I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade.

This actually sounds like a feed technique problem or bad material that may
be case hardened such that it bows after being cut. To eleminate that
possibility og bad stock try cutting MDF or plywood.



As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly.

The only place that you want to use a feather board is in front of the
blade, NOT the back side.


I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

You can easily check the blade to slot alignment with your miter gauge.
Attach a piece of wood to the miter gauge so that the end of the wood is
about 3/4" from the blade. Screw a screw into that end of the board so that
it just comes in contact with the side of a tooth on the front of the blade.
Rotate the blade so that the "same" tooth is at the back side, slide the
miter gauge back and compare the measurement again. For the most accuracy
raise the blade to its full up position and be sure to have the saw
unplugged during this process.

Once you are happy with that adjustment adjust the fence to be dead on
parallel to the same miter slot used to align the blade to the miter slot.
You can simply use a piece of wood, thinner than the miter slot, to slide
down the face of the fence into the slot. Check the clearance at several
points if the fence is not parallel the piece of wood should hit the table
surface and not go down into the slot. Make a test cut and adjust
accordingly.



BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

That is what a decent fence should do.

Look into books by Kelly Mehler.

It's worth the $20. We could go over all the steps, but I think you'll find
the book worthwhile.


"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

On Feb 25, 10:43 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

The only place that you want to use a feather board is in front of the
blade, NOT the back side.

I didn't specify it's location, but that's where I have it. See, cos I
have this thing about taking a board to the mid section.

On Feb 25, 12:28 pm, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

...

With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive measuring
tools'. There is an easy way to get your fence dead on balls accurate and
you can then eliminate that as a potential cause of your problem.

http://www.garagewoodworks.com/TS_aligner.htm

--www.garagewoodworks.com


You have Jr.? I assume you think it was worth 133.00. How often do you
use it?

I have a hunch either your blade is not parallel with the miter slot or the
fence is not parallel with the blade.

Here's how you can fix that for WAY LESS than the prices of some of the
tools recommended by others. Get yourself an adequate dial indicator
(Harbor Freight has them). Cut a square end on piece of narrow hardwood and
screw the housing of the dial indicator to it (it would be better of you
bevel the hardwood so the indicator plunger touches near the bottom of your
saw fence).

Clamp the assembly to your miter gauge (if necessary, shim the miter gauge
guide bar so it doesn't drift in the slot).

Raise the blade to full height and mark a tooth with a marker. Check the
blade by measuring the marked tooth nearest the front of the table, rotate
the blade so the marked tooth is at the back and measure again. If the
difference is more than .002-.003, adjust the blade to be parallel with the
miter slot.

After aligning the blade, reclamp the dial indicator rig in the miter gauge
so it will reach the fence (you can position the fence fairly close to the
blade). Measure the fence along its full length from the front of the table
to the back. It should vary no more than .005 and the back should be the
longest measurement so the work piece won't bind when being cut.

For around $20 and a little work, you should see an improvement.
"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
On Feb 25, 10:43 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

The only place that you want to use a feather board is in front of the
blade, NOT the back side.

I didn't specify it's location, but that's where I have it. See, cos I
have this thing about taking a board to the mid section.

Ok then, Since you said, I can"correct" this problem with a feather guide,


If the feather board in the correct position solves the problem, your
technique is probably the problem.

Yep..that's exactly it.. for contractor type saws.. need to loosen trunion
bolts and move it around. For cabinet type saws.. loosen top and slide it
around. Loosen a very little and move in tiny increments. Remember.. we're
talking about .001" here.

On your fence hopefully you have some parallel to slot adjustments and also
perpendicular to table adjustments.

You might also want to look at the flatness of the top.

Also.. add in a homemade splitter if you need to remove the blade guard /
stock splitter. Get a chunk of 1/8" wide metal, cut a hole then slot in the
bottom to slip down onto the bolt that holds the blade guard inplace. Cut
the metal off about 1" above the table. You can make one that sticks 1/4"
and 2" if you want for thos times when you cut grooves. It's not as good as
a riving knive, but pretty close... and can significantly reduce kickback.

