In article <[email protected]>, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:ABI%[email protected]...
>
>> >I suppose you'd have a big crisis if I mentioned I am also perfectly
>> >comfortable cutting something freehand on a table saw as well! --dave
>>
>> No, I won't have a big crisis from you mentioning it, but *you* will some
>day
>> from *doing* it. That's just not a smart idea.
>>
>
>Not necessarily at all Doug. I'd agree that short cuts done free hand offer
>a significant potential for problems. The smaller the piece, the more
>likely it is that you can't control the travel of the piece through the
>blade accurately enough to maintain a proper straight path. However, long
>rips do not pose the same threats. He's not in any way guaranteed to have a
>problem by cutting freehand - depending on what the definition of freehand
>is.
Mabe we'd better agree on a definition first. My definition of a freehand cut
is one in which only the operator's hands are used to guide the work past the
blade (this would include hand-held pushsticks etc), without using a guide of
any sort -- no fences, jigs, fixtures, sleds, whatever, just the hands and
hand-held devices.
> I have been forced to make many free hand cuts on a table saw over the
>years.
Forced how/why?
>It's not my prefered technique or approach, but I've done it. You'd
>have to do more than simply assert that this is something that *will* some
>day result in a big crisis.
OK, change that to "will probably"... It's not a good idea.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Want to do a pol? I doubt very many will be on your side. I came very close
to doing the same thing to you as Leon did.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> IOW... you know you lost the argument, but won't admit it... LOL
>
> --
I guess there are two "David"s, but I agree with the other one.
The other risks are the usual
No guard. Pushing a hand into the cutting path to block kickback. No
outfeed support, requiring a lot of downpressure at the end of the cut.
If it binds, the hand goes into the blade. (Sometimes even with a
pushstick.) The monotony of repetitive tasks. Alcohol (believe it or
not) and fatigue. Knots. Freehand cuts and pieces that are too small.
Failure to use pushsticks. Lots of injuries occur after the cut --
reaching over the blade and running a hand or forearm over the
invisible, spinning teeth. Distraction (either sudden - a tap on the
shoulder during a cut or chronic - dwelling on other problems while
working). Time pressure to finish a job. I believe that carelessness and
poor technique play a big role, but people differ on what they consider
careless (note the thread on "watching the blade"), and what is
appropriate technique.
David
David wrote:
> Bruce Barnett wrote:
>
>> What are the most frequent causes to accidents with tablesaws?
>>
>>
> Carelessness. Failure to understand and/or proper cutting techniques.
I'll side with Mortimer and Nigel. As a hand surgeon, I've probably
cared for close to 1000 table saw injuries in my career. (At least one
or two a week for the last 15 years.) So far, I have NEVER seen a table
saw injury in a woodworker using a guard. The cuts that are hard to do
with a guard (such as freehanding on the tablesaw - mentioned above)
ought to be rethought. (Some exceptions are dados on guards with a
built in splitter, and some thin rips.) I've heard every excuse -- "the
power was off and the blade was coasting", "I saw the blade but not the
teeth", and "I was just trimming a little bit. . . "
While few of these injuries are life-changing (although I've seem my
share of those), all are lifelong -- stiffness, cold intolerance,
barosensitivity, nail deformities, decreased sensation, regional pain
syndromes, cosmetic abnormalities, etc. In most patients they improve
with time, but do not always go away.
Needless to say, I use the guard user whenever possible. When not
possible, I look to other tools, or exercise even more care than usual.
David S.
Nigel Burnett wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:10:28 GMT, [email protected] (Doug Miller) wrote:
>
>
>>In article <%[email protected]>, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>>
>>>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
>
> I took mine off 25 years ago and left it off util a year and a half ago. Then I caught my the first finger of my left
> (non-dominant) hand in the blade. It was 95% off, just hanging by the skin and one small artery. After two hours
> in the operating room and six months of physiotherapy, it is now slightly functional. It goes up and down but
> it doesn't bend as the blade went through the PIP joint. My physiotherapist learned the word 'kerf'.
>
> The blade guard has stayed on (except for dados) every since.
>
> The pain in the finger is minor but ever-present. Cold weather bothers it a lot as the circulation is buggered up.
> Getting older is going to be a bitch as it will become seriously arthritic.
>
> If you insist on keeping the blade guard off, move to a country with socialised medical system.
>
> Nigel
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 03:15:41 GMT, zap <[email protected]> wrote:
>Well My Friend, There are some who can, and will, learn by what others
>have experienced, but there are always some who insist on learning the
>hard way, insisting that they just have to do it their way.
>
>Every one of us who got cut up on a saw, or banged up on a motorcycle
>was sure that it would not happen to us, we were just too good and
>careful.
Hardly a fair comparison because there's a lot not in your control
(e.g. other drivers) when you're on a bike.
>
>Have fun in the Emergency Room of the hospital, and when you come out,
>please write and tell us about your blade guard and if it is still on
>your shelf gathering dust.
>
>I myself have no problem with you leaving your blade guard off, It's not
>my fingers that will be gone, it will be like my son who lost his finger
>just that way. Thought he could work faster without the blade guard, but
>now is slower just because he is trying to make the other fingers (which
>were damaged) still work. Well you have had enough warnings, now go
>ahead and have your accident. It's your privilage to do so.
>
I have the utmost respect for the tablesaw anytime I have it running.
Take a lot of care to keep fingers and such away from spinning blade
and never rush. It's an imposing tool so it's hard to forget the
respect part.
Use push sticks and such.
Sure, there's always a chance an accident could happen, but it's more
likely to be something other than "accidentally" sticking my hand in
the blade.
My couple cents...
Renata
>Zap
>
>CW wrote:
>> "zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:Rxd%[email protected]...
>>
>>>The first time that you put your finger or hand into the spinning blade,
>>>it will make a lifelong believer of you to use that blade guard.
>>>
>>>I was a young and stupid teenager when I did it, and the only thing that
>>>saved me, and only left me with a scar, was that I had just as stupidly
>>>put the blade on backward.
>>
>>
>> The sure way not to get cut is not to stick your hand in the blade.
>>
>>>Remember this, it is not a question of IF, it is a question of WHEN!!!
>>
>>
>> For you, maybe.
>>
>>
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I don't. The saw I have didn't come with one. I got it used and the
guard wasn't included.
I am however building an overhead guard for it. The guard I'm building
is made of 3/8 lexan on an overhead mount, It'll be wide enough that I
can also do dado's on it. For the plans just do a search on lexan
blade gaurd in the rec. There are several sites with the instructions.
I had a close call and was lucky that's all it was... Was doing a
series of cuts on several pieces, got too cozy with it and didn't shut
off between cuts, in the process of moving back across the blade the
wood brushed the blade.... ZING!!!! I did a quick inventory, got to
ten and decided a guard might be a good idea.
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
When I had my Craftsman I always used the guard for through cutting
and would have preferred to have a suspended guard for dado/grooving,
etc. Shortly after upgrading to a Unisaw I added a Uniguard and I use
it for all types of cutting. I really enjoy the "security" a blade
guard offers - even for non through cuts - but I don't let my own guard
down and become careless.
As a side note, several weeks ago I posted a message about a
potential accident that occurred when my basket guard caused the table
insert to lift due to some adhesive that got stuck from a previous cut.
I was able to shut off the saw before the blade made contact with the
insert. This just adds to the fact that you need to be careful and
mindful of everything when using a table saw, irrespective of the
safety devices and guards that it is fitted with.
Marc
Warning- I am biased- I manufacture a safety tool for ripping.
But you shoud really know- there is a better way to rip wood than using
your fingers.
I have ripped over 5 million linear feet of thin, knotty, warped, and
cupped lumber over the last 15 years at woodworking shows without
kickbacks or fingers near the blade.
I get to see the short fingers for three days per weekend at
woodworking shows. A question I ask is "Has anyone in this group (of
10 or so) tangled with a tablesaw?" Almost always someone has.
Usually the fingers have been sewed up or back on, but do not work as
well anymore.
The key to finger safety when ripping or dadoing is to use something
other than your fingers to hold the wood against the fence, down (both
before and after the blade), and use something other than your fingers
to push the wood by the blade.
Question:
How often do you use a featherboard instead of your fingers?
The reason you don't is that clamped feather boards take too long
to clamp in place and remove. You use them only when you have to.
The solution is a magnetic featherboard or roller feeder that sets up
with one hand, as quick as putting your fingers there- Something you
actually use. It exists- and 250,000 table saw owners use it on every
rip, and jointer cut.
I apologize for the rant, but I have seen too many short fingers to
keep quiet.
