b101uk

you could say "metal brush cutting accessories fitted to petrol driven brush cutters can fail catastrophically in-service. There is a risk of death or serious injury to operators and others in vicinity from ejected metal components" of ANY metal brush cutting accessories. looking at the photos on the HSE site you can see the 1 remaining end link is almost worn threw and the 1 on the other end is missing. given that is is not a problem with design but of the operator using something that was worn out and should have had its chains replaced which would be no different it using a badly worn brush cutting head of any design be it single or multi part.

All I will say is, There are a lot of fools in arb who are easily parted with there hard earned money for grossly overpriced simplistic bits of kit like chippers driven via v-belts/pullys with pillow-block bearings and little mass market industrial engines and crude steel plate construction, and that’s with reference to TW yet alone schliesing and other makes!

If you are relatively unfamiliar with airbrake systems you would be better of contacting a local mobile HGV mechanic, mog airbrake systems are really no different to any other truck air-over brake system which a mobile HGV mechanic will be familiar with. You can easily waste hours looking at something you are unfamiliar with and waste lots on money aimlessly replacing parts that are not needed nor fix the problem. As said by others use a workshop compressor (>150L tank preferably), set the pressure on the workshop compressor to 110psig and charge its tank, undo the pipe from the mog compressor to the unloader valve at the rear of the unloader valve and get some pipe fittings to fit an airline QR coupling on the unloader valve, then when the workshop compressor is charged plug its airline into the QR coupling on the unloader valve, air will rush from the workshop compressor tank to the mog air system trying to charge the mog system as the mog compressor would try to do, repeat the above until you have found the leak, as the workshop compressor is set to 105psig the unloader valve on the mog should not trigger as that should happen at 8.1bar/117.5psig which can be tested by rising the workshop compressor operating pressure above 8.1bar/117.5psig.

SEE below, You have given two diameters (450mm & 500mm) the average of both is 475mm, you use radius which is half of the diameter (237.5mm) expressed in meters i.e. 0.2375m

as per treequip says. or use windows PC calc (calc.exe) in scientific view the x^2 button i.e. input 0.2375 then hit the x^2 button to give 0.05640625 (same as 0.2375 x 0.2375 = 0.05640625)

Treequips equation was right he just put the wrong m3 475mm dia / 2 = 237.5mm (0.2375m) radius [0.2375m radius x 0.2375m radius] x 3.14 π (short Pi) x 5m length = 0.885577m3 volume using longer Pi its ~0.8863839285714279m3

yes showing that its NOT 3.6m3 as you said given the square volume is still only ~1.25m3 then a cylinder MUST be less than that!

err asuming timber was square at 0.5m x 0.5m that is a 0.25m2 x 5m = 1.25m3 i.e. W (0.5m) x H (0.5m) x L (5m) = volume thus round timber of <500mm dia by 5m long must be less than 1.25m3

use 475mm dia or ~0.8863839285714279m3 500mm dia = ~0.9821428571428563m3 450mm dia = ~0.7955357142857136m3

why was it not a tractor?

err no, men and women statisticly have the same amount of accidents BUT womens accidents statisticly cost less each so premiums are slightly higher for men.

I had an 038AV FB, it lasted >12 years of 6 days per week use in forestry and arb, it only had a couple of plugs in that time. Now have a MS390 that so far is proving to be just like my 038 was though it doesn’t have the same use the 038 did I like the 038/ms390 because they are happy to cut at any rpm as they have plenty of torque at lower rpm’s unlike I find pro saws of the same power but lower CC

I appreciate that, but saying “'City & Guilds NPTC Qualified Staff'” would imply for every job you undertake you would have to use 'City & Guilds NPTC Qualified Staff' if you then have anyone do something work related for which they are not C&G/NPTC Qualified you would then be in breach of that statement thus misleading customers. “but I think they would be pleased that people are using their logo and raising their profile” I think you will find there is a bit of a difference between the free advertising effect of sticking a company logo on something not related to business or the earning of moneys like in armature motocross or mountain biking etc vs. that of a professional business who’s sole goal is earning money.

Do you have permission in writing to use there logo in the manner you intend. If not then you shouldn’t be using them

If it’s the type that the flywheel sits on a single stub-axel (like the tracked 190’s) which is held to the chipper by caps (like a crank is held in a block by caps) The stub axel is stationery - the caps allow you do remove it from the chipper. The flywheel fits to the stub axel just like a wheel hub dose on a car stub-axel. The drive-belt pulley wheel then fixes direct to the engine end of the flywheel in a similar manner to how a half-shaft flange fixes to a hub.

Loosen the belts and spin the flywheel by hand to see if the bearing have gone. The 190 bearing (flywheel on stub axel) I have seen are not very good, they seam to have almost half the amount of ball bearing they should have (they are very widely spaced within the race)

Tracked/wheeled self-propelled chippers/stump grinders on the road would be plant IF it were taxed as such and displayed number plates along with a tax disk and had valid vehicular insurance for use on the public road! If its not registered as a plant machine with the DVLA and not taxed or insured BUT is on the public road it is then there totally illegally and as such given it is there illegally would need to be on DERV given its NOT proven that its plant by way of DVLA registration.

true the loops on the TW are on the ends of the chassis and NOT on the undercarriage, thus encourage chassis bending up/down. but most tracked chipper the undercarriage would be hard to reach with a trailer hitch

I have seen tracked chipper chassis cracked from pulling timber up hill, and pulling trees over especially when pulled from the ends of the chipper rather than the actual undercarriage.

That means you were carrying ~5300kg more weight than the standard ~5200kg kerb weight, with quite a lot of it forward of the rear axel, also I think the GVW of the Valmet 8150 to 9850 was 10500kg. I don’t think a crane & grab + weights + tyre water ballast would weigh ~5300kg more like <2500kg

Aren’t most items in the USA in shops shown without tax due to the different state tax & federal tax placed on each item at point of sale or inter-state sale hence why they look so cheep, after all if the price included taxes then they would be even cheaper as exports are exempt from state tax & federal tax at point of sale given they are then taxed hear with import duty & VAT

Rather than make the rear body tip would it not be cheaper and slightly more functional to make an ejector to go in the rear body that is removable, protects the original floor and boxes out the wheel arch to side height (space can be used for lockers with top doors) leaving a rectangular load space or with lockers to wheel arch height giving smaller lockers but more load space (stepped) Nothing knocks money off a pickup like the rear tub all bashed about and dented wheel arch, after all if you hand load/unload it it will get bashed about a lot less than if its tipped out

all you like, it WILL be a compromise in both practicality and strength/durability vs. putting a proper tipper bed on.

Start putting anymore than 2000kg on the rear lift arms (close to the lift point) on a 150hp Valmet you will have little steering effect under power/hills or on mud, even with 1000kg (close) they will begin to start under-steering on road turning into e.g. junctions or small traffic islands.