Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
You probably know this from the TM diagrams, but the dual circuit trucks have a priority valve on the drivers side frame rail (Bendix 278614 DC4). Both airpacks have an air line going to the priority valve and from it a single airline goes to the gladhand.PEASHOOTER, Both my airpacks are the short style. I know that all my fluid lines are correct, that's simple enough. Its just odd that I would have air only gushing from the vent line, no fluid just air like a leaking air hose. Are there any differences in the air port locations on the airpacks? I am just thinking that maybe the one being used for the "vent" is actually the gladhand port, if it were being used. The same port, on the driver side airpack on mine runs to the gladhands, which is why I plugged the port of the passenger side pack. Ill dig through the tms again and try to find some definitive answer, but it looks like I may just try to reverse the vent and the plugged port and see what happens.
View attachment 755172
You probably know this from the TM diagrams, but the dual circuit trucks have a priority valve on the drivers side frame rail (Bendix 278614 DC4).
Hmmm. The priority valve is definitely missing. I missed that part for the swap. I believe you are right that the vent line is in the correct spot after i layed under the truck for 20 minutes staring at both airpacks. To give a better idea of what I have done: pedal bracket installed, dual master installed with the remote reservoir up on firewall. Added a third air tank to supplement the standard 2 on the a2. I added a "t" to the second tank and ran a line to the third tank, with its exit line running straight up to the new passenger side airpack. I left the original tank line running up to the driver side original airpack. Added the vent line on the new passenger airpack and ran it up to the old vent t above differential on frame.
I was thinking that this would suffice for getting air pressure to the new airpack and still maintaining the original airpack pressure and gladhand. I believe you are right about the vent line being plumbed correctly. So, if I'm understanding this correctly, I need to add the bendix priority valve to balance the air out?? I did print off the a3 tm diagram you loaded up to use as a guide, but with it only having the two tanks with a split tank, it doesn't match up correctly. I need to figure out where the valve should go in relation to the plumbing i have now or reroute it to use the valve. I hope this is whats needed as i really do not want to rebuild both airpacks.
You have your lines mixed up. Use this diagram. It is for the "long style" but the fitting locations are the same.PEASHOOTER, Both my airpacks are the short style. I know that all my fluid lines are correct, that's simple enough. Its just odd that I would have air only gushing from the vent line, no fluid just air like a leaking air hose. Are there any differences in the air port locations on the airpacks? I am just thinking that maybe the one being used for the "vent" is actually the gladhand port, if it were being used. The same port, on the driver side airpack on mine runs to the gladhands, which is why I plugged the port of the passenger side pack. Ill dig through the tms again and try to find some definitive answer, but it looks like I may just try to reverse the vent and the plugged port and see what happens.
View attachment 755172
Glad to hear it ! The TM is a rare one I own. It has all the "air" components for the deuce like the air compressors and relays and air-pacs.View attachment 755268Success!! Split brakes, great pressure, no leaks! I can go scare the neighbors now!
I was thinking about how to cheaply reduce the risk of individual failed brakes at each wheel.
What i came up with is a kind of check valve that would in a sense limit the volume of fluid you could hemorage on each line. It would be based on the amount of fluid that can be used by a brake cylinder as the limiting factor.
Basically, it would be an in-line reservoir that would deplete and close if more than the normal amount of fluid is pulled through.
Would still need to build in a bypass of sorts to bleed the brakes, but here is a lil drawing of the idea. Its very basic.
The internal plunger will aplly pressure on the fluid downline till it runs out, then seals that wheel off. I would put them as high up the system as possible. Could even make it a multi piston single unit with one inlet and six outlets. This would protect against blown lines, and leaks.
If this proves practical and effective maybe you should consider investing a few grand toward filing a patent.I was thinking about how to cheaply reduce the risk of individual failed brakes at each wheel.
What i came up with is a kind of check valve that would in a sense limit the volume of fluid you could hemorage on each line. It would be based on the amount of fluid that can be used by a brake cylinder as the limiting factor.
.If this proves practical and effective maybe you should consider investing a few grand toward filing a patent.
Who knows?!
.I'll have to look into what you were saying the chevy's used. They may already have an easier solution.
Here is the idea for a front back split system.
If on fails, the reservoir piston will bottom out and shut that line off. The bottom volume would be for the rear, larger since it has twice the cylinders to feed.
Single inlet from the master with a bleeder, and a split output to the front / rear brakes. And their respective bleeders.
Basic mockup. Does it make sense or feel like a doable system?
Lookey there:Problem was solved when one of the older guys pointed out the "button" on that valve - and PRESTO - fluid flowed again...