On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 8:35:37 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On 10/2/2013 8:25 AM, wrote:

***The below is referring to the 5-cut method of squaring a table saw sled fence to 90 degrees.



Unless I am mistaken, it is a misconception to think that the 5-cut method squares your table saw blade to the sled fence.



What it really does is square your fence to 90 degrees of the direction

of travel (miter track). If the blade



was angled by a small amount the process would still align the fence

90 degrees to the direction of sled travel.



If the table saw blade were a cutting laser projecting 90 degrees to the table, the 5-cut method would still work.



Because this is true, the thought that the 5-cut method squares your

fence 90 degrees to a blade can not be true.



Am I missing something? I know it's picky but it makes me cringe when people make that claim.





I have always questioned the 5-cut process. If the blade were not

parallel to the fence.


I assume you mean perpendicular and not parallel.

the blade would cut a wider kerf.

Exactly. Analogous to a fatter or skinnier cutting laser. The process does NOT consider the squareness of the blade to the sled fence. Only that the process involves cutting.






Once the angle between the blade and fence became large enough I suspect

there would be problem.



Has any body tried to measure the parallelism by measuring the width of

the teeth on the blade, to the width of the kerf?