Belt run implements

[mhankins]

Most of the tractor belt run implement belts are very long. Is there a reason for this?

 

[wore out]

Most of the tractor belt run implement belts are very long. Is there a reason for this?

It is easier to keep a LONG belt tight and transmitting power without slipping than it is with a short one.

The suspended weight of the long belt is the big factor in this, IMHO.

 

[Janicholson]

It is easier to keep a LONG belt tight and transmitting power without slipping than it is with a short one.

The suspended weight of the long belt is the big factor in this, IMHO.

Agree. And there is more room around the driven equipment, it stays cooler in operation, as well as it looks cool. Jim

 

[Not db4600]

Most of the tractor belt run implement belts are very long. Is there a reason for this?

A couple observations. Have heard said about the proximity of the steam engine to the straw pile, but this doesn’t always hold water as sparks can be cast by the wind. Most likely that a long belt is heavy and can transmit driven power being looser than a short belt thereby lessening the wear on bearings versus a short tight belt.

 

[mhankins]

Thanks. I have always wondered about it after watching you tube videos of old tractors powering by belt.
That definitely makes sense.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

Most of the tractor belt run implement belts are very long. Is there a reason for this?

You talking about the belt or the implement itself? Any examples?

Buzz saws are very short.
Stationary balers are about the same length as their tow behind counterparts.
Threshers are "long" but they need to be to do the job they're designed to do.

 

[Tim in New York]

Old guy I helped years ago used the same belt on his silo blower as he did on the buzz saw, as far as I can remember. He gave up the thresher years before that, so I can't comment on what belt he used on that.

 

[Texasmark]

Most of the tractor belt run implement belts are very long. Is there a reason for this?

In addition to the other answers, the weight of the belt in motion is a source of kinetic energy in the belt. An example of how this plays out is a hammer mill. You get the tractor up to speed, and the belt in motion at a good clip, throw a bunch of whatever into the mill and depending on the amount of energy in the belt, determines how fast it will digest that wad of whatever and be ready for the next load.

When I moved here from the city, I had a lifelong senior guy as a neighbor. He had a JD B I think it was, and a belt, looped must have been 12-15' long, the width of the pulley on the Deere.....I had the hammer mill with great aspirations as to what I would do with it I bought with a bunch of junk I thought I would need and use on the newly acquired farm. He comes over punctually at the crack of dawn, ready to work. We get everything ready, he winds up the Deere, the mill starts humming, I throw in a big wad of corn stalks (5-6' tall), it grunts, makes some noises spits out the debris and is right back up to RPMs. I was impressed.

On the neighbor, he had a lot of fun with me over the years, teaching me how to do things and getting a kick out of it at the time. One of his dirty tricks was to invite me to take a Holstein cow he had which had just given birth to its first calf, over to my place and keep it as long as I desired. The problem with the cow was her teats were only about 2" long. The neighbor that sold it to him, raised Holsteins and this one was the result of a white face bull hopping the fence and pleasurising himself on one of the Holstein cows. Since there were 4 kids to raise it sounded like a great idea.

The beef cow genes must have been predominant to some degree because I could milk the cow in the evening, put the glass jug in the refrigerator over night and in the morning almost half the bottle was cream. That stirred up on a bowl of Rice Krispies was a breakfast to behold. Anyway, after a couple of weeks I went over and asked him what he wanted for the cow. He said $900 and I could pay it out......no where could he get that kind of money for a 2" teated milk cow. We kept her for a number of years...forget her fate.

 

[DanielW]

In addition: All belts have some degree of elasticity. Not perceptible when handling it by hand, but on the implement it can make a surprising difference. When running headsaws (circular sawmills) with belts, longer belts make for smoother operation due to the longer length for the elasticity to smooth out the effect of the engine. Very important on a headsaws that are hammered to specific speeds and need smooth action. It's more significant with some power units than others. Anyone who's ran a large headsaw off a two cylinder Deere, for instance, quickly learns you want as long a belt as possible (and as large a flywheel as possible so the momentum can smooth out the engine chugging). Run the same headsaw on a 6 cylinder power unit (or a two stroke Detroit) and your belt can be half the length, have no flywheel, and still cut smoother.

