Re: (ET) Bye bye brakes

["Jim (fiskfarm)" <fiskfarm mediaone net>]

Hey Larry,

Now I am confused. With the seat switch active, one bounce and you loose 
regen braking (which in some cases was all the brakes I had) so how does 
that help on long hills? The only time the seat switch helps is if you put 
the tractor in motion after you get off. With a 20 or 185 this is hard to 
do unless your foot throttle is sticky. On the 145 I often nudge the 
tractor in LL (from off the seat) to line up with a heavy trailer hitch, 
etc. Can't do that with a seat switch. One can always leave their car in 
gear (auto) and jump out, but we don't! and they don't have seat switches! 
Who are we trying to protect? 3 year olds shouldn't be allowed on the 
tractor to begin with.  I have had all kinds of large
tractors over the years and they don't have seat switches. I think they 
are designed for the back yard crowd, you know the ones who need signage 
to tell them not to clean the mower blades while running!!  or clean the 
snow out of the blower while running!  Am I alone in this?  Each to their 
own. Do I make sure they (seat switches) are working for customers, YES 
thanks to the LAWYERS!  :)  Thanks for letting me vent on this and I 
welcome all views!!  :) :)

Later, Jim


"Elie, Larry (L.D.)" wrote:

> Chris, Jim...
>
> I vote with Chris.  This should be a good and safe mod.  I want to look 
> at the circuit.  Disabling the seat switch for people with hills is a 
> BAD idea, yet the same switch can be a pain.  The down side is that I 
> don't think you want the field on real long (run down the batteries) 
> because some people (kids) might just get off the switch and walk away 
> for a few hours.  A solid-state timer for say 30 seconds would be one 
> way out, and they are available for relay logic, but this begins to be 
> more complex.  Should it also be wired to the break?  I don't think so, 
> but see how this gets?  Or perhaps with a mercury level switch, just 
> locking the field on a seat trip if the angle is 10+ deg.... we could go 
> on.
>
> Larry Elie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim (fiskfarm) [mailto:fiskfarm mediaone net]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:14 PM
> To: Christopher Zach
> Cc: Pieter Litchfield; Discussion List Electrac tractor
> Subject: Re: (ET) Bye bye brakes
>
> Chris,
>
> You need to do more riding and less thinking! We could fail safe these 
> suckers
> to death but we wouldn't get anything else done. Roll bars and seat 
> belts would
> be good.
>
> I'm happy if I can just keep the fleet running! Right now 3 of my best 
> are
> down. The I-5, E-20 and C185. Each has some squirrely electrical 
> problem. The
> old trusty B145 is trooping along. Pulled 3 wagons loaded down with wood 
> all in
> a row today. Quite a picture.
>
> Jim :)
>
> Christopher Zach wrote:
>
> > Well, personal anecdote:
> >
> > A number of years ago my mom was bounced hard on the Craftsman 16hp 
> > tractor
> > they owned. The engine seat kill switch disabled the engine, however 
> > she
> > landed half on the seat/half off and the motor happily restarted and 
> > drove
> > forward till she fell completely off.
> >
> > She was ok, but very shaken. This is part of the reason I like the
> > Elec-Trak's interlock system: If you fall off and grab the seat on the 
> > way
> > down the tractor will stay in "failed" mode.
> >
> > That said, what I think we need here is a circuit that instead of just
> > shutting down the motor it brings the field current to full, then 
> > shorts the
> > armature dead to itself along with the rest of the normal fault 
> > functions
> > (ie: killing all the attachments). This way the motor will be off, yet
> > shorted for maximum stopping power. After 30 seconds of this, the 
> > custom
> > circuit can cut out, returning the tractor's logic to a default 
> > "faulted"
> > condition.
> >
> > Now the first set of questions are:
> >
> > 1) With the field current at full and the armature shorted, will the 
> > motor
> > behave the same way as a PM motor? If the field current is dead then it
> > doesn't matter what happens to the armature, so the field needs to be