Jerry Jaksha
http:// www.grip-tite.com
PS: we are giving away 25 Grip-Tites to public school shop programs
this fall- please tell any shop teachers you know about this.
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
Doug Miller wrote:
> In article <%[email protected]>, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> >today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
> >
> >Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
> I do, whenever possible. The reason is simple: the blade is inside the guard.
> If you keep your fingers outside the guard, they can't come in contact with
> the blade.
>
Bingo!
It is astonishing how many people (the "I have to see the spinning
blade to know it's there crowd") indicate they haven't figured that
out.
--
FF
Doug Miller wrote:
> ...
> >
> >If it had a guard, I might take my eyes off it, and forget about the
> >blade. So the guard might make me more comfortable, and less cautious.
> >
> Sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense. You don't need to see the blade
> in the first place, so taking your eyes off of it doesn't matter. You don't
> (or at least shouldn't) need to be able to see the blade in order to remember
> that it's there, and that it's dangerous. You don't need to see it in order to
> make a proper cut, because the cut path is determined by the setting of your
> rip fence, miter gauge, or whatever you're using to guide the wood past the
> blade. So what purpose does it serve to watch the blade?
>
No kidding. I'd rather not be in the same shop as a person who can
use a tool to cut off a 2 x 4, and yet not realize that it is dangerous
unless he can see the spinning blade!
--
FF
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
Yes. Unless cut is not "through". Makita 2704 has very nice guard,
splitter, anti-kickback pawls. In/out in 30 sec.
Push-sticks are in-hand before commencing cut, unless both hands
will remain at least 10" away from blade, at absolute minimum.
Failing-safe very important too- continuously tracking highest possible
threat to extremities, and limiting that to zero. Stuff happens fast.
J
I use a bladeguard any time it doesn't impede an operation and I
require 350+ college student shop users to do the same. Back when I
didn't have to set an example, I hated bladeguards as much as the next
guy, but after a few years of using 'em, I get uncomfortable when it
should be there but isn't.
Of course most stock guards are worthless and are thrown out for a
reason. Aftermarket overheads are pretty good or you can build your
own or just get a new saw (a good excuse for a new tool!!). The new PM
has a riving knife as does the sawstop. I think I recently heard that
riving knifes will be required on new saws in 09? (I'll check this out
at work tomorrrow) So if your looking for new equipment, you might put
it off to see what happens with this.
We use Beismeyer overheads. The cheezy adjustment bolts are removed,
so it's an easy slide of the telescoping tubes to tweak the location of
the guard or to push it out of the way for narrow rips.
We have SawStops, so the riving knives are ALWAYS(nearly) there,
invisibly making stock go straight and preventing binding. I actually
worry that our students will get into trouble if they use saws without
riving knifes in some other setting: the riving knives almost make
things too easy.
BTW: we have not changed any sop's with the advent of sawstops, they're
just another layer of protection.
I agree that watching the blade is not necessarily sound practice. You
really cannot discern what your stock is doing if your fixating on the
blade spinning 'round. If you're ripping, it's much more important to
keep an eye on the edge of your stock against the rip fence so that you
know that it's going straight and can adjust accordingly if it isn't.
The blade is going to spin and cut, you should be concentrating on
making the stock go straight.
I've got 2 unbending, shorter-than-the-other fingers due to an
unguarded tablesaw that I got into when I was in college. I've been
preventing it from happening to other students for 12 years now. Blade
guards (and sawstops) are a no-brainer.
If you don't use a guard you're just asking for trouble.
I don't care how experienced, careful, knowledgable or invincible you
are, WHY would you leave that spinning blade out in the open when you
can put something over it.
Kevin Groenke
University of Minnesota
College of Design - FabLab
Roger Haar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I try to use the guard/splitter/antikick back thing when I can.
> There are times such as when cutting dadoes when it does not work. I
> have practiced installing and removing the guard so that the process is
> relatively quick. Also I try to plan my cuts to minimize switching cut
> types. I do not have a guard on my cutoff sled, mostly, because I have
> not figured out a good design, that would not get it the way of my
> product runs of 100 identical pieces.
>
> With that said, my biggest safety feature has been the constant
> training of myself to put my full attention on the saw if the blade is
> spinning. If there is a distraction or I feel even a bit dazed or
> tired, the saw gets turned off immediately. No "One more cut."
>
> Thanks
> Roger Haar
>
> *******************************************************************************
> Samson wrote:
> > I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> > today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
> >
> > Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
Bruce Barnett wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
>
> > No kidding. I'd rather not be in the same shop as a person who can
> > use a tool to cut off a 2 x 4, and yet not realize that it is dangerous
> > unless he can see the spinning blade!
>
> That's not the point at all. Are you telling me that people who had
> accidents with a table saw didn't THINK it was dangerous?
No.
That's what they tell me when they say they need to see
the blade to maintain an awareness that it is there and
dangerous.
>
> The cause of most accidents are (I would guess) inattention,
> stupidity, and ignorance. And I bet that most seasoned woodworkers
> have accidents with tablesaws because of inattention.
Agreed.
>
> My attention won't wander while I'm watching that blade.
>
Why would it wander if there was a guard over the blade?
Out of sight, out of mind?
--
FF
The Grip-tite fins are made from polycarbonate-(lexan). We do guarantee
that they will last at least 2 years. They will eventuallly wear out if
you are cutting corian or run a millwork shop cutting lots of
hardwoods. (on oak, etc. they tend to wear at the sharp wood corner.)
After that they cost $1.50 / pair to replace...
You should not spray wd40 or other sprays on them. Polycarbonate gets
brittle when sprayed with that kind of stuff.
Amost all the fins we replace are ones which the blade has eaten,
instead of fingers.
Jerry
Locutus wrote:
> "jack the ripper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Jerry Jaksha
> > http:// www.grip-tite.com
> >
> > PS: we are giving away 25 Grip-Tites to public school shop programs
> > this fall- please tell any shop teachers you know about this.
> >
>
> I use the grip-tite and really like it. Thanks for the good product. (though
> I am skeptical about how long the plastic fins will last...)
Frank Boettcher wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I don't believe it.
> >
> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
> thousand a year.
Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
were not adequately successful.
>
> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
> technical experts in depositions.
I would think that only a small number of table saw
injuries result in a personal injury claim being filed,
if you mean lawsuits, more if you mean workman's
comp and still more if you include health insurance
claims. E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
is not likely to even consider suing.
Surgeon specialists can do a lot of work. When my
father had bypass surgery it was his surgeon's thrid
operation of the day, and it was only mid-afternoon.
I amskeptical of that number if if refers only to
table saw injuries. It is borderline believable that a
hand-surgery specialist would perform 1000 surgeries
per year for power saw (of all sorts) injuries. It is
entirely beleiveable that she would have a thousand
face-to-face, or face-to-hand visits for saw-injuries
if you include simple stiching, pre-surgical consultation,
and follow-up.
Suppose ahand-specialist performs an average of
five operations a day, five days a week, (allowing
two days for consultaion, doing rounds etc). That's
1250 operations a year. Unless she is a table-saw-
injury-hand-surgeon specialist that seems unrealistic.
The statistic that I do believe is ZERO tramatic
amputations or other injuries from contact with the
blade when using a guard.
Problems with poorly designed or utilized guards
can cause kick-back but it is pretty hard to imagine
one that brings a body-part into contact with the blade.
BTW, The Cleveland Clinic does research on animals
and so has some veterinarians on staff. For restoring
traumaticly amputated fingers, it was routine, and may
still be routine, for a verterinarian surgeon to assist
as he was _really_ expert at working on a small
scale.
--
FF
David wrote:
> Samson wrote:
> > I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> > today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
> >
> > Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
> NO. I'm not going to stick my feet in my lawnmower and I'm not going to
> put my hands into my tablesaw blade. The guard is more trouble that
> it's worth. If I was cutting tons of MDF all day, then a guard with DC
> would be a must.
>
> Dave
How about another similar bone-of-contention for some years back-
seat-belts in cars. In that case, too, the unexpected happened very
quickly,
leaving you no options. Even using them, you still have to drive
reasonably;
in neither case could you be said to be recklessly risking yourself in
traffic.
Seat belts are probably a bother and a nuisance to some, for a while.
My sons were gotten accustomed to them from their first ride, and feel
very exposed now, in their twenties, without being buckled in. One of
them is alive because of using proper restraints; the other escaped
possibly major injury.
If you're going to be involved in sports-car competition, you will have
an
approved 5-point harness strapping you in. No discussion.
If I use proper safety-equipment and procedures on t/s, I can make my
probability of amputation be zero. Saves cleaning up blood-spatter too.
HTH,
J
Frank Boettcher wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I don't believe it.
