Advice needed on adding hydraulic remote for quick attach on industrial loader tractor

[jacks]

I tried asking this question on the Massey Ferguson forum but got no response. I have a 1980 MF 20C industrial tractor with 32A loader. I have converted the loader arms to quik attach to accept skid steer attachments. I would like to add a remote valve to serve hydraulic powered attachments such as a concrete mixer or sickle mower. The tractor has two separate hydraulic systems, one for the 3 point hitch and also an engine coupled pump for the loader providing 19 GPM. I would like to tap into the loader hydraulic system because the GPM's would be adequate to power some attachments. Can the remote valve be teed into the pump pressure side, and return line teed into the return side? Would i need a priority valve? I don't expect to be using much of the lift capacity of the loader (2800 lb) while operating an attachment. Any advice would be appreciated!

 

[Jim.ME]

I tried asking this question on the Massey Ferguson forum but got no response. I have a 1980 MF 20C industrial tractor with 32A loader. I have converted the loader arms to quik attach to accept skid steer attachments. I would like to add a remote valve to serve hydraulic powered attachments such as a concrete mixer or sickle mower. The tractor has two separate hydraulic systems, one for the 3 point hitch and also an engine coupled pump for the loader providing 19 GPM. I would like to tap into the loader hydraulic system because the GPM's would be adequate to power some attachments. Can the remote valve be teed into the pump pressure side, and return line teed into the return side? Would i need a priority valve? I don't expect to be using much of the lift capacity of the loader (2800 lb) while operating an attachment. Any advice would be appreciated!

I believe your loader hydraulic system is open center. You can't tee into it as you described. You would need a power beyond adapter in your existing control valve to feed the new valve. Or you can add a diverter valve, which would need to be shifted to port oil from one control valve to the other, each time you wanted swapped the valve you wanted to use. A third option, and the cleanest, is to get a new loader control valve with a third function spool already in it. A fourth is there are hydraulic multiplier set ups that let you flip a switch and use your same valve spool (most usually tie into the bucket spool) to operate the bucket and the attachment. This adds an electrical control system for the multiplier, more hoses, and many cost more in the end than getting a new 3 spool loader valve.

 

[Harry in Ky]

You can also add an additional single or double (even triple should you need that many) power beyond type spool valve between the pump and the existing loader valve. Then you won't need to mess with the loader valve at all, and you won't have a tangle of wires, switches, and all that to contend with.

If I were doing it, that's most likely the way I would go. Your tractor, your money, your choice.

 

[used red MN]

I tried asking this question on the Massey Ferguson forum but got no response. I have a 1980 MF 20C industrial tractor with 32A loader. I have converted the loader arms to quik attach to accept skid steer attachments. I would like to add a remote valve to serve hydraulic powered attachments such as a concrete mixer or sickle mower. The tractor has two separate hydraulic systems, one for the 3 point hitch and also an engine coupled pump for the loader providing 19 GPM. I would like to tap into the loader hydraulic system because the GPM's would be adequate to power some attachments. Can the remote valve be teed into the pump pressure side, and return line teed into the return side? Would i need a priority valve? I don't expect to be using much of the lift capacity of the loader (2800 lb) while operating an attachment. Any advice would be appreciated!

Just a couple comments. On an open center system there is no or more correctly negligible pressure on the pump output line as long as no function is being used. The oil just circulates in an “open” loop back to the reservoir. So a “tee” into the line as Jim suggest provides nothing. Also your suggestion to “tee” the return from your added circuit from a motor back into the line supplying the pump is not wise. The oil should return to the reservoir to allow the heated oil to dissipate heat into other oil in the reservoir.

 

[Jim.ME]

You can also add an additional single or double (even triple should you need that many) power beyond type spool valve between the pump and the existing loader valve. Then you won't need to mess with the loader valve at all, and you won't have a tangle of wires, switches, and all that to contend with.

If I were doing it, that's most likely the way I would go. Your tractor, your money, your choice.

True, a new valve could be the one with the power beyond feature and add it inline (not teed in) ahead of the existing valve as you say.

 

[bob p mn]

I have a single spool valve that I removed from a Massey 2200 tractor with a 200 loader, it was plumbed in as Harry in Kentucky suggested and mounted on the right side fender. I will part with it. I am in northern MN. If interested let me know and we can see if we could figure something out.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

The simplest way to add a function on an old tractor like that would be to identify the OUT port on the loader valve. Source yourself a one or two spool "four way" open center valve and mount it somewhere convenient on the tractor. Disconnect the OUT port from the loader valve, and connect it to the OUT port on your new valve. Connect the OUT port from the loader valve to the IN port on your new valve. Then add couplers and/or hoses to the A/B (aka work) ports on the new valve as your needs require.

