This invention relates to a belt drive for lawn mowers.
This invention relates to an engine and belt drive arrangement for a mower vehicle and more particularly to the arrangement of a belt drive for transferring power from the engine to the mower deck of a riding lawn mower. A belt drive arrangement for communicating power between an engine and a mower deck is known by those skilled in the art as a “mule drive”. A riding lawn mower may be considered in relation to an axis system including a longitudinal X axis where the positive direction is forward, a transverse Y axis where the positive direction is toward the operator's right and a Z axis where the positive direction is up. The X and Z axes define a vertical, longitudinal plane which generally bisects the riding lawn mower. Typically, a mule drive includes a drive sheave having an axis of rotation which is generally horizontal and co-planer with or at least parallel to the longitudinal plane of the mower vehicle. In a typical prior art mule drive, an endless belt communicates between the drive sheave and a mower deck. The mower deck typically has a driven sheave for each mower blade and various idler and tensioning pulleys as needed to maintain frictional engagement between the driven sheaves and the endless belt. A pair of guide pulleys situated under the drive sheave redirect the endless belt to the mower deck. The guide pulleys rotate on an axis which is normal or almost normal to the vertical, longitudinal plane of the mower vehicle. The orientation of the guide pulleys forces the endless belt to twist through an angle between the drive sheave and guide pulleys which is at or near 90 degrees. Typically, the guide pulleys are located as close as possible to the drive sheave so that the engine may be mounted as low as possible in the mower vehicle to maintain a relatively low center of gravity. Accordingly, the near 90 degree twist angle of the portions of the belt between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys must typically be accomplished over a relatively short distance. A rate of belt twist may be measured in angular degrees per unit length of belt. The rate of belt twist in a typical prior art mule drive may easily exceed 7 degrees per inch between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys. The rate of belt twist of the endless belt between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys limits the size and capacity of the belt as well as reducing the life of the belt.
The limitations inherent in a typical prior art mule drive configuration are three fold. First, in a traditional mule drive arrangement, an engine is positioned in a longitudinal fashion thereby increasing the length and decreasing the maneuverability of the mower vehicle. In a zero turning radius (ZTR) riding lawn mower, the longitudinal orientation of the engine also places the engine further to the rear of the center of rotation for the mower. Because of the need to prevent backward tipping of a ZTR mower about its primary drive wheels, the aft location of the engine forces the designer to position the counter balancing weight of the operator further forward of the center of turn rotation. However, in a ZTR mower, it is preferable to locate the operator close to the center of rotation for turning to reduce the centrifugal force experienced by the operator during tight turns or spin turns. This centrifugal force causes the operator to experience the unwanted sensation of riding at the end of a boom during a tight turn or spin turn. Second, the relative positions of the drive sheave and the guide pulleys are such that the area of the cross section of the belt (or more precisely the width and extent of the central load carrying fibers of the belt) and therefore the power transmission capacity of the belt are limited to allow a 90 degree twist between the drive sheave and a guide pulley. Third, even when the size of the endless belt is properly limited, an endless belt that undergoes repeated abrupt high angle twisting will withstand fewer cycles than a belt which is not subject to such repeated abrupt high angle twisting.
A lawn mower drive arrangement is provided for delivering power from a prime mover such as, for example; an internal combustion engine or an electric motor to a mower deck of a lawn mower vehicle. The lawn mower vehicle may be considered as having a generally vertical longitudinal plane dividing its left side and the right side. The drive arrangement preferably includes an engine, a drive sheave connected to the engine preferably by a clutch, a mower deck having at least one mower blade drive sheave for powering each cutting blade associated with the mower deck, various idler pulleys, a tension pulley, an endless belt frictionally engaging the drive sheave and the mower blade drive sheaves and any other pulleys which may be associated with the mower deck. The improvement includes orienting the engine such that the axis of rotation of the drive sheave is preferably generally normal to the longitudinal plane of the lawn mower vehicle and positioning two guide pulleys to guide the slack side and the tension side of the endless belt between the drive sheave and the mower deck such that the axis of rotation of both guide pulleys preferably form acute angles with the longitudinal plane of the lawn mower. This causes the angles of twist between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys to be acute angles.
Referring to the drawings,
In the prior art mule drive, the rate of belt twist between drive sheave 310 and each guide pulley 312A and 312B, which may be considered as angular degrees of twist per unit of distance, constrains the placement of drive sheave 310. As drive sheave 310 is positioned lower in the vehicle, the angle of twist per unit distance between drive sheave 310 and the guide pulleys increases. As the twist rate increases, the designer is confronted by a number of trade-offs. The designer may increase tension in the belt to prevent the belt from slipping off the guide pulleys, but this increase in tension may necessitate an increase in belt size. An increase in tension may also increase fatigue stresses in the belt. The designer may decrease the size of the belt to reduce its resistance to twisting, but this choice reduces the power transmission capability of the belt. The designer can elevate the engine and drive sheave to increase the distance between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys, but this will elevate the center of gravity of the mower vehicle.
