Jump to content
WheelHorseVH

520H Front Hydraulic Idea

Recommended Posts

Handy Don
15 hours ago, WheelHorseVH said:

@Handy Don for the lines, standard brake line size will do? And for the fittings, what should I buy?

 

I can do single and double flares on brake line, will either of those be compatible with the fitting?

 

Thank you, your hydraulics posts are incredibly informative. 

I used the new nickel-copper alloy brake lines instead of steel because rust gives me a rash ;). The extra few bucks was worth it to me and I got easier bends/flares, as well.

 

I used standard single 37º flares and fittings. No need to get extra fancy. Definitely practice flaring before doing your “for real” parts in the alloy. I found I needed a bit more tubing extending out of the flaring clamp to get the best flare length.

 

Also, with the alloy, do NOT expect to get as many loosen/tighten cycles at the flare fittings as you might with steel--the material is softer and forms readily to the fittings. I went a bit less tight on them until running the complete system and then tightened where I found leaks until they stopped! 

 

Lastly, alloy is VERY unhappy with vibration and will crack at the fittings if allowed to “buzz”. Tractors shake a lot. Be sure you have the tubing fully clamped down. I used the metal clamps with shaped plastic inserts at no more than 10” intervals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH
8 hours ago, Handy Don said:

used standard single 37º flares and fittings


To continue my theme of dumb questions…when it comes to fittings, what exactly should I buy? They would need to fit the standard flared brake line to the WH spool valve and the WH lift cylinder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don
14 hours ago, WheelHorseVH said:


To continue my theme of dumb questions…when it comes to fittings, what exactly should I buy? They would need to fit the standard flared brake line to the WH spool valve and the WH lift cylinder. 

This one opens the door to a LOT of options! I (over)spent a lot of time poring over websites and compiling lists based on different configurations of tubing routing. I also have a box of unused fittings from some of my “tried and it didn’t work” ideas.

 

This chart helped me understand the different kinds of connections. JIC flare, NPT, O-Ring Boss (ORB), and O-Ring Face (ORF) are the most common moderate pressure fittings. The control valve I used required ORB terminations, as did the WH cylinder. The pressure relief used NPT. I used forged steel JIC 37º flare for the ⅜" tubing connections (note the stronger JIC fittings require two parts--a sleeve and a collar nut). I used flexible hose solely to connect to the cylinders, since they would have movement.

 

This chart was essential for helping me spec out my shopping list for the JIC-to-JIC connections as well as for JIC-to-ORB  and JIC-to-NPT component connections (pump, control and pressure relief valves, quick-connects, and filter/tank). I looked at getting custom hoses to the cylinders with the exact end fittings I wanted, but in the end using “stock” hoses and a couple of adaptor couplings was cheaper and more flexible. Note that nearly all manufactures will cross-reference their most commonly used fittings to the numbers in this chart, though some “extend” this numbering to identify unique fittings. 

 

Note the nomenclature in this example:

6600-06-06-06-FG : OneHydraulics Tee, 0.375 (3/8) Male JIC x 0.375 (3/8) Male JIC x 0.375 (3/8) Female JIC Swivel, Steel, 5000psi

 

OneHydraulics is the manufacturer

6600 defines a Tee with male JICs on the “through” ends and a female JIC swivel on the “leg” end

-06-06-06 defines the dimensions of the corresponding “through” ends and the leg in 1/16s of an inch -- 6/16ths = ⅜”

FG means it is forged steel (vs. SS for stainless or B for brass)

 

Here are links to three vendors I used, though I can no longer remember what came from where.

https://www.hydraulichoses.com https://www.hydraulicsdirect.com/default.asp https://brennaninc.com

 

I also used https://www.surpluscenter.com for some good deals on stock hoses, anti-friction sheathing, and quick connect dust plugs

Edited by Handy Don
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH

Wow. I am going to go read and digest all of this and then come back.
 

Once again thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
peter lena

 @WheelHorseVH agree with @Handy Don on the multiple view look / ideas , never look at a problem  with a singular fix , take advantage of where you are in the fix it stage . tube routing , connections , etc . have often eliminated  a chronic issue , pete 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don
22 hours ago, WheelHorseVH said:

Wow. I am going to go read and digest all of this and then come back.
 

Once again thank you!

Glad to help.

BTW, please don’t let the breadth and depth of those reference charts overwhelm you. I’d focus on the ORB, JIC, and NPTs since you won’t see ANY of those other types of connection on a WH!

