2" removable receivers

[treeguy]

The rear shackle mounts on a deuce are just about 1-3/8" thick so the 1x2 bars are padded out to fit. I don't know if 5 ton mounts are the same dimentions and mounted the same width apart, these will be the issues if it will fit or not and if you have a clear under frame at 12" to 18-1/2" in from the end of the C channel for the front arms to bolt to to create the right geometry, keeping the rear uprights perpendicular to the frame.
Mudguppy, TM, and Jesusgatos thanks so much for all the help!

 

[flyBURopTIK]

Treeguy,

Design is sexy n' fab'ing looks like it just came out of a box that says WARN!
Any word on pricing? =)

Thanks,
opD

 

[jesusgatos]

Just noticed one more thing: I still think it's a bad idea to mount this to the bottom of the framerails, but in any case, when you sandwich something between two plates, it's always a good idea to make the two plates different sizes/shapes. Would also try to avoid making those plates with straight edges that run perpendicular to the framerails. Put a radius in it, or make it more like a diamond-shape. And put a generous radius on the edges of those plates where they contact the framerails. All these suggestions are to aid in distributing loads (which again, I think would be better to redirect to the sides of the framerails). Hope you take this input to be constructive, I'm not trying to be a jerk.

 

[oilburner]

Treeguy,
Nice work! I is nice to see clean finished work on a MV not flame cut booger welds.

 

[treeguy]

Jesusgatos, No jerk roun' here. P-c-ate it Thanks, how does the diamond shape help distribute the load sandwich, its reduced shape reduces surface area on the clamping area? The total flat available on the frame here is 2-1/4" before the radius to the side, but, YOU did know that because I got a peek at those hot looking brackets that look like spring perches in your CAD pic. a while back. I was going to ask you about that design and possibly using it here if you approve. Which CAD program do you have that in if you may still have it? Does a large radiused edge create less stress within said plate by not having sharp points to crack? I would radius more but I didn't want to invite more water and debris into this joint area to cause frame rot. Refering to the big plate little plate sandwich rig, what determines which side gets the larger plate? I would guess in the pic. shown that the bottom would be larger pushing up on the frame and the top could be smaller used as a washer type unit for the nuts to grap and dis-suade any warpage to the existing part (frame bottom side).

Do you disaprove of this mouting location because of the chance of destroying this section of frame? What I was thinking is that this mounting point would receive push/pull pressure, but at an angle equal to the angle of the bars attached here. I now think I see what you mean, this 2-1/4" area is going to get flexing pressure causing it to try to flex up and down and fatigue. Towing an Abrams would probably accelerate this force, but to be safe I could extend the forward arms longer to mate up to a bracket like what you designed. The only problem is that the pic. shows what I now have and to determine the precise length pin hole to pin hole I would need to grind out my rivets and install one on my truck to get all this right. Any suggestions? Like I said I didn't want to drill out mine just to measure this up. Looks like some fancy math. Would you also recomend heavy wall 1"x2" box tubing instead of solid? I reeeeeealy want to stick to this 1x2 dimention.

 

[treeguy]

I guess with the use of those brackets I could call it the "Tow your house off its foundation removable deuce receiver".
(Mel Gibson "Lethal Weapon" movie!)

 

[Recht71]

Treeguy Great looking hitch very nicely done. I have the other removable hitch AGE /KShaufl asked if it had fail ,that would be a no, been all over this last summer hits some bad bumps on 76 thru P.A . There are 6 of them out there Till Later Randy

 

[jesusgatos]

J...how does the diamond shape help distribute the load sandwich, its reduced shape reduces surface area on the clamping area? Does a large radiused edge create less stress within said plate by not having sharp points to crack? I would radius more but I didn't want to invite more water and debris into this joint area to cause frame rot. ...Refering to the big plate little plate sandwich rig, what determines which side gets the larger plate? I would guess in the pic. shown that the bottom would be larger pushing up on the frame and the top could be smaller used as a washer type unit for the nuts to grap and dis-suade any warpage to the existing part (frame bottom side).

Exactly. We're talking about radiuseses in two direction here. 1st is the shape of the plate if you were looking at it from the top/bottom, and 2nd is the front/back edges/corners of the brackets where the brackets contact the frame the framerails. The idea is to reduce the stress that's concentrated on any one area, so you want to avoid the sharp edges and straight lines across your framerails.

As far as the shape of sandwich plates, if you think about it for a second, it should be obvious how/why that will create exactly the type of stress concentrations that you should be trying to avoid. You would want to make the top plate larger if you were mounting something like a rollcage to the floor of a Jeep tub (because you don't want the rollcage punching through the floor if/when it rolls), but in this application it's more about the pushing/pulling/twisting forces. All I'd do is create two plates with a similar amount of total surface area, but with different shapes on the front/back edges. Does that make sense?