IMHO the old low pressure low volume hydraulic systems on these tractors don't need "power beyond." Old timers did it the way I described it above, using "IRON" WATER PIPE and fittings to connect the valves together and they worked fine. We're not talking about a modern 3000+ PSI system here.

However I would suggest using proper hydraulic hoses and fittings. The water pipe and fittings out there these days aren't the same as what you could get in the 1950's.

 

[Jim.ME]

The simplest way to add a function on an old tractor like that would be to identify the OUT port on the loader valve. Source yourself a one or two spool "four way" open center valve and mount it somewhere convenient on the tractor. Disconnect the OUT port from the loader valve, and connect it to the OUT port on your new valve. Connect the OUT port from the loader valve to the IN port on your new valve. Then add couplers and/or hoses to the A/B (aka work) ports on the new valve as your needs require.

IMHO the old low pressure low volume hydraulic systems on these tractors don't need "power beyond." Old timers did it the way I described it above, using "IRON" WATER PIPE and fittings to connect the valves together and they worked fine. We're not talking about a modern 3000+ PSI system here.

However I would suggest using proper hydraulic hoses and fittings. The water pipe and fittings out there these days aren't the same as what you could get in the 1950's.

MF 20C with a 32A loader hydraulic pressure should be in the 2200 to 2500 psi range, with flow in the 19 - 20 gpm range for the front pump.

 

[moresmoke]

The interesting part of this question comes about with the OP saying he wants to run motor loads from this aux valve. Power beyond and motor control don’t always play well together. When using a power beyond valve, it diverts flow to the application from the downstream valve. So if you cycle the first valve full on, there will be no flow to the secondary valve. Works fine if you only ever want to use one function at a time.

Plumbing 2 regular valves in series, can cause a multiplication of pressures. The pressure of any functions operated simultaneously is added together, and hydraulic cylinders have the ability to increase or decrease the available pressure depending which way they are fed. Any motors in this type of setup need to be on the last valve in the circuit, or you risk blowing the shaft seal out due to back pressure.

I would recommend to use a flow divider or flow control like this:

The line from the pump would go to the inlet of the flow control. The controlled flow line would connect to the aux valve, and the outlet port would feed the original valve. Plumbed like this, the flow control is acting as a priority valve that can be controlled by the operator.

In regular use, set the flow control to 0 and the loader will work like it originally did. If you are using the aux valve for a cylinder, the flow control can divide the pump flow between the two functions, the loader controls will slow down depending how much volume is sent to the aux valve.

To run a motor off the aux valve, the flow control will set the motor speed. On something like a mower, it would probably take most of the hydraulic flow, but you can leave a little going to the loader valve so you can still adjust the position while the motor is running.

 

[Jim.ME]

The interesting part of this question comes about with the OP saying he wants to run motor loads from this aux valve. Power beyond and motor control don’t always play well together. When using a power beyond valve, it diverts flow to the application from the downstream valve. So if you cycle the first valve full on, there will be no flow to the secondary valve. Works fine if you only ever want to use one function at a time.

Plumbing 2 regular valves in series, can cause a multiplication of pressures. The pressure of any functions operated simultaneously is added together, and hydraulic cylinders have the ability to increase or decrease the available pressure depending which way they are fed. Any motors in this type of setup need to be on the last valve in the circuit, or you risk blowing the shaft seal out due to back pressure.

I would recommend to use a flow divider or flow control like this:
View attachment 5520
The line from the pump would go to the inlet of the flow control. The controlled flow line would connect to the aux valve, and the outlet port would feed the original valve. Plumbed like this, the flow control is acting as a priority valve that can be controlled by the operator.

In regular use, set the flow control to 0 and the loader will work like it originally did. If you are using the aux valve for a cylinder, the flow control can divide the pump flow between the two functions, the loader controls will slow down depending how much volume is sent to the aux valve.

To run a motor off the aux valve, the flow control will set the motor speed. On something like a mower, it would probably take most of the hydraulic flow, but you can leave a little going to the loader valve so you can still adjust the position while the motor is running.

Good point on the diverter/flow control for running hydraulic motors. If it is a mower, or other equipment that continuously runs, a directional control valve with a with a detent to hold it engaged might also be desirable, where that might not be wanted for a valve that just controls cylinders.

 

[jacks]

Thanks for all of the replies! I like the idea of the flow divider valve so there would not be either/or operation between the loader and any hydraulic motor on an attachment. Also seems like it would insure that the overall flow rate of the system remains constant.