If one could have two cdf rotors, one configured for soybeans and one for corn, what would be the best way to configure each rotor to make it most effective for its respective crop? Seems the only thing the two crops have in common is the relative size and density of the grain but beyond this the material going thru the machine is quite different and all rotors seem to be a compromise between these differences.
Two rotor question for NDan and others
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Corsair,
For the most part all we have did so far with the CDF is remove reverse bars to install forward and remove all knifes. In an effort to get one to work as well as a sweeped up eight bar in edible bean I installed all forward bars, installed all knifes then took them all out. Didn't work so I had to custom build some sweeps to fit. Before even putting one of these in the field I install a minimum of an economy version of steep pitch thresher helicals (do that with any design of rotor). This has worked just fine for us so far but will be adapting more tricks as I hear of them.
Today I get a call from down south and it promted me to go ahead and answer your question I have been pondering for a couple days. He recently added a R75 to his allready hyped up R72s that had eight bar rotors with sweeps. 75 was all stock with a CDF in corn. Complaint was machine would be going along and then just pull down. He flipped the door open to peak at rotor and found left side of concave and right side of seperator grate packed with junk. This is exactly why I suggest steep thresher helicals and get rid of most if not all reverse bars.
Now I will share what I have learned from guys that have did more tweaking with CDF.
First I hear of some guys shimming out thresher bars by 1/2". This got the thresher side back out to original 25" diameter of the eight bar rotor. I believe this was mostly done for small grains for it would give a better fitup of whole concave to cylinder instead of just front half.
Second I hear of leaving thresher cylinder bars alone but installing steep thresher helicals shimmed out from 1/4 to 3/8". This has worked well in all crops but can likely be improved on.
Third is same as above and also shimmed the thresher cylinder bars by 1/4". This guy ran nice variety of crops including corn and didn't see any drawbacks.
Fourth is the steep thresher helicals as above shimmed out by 3/8" and no shimming of all forward thresher cylinder bars, removed every other bar in row B which is just to left of concave, removed every other bar in row A which is just next to discharge paddles, cut and made three two bolt reverse bars and installed one right next to discharge paddle, one in middle location of row A, and the third at right location of row A. These two bolt reverse bars were shimmed out by 3/8". This setup worked extremely good for the guy but he expanded on this by going with all shimmed out two bolt bars on seperator side. This gave him a setup of all straight bars over concave and maximum room by leaving at 24" diameter. Flow still controlled very well with the shimmed out steep helicals. The missing sections of bars on seperator side gained him room there while still providing positive flow and some mixing plus slightly higher tip speed of rasp bar. Short rasp bars overlap some from position to position so material that happens to slip around the edge will still get hit with next bar. A couple of the short rasps that end up overlaping concave a bit would have to be trimed to prevent concave contact at zero clearance. This setup has given the guy tremendous performance in barley, wheat, lentils, and peas. This guy had studied the good bad and otherwise of the Gleaner eight bar, Gleaner CDF, Sunnybrook gen 2, St. John, PFP, and Bison to help him deside what he wanted to give a try. He had been away from Gleaner for nearly twenty years and now is extremely happy to be back.
Now if I were to put my own twist on the whole deal I would set up the same no matter which crop including corn. First I would install steep thresher helicals shimmed out 1/4" and spaced apart an extra whole as I moved toward discharge. First helical would start against the gearbox wall and line up with helical on triangle across feeder opening, next helical would start one hole to left of original second helical and run paralell to first helical (this will preserve the distance between helicals that original ones had) and so on with two more long helicals and one medium length. Don't forget to trim triangle over feeder to prevent blocking flow from feeder and reposition that helical accordingly. Then I would make up 1/4" shim plate for the whole length of cylinder bars. Install all the forward thresher bars (maybe everyother or all narrow rasp if in tough to thresh small grains). Then use all forward two bolt bars on seperator side in a steggered setup. I would also want the high wide wire seperator grate to get wires within 1/4" of top of crossbar. I noticed a couple R66s had line bored and very sharp leading edges on seperator grate cross bars and I would prefer to grind leading edge on them to prevent posibly busting corn cobs or hanging material excessively. I believe this would make a very nice all around rotor and would have to give a try sometime. A guy could still easily install a couple or more reverse bars if ever needed and there is a guy creating some sweeps that will fit between the bar mounts in area of knife mounts so more options or attachments coming.