Do you disaprove of this mouting location because of the chance of destroying this section of frame? What I was thinking is that this mounting point would receive push/pull pressure, but at an angle equal to the angle of the bars attached here. I now think I see what you mean, this 2-1/4" area is going to get flexing pressure causing it to try to flex up and down and fatigue.

I got a peek at those hot looking brackets that look like spring perches in your CAD pic. a while back. I was going to ask you about that design and possibly using it here if you approve. Which CAD program do you have that in if you may still have it?

Yeah I would just prefer to tie into stronger parts of the frame. That's why I designed those mounting brackets to bolt to the framerails right under that crossmember behind the rear axle. Much stronger than if they were bolted to an unsupported part of the framerails, and this also eliminates the need to use backing plates on the bottom edges (would still use large hardened fender-washers on the sides).

Started another thread with links to CAD files that I uploaded to the CAD Library. Free for everybody to download and use, modify, whatever. I use SolidWorks, but also uploaded and IGS file (universal file format that most CAD programs can open) and an eDrawings file (for all everybody that doesn't use CAD). eDrawings is a free CAD viewing program that anybody can download and use to open CAD files like these. Very cool.

The only problem is that the pic. shows what I now have and to determine the precise length pin hole to pin hole I would need to grind out my rivets and install one on my truck to get all this right. Any suggestions? Like I said I didn't want to drill out mine just to measure this up. Looks like some fancy math.

Not sure what's so tricky about that? No fancy math, just took some measurements and made a best guess. Won't know for sure if my measurements are spot-on until somebody actually makes parts and tries to install them. That's just the nature of this kind of design work.

Would you also recomend heavy wall 1"x2" box tubing instead of solid? I reeeeeealy want to stick to this 1x2 dimention.

Sorry, I'm not an engineer and don't really feel comfortable giving that type of advice/input on materials.

 

[treeguy]

What size plates were you thinking of using for your brackets. I'm not sure about 1/4", but 1/2" would be rediculous.
I was just asking if you would use tubing or solid because of what you and others had said about the pros and cons of solid vs. tubing.
What I ment about fancy math is that this rig is a triangle design. The constant will be the receiver unit at said height and perpindicular to the truck's frame. Your monster brackets would be at .......... designed location with the pin hole at .............. location from the rear edge of truck frame. With these two set locations of the mounting pin holes the variable would be the length (hole to hole) of the forward/angled arms. My problem is that with the rivets in place, mocking up your brackest, they will rest on the rivet heads. So the dimentions will be dropped by 5/16? So a measurment of the forward arms will have to be longer to match the final mounting position. If I am going to fab these for people they are going to have to fit spot on. The other variable is the idiocincracies of Monday or Friday deuce frame manufacture and hole drilling locations.
I guess this is the differance between custom making tight for yourself as upposed to looser fit to mount everyone's trucks.
Sorry for the rant.

 

[jesusgatos]

I don't know that I ever got as far as thinking about materials, and I haven't looked at those files in a while, but guess I might have used something like 3/16-1/4" plate?

I wouldn't use solid for anything, except maybe an application where I might be concerned about tubing getting crushed? Or maybe if I needed to drill/tap that piece of material and wasn't concerned about weight.

Was it clear that I was intending to remove the three rivets on the bottom of the framerail and replace them with bolts? I wasn't planning on mass-producing these, so wasn't concerned about small variations from truck-to-truck. Still don't think that would be too difficult to accommodate though. Using a threaded clevis or heim-joint t one end of those links would be one potential solution. But even if you used fixed mounting points and fixed-length links, and even if there was something like a 1/2" variation between trucks (which would be a lot), I don't think that would really matter much at all. Worst case scenario might be that the receiver hitch sits a fraction of a degree off-level?

 

[goldneagle]

I just saw this tread and am impressed with the design and workmanship. As far as those diagonal supports I would cut a piece of 1/4" plate 12" x 12" diagonally and weld them to the inside of the bottom tubing and the vertical supports.

I also wanted to correct the misconception that UPS only accepts packages up to 70 pounds. UPS accepts packages up to 150 pounds. I ship floor sanders all over the country that weigh 148 pounds. I think USPS only takes up to 70 pounds.

You should have no problem shipping these through UPS Ground.

 

[treeguy]

Thank you for your parise and input. I'm going to add 1"x1 1/2" box tubing on an angle from the uprights to the horizontal boxing as a stabilizer meeting at the bottom just above the receiver and 1/2" thick triangle plates from the uprights forward to the base and the same triangles matching to the 1x1 1/2 tubes to the horizontal box as well facing the front of the truck.