Send me a sketch too, Ed. I cannot picture what you are saying. I understand the implied concept but I do not see it as an easy mechanical/engineering transition from the Shopsmith configuration.
I assume the same power head would drive the lathe and the drill press and the bandsaw and the jointer.
I also assume we would no longer call it "Shopsmith Mark V".
New ShopSmith 530
Moderator: admin
A DC motor with electronic speed control is not really a good option. DC motors are provide constant torque from their base speed downward.
thus you would loose HP as you decreased speed. Thus if you wished to drill with a 3" forstner bit at low speed you would not have enough torque to do the job. Also, DC motors are in larger frame sizes than equivalent AC motors.
The present mechanical system utilizing the variable pitch sheaves increase torque proportionally as you decrease speed. This is why I can easily rip two inch thick boards. The common home type single speed saw, at 3600 rpm or higher, has difficulty doing this because the cutting torque is lower.
That being said, a new headstock that will accomodate a 56 frame motor would enable an increase in HP. Actually, there could be two options; a motor that would stay within the amperage limits of the common household 15 amp breaker, and a more powerful motor that would require a 20 amp circuit.
Rather than have a separate "add on" speed increaser and speed reducer, an internal transmission could provide higher or lower speed ranges with the flip of a lever.
To further complicate the design of a new headstock, it could be mounted on a carriage that would allow the motor to tilt 45 degrees, thus eliminating the tilting table.
Finally, leg skirts that allow a few inches of height adjustment would be a nice feature.
thus you would loose HP as you decreased speed. Thus if you wished to drill with a 3" forstner bit at low speed you would not have enough torque to do the job. Also, DC motors are in larger frame sizes than equivalent AC motors.
The present mechanical system utilizing the variable pitch sheaves increase torque proportionally as you decrease speed. This is why I can easily rip two inch thick boards. The common home type single speed saw, at 3600 rpm or higher, has difficulty doing this because the cutting torque is lower.
That being said, a new headstock that will accomodate a 56 frame motor would enable an increase in HP. Actually, there could be two options; a motor that would stay within the amperage limits of the common household 15 amp breaker, and a more powerful motor that would require a 20 amp circuit.
Rather than have a separate "add on" speed increaser and speed reducer, an internal transmission could provide higher or lower speed ranges with the flip of a lever.
To further complicate the design of a new headstock, it could be mounted on a carriage that would allow the motor to tilt 45 degrees, thus eliminating the tilting table.
Finally, leg skirts that allow a few inches of height adjustment would be a nice feature.
-
weelildaddy
I would echo most of the suggestions presented even though some are really "out there" My main two wishes would simply be to have Wixey innards attached to everything that angles and plain old fashioned industry standard miter guage slots in everything. It seems that all the toys I want to buy somehow depend on that silly ole slot being the industry standard. In other words, I want a better choice.
Arno
Arno
-
a1gutterman
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 3653
- Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:45 am
- Location: "close to" Seattle
-
Ed in Tampa
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
- Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida
Okay I don't have drawings and with my drawing skill I'm not sure they would do any good.
Here is how I see it. Move the support tubes from the tunnion and bolt them directly to the table. The table is now fixed but can be moved up and down something that will be needed later.
Take an assembly similar to the one that exists in most table saws that holds the blade arbor and mount it between the existing SS trunion.
This assembly would have an additional idler pulley/gear that would allow a connection between it and the powerhead. From that point on the assembly could/would be a duplicate of the existing arbor assemblies found in most table saws.
I would think the power connection would be easiest using a belt where the whole assembly could be raised or lowered using exist table height adjustments to adjust for proper belt tension. The idler pulley would be fixed so the belt tension between it and saw arbor pulley would remain constant as the arbor assembly with blade (not the table) is cranked up and down. It would also allow the arbor/blade to be tilted to make bevel cuts.
I think the only engineering would be the design of the assembly that is suspended between the existing SS trunnions that supports the saw arbor that would allow the saw arbor to be raised and lowered and tilted. I think this would easily be adapted from existing designs found in just about any saw commonly sold today.
The only other engineering would be the assemble to support the idler connection and the actual connection to the SS power head. Again I think a fixed pulley with a simple pulley on the SS drive and belt connection between. Adjustment of tension of this belt would be done by using the existing SS height adjustment which would increase or decrease the distance between the idler pulley and the SS power output pulley.
My thoughts would require the SS to have 2 main tables one on which the saw arbor support structure would be mounted and one where the table would have the existing configuration. Since there would be two unigue tables both could be further customized to better fullfill their particular jobs.
On the saw only table it could be designed to use industry standard accessories including table inserts, mitre gauge slot and etc. On the other table since it would be used for all other none sawing operation the table insert could be more patterned to drilling, drum sanding, routing/shaping, and those kinds of tasks.
Shopsmith would have a super upgrade. One I think very few could ignore. Plus it would open SS up to a larger business selling new inserts, and new accessories.
Since the table would be rigid all previous criticism of SS of being too shakey would be eliminated. Since the table height after the initial adjustment of the belt drive would remain constant infeed and outfeed table heights would remain constant. Since the table would no longer tilt but the blade instead all criticism over bevel cutting would be gone.
Conversion from Saw to one of the other tools would be nothing more than remove the belt, swap the table from the saw table to the multifunction table. And taking the drive pulley from the SS arbor and mounting whatever back on. The blade, saw guard, splitter, dust collector shields would all remain attached to the saw table.
The only thing would be storage of the saw table which would have the saw arbor assembly attached to it. Again this would be a great opportunity for SS to design a saw table parking/storage solution. Something else SS could sell for the owners that don't want their Saw table just sitting on the floor while in lathe, drill press or horizontal boring mode. I could envision something like a moveable storage system with provision to store either multi purpose or the saw table on top and drawer and cabinet space to contain the rest of the SS accessories.
I would almost wager that there is an existing saw blade arbor support assembly in existance in one of the commonly sold table saws that would almost directly mount between the SS existing trunions. Perhaps I will take my measuring tape find out the exact distance and visit Lowes and measure a few saws on display. If I find one the only other thing I would need to do is build something to support my idler pulley assembly.
Ed
Here is how I see it. Move the support tubes from the tunnion and bolt them directly to the table. The table is now fixed but can be moved up and down something that will be needed later.
Take an assembly similar to the one that exists in most table saws that holds the blade arbor and mount it between the existing SS trunion.
This assembly would have an additional idler pulley/gear that would allow a connection between it and the powerhead. From that point on the assembly could/would be a duplicate of the existing arbor assemblies found in most table saws.
I would think the power connection would be easiest using a belt where the whole assembly could be raised or lowered using exist table height adjustments to adjust for proper belt tension. The idler pulley would be fixed so the belt tension between it and saw arbor pulley would remain constant as the arbor assembly with blade (not the table) is cranked up and down. It would also allow the arbor/blade to be tilted to make bevel cuts.
I think the only engineering would be the design of the assembly that is suspended between the existing SS trunnions that supports the saw arbor that would allow the saw arbor to be raised and lowered and tilted. I think this would easily be adapted from existing designs found in just about any saw commonly sold today.
The only other engineering would be the assemble to support the idler connection and the actual connection to the SS power head. Again I think a fixed pulley with a simple pulley on the SS drive and belt connection between. Adjustment of tension of this belt would be done by using the existing SS height adjustment which would increase or decrease the distance between the idler pulley and the SS power output pulley.
My thoughts would require the SS to have 2 main tables one on which the saw arbor support structure would be mounted and one where the table would have the existing configuration. Since there would be two unigue tables both could be further customized to better fullfill their particular jobs.
On the saw only table it could be designed to use industry standard accessories including table inserts, mitre gauge slot and etc. On the other table since it would be used for all other none sawing operation the table insert could be more patterned to drilling, drum sanding, routing/shaping, and those kinds of tasks.
Shopsmith would have a super upgrade. One I think very few could ignore. Plus it would open SS up to a larger business selling new inserts, and new accessories.
Since the table would be rigid all previous criticism of SS of being too shakey would be eliminated. Since the table height after the initial adjustment of the belt drive would remain constant infeed and outfeed table heights would remain constant. Since the table would no longer tilt but the blade instead all criticism over bevel cutting would be gone.
Conversion from Saw to one of the other tools would be nothing more than remove the belt, swap the table from the saw table to the multifunction table. And taking the drive pulley from the SS arbor and mounting whatever back on. The blade, saw guard, splitter, dust collector shields would all remain attached to the saw table.