I happen to geek out on well structured and informative charts and tables but they surely are not everyone's forte. 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH

@Handy Don I feel like I have just watched hours of boxing tape and am ready to enter the ring! I have combed through a ton of hydraulics topics on RS and come across your many pieces of advice. On top of that, I read through a bunch of other hydraulics material and I think I am way better equipped. I am determined to not let this thread die without a successful conclusion. To that end, I now have a cylinder from a 520H that I am going to rebuild this week and a spare spool valve from a 520H on the way. I will describe my plans below and see if anyone has thoughts.

 

The topic of spool valves left my head spinning. It seemed like the only viable option for a dual spool value was for me to find one off of a C195 with the Eaton 1100 and that proved to be tricky. The dual spool valve off a D200 would work but would require me to add external relief since it lacks the internal relief that the Eaton pump expects inside its valves. So I did away with that option and instead will look to use a second 520H valve mounted to the right of the original valve so it can be hooked up to the (former) motion control lever. This way, I know I have internal relief at 700psi for the Eaton.

 

For lines, what I am thinking is this. A stock late model 520H has 3/8" formed metal lines running to and from the valve (P & T). The lift cylinder has hose going to the valve (A & B). I will make a short section of metal line with JIC fittings to connect the T port from the existing valve to the P port of the new valve. I will do the same to connect the T port from the new valve to the existing T metal line going back to the back of the tractor. That leaves the A & B ports for the new valve. For these, I would use 3/16" brake line to run them down to a location yet to be determined where they would terminate in quick couplers. I haven't yet decided whether they should have a short section of hose before the quick couplers just to make things a little more flexible. Open to thoughts on that.

 

That takes us through the tractor part. For the plow itself, I have something I still need to figure out but I will start with the design then go to that. The plow frame will have the 520H cylinder mounted to the front somewhere and will either operate against the quadrant in a manner similar to the hand lever, or will have a tang welded somewhere else, maybe on the plow moldboard. From there, there will be 3/16" metal brake lines running along the frame to wherever the quick connects are hanging off the tractor. From that point up will be brief sections of hose with the quick couplers on the end.

 

The part that I need to figure out...many plows use 2 single acting cylinders to operate angle. I believe this is because you can achieve symmetry easier than using a single double acting cylinder. Is there is mounting position with 1 double acting cylinder that will get me full rotation in both directions without one side being short of full rotation, or the other direction over-rotating?

 

All feedback welcome. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
wallfish

My :twocents-twocents:

Mount the lines and quick connectors on the tractor rigid. Then use hoses to the cylinders (or motors) on any attachments after that for the flexibility and allow for movement and simplicity.

By using 2 single acting cylinders on a dozer blade connected to a single spool valve, it's basically the same as a double acting cylinder but the mounting points (4) of the 2 cylinders would be spread out over a larger support area and basically double the support strength on the blade and the frame. Each cylinder will lock in position when the valve is centered.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don

Well I’m glad you are back and definitely haven’t given up. Hooray!

 

The only real downside to the fluid plumbing you describe is that you won’t be able to move both cylinders with significant force at the same time. I don’t want to overwhelm you with the details but as long as you operate ONE control at a time, you’ll get your expected good results.

 

“Big boy” plows need exactly symmetric force for rotating and holding in either direction, hence they use the two cylinders and then “extend” either one to move its respective side forward and then “lock it". The 520 cylinder is plenty strong enough to hold the plow in either extend or retract position, since the control valve closes both the A and B when it is in neutral (shunting P to T, of course). 

 

Critical for attaching is to carefully measure the total throw of your cylinder (they vary). This is the difference in length between fully extended and fully retracted.

Use this to find where on the plow that throw can rotate the plow from left to right. On my BD-4263 dozer blade, the standard lever attachment point moves about 4” for the full swing. I’d figure on losing about a quarter of an inch of the throw at each end of the travel to mechanical slop in the linkage. Specifics for your plow will vary, but don’t rule out having a linkage rather than a direct connection. Put up some pictures and measurements if you’d like.

 

 

Edited by Handy Don
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
wallfish
1 hour ago, Handy Don said:

“Big boy” plows need exactly symmetric force for rotating and holding in either direction, hence they use the two cylinders and then “extend” either one to move its respective side forward and then “lock it". The 520 cylinder is plenty strong enough to hold the plow in either extend or retract position, since the control valve closes both the A and B when it is in neutral (shunting P to T, of course). 

Will the single mount ends hold up better when running into the immovable object? Or twist them? Or, will it bend that little 1/2" rod of a 520 cylinder? It's a short stroke on those little cylinders so add any part of the blade extending out past the mounting point to the mechanical advantage, or in this case the disadvantage to the forces involved. Yes, that cylinder will easily move it but even if the mounting points hold up, then it transfers the weak point to the size of that cylinder rod. I'm guessing I could bend a 1/2" hardened rod with the blade on my 654 if it was mounted rigid from the blade to the plow frame in the position a 520 cylinder would fit. But again, I'm guessing.