> > powered somehow.
> >
> > 2) Where do you get max regen power on a shunt wound motor? With the 
> > field
> > current at max or min (I would guess max)
> >
> > 3) What is the effect of having field current at 100% but armature 
> > current
> > at zero (or less than zero)? Will the field windings burn up? How long 
> > can
> > they go with nothing in the armature, and will the back current coming 
> > from
> > a shorted armature blow up the field windings?
> >
> > 4) Will shorting the armature like this put so much braking energy on 
> > the
> > motor the belts will just slip rather than stop the tractor (even 
> > properly
> > tensioned belts must have some sort of slip point where they just go, 
> > esp in
> > high gears)?
> >
> > It would be neat to build a truly fail-safe stopping system into the 
> > seat
> > switch. When going down a steep hill, or when towing something heavy, 
> > you
> > want all the "stop power" you can possibly have.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jim (fiskfarm)" <fiskfarm mediaone net>
> > To: "Pieter Litchfield" <plitch attglobal net>
> > Cc: "Discussion List Electrac tractor" <elec-trak cosmos phy tufts edu>
> > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 5:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: (ET) Bye bye brakes
> >
> > > Hmmm, maybe the seat switch is better off disabled. I only have one
> > tractor
> > > with it hooked up. Never missed it and I'd rather have the motor stay
> > engaged
> > > during regen braking. Sounds like a personal preference decision.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> > > Pieter Litchfield wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have recently replaced the transzxle (and  rebuilt the original 
> > > > brake)
> > on
> > > > my e-15.  Apparently there were at least two different designs - 
> > > > one in
> > > > which the caliper was fixed but the rotor floated (was free to 
> > > > slide a
> > bit
> > > > on the transmission shaft) and another where the caliper floated 
> > > > on pins
> > but
> > > > the rotor was fixed.  Somehow I managed to combine the two designs 
> > > > so
> > that
> > > > both parts are now floating on mine.  It seems to work as well as 
> > > > can be
> > > > expected of two square inches of mechanical disk brake!  In 
> > > > addition, I
> > use
> > > > a bit of "Never-Seize" graphite/lithum grease to lightly coat all 
> > > > the
> > > > floating points, since as I am sure we ALL have experienced, the 
> > > > brake
> > rotor
> > > > dearly loves to weld itself to the shaft.  Lubing and checking for 
> > > > free
> > > > float should be an annual rite.  In addition the brake power cut 
> > > > off
> > switch
> > > > on the linkage needs to be adjusted so that the motor is not 
> > > > working
> > against
> > > > a fully applied brake, causing wear and ineffective braking.  I 
> > > > allow
> > for a
> > > > bit of overlap - the brake just begins to take effect when the 
> > > > power
> > switch
> > > > kills motor current.  It is, in my opinion, a design which when 
> > > > working
> > well
> > > > is of marginal capacity, and which almost never works "to spec"!  
> > > > Bill's
> > > > upgrade is surely worth it.  I suspect that the design was an 
> > > > original
> > part
> > > > from the transaxle supplier (Peerless) and is designed to be used 
> > > > on
> > lighter
> > > > gas engine machines.  Nobody envisioned six big batteries headed 
> > > > down a
> > > > steep slope.  If the throttle is not cut, or if you don't bounce a
> > activate
> > > > the seat cut-off switch, the tractor is capable of some effective
> > > > regenerative braking effort.  If however (as I have done) a bump 
> > > > causes
> > a
> > > > power cutoff in the middle of a hill, the mechanical brake may be 
> > > > barely
> > > > adequate to save you!  I always shift to a lower speed range 
> > > > (using the
> > > > mecahnical transmission) for steep downslopes, and then keep my 
> > > > foot off
> > the
> > > > brake pedal so I maintain power.  Of course, we are talking about a
> > brake on