The only thing would be storage of the saw table which would have the saw arbor assembly attached to it. Again this would be a great opportunity for SS to design a saw table parking/storage solution. Something else SS could sell for the owners that don't want their Saw table just sitting on the floor while in lathe, drill press or horizontal boring mode. I could envision something like a moveable storage system with provision to store either multi purpose or the saw table on top and drawer and cabinet space to contain the rest of the SS accessories.
I would almost wager that there is an existing saw blade arbor support assembly in existance in one of the commonly sold table saws that would almost directly mount between the SS existing trunions. Perhaps I will take my measuring tape find out the exact distance and visit Lowes and measure a few saws on display. If I find one the only other thing I would need to do is build something to support my idler pulley assembly.
Ed
-
Ed in Tampa
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:45 am
- Location: North Tampa Bay area Florida
Okay here is idea number two.
Shopsmith has a Bandsaw, planer, jointer, jig saw attachments as special purpose tools and no one complains. Why not have a table saw special purpose tool attachment. If SS doesn't want to engineer an assembly to fit between the existing trunnions to hold the blade arbor okay adapt a table saw as a special purpose tool.
Simply build a tilting arbor table saw that mounts to the SS as a special purpose tool. It could be a copy of existing contractor/cabinet saws only it would have a connection to the SS drive arbor for power. You could have it use the existing 520 fence rails and that would allow us to have floating tables and nearly any size fence.
Again this would virtually eliminate the industries criticism of the SS as not having a high enough quality saw. It would keep people from saying SS is okay but you really need a standalone saw and citing the tilting table as being the main problem.
Ed
Shopsmith has a Bandsaw, planer, jointer, jig saw attachments as special purpose tools and no one complains. Why not have a table saw special purpose tool attachment. If SS doesn't want to engineer an assembly to fit between the existing trunnions to hold the blade arbor okay adapt a table saw as a special purpose tool.
Simply build a tilting arbor table saw that mounts to the SS as a special purpose tool. It could be a copy of existing contractor/cabinet saws only it would have a connection to the SS drive arbor for power. You could have it use the existing 520 fence rails and that would allow us to have floating tables and nearly any size fence.
Again this would virtually eliminate the industries criticism of the SS as not having a high enough quality saw. It would keep people from saying SS is okay but you really need a standalone saw and citing the tilting table as being the main problem.
Ed
Thanks Ed! That's some Idea! Thanks for the further explanation! Although I think at this point, I wouldn't want two tables to handle and store, yours is certainly a innovative idea. 
That's really thinking out of the box.
That's really thinking out of the box.Octogenarian's have an earned right to be a curmudgeon.
Chuck in Lancaster, CA
Chuck in Lancaster, CA
I'm also in favor of having the blade raise or lower and tilt. Example of problem I face. After I have the Incra TSIII Ultra Fence and router table completely mounted and adjusted, which by the way works great. If I need to make any heighth adjustment, change blades, or use the dado,guess what? I have to completely take it apart to make that adjustment, change blades, or install a dado, then put it all back together. A real pain in the you know what. Just because of that alone, I've been really thinking hard about buying a Unisaw or something similiar, and just push the SS into some corner for special purpose use, such as drilling, lathe work.
Pat
Oregon
1992 SS 510, 11" Bandsaw on power station, 4" jointer, Pro Planer, Incra Miter 2000, Incra Ultimate Fence Router Pkg, Grizzly 6" Parallelogram Jointer.
Oregon
1992 SS 510, 11" Bandsaw on power station, 4" jointer, Pro Planer, Incra Miter 2000, Incra Ultimate Fence Router Pkg, Grizzly 6" Parallelogram Jointer.
Very compelling problem, Shy! It appears to me to be an issue that deserves more discussion. Maybe you could copy this and put it in a separate thread.shydragon wrote:I'm also in favor of having the blade raise or lower and tilt. Example of problem I face. After I have the Incra TSIII Ultra Fence and router table completely mounted and adjusted, which by the way works great. If I need to make any heighth adjustment, change blades, or use the dado,guess what? I have to completely take it apart to make that adjustment, change blades, or install a dado, then put it all back together. A real pain in the you know what. Just because of that alone, I've been really thinking hard about buying a Unisaw or something similiar, and just push the SS into some corner for special purpose use, such as drilling, lathe work.
Octogenarian's have an earned right to be a curmudgeon.
Chuck in Lancaster, CA
Chuck in Lancaster, CA