I'm not so sure it's about having symmetry to look good on the big ones but more to split the forces between the 2 cylinders for much better support using smaller cylinders instead of one big honking cylinder that would be slower.  :confusion-shrug: Just kinda spit balling to what sticks

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
kpinnc

Not quite the same thing, but I used a twin spool on my Bronco 3-point with a D series cylinder. It's larger diameter and rod moves slower, and was less likely to bend under load. Also used on a Sundstrand as opposed to an Eaton transmission. The Eaton charge pumps appear to have greater volume, as the standard cylinder moves much faster with them. 

 

Anyway, the D series cylinders are very stout. You'd be hard pressed to bend one of them. 

 

 

2960.jpg

IMG_20220123_161054288.jpg

IMG_20220122_211841520.jpg

IMG_20230829_115555501.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH

I honestly had not considered the cylinder rod bending under load but that makes sense. I wonder if there is a geometric way for me to mount it to where it is "head-on" against the load when it is at full extension on, let's say, a full left angle of the blade assuming the cylinder is mounted to the right side of the plow frame. Good thing for me to think through, @wallfish.

 

@Handy Don I don't think I would need to have a situation where both valves would be actuated at the same time so I think that is fine. The only thing that I worry about is whether standard brake line at 3/16" is adequate for running to the cylinder. P and T would be 3/8" stock so it doesn't affect the trans in any way.

 

@kpinnc That D cylinder indeed looks stout. Those are not rebuildable without cutting, correct?

 

Finally, I know a lot of pictures on old posts went by the wayside a few years ago but does anyone have pictures of a WH plow with hydraulic angle? I would love to see how others mounted theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don

@kpinnc and @wallfish’s points are well taken with regard to the stoutness of the cylinder’s rod coming into play--especially the concern for hitting something solid with the end of the plow being supported by an extended rod. The sturdiness of the quadrant locks on WH plows is testament to the potential forces. 

I did a little checking, and cylinders often seen on the “Big” plows have pretty thick rods. That thickness would limit their power to retract so, again, having two cylinders each pushing on one side of the plow makes sense.

For your plan, running two cylinders off the same valve might be a solution. The A port on the valve would connect to A on one cylinder and B on the other. Vice versa for the B port connection. That would divide the force on the plow over the two cylinders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don
3 minutes ago, WheelHorseVH said:

 

@Handy Don I don't think I would need to have a situation where both valves would be actuated at the same time so I think that is fine. The only thing that I worry about is whether standard brake line at 3/16" is adequate for running to the cylinder. P and T would be 3/8" stock so it doesn't affect the trans in any way. 

 

@kpinnc That D cylinder indeed looks stout. Those are not rebuildable without cutting, correct?

 

Finally, I know a lot of pictures on old posts went by the wayside a few years ago but does anyone have pictures of a WH plow with hydraulic angle? I would love to see how others mounted theirs.

I used ⅜” brake line--I would stick with this throughout. The cylinder fittings were 5/16"

D cylinders have 1” rods and yes, those cylinders must be cut to be rebuilt. 

I’ve never seen a hydro-rotate plow on a WH.

JD does have a 54” hydro rotate plow. Different years used different cylinders. This one’s are similar to the D-style. Note how close to the pivot the rotate cylinder is--I’m guessing its throw is 4” with ~2” exposed when the plow is centered.

Other things about the Deere plow:

- the lift cylinder lifts on retract--it emphasizes power for downforce

- the spring-loaded pin near the right-hand trip spring locks the blade from tipping over on impact (not a feature on WH plows)

- the plow mounts directly to the front of the substantially heavier than WH frame of the JD 300 and 400 series tractors

- lift and rotate cylinders are the same - here is a source, if you are interested!

 

image.png.a188af21763289d797b3609ac4b12427.png 

 

I found the specs, too!

AM31362
 

Specification  
Weight: 5.73 LBS 2.60 Kg
Bore Diameter 2.500 IN
Rod Diameter 1.000 IN
Stroke 4.000 IN
Closed Length 8.000 IN
End Type-Rod & Cap 0101
Rod End Size 0.516 IN
Cap End Size 0.516 IN
Working Pressure 2,000 PSI

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH

Seeing the pictures of the JD setup are really helpful, thank you for that. @wallfishI am starting to think your point about the 520 cylinder is a good one, especially seeing the JD setup uses a cylinder with a 1" rod. I am kicking myself a little that I went ahead and got the 520 cylinder and am in the process of rebuilding it right now. Worst case scenario, I will have a really nice refreshed cylinder to keep on my shelf oiled and ready to go if I need it.