For the most part all we have did so far with the CDF is remove reverse bars to install forward and remove all knifes. In an effort to get one to work as well as a sweeped up eight bar in edible bean I installed all forward bars, installed all knifes then took them all out. Didn't work so I had to custom build some sweeps to fit. Before even putting one of these in the field I install a minimum of an economy version of steep pitch thresher helicals (do that with any design of rotor). This has worked just fine for us so far but will be adapting more tricks as I hear of them.
Today I get a call from down south and it promted me to go ahead and answer your question I have been pondering for a couple days. He recently added a R75 to his allready hyped up R72s that had eight bar rotors with sweeps. 75 was all stock with a CDF in corn. Complaint was machine would be going along and then just pull down. He flipped the door open to peak at rotor and found left side of concave and right side of seperator grate packed with junk. This is exactly why I suggest steep thresher helicals and get rid of most if not all reverse bars.
Now I will share what I have learned from guys that have did more tweaking with CDF.
First I hear of some guys shimming out thresher bars by 1/2". This got the thresher side back out to original 25" diameter of the eight bar rotor. I believe this was mostly done for small grains for it would give a better fitup of whole concave to cylinder instead of just front half.
Second I hear of leaving thresher cylinder bars alone but installing steep thresher helicals shimmed out from 1/4 to 3/8". This has worked well in all crops but can likely be improved on.
Third is same as above and also shimmed the thresher cylinder bars by 1/4". This guy ran nice variety of crops including corn and didn't see any drawbacks.
Fourth is the steep thresher helicals as above shimmed out by 3/8" and no shimming of all forward thresher cylinder bars, removed every other bar in row B which is just to left of concave, removed every other bar in row A which is just next to discharge paddles, cut and made three two bolt reverse bars and installed one right next to discharge paddle, one in middle location of row A, and the third at right location of row A. These two bolt reverse bars were shimmed out by 3/8". This setup worked extremely good for the guy but he expanded on this by going with all shimmed out two bolt bars on seperator side. This gave him a setup of all straight bars over concave and maximum room by leaving at 24" diameter. Flow still controlled very well with the shimmed out steep helicals. The missing sections of bars on seperator side gained him room there while still providing positive flow and some mixing plus slightly higher tip speed of rasp bar. Short rasp bars overlap some from position to position so material that happens to slip around the edge will still get hit with next bar. A couple of the short rasps that end up overlaping concave a bit would have to be trimed to prevent concave contact at zero clearance. This setup has given the guy tremendous performance in barley, wheat, lentils, and peas. This guy had studied the good bad and otherwise of the Gleaner eight bar, Gleaner CDF, Sunnybrook gen 2, St. John, PFP, and Bison to help him deside what he wanted to give a try. He had been away from Gleaner for nearly twenty years and now is extremely happy to be back.
Now if I were to put my own twist on the whole deal I would set up the same no matter which crop including corn. First I would install steep thresher helicals shimmed out 1/4" and spaced apart an extra whole as I moved toward discharge. First helical would start against the gearbox wall and line up with helical on triangle across feeder opening, next helical would start one hole to left of original second helical and run paralell to first helical (this will preserve the distance between helicals that original ones had) and so on with two more long helicals and one medium length. Don't forget to trim triangle over feeder to prevent blocking flow from feeder and reposition that helical accordingly. Then I would make up 1/4" shim plate for the whole length of cylinder bars. Install all the forward thresher bars (maybe everyother or all narrow rasp if in tough to thresh small grains). Then use all forward two bolt bars on seperator side in a steggered setup. I would also want the high wide wire seperator grate to get wires within 1/4" of top of crossbar. I noticed a couple R66s had line bored and very sharp leading edges on seperator grate cross bars and I would prefer to grind leading edge on them to prevent posibly busting corn cobs or hanging material excessively. I believe this would make a very nice all around rotor and would have to give a try sometime. A guy could still easily install a couple or more reverse bars if ever needed and there is a guy creating some sweeps that will fit between the bar mounts in area of knife mounts so more options or attachments coming.