> >> >
> >> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
> >> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
> >> thousand a year.
> >
> >Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
> >
> >My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
> >but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
> >were not adequately successful.
> >
> >>
> >> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
> >> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
> >> technical experts in depositions.
> >
> E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
> >is not likely to even consider suing.
>
> Not accurate.
How is that not accurate?
> Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
I didn't deny that cases are filed or won. I speculated that
a home-user who removed his guard is not likely to even
consider suing. That implies that such suits would be rare,
not nonexistant, although no one in thid thread has presented
an example of such a suit--yet, despite the fact that we have
had examples of accidents presented.
> Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
> either puts them in a bad position in an action.
Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
Another reason may be that most of the injuries that do require
professional treatment are (hopefully) relatively trivial--mere
stitches
required.
Kep in mind that there is a reason why you see news items about
people winning seemingly trivial suits--they are rare. If they were
commonplace, they wouldn't be newsworthy.
--
FF
Frank Boettcher wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2006 12:07:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >I don't believe it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
> >> >> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
> >> >> thousand a year.
> >> >
> >> >Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
> >> >
> >> >My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
> >> >but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
> >> >were not adequately successful.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
> >> >> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
> >> >> technical experts in depositions.
> >> >
> >> E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
> >> >is not likely to even consider suing.
> >>
> >> Not accurate.
> >
> >How is that not accurate?
> >
> >> Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
> >
> >I didn't deny that cases are filed or won. I speculated that
> >a home-user who removed his guard is not likely to even
> >consider suing. That implies that such suits would be rare,
> >not nonexistant, although no one in thid thread has presented
> >an example of such a suit--yet, despite the fact that we have
> >had examples of accidents presented.
> >
>
> And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
But you actually discuss a matter not dispositive as to
the question of what proportion of the injured sues or
seriously considers suing.
It is not that your comments are wrong or even questionable,
they just don't address that particular question.
>
> >> Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
> >> either puts them in a bad position in an action.
> >
> >Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
> >themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
> >They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
> >but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
> >if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
> >manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
> >
> >Another reason may be that most of the injuries that do require
> >professional treatment are (hopefully) relatively trivial--mere
> >stitches
> >required.
> >
> >Keep in mind that there is a reason why you see news items about
> >people winning seemingly trivial suits--they are rare. If they were
> >commonplace, they wouldn't be newsworthy.
>
> And I would contend that you are in error with this statement also.
> I've served on the liability committee of a fortune 100 company (not
> the woodworking machinery company) and can assure you that the vast
> majority of cases are settled without going to court simply because it
> cost the defendant less to do so, win or lose.
> The vast majority of those potential cases were without merit.
I didn't argue that meritless (dare I say fraudulent) suits are
not an expensive problem, only that it is rare for a plaintiff
to win one that actually DOES go to trial.
That the vast majority of cases are settled out-of-court
does not address the question of what proportion of the
injured has (seriously) contemplated suing. For every
meritless suit there may be ten or more equally injured
people who lack the chutzpah to sue.
Despite having Usenet access I still think that decent
(even if careless) people are the majority.
--
FF
I don't use a blade gaurd becuase they tend to get in the way and don't
allow for free hand cuts because you can't see where your cutting. I given a
lot of thaught to investing in a good gaurd though that was designed
properly instead of a cheap piece of plastic that is shipped with the saw
and the manufacterer knows your going to toss. I've learned the hard way
twice. Once while ripping some oak the wood kicked back and sent my middle
finger tip through the saw a few years later while working I had my sweet
shirt get caught, I wasn't hurt but the only way to explain it is.
"I was leaning over the saw when someone "karate chopped" the back of my
neck" the shirt got yanked hard and fast against my neck. The only reason I
caught it was because it had happened to my uncle years earlier and this is
how he discribed it. He was looking around the shop for some jocker, and
didn't catch it until he stopped for a coffee.
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I use the guard & splitter whenever the cut permits it (which is about 99%
of the time)
"bigegg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tim wrote:
>> "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:%[email protected]...
>>> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>>
>>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>>
>> Is this a trick question? I don't use it for the same reasons you don't
>> use
>> it.
>>
>>
> I don't use one.
>
> The reason the book says otherwise is because putting it in print, with
> your name on it, is a good way to get sued into destitution.
>
The reason the book says otherwise is because it's the right thing to do.
"jack the ripper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Jerry Jaksha
> http:// www.grip-tite.com
>
> PS: we are giving away 25 Grip-Tites to public school shop programs
> this fall- please tell any shop teachers you know about this.
>
I use the grip-tite and really like it. Thanks for the good product. (though
I am skeptical about how long the plastic fins will last...)
zap wrote:
> Well My Friend, There are some who can, and will, learn by what others
> have experienced, but there are always some who insist on learning the
> hard way, insisting that they just have to do it their way.
>
> Every one of us who got cut up on a saw, or banged up on a motorcycle
> was sure that it would not happen to us, we were just too good and
> careful.
>
> Have fun in the Emergency Room of the hospital, and when you come out,
> please write and tell us about your blade guard and if it is still on
> your shelf gathering dust.
>
You are making the erroneous assumption that an accident is inevitable. Well,
yes it is, if you think those monkeys are going to reproduce Shakespeare in
your lifetime :-).
I've ridden motorcycles since I was 14 (I'm 69 now) and apart from a few cases
of road rash, had no problems. I've driven at least a half million miles and
been involved in 3 non-injury accidents, none of them my fault. And I've
been pushing wood through a tablesaw for at least 30 years and still have all
my fingers. In fact, I can only remember one kickback in those 30 years.
Yes, I know you're going to say I'm just lucky. I happen to believe you make
your own luck. If being careful and knowing the odds is luck, then yes I'm
lucky :-).
Luck is when somebody shoots at you and misses :-). And yes, I've had that
happen as well.
--
It's turtles, all the way down
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:iqz%[email protected]...
> On 10/24/2006 9:32:24 AM, "jack the ripper" wrote:
>
>>I apologize for the rant, but I have seen too many short fingers to
>>keep quiet.
>>
>>Jerry Jaksha
>>http:// www.grip-tite.com
>
> What's the cost of these things, Jerry?
Did you try clicking on the link in his sig?
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Suppose ahand-specialist performs an average of
> five operations a day, five days a week, (allowing
> two days for consultaion, doing rounds etc). That's
> 1250 operations a year. Unless she is a table-saw-
> injury-hand-surgeon specialist that seems unrealistic.
>
She??
The OP stated "I've probably cared for close to 1000 table saw injuries in
my career". Career... not in a year. If he has been practicing for 10 years,
that would only be 100 a year...
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> I amskeptical of that number if if refers only to
> table saw injuries. It is borderline believable that a
> hand-surgery specialist would perform 1000 surgeries
> per year for power saw (of all sorts) injuries. It is
> entirely beleiveable that she would have a thousand
> face-to-face, or face-to-hand visits for saw-injuries
> if you include simple stiching, pre-surgical consultation,
> and follow-up.
>
Nevermind... I missed what you were specificly replying to. :)
"zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:H7z%[email protected]...
> Hi All,
>
> This is a rant. If you read it, don't complain later that it was too long
> or about what it says.
>
> All this back and forth over a blade guard. Not one of you is going to
> change. Those who believe that they are invincible will continue to
> believe that they are invincible. those who have either taken advice or
> have seen enough accidents will be using a blade guard. So be it.
>
Actually, several posters in this thread have stated that they will start
using the guard after reading this thread...
"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
>
I would speculate that your speculation of his speculation is merely
speculation.
"Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:leU%[email protected]...
>
> Regardless of whether or not it has a guard, MY fingers are at stake
> here, and the saw has my full undivided attention at all times. This has
> played the key role for me in keeping all 10 intact.
You better knock on some wood. ;)
Leon wrote:
> I like to see the blade so that I can align my mark up with where the teeth
> are "actually" cutting when cross cutting.
Screw a sacrificial fence to your mitre gauge/crosscut sled, then cut a
kerf in it with the blade you're going to use. The edge of the kerf is
where your cut will be.
Chris
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:21:31 +0000, Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
My blade guard has been off since the day it was first plugged in. Today I
hooked it back up. I'll give it a trial for now, but I've already
noticed scratching where the anti-kickback pawls (Craftsman 10"
contractors saw ... all original except for the belt & blade) were
dragging across the wood. I'm not too thrilled with that.
It is a crummy design when the cutoff is thin enough to fit underneath it.
The liklihood that I will feel said cutoff before I even see it approaches
certainty. BTDT numerous times.
BUT, I'll give it yet another trial.
If the Saw STop people want to make a metric ton of money, all they have
to do is design a retro-fit for the Craftsman saws ... of which there are
at least 2 zillion ... all still in use.
