My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
check blade alignment.

I cobbled together a jig similar to this
http://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
to check my setup

My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
used this method to align my blade
http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/sto...l&catref=wd146
(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

"RayV" wrote in message

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.

On Oct 15, 10:10 am, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:
"RayV" wrote in message

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.

You're right Ed, very interesting (entertaining?) thread this has
turned out to be...

On Oct 22, 9:47 am, RayV wrote:
On Oct 15, 10:10 am, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:

"RayV" wrote in message

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

When I get home I'm going to make some popcorn and ice my favorite adult
beverage to sustain me while the results come in on this one.

You're right Ed, very interesting (entertaining?) thread this has
turned out to be...

Yep, Ed's been around long enough to see this happen dozens of times.
From what you said in response, it would appear that my comments
helped you. That's all I wanted to do - lend some of my expertise to
help you out. I didn't try to sell you anything. I didn't say
anything that I didn't believe to be absolutely true. I didn't say
anything with the intent to insult anybody. But, this happens in
virtually every single thread that I offer technical advice in. And,
it's usually instigated by the same group of people (at one point or
another, most of them chimed in on this thread).

I hope you find your dial indicator useful and a lot easier than a
bevel blade attached to the miter bar ;-). Don't let the ignorant
hecklers discourage you from using your brain. Thinking people can be
real woodworkers - they just have to endure a lot of taunting and
heckling.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

RayV wrote:

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

How do test rips look?

On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y wrote:
RayV wrote:

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

How do test rips look?

Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
these:
http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.co...worker_II.html

RayV wrote:
On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y wrote:
RayV wrote:

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
How do test rips look?

Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
these:
http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.co...worker_II.html


I love my WWII's, but a 24T rip blade is easier to use on thicker stock.
When I have more than a few rips to do, I take the time to install the
rip blade.

I've had Freud, CMT, and Ridge Carbide rip blades that I liked.

"RayV" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y wrote:
RayV wrote:

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

How do test rips look?

Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
these:
http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.co...worker_II.html


You can typically rule the blade out with that one but be sure to get the
"regular kerf" blade.

Leon,
Why do you recommend "regular kerf"? (I presume this is rather than "thin"
kerf.) I have been told that one should not use a thin kerf blade on a 3hp
cabinet saw but don't know if this is bs or what.
Best,
David
"Leon" wrote in message
. net...

"RayV" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 15, 10:38 am, B A R R Y wrote:
RayV wrote:

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

How do test rips look?

Hard to tell, I went looking for a decent combination blade over the
weekend but couldn't find one. The Avanti (50T $30) blade cuts right
through Maple but leaves hatchet marks. I will stop at the Lumberyard
today and see what they have, I will probably end up ordering one of
these:
http://www.forrestsawbladesonline.co...worker_II.html


You can typically rule the blade out with that one but be sure to get the
"regular kerf" blade.

"David Todtman" wrote in message
news:aYSQi.66141$th2.25985@pd7urf3no...
Leon,
Why do you recommend "regular kerf"? (I presume this is rather than
"thin" kerf.) I have been told that one should not use a thin kerf blade
on a 3hp cabinet saw but don't know if this is bs or what.
Best,
David


I used thin kerf for years because they cut so "fast". I was not happy with
the cuts. They were never quite true enough for me and even with a
stiffener which limited the depth of cut I was not happy. In 1989 I talked
to my local tool dealer and blade sharpener. They still sharpen blades but
do not sell tools. I asked what he recommended for a good combination
blade. He recommended a Systematic combo "Regular Kerf".
He told me, and I agree with that statement to this day that a "good quality
and sharp" regular kerf blade will cut just as smoothly and effortlessly as
any thin kerf blade. Plus you get flat bevels, miters, and compound bevel
cuts. At the time I was using a 1 hp Craftsman TS and never again put a
thin kerf blade on my saw. About 8 years ago I up graded to a 3 hp cabinet
saw and immediately upgraded to the Forrest WWII regular kerf 40 tooth
blade. A few years ago I bought another Forrest WWII to have on hand while
Forrest resharpens the other. I also strongly recommend Forrest for
resharpening. They can retune the blade if necessary when they resharpen
it.
If you are buying a cheap blade, a thin kerf may be the better choice but if
you have your sat properly set up and want dead flat cuts a "Quality"
regular kerf blade is the way to go.
Thin kerf makes it easier for a low powered saw cut through hard woods. A
sharp good quality regular kerf blade can do this also.

