Schedule a Meeting · Talk to a real woodworker: +1 937-890-5197 · 8:00AM – 4:30PM ET

Bosch Digital Laser

dusty

I bought a couple new toys a couple weeks ago but have not had much time to play with them. Today I have the time but after just a few minutes I decided that I needed to ask for advice.

I have the laser set up on my table saw with the laser pointed at the blade a fixed distance away. As I rotate the blade (using the spindle) I can move each successive tooth into the laser and get a measurement (of that fixed distance).

My question: When I finally get done (having recorded the distance for each and every tooth) will there be any valid conclusion that I can draw from the data?

The laser is advertised to be accurate to 1/32" (.03125") and the blade is a common ordinary Shopsmith combination blade.

Bosch Laser 1.jpg

Bosch Laser 2.jpg

Gene Howe

1/32" seems like a lot of variance, to me. For fence alignments, it might be useful.

dusty

Gene Howe wrote1/32" seems like a lot of variance, to me. For fence alignments, it might be useful.

As shown, this would tell you nothing about fence alignment. If anything useful at all, when used as shown in the pictures, it would quantify the variations in blade (wobble).

But for your comment, what do you consider appropriate for fence and table alignment?

Gene Howe

For both fence and table alignment, I use a dial indicator and a verified flat steel plate on the arbor.

dusty

Gene Howe wroteFor both fence and table alignment, I use a dial indicator and a verified flat steel plate on the arbor.

Agree. And what do you use for a tolerance. I shot for +-.003" but often accept a little bit more and this is only for alignments.

These days I am quite satisfied if my projects come out somewhere between 1/16" and 1/32" of what is called out on my drawings.. However, the improved shop lighting may enable me to become a bit more picky.

Gene Howe

.03 either way is close enough for me. .05 is just ok.

I very, very seldom work from plans. It's usually, as a buddy calls it, my one cell Sketchup. Consequently, other than gross ones, measurements are rarely used. I've got 6 or eight tapes and several rules from my cabinet building days. All are gathering dust. That is not to say that precision cuts have no place in my shop. I just get there without relying on gadgets with numbers.

charlese

A-men, Gene! When reading threads like this about using the newest and greatest inventions of measurement it makes me wonder if woodworkers are quickly losing any ability to see and feel the unique and exciting feeling of cutting, shaping and fitting of wood for useful purposes.

Are we losing the experience of using blocks, sticks, eyesight and feeling rather than some digital device to fashion a piece of wood? I was taught that finger tips are more accurate than micrometers. Still think that's true.

ChrisNeilan

charlese wroteA-men, Gene! When reading threads like this about using the newest and greatest inventions of measurement it makes me wonder if woodworkers are quickly losing any ability to see and feel the unique and exciting feeling of cutting, shaping and fitting of wood for useful purposes.

Are we losing the experience of using blocks, sticks, eyesight and feeling rather than some digital device to fashion a piece of wood? I was taught that finger tips are more accurate than micrometers. Still think that's true.

Another Amen from me!

JPG

± 1/32"???

Bosch says accuracy is ± 1/16" ?????

I would have expected something better.

Hobbyman2

with out any question a saw set to cut accurately and true is hands down much more safe to use then one out of wack , especially when it comes to kick back .

Also adds life to blades .

lay out lines , that's a different story .

My motto is ,,,when its tight ,, its right jmo

BuckeyeDennis

JPG wrote± 1/32"???

Bosch says accuracy is ± 1/16" ?????

I would have expected something better.

That’s over a range of 165 ft. So the max error is only 0.003% of full range, which is pretty darned good in my book. Very likely better than a tape measure of that length.

https://www.boschtools.com/us/en/boschtools-ocs/laser-measuring-glm-50-35087-p/

But I think Dusty would need a different device to get useful saw-blade runout measurements.

dusty

BuckeyeDennis wrote
JPG wrote± 1/32"???

Bosch says accuracy is ± 1/16" ?????

I would have expected something better.
That’s over a range of 165 ft. So the max error is only 0.003% of full range, which is pretty darned good in my book. Very likely better than a tape measure of that length.

https://www.boschtools.com/us/en/boschtools-ocs/laser-measuring-glm-50-35087-p/

But I think Dusty would need a different device to get useful saw-blade runout measurements.

Absolutely agree. I was "playing" with a new tool. I bought the Bosch tool to make structure measurements like overall length of an outside wall or distance from a wall to the fence line.

JPG

Dusty's is a GLM 42 so the max range is 135 ft.

I am curious if it detected the difference between the distance to the carbide tips vs the tooth base metal. I doubt it can.

dusty

JPG wrote
Dusty's is a GLM 42 so the max range is 135 ft.

I am curious if it detected the difference between the distance to the carbide tips vs the tooth base metal. I doubt it can.

I don't know that this proves anything as I was not seeking proof but was simply playing with a new toy but...

this was done just for those who doubt:

Sorry about the poor quality photographs. Could have done better.

JPG

Off hand I see thee proved my doubt.

I assume the table was moved up/down.

Nor do I see the carbide targeted.

Enough of this. ;)

BTW it IS a nice tool!!!

dusty

JPG wroteOff hand I see thee proved my doubt.

I assume the table was moved up/down.

Nor do I see the carbide targeted.

Enough of this. ;)

BTW it IS a nice tool!!!

And you won't. I thought I had targeted the carbide (first shot) and I went back to get some better pictures to show that. I am unable to target just the carbide and get an accurate reading. The laser beam is too wide and the tool gets confused trying to give a reading.

There probably is a laser tool that would do this but not within my tool budget.

billdvorak

I think using the Bosch would be a quick way to verify the calibration. Assuming that the initial calibration is as accurate as possible. I am a beginner woodworker and have just ordered a Mark 7. I am looking forward to getting the alignment as accurate as possible. After that I will post if the Bosch laser thing is a good way to keep track of alignments.

JPG

billdvorak wroteI think using the Bosch would be a quick way to verify the calibration. Assuming that the initial calibration is as accurate as possible. I am a beginner woodworker and have just ordered a Mark 7. I am looking forward to getting the alignment as accurate as possible. After that I will post if the Bosch laser thing is a good way to keep track of alignments.

I do not think the Bosch has fine enough resolution to be effective in aligning/verifying.

I think the SS tool kit method is better than the Bosch is capable of.

dusty

We keep having these discussions but seldom does anyone declare what "satisfactory precision" really is. How accurate is "accurate"?

If you are going to use the SS Tool Kit Method (without adding in a set of feeler gauges), just how accurate will the measurements be. Then there is repeatability (especially with this method). It is a touch and feel measurement.

JPG

dusty wroteWe keep having these discussions but seldom does anyone declare what "satisfactory precision" really is. How accurate is "accurate"?

If you are going to use the SS Tool Kit Method (without adding in a set of feeler gauges), just how accurate will the measurements be. Then there is repeatability (especially with this method). It is a touch and feel measurement.

Yes it is not 'quantified' as would feeler gauges or dial gauges would be.

However touch and feel is, IMO, good enough since that is what will reveal any error in the end product(the work pieces).

IIRC it has been determined that touch can detect 0.001".

In any event I consider it good enough even though there are ways of contaminating the procedure.

I think the reason for for these 'discussions' is that some are over enthusiastic over gadgetry that will lead to quantifiable(figure of merit?) results. ;)