Bill
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Never quite understood that rationale (or attempt at rationale). It's been
> years since I've seen a blade guard that wasn't see-through. I've had four
> different guards on two saws in 20 years and I've never had a bit of
trouble
> "seeing the blade" with any of the guards.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Though the only saw I own with a guard is
my miter, I have never lacked for clear visibility owing to the guard.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't believe it.
>
Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
thousand a year.
It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
technical experts in depositions.
This is an important matter. David should authenticate if it is true.
Table saws are inherently dangerous and all should be encouraged to
use their guards, splitters, and pushsticks whenever possible, and
their minds in all cases. UL/CSA standards committees should be
encouraged to provide standards that would allow manufacturers to
provide OEM guarding that is "practical" and effective. That has not
always been the case.
There was a time, and it may have changed I'm several years out of the
business, that the very good aftermarket guards no matter what brand
could not have been supplied as standard equipment with UL/CSA saws
because they didn't meet the standards. That doesn't make sense.
Frank
>"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> I'll side with Mortimer and Nigel. As a hand surgeon, I've probably
>> cared for close to 1000 table saw injuries in my career.
>
In article <[email protected]>, "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:21:31 +0000, Samson wrote:
>
>> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>
>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
>My blade guard has been off since the day it was first plugged in. Today I
>hooked it back up. I'll give it a trial for now, but I've already
>noticed scratching where the anti-kickback pawls (Craftsman 10"
>contractors saw ... all original except for the belt & blade) were
>dragging across the wood. I'm not too thrilled with that.
I took the pawls off of mine on about day two, for exactly that reason.
And because they're unnecessary. With proper cutting technique, properly
surfaced stock, *and* a splitter in place, kickback is extremely unlikely.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
"HotRod" wrote:
> >I don't use a blade gaurd becuase they tend to get in the way
>
> The main thing they "get in the way" of is sticking your fingers in the
blade.
> I don't know about you, but I *like* anything that gets in the way of
that.
That had most of the earmarks of a David Eisan type, joke troll.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/06
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Same here on all counts. When I'm cutting to a pencil mark, I routinely
>> line
>> up a single tooth against the mark (with the saw off, of course) -- and I
>> have
>> *never* observed the actual cut to deviate from that position. If that
>> *does*
>> happen for you, your saw has more runout than you think, or there's
>> something
>> wrong with your blade.
>>>
>
>I guess the point I am trying to make here is that I do not want to spin the
>blade to get to the tooth that is going to establish the side of the cut
>that I am referencing.
And the point that *I'm* trying to make is that if you *need* to that, you
have an equipment problem of some sort: excessive runout, bent arbor, bent
blade, or teeth that aren't set uniformly. In my experience, *any* tooth
that's set to the side where the pencil mark is will work just fine to
establish the cut line. Given that none of the equipment problems I cited
above exist, that is.
>>>
>>>Nope. Not all teeth on blades cut on both sides of the kerf.
>>
>> Yes, I know that.
>
>Then you can understand why I do not rely on using any tooth that is in
>position to align my mark.
No, I'm sorry, I can't understand that.
Blade will have teeth set like \, |, and /, right? So if your pencil mark is
left of the blade, align it to *any* tooth that's set like \ . That's all.
There's no need to rotate the blade any more than two or three teeth to get
one that's set in the proper direction.
>
>
>>> I simply like
>>>to use the actual kerf vs. picking out the tooth that will establish the
>>>particular kerf edge that I am looking for
>>
>> I repeat: if there's so much difference between the static position and
>> the
>> actual cut that it becomes a trial and error process, you have an
>> equipment
>> problem.
>
>No equipment error, I just like to be as exact as I can be to start with.
OK, fine -- are you telling me that aligning a pencil mark that's left of the
blade, to the point of a tooth that's set to the left, isn't "exact"??
>The difference is very slight between the tooth that cuts the left side of
>the kerf and the tooth that cuts the right side of the kerf and for the most
>part is probably immesurable
I wouldn't call it immeasurable; it's probably at least 1/32". Of course, I
haven't been talking about aligning the pencil mark to just any random tooth,
either.
>however this is the way that I have ended up
>aligning my cuts. Years ago I used to align marks with reference marks on
>my insert and that worked pretty good however I progressed to seeing the cut
>as a reference. It's a touchey feeley kind of thing.
So, tell me, how do you align your pencil mark with the spinning blade?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Paul D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> Do you really need to question the number of injuries. If you really want
> some idea just have a look through this ng and other woodworking forums to
> see the number of posts about near misses and not so near misses. I see a
> posting about an injury/near miss at least twice a week. Now take into
> account the the vast majority of woodworkers who do not have internet
access
> or subscribe to this ng and the number of injuries grows quite
considerably.
>
>
Twice a week? You must look at a lot of other forums besides this one. I
sure don't see that kind of frequency here. What are you calling injuries
and near misses though? Many of the things that have been posted here about
problems people have gotten into would not have been eliminated by a blade
guard.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Tim wrote:
> "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
>> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>
>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
> Is this a trick question? I don't use it for the same reasons you don't use
> it.
>
>
I don't use one.
The reason the book says otherwise is because putting it in print, with
your name on it, is a good way to get sued into destitution.
--
BigEgg
Hack to size. Hammer to fit. Weld to join. Grind to shape. Paint to cover.
http://www.workshop-projects.com -
Plans and free books - *Now with forum*
Locutus wrote:
> "bigegg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Tim wrote:
>>> "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:%[email protected]...
>>>> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>>>
>>>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>>> Is this a trick question? I don't use it for the same reasons you don't
>>> use
>>> it.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't use one.
>>
>> The reason the book says otherwise is because putting it in print, with
>> your name on it, is a good way to get sued into destitution.
>>
>
> The reason the book says otherwise is because it's the right thing to do.
>
>
Well, *obviously*.
Except when it's not the right thing to do
The simple fact is that it's up to the operator whether he uses a guard
or not - his choice, his risk, and his responsibility.
Unfortunately, some people make the choice, take the risk, then try to
make someone else responsible - hence any media (whether Norm with his
"safety guards are removed for photographic purposes only" (even whilst
cutting dadoes) and "there is no more important safety rule than to wear
these: safety glasses" (when they plainly aren't, since they have no
side guards), or the OP's book which insists on using guards "whenever
possible") will always cover itself to remove the risk of being held
responsible.
--
BigEgg
Hack to size. Hammer to fit. Weld to join. Grind to shape. Paint to cover.
http://www.workshop-projects.com -
Plans and free books - *Now with forum*
"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I don't believe it.
> >
> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
> thousand a year.
>
> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
> technical experts in depositions.
>
> This is an important matter. David should authenticate if it is true.
>
Do you really need to question the number of injuries. If you really want
some idea just have a look through this ng and other woodworking forums to
see the number of posts about near misses and not so near misses. I see a
posting about an injury/near miss at least twice a week. Now take into
account the the vast majority of woodworkers who do not have internet access
or subscribe to this ng and the number of injuries grows quite considerably.
Actually I find a majority of the injuries could only be eliminated by a
Idiot Guard. They are mostly results from ppl trying to do things they
shouldn't be doing on a saw, or doing it the wrong way.
"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Paul D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > >
> > Do you really need to question the number of injuries. If you really
want
> > some idea just have a look through this ng and other woodworking forums
to
> > see the number of posts about near misses and not so near misses. I see
a
> > posting about an injury/near miss at least twice a week. Now take into
> > account the the vast majority of woodworkers who do not have internet
> access
> > or subscribe to this ng and the number of injuries grows quite
> considerably.
> >
> >
>
> Twice a week? You must look at a lot of other forums besides this one. I
> sure don't see that kind of frequency here. What are you calling injuries
> and near misses though? Many of the things that have been posted here
about
> problems people have gotten into would not have been eliminated by a blade
> guard.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> [email protected]
>
>
"zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Rxd%[email protected]...
> The first time that you put your finger or hand into the spinning blade,
> it will make a lifelong believer of you to use that blade guard.
>
> I was a young and stupid teenager when I did it, and the only thing that
> saved me, and only left me with a scar, was that I had just as stupidly
> put the blade on backward.
The sure way not to get cut is not to stick your hand in the blade.
>
> Remember this, it is not a question of IF, it is a question of WHEN!!!
For you, maybe.
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
> Not exactly, but he *did* say that he adjusts the board as needed after he
> sees where the cut starts:
While this is getting way too religious/fixated for further participation, I
will say again what you left out of my quote ... it's damn hard to argue
with Leon's results.