 

So I am thinking that I will get that JD cylinder, @Handy Don. It is just easier to spend the money on that knowing it is brand new rather than buying a used one from a D and not knowing if I would have to send it out to get rebuilt. 

 

For spool valves, I would love to throw in a dual spool but there are 2 issues.

 

1) I do not know how to source one that is internally relieved the way the Eaton 1100 needs (D spools are not) and

 

2) I don't know if the valve would physically fit in the space where I am looking to mount it under the right motion lever.

 

If anyone has an internally relieved dual spool valve, please PM me. If I got this, then I think I would be in great shape to having a rear cylinder as well. If I can get both with not a lot of extra work while I am doing it, why not, right? Any issues you all see with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don
1 hour ago, WheelHorseVH said:

dual spool but there are 2 issues.

YES! 

It could be done (adding external pressure relief), but I realized it would take hours and hours to work out how to do it and to install it, and any maintenance would be a nightmare.  

The WH engineers/designers kept the 520’s innards pretty snugly packed and they chose their components to just do the job so (except for longevity and “KISS”) there isn’t much extra space or functionality anywhere.

I did a lot of research hoping for a dual with internal pressure relief and came to the conclusion that they don’t exist for pressures below 1,200 psi. The PR valve I bought cost $75 at the time as a special order item where I could choose the fitting connection sizing. A bonus was that I could mount it in a place convenient for adjusting. 

 

I settled on an outboard push/pull cable control joystick and positioned the valve up front on a custom bracket bolted to the frame. This layout simplified both the plumbing and the control linkages by a lot. 

You can see the 1” cylinder rod in the front lift mechanism--lift on extend for more power and to not put heavy pressure on the wiper seal! The lift frame latches into the front- and mid-attach-a-matics so it’s easily removed. You can also see the ⅜” supply and return tubes to the valve--they're peeking out of the cover near the brake pedal. 

 

This setup has been worked hard at my son and daughter’s camp and so far, so good.

 

image.png.fb3aafda6be75cf687994edea260ff48.png

 

image.png.e7a21e28318dcbde0232cf47123b6d0b.png

 

 

Edited by Handy Don
  • Excellent 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
WheelHorseVH

I have seen pictures of that setup of yours with the articulating front hitch and it is terrific! For this particular project, one of the build principles is to keep things looking as stock as possible so I am trying to have the second valve tuck neatly under the dash next to the stock one. Your points on the dual spool are noted though, I may as well scrap that route. I may look into whether I can get a diverter valve added somewhere so I can control a front and rear cylinder with the one new valve. Any thoughts on that? Brand/type?

 

I really hope this project works out. After all the knowledge that I am TAKING from you all, it would be nice to GIVE back a nice writeup with pictures and specs in case someone else wants to do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
kpinnc
On 2/4/2025 at 12:26 PM, WheelHorseVH said:

I honestly had not considered the cylinder rod bending under load but that makes sense.

 

All belly cylinders on wheel horses lift on the pull stroke. If you find a bent one, it's because someone used a solid link instead of a chain and applied too much down pressure. 

  • Excellent 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Handy Don
4 hours ago, WheelHorseVH said:

diverter valve

 

JD uses a “diverter valve” to manage a rear hydro cylinder on H2 300’s and 400’s (dual spool control valve). It actually just shuts off one leg of a line that splits at the control valve to prevent fluid from going to two places at the same time. (In electrical terms, it’d be an SPST.) Theirs uses a knob that needs several turns to go from open to closed and vice versa--they intend it for when the attached implement is changed, not for regular use.

 

There are some nifty solenoid-controlled diverters (think DPDT) used on backhoes (here are some examples). They typically swap one axis of a control joystick from swinging the boom to opening/closing the “thumb” that pinches stuff against the bucket (picture below). They are pricey and add a lot of plumbing. They are larger, by a lot, than adding another spool to a control valve! Their value is switching with a finger on a button versus not requiring an operator to move their hand off a joystick.

image.png.68bd80b626c4dc948387c1010965a4d4.png image.png.3eb5973f7789a8854392fe60ded6db5b.png

 

Frankly, if I were dead set on preserving the “stock” profile (:)) and could live with just two circuits, I would replace the existing valve completely with the smallest dual I could find that had its lever positioned as I needed them (example) and then add an external PR (example) on the supply between the pump and the valve. The T connection from the PR would “tee” into the T port on the valve and thence to the filter.

 

I’m assuming you are ok with having the control levers come out of the hoodstand below the choke lever, where many of the early 3,4, & 500’s had their single lift lever.

Edited by Handy Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...