I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
what's the consensus amongst the group?
Thanks
"Bruce" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 14:59:52 -0700, SBH wrote
> (in article <[email protected]>):
>
>> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the
>> placement
>> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
>> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a
>> limited
>> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus,
>> making
>> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought
>> leans
>> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
>> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
>> what's the consensus amongst the group?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
> In my opinion it's is probably more a mater of convention. Rear connection
> is
> easier to access and less prone to falling off. Also, with a router
> table/cabinet a bottom connection would eat up a chunk of drawer storage.
>
> -Bruce
>
That's exactly the main reason I wouldn't want to go bottom. I originally
had an idea to use it for space whether a drawer or just an open cavity for
another router or accessories. But if it provided a better dust removing
ability, I would sacrifice the extra storage.
I have both. in the fence and I built a pvc shroud that grabs what it
can from the shaft of the motor.
When cutting grooves this does the best job below the table.
When cutting with the bit in the fence then the normal fence mounted
works best.
Neither is perfect. Some will still get kicked out the side.
On 12/19/2010 4:59 PM, SBH wrote:
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the
> placement of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most
> tables have the hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the
> router) but saw a limited few which had the attachment on the bottom
> (under the router), thus, making me wonder if one has the advantage over
> the other. Part of my thought leans towards the bottom placement due to
> the gravity effect. The other part thinks it may not make a difference
> with a powerful DC system. Therefore, what's the consensus amongst the
> group?
>
> Thanks
On Dec 19, 3:59=A0pm, "SBH" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placeme=
nt
> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limi=
ted
> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, maki=
ng
> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought lea=
ns
> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
> what's the consensus amongst the group?
>
> Thanks
I have a router table built into my cabinet saw, with a large,
adjustable fence that attaches to the saw fence. The dust collection
port is a 6" compartment that slants from above the blade to behind
the blade. A vacuum attachment is installed on the slanted piece. It
works well, but obviously some of the stuff gets out the bottom. I
believe it partially depends on how the bit fits with the table
insert. Large bits like radius or ogee seem best. Small diameter
bits seem to be less effective. At any rate it keeps at least 1/2 or
more of the chips off of the floor. Large molding runs, with a big
bit probably put 2/3 - 3/4 of the stuff in the vacuum.
Take a look at last month's Fine Woodworking. They featured an table
saw router table that had a interesting dust collection system. Dual
port with one on the fence and one built into a collection box beneath
the table. The lower one collected from a dust or vacuum system and
used to routers collection too. Kinda complicated but it looked like
it might work well. Made me think I might redo mine some day.
BTW, in spite of having dust collection now, I plan to keep using my
shop vac.
RonB
"SBH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the
> placement of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables
> have the hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but
> saw a limited few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the
> router), thus, making me wonder if one has the advantage over the other.
> Part of my thought leans towards the bottom placement due to the gravity
> effect. The other part thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful
> DC system. Therefore, what's the consensus amongst the group?
>
> Thanks
My arrangement:
http://picasaweb.google.com/contrarian32/Routers#5389276365652311026
Very little dust escapes *unless* I'm routing a dado or some configuration
where the dust gets trapped and can only escape horizontally.
Max
"Max" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:4d0ea6fe$0$19635>
>
>
> My arrangement:
> http://picasaweb.google.com/contrarian32/Routers#5389276365652311026
>
> Very little dust escapes *unless* I'm routing a dado or some configuration
> where the dust gets trapped and can only escape horizontally.
>
> Max
That's how I expect to do mine. Thank you
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
> what's the consensus amongst the group?
Don't put it where it fights the cooling fan on the router.
"SBH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the
> placement of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables
> have the hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but
> saw a limited few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the
> router), thus, making me wonder if one has the advantage over the other.
> Part of my thought leans towards the bottom placement due to the gravity
> effect. The other part thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful
> DC system. Therefore, what's the consensus amongst the group?
>
> Thanks
It all depends on what you are doing, cutting groves, noting gets caught.
My DC Collector hose is connected directyly to the fence behind the bit
opening. Works well when the debris can get through.
SBH wrote:
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the
> placement of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most
> tables have the hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the
> router) but saw a limited few which had the attachment on the bottom
> (under the router), thus, making me wonder if one has the advantage over
> the other. Part of my thought leans towards the bottom placement due to
> the gravity effect. The other part thinks it may not make a difference
> with a powerful DC system. Therefore, what's the consensus amongst the
> group?
>
Never seen any that collected all that much; you'll need the hood in the
lateral location to keep chips from going off horizontally.
--
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 16:59:52 -0500, "SBH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
>of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
>hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
>few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
>me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
>towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
>thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
I'd use a bucket/trashcan under an open hole in the base cabinet, and
a DC collector up top. Most of the waste will tend to come up with
the bit upside down in a top like that. Gravity only happenswhen the
fast-moving waste stops moving fast. That pretty much doesn't happen
within inches of the bit.
>what's the consensus amongst the group?
Consensus, in THIS group? Har! He make joke!
--
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country
against his government." --Edward Abbey
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 14:59:52 -0700, SBH wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):
> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
> what's the consensus amongst the group?
>
> Thanks
>
In my opinion it's is probably more a mater of convention. Rear connection is
easier to access and less prone to falling off. Also, with a router
table/cabinet a bottom connection would eat up a chunk of drawer storage.
-Bruce
"SBH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I will also have the hose connected to the fence in addition to the router
> box exit hose. I'm just wondering if there's an advantage of one over the
> other.
>
> Thanks
>
>
I find that very little actually goes down inside the cabinet with the hose
connected tot he fence. Because routers blow down, up when mounted upside
down most the debris stays outside the cabinet. Like a TS you simply cannot
contain all of it and a little goes every where. After a routing table run
I simply open the cabinet doors and suck out the debris that escaped the
fence opening. If you are cutting dado's it is virtually impossible to
contain any of the waste.
You can mount a hose in both locations, the fence and inside the cabinet,
but I would speculate that the hose in the cabinet will not catch much more
than no hose at all. YMMV
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 18:15:57 -0600, "Leon" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>You can mount a hose in both locations, the fence and inside the cabinet,
>but I would speculate that the hose in the cabinet will not catch much more
>than no hose at all. YMMV
>
I don't know how much it catches, but I know it works great for
cleaning off the table after the bit has stopped. I just brush
everything with my hand and anything within 2 inches of the opening
gets sucked right in. My Triton is pretty well enclosed and has a
1-1/4" port built in. So when the fence is open most of the air is
being pulled from the larger opening up top, when the fence is closed
it all goes to the lower port.
It also really sucks down on the part which is kind of like having an
automatic featherboard.
-Kevin
Yep there are some things a shop vac is better at.
In many cases you will starve a DC with a small sander, the old style
Delta band saw port, a single 2 inch router fence port.
You probably won't starve it if you have fence and cabinet makeup.
On 12/21/2010 8:49 AM, RonB wrote:
> On Dec 19, 3:59 pm, "SBH"<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
>> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
>> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
>> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
>> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
>> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
>> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
>> what's the consensus amongst the group?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> I have a router table built into my cabinet saw, with a large,
> adjustable fence that attaches to the saw fence. The dust collection
> port is a 6" compartment that slants from above the blade to behind
> the blade. A vacuum attachment is installed on the slanted piece. It
> works well, but obviously some of the stuff gets out the bottom. I
> believe it partially depends on how the bit fits with the table
> insert. Large bits like radius or ogee seem best. Small diameter
> bits seem to be less effective. At any rate it keeps at least 1/2 or
> more of the chips off of the floor. Large molding runs, with a big
> bit probably put 2/3 - 3/4 of the stuff in the vacuum.
>
> Take a look at last month's Fine Woodworking. They featured an table
> saw router table that had a interesting dust collection system. Dual
> port with one on the fence and one built into a collection box beneath
> the table. The lower one collected from a dust or vacuum system and
> used to routers collection too. Kinda complicated but it looked like
> it might work well. Made me think I might redo mine some day.
>
> BTW, in spite of having dust collection now, I plan to keep using my
> shop vac.
>
> RonB
Yep there are some things a shop vac is better at.
In many cases you will starve a DC with a small sander, the old style
Delta band saw port, a single 2 inch router fence port.
You probably won't starve it if you have fence and cabinet makeup.
On 12/21/2010 8:49 AM, RonB wrote:
> On Dec 19, 3:59 pm, "SBH"<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm midway to finishing my router table and I'm contemplating the placement
>> of the Dust Collection connector hose. I've noticed most tables have the
>> hose attached to the rear of the table (behind the router) but saw a limited
>> few which had the attachment on the bottom (under the router), thus, making
>> me wonder if one has the advantage over the other. Part of my thought leans
>> towards the bottom placement due to the gravity effect. The other part
>> thinks it may not make a difference with a powerful DC system. Therefore,
>> what's the consensus amongst the group?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> I have a router table built into my cabinet saw, with a large,
> adjustable fence that attaches to the saw fence. The dust collection
> port is a 6" compartment that slants from above the blade to behind
> the blade. A vacuum attachment is installed on the slanted piece. It
> works well, but obviously some of the stuff gets out the bottom. I
> believe it partially depends on how the bit fits with the table
> insert. Large bits like radius or ogee seem best. Small diameter
> bits seem to be less effective. At any rate it keeps at least 1/2 or
> more of the chips off of the floor. Large molding runs, with a big
> bit probably put 2/3 - 3/4 of the stuff in the vacuum.
>
> Take a look at last month's Fine Woodworking. They featured an table
> saw router table that had a interesting dust collection system. Dual
> port with one on the fence and one built into a collection box beneath
> the table. The lower one collected from a dust or vacuum system and
> used to routers collection too. Kinda complicated but it looked like
> it might work well. Made me think I might redo mine some day.
>
> BTW, in spite of having dust collection now, I plan to keep using my
> shop vac.
>
> RonB