Perhaps there is an element of danger that goes along with talent? IIRC, Sam
Maloof had a hard time, on more than one occasion, telling his fingers from
the workpiece when using a bandsaw.
Then there's Roy ...
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/29/06
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>
>but I do know that I'm not going to ask him for safety
>> tips.
>
>You know Doug, originally you asked another poster why they would want to
>see the blade. I gave you "1" reason why I do. I was not really looking
>to get in to a pissing contest but simply to answer your question. I was
>not trying to call your method wrong. I was simply answering your
>question.
Right... and I'm pointing out for the benefit of the guy who asked the
question originally that the reasoning behind your wanting to see the blade is
faulty.
Keeping the blade uncovered so you can see it *does* increase the hazard (you
even agreed with that) and it does *not* provide any advantages.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
NO. I'm not going to stick my feet in my lawnmower and I'm not going to
put my hands into my tablesaw blade. The guard is more trouble that
it's worth. If I was cutting tons of MDF all day, then a guard with DC
would be a must.
Dave
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Never quite understood that rationale (or attempt at rationale). It's been
> years since I've seen a blade guard that wasn't see-through. I've had four
> different guards on two saws in 20 years and I've never had a bit of
trouble
> "seeing the blade" with any of the guards.
Yeah, but as you know, it's not as perfectly visible as no blade guard. I
suspect that most (all) tablesaw accidents start with the "who me, I don't
make stupid mistakes like that" thought before the inevitable happens.
In article <[email protected]>, "HotRod" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't use a blade gaurd becuase they tend to get in the way
The main thing they "get in the way" of is sticking your fingers in the blade.
I don't know about you, but I *like* anything that gets in the way of that.
>and don't
>allow for free hand cuts because you can't see where your cutting.
Nobody with any good sense does freehand cuts on a table saw anyway.
That's Table Saw Safety Rule Number One. It's *very* dangerous, just *begging*
for a kickback or worse. Save the freehand stuff for the bandsaw or scrollsaw.
> I given a
>lot of thaught to investing in a good gaurd though that was designed
>properly instead of a cheap piece of plastic that is shipped with the saw
>and the manufacterer knows your going to toss.
You should first give a lot of thought to learning how to use your saw safely.
>I've learned the hard way
>twice. Once while ripping some oak the wood kicked back and sent my middle
>finger tip through the saw
And the cause of this was -- ? Were you doing a freehand cut, by any chance?
Was there a splitter installed on the saw? I'll bet not -- since the factory
blade guard on most saws is integral with the splitter, when you removed the
guard, you *also* removed the single most important component in preventing
kickbacks: the splitter.
> a few years later while working I had my sweet
>shirt get caught, I wasn't hurt but the only way to explain it is.
>
>"I was leaning over the saw when someone "karate chopped" the back of my
>neck" the shirt got yanked hard and fast against my neck. The only reason I
>caught it was because it had happened to my uncle years earlier and this is
>how he discribed it. He was looking around the shop for some jocker, and
>didn't catch it until he stopped for a coffee.
I guess nobody ever taught either you or your uncle not to wear loose-fitting
clothing while operating power tools. Or not to lean or reach over power tools
while they're in operation.
Has it occurred to you yet that your shirt would not have come in contact with
the blade if you hadn't removed the blade guard?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> The "advantages" you've indicated are purely illusory. There are in fact
> no
> advantages at all, and it's not *me* having trouble wrapping his mind
> around a
> simple concept. Statically aligning the pencil mark is every bit as
> accurate,
> perhaps even more so, than trying to align to a spinning blade -- as long
> as
> you pick the right tooth (which seems to be where you're having trouble).
>
> It's faster, it's safer, and the only reason for not doing so is "I've
> never
> done it that way before."
LOL.... I sincerely hope you never actually start to post anything that is
of any importance as I will miss it.
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut" in
>relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the board
>left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a portable
>circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
>blade to align the start of the cut.
If you have to move the board left or right after the blade "begins to
cut", you have already mis-cut the board.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> A *lot* of people have said that, but nobody has explained why. And at
> least
> one person has pointed out that you *can't* see the part of it that's
> going to
> bite you while it's moving... so what purpose is served by being able to
> see
> the blade?
I like to see the blade so that I can align my mark up with where the teeth
are "actually" cutting when cross cutting. Aligning with a stationary
tooth does not always result with a dead on cut. All teeth cut a bit
differently. If you ease the board and mark up to the spinning blade you
can see where the cut begins in relation to the mark. Other wise it tends
to be a bit of trial by error.
Additionally, I have seen small pieces of cut off waste apparently get bound
up between the guard and blade and come shooting out. I personally feel
better with out the guard than with and I have been injured after the saw
was turned off. Guard or no guard, you still have to be careful and still
stand the risk of being injured with any tool regardless of your experience.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:jYm%g.14271
>
> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable
without
> the guard than with it?
I'd guess that some feel more comfortable when they can see the blade as
compared to a guard that partially obscures seeing the whole blade.
"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'll side with Mortimer and Nigel. As a hand surgeon, I've probably
> cared for close to 1000 table saw injuries in my career. (At least one
> or two a week for the last 15 years.) So far, I have NEVER seen a table
> saw injury in a woodworker using a guard.
With all due respect to your profession, skill and experience David, I find
the above statement to be beyond belief. Saw guards are far from fool proof
and if you truly have seen that many table saw injuries, I find it very hard
to believe you've never seen a hand injury on a saw with a guard.
Likewise, I was a paramedic for 12 years in a rural area. In all of that
time I never took in a single patient from a table saw accident, though
there are plenty of table saws in garages and basements around here. For
you to attend 1-2 per week for 15 years, your experience is at the very
least, contrary to my own. Must be these people drive themselves in for
treatment?
> I've heard every excuse -- "the
> power was off and the blade was coasting", "I saw the blade but not the
> teeth", and "I was just trimming a little bit. . . "
>
That I can believe. Isn't that the way that accidents go though.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?<<<<
Nope! I can still count to ten but the closest call I have ever had was with
the guard on. I find it a distraction and always in the way. I am not a full
time woodworker but have used a table saw for 50yr (just every now and then)
so don't get what you would call comfortable with the blade, so it scares
hell out of me and I want to be able to see it at all times. RM~
PS, I use all other precautions, push stick and etc.
"Nova" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Nsw0h.27$dx4.10@trndny05...
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or
>> however far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction
>> exposed? It's not like they're set in random positions--they'll either
>> be alternate left and right or left, center, right so you don't have to
>> rotate more than teeth worth.
>
> It the unplugging/plugging in the saw to rotate the blade that eats up the
> time.
Exactly.... ;~)
It's not often that I save a copy of a newsgroup post, but I'm keeping
a copy of this one. (And no I don't top post too often either...)
In article <H7z%[email protected]>,
zap <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>This is a rant. If you read it, don't complain later that it was too
>long or about what it says.
>
>All this back and forth over a blade guard. Not one of you is going to
>change. Those who believe that they are invincible will continue to
>believe that they are invincible. those who have either taken advice or
>have seen enough accidents will be using a blade guard. So be it.
>
>There are two times when one is an accident waiting to happen, The first
>is when they are just beginning, and the second is when they think that
>they have mastered it and think that they are in control, thus becoming
>comfortable with what they are doing.
>
>I do not know about the rest of you, but I have spent a lifetime working
> in dangerous places and situations around moving machinery and high
>voltage. And in that lifetime,of over 70 years, I have see a great many
>accidents around machinery, and virtually all of them happened to
>someone who had been doing that job for many years. Then it happened to
>them.
>
>What roofer or carpenter has not seen someone fall off a building? What
>meat cutter has not cut them self? So you really think that it won't
>happen to you?? Every one of them was sure that it only happens to
>someone else, and won't happen to them. All you have to do is to sneeze
>once without warning, and you are going to move where you do not expect
>to be. I personally knew a man who was hit by an airplane propeller,
>and yes he lived. That he lived was so unusual that the navy sent him
>all over the world to teach safety. He had worked around those
>airplanes for many years. He knew where the danger zone was, but a gust
>of wind at just the wrong time. I saw a man physically picked up and
>drawn into the intake of a Jet engine in less than 4/10 of a second, he
>got too close. Again a man who had worked around those engines for
>years. He knew where he should not be, but just one foot too close. I
>saw men loose fingers and hands and eyes, just because they grew
>comfortable around moving machinery. And you think that it will not
>happen to you? Good luck all, I hope that you never find out the hard
>way as so many do. No it does not have to be your fault. strange things
>happen sometimes. A single thread hanging down can be caught and drag
>you into whatever is moving. One strand of hair is all it takes to grab
>you and pull you in. Just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I
>have see that happen also. I saw a man one day slip and have his hand
>run into a moving band saw blade faster than you could blink, his hand
>had been at least a foot away from the blade. Cut three inches into his
>hand between the thumb and first finger before he could stop his hand
>from moving. Every one of them was doing what they did day in and day
>out. Professionals every one.