 

[Texasmark]

I can't imagine trying to run a sawmill with a Johnny Popper, big flywheel or not. Course as I understood the popper, the flywheel on the tractor did the work, the pop-pop-rest, etc., etc., was just to get and keep the flywheel turning.

On the pop-pop subject, anybody know why the original Harley designers decided to use the same analogy on their cycles? I never saw the size of the flywheel on one but there isn't all that much room like on a tractor.

 

[NY 986]

I can't imagine trying to run a sawmill with a Johnny Popper, big flywheel or not. Course as I understood the popper, the flywheel on the tractor did the work, the pop-pop-rest, etc., etc., was just to get and keep the flywheel turning.

On the pop-pop subject, anybody know why the original Harley designers decided to use the same analogy on their cycles? I never saw the size of the flywheel on one but there isn't all that much room like on a tractor.

I remember reading that HD used that firing pattern before the Waterloo tractors which was the basis of what JD did from 1918-1960.

 

[Texasmark]

I remember reading that HD used that firing pattern before the Waterloo tractors which was the basis of what JD did from 1918-1960.

Really? So did the HD have a pretty good sized flywheel? Otherwise what was the point in the timing sequence it used that differed from every other internal combustion engine (of which I am aware) at the time?

 

[NY 986]

Really? So did the HD have a pretty good sized flywheel? Otherwise what was the point in the timing sequence it used that differed from every other internal combustion engine (of which I am aware) at the time?

Don't have an answer for you.

 

[Absent Minded Farmer]

Really? So did the HD have a pretty good sized flywheel? Otherwise what was the point in the timing sequence it used that differed from every other internal combustion engine (of which I am aware) at the time?

Avoiding patents would be my guess.

Mike

 

[Ozlander]

Really? So did the HD have a pretty good sized flywheel? Otherwise what was the point in the timing sequence it used that differed from every other internal combustion engine (of which I am aware) at the time?

Flywheels (there are two, one on each side of the rod) are about 13 inches) in diameter. One body has ever accused a HD of being smooth. there is a reason they are called the Milwaukee Vibrator, and the engine is now floats in rubber.

 

[Leroy]

Old guy I helped years ago used the same belt on his silo blower as he did on the buzz saw, as far as I can remember. He gave up the thresher years before that, so I can't comment on what belt he used on that.

The rasher was gone about time I came along, 2 or 3 years old and back in the mid 40's. I have ran belt powered cordwood (Buzz) saw and corn shreader and hammer mill and used same about 25 foot between tractor pully and implement pulley using same 6 inch wide belt. Now the 3 pt mounted saw was about 4-5 foot long. The thrashers were powered with an 8 inch wide belt, not 6 inch like other implements and took more power so larger belt to power would make sence. But I think, have no prof of what I think but location was problaby the most inportant thing in determining belt length The corn shreader was used until 1960 and the hammer mill until 1980 for cow feed. Saw later for fire wood.

 

[Keith True]

From the teens through the early 70's most Harley flywheels were around 8 inches,plus or minus 1/2 inch for different applications.A friend had a sawmill with a big flywheel mounted to the side,and a long flat belt,(crossed) that ran from the flywheel to the husk.I had painted up a beauty of a Cockshutt Blackhawk 40 for my boss,and they hooked that to the mill.That used a PTO shaft between the tractor and the center of the flywheel.It had a nice sound when the log hit the saw,and the governor kicked in on that Buda.Just the tone would change,the RPM change was hard to detect.He hooked a 70 diesel to it,that tractor barely knew it was sawing.It would make a 620 grunt a little,but the RPM's weren't there to make it work right.My MF 65 did good with it too,but that flywheel and big flat belt did all the work,not the tractor engines.That was a rack and pinion mill,and I have no idea if that took more or less power to run the carriage than a standard Hitchcock or Glover cable feed.