Jtodd
I must say that is the most impressive lister type frame I have seen by far.
Do you by chance own a fabrication business? The raw materials alone on your frame would have cost me an arm and a leg, even from the scrap yard ar .50/pound for steel, they chage $3-$4/lb for stainless.
I was quoted $89.00 for a 20' length of 2" square tube with wall of .125 new for the guard frame i need to build fot the belt side of my gen. I think I will just build the guard frame out of 1" black pipe, its alot cheaper but not square so harder to weld.
I noticed you have what looks like resiliant mounts between your frame and sub frame. I would be very interested to know what kind of movement the frame has in relation to the sub frame as well as what kind of vibration is transmited to the surface the subframe rests on. Better yet a video would really show how it behaves.
Best regards
Scott
"I'm not a fabrication shop; I just play one on the Internet." I'm just the designer and owner; someone far better than me with a MIG/TIG welder does the actual metal melting.
I'll let you know how the vibration control works out once I start up the engine on the mounts. :-) I also have about 100 pounds of lead shot that can be used to fill up some of the x/y rectangular tubing that makes up what I call the "sub-frame" on which the engine/genset directly rest. However, I'll need to wait to see if that's going to be necessary, and then it will require some tuning if so. I also have some dynamic rotational dampeners that I've got, and will try out if there is any significant rotational imbalance after final assembly. The whole concept of vibration dampening is quite a religous topic here, so I'll hold my comments until I've got real test results to discuss. The chassis has not only the small rubber bushings you see in the pictures, but also some 5/8" vibrational dampening pads which bolt onto the bottom of the I-beams that form the interface between the chassis and ground (yes, to counter the inevitable comments, I have a grounding strap and rod that is part of the system.) The casters in the pictures are only for transport, and pull out with quick-release pins to set the whole rig down on a flat surface before operation. Hi-Lift jacks in the pockets at each corner make lifting/lowering possible easily.
Yes, the steel bill on this is getting out of control fast. Despite using lots of scraps and odds-end-ends, there is still quite a bit of ferrous weight in that chassis and that equates to $ these days. I intend to have this chassis for the rest of my life, so I'm building it to outlive me and hopefully the next one or two generations without any significant maintenance or overhaul. Engines and generators will come and go, but I expect the chassis base to be the foundation for many years of experimentation and ultimately productive power.
That's kind of why I'm not terribly disappointed in my failure of finding a starter/generatng and having to use the automotive (Chevy, 1985 to be exact) flex plate/starter combination. Those parts will be easily available for many, many decades. Hopefully this will provide me with reliable starting capability even when I'm old enough to appreciate not spinning up a 12/2 in the shed in sub-freezing weather. My <cough> youth provides me with reservoirs of foolishness and bravado currently, so I don't mind the cold and grunting to get the thing firing now, but I know myself too well and those routines get tiring. Additionally there is someone else in the household who draws the line at cranking an engine manually if I'm not around, though she will assiduously do a pre-start checklist and report on out-of-specification behaviors, she doesn't want to be actually TOUCHING the engine before she wants to run the microwave or do a load of laundry, etc. So the design here has to be somewhat non-mechanic friendly for the infrequent operator who is not a diesel fanatic.
Your plans for pipe are probably just as well as rectangular or square stock steel, if you're looking to build something structural out of it. Comments have been made here (though I can't validate them) that the round tube is stronger when exposed to torsional forces. Whatever works, I say. Over-engineering things tends to take a bit of the risk out, too. However, if this is just a "guard frame" as you call it, then maybe that's un-necessary overkill. Do you really need .125" for a guard frame in 2" width? Wouldn't .75" tube work with something a lot thinner for wall thickness? For guarded areas, I've mostly chosen to use galvanized sheet riveted to tabs welded on some 5/8 rod at the edges to give it some stiffness. (I don't plan to weld things directy to the galvanized steel, since that causes corrosion spots, and I'm an anti-corrosion zealot.) You could also possibly investigate using the same methods for expanded "mesh" steel (aka: catwalk material) since that is reasonably cheap in odd-lot sizes at scrapyards and then just paint it. Keeps the fingers and limbs of the foolish from becoming quickly disassociated with their owners.
JT