>
>I have watched those carpenters and other workers who have thrown safety
>out the window just because the boss is pushing for just a little more
>speed.
>
>You all should really look at power company workers, the hot linemen.
>You have two extremes of their ages. Either very young just starting
>out, and very old men. The only way for the very young to reach the old
>age is to listen to the old men who practice extreme safety at all
>times. If it cannot be done safely, it just will not be done.
>
>I have refused to do some jobs because they could not be done safely,
>and I refused to take a chance. They could keep the job, and I'll keep
>my life. Every time they found someone else who would gamble their life,
>gamble their hands, eyes, etc that they could get away with it. And
>mostly they did win the gamble. But once in awhile some one lost the
>gamble.
>
>You go ahead and gamble, it's not going to hurt me. It's going to hurt
>your family.
>
>But I still have all my fingers, all my toes, both my eyes. You say that
>you have too? Well some of us are trying to help you keep them.
>
>So much for this rant.
>
>Zap
>
--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]
On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >I don't believe it.
>> >
>> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
>> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
>> thousand a year.
>
>Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
>
>My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
>but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
>were not adequately successful.
>
>>
>> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
>> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
>> technical experts in depositions.
>
E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
>is not likely to even consider suing.
Not accurate. Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
either puts them in a bad position in an action.
That is why when other service part tooling for obsolete tools was
discontinued after a long period of limited demand, guard tooling,
warning label art work, and warning printed matter was preserved
forever, at least while I was active.
>
><stuff snipped>
>
>Suppose ahand-specialist performs an average of
>five operations a day, five days a week, (allowing
>two days for consultaion, doing rounds etc). That's
>1250 operations a year. Unless she is a table-saw-
>injury-hand-surgeon specialist that seems unrealistic.
In my area they see patients for three days a week and do elective
surgery on one day. My wife was a recent patient for CT. There are
obviously emergencies, however, I question the volume.
Additionally, if you multiply the claimed number by the number of hand
surgeons in the U.S. the number would be well over a hundred thousand
table saw hand injuries a year. My local woodwoking club has had none
in the past ten years, so you other guys must be real careless.
Frank
><stuff snipped>
In article <ugy%[email protected]>, "Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>(snip) If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade
>guard!
>
>I'm not trying to argue anything here. Just because YOU use one doesn't
>mean everyone else should.
My point, which you appear to have missed, is that the failure of construction
workers to use guards means absolutely *nothing* with regard to whether doing
so is a good idea, or not -- in my experience and observation, most
construction workers use little if any safety equipment, even something as
basic as goggles when running a Sawzall *overhead*.
>Have you ever run yours without a guard? And if
>so, why are you using one now.
Yes, I have -- some cuts are impossible to make on my saw with the guard in
place. (I'm using the factory guard, which has an integral splitter. The
splitter has to come off for a dado or rabbet, which means the guard does
too.)
>
>(snip) If you have not already learned to pay close attention, you shouldn't
>be
>> operating the tool *with* a guard, let alone without one.
>
>On the flip side, if you *truly* have learned to pay close attention to the
>task at hand why would you need a guard?
Mostly because it provides a little extra protection for those moments when,
for whatever reason, that close attention wanders a bit.
> Guards surely prevent accidents,
>but accidents in the shop generally don't happen to someone who is aware of
>, and more importantly knowledgeable, about what they are doing.
I disagree completely. I think a lot of accidents in the shop happen to people
who are knowledgeable and aware, but whose attention slips briefly at just the
wrong moment.
>
>I suppose you'd have a big crisis if I mentioned I am also perfectly
>comfortable cutting something freehand on a table saw as well! --dave
No, I won't have a big crisis from you mentioning it, but *you* will some day
from *doing* it. That's just not a smart idea.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <ABI%[email protected]>, [email protected] (Doug Miller) wrote:
>In article <ugy%[email protected]>, "Dave
> Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>(snip) If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade
>>guard!
>>
>>I'm not trying to argue anything here. Just because YOU use one doesn't
>>mean everyone else should.
>
>My point, which you appear to have missed, is that the failure of construction
>workers to use guards means absolutely *nothing* with regard to whether doing
>so is a good idea, or not -- in my experience and observation, most
>construction workers use little if any safety equipment, even something as
>basic as goggles when running a Sawzall *overhead*.
>
>>Have you ever run yours without a guard? And if
>>so, why are you using one now.
>
>Yes, I have -- some cuts are impossible to make on my saw with the guard in
>place. (I'm using the factory guard, which has an integral splitter. The
>splitter has to come off for a dado or rabbet, which means the guard does
>too.)
Oops -- forgot to respond to the second part of your question.
I'm using one now because I believe it's an important safety practice to use
*all* guards on *all* machines for *all* operations, whenever possible.
The combined guard and spliiter comes off my table saw when I need to make a
cut that's impossible with them in place -- usually this means a cut that's
impossible with the splitter, specifically, in place -- and it goes right back
on as soon as I'm done with that operation.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <5Md%[email protected]>, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:Rxd%[email protected]...
>> The first time that you put your finger or hand into the spinning blade,
>> it will make a lifelong believer of you to use that blade guard.
>>
>> I was a young and stupid teenager when I did it, and the only thing that
>> saved me, and only left me with a scar, was that I had just as stupidly
>> put the blade on backward.
>
>The sure way not to get cut is not to stick your hand in the blade.
Quite true -- and keeping the guard in place makes it less likely that you
will do that.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Same here on all counts. When I'm cutting to a pencil mark, I routinely
> line
> up a single tooth against the mark (with the saw off, of course) -- and I
> have
> *never* observed the actual cut to deviate from that position. If that
> *does*
> happen for you, your saw has more runout than you think, or there's
> something
> wrong with your blade.
>>
I guess the point I am trying to make here is that I do not want to spin the
blade to get to the tooth that is going to establish the side of the cut
that I am referencing.
>>
>>Nope. Not all teeth on blades cut on both sides of the kerf.
>
> Yes, I know that.
Then you can understand why I do not rely on using any tooth that is in
position to align my mark.
>> I simply like
>>to use the actual kerf vs. picking out the tooth that will establish the
>>particular kerf edge that I am looking for
>
> I repeat: if there's so much difference between the static position and
> the
> actual cut that it becomes a trial and error process, you have an
> equipment
> problem.
No equipment error, I just like to be as exact as I can be to start with.
The difference is very slight between the tooth that cuts the left side of
the kerf and the tooth that cuts the right side of the kerf and for the most
part is probably immesurable however this is the way that I have ended up
aligning my cuts. Years ago I used to align marks with reference marks on
my insert and that worked pretty good however I progressed to seeing the cut
as a reference. It's a touchey feeley kind of thing.
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or however
>> far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction exposed? It's
>> not like they're set in random positions--they'll either be alternate left
>> and right or left, center, right so you don't have to rotate more than
>> teeth worth.
>>
>What does it matter how much time it takes. The blade spins back to where
>it was when I let go.
Come on, now, don't be ridiculous -- how hard is it to hold the blade still
for the three seconds it takes to line your pencil mark up?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Upscale" wrote in message
>
> "Doug Miller" wrote in message
> >
> > [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable
> without
> > the guard than with it?
>
> I'd guess that some feel more comfortable when they can see the blade as
> compared to a guard that partially obscures seeing the whole blade.
Never quite understood that rationale (or attempt at rationale). It's been
years since I've seen a blade guard that wasn't see-through. I've had four
different guards on two saws in 20 years and I've never had a bit of trouble
"seeing the blade" with any of the guards.
Whatever the rationale not to use a guard, and the choice is certainly
their's to not do so, my bet is that it boils down to simply a matter of
convenience, or lack thereof.
The Uniguard I use is "convenient" most of the time ... the time's it's not
is when I find myself tempted to "just leave it off for this one cut".
At that point it boils down to a matter of common sense and discipline ... a
combination that always seems to be in short supply.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/06
Mine is in place. Far end of the shop, top shelf.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:B0e%[email protected]...
> Quite true -- and keeping the guard in place makes it less likely that you
> will do that.
"Paul D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Actually I find a majority of the injuries could only be eliminated by a
> Idiot Guard. They are mostly results from ppl trying to do things they
> shouldn't be doing on a saw, or doing it the wrong way.
Absolutely correct. But, us show me a person that is incapable of making a
mistake or doing some something stupid and I'll call him God.