Thanks for the response Dan, I currently have the steep pitch threshers with 1/4" shims installed per the agco plan and I'm not sure about the spacing that provides compared to your recommendation. It required 3 long helicals one medium and one short to complete the installation. As far as the rotor, it is configured original with 2 reverse bars in row A and one reverse in row C and row D. I have noticed the fine cut chopper blades wear most on the right half of the discharge while on the far left side they wear much less. What is your opinion on adding extended helicals towards the discharge in an effort to try and get more of the material to evenly feed the chopper? I have also considered removing three of the six discharge paddles and simply extending forward rasp bars into this area as a replacement. I saw a cdf on the floor of local dealership and noticed just how much the corners wear on those paddles to the right side and how little they wear on the far left side. Seems like we're not using the full potential of the discharge chute when so much of the material is being forced out of its right side. I like your idea of reverse bar removal over the concave. Does seem reverse bars at this position would be counterproductive. I have also considered maching shims that would be tapered to remove some of the forward tilt of the rasp bars raising the leading corner a little higher but this would not necessarily be an economical approach as tapered shims would also be needed for the bolt heads on the bottom side.
Joined
·
735 Posts
corsair, I did extend 3 bars into discharge because of the wear that you indicated however the holes don't line up to get the bars all the way to the left. The A row bars are longer which you already know so I just moved every other one left 1 or 2 holes can't remember exactly and removed the paddle however there is still maybe 3" gap to end of rotor. You could cut some bars down if you wanted to, to get you to the end but I fiqured for the cost of 3 new bars that the gap would be fine. I do believe that it worked to get an even feed out because there was no clumps being thrown off the spreader. I put the new style knives in at beginning of harvest but have not checked them to see how they wore.
Thanks for the response greencountry. I have the updated chopper knives and by looking up the discharge with a flashlight they look pretty worn on the right side and better as you go to the left. Maybe I can reverse and swap from side to side being careful to keep sets matched to sets opposite as the right side ones are going to be lighter than the left side sets. I have heard they are now around $600 set. Too high for what appears to be simple heat treating. No hard surface cutting edge like the rotary chopper knives on the chopping corn heads. I will have to look at the paddle area and see what can be done in regard to the holes. If additional holes can be added it might make this modification easier. Yes I have noticed clumps hitting the spreader in tough soybeans and hope they are simply forming in the discharge area. If they are coming from further upstream in the rotor-cage area, it may be tougher to correct. When it comes to electronic gadgets on harvesters, something that would have some useful merit would be high speed cameras placed in the processor area and cleaning shoe area. That would be more useful than all this mapping and auto-steer. It could store so many frames of pictures and when full, you could then play it back hopefully helping in adjustment analysis.
Rburk, I couldn't say if the knifes are good or bad. I just don't like posibility of them disturbing or messing up straw flow when seeds are about sorted out. I like the straw to stay as whole as posible prior to chopper. I believe seperation is best with straw as whole as posible after the concave. I believe the knifes come from the axial machines. I haven't used any knifes since someone posted a year or two ago that they removed them to cure rotor loss.