As for why you should not use a thin kerf blade on a 3hp saw, probably
because the blade will not deliver the precision that a better quality saw
is capable of delivering.

"RayV" wrote in message
ps.com...
My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
check blade alignment.

I cobbled together a jig similar to this
http://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
to check my setup

My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
used this method to align my blade
http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/sto...l&catref=wd146
(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table saw...
I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a kickback,
it shouldn't cause any real problems...

Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
..001" or so?

But I'm here to learn so I'll wait for the experts to answer.

Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:TFLQi.5768$2o1.4756@trnddc03...
"RayV" wrote in message
Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table
saw... I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a
kickback, it shouldn't cause any real problems...

Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
.001" or so?


Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.
However the closer to perfect you get the blade to being parallel to the
fence or perpendicular to the miter slot the less sanding you have to do.
Typically I NEVER have to sand a ripped or mitered cut.

You do not need fancy measuring equipment to set the saw up to make cuts
like that. For some the measuring equipment makes it easier. For some it
is an extra and unnecessary step. Results will tell you if the saw is set
up right or not.

"Leon" wrote in message
. net...

"Joe AutoDrill" wrote in message
news:TFLQi.5768$2o1.4756@trnddc03...
"RayV" wrote in message
Not being an avid woodworker or someone with much time using a table
saw... I'm guessing that unless this adversely affects the chances of a
kickback, it shouldn't cause any real problems...

Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
.001" or so?


Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.

(raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.

I will be the first to admit that I go overboard, but since I work to .0001
or so during the day, going to a .001 or so, doesn't seem like that big of a
stretch.

However the closer to perfect you get the blade to being parallel to the
fence or perpendicular to the miter slot the less sanding you have to do.
Typically I NEVER have to sand a ripped or mitered cut.

Absolutely...if you don't get the machine accurate, the part can NOT be
accurate without fiddling with something somewhere....easier to do it on the
first operation, I think.

You do not need fancy measuring equipment to set the saw up to make cuts
like that. For some the measuring equipment makes it easier. For some it
is an extra and unnecessary step. Results will tell you if the saw is set
up right or not.

Also very right...the finish of the ripped board is what counts...assuming
that you'll make an adjustment if the size is off, if the finish is there,
that's most of the battle.

Mike

"The Davenport's" wrote in message
...
Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.

(raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.


I think Jow was refering to ripping a board to width 3" +, - .001"
If you are doing "that", don't remeasure today's rip tomorrow. :~)

On Oct 16, 12:20 am, "Leon" wrote:
"The Davenport's" wrote in message

...

Good point, but to answer the question, NO ONE does that.

(raising hand in a grade school manner...) I do.

I think Jow was refering to ripping a board to width 3" +, - .001"
If you are doing "that", don't remeasure today's rip tomorrow. :~)

Yeah, rilly.

Joe AutoDrill wrote:

Just thinking out loud - How many people do you know that measure wood to
.001" or so?

When fitting joints with a hand plane, it's fairly easy to take off a
thou or two at a time. It's not so much measured as felt though...your
fingertips can feel .003" fairly easily, it's roughly the thickness of a
piece of paper.

Chris

"RayV" wrote in message

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Your measurements are only as accurate as the instrument you used to do the
measuring.

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?

If you mean the blade aligned to the miter slot, that real good. + .005 and
it's generally considered that you have problems that need to be addressed

Are you sure that indeed measured "blade runout"/warp/flatness, and your
measurement does not arbor or flange runout also?

There is a specific procedure for checking the flatness of a blade with that
type of instrument:

With the instrument, find and mark the high spot on the blade; loosen the
nut and turn the blade 1/2 turn on the arbor; re-tighten the nut check for
the high spot again; if the high spot coincides with the marked spot, then
the it's due to blade warp, if not, then it's arbor or flange runout.

Arbor and flange runout on a good table saw should be less than .001"

I'm sure you'll get a lot more responses ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/30/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

RayV wrote:

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Personally, I'd consider that just fine. Before you judge any test rip
cuts, you should also ensure that your fence is parallel to the blade
and the mitre slot.

