The jack shaft is flexing putting undue stress on the bearing in the chaincase
Do you want to cure the belt chatter and hot belts on your Proclimb 800?
- Thread starter RKT
- Start date
S
I can see where this would cause multiple issues.
R
Having a pivot point IS the problem.. We need to eliminate the pivot point and this will keep the clutches in alignment (somewhat)
This is very ironic.. the one thing that Cat designed to fix the alignment issues is actually causing alignment issues..
I do have some concerns, like Schmeg mentioned...focusing the stress on a new area..
What I am trying to do, and have done, is solve this issue with a VERY inexpensive "fix" that is non intrusive.. What I do not know is if this "fix" will cause other issues to surface down the road?? The $5.00 fix is what concerns me on this..
More complicated fixes (like front rubber motor mount) will be much harder to install and MAY cause stress on the tower supports..and WILL be harder to install and more intrusive. I guess "somebody" will market that fix.. But I will stay with my $5.00 for the time being and HOPE that it does not cause other issues.
I can see now, why Cat did the chaincase side jackshaft bearing the way they did now... Again.. think about what the Clutch end of the jackshaft is doing??
S
Maybe you could add a link that used a bearing to tie the tcl side of the jackshaft to the frame
C
Challenge back at ya RKT.
Of all the critical dimensions between the primary and secondary: 1. Center to center, 2. And alignment of the three rotational axis, none of these appear to be worse than a typical clutch, chassis and engine relationship, at least during steady state, quasistatic loading.
But, going back to the direction you are taking, the engine appears to have a higher degree of latitude to move, which MAY introduce dynamic, vibrational related forces.
Hmmmm, so not really a challenge but some out koud thinking.
All tcl Cats don't have issues though?
Of all the critical dimensions between the primary and secondary: 1. Center to center, 2. And alignment of the three rotational axis, none of these appear to be worse than a typical clutch, chassis and engine relationship, at least during steady state, quasistatic loading.
But, going back to the direction you are taking, the engine appears to have a higher degree of latitude to move, which MAY introduce dynamic, vibrational related forces.
Hmmmm, so not really a challenge but some out koud thinking.
All tcl Cats don't have issues though?
S
Kelsey, for your 5 dollar fix, are you just "strapping up" the TCL to the frame to unload it a bit?
R
I think that ALL do have this problem. They would have to.. You have a giant lever around a sole pivot point..Leverage is at work here.
R
LOL. Oh ya, I forgot to tell ya the $5.00 fix...
Yes, steel strap from the TCL to the lower frame (using an existing bolt on the frame) No noticeable vibration issues and I think that the movement should be so minimal that there should be no long term ILL effects (I hope)
Other solutions:
1) Rubber mounted front engine mount
2)3/4" bushing in existing ACCESS hole to the frame. Also, thought of using a rubber bushing here..
Thoughts?
C
Not clear exactly what your fix ix yet, but if this is vibrational in nature, which chattering could be seen as, it may be an issue of system resonance. The two main ways of countering that, or at least shifting the resonance point is to change system mass, dampen the system, or change the system configuration. Or,all of the above. What you're doing almost has to be changing one of those, and it may not take much. In other words, if you're careful, you may not have to introduce very significant loadings at a different point.
R
This is the other EASY idea that I was going to test.. But may not test..
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
A
Shoving some rubber between the tcl and aluminum frame rail up front?
S
That would be a very "sane" fix, and I may give it a go. Are you attaching the steel strap there?
R
Here is a rough idea of what I have done. I actually drilled through the TCL to connect the strap to the TCL.
Thoughts??
C
I never experienced anything noticeable in mine. But, like I previously stated, if it's a resonance, it doesn't take much to have it appear or disappear. Could be very sensitive to belt compounds for instance or variations in the rubber damper material, etc.
That said, your mode of How the system is stressed sounds right.
Can you adjust how much tension or force you that you apply via your strap? If so, if it is resonance then you most likely don't have to apply much force and can mitigate some of the concerns you have about introducing a longer term stress raiser.
Your thread is great btw. Good way to get people thinking. Used to do vibrational analysis and problem solving in piping, pump and compressor systems so this is fun!
--Seems like another motor mount would be the best overall solution as there would be no pivot point on the TLC, would absorb vibration, and it would also reduce wear and tear on the highly leveraged rear TLC mount
--Even if there were another rubber TLC mount midway between the clutches
--Even if there were another rubber TLC mount midway between the clutches
Last edited:
R
I agree.. but you will need to drill into the A-Arm supports to attach the mount and this is a concern for me?
CATRPILLAR Do you think that there would be much loading on the strap attachment points? Afterall.. there is VERY little movement or moment of inertia?? I also can notice NO added vibration.. I thought I would have some added vibration.. but it seems there is none..
Interested in your expert opinion
C
This would be a very simple resonance test to try. I like RKT's thought about using the hole to lengthen the fastener that is already thre too. Mount a chunk of hose to create a friction fit without necessarily fastening it, would be worth a try.
S
I think I'm going to fit up a hard rubber bushing through a bolt and go that route for now, and keep things under watch. It doesn't offer as much mechanical advantage as the strap further toward the PTO, but it avoids drilling into the TCL for now. Being a flatlander, I'm not stressing the system as hard either.
C
what about a polyurethane bushing in the hole in plate?? have some booger bushings for dodge neon shifter that may fit the bill??? also maybe a bottom mount on pto side of motor based on principle of m1000 mounts that were being added??? makes perfect sense,especially if you consider that pivot point on pto side and mag side are way different in comparison to crank ctr line,causing yet another strange movement situation. more thinking out loud.im sure cat is watching this topic and will base the 2013 fix on what we post.maybe we should pm eachother and keep the fix from them as punishmnent or require they update 2012s for no charge
S
CFR, you and I are thinking on the same lines with the bushing. May work good with a stiff enough bushing. It's non intrusive too.
