I have a planer\sander\molder\gang-ripper from Woodmaster. I need to
come up with some enhancements to the feed table.

My Problem: When I gang rip, I am working from cheap S4S pine that can
vary nearly a 1/4" in width. The setup on the machine has 1/2" tall
poly fences at each side over a ploy bed. They work great when I am
cuting molding from ripped stock that has a consistent width. However,
adjusting the fences is a major pain. I have to stop the machine and
drop the bed to access the fence adjustments. Not too well thought out
but that's another story.

What I Need: I need some feathers\fingers\springloaded fence that is
only 1/2 tall, about 24" long and I want to keep the width to a minimum
to maximize the width of material I can send through. I want it to only
be maybe 2" wide. I'll just clamp it off at each end vs using the
holdowns of the current fence.

Picture adding a 1/2" tall fence to a typical planer at each side and
having one of them be a feather board or spring loaded.

I'm looking for ideas about what material or what other type of setup
might work. I'm thinking a spring loaded something but not sure of the
best approach.

BW

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote in
oups.com:


I'm looking for ideas about what material or what other type of setup
might work. I'm thinking a spring loaded something but not sure of the
best approach.

What pops into mind is a set of parallel spring-loaded rollers. Something
designed along the lines of a roller lifter or roller tappet for high
performance cams in hot rods. See
http://www.iskycams.com/racingcamseries.php
the "roller series" photo. Rollers would have to be rotated 90 degrees for
your app. but something like this would work.

"Dan Major" wrote in message
What pops into mind is a set of parallel spring-loaded rollers. Something
designed along the lines of a roller lifter or roller tappet for high
performance cams in hot rods. See

I suppose it would work if engineered properly, but it sounds a little bit
exotic. Lee Valley Tools sells various types which might be useful under
difference circumstances.

http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...885,42837&ap=1
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...at=1,240,45884
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...at=1,240,45884
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.a...34&cat=1,43000

SonomaProducts.com wrote:
I have a planer\sander\molder\gang-ripper from Woodmaster. I need to
come up with some enhancements to the feed table.

My Problem: When I gang rip, I am working from cheap S4S pine that can
vary nearly a 1/4" in width. The setup on the machine has 1/2" tall
poly fences at each side over a ploy bed. They work great when I am
cuting molding from ripped stock that has a consistent width. However,
adjusting the fences is a major pain. I have to stop the machine and
drop the bed to access the fence adjustments. Not too well thought out
but that's another story.

What I Need: I need some feathers\fingers\springloaded fence that is
only 1/2 tall, about 24" long and I want to keep the width to a minimum
to maximize the width of material I can send through. I want it to only
be maybe 2" wide. I'll just clamp it off at each end vs using the
holdowns of the current fence.

Picture adding a 1/2" tall fence to a typical planer at each side and
having one of them be a feather board or spring loaded.

I'm looking for ideas about what material or what other type of setup
might work. I'm thinking a spring loaded something but not sure of the
best approach.

BW





how about a springboard?

make a piece of baltic birch ply, 1/2" thick by whatever width you need
to have it stiff enough by long enough to extend out of the machine far
enough to conveniently get clamps on. also make a long thin ripping of
some hard springy wood. make it a few inches longer than the BB ply.
play with the dimensions until it has the springiness to bend twice the
distance you need at the pressure you need it to be applying to the
edge of the board. note that in this case, since you need 1/2" thick,
to get a firm push against the workpiece the width will likely be
greater than the thickness... I'll guess about an inch if the ripping
is oak and the length is 30".... now lay the ripping on top of and
flush with the edge of the BB and put one clamp in the middle, holding
them to each other and to the bench. apply pressure to the ends of the
ripping to achieve your desired curve and trace the line on the BB.
unclamp and draw two new lines that approximate the angle of the curved
line where it exits the ends of the BB. these should be maybe 3" long,
falling off of both the ends and the edge of the BB. cut these two
short lines. glue and fasten the ripping to the BB at these two cut
surfaces, with the ripping spanning between them in a smooth arc. sand
smooth and wax the convex face of the ripping.

to use it, slip a board to be ripped into the machine, up against the
fence. set the springboard in place next to it, apply pressure towards
the fence and clamp the ends.

I was familiar with most of these but they are all too big in one
dimension or the other. However the fist one with the spring steel
gives me some ideas thanks.

Thanks, I think I follow. I'll have to try playing with this idea.

Vever thought of using lifters. Interesting idea. If I go witha spring
loaded concept this might be the way to do it.

On 21 Jul 2005 09:31:56 -0700, "SonomaProducts.com"
wrote:

Thanks, I think I follow. I'll have to try playing with this idea.


hey, leave a little of what you're replying to so we know where it is
in the thread...

hey, leave a little of what you're replying to so we know where it is
in the thread...

Ahh, I've seen comments similar to this before but never understood
what the deal was. Now I get it.

I have the entire thread displayed as a tree in my reader so I can
always see where I am in the thread. I guess if I didn't have that I'd
have realized I am not leaving enough history forfolks to follow. And
all along I though people just wanted me to conform to some arbitrary
way of responding because they liked it better, not because it was
required.

Thanks.

On 21 Jul 2005 14:17:28 -0700, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
hey, leave a little of what you're replying to so we know where it is
in the thread...

Ahh, I've seen comments similar to this before but never understood
what the deal was. Now I get it.

Yay! A breakthrough!

SonomaProducts.com (in
) said:

| I have the entire thread displayed as a tree in my reader so I can
| always see where I am in the thread. I guess if I didn't have that
| I'd have realized I am not leaving enough history forfolks to
| follow. And all along I though people just wanted me to conform to
| some arbitrary way of responding because they liked it better, not
| because it was required.

Even with the whole tree displayed, if the stuff to which you're /not/
responding is snipped then it becomes much easier to see the exact
context in which you do intend to speak.

It's also a big help if you leave in the attribution for all the
remarks that aren't snipped so readers like myself can look back to
identify posts we might want to reread if we feel that doing so would
help your remarks to make more sense and/or be more convincing.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote in message
oups.com...
hey, leave a little of what you're replying to so we know where it is
in the thread...

Ahh, I've seen comments similar to this before but never understood
what the deal was. Now I get it.

I have the entire thread displayed as a tree in my reader so I can
always see where I am in the thread. I guess if I didn't have that I'd
have realized I am not leaving enough history forfolks to follow. And
all along I though people just wanted me to conform to some arbitrary
way of responding because they liked it better, not because it was
required.

I am happy that you understand and will be making some kind of appropriate
adjustment.

It should be pointed out that many folks who abuse others on usenet also
don't attribute. So by following some basic rules, you don't become
identified with some real scumbags.

Which would be unfortunate. Because your contributions are appreciated.