"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:SKI%[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, David
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >NO. I'm not going to stick my feet in my lawnmower and I'm not going to
>> >put my hands into my tablesaw blade.
>>
>> Please read the "rant" posted earlier by 'zap'...
>>
>> Just because you haven't *yet* does not mean you never will.
>>
>
> Well, to be fair, if one were to take zap's rant too much to heart, one
> would never venture into the shop since life is full of so many fluke
> accidents.
>
To be fair, you will never get into my shop with that attitude.
I, too, am a safety freak. I guess I got that way growing up around stupid
people who were NOT safety freaks and hurt themselves on a regular basis. I
just looked at them and said that I was going to be different.
Yes, there are those freak accidents that happen from time to time. But the
occur in many places, not just shops.
I have taken a number of injured people to the hospital. In every case,
they screwed up. And most of them knew it too. Interestingly enough, some
people learned from this experience. and some did not.
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Blade will have teeth set like \, |, and /, right? So if your pencil mark
>> is
>> left of the blade, align it to *any* tooth that's set like \ . That's all.
>> There's no need to rotate the blade any more than two or three teeth to
>> get
>> one that's set in the proper direction.
>
>
>Precicely. I do not want to rotate the blade at all. Typically the blade
>wants to return back to the previous positiion after you let go and you are
>back where you started. Its just an extra step that I do not widh to take.
>
Oh, come on, I do that all the time. It takes five seconds, max -- and you're
leaving the blade guard off because you don't want to take that "extra step".
Do you leave your seat belt off when you drive, too, because it takes too long
to buckle it on?
>
>>
>> So, tell me, how do you align your pencil mark with the spinning blade?
>
>I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut" in
>relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the board
>left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a portable
>circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
>blade to align the start of the cut.
So in other words, you're:
(a) leaning over a spinning, unguarded blade so you can see where it's hitting
the board -- because that's the only way you can see where the blade actually
contacts the leading (bottom) edge of the wood -- and
(b) adjusting the position of the wood back and forth while directly adjacent
to said spinning, unguarded blade
because you don't want to take the "extra step" of rotating the (stopped)
blade a couple of teeth to make a static alignment.
A static alignment that you will *not* have to readjust when you start the
saw.
Think it through. You're *not* saving *any* time at all. And you *are*
increasing the hazard.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Hi All,
This is a rant. If you read it, don't complain later that it was too
long or about what it says.
All this back and forth over a blade guard. Not one of you is going to
change. Those who believe that they are invincible will continue to
believe that they are invincible. those who have either taken advice or
have seen enough accidents will be using a blade guard. So be it.
There are two times when one is an accident waiting to happen, The first
is when they are just beginning, and the second is when they think that
they have mastered it and think that they are in control, thus becoming
comfortable with what they are doing.
I do not know about the rest of you, but I have spent a lifetime working
in dangerous places and situations around moving machinery and high
voltage. And in that lifetime,of over 70 years, I have see a great many
accidents around machinery, and virtually all of them happened to
someone who had been doing that job for many years. Then it happened to
them.
What roofer or carpenter has not seen someone fall off a building? What
meat cutter has not cut them self? So you really think that it won't
happen to you?? Every one of them was sure that it only happens to
someone else, and won't happen to them. All you have to do is to sneeze
once without warning, and you are going to move where you do not expect
to be. I personally knew a man who was hit by an airplane propeller,
and yes he lived. That he lived was so unusual that the navy sent him
all over the world to teach safety. He had worked around those
airplanes for many years. He knew where the danger zone was, but a gust
of wind at just the wrong time. I saw a man physically picked up and
drawn into the intake of a Jet engine in less than 4/10 of a second, he
got too close. Again a man who had worked around those engines for
years. He knew where he should not be, but just one foot too close. I
saw men loose fingers and hands and eyes, just because they grew
comfortable around moving machinery. And you think that it will not
happen to you? Good luck all, I hope that you never find out the hard
way as so many do. No it does not have to be your fault. strange things
happen sometimes. A single thread hanging down can be caught and drag
you into whatever is moving. One strand of hair is all it takes to grab
you and pull you in. Just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I
have see that happen also. I saw a man one day slip and have his hand
run into a moving band saw blade faster than you could blink, his hand
had been at least a foot away from the blade. Cut three inches into his
hand between the thumb and first finger before he could stop his hand
from moving. Every one of them was doing what they did day in and day
out. Professionals every one.
I have watched those carpenters and other workers who have thrown safety
out the window just because the boss is pushing for just a little more
speed.
You all should really look at power company workers, the hot linemen.
You have two extremes of their ages. Either very young just starting
out, and very old men. The only way for the very young to reach the old
age is to listen to the old men who practice extreme safety at all
times. If it cannot be done safely, it just will not be done.
I have refused to do some jobs because they could not be done safely,
and I refused to take a chance. They could keep the job, and I'll keep
my life. Every time they found someone else who would gamble their life,
gamble their hands, eyes, etc that they could get away with it. And
mostly they did win the gamble. But once in awhile some one lost the
gamble.
You go ahead and gamble, it's not going to hurt me. It's going to hurt
your family.
But I still have all my fingers, all my toes, both my eyes. You say that
you have too? Well some of us are trying to help you keep them.
So much for this rant.
Zap
Dave Jackson wrote:
> A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
> chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included) is
> slim to none. There are many of us who feel more comfortable seeing the
> blade and watching the cut rather than having it obscured. Without the
> blade guard you learn to pay very close attention to the task at hand, which
> is a good skill to have running a table saw anyway (with or without the
> guard.)
> However, I recently bought a cabinet saw for the shop and would like to find
> a decent guard. I tried the excalibur guard I got at auction out today and
> find it a little clunky at the blade cover, although with some re
> engineering I think I can make it workable. --dave
>
> "Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:jYm%[email protected]...
>
>>In article <vVf%[email protected]>, "Dave
>>Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>I've never used a guard, but I bought a new saw recently and thought I'd
>>>at
>>>least try using the guard. Well, after two cuts or so, the guard was
>>>removed, and there it sits. As in the past, I felt more comfortable
>>>without
>>>it.
>>
>>[Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable
>>without
>>the guard than with it?
>>
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>>
>>It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
>
>
>
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
No I do not, but should I decide that I should, I'll buy a SawStop instead.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
but I do know that I'm not going to ask him for safety
> tips.
You know Doug, originally you asked another poster why they would want to
see the blade. I gave you "1" reason why I do. I was not really looking
to get in to a pissing contest but simply to answer your question. I was
not trying to call your method wrong. I was simply answering your
question.
I would not dream of trying to give you any tips on safety nor was I in any
way trying to convince you of a better way to do it. I was simply stating
why I like to see the blade. This was the way I was taught in school 40
years ago. Call it old school, call it what you like.
If you like the way you do things, fine. Please don't think that I really
care one way or the other how you use your saw. Again, I was only giving
you an answer to your question.
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Perhaps there is an element of danger that goes along with talent? IIRC,
> Sam
> Maloof had a hard time, on more than one occasion, telling his fingers
> from
> the workpiece when using a bandsaw.
Well I certainly am not to be compared to Sam Maloof but I suspect that he
and I have similar methods of making cuts. I had to chuckle the other day
while watching Modern Masters on TV.. Sam Maloof was one of the artists
being recognised.
He was rounding over the edges of a 2" wide leg for one of his rockers with
a large router. He was holding the router with only one hand while
holding the leg with the other. He said that he had his share of scars from
not having always done things in a more conventional way.
> Then there's Roy ...
Yeah, and then there is Roy. I know that he will always be wearing a
bandaid and hope that the bandaid is all he will ever need. ;~)
>
> --
> www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 10/29/06
>
>
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
>
> Au contraire. It's been my experience very few of these guys are all business.
> I'd be surprised if they didn't take the time to ask. Hell, I'd ask.
I've been sent to emergency rooms by radio control airplane propellers
and on and off-road bicycle crashes, but never a tool.
Every time, the attending professionals asked about the details of the
injury. I met a PA who flies r/c and an orthopedic doc who mountain
bikes! <G>
In article <8jU%[email protected]>, "Rob Mills" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:%[email protected]...
>
>>>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?<<<<
>
>Nope! I can still count to ten but the closest call I have ever had was with
>the guard on. I find it a distraction and always in the way. I am not a full
>time woodworker but have used a table saw for 50yr (just every now and then)
>so don't get what you would call comfortable with the blade, so it scares
>hell out of me and I want to be able to see it at all times. RM~
Why do you want to see it?
