Larry Fishel wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:38 pm, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 16, 6:37 pm, wrote:

On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:16:03 -0600, dpb wrote:
RBM wrote:

They're also not pointing vertically directly below the load, either;
only the force in the direction of lift is actually vertical.
Not true. Not at all. You need to study your basic physics - simple
levers, classes and ratios.
He is correct. The force that counts is that applied at the load.
That depends on all the various levers, angles, etc. but it still
comes out to "what is the actual vertical force on the load". It will
be considerably less than the force measured 'at the cylinder pivots'.

I also read this statement to suggest that he was thinking in terms of
vector mechanics such that only the vertical component of the
cylinder's force vector was applied to the load. If so. this has very
little to do with this type of system. The cylinder could be
horizontal, sideways of pointing down and still supply (almost)
exactly the same force at the load.

On second reading, it's really hard to tell exactly what he meant by
that second clause...

Well, all of the above...

The poster who started this subthread to which I was responding noted
that altho had sizable cylinder on a tractor loader that didn't have
anything close to the lift force that one might expect simply from the
bore/pressure of the cylinder and the responder directly ahead mentioned
only the weight of the loader itself as a confounding factor...

A typical small/medium tractor loader is generally a very simple
mechanism a la the one shown at the link below--

http://www.americanlisted.com/idaho_12/garden_house_22/ford_8_n_loader_tractor_3375_14793104.html

While there are complex mechanisms found on either very large and/or
expensive loaders and/or the compact loaders such as the Bobcat and ilk,
a basic loader of the above type doesn't have mechanical advantage--the
upward component at the bottom is fairly small and the relatively long
moment arm beyond the lift point (necessary to get reasonable lift
height, etc.) requires quite a bit to counteract.

I was simply trying to be concise at, perhaps, the cost of some clarity
in pointing out that mechanics are a part as well as weight and cylinder
force...as per usual on usenet, the opportunity to seek advantage and
display perceived intellectual prowess at expense of others is,
apparently, irresistible force for some.

--