Chris

"RayV" wrote in message
ps.com...

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg


Regardless of the slight differences you see now, how does the cut look?
Happy with the results? Stop fiddling.
A typical Forrest blade when new is with in .001". The arbor run out on my
saw when new was .0005".
When I check my fence alignment I make a test cut. If there were tooth
marks on the keeper side I would slightly adjust the fence on the back side
away from the blade. Tooth marks on the waste side, move the back side of
the fence slightly towards the blade.
Yeah, you waste "a" scrap piece of wood doing this and if your saw is decent
you only have to do this once every 3 or 4 years, maybe.

Regardless of what kind of measuring equipment you use to set the saw up,
you have no control over the fact that most wood does not remain dead flat
or straight to the extent that those tiny measurements that you tweak you
saw to come in to effect. They help but often wood can warp as you cut it.
Wood often will move during the cut much more than the tolerances that you
are looking at and then every thing becomes a moot point.

Or wait a little while and Ed will try to sell you an aligner that may or
may not help with the results of your cut.

On Oct 15, 9:47 am, "Leon" wrote:

Regardless of what kind of measuring equipment you use to set the saw up,
you have no control over the fact that most wood does not remain dead flat
or straight to the extent that those tiny measurements that you tweak you
saw to come in to effect. They help but often wood can warp as you cut it.
Wood often will move during the cut much more than the tolerances that you
are looking at and then every thing becomes a moot point.

This is very true. Most wood just can't hold these sorts of
tolerances. Even the heat generated by cutting will cause dimensional
changes on the order of 0.001". But, like you said previously, we're
not talking about working wood to within a few thousandths of an
inch. We're talking about aligning a machine. The goal here is to
make sure that the machine doesn't introduce additional problems
(beyond those inherent in the wood). You want to avoid having to
clean-up or re-work something that the machine could have done
correctly to begin with.

Wood does change dimensionally over time. So, the wise and skillful
woodworker will not to allow a lot of time between cutting and fitting
parts together. In other words, don't cut out all the parts one day
and then try to assemble them on another day - especially if you
expect the weather to change. Also, if you notice a board warping or
twisting during a rip cut, it's a very significant sign that the
particular piece of wood doesn't belong in your project. It was
improperly dried ("case hardened") and will be nothing but trouble if
you use it (reminds me of an armoire my brother made).

Or wait a little while and Ed will try to sell you an aligner that may or
may not help with the results of your cut.

There's a "definite maybe" if I've ever seen one! Spoken with true
conviction.

Hey! What's that sharp steel thing hanging out of my mouth? What
the?!?!? Heck Leon, are you fishing again? Geez! Can't a guy offer
some helpful assistance without getting trolled? I didn't suggest
that he buy anything. With regard to his setup I said: "That will do
the trick...". Is that what you Texas boys call the "hard sell"?

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

"Ed Bennett" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 15, 9:47 am, "Leon" wrote:
..

This is very true. Most wood just can't hold these sorts of
tolerances. Even the heat generated by cutting will cause dimensional
changes on the order of 0.001". But, like you said previously, we're
not talking about working wood to within a few thousandths of an
inch. We're talking about aligning a machine. The goal here is to
make sure that the machine doesn't introduce additional problems
(beyond those inherent in the wood). You want to avoid having to
clean-up or re-work something that the machine could have done
correctly to begin with.

Exactly and as I mention in another post, I seldom need to address cut edges
other than to bring them to the same smoothness as the other project when
sanding.



Snip


There's a "definite maybe" if I've ever seen one! Spoken with true
conviction.


LOL, "definate maybe", the earliest that I recall using that comment was
in the Fall of 1972 when speaking to the store district manager. I was in
my first year of college and the "definate maybe" answer to his question
brought a "College Kid Answer" from him. ;~)


Hey! What's that sharp steel thing hanging out of my mouth? What
the?!?!? Heck Leon, are you fishing again? Geez! Can't a guy offer
some helpful assistance without getting trolled? I didn't suggest
that he buy anything. With regard to his setup I said: "That will do
the trick...". Is that what you Texas boys call the "hard sell"?

