Shopsmith Forums

dusty wrote:So how often do you get to the point of making a "test cut" only to find that you need to go back to make a main table alignment? Ever?.

Until I started reading this forum I never thought about my main table alignment. After initial setup it never seemed to change. HOWEVER I started reading this forum and started to mess with my main table alignment. From then on things got interesting! Oh the REGRET!

I don't think I ever got my setup back to the percision of my original setup. Oh well!

I rarely make test cuts for simple cuts. Of course my main method of woodworking is measure once cut a number of times, throw that board away and start again. The cut is complete when I run out of wood or exhaust myself.

Ed in Tampa wrote: Until I started reading this forum I never thought about my main table alignment. After initial setup it never seemed to change. HOWEVER I started reading this forum and started to mess with my main table alignment. From then on things got interesting! Oh the REGRET!

A MEN, Ed - A MEN!!

dusty wrote: . . .
"Testing the same tooth front and back". I put this in the category of an old wives tale. Blade technology has changed/improved so much over the years. A quality blade, properly handled, will do just fine.

This is for wood working - right?

Says the man who uses a dial indicator to align his 'saw(s)' to get 'alignment' within 0.005".

" and then the effect of the RPM on the blade. In most blades, especially thin curf the blade set is different when it is at speed vs at rest."

So who here is brave enough to check a spinning blade with their dial indicator? (Please don't!)

I think it depends on the project. When making furniture I generally check the cut with each setup, meaning when I change from one fixture to another. Other than that I live with what there is. Most projects don't require dead on accuracy but when necessary I go through the steps.
Paul

masonsailor2 wrote:I think that both solutions would get you close but you still would have to rely on the test cut. There are three variables in getting a perfectly square cut. The blade to table alignment, the alignment of the guide device ( miter bar, fence, etc) and then the effect of the RPM on the blade. In most blades, especially thin curf the blade set is different when it is at speed vs at rest. So in the end with all variables considered you get it as close as you can and then adjust using test cuts. The four square method used with sleds is an example. The final adjustment is in the fixture you are using and they will all differ slightly. With each fixture a slight final adjustment is usuall necessary to get the perfect ( or close to perfect ) square cut.
Paul

As usual, the injuneer types are flapping about pickey details. Not so to disagree so much as to make all aware of assumptions that can lead to the Ed and Charlese result.

Aligning ALL there is to adjust requires complete understanding AND persistence to DO IT ALL with extreme patience(we do not have a precision jig/fixture to do so as they do at the MS).

I agree the blade does alter from static(hand rotating) to dynamic(spinning), and that is why tooth at front/at back is not an old wives tale. It does not however alter the 4/5 1* cut test cut result.

I agree the other two factors are what determines cut result(ignoring cockpit factors).

However the table to blade alignment really only affects the degree of blade drag at the rear(it affects cross cutting as well as ripping).

The resultant angle is solely the result of the miter gauge alone(again ignoring cockpit issues).

If we want to get real picky, the blade to table parallel deviation can result in a concave cut edge as well as blade jamming at the rear.

* I prefer the one cut method - straight edge test board(long) against the mitergauge, cut, then set the just cut ends flat on the table with the 'straight edges' adjacent. The far end will reveal any lack of a square cut - quicker!

To answer Dusty's then what ?, adjust the miter gauge angle stop.

Table to blade alignment will not affect the resultant angle unless blade interference causes the work piece to slide on the miter gauge face.

I'll add just this little link to the discussion.

https://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-MP-1- ... B00006RGLC

Ed

reible wrote:I'll add just this little link to the discussion.

https://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-MP-1- ... B00006RGLC

Ed

LOL Cheaper than either a blade or sanding disk!

'flat to within thousandths' - Wonder how many?

JPG wrote:

reible wrote:I'll add just this little link to the discussion.

https://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-MP-1- ... B00006RGLC

Ed

LOL Cheaper than either a blade or sanding disk!

'flat to within thousandths' - Wonder how many?

Interesting that they don't say even in the manual or on their own web site. Further down on the Amazon page it says you can align your saw to +/- .001" and it also says the plate has zero runout. Hmmm...