If you can picture all this then you have the info.. if not.. like I said,
see Kelly Mehler's books... I got one starting out and it's worth it.

"Chuck Hoffman" wrote in message
. net...
I have a hunch either your blade is not parallel with the miter slot or the
fence is not parallel with the blade.

Here's how you can fix that for WAY LESS than the prices of some of the
tools recommended by others. Get yourself an adequate dial indicator
(Harbor Freight has them). Cut a square end on piece of narrow hardwood
and screw the housing of the dial indicator to it (it would be better of
you bevel the hardwood so the indicator plunger touches near the bottom of
your saw fence).

Clamp the assembly to your miter gauge (if necessary, shim the miter gauge
guide bar so it doesn't drift in the slot).

Raise the blade to full height and mark a tooth with a marker. Check the
blade by measuring the marked tooth nearest the front of the table, rotate
the blade so the marked tooth is at the back and measure again. If the
difference is more than .002-.003, adjust the blade to be parallel with
the miter slot.

After aligning the blade, reclamp the dial indicator rig in the miter
gauge so it will reach the fence (you can position the fence fairly close
to the blade). Measure the fence along its full length from the front of
the table to the back. It should vary no more than .005 and the back
should be the longest measurement so the work piece won't bind when being
cut.

For around $20 and a little work, you should see an improvement.
"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote

You have Jr.? I assume you think it was worth 133.00.

If you pay the bucks for a high quality tool, why not spend a fraction of
that to keep it operating at the peak of perfection? If you're really
serious about woodworking, it's indeed a valuable instrument to have in the
shop.

How often do you
use it?

For high quality tools that hold their setting, probably not that often "per
tool", but over the range of tools in the shop that benefit from tweaking
for best performance, probably more than you think. (It's amazing how often
a tool can take an accidental blow in a shop environment, necessitating a
tweak, here and there, for even the best of equipment).

It's also a good feeling, when starting a new project, one you've been
planning for months and just bought the wood for, to spend the time getting
everything tweaked just right in anticipation of milling that new stack ...
sort of a good karma, Zen, ying and yang, up your project chakra, kind of
thing.

Hint: if you have a choice of dial indicators, consider upgrading to the
highest quality one you can afford ... when you start dealing in ten
thousandths of an inch, you'll probably be glad for extra little bit of
accuracy.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Feb 25, 3:38 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

...

On Feb 25, 10:43 am, "Leon" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

The only place that you want to use a feather board is in front of the
blade, NOT the back side.

I didn't specify it's location, but that's where I have it. See, cos I
have this thing about taking a board to the mid section.

Ok then, Since you said, I can"correct" this problem with a feather guide,

If the feather board in the correct position solves the problem, your
technique is probably the problem.

That's certainly possible but I could rip straight without a feather
guide on my last saw (a considerably crappier piece of machinery...)
You can almost set your watch to the path each piece takes as it runs
past the blade.

"Jeff" wrote

That's certainly possible but I could rip straight without a feather
guide on my last saw (a considerably crappier piece of machinery...)
You can almost set your watch to the path each piece takes as it runs
past the blade.

Hold a known straight edge across the length of your fence's face just to
rule out that lack of flatness is not an issue ... little things add up.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

I should have added:

You can check for any bow in your fence with a dial indicator, too. Do the
setup for the fence test as I described above then check the fence along its
entire length. It should should not vary in flatness more than a couple
thousandths from front to back. If both ends are very close in measurement
and the middle has a deflection (one way or the other) of more than
..003-.004, you should find some way to flatten the fence.

One way is to add an auxiliary face using birch ply or melamine laminated
MDF. You may have to shim it (either on both ends or in the middle) to
remove the bow.

If you add an aux fence, you'll have to reset the zero point on your rails.
"Chuck Hoffman" wrote in message
. net...
I have a hunch either your blade is not parallel with the miter slot or the
fence is not parallel with the blade.

Here's how you can fix that for WAY LESS than the prices of some of the
tools recommended by others. Get yourself an adequate dial indicator
(Harbor Freight has them). Cut a square end on piece of narrow hardwood
and screw the housing of the dial indicator to it (it would be better of
you bevel the hardwood so the indicator plunger touches near the bottom of
your saw fence).

Clamp the assembly to your miter gauge (if necessary, shim the miter gauge
guide bar so it doesn't drift in the slot).

Raise the blade to full height and mark a tooth with a marker. Check the
blade by measuring the marked tooth nearest the front of the table, rotate
the blade so the marked tooth is at the back and measure again. If the
difference is more than .002-.003, adjust the blade to be parallel with
the miter slot.

After aligning the blade, reclamp the dial indicator rig in the miter
gauge so it will reach the fence (you can position the fence fairly close
to the blade). Measure the fence along its full length from the front of
the table to the back. It should vary no more than .005 and the back
should be the longest measurement so the work piece won't bind when being
cut.

For around $20 and a little work, you should see an improvement.
"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

On Feb 25, 6:00 pm, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

...

On Feb 25, 12:28 pm, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. wrote:
"Jeff" wrote in message

...
You have Jr.? I assume you think it was worth 133.00. How often do you
use it?

I think it is worth it's weight in gold. I use it before every project
session to check for alignment of various tools. My EB3 miter gauge
usually hangs on my peg board. Before I use it I can check for square
without making a single test cut.

I also make sure my jointer fence is square before squaring leg blanks.

You will be surprised how often you use it. For your case now it would be
a huge asset. You could check your fence front to back and know how far
out of wack (or not) it is (quickly and accurately w/o a single test cut).


Sold. I'll get one in the next billing cycle...

On Feb 25, 7:48 pm, "Chuck Hoffman" wrote:
I should have added:

You can check for any bow in your fence with a dial indicator, too. Do the
setup for the fence test as I described above then check the fence along its
entire length. It should should not vary in flatness more than a couple
thousandths from front to back. If both ends are very close in measurement
and the middle has a deflection (one way or the other) of more than
.003-.004, you should find some way to flatten the fence.

One way is to add an auxiliary face using birch ply or melamine laminated
MDF. You may have to shim it (either on both ends or in the middle) to
remove the bow.


Thanks. I used your method and found the blade is off by .02" The
front of the blade is closer to the fence.

Jeff

"Garage_Woodworks" wrote

I like that! (I had to look up chakra G)

G ... I knew a whole bunch of hippy chicks back in the 60's and we were
always trying to 'up our chakra', in one way or another.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

That's an error of 20 thousandths, or about 10 times the recommended amount.
I'm surprised you don't get some binding or kick-back.

Just think about this for a moment and sketch it out on paper. You'll see
what's happening. The rear of the blade is farther away from the fence than
the front by more than 1/8 of an inch. As you push the workpiece thru, the
kerf will guide it away from the fence because the back of the blade is
farther away. That would explain the initial condition you described.

Do a much more precise blade and fence alignment and your problem should go
away.
"Jeff" wrote in message
...
On Feb 25, 7:48 pm, "Chuck Hoffman" wrote:
I should have added:

You can check for any bow in your fence with a dial indicator, too. Do
the
setup for the fence test as I described above then check the fence along
its
entire length. It should should not vary in flatness more than a couple
thousandths from front to back. If both ends are very close in
measurement
and the middle has a deflection (one way or the other) of more than
.003-.004, you should find some way to flatten the fence.

One way is to add an auxiliary face using birch ply or melamine laminated
MDF. You may have to shim it (either on both ends or in the middle) to
remove the bow.


Thanks. I used your method and found the blade is off by .02" The
front of the blade is closer to the fence.

Jeff

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:50:00 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

Hold a known straight edge across the length of your fence's face just to
rule out that lack of flatness is not an issue ... little things add up.


In the same vein...

Lots of times, the little things can add funky issues.

For instance, a bowed fence can show itself to varying degrees, based
on the length of stock being ripped. Multiple rips from the same
board can get really funky, especially if the board is short. On the
other hand, a board of the right length will bridge the bow and come
out skinnier in the middle. The short and long boards may exhibit
different problems.

"Garage_Woodworks" wrote

"Jones" wrote
You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive
measuring
tools'. There is an easy way to get your fence dead on balls
accurate
and
you can then eliminate that as a potential cause of your problem.

http://www.garagewoodworks.com/TS_aligner.htm

Or, for half the price of that:

http://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-SB-.../dp/B00006RGLB



Ugg. No thanks.

LOL ... not even close to being in the same ballpark, for versatility and
accuracy (... and no wonder he's got his archive bit flipped, I wouldn't
want to archive that recommendation either)


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Jones" wrote in message
news:200802281934188930-at@yourhousenet...
| On 2008-02-28 18:05:17 -0500, "Swingman" said:
|
|
| "Garage_Woodworks" wrote
|
| "Jones" wrote
| You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive

| I guess you're another one of these guys who feels he needs to have
| tolerances within a few ten-thousandths.
|
| Tell me: Does NASA really buy that many items made of wood?

Well, the Russians used oak for heat shields instead of the fancy stuff the
US used.... maybe he should make an offer for shuttle panels?

John

Jones wrote:
On 2008-02-28 18:05:17 -0500, "Swingman" said:


"Garage_Woodworks" wrote

"Jones" wrote
You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive
measuring
tools'. There is an easy way to get your fence dead on balls
accurate
and
you can then eliminate that as a potential cause of your problem.

http://www.garagewoodworks.com/TS_aligner.htm

Or, for half the price of that:

http://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-SB-.../dp/B00006RGLB




Ugg. No thanks.

LOL ... not even close to being in the same ballpark, for versatility and
accuracy (... and no wonder he's got his archive bit flipped, I wouldn't
want to archive that recommendation either)

I guess you're another one of these guys who feels he needs to have
tolerances within a few ten-thousandths.

Tell me: Does NASA really buy that many items made of wood?

Do you ever *cut* any wood? Or just play with calipers and micrometers
and polish the fence?



Kinda new around here huh?

--

Tanus

http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/

John Grossbohlin wrote:
"Jones" wrote in message
news:200802281934188930-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-28 18:05:17 -0500, "Swingman" said:


"Garage_Woodworks" wrote

"Jones" wrote
You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive

I guess you're another one of these guys who feels he needs to have
tolerances within a few ten-thousandths.

Tell me: Does NASA really buy that many items made of wood?

Well, the Russians used oak for heat shields instead of the fancy
stuff the US used.... maybe he should make an offer for shuttle
panels?

Early on the Russians used oak for some RVs. I don't think that that
is what they used on Vostok or Soyuz though. Some sort of wood
composite was used on the Polaris RV, so it wasn't just the Russians.

Trouble with oak is weight. Ever see a Shuttle tile? Set it on a
table and blow on it and it will blow away. Hold it by the corners
and apply an oxyacetylene torch to the center and you don't get
burned. If oak was used then there wouldn't be a whole Hell of a lot
of payload left and it would all have to be replaced after every
flight (oak works by charring--it's a one-shot for reentery).

As for wood inside the spacecraft, there is going to be as little
flammable material as possible--they learned that lesson in the Apollo
fire.




--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Jones" wrote in message
news:2008022816394650073-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-25 12:28:37 -0500, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. said:

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?


You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive measuring
tools'. There is an easy way to get your fence dead on balls accurate
and
you can then eliminate that as a potential cause of your problem.

http://www.garagewoodworks.com/TS_aligner.htm

Or, for half the price of that:

http://www.amazon.com/MasterGage-SB-.../dp/B00006RGLB



And stuff like this may explain why you don't trust the rule on your TS
fence.

"Jones" wrote in message
news:200802281934188930-at@yourhousenet...

I guess you're another one of these guys who feels he needs to have
tolerances within a few ten-thousandths.

Tell me: Does NASA really buy that many items made of wood?


Do you ever *cut* any wood? Or just play with calipers and micrometers and
polish the fence?


You should learn to listen and not spew before you really know what you are
talking about.

"Jones" wrote in message
news:2008022906333150878-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-28 21:11:57 -0500, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. said:

You tell me. (See link below)

You tell me: How many months (or years) did it take you to set up that new
saw when you had to step back and take another picture after putting in
each table-wing bolt and using your digital torque wrench to seat it
within +/- 3 atto-Newton meters of torque?

(Ha, I bet you only used the *old* standard of +/- 3 FEMTO-Newton-meters
of torque on the table wing bolts! Better get back out there and bring
that up to spec, Feynman!)

Snip


Your eyes are brown, aren't they.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
| John Grossbohlin wrote:
| "Jones" wrote in message
| news:200802281934188930-at@yourhousenet...
| On 2008-02-28 18:05:17 -0500, "Swingman" said:
|
|
| "Garage_Woodworks" wrote
|
| "Jones" wrote
| You might want to seriously consider upgrading your 'primitive
|
| I guess you're another one of these guys who feels he needs to have
| tolerances within a few ten-thousandths.
|
| Tell me: Does NASA really buy that many items made of wood?
|
| Well, the Russians used oak for heat shields instead of the fancy
| stuff the US used.... maybe he should make an offer for shuttle
| panels?
|
| Early on the Russians used oak for some RVs. I don't think that that
| is what they used on Vostok or Soyuz though. Some sort of wood
| composite was used on the Polaris RV, so it wasn't just the Russians.
|
| Trouble with oak is weight. Ever see a Shuttle tile? Set it on a
| table and blow on it and it will blow away. Hold it by the corners
| and apply an oxyacetylene torch to the center and you don't get
| burned. If oak was used then there wouldn't be a whole Hell of a lot
| of payload left and it would all have to be replaced after every
| flight (oak works by charring--it's a one-shot for reentery).
|
| As for wood inside the spacecraft, there is going to be as little
| flammable material as possible--they learned that lesson in the Apollo
| fire.

Clearly I should have put a grin on that.... ;~)

John

Jones wrote:
On 2008-02-29 12:23:58 -0500, "Leon" said:


"Jones" wrote in message
news:2008022906333150878-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-28 21:11:57 -0500, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. said:

You tell me. (See link below)

You tell me: How many months (or years) did it take you to set up
that new
saw when you had to step back and take another picture after putting in
each table-wing bolt and using your digital torque wrench to seat it
within +/- 3 atto-Newton meters of torque?

(Ha, I bet you only used the *old* standard of +/- 3 FEMTO-Newton-meters
of torque on the table wing bolts! Better get back out there and bring
that up to spec, Feynman!)

Snip


Your eyes are brown, aren't they.

I only have eyes for you, Leon. You know that.


Couldn't resist. Some of you old farts will remember...

My love must be a kind of blind love
I can't see anyone but you.

Are the stars out tonight?
I don't know if it's cloudy or bright
I Only Have Eyes For You, Dear.

The moon maybe high
but I can't see a thing in the sky,
'Cause I Only Have Eyes For You.

I don't know if we're in a garden,
or on a crowded avenue.

You are here
So am I
Maybe millions of people go by,
but they all disappear from view.
And I Only Have Eyes For You.


And a free slam at the dorker of your choice if you can tell me the name
of the doo-wop group.
doowop shoo bop,
jo4hn

"jo4hn" wrote in message
...

Your eyes are brown, aren't they.

I only have eyes for you, Leon. You know that.


Couldn't resist. Some of you old farts will remember...

My love must be a kind of blind love
I can't see anyone but you.

Are the stars out tonight?
I don't know if it's cloudy or bright
I Only Have Eyes For You, Dear.

The moon maybe high
but I can't see a thing in the sky,
'Cause I Only Have Eyes For You.

I don't know if we're in a garden,
or on a crowded avenue.

You are here
So am I
Maybe millions of people go by,
but they all disappear from view.
And I Only Have Eyes For You.


And a free slam at the dorker of your choice if you can tell me the name
of the doo-wop group.
doowop shoo bop,
jo4hn


The Flamingo's , it was IMHO brilliantly redone in 1976 by Art Garfunkel.
Would you like me to e-mail you a mp3 version of the song?

Jones wrote:
On 2008-02-29 12:23:58 -0500, "Leon" said:


"Jones" wrote in message
news:2008022906333150878-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-28 21:11:57 -0500, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. said:

You tell me. (See link below)

You tell me: How many months (or years) did it take you to set up
that new
saw when you had to step back and take another picture after putting in
each table-wing bolt and using your digital torque wrench to seat it
within +/- 3 atto-Newton meters of torque?

(Ha, I bet you only used the *old* standard of +/- 3 FEMTO-Newton-meters
of torque on the table wing bolts! Better get back out there and bring
that up to spec, Feynman!)

Snip


Your eyes are brown, aren't they.

I only have eyes for you, Leon. You know that.



Ok, ok..Gotta be a troll. No one is that
idiotic right out of the gate. Are they?

--

Tanus

http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/

jo4hn wrote:
Jones wrote:
On 2008-02-29 12:23:58 -0500, "Leon"
said:


"Jones" wrote in message
news:2008022906333150878-at@yourhousenet...
On 2008-02-28 21:11:57 -0500, "Garage_Woodworks" .@. said:

You tell me. (See link below)

You tell me: How many months (or years) did it take you to set up
that new
saw when you had to step back and take another picture after putting in
each table-wing bolt and using your digital torque wrench to seat it
within +/- 3 atto-Newton meters of torque?

(Ha, I bet you only used the *old* standard of +/- 3
FEMTO-Newton-meters
of torque on the table wing bolts! Better get back out there and bring
that up to spec, Feynman!)

Snip


Your eyes are brown, aren't they.

I only have eyes for you, Leon. You know that.


Couldn't resist. Some of you old farts will remember...

My love must be a kind of blind love
I can't see anyone but you.

Are the stars out tonight?
I don't know if it's cloudy or bright
I Only Have Eyes For You, Dear.

The moon maybe high
but I can't see a thing in the sky,
'Cause I Only Have Eyes For You.

I don't know if we're in a garden,
or on a crowded avenue.

You are here
So am I
Maybe millions of people go by,
but they all disappear from view.
And I Only Have Eyes For You.


And a free slam at the dorker of your choice if you can tell me the name
of the doo-wop group.
doowop shoo bop,
jo4hn

Frankiey Valle and the 4 Seasons?

--

Tanus

http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/

On Feb 25, 8:52 am, Jeff wrote:
I got a new table saw (Powermatic 64 Artisan) and I'm having a tuning
problem. When I push the lumber past the blade, the piece starts to
turn away from the fence toward the blade. As a result, the back of
the piece can be 1/16" of an inch narrower than the front. I can
"correct" this problem with a feather guide, but I'd prefer to tune it
correctly. I assume the problem lies with a slight misalignment of
either the fence or the blade. With my primitive measuring tools -
namely a combo square - both the blade and the fence seem aligned with
the table. Any thoughts?

BTW: The Accu-fence rocks! I can dial up 3" and it cuts 3". With my
old saw, I could never trust the stupid guide. I measured each cut
from blade to fence with my combo square.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Sorry to weigh in so late on this topic. Hope my comments will help
you to sort things out.

There are two classic symptoms of poor blade/fence alignment:

1. Burning on the good side of the cut. This occurs when the wood
gets pinched between the rear of the blade and the fence.

2. Wood wandering away from the fence during the cut. This occurs
when the wood follows the lead of the blade rather than the fence. If
you constrain the wood so that it doesn't wander (i.e. feather board),
then there can be burning on the waste side of the cut.

This isn't a technique or a fence flatness issue. You've got classic
symptom #2. Your blade and/or fence are misaligned. The distance
between them at the trailing edge of the blade is greater than at the
leading edge. They should both be parallel to the miter slot (the
reference for blade and fence alignment).

Some people can use the subjective methods ("feel the rub", "hear the
scrape") to detect and correct blade/fence misalignment. I'm not one
of them and based on your current circumstances I would guess that you
aren't either. So, the advice from Garage Woodworks is good. Get
yourself a dial indicator jig. You can make a simple "dial indicator
on a stick":

http://www.ts-aligner.com/tsjrlitevsdistick.htm

and use it with your miter gauge. Or, if you want more functionality
and versatility then you can buy a commercially made jig.

I see Jones has mentioned the "SuperBar" product. I bought one of
these last year for competitive analysis. You can see my review he

http://www.ts-aligner.com/tsjrlitevssb.htm

This falls short of a dial indicator on a stick on two counts:

1. It's a lot more expensive. You can get a decent (comparable) dial
indicator for less than $20 and the rest (a stick and a wood screw) is
probably sitting in your shop right now. That puts it at less than
half the cost of a SuperBar.

2. It's not as easily adjusted. You can slide a stick against the
miter gauge and position the dial indicator exactly where you want
it. The SuperBar does not allow you to change the position of the
dial indicator. You either bring the object to the dial indicator or
add stylus extensions to the end of the plunger. See the review for
details.

There are lots of other jigs on the market, I suggest you judge them
by the same standard: the cost and versatility of a dial indicator on
a stick. Most won't fair so well. If you are going to spend money on
a dial indicator jig, get one that has features and functionality that
exceeds that of a jig that will take you less than 10 minutes to make
and cost you less than $20.

Contrary to what was said, there is no accuracy difference between a
SuperBar, a TS-Aligner Jr., or a dial indicator on a stick. One might
be easier to use or more versatile but they all use a 0.001"/div dial
indicator. Allusions to "NASA" and "ten-thousandths of an inch" are
absurd. Don't get fooled by such nonsense or discouraged by demeaning
statements about the quality or craftsmanship of your woodworking
(i.e. "Do you ever *cut* any wood? Or just play with calipers and
micrometers and polish the fence?"). This says more about the critic
than it does about you.

I see Swingman has recommended a TS-Aligner Jr. (thanks!). But, as I
have seen several times now, he recommends getting it with the highest
cost dial indicator you can afford. Actually, this goes contrary to
what I generally recommend. You should get the lowest cost dial
indicator that will suit your needs. Let me explain...

1. There is no significant accuracy difference between the lowest cost
"made in China" dial indicator and the highest cost domestic brand.
They all provide accuracy that exceeds the application (woodworking
machinery alignment) by a good margin (5x). You will not be dealing
in ten-thousandths of an inch and any attempt to do so would be
extremely futile and frustrating.

2. The big differences that you see as move up to the higher cost dial
indicators is in durability and sensitivity. The lowest cost model
has simple brass gears and brass bushing bearings. The high-end
models have hardened steel gear trains, shock-proof movements, and
jeweled bearings. They are made for the rigors of industrial use.

3. I added some new dial indicators to the lineup with 0.0005"/div
accuracy when I introduced the SawStop version of TS-Aligner Jr. The
only reason I did this was to satisfy the recommendation in the
SawStop User's Manual. The best I can figure is that they want to
follow the Metrologist's 10x rule of thumb. I've been in this
business for 17 years and have done a lot of testing. I have yet to
see any tangible benefit for reducing alignment error to less than
0.005". I think a 0.001"/div indicator is an excellent and low cost
solution.

If you are a home shop user, and you take good care of your tools,
then the low cost Chinese indicator will work great and serve you for
many years. If you run a commercial shop and need tools that can
survive industrial abuse, then it would be wise to buy something
better.

This is what I told Swingman when he called to order his Jr. He ended
up following my advice by purchasing the MHC (Chinese) dial
indicator. But, if he now feels that he should have purchased a high-
end indicator then I would be happy to make the exchange for him.
Personally, it doesn't matter to me. I pretty much break even on dial
indicators.

That should pretty much cover most of it. Let me know if you have any
questions.

Thanks,
Ed Bennett


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