Lawn mower vehicle 2 may be considered as having a generally vertical longitudinal plane LP which is positioned between the left and right sides of lawn mower vehicle 2. An axis system A is given to orient the skilled reader in
Lawn mower vehicle 2, which is partially shown in phantom in
An endless belt 100 engages drive sheave 20 and the blade drive sheaves 52 and pulleys 54 and 56 of mower deck 50 and thus transfers power from engine 12 to cutting blades 58A, 58B and 58C. The direction of rotation of drive sheave 20 is given by arrow D indicated in
Endless belt 100 is shown in
The present belt drive arrangement is accomplished by the transverse orientation of engine 12 and the orientations of tension side guide pulley 62 and slack side guide pulley 72. As can be seen in
As can be best seen in
There are at least four significant advantages afforded by improved belt drive arrangement 10. First, by orienting engine 12 transversely, the length of mower vehicle 2 can be reduced thereby increasing the maneuverability of mower vehicle 2. Engine 12 may be placed inside the turn radius of mower vehicle 2 in the case of a ZTR mower thereby greatly increasing the maneuverability of mower vehicle 2 and eliminating the possibility of an operator rotating the vehicle to cause an otherwise protruding engine to collide with an obstacle. The transverse mounting of engine 12 also allows for the location of engine 12 closer to the center of gravity of mower vehicle 2. In a ZTR mower, this allows the location of the engine closer to the center of rotation for turning. This further allows improvement in the position of the operator seat and thus the operator. Because the engine is positioned closer to the center of rotation, the counterbalancing operator may also be positioned closer to the center of rotation. This is an important consideration in a ZTR mower wherein it is very advantageous to position the operator close to the center of rotation of the mower vehicle. Second, due to the reduced angles of twist between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys, close vertical spacing of the drive sheave and the guide pulleys permits the engine to be mounted lower in mower vehicle 2 thereby allowing an advantageous lowering in the center of gravity of mower vehicle 2. Third, the transverse engine orientation makes it possible to offset the guide pulleys in a longitudinal direction relative the drive sheave. This allows a further reduction in the vertical distance between the drive sheave and the guide pulleys thereby allowing lower placement of the engine relative to mower vehicle 2. Third, the lower angle of twist and twist rate allows the use of a larger, heavier belt thereby increasing the power transmission capability of the belt. Fourth, the life of the belt is extended because the belt is subjected to less fatigue thereby reducing the expense and labor associated with replacing belts.
It is to be understood that while certain forms of this invention have been illustrated and described, it is not limited thereto, except in so far as such limitations are included in the following claims and allowable equivalents thereof.
This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 12/288,041 filed on Oct. 16, 2008 which is incorporated herein by reference. Application Ser. No. 12/288,041 claimed the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/999,084 filed Oct. 16, 2007 which is incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2296740 | Reiling | Sep 1942 | A |
2620612 | De Eugenio | Dec 1952 | A |
2705393 | Cofer | Apr 1955 | A |
2727349 | Wetzel | Dec 1955 | A |
2740246 | Smith et al. | Apr 1956 | A |
2872831 | Wood | Feb 1959 | A |
2989134 | Kamlukin et al. | Jun 1961 | A |
3498398 | Burrough et al. | Mar 1970 | A |
3550364 | Musgrave | Dec 1970 | A |
3680292 | McCanse | Aug 1972 | A |
3693332 | Bobard | Sep 1972 | A |
3698497 | Bombardier | Oct 1972 | A |
3709062 | Draege | Jan 1973 | A |
3925970 | Rusco | Dec 1975 | A |
4102114 | Estes et al. | Jul 1978 | A |
4150928 | Regan et al. | Apr 1979 | A |
4395865 | Davis et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4454706 | Geeck, III | Jun 1984 | A |
4597746 | Goscenski, Jr. | Jul 1986 | A |
4773895 | Takami et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
4813215 | Chase et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4925437 | Suzuki et al. | May 1990 | A |
5012632 | Kuhn et al. | May 1991 | A |
5254046 | Hohnl | Oct 1993 | A |
5361566 | Hohnl | Nov 1994 | A |
5367863 | Quataert | Nov 1994 | A |
5390479 | Hutchison et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5526635 | Wilder, Jr. | Jun 1996 | A |
5769747 | Kuhn et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5816034 | Peter | Oct 1998 | A |
5865020 | Busboom | Feb 1999 | A |
5928097 | Mast | Jul 1999 | A |
6176071 | Thorman et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6312352 | Holland et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6389786 | Bergsten et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6591592 | Krimminger | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6602155 | Buss et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6651413 | Papke | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6931825 | Stineman | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6952913 | Crumly | Oct 2005 | B1 |
7028456 | Thatcher | Apr 2006 | B2 |
20050230565 | Kallinen | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060025255 | Melone | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060230734 | Wouw | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070028577 | Clement et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60999084 | Oct 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12288041 | Oct 2008 | US |
Child | 12660163 | US |