LOL, Ed I was just seeing if you were paying attention. ;~)

On Oct 15, 7:36 am, RayV wrote:
My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
check blade alignment.

Good idea. Like cherry, maple is prone to show scorch marks and any
closed grain wood will make blade marks more obvious.

I cobbled together a jig similar to thishttp://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
to check my setup

That will do the trick for blade and fence alignment.

My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
used this method to align my bladehttp://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood...
(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

I'm wondering why you think the alignment is this close. See my
comments below.

Is the "Ray Vojtash" of the Wood Mag article the same as "RayV" of
this posted message? I'm not sure why you think the technique is
special or better than any other "feel the rub" technique. It doesn't
matter if you hold the stick (or bevel gauge blade) against the miter
gauge or screw it onto the bar, it's the exact same technique.

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

It is a bit high, but not outrageous. It's probably not the silver
coating on the blade (unless this coating is thick paint). This
brings up the alignment question I mentioned above. How can you be
sure of your alignment accuracy when the blade runout is three times
higher? Did you mark a spot on the blade and make all your
measurements on that spot (rotating the blade)? Or did you just run
the indicator stylus along the surface of the blade?

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?

Yes. In general, anything less than 0.005" is good enough. I've done
a lot of testing with various blades and woods. Even with
magnification, I could not detect any improvement in the quality of
the cut surface for alignment error below 0.005"

Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

It means that your cut surface will have ripples in it that are 0.003"
deep. The size and shape of these ripples will depend on how high you
raise the blade and how fast you feed the stock. This sort of defect
can easily be seen and felt on exposed surfaces so expect it to
require some extra cleanup. Good quality modern glues don't generally
have any trouble filling 0.003" gaps between mating surfaces.

You need to determine if this runout is due to blade warp or an arbor/
flange problem. You can easily use your setup to check both the arbor
and the flange. You will want to tilt the arbor so that the dial
indicator can meet the surface of the flange at 90 degrees. You will
want to leave the arbor at 0 degrees to check arbor runout. Hopefully
there is a spot along the surface of the arbor where you can avoid the
threads. You should see less than 0.001" runout on both of these.

Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?

The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt). When the dial
indicator is tilted at an angle it introduces error into the reading.
The error is going to make the reading look higher than actual changes
in the surface being measured. It will also exaggerate any
instability in your dial indicator fixturing.

(as seen here, but not my site)http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg

You can calculate the actual geometry from the dial indicator
reading. It is equal to the dial indicator reading times the cosine
of the tilt (away from 90). The cosine of zero degrees is 1 (best
situation). If you are tilting your indicator by 30 degrees, then
multiply your readings by 0.86 to see what it would read if there were
no tilt.

Tilting the indicator is a better alternative than using one of those
flat blade replacement plates. Apart from the monetary savings ($40
or more), and the time you save not needing to swap out your blade,
you won't be introducing a reference surface with unknown errors. The
specs on one popular plate seen in catalogs and online are +/-0.003".
You could think that you've aligned your saw properly when all you
actually did was align it to match the warp in the blade replacement
plate.

Feel free to ask questions.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, Ed Bennett wrote:

My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
used this method to align my bladehttp://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/story.jsp?storyid=/templatedata/wood...
(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

I'm wondering why you think the alignment is this close. See my
comments below.

Is the "Ray Vojtash" of the Wood Mag article the same as "RayV" of
this posted message?

sure is.

How can you be
sure of your alignment accuracy when the blade runout is three times
higher? Did you mark a spot on the blade and make all your
measurements on that spot (rotating the blade)?

yes


Is 0.003" blade runout too much?

It means that your cut surface will have ripples in it that are 0.003"
deep. The size and shape of these ripples will depend on how high you
raise the blade and how fast you feed the stock. This sort of defect
can easily be seen and felt on exposed surfaces so expect it to
require some extra cleanup.

That makes sense.

You need to determine if this runout is due to blade warp or an arbor/
flange problem.

I'm going to check it by rotating the blade and then checking the
arbor and flange. I suspect that this $30 blade is warped because
when I've ripped with a good 80T blade I've nearly finish ready
surfaces.


Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?

The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt). When the dial
indicator is tilted at an angle it introduces error into the reading.
The error is going to make the reading look higher than actual changes
in the surface being measured. It will also exaggerate any
instability in your dial indicator fixturing.