Corsair, You would have the steep thresher helicals the way Gleaner desided to go with. They will be closer together than the way we do it. Maybe no problem closer together with the CDF's 24" diameter. We spread them apart to maintain gap the standard ones had because all machines did have the 25" cylinder. With the larger rotor I wanted to save room or provide room for whole cobs to flow against cage surface. With helicals to close together and cylinder bars to close to helicals you will grind up the cob. Wouldn't worry so much about gap between helicals or distance to bars on other crops. One thing about steep helicals is material will try harder to slip over the top. This is why I prefer or suggest to shim them out when used in conjunction with the smaller diameter CDF. I believe there is such a thing as to large of a gap from the rotating object and stationary objects that are responsible for keeping the flow going. Shimming the helical not only brings this metal to metal clearance together it also creates a taller more positive helical without closing up the gap to cage. I know exactly what your saying about chopper blades wearing on right side. Funny with the small chopper we only use about 1/2 of it. This is why we add a 3"x4" triangle filler to top right corner of chopper opening. This provides wider path for the straw following helical to get by chopper and make one last revolution. We also extend the helical that ends at 12:00 position. We line up another helical with this one and wrap around until it is about 4" to 5" from stop sign surface. Now to make this helical and the one that allready extends into this area work the best you must do just what you are thinking with every other cylinder bar. It takes the combonation of forward rasp and angle of helical to keep straw moving over. You are spot on about this utilizing the extra cage area for last second seperation and feeding chopper more even. We were putting full length rasp bars in everyother location on the eight bar rotors and had Loewen building them prior to A&I getting ahold of them. I also wish Gleaner had the discharge paddles more square with rotor. With them leaned back they could have more potential to pack material against cage than to work as discharge aid. This would be less of a factor if you go with the extended rasp bars. As far as tilting the rasp bars more flat I don't know. St. John and Sunnybrook have them square with rotor like the old conventionals and they won't flow edible bean straw any better than Gleaners tilted bar without installing sweeps or the like. Besides that I wouldn't want to try secure something as important as a cylinder bar with the head of the bolt not totally square with surface. Can't imagine how heavy that bar gets with rotor at 1000 RPM. I'm with Greencountry on the three inch gap to end of rotor the way he extended bars. I think that is all the further you would have to go to get full benifit especially if that works out best or the easiest.
Corsair, You would have the steep thresher helicals the way Gleaner desided to go with. They will be closer together than the way we do it. Maybe no problem closer together with the CDF's 24" diameter. We spread them apart to maintain gap the standard ones had because all machines did have the 25" cylinder. With the larger rotor I wanted to save room or provide room for whole cobs to flow against cage surface. With helicals to close together and cylinder bars to close to helicals you will grind up the cob. Wouldn't worry so much about gap between helicals or distance to bars on other crops. One thing about steep helicals is material will try harder to slip over the top. This is why I prefer or suggest to shim them out when used in conjunction with the smaller diameter CDF. I believe there is such a thing as to large of a gap from the rotating object and stationary objects that are responsible for keeping the flow going. Shimming the helical not only brings this metal to metal clearance together it also creates a taller more positive helical without closing up the gap to cage. I know exactly what your saying about chopper blades wearing on right side. Funny with the small chopper we only use about 1/2 of it. This is why we add a 3"x4" triangle filler to top right corner of chopper opening. This provides wider path for the straw following helical to get by chopper and make one last revolution. We also extend the helical that ends at 12:00 position. We line up another helical with this one and wrap around until it is about 4" to 5" from stop sign surface. Now to make this helical and the one that allready extends into this area work the best you must do just what you are thinking with every other cylinder bar. It takes the combonation of forward rasp and angle of helical to keep straw moving over. You are spot on about this utilizing the extra cage area for last second seperation and feeding chopper more even. We were putting full length rasp bars in everyother location on the eight bar rotors and had Loewen building them prior to A&I getting ahold of them. I also wish Gleaner had the discharge paddles more square with rotor. With them leaned back they could have more potential to pack material against cage than to work as discharge aid. This would be less of a factor if you go with the extended rasp bars. As far as tilting the rasp bars more flat I don't know. St. John and Sunnybrook have them square with rotor like the old conventionals and they won't flow edible bean straw any better than Gleaners tilted bar without installing sweeps or the like. Besides that I wouldn't want to try secure something as important as a cylinder bar with the head of the bolt not totally square with surface. Can't imagine how heavy that bar gets with rotor at 1000 RPM. I'm with Greencountry on the three inch gap to end of rotor the way he extended bars. I think that is all the further you would have to go to get full benifit especially if that works out best or the easiest.
Thanks again Dan for the reply. In regard to extending the long bars over on three of the row A bars, if one stays with the two opposite located reverse bars, then one of the bars has to be a reverse bar. Is this a problem or should one replace this long reverse bar with a long forward bar? In regard to the tapered shims to level the bars, yes it would require a tapered washer to make the bolt head clamping surface square. You have talked me out of this approach with your experience with sunnybrook and st john rotor in edible bean straw. I suppose if any tapered shim has a place, it would be to straighten the discharge paddles, making them more agressive. But again a heck of a place to have something let go. One last thought, I will check some time at the bolt spacing provided on the cdf thinking one could use four standard length bars to extend over to the discharge end of the rotor instead of using the four bolt long bars on the three rows with the paddles removed. I know those long bars are quite expensive.
