Drive pulley size on W-M super mills

[RPowers]

I have a 47hp diesel on my LT50. I am running WM 7*turbo blades, and can't even begin to bog that engine down before sawdust is spilling around the band due to speed and gullet filling and the waves begin. I either want to find blades with larger gullets than the 7/39 turbos which I havent found yet, or to see about putting a smaller drive pulley on the wheel or larger on the engine crank to run more fpm on the band. My thought is that if a fresh blade in hickory or white oak wont bog the thing at all  then I can take some of that extra torque and convert it into speed for faster chip removal and allowing higher feed rates. Am I crazy here or would this work? I never turn the rheostat on the feed much past 25% even on soft logs, and I'd like to push this thing harder.

Also, will I need to adjust the tracking and guide roller positioning before I try a 1.5" blade? I am wondering if the deeper beam on the 1.5" will give better rigidity with the 7/39 blades due to the deeper gullet as it eats a lot of beam on the 1.25" blades.


RP

[JB Griffin]

I recommend the 1.5" blades. At work I run a BP Dominator and run 2" wm turbo 7s. We use to run 1.5" and I'll tell you the difference is amazing. Sawed 8' white and post oak all day and saw a little over 7800 bdft.
Wm has the sfpm set to cover a wider range of sawing than say a 6" resaw so it will handle a variety of different types of wood.

[Ben Cut-wright]

I have a 47hp diesel on my LT50. I am running WM 7*turbo blades, and can't even begin to bog that engine down before sawdust is spilling around the band due to speed and gullet filling and the waves begin. I either want to find blades with larger gullets than the 7/39 turbos which I havent found yet, or to see about putting a smaller drive pulley on the wheel or larger on the engine crank to run more fpm on the band. My thought is that if a fresh blade in hickory or white oak wont bog the thing at all  then I can take some of that extra torque and convert it into speed for faster chip removal and allowing higher feed rates. Am I crazy here or would this work? I never turn the rheostat on the feed much past 25% even on soft logs, and I'd like to push this thing harder.

Also, will I need to adjust the tracking and guide roller positioning before I try a 1.5" blade? I am wondering if the deeper beam on the 1.5" will give better rigidity with the 7/39 blades due to the deeper gullet as it eats a lot of beam on the 1.25" blades.


RP

Have your determined if the "spilling" is because of sfpm band speed, blade design, type of wood, width of cut, or other?  IOW, does the spill begin at speed of travel (Pot setting), or certain width cuts, or with all blade designs?  Have you experimented with different set widths to help clear the cuts?  I find less set (.015"- .018")seems to clear fairly well in our Oaks. My HP is less than half of yours and I guess your torque is well over twice what mine is. 

It is apparent you have enough torque with the engine and band you are using.  I would imagine the sfpm dictated by the manufacturer's components would be very close to optimum as shipped.  A higher sfpm will introduce friction, and friction is very bad. 

Can't speak on the matter of wider bands. Increased rigidity will most likely reduce band life.  If the profile is similar to what you are using, an increase in travel speed might not be a result. 

Surely the pot is adjusted for a faster feed-speed for cants and narrow cuts? 

[MartyParsons]

Hello,
  I agree with Ben, when Wood Mizer first came out with the Super in 95 it was the 40 hp diesel. The cut quality was poor in some species. They found out by slowing the band speed. Surface Feet per Min SFPM the blade worked much better. I have worked with customers who changed the band speed on some resaws and other equipment and it helped the machine work better. Not saying you would be wrong in changing the band speed, my experience would say it may not work as you expect.
Hope this helps.
Marty
 

[drobertson]

I may be way off here,, but it seems to me if you speed up the surface speed, you will produce more sawdust?  I would first be inclined to try a 1-1/2" X 1-1/8 pitch, I came across the same issue some years back, and settled for a slower speed to reduce the occasional wave, now for folks wanting to meet high production standards, with quality included, a different set up may be required.  Surface speed in regards to cutting tools have more to do with the material being machined.  Wood is much like metal in that aluminum typically cuts faster than carbon steel, and then you have all the alloying elements to consider.  Wood is the same,, green pine,, dried up hickory,,old dead white oaks, we know these are hard,,point being, try a wider blade,,and it may be a good time if not done already to check drive belt tension.