You can calculate the actual geometry from the dial indicator
reading. It is equal to the dial indicator reading times the cosine
of the tilt (away from 90). The cosine of zero degrees is 1 (best
situation). If you are tilting your indicator by 30 degrees, then
multiply your readings by 0.86 to see what it would read if there were
no tilt.

Thanks. I'll see if I can modify my jig to get it closer to 90deg so
I don't need to look for my calculator.

The indicator I have does have a pin 180 from the working end but I
would have to grind the lug off of the back to make using that
worthwhile. I might be able to get the back lug to go below the table
if I measure from the left side of the blade.

Your point about the blade runout equaling depth of hash marks on the
wood makes sense to me so I will investigate that further.
Thanks Ed.




Tilting the indicator is a better alternative than using one of those
flat blade replacement plates. Apart from the monetary savings ($40
or more), and the time you save not needing to swap out your blade,
you won't be introducing a reference surface with unknown errors. The
specs on one popular plate seen in catalogs and online are +/-0.003".
You could think that you've aligned your saw properly when all you
actually did was align it to match the warp in the blade replacement
plate.

Feel free to ask questions.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 15, 2:09 pm, Ed Bennett wrote:
On Oct 15, 7:36 am, RayV wrote:
snip
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?

The best practice is to keep the dial indicator plunger at 90 degrees
to the surface being measured (zero degrees tilt).

snip

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

Looking at your site just made me realize that I don't need the
indicator near the table to check blade runout. I can do that up
high. I just need to get it close to 90deg near the table to check my
alignment.

Thanks again.

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:36:54 -0700, RayV
wrote:

My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
check blade alignment.

I cobbled together a jig similar to this
http://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
to check my setup

My alignment, which I think is OK, is 0.001". Not bad considering I
used this method to align my blade
http://www.woodmagazine.com/wood/sto...l&catref=wd146
(whoever came up with that technique is a genius)

The runout measuered on the body of the blade is 0.003". I think this
is too much but it could be the 'silver' coating on the Avanti blade I
just bought.

Is 0.001" alignment close enough?
Is 0.003" blade runout too much?
Is it OK to have the dial indicator angled so the measurement can be
taken closer to the table or does it need to be 90deg?
(as seen here, but not my site)
http://home.comcast.net/~kvaughn65/dial_indicator.jpg


I also check the blade for parrallism to the miter slot with the blade
all the way out ( but not on the stop) and down as far as you can and
still get a measurement. The main thing is to not have the blade cut
wood on the back side at any depth of cut .

On Oct 15, 8:47 pm, klaatu wrote:


Verata Nictu? Necktie?

Followup:

Returned the 'Silver' coated Avanti blade and ordered a 50T Frued
Diablo. Probably not as good as a WWII but half the price. I am also
very happy with the 80T Diablo I have, cuts great and will easily rip
3/4" Maple even though it is not made to do so.

Checked the runout on my arbor, barely perceptible ~0.00015. Good.

Checked the runout on the flange and at first it was ~0.0015! Then I
noticed that even touching the belt caused the needle to jump
(contractor saw). So I took the belt off and the flange runout is
~0.0003 after a little touch up with emery cloth, good enough for me.

Put the original 28T Jet blade on that made maybe three cuts in its
life and the blade runout was 0.005! WTF? Spun it 180 and now the
runout was 0.001. Spun it back and runout was 0.002? Took the blade
off to see that it was scratched/smutzed up. Emery clothed it and now
the runout is around 0.001 in any position (without the belt). I'm
satisfied the saw is OK and the Avanti blade was a POS.

OK, so is all this checking worth it? I think it is, it takes maybe
five minutes to check the runout of a newly mounted blade. Well worth
it to find out that an errant wood chip got stuck between the blade
and the flange making a smooth cut nearly impossible. I plan to keep
the dial indicator in a much handier spot. That way I can check a
blade that has been lying around for a year with an Allen wrech under
one side and a stacked dado set sitting on top of it ;-).

Enough measuring, I need sleep so I can make some sawdust tomorrow.

On Oct 15, 9:36 am, RayV wrote:
My latest project requires me to rip some 1 1/2" Maple so I deicded to
check blade alignment.

I cobbled together a jig similar to thishttp://www.newwoodworker.com/dilindjig.html
to check my setup

Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".

On Oct 15, 10:13 pm, Ferd Farkel wrote:
Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".

I don't happen to have a PM66 handy right now, but I'm very familiar
with it. It's a fine machine. I wouldn't mind trading in my Unisaw
for one. I wouldn't trade one for any contractor's saw. If it isn't
aligned properly, the best table saw can perform much worse than an
everyday humble contractor's saw. I know for a fact that there are a
lot of real cheap junkers out there outperforming high end cabinet
saws. Alignment does make a difference.

When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Oct 16, 1:29 pm, Ed Bennett wrote:
On Oct 15, 10:13 pm, Ferd Farkel wrote:

Do any PM 66 owners here know the tolerances of their
saws? I aligned my humble Delta contractor's saw with
that jig, and it cuts easier than any 66 I've ever seen. I
think I got the blade parallel to the slot to within 0.002".

I don't happen to have a PM66 handy right now, but I'm very familiar
with it. It's a fine machine. I wouldn't mind trading in my Unisaw
for one. I wouldn't trade one for any contractor's saw. If it isn't
aligned properly, the best table saw can perform much worse than an
everyday humble contractor's saw. I know for a fact that there are a
lot of real cheap junkers out there outperforming high end cabinet
saws. Alignment does make a difference.

The 66 is a great machine, made for shops that turn
it on at 8 AM and off at 5.

When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.

I aligned my Delta for safety, with the rear trunnion bolts upgraded
to
PALS brackets. Improved cut quality is a welcome side benefit.

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:29:16 -0700, Ed Bennett
wrote:

Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

An insulting and misleading statement. Leads the reader to consider
that there is no basis for quality judgement and comparison from the
alignment done on the assembly line by the manufacturer.

The truth is unless the component parts are just terrible, all saws
can be "set" to very close to zero at 90 degrees and I suspect that
most manufacturers have assembly procedures that achieve that using
rather sophisticated set up tools. I know one does at least. As the
blade is tilted, it is exactly the "quality of the workmanship" of the
component parts that determines the reading at 45 degrees and the
difference between the two figures is an excellent indicator of the
quality of workmanship when comparing different units. The flatter
the table, the more parallel the boss plane to the top, the flatter
the cabinet top plate plane, the more accurate the trunnion/brackets,
yoke assembly and arbor assembly, the closer that 45 degree figure
will stay to zero out of the box. While there are certain things you
can do to offset the tolerance stackup of some of those parts if
others are bad "you got what you got".

Frank

On Oct 17, 3:46 pm, Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:29:16 -0700, Ed Bennett
wrote:

Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

An insulting and misleading statement. Leads the reader to consider
that there is no basis for quality judgement and comparison from the
alignment done on the assembly line by the manufacturer.

I don't know why anybody would take offense Frank. I really don't
think it's reasonable to expect a machine to maintain proper alignment
after riding around on forklifts, trucks, and rail cars. The
vibrations and thermal changes virtually guarantee that alignment will
be lost during shipping. If I were personally responsible for
aligning and testing table saws at the end of a production line I
would not be surprised or offended to learn that 99.9% of the machines
that I so carefully aligned arrived completely out of whack. It's
just physics. My Unisaw needed alignment, and it came with a bunch of
"shock watch" tags on it.

I think a manufacturer cannot verify that a machine is defect free
until they properly align and test it. And, the quality can be
clearly judged inferior if a machine cannot be properly aligned. But,
the state of alignment as delivered "out of the box" is pretty much
irrelevant.

The truth is unless the component parts are just terrible, all saws
can be "set" to very close to zero at 90 degrees and I suspect that
most manufacturers have assembly procedures that achieve that using
rather sophisticated set up tools. I know one does at least. As the
blade is tilted, it is exactly the "quality of the workmanship" of the
component parts that determines the reading at 45 degrees and the
difference between the two figures is an excellent indicator of the
quality of workmanship when comparing different units. The flatter
the table, the more parallel the boss plane to the top, the flatter
the cabinet top plate plane, the more accurate the trunnion/brackets,
yoke assembly and arbor assembly, the closer that 45 degree figure
will stay to zero out of the box.