> > > > the input shaft of a differential, so braking is limited by the
> > available
> > > > traction at either rear wheel.  If one rear wheel is unweighted 
> > > > (as when
> > > > traversing across a slope), the available braking traction is 
> > > > limited to
> > the
> > > > amount of force that can cause the lighter rear wheel to slide -
> > sometimes
> > > > not much.  All in all, the E series brake is a weak point!  If 
> > > > equipped
> > with
> > > > two drum or disk brakes at the rear wheels, the brakes would have 
> > > > been
> > far
> > > > more effective, and of course more expensive.  But you could have
> > employed
> > > > brake steeering and traction control as well as do "real" tractors.
> > This
> > > > would appeal to me because even with a weight box on the back and
> > chains, I
> > > > often spin rear wheels with a full bucket on the front mounted 
> > > > loader.
> > > > Being able to independently brake each rear wheel would be a big
> > advantage
> > > > for me in trasferring power when one has better traction than the 
> > > > other.
> > > > Hmmmm...... winter project?
> > > >
> > > > I used to have an old Jacobson tractor that had a transmission 
> > > > brake on
> > the
> > > > input shaft like the GE, but it was a very simple "outside drum" 
> > > > where
> > the
> > > > pedal linkage pulled tight a lined metal band looped around a drum
> > attached
> > > > to the shaft.  It was very effective, but of course suffered from 
> > > > the
> > same
> > > > limits on brake force generated by sliding a wheel.
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-elec-trak cosmos phy tufts edu
> > > > [mailto:owner-elec-trak cosmos phy tufts edu]On Behalf Of Jim 
> > > > (fiskfarm)
> > > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:43 AM
> > > > To: Christopher Zach
> > > > Cc: Elec-trak
> > > > Subject: Re: (ET) Bye bye brakes
> > > >
> > > > Hey Chris,
> > > >
> > > > The rotor is NOT supposed to "deform" but rather float free on it's
> > keyed
> > > > shaft. I use a combo of air chisel, Breakaway and sometimes heat 
> > > > to free
> > up
> > > > the
> > > > rotor and then remove it , clean up both shaft and sleeve, 
> > > > retighten the
> > > > rivets
> > > > by hammer and anvil (or replacement) and reinstall all with a 
> > > > gentle
> > coating
> > > > (you don't want any on the rotor and pads) of Never Seize. Here, 
> > > > unlike
> > a
> > > > car,
> > > > the caliper doesn't float, but the rotor does. Also you will want 
> > > > to
> > sand
> > > > the
> > > > rotor smooth with either a power sander or rotate the rotor in 
> > > > place
> > with
> > > > the
> > > > motor while sanding by holding the paper against it. Not for the 
> > > > faint
> > of
> > > > heart
> > > > but probably the fastest for the more experienced. DO NOT "grab" 
> > > > the
> > rotor
> > > > with
> > > > the paper , but rather sand one side at a time. New pads (if they 
> > > > are
> > shot)
> > > > go
> > > > without saying. Stainless steel rotors would avoid about 99% of the
> > problems
> > > > with these breaks. That and Never Seize.
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps you along,
> > > >
> > > > Jim
> > > >
> > > > Christopher Zach wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Well, I figured out why I have no brakes....
> > > > >
> > > > > No brake pad :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Seriously, the outboard pad is gone. It appears that the brake 
> > > > > lever
> > > > engages
> > > > > a cam which pushes on a metal dowel which pushes on a pad which 
> > > > > pushes
> > the
> > > > > disc into another static pad on the other side. Interesting 
> > > > > design,
> > are
> > > > > there any specs for pad clearance on the static pad (if it wears 
> > > > > down,
> > the
> > > > > disc will have to deform more and more for the brake to engage, 
> > > > > thus
> > > > > reducing brake effectiveness)
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah well, it looks like the pad disintegrated or something. I'll 
> > > > > call
> > Mr.
> > > > > Gunn and see if he has a new puck.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >