On 10/10/10 9:22 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 17:30:01 -0500,
wrote:

On 10/10/10 4:51 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 11:54:19 -0500,
wrote:

On 10/10/10 11:35 AM, willshak wrote:
WW wrote the following:
wrote in message
...
Found this article...

"Single-phase induction motors drive many arbor-mounted cutting tools
in the home workshop. Stationary grinders, table and radial arm
circular saws frequently turn abrasive or cutting disks that are
directly mounted on the motor's spindle. These disks have large
inertial moments that allow them to free wheel for a long time after
the power is turned off. A lengthy coast to complete stop often
amounts to a major inconvenience."

http://www.homemetalshopclub.org/new...html#reversing


Great ... I may rig up my table saw this way. Would be safer with a
brake. WW

If I need to stop a spinning table saw blade in a hurry to change or
reset something, I find that a scrap piece of lumber makes a great blade
brake. Turn the saw off and slide the scrap up to the still spinning
blade. Blade stops in a couple of seconds. No extra parts needed.


Someone could make some money by developing an aftermarket saw brake,
under the table.... pads or rollers or whatever, that would squeeze the
blade.

Lawsuits from the arse with the SawStop patents notwithstanding, I
think he went with the positive stop style because it's the only one
which would keep from taking a finger off. The rest spin just enough
to do serious damage.


A saw blade brake wouldn't infringe on SawStop's patent at all.

WTF does that have to do with lawsuits? People sue to keep their
product on top whether they have a case or not. REAL WORLD, Mike.


In the "REAL WORLD" (relax, man), patent infringement law suits get
thrown out in the first hearing, too, Larry. What, you're a patent
attorney, too?


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply