IH plumbed the 1000 loader. The manual shows how to connect, but may not be totally clear. You need a bypass block. Pressure from the TC manifold goes to the remote valve inlet. The output from the valve (where flow goes in neutral) goes to the bypass block. The dump from the valve (return flow from the remote cylinder) goes into the top of the auxiliary tank. A line from the bottom of the auxiliary tank goes into the Touch-Control filler. The auxiliary tank (and anything added in series with it) are under low pressure and provide cooling but won't have any flow if the remote cylinder isn't being used.

Jim

Is there a hydraulic diagram of this somewhere? Or could one be drawn up? The only manual that I have of the 1000 loader to reference is really hard to read.

Thanks Dave

[BigBill]

Adding a large work table on both sides of the beam past the knife sure helps out too on the larger wood rather than pick it up twice or more to split again its sitting right there to turn into the knife and hit it again. It saves time too. I also added the hydraulic crane with the grapple rather than add a hydrulic lift/work table which may or may not workout with the 48"+ diameter wood we had to split. You have to save are backs were we can too. I did find out my larger work tables need to be even bigger so i'm thinking of going with hinged fold downs like the bat wing mowers added to my present work tables.

We had to rush this so we could get our wood split lastyear and i would like to upgrade it next. I'm thinking of making it split in both directions too. That would also decrease the cycle timing and increase the production too.

On all my log splitters I welded two pieces of 90 degree bent plate on both sides of my knife just about 2" past the knifes edge. This allows the knife edge to start the split and when it hits these two vertical angles it forces the wood to completely split again saving time by not going the complete stroke to split the wood. Even the narly stuff gets forced thru these two plates too.

[BigBill]

Here's some ideas you may want to consider when building a log splitter my pics are above.....

[Rudi]

Bill:

That is some serious log splitter. I am not sure it would be even a good idea to pull that one with a Cub.. especially down a long hill

Nice job.. really nice piece of equipment.

[BigBill]

Bill:

That is some serious log splitter. I am not sure it would be even a good idea to pull that one with a Cub.. especially down a long hill

Nice job.. really nice piece of equipment.

I started out buying the stuff for a smaller log splitter but then the larger beam was delivered to me so my plans changed.

This is my 3rd log splitter that i built. My first one lasted over 25+ years splitting 50 to 100 cords a year of fire wood. I actually wore out the beam. My second build was for a friend. On my first one i noticed were the beam flexed in the middle when the cylinder loaded up with the 3,000psi to split the log. Even with a 3.5" bore cylinder I could see my smaller beam arc during this time. My point is if your going with a smaller beam you need to add the long gusset plate on the bottom like i did on the one pic'd. Or fish plate the inside of the beam in this area or go with a larger H style beam. Not allowing the beam to flex in this area applies more splitting pressure to the log. I went with a medium sized beam that i have anyway and did install the flex plate. I think the beam we choose is the most important thing when building a log splitter.

I have seen some log splitter designs made with twin pipes too. I believe that metkit offers one already built you just add the hydraulics. http://www.metkit.com For a few $$$ it saves sometime in building one. Its in the new products section.

When using a lower pressure pump you need a larger cylinder so the tonnage will be higher with less pressure.