A little challenge

[algale]

I've been using this dust deflector for about 2 weeks. It is made from a door sweep from the borg. This one had a plastic holder that was designed to be screwed to the bottom of the door. The brush (which has a metal spine) slides into the plastic holder. I cut off about a 4 inch section of holder/brush. Be sure to crimp the end of the metal spine and add a drop of CYA glue to prevent the bristles from coming out of the ends of the cut spine. I then cut away all of the holder except the part that accepts the brush's metal slide and attached it with heavy duty double stick tape to the front lip of the lower saw guard. The photo should be self explanatory.

[ATTACH]23129[/ATTACH]

Its best feature is that it does not interfere with the tilting table; the table simply pushes the bristles down. It also adapts to different widths of the lower saw guard, although this brush isn't long enough when the guard is fully open. An even longer brush would be ideal but this still works very well.

Edit: I have since abandoned this brush-type deflector and attached an accordion-style solid plastic deflector as shown in subsequent posts.

[dusty]

Have you studied the saw guard while in operation to determine where the dust is actually escaping from? I think you might be surprised.

This has been covered quite extensively here on the forum.

[algale]

Have you studied the saw guard while in operation to determine where the dust is actually escaping from? I think you might be surprised.

This has been covered quite extensively here on the forum.

Yes, both based on your prior reports in this thread and my own observations. Most of the dust escapes from the gap above and to the right (as observed from the operator) of that front lip of the lower saw guard. One day when I was cutting a lot of deep dados it actually piled up there until it formed it's own clog/barrier. To a lesser degree dust escapes between the lower saw guard and the tie bar protector. Do you disagree?

The brush in the photo can be slid upwards, slightly, without interfering with operations. I do not claim it is 100% effective, however, it is a significant improvement for me and better than the solid deflector I had been experimenting with and which needed to be removed to make a bevel cut with the tilted table. A brush with longer and denser bristles would be better still.

[dusty]

No, I do not disagree.

I have said this a couple time in the past. SHOPSMITH, HELP. This is one area that needs some simple design work. A new saw guard that actual collects the dust I believe would sell like crazy. Just don't gold plate it.

[algale]

No, I do not disagree.

I have said this a couple time in the past. SHOPSMITH, HELP. This is one area that needs some simple design work. A new saw guard that actual collects the dust I believe would sell like crazy. Just don't gold plate it.

I wholeheartedly agree with the exception that I do no believe this is a simple redesign.

The issue, which I am sure you are aware of, is that that gap through which most of the dust escapes does not remain static. As one raises or lowers the table, it changes height. That's a relatively easy fix. In addition --and this is the complicated bit -- as the table tilts (and you advance the quill to keep the blade centered in the table insert) the gap changes width AND shape. By the time you have fully tilted the table to 45 degrees and advanced the quill to compensate for the tilt, the rotation of the tie bar guard forces one to close the lower saw guard almost to its minimum and the tilting of the table nearly closes the gap and cuts across the top of the gap at at 45 degree angle. Accordingly, the current design is probably about the best that can be done while maintaining the ability to make bevel cuts and dados (which requires setting the lower guard to wider settings) IF the entire guard is made out of a rigid material. Anything put into that gap must be flexible enough to conform to these changes in shape if the table saw is going to be able to make dado and bevels.

[dusty]

Think OUTSIDE the box. Why does the lower saw guard have to resemble the one we have now? Why does it (the lower saw guard) need to be adjustable at all?

I don't have the solution or I would be selling it to you but I do believe there are better ways to do this.

You are right. All of the variations make this a complex situation but with the aid of CAD and current molding capabilities I believe it could be done.

I have spent an unreasonable amount to time working on issues like this one with the Shopsmith. It is when you change configurations that the "monkey wrench" becomes apparent. What works in "table saw" doesn;t work in "drill press", etc.

BTW - I have one lower saw guard that I use most of the time that has been tailored for " horizontal table saw" work. With it, I get very good dust collection. I have posted results before. In other configurations, I use a different lower saw guard. Table tilt does become the major issue. Dust collection is not near so good. I am resigned to that.

[fredsheldon]

Ok, I'm thinking way outside the box. I have an idea that I will start working on today and when I get a prototype made I will publish my results. Stay tuned.

[dusty]

Ok, I'm thinking way outside the box. I have an idea that I will start working on today and when I get a prototype made I will publish my results. Stay tuned.

Good. That means that there is at least two of us attempting to improve on what we have today.

[algale]

Think OUTSIDE the box. Why does the lower saw guard have to resemble the one we have now? Why does it (the lower saw guard) need to be adjustable at all?

I don't have the solution or I would be selling it to you but I do believe there are better ways to do this.

You are right. All of the variations make this a complex situation but with the aid of CAD and current molding capabilities I believe it could be done.

I have spent an unreasonable amount to time working on issues like this one with the Shopsmith. It is when you change configurations that the "monkey wrench" becomes apparent. What works in "table saw" doesn]In other configurations, I use a different lower saw guard. Table tilt does become the major issue.[/B] Dust collection is not near so good. I am resigned to that.

Bevel cuts, where one must tilt the table and extend the quill to position the saw blade in the center of the tilted table insert are the main reason why I believe the lower blade guard adjusts for width. Perhaps it does not need to be that way. If the saw arbor were longer -- long enough to position the blade in the center of the table insert with the table tilted all the way -- then perhaps the blade guard could be a fixed width. One could simply move the entire headstock to the left when making level (horizontal cuts). This might require further redesign of the dado arbor, however.

[dusty]

Bevel cuts, where one must tilt the table and extend the quill to position the saw blade in the center of the tilted table insert are the main reason why I believe the lower blade guard adjusts for width. Perhaps it does not need to be that way. If the saw arbor were longer -- long enough to position the blade in the center of the table insert with the table tilted all the way -- then perhaps the blade guard could be a fixed width. One could simply move the entire headstock to the left when making level (horizontal cuts). This might require further redesign of the dado arbor, however.

This comment serves to resurface a question that I have long had. Why not just leave the lower saw guard set with a wide opening? What is lost by doing that?

Please! If you think that it changes the efficiency of dust collection, you'll have to convince me. Others have told me that is why it is adjustable.