Adding a spool valve

[thebuildist]

Thinking out loud here,. The 600s ran the same hydraulic pump as the 400s. They ran through the tcv with power beyond to the loader. Obviously it works based on the popularity of them. So maybe the right tcv is the answer?

You make a good point. I suspect the factory 64X TCV must not be a traditional Power Beyond valve. It must direct its work oil return out the PB port, not back to its Tank port. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to lift the bucket any time the machine is in motion.

So kind of a custom product in that sense.

Anybody know precisely how to convert a standard Case TCV into is 64X ("power beyond") equivalent? The machining isn't my problem, it's the "knowing what to machine." That's my problem.

I guess I could buy one. Are they still available new? I once saw a used one on Ebay. It went for more than $500 if I recall, and it had no integrated holding valve.

It makes me think that duplicating the 64X scenario isn't really doable.

But if the overall GPM of the 64X is anything to go by, then my 9 gpm coming out of my Power Steering splitter may be adequate to make the machine perfectly usable, even if it isn't zippy.

Bob

[thebuildist]

Understandably the two stage pump is either very expensive (new) or hard to find. I would listen really carefully to what @DavidBarkey says because of us all here he is the only one who actually built a loader on a 400 series tractor and it withstood the test of time. After I wrote my reply I realized that I forgot to mention that obviously the two stage pump is longer and the space behind the pump is small. Like he said, a 12-14 GPM single stage pump should not be more than $200 in , you guys have so many more options than us. Think about this project, you're building it for many years of use. Spread the $200 over that many years, and think of the aggravation you'll have for all that time with a tractor that almost works well.

Regarding the proportional metering valves. Again, I would ask myself if the 600 series tractors have this. They have been working well for over 40 years, so if they work without, why shouldn't yours too? @DavidBarkey do you have something like that?

Frankie has a pressure compensated fixed valve . A adjustable one would be handy when running the tiller on the thing as I could then put a little more flow to the tiller (pto valve ) , don't need much ground speed then . And when moving around the yard being able to put a little more to the drive motor would increase speed a little . Do to it's weight I very seldom am able to use high gear . So for his an adding an adjustable flow control valve would be good idea . BUt it would need to be easily adjusted .

Dave

@DavidBarkey Frankie has a pressure compensated fixed splitter. The "adjustable priority flow divider valve" I've bought uses pressure to move its internal spool, which regulates the flow. But I don't think it qualifies as "pressure (or pleasure ) compensated".

https://www.buyersproducts.com/product/ ... valve-1056

What's your opinion? Do you think it's going to work the way I envision?

If the valve at least behaves in the way that I expect, but I'm still not happy with overall performance, I can buy one of these pumps from Surplus Center:
https://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulic ... 98-D-S.axd

I'll have to bush its 5/8 keyed input shaft to mate to the Ingersoll's 3/4 keyed driver, but other than that it should bolt in. And it will boost my output from 11.2 up to 13.4 GPM.

Bob

[DavidBarkey]

Maintains GPM to your standards for your priority application.
Allows you to redirect oil to a secondary application.
The Priority Flow Divider Valve from Buyers Products splits the oil from a single inlet into two separate flows, ensuring that your oil flow is maintained at the proper GMA regardless of load variations.

This is another way of say pressure constipated . Yes that will do what you want.
I don't think you will need a bigger pump . Remember you most likely will not be working the loader cylinders during full speed so there will be plenty of GPM to go around . You will be surprised just how little GPM cylinders require compared to motors . GPM make motors work / PSI make cylinders work .

Dave

[DavidBarkey]

I'll have to bush its 5/8 keyed input shaft to mate to the Ingersoll's 3/4 keyed driver, but other than that it should bolt in. And it will boost my output from 11.2 up to 13.4 GPM.

No need to bush just replace with the right size Lovejoy connector and new spider . You biggest concern would be the pilot (centering ring on the front of the pump is the same as the old pump , there is a few different standardized sizes . But again if your pump is in good shape I think you have enough for your needs . In this case , bigger is not alway better .