[ladylake]

 

  47HP is way to much for 1 1/4" bands.  AS mentioned above I'd try slowing down mill the blade speed not increasing it and see how it saws. With 47 hp you can just slow the engine down (you'll use quite a bit less fuel also) by around 400 rpm and try it. My motor runs around 3100 RPM with the diesel vs 3600 RPM with the gas that it came with, same pulleys and it saws great and I run shallow gullet blades on purpose  as they saw straighter, more blade and less tooth trying to make it wave.   A mill south of me couldn't even saw birch straight until he slowed his mill down.  Steve

[RPowers]

 Thanks for all the responses guys, I'll have to think about it some more and pay attention next time I cut.  It seems like I'm getting sawdust spilling out when I try to feed faster than the blade can clear the dust, so my thought was increasing the surface feet per minute on the blade would clear sawdust faster thus allowing for more aggressive feed rights, but the beam of the blade would have to be able to handle that push as well.  If I have unused power on the engine then I want to feed faster not slower so I'm trying to figure out how to do this and clear the sawdust fast enough.  The motor rpm is fine, I just want to transfer more of that power and speed to the blade, maybe I need to try a wider pitch between the teeth so they will take larger chips.  All I know is that when I spend eight hours sawing large oak logs any way that I can feed faster would be an improvement.

[ladylake]

 
If you can saw softwood faster than hickory or white oak the gullets getting full of sawdust is not the problem.  Steve

[dgdrls]

As @drobertson indicated I would try more beam section and more tooth spacing (pitch)
be attentive to your tooth set,

let us know how you make out.

D

[YellowHammer]

What thickness band are you running?  Something keeps telling me some thing else is happening or adding to the mix.  I have a Yanmar diesel and with 1.25" Turbo 7's 0.55 I can saw straight as an arrow in big oak and hickory and will almost stall my engine if I get too fast.  I couldn't mill straight with 0.45 Turbos, big difference in the thicker bands. Not that I try to stall the engine, only that I'm running right in the edge of my power curve and it's almost happened once or twice or more. :

The Turbos, in my experience, also, really accelerate the drag and wear on the drive belt, so I had to adjust tension much more frequently.  Loose drive belt causes waves. 



 

[Ga Mtn Man]

Reading this thread makes me glad I'm not burdened with all that "excess" horsepower.  :laugh:

[4x4American]

I'm curious more about the conditions of the blades you're running.  I've been finding WM is sending their blades out with way too much set.  The past few batches were set at .035", which is too much.  I'm running 1-1/2" x .055" turbos and like YellowHammer I can just about stall the engine and be cutting flat (36hp yanmar on a 40 super) in hardwood.  I mainly been sawing beech hard maple and oak for the past few months.  Along with hickory, popple, elm, ash, white pine, and stuff.  I'm also rolling my blades flat which helps.


My questions to you are:
-What thickness blades you running?
-What are they set at?
-Are they resharps?

[drobertson]

I know nothing about your engine,, but I know for a fact I have bogged,, bogged the cat 51 diesel, no slippage on the drive belt, a few times by accident I've squalled it,, :D  wide cuts in hard white oaks have been the worst,, I mean full 28" cuts, so, I'm thinking know the limits of the mill, and I still would check the drive belt tension,,bog happens when its right,, no bog means it may be a bit loose and slipping, which can cause a wave,,

[RPowers]

I am running mostly the .045 x 1.25" turbo 7s. New blades do run better than Resharps have for me. I will try some .055s and 1.5" after I pull a complete re-alignment on the mill next week. I did notice on my old mill (LT-28 with 25hp) that once I switched from a WM drive belt to a cogged version v-belt that there was a much better power transfer to the blade, so I wish I could find a similar belt for the LT50.

[YellowHammer]

I am running mostly the .045 x 1.25" turbo 7s. New blades do run better than Resharps have for me. I will try some .055s and 1.5" after I pull a complete re-alignment on the mill next week. I did notice on my old mill (LT-28 with 25hp) that once I switched from a WM drive belt to a cogged version v-belt that there was a much better power transfer to the blade, so I wish I could find a similar belt for the LT50.

If you don't have one, get the WM belt tension gauge.  It takes the unknowns out of belt tensionining. 
 

[RPowers]

I do have one although getting an accurate reading on the 50 is a pain compared to my old mill. I run it 1-2#s over spec and usually it won't squeal even in hard woods when being pushed. That cogged belt was huge let me tell you, at least with the pulley size on the 28.v-belt supply online has them

[drobertson]

I would get the chirp on engaging the blade, that's not the squall I'm referring too, I meant when I hit the feed reo with a wide open speed,, :D  not intended for sure,