I agree, there are certain aspects of alignment (like the tilt axis
parallelism to the table top that you mention here) that are dependent
on quality of manufacture. It would be incredibly easy (and
inexpensive) to implement in-process 100% inspection of every single
casting that gets machined. And, the use of the Meehanite casting
process would significantly reduce (eliminate) post machining
warpage. I suspect that only an exceptional manufacturer would do
such things. And, if they really did, then I would expect that none
of their saws would require shimming under the trunnions or between
the base and the table (or, such a small number that you would just
never hear about it).

Having heard of this problem from owners of all the most popular
brands, I suspect that they really aren't doing anything substantial
in this area. My 80's vintage "Proudly made in the USA" Unisaw needed
shimming (among things) before it would operate properly. So,
whatever Delta did before shipping my machine, it didn't help much.

While there are certain things you
can do to offset the tolerance stackup of some of those parts if
others are bad "you got what you got".

This might be how I "got what I got" with my Unisaw. If the
tolerances stack up so that the product (when fully assembled) can not
be properly aligned (without shimming, filing, or other
modifications), then any mechanical engineer will tell you that the
manufacturing process is poorly designed. Tolerances are *supposed*
to define the range of variability for which no defect can occur.
Unfortunately, too many manufacturers define their tolerances as the
range of variability for which an affordable amount of warranty
expense occurs. I'm in the "zero defect" camp, not the "acceptable
warranty liability" camp - which never made me very popular with the
bean-counter types. They were always glad that I only did the
numbers, not the decisions.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:15:02 -0700, Ed Bennett
wrote:

all snipped

My mistake Ed. I should have assumed you would not see the offense.
But the mistake was mine. I should never have reacted. It offered you
another chance to extend your not so subtle spam campaign. Won't
happen again.

Frank

When I look at comparative reviews of machinery, the first thing I
look for is a description of how the machine was prepared. Most
reviewers ignore alignment completely. Some check the "factory"
alignment in a misguided (ignorant) attempt to judge the quality of
workmanship. I don't think I've seen a reviewer pay attention to
setup and alignment since Kelly Mehler's table saw review in the April
2003 edition of Woodworker's Journal. You can't make valid
comparisons between two machines until they are both properly setup
and aligned. Glad to see that Kelly understood this - wish more did.


factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved. a good
argument can be made that the consumer benefits more from the effort
and QC. going somewhere other than into factory alignment, but it also
can be argued that the production line that aligns each and every saw
will have a better handle on and more interest in all of the upstream
precision machining processes.


me, I mostly buy old machines anyway, so factory alignment is kinda a
moot point in my shop.

wrote in message
oups.com...




factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you here. A company that does not
take measures to insure that a product is delivered in the same shape it
leaves the factory has no "real" QC as far as the customer is concerned.
What really matters is that the sale is completed with a product that is
delivered in the same shape that it leaves the factory. Blaming the
shipping company is a pittyful excuse and is simply dropping the ball where
the customer is concerned. If the manufacturer does not package, package
properly for shipping, and monitor the shipper to insure delivery of
undamaged products it may as well nave no QC at all. Ignoring those facts
is what has gotten many of them in the jam that they are in today.
Sorry to mention this again Frank, Delta had a problem with broken trunions
on their Unisaws some 10 years ago. Does it really matter why the trunion
arrived broken? The consumer saw a product that was broken. That was the
#1 reason I chose the Jet over the Delta when I bought 7-8 years ago. The
Delta setting on the show room floor with the "broken tag" attached to the
top was not inviting. The saw looked fine.

My Jet cabinet saw was delivered with no adjustment needed after factory
alignment, that goes for my Laguna BS, and Delta stationary planer.