Dave

[Timj]

Thinking out loud here,. The 600s ran the same hydraulic pump as the 400s. They ran through the tcv with power beyond to the loader. Obviously it works based on the popularity of them. So maybe the right tcv is the answer?

You make a good point. I suspect the factory 64X TCV must not be a traditional Power Beyond valve. It must direct its work oil return out the PB port, not back to its Tank port. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to lift the bucket any time the machine is in motion.

So kind of a custom product in that sense.

Anybody know precisely how to convert a standard Case TCV into is 64X ("power beyond") equivalent? The machining isn't my problem, it's the "knowing what to machine." That's my problem.

I guess I could buy one. Are they still available new? I once saw a used one on Ebay. It went for more than $500 if I recall, and it had no integrated holding valve.

It makes me think that duplicating the 64X scenario isn't really doable.

But if the overall GPM of the 64X is anything to go by, then my 9 gpm coming out of my Power Steering splitter may be adequate to make the machine perfectly usable, even if it isn't zippy.

Bob

Spot on Bob, that's what they did, the return oil from the drive motor goes to the power beyond.

Custom made for Case Ingersoll, possibly proprietary, no longer available, hard to find a work around, and expensive, are common with some of these things. The hydraulic motors fall in the same category.

I don't know if the drawings of how the valve works show enough to see how they did it?

[DavidBarkey]

Pressure , you know that thing you suffer when you haven't had pleasure for a while . I did have to look and see if I spelled it wrong .

Dave

haha, that was just me attempting a little light fun! a little smile in the middle of the day that's all!

Ya but made me look twice LOL. I have been know to misspell thing of late . Computer usually corrects me though.

Dave

[Gordy]

Tim,
Is this what you were talking about?

Cheers,
Gordy

[Timj]

Tim,
Is this what you were talking about?

TCV with PB Colored Diagram.png

Cheers,
Gordy

Yes, that was the one I was looking at, didn't know if showed enough for Bob to machine his to work. Definitely not enough for me, there was another one without the color too.

[thebuildist]

Tim,
Is this what you were talking about?

TCV with PB Colored Diagram.png

Cheers,
Gordy

Ok, that's awesome! I presume it's from one of the Hydro manuals. Which one? I need to compare it to an "non PB" valve to be sure that there are no differences other than the machined PB port and the inserted adapter.

I've just done some analysis, and my hunch was correct: The valve dumps all open centered flow out the PB port. In addition, any "Travel Spool" flow, any flow running through the travel motor, is also dumped out the PB port. Any flow through the mid-lift cylinder ports just dumps back to tank. So kinda specially made to pair with that other spool valve downstream. But the valve downstream doesn't need to be special. It's just a normal spool valve.

So now I'm a little torn. I have an extra TCV sitting on the shelf from my old 442. I'm tempted to set it up and machine that port in it. (pending confirmation that the other valve internals are the same) But do I really want to go to the work of installing a non-holding valve TCV on my tractor?

In the later years Ingersoll abandoned this approach. Is that because the integrated holding valve makes this approach unworkable? Can anyone confirm the existence of a TCV with both integrated holding valve and a PB sleeve/port? My current late model TCV has a port labelled "PB" and has a fitting screwed into it. But it's just a little bitty fitting where the PS valve returns to tank. The port isn't machined large enough to receive a PB sleeve, and it's certainly not functioning in a PB fashion.

But this is intriguing.

[thebuildist]

[/quote]
Spot on Bob, that's what they did, the return oil from the drive motor goes to the power beyond.

Custom made for Case Ingersoll, possibly proprietary, no longer available, hard to find a work around, and expensive, are common with some of these things. The hydraulic motors fall in the same category.

I don't know if the drawings of how the valve works show enough to see how they did it?
[/quote]
Sorry. I replied with my big "analysis" statement before I read this. The drawing does show enough to tell. I just opened it in GIMP (like Phostoshop but free) and cut and pasted the spool area, and then slid it to the side as though it had been pushed in. Then you can just visualize where the flow has a free path to travel.

Bob