What's new
What's new
By:
Advanced search…

Objective: Make Flywheel for antique Farmall C tractorđźšś

5

560Dennis

Plastic
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
I recreationally pull this old farm tractor at this time in the 3500 lb. class. Rpm limits are in place that I can run 10 percent over 1815 rpm. But I’ve seen some groups allow 20 percent ( ive not participated ).
Background is in the press world of deep drawing metal for lamp bases. An old engineer (technical advisor told us at lunch one day ,that the only difference between his bandes 100 ton press and the 120 press was the bigger mass of the flywheel. Oh ! I stored that information in my memory for future use.
Now seems like a time to put this to the test with the Farmall 113 cubic inch .
I’ve pull a few times ,and I’ve been beaten pretty good. Some tractor in that weight class are sporting 200 cubic inch at much lower rpm . ( more toque ) I don’t lose tractor traction ,my engine dies out .
My theory is to make a steel flywheel that will be larger diameter
With more mass to improve the C113 torque at 2000 rpm .
Is my theory realistically worth the effort ?
If it is please tell what steel to use?
It would be a cup shaped flywheel about no more than 1 to 1 1/2 large diameter than the stock 9 inch clutch flywheel.
 
You do know that the energy stored in the flywheel will be extracted pretty fast, and then you have to have time to spin it up again. Adding mass to the flywheel will only give you momentary help, then its a liability for a while.
 
I agree with the above about losing the energy quickly and having to build it back up.
But if I remember from the couple tractor pulls I've seen, the launch, getting the sled moving is critical, and an increase of that stored energy may help.....or maybe a turbo with nitrous
 
You've asked the same question in two different threads and even if you ask a third time, the answer will still be no. A different flywheel is not how old tractors make more power.

jack vines
 
The only way I see this wsrking is up to have two flywheels. The one on the engine and a second one connected with a clutch. While on the starting line have the clutch engaged so you can spin it up the second flywheel. Disengage the clutch and pull away. Once the tractor starts to bog reingauge the clutch to use the stored energy of the second flywheel. May get you a few feet extra. Perhaps enough to win.
 
Milland said:
One reason for making a new flywheel might be safety, If the old FW is the stock, cast iron unit, a "billet" steel FW may save someone's skin in case of diesel runaway.
Click to expand...

It's a gasser not diesel. Though a cousin blew one up (engine) by tying a string to the governor and whooping it down the road.
 
Superbowl said:
Cute rhyme, but I will take a small block with a super charger over a big block without one any day, and blow your ass away.
Click to expand...

Well, I have a Super C out in the shed with a windowed block. Drop off that supercharged small block please; I'll shoehorn it in. I'm not picky about what it is either.
 
"Cute rhyme, but I will take a small block with a super charger over a big block without one any day, and blow your ass away. "


So what you're saying is if you take a small block and force fuel/air into it, effectively causing it to displace more, it will be faster than an engine that displaces more? Hmmm....how about you show up with your small block, un-supercharged, and take on the big boys?
 
Superbowl said:
Cute rhyme, but I will take a small block with a super charger over a big block without one any day, and blow your ass away.
Click to expand...

And I'll make you drive that temperamental, whining, overboosted beast 10,000 miles before we race. You will give up first. The driveability of big inch engines is far better than their smaller siblings.
 
That said...my Hellcat engine could be considered a small block and it's supercharged and it is also reliable and mild mannered. Of course, it's not the type of engine being discussed, either.
 
Spin up maybe?

Way back in the day I read some articles where they had weights magneticly suspended and spun them very fast. Many thousands of RPM to then use stored energy to provide power for electric drive.

Flywheel spining same ram as engine adds short additional stored energy.

Spinning that thing via step up gearing would require some time to spin up but the gear reduction going back may amplify the torque lake standard tyranny.

These devices are common for tractors, someone gave us a chipper made in Germany with 3 point attachment with a 4 to 1 gear box to increase the PTO speed up for the chipper.

That may not be legal in stock but modified?

Someone with the better math than me could determine how fast it needs to go along with the additional torque available.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
 
560Dennis said:
I recreationally pull this old farm tractor at this time in the 3500 lb. class. Rpm limits are in place that I can run 10 percent over 1815 rpm. But I’ve seen some groups allow 20 percent ( ive not participated ).
Background is in the press world of deep drawing metal for lamp bases. An old engineer (technical advisor told us at lunch one day ,that the only difference between his bandes 100 ton press and the 120 press was the bigger mass of the flywheel. Oh ! I stored that information in my memory for future use.
Now seems like a time to put this to the test with the Farmall 113 cubic inch .
I’ve pull a few times ,and I’ve been beaten pretty good. Some tractor in that weight class are sporting 200 cubic inch at much lower rpm . ( more toque ) I don’t lose tractor traction ,my engine dies out .
My theory is to make a steel flywheel that will be larger diameter
With more mass to improve the C113 torque at 2000 rpm .
Is my theory realistically worth the effort ?
If it is please tell what steel to use?
It would be a cup shaped flywheel about no more than 1 to 1 1/2 large diameter than the stock 9 inch clutch flywheel.
Click to expand...

or you could go with a two cylinder John deere, they came from the factory with a massive flywheel and loads of torque.
 
My old company used to make gen sets for the nuclear industry, back before that industry was ruined by the tree huggers and bed wetters and folk singers.

Anyway, the gen sets were not that big, and they only produced 240v power. But, they were special in the sense that they were used to power the mechanism that dropped the cooling rods into the water in the event of a failure, so as to prevent a nookler meltdown.

What made them special was the requirement they continue to produce full 60HZ power for a small amount of time - something like 1 second - even after they had lost all of their input power. This was enough time to drop the rods, that's all that mattered. So.....they were a small motor driving a small generator with a BIG flywheel sandwiched between the two. We tested each and every one of these units...it was weird to see the power get shut and the output meters would seem to be broken for a short time as they continued to stay fixed. Then, Mother Nature (or was it Pete Seeger?) would take over....
 
thanks for the comments and complements ! I’ve learned a lot from drag racers in pass when I pulled lawn tractors , that’s why I posted the question here. You never learn till you ask , don’t care where I get good advice about what to try and not to , this ,that and why. Never know where you get a aha innovation.
think the little c113 is out cubed. But does well for what it is . Going to keep it as close stock as ,I can ,higher compression, take weight off the wheels . Governor and carburetor .
I’ll get beat but the point was to improve to maximize and to get economic efficiency
Any other ideas I gladly consider !
 
The flywheel stores kinetic energy. It can absorb or release tremendous power when accelerated or decelerated quickly. It does not absorb or provide any power when held at a constant rotational speed. Over longer time spans it does nothing to increase or decrease the average power delivered by the system.

The energy stored in the flywheel is proportional to the rotational speed squared: Ef = 1/2 I w^2.

I is the moment of inertia for the flywheel. I = k m r^2 r is the radius, m is the mass and k is a constant determined by the shape of the flywheel.

Making the engine spin faster increases the stored energy much more than a heavier flywheel. Making a larger diameter flywheel increases the stored energy much more than making a heavier flywheel.

Big picture, you are not going to store anywhere near enough energy to make a difference in a race or pulling contest with the speed and space constraints you have.

Like many have said here, you need to think about increasing the power delivered from the engine. Run it faster with the same displacement and change the gear ratio or increase the displacement at the same speed. Either way, it will need to consume more fuel and need to breathe more air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

5
Suggest Steel for antique tractor flywheel performance
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
michiganbuck
michiganbuck
J
Rebuild of an old steam engine & Method for making split bronze bearings (aka "Brasses")
Replies
9
Views
2K
dundeeshopnut
D
W
Looking for input on a recent tragedy
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
10K
michiganbuck
michiganbuck
M
Weeke BP100 for sale in Salt Lake City-$2,000
Replies
0
Views
2K
madhatterarms
M
M
Weeke BP100 for sale in Salt Lake City
Replies
0
Views
1K
madhatterarms
M








 

ABOUT PRACTICAL MACHINIST

With more than 10.6 million unique visitors over the last year, Practical Machinist is the most visited site for metalworking professionals. Practical Machinist is the easiest way to learn new techniques, get answers quickly and discuss common challenges with your peers. Register for the world’s largest manufacturing technology forum for free today to stay in the know.

Learn more about us.

STAY CONNECTED

Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn Pinterest Twitter Tiktok

Register Become a forum member. Register today.

Sign Up Sign up for our e-newsletter.

© 2024 Copyright Practicalmachinist.com. All Rights reserved.

Back
Top