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:02:01 -0500, "Leon"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...




factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you here. A company that does not
take measures to insure that a product is delivered in the same shape it
leaves the factory has no "real" QC as far as the customer is concerned.
What really matters is that the sale is completed with a product that is
delivered in the same shape that it leaves the factory. Blaming the
shipping company is a pittyful excuse and is simply dropping the ball where
the customer is concerned. If the manufacturer does not package, package
properly for shipping, and monitor the shipper to insure delivery of
undamaged products it may as well nave no QC at all. Ignoring those facts
is what has gotten many of them in the jam that they are in today.
Sorry to mention this again Frank, Delta had a problem with broken trunions
on their Unisaws some 10 years ago. Does it really matter why the trunion
arrived broken? The consumer saw a product that was broken. That was the
#1 reason I chose the Jet over the Delta when I bought 7-8 years ago. The
Delta setting on the show room floor with the "broken tag" attached to the
top was not inviting. The saw looked fine.

And since you mentioned it again I'll reiterate the facts. As a
percentage of units shipped a small number of units were damaged in
shipment in a way that caused trunions to break. Extensivel testing
determined that what caused the breakage was a full running tipover
where the unit was slammed over on a concrete dock or tipped out of a
warehouse rack. I seriously doubt that any "packaging" would have
stopped that from happening, but in any event, you as a consumer would
not want to pay for it. When a rather expensive improper handling
device was added to the packaging, the problem went away. Your
distributor, who left a broken unit on his floor did not have to.
Delta was allowing immediate freight allowed RMA's and replacement
units for any damaged units as they did for any type of damage. Why
your distributor chose to keep the saw is a mystery to me. No end
user customer was ever "stuck" with a unit that had broken trunions.
If the distributor had used the RMA process, you as a consumer, would
not have had the opportunity to see the broken tag.

Your comment about "may as well have no QC at all" is insulting to
those involved with it and is, of course, your opinion with full right
to express it on an open forum

Frank

My Jet cabinet saw was delivered with no adjustment needed after factory
alignment, that goes for my Laguna BS, and Delta stationary planer.

in an ideal world all shipping variables can be taken into account. in
the real world, shipments get tossed around by storms at sea, pallets
get left out in the rain and boxes get dropped. the higher degree of
precision the factory setup the more susceptible it is to change- any
change, even temperature swings. now, generally woodworking equipment
isn't the most precise stuff around, and I'm sure the manufacturers do
cost- benefit analyses of precision factory setup among other things
and find a happy medium. then we as users tweak the machines to our
individual requirements, even using aftermarket parts and devices. no
prob (TM Joat) everybody gets what they need and a thriving economy
exists based on table saw alignment devices.

very few precision machines arrive from the manufacturer plug and play
at their optimum performance, and the ones that *must* do so come with
a tech from the factory to do the setup.

On Oct 17, 8:34 pm, wrote:
factory setup is a relevant data point, in that it indicates how much
care the Mfr. puts into final stage QC., less shipping jostling. the
shipping is the real bugger for factory setup... you're always gonna
have to do some alignment to a machine that has been moved. a good
argument can be made that the consumer benefits more from the effort
and QC. going somewhere other than into factory alignment, but it also
can be argued that the production line that aligns each and every saw
will have a better handle on and more interest in all of the upstream
precision machining processes.

me, I mostly buy old machines anyway, so factory alignment is kinda a
moot point in my shop.

I think it's important for the factory to test machinery before it
ships. And, you can't tell if a machine is operating properly
(accurately) unless it's aligned. Aligning it at the factory also
proves that it can be aligned. You would be amazed at the number of
customers who call me to say that they cannot move the trunnions
enough to obtain proper blade alignment because the castings are so
far out of whack. My own unisaw was incapable of blade tilt all the
way to 45 degrees as delivered. I had to go after the castings with a
file (as recommended by the tech support guy) before it worked
properly.

It's not very reasonable to expect that a machine can maintain proper
alignment after riding around on fork lifts, in trucks, and on rail
cars. The amount of vibration and thermal variation that it receives
would challenge the skills of even the best engineers to come up with
ways to maintain alignment. It would be a waste of time and money to
implement such countermeasures to ensure that factory alignment was
maintained during shipping. If a manufacturer really wants to ensure
the best customer experience, then they should sell through dealers
who provide accurate setup and alignment at no extra charge. But, in
this "big box" retail world, it's not a very practical option.

In the 16 years that I've been making TS-Aligners (many thousands of
units), I think I've heard from only 3-4 customers who said that their
machine was accurately aligned from the factory. I chalk it up to
pure luck.

Ed Bennett


http://www.ts-aligner.com
Home of the TS-Aligner