Well you know my feelings on reverse bars. I have a semi load of them I wish I could find a purpose for. I'd get a look at it when you get to it and maybe you could at least remove the one. Then if you should have some three bolt forward bars around you could figure a way to fill the area of four bolt bar and into discharge area. The discharge paddles on eight bar rotor have a crimp in them to make them more square to rotor especially when they have not been worn back. Just noticed this paddle was not crimped on CDFs. I didn't get a chance to see if CDF has a different P/N for this paddle as does the latest paddle for eight bar rotors. Someday I will see if eight bar paddle will fit the CDF.
What exactly is the logic of reverse bars other than they stall forward flow and shift the combing action of the crop mat back towards the intake? Do they really lower rotor loss as is claimed or are they a myth? I have looked at the underside of the processor door to look at the paint and have noticed that most of the paint is gone near the concave but quickly this loss of paint subsides as you move to the left. This makes me think that most of the grain comes out the concave area and rapidly tapers off as you move left. This is of course with corn and soybeans and I can't say what this looks like on a small grain machine. It does seem that analysis of wear patterns of both metal and paint are a useful way to tell what is going on when one does not have the benefit of a high speed camera. Getting back to your recommendation, it sounds like you would not run any reverse bars period. Do you then modify new cdf rotors to eliminate the reverse bars?
Joined
·
209 Posts
We ran into a lot of trouble this fall with combines plugging the last two sections of concave and first two sections of separator grate in high moisture corn. Combines that had eight bar rotor did not seem to have near the problem, and I was pretty much convinced that it was because there was less space between the rotor and helical bars meaning crop was moved through processor faster. We will definitely be shimming out a few cdf rotors for next year. A question for nddan, What are you making for sweeps to add to the cdf rotors? Do you think if you put half inch shims under rasp bars on the cdf you would still shim helicals out?
Joined
·
209 Posts
If I understand correctly shimming helicals out was only done if bars were shimmed out no more than 1/4 inch. I was just wondering if shimming helicals out after putting half inch shims under bars would make clearances too tight. Maybe we would be better off just shimming bars out 1/4 inch and then doing something with helicals also.
Corsair, Yes the reverse bars slow forward flow and by thery should allow more time for separation. There is no doubt that they do work just as they are meant to at times. Trouble is I have found that they can take a ton of power in tough conditions, grind up straw in dry conditions causing excess shoe load, and basically anything that comes with rotor constipation. We had two then four then six then eight reverse bars in a 72 one time to try hold barley. All the reverse bars did is take more and more HP. We cured that thing over fifteen years ago with all forward bars and cage material covers placed over the top of seperator grate crossbars. Ends up seperator grate was evedentally staying pluged under load. Thus we have been raising wires in grates to get closer to top of cross bars (more like corn seperator grate). We do a minimum mod to all new machines with CDFs (replace reverse bars with forward, cut back triangle over feeder and reposition helical accordingly to prevent blocking any flow coming up feeder, remove the knifes, and economy steep helical job).
Combinekid, I would suggest the plugging of concave and seperator grate was agrivated by the smaller diameter rotor. I would also presume they had standard helicals and maybe even reverse bars. I have only made a handfull of sweeps for CDF. I am waiting to see some pictures of a CDF where the guy had some sweeps that would fasten in the area where the knives are. Sunnybrook did a little work on this a couple years ago for I got the art on it but I think for whatever reason the plans stalled. I don't like the looks of the protos I built as well as the eight bar sweeps so I'm looking for a better idea. I do not think it is necesary to shim helicals if you shim cylinder bars by 1/2" thus I would not go threw the trouble. I have shimmed out a cage full of steep helicals by 1/4" prior to the days of sweeps in an effort to flow tough edible beans. The bars will clear the helicals but not by much. The shimmed helicals did not help me in that situation but they are still in there after 15ish years. The Aussie that shimmed steep helicals by 3/8" as well as the two bolt bars on seperator side by 3/8" would be running this close clearance where the steep helicals overlap into seperator side. I kind of like the 1/4" on both helicals and bars for I think it could over the best for all worlds including the space were tring to preserve for corn cobs. I hope that makes sense.
Combinekid, I would suggest the plugging of concave and seperator grate was agrivated by the smaller diameter rotor. I would also presume they had standard helicals and maybe even reverse bars. I have only made a handfull of sweeps for CDF. I am waiting to see some pictures of a CDF where the guy had some sweeps that would fasten in the area where the knives are. Sunnybrook did a little work on this a couple years ago for I got the art on it but I think for whatever reason the plans stalled. I don't like the looks of the protos I built as well as the eight bar sweeps so I'm looking for a better idea. I do not think it is necesary to shim helicals if you shim cylinder bars by 1/2" thus I would not go threw the trouble. I have shimmed out a cage full of steep helicals by 1/4" prior to the days of sweeps in an effort to flow tough edible beans. The bars will clear the helicals but not by much. The shimmed helicals did not help me in that situation but they are still in there after 15ish years. The Aussie that shimmed steep helicals by 3/8" as well as the two bolt bars on seperator side by 3/8" would be running this close clearance where the steep helicals overlap into seperator side. I kind of like the 1/4" on both helicals and bars for I think it could over the best for all worlds including the space were tring to preserve for corn cobs. I hope that makes sense.
Joined
·
209 Posts
So probably for an all crop rotor we would likely be best off going with a 1/4" shim under rotor bars and helicals. Do you make the shims your self that are used for the helicals? I am not aware of an agco part number for this. Thanks.
Joined
·
3,259 Posts
I try to follow as best I can all of nddan's mods and ideas. I have transfered some of them to my red machine.
In case there may be others that are somewhat confused by the difference of shimming bars vs. shimming helicals, perhaps nddan can help out here. IMO, shimming helicals will make for more agressive transport as the helicals are now deeper, or taller in nature. In this way, they can get a better grip on the material, especially slippery material or material that otherwise does not slide along the cage walls easily.
Shimming bars will make a more agressive thresh as it decreases the clearence between the outter, fixed devices such as the grate and other material retarding devices.
As I have had one season with my red machine running a few reverse rasp bars, its my experience that shimming the helicals/vanes will reduce the negative effects of the reverse rasp bars, as opposed to shimming the reverse rasp bars will increase the aggressive nature of the bar to slow the transport.
nddan, what is your thought on that concept?
Thanks.
In case there may be others that are somewhat confused by the difference of shimming bars vs. shimming helicals, perhaps nddan can help out here. IMO, shimming helicals will make for more agressive transport as the helicals are now deeper, or taller in nature. In this way, they can get a better grip on the material, especially slippery material or material that otherwise does not slide along the cage walls easily.
Shimming bars will make a more agressive thresh as it decreases the clearence between the outter, fixed devices such as the grate and other material retarding devices.
As I have had one season with my red machine running a few reverse rasp bars, its my experience that shimming the helicals/vanes will reduce the negative effects of the reverse rasp bars, as opposed to shimming the reverse rasp bars will increase the aggressive nature of the bar to slow the transport.
nddan, what is your thought on that concept?
Thanks.
Combinekid, I going to stick with 1/4" and 1/4". That's my story and I'm stickin to it. If going with 1/2" cylinder bar shim kit from Gleaner I would go with steep thresher helicals at standard height and spaced apart an extra hole. Talked to guy today that ran the spaced apart steep helicals two seasons ago and worked great with corn included then this year shimmed thresher cylinder bars by 1/2" along with the shimmed helicals and worked just as good but no test in corn. Talked to another guy today that has run a couple years with spaced apart steep shimmed helicals and he is getting along fine without shimming cylinder bars. Also called and talked to Warren at Fairbanks International in Hastings, Neb for they have been shimming steep helicals with their CDFs. They have local guy making the 1/4" shims for them. They have been ordering them from him as they need them and they usually install three long, one medium, and one short which I believe would be just right to match Gleaners steep thresher helical package. Sounded like you could get shim kit for $200 range. This sounded reasonable so I believe I will have them make me a kit that includes four long and one medium for that is what it takes me when I space them apart as I move over. I had local machine shop making the protos for me but they have now closed local shop in favor of bigger shop. Nothing like having them made local so I'll have to check things out a bit more.
Doorknob, Seems you have it figured the same as I do. I don't know how CIH red does it but I think it was a MF red video I was watching the other day and they were braging about multiple passes over concave. Maybe they need to do this and maybe that is why I have read where they sometimes use different design concave sections as they move toward back. I'd rather the concave sees the material once to get threshed then centrifical seperation around 360 degrees of the cage for the completion of seperation. Gleaners cage is a touch over 27" with 24" enclosed CDF or 25" open eight bar rotors. The chromed Gleaner channel helical stands up 5/8" from cage. Can you tell me the diameter of various IH rotors and cage diameter? I believe IH has a 1" angle iron vane/helical. Anyone know these dementions for the MF? Thanks
Doorknob, Seems you have it figured the same as I do. I don't know how CIH red does it but I think it was a MF red video I was watching the other day and they were braging about multiple passes over concave. Maybe they need to do this and maybe that is why I have read where they sometimes use different design concave sections as they move toward back. I'd rather the concave sees the material once to get threshed then centrifical seperation around 360 degrees of the cage for the completion of seperation. Gleaners cage is a touch over 27" with 24" enclosed CDF or 25" open eight bar rotors. The chromed Gleaner channel helical stands up 5/8" from cage. Can you tell me the diameter of various IH rotors and cage diameter? I believe IH has a 1" angle iron vane/helical. Anyone know these dementions for the MF? Thanks
Dan, do you think there could be any advantage to shimming the regular pitch helicals 1/4" as well. Would this make the flow too fast and lead to losses? Or simply not be necessary. I do believe the angle iron vanes in the CaseIH rotor cage and cone are 1" high stainless steel. Probably pretty effective in spiraling the crop rearward. One final thought about the CaseIH rotor cage. It has limited perforations around the top and has many areas that are smooth unlike the gleaner cage and this must facilitate smoother lower resistance flow of material along the helicals. That is why I believe the channel helicals work well in the fully perforated gleaner cage as they create a small smooth area for crop to slide. I have noticed that used channel helicals wear on the intake side of the channel and the discharge side of the outer edge of the channel. the other corner of the channel will snow virtually no wear with the chrome still rough. Perhaps a 1/8" shim maybe 3/8" wider than the channel protruding towards the discharge side would create another smooth pocket for material to flow making the helical more effective.
Corsair, I'm sure you are talking the standard pitch helicals on seperator side. I highly doubt this would give you any trouble. Geez you raise some tough questions. I've never gave much thought to raiseing the standard helicals. They are not at a very stiff angle so it would surely have less benifit than shimming steep helicals. Now when we are talking the reduced diameter CDF the thought of bringing the metal to metal clearance closer should be an OK idea. I highly doubt shimming them will flow anything faster but maybe more positively. Talking to guy today about his R75 with all forward bars on his CDF and steep thresher helicals with nothing shimmed and he could do same acres per hour as his class eight so I wonder how much more can be done. I understand what you say about many axial brands being flat smooth unperforated cages on top where much of their helical/vanes are. This would no doubt allow crop to follow helical with little resistance. I have did the 1/8" shim protruding 3/8" to 1/2" in an effort to flow edible bean straw prior to sweeps. It didn't help evidently but didn't have to remove when back in other crops either. Some Australians did this trick to their flat iron helicals used in the P1s with excellant results. The extra 1/8" height certainly helped them some but I'm sure the smooth corner where most of the pressure is helped plenty as well. I think if we preserve room between helicals for cobs and don't pinch cobs between bars and helicals we will be just fine.
Sounds like the limits are being approached for the size of the rotor and cage and with the shimmed steep pitch helicals and all forward bars, about the only thing left to perfect is getting even feeding of material into the chopper preventing clumping and possible power loss in this area. Sounds like we are running out of room to continue 'hot rodding' this basic design. Oh well just when you think it has all been done, someone discovers another angle.
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