A *lot* of people have said that, but nobody has explained why. And at least
one person has pointed out that you *can't* see the part of it that's going to
bite you while it's moving... so what purpose is served by being able to see
the blade?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"MNFabLab" wrote in message
> guy, but after a few years of using 'em, I get uncomfortable when it
> should be there but isn't.
Bingo! ... As you get older you realize that gaining good habits is as easy
as gaining bad ones and the sense to find a good blade guard and use it, and
the discipline to make the use a habit, ends up just like you describe.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/06
In article <%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Want to do a pol? I doubt very many will be on your side. I came very close
> to doing the same thing to you as Leon did.
I frankly don't care if you, or Leon, or anyone else, killfiles me, and
I'll be quite happy to debate with anyone the proposition that aligning
pencil marks to a spinning saw blade somehow saves time or improves
accuracy as compared to aligning the same marks with a single tooth when
the blade is stopped.
Leon at least had enough sense to recognize that leaning over a spinning
saw blade while sliding a board back and forth to align a pencil mark to
the blade is less safe than making the alignment when the saw is not
running -- but when I pointed out that he had completely failed to
justify his frankly absurd contention that doing so saved time and
improved accuracy, he got his panties in a wad, made a few snide
remarks, and bailed on the discussion.
No great loss IMO.
[My apologies to all if this post appears multiple times -- having some
trouble with the newsreader software]
"zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Rxd%[email protected]...
>
> Remember this, it is not a question of IF, it is a question of WHEN!!!
When I rode motorcycles, we used to say there were two kinds of riders,
those that crashed and those that were going to crash.
Use saftey equipment whenever possible.
Jack
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> So in other words, you're:
>>
>> (a) leaning over a spinning, unguarded blade so you can see where it's
>> hitting
>> the board -- because that's the only way you can see where the blade
>> actually
>> contacts the leading (bottom) edge of the wood -- and
>
>Correct.
Do you think that's wise?
>
>>
>> (b) adjusting the position of the wood back and forth while directly
>> adjacent
>> to said spinning, unguarded blade
>
>Correct.
>
Do you think that's wise?
>>
>> because you don't want to take the "extra step" of rotating the (stopped)
>> blade a couple of teeth to make a static alignment.
>
>Correct.
>
>>
>> A static alignment that you will *not* have to readjust when you start the
>> saw.
>
>Correct.
>
Ah, good, I'm glad you agree (though I suspect you didn't mean to say that!).
But you're right, that *is* correct: a properly made static alignment does
*not* need to be readjusted when the blade begins to spin.
>>
>> Think it through. You're *not* saving *any* time at all. And you *are*
>> increasing the hazard.
>
>Yes, saving time and the hazaed does increase. I can live with that.
Doesn't sound like a good tradeoff to me -- especially since you're *not*
saving any time. You're increasing the hazard in exchange for no benefit at
all.
Do you think that's wise?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <[email protected]>, Bruce Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Doug Miller) writes:
>
>>> 3) Keep my eye on the blade, especially when it's spinning.
>>
>> Why? What's it gonna do?
>[snip]
>>You don't need to see it in order to
>> make a proper cut, because the cut path is determined by the setting of your
>> rip fence, miter gauge, or whatever you're using to guide the wood past the
>> blade. So what purpose does it serve to watch the blade?
>
>It's dangerous after the cut as well. In repetitive cuts, I have to
>move my hands, wood, etc in preparation for the next cut. Some
>accidents occur when people watch other things, and forget about the
>blade.
This, of course, is one very good reason to use a blade guard. The blade is
inside the guard. If you keep your fingers outside the guard, they won't hit
the blade.
>
>If I take my eyes off the blade, I might get careless. It's hard to
>forget about the blade if your eyes are on it.
If you truly *need* to be looking at the blade in order to remember that it's
dangerous, you probably should take up a safer hobby. Something like knitting.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
J. Clarke wrote:
> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or however
> far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction exposed? It's not
> like they're set in random positions--they'll either be alternate left and
> right or left, center, right so you don't have to rotate more than teeth
> worth.
>
It the unplugging/plugging in the saw to rotate the blade that eats up
the time.
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]
Bruce Barnett wrote:
>> I don't really want to question him since he's agreeing with my
>> position but his numbers are a bit odd.
>
> He did say he was a hand surgeon.
Yeah, but his patients would become my patients if they become admitted to the
hospital. I work with orthopedic surgeons every day at work; that's the area I
work in. We're an orthopedic/neurosurgery/med-surg floor.
I used to work on a combination orthopedic joint/urology unit at a large
teaching hospital. I called it : "bones 'n boners".
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Some people just don't have the common sense God gave a stump.
BOY YOU can say that again.
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Samson wrote:
>
> Question: Do you use one?
A shop-made overhead guard, made of Lexan. I built mine following a
woodcentral.com article, complete with a dust fitting.
My splitter is also shop made, consisting of a shop-made zero clearance
insert with a glued in a white oak splitter. I have different versions
for different blades.
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>>>
>> What does it matter how much time it takes. The blade spins back to
>> where it was when I let go.
>
> Damn, must be nice to have such loose bearings. Or maybe something needs
> balancing?
>
That would be the set in the 3 belts.
"Chris Friesen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Leon wrote:
>
>
> Screw a sacrificial fence to your mitre gauge/crosscut sled, then cut a
> kerf in it with the blade you're going to use. The edge of the kerf is
> where your cut will be.
>
> Chris
You can do that too. I prefer my method.
"Paul D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Do you really need to question the number of injuries. If you really want
> some idea just have a look through this ng and other woodworking forums to
> see the number of posts about near misses and not so near misses. I see a
> posting about an injury/near miss at least twice a week. Now take into
> account the the vast majority of woodworkers who do not have internet
> access
> or subscribe to this ng and the number of injuries grows quite
> considerably.
>
>
When I cut my thumb in 1989 the ER doctor indicated that he saw TS injuries
at least daily.
The first time that you put your finger or hand into the spinning blade,
it will make a lifelong believer of you to use that blade guard.
I was a young and stupid teenager when I did it, and the only thing that
saved me, and only left me with a scar, was that I had just as stupidly
put the blade on backward.
Remember this, it is not a question of IF, it is a question of WHEN!!!
Zap
bigegg wrote:
> Tim wrote:
>
>>"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:%[email protected]...
>>
>>>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>>
>>>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>>
>>Is this a trick question? I don't use it for the same reasons you don't use
>>it.
>>
>>
>
> I don't use one.
>
> The reason the book says otherwise is because putting it in print, with
> your name on it, is a good way to get sued into destitution.
>
In article <g2x%[email protected]>, "Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
>chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included) is
>slim to none.
So?
I've worked construction before, and I've seen plenty of construction sites.
And I can say that the chance of finding eye or ear protection on any of the
people working there is slim to none.
Doesn't mean it's a good idea.
If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade guard!
>There are many of us who feel more comfortable seeing the
>blade and watching the cut rather than having it obscured.
The question remains unanswered: why do you "feel more comfortable" when you
can see the blade? It isn't going anywhere...
>Without the
>blade guard you learn to pay very close attention to the task at hand,
If you have not already learned to pay close attention, you shouldn't be
operating the tool *with* a guard, let alone without one.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:aHb0h.358>
> If it doesn't, you need to use better blades, or a saw with less run-out.
Not necessarily so. Proper alignment of the blade to the miter slot is to
use a single tooth tip to take front and back measurements. Teeth are not
always in perfect alignment with each other. I use WWII's and a relatively
new Jet cabinet saw with .0005 run out at the arbor the last time I checked.
I get really smooth/burnished cuts.
>
>>All teeth cut a bit
>>differently. If you ease the board and mark up to the spinning blade you
>>can see where the cut begins in relation to the mark. Other wise it tends
>>to be a bit of trial by error.
>
> Again -- if there's so much difference between the static position and the
> actual cut, you need better equipment.
Nope. Not all teeth on blades cut on both sides of the kerf. I simply like
to use the actual kerf vs. picking out the tooth that will establish the
particular kerf edge that I am looking for
>>
>>Additionally, I have seen small pieces of cut off waste apparently get
>>bound
>>up between the guard and blade and come shooting out.
>
> Yep -- I've seen that too. I've also seen offcuts walk into the blade from
> vibration and come shooting out when there was *not* a guard in place. Not
> a
> valid argument for removing the guard IMO.
Not saying that cut offs may not walk back into the blade however I have
never seen one being thrown back with much force unless it was in a bind.
That would be your classic kick back. I have had plenty of pieces walk back
into the back end of the blade after the cut but if there is nothing to hold
the scrap against the blade, there is not as much chance of the piece being
forcefully thrown back at you.
I am not saying to not use a guard, I am only saying that with any tool, a
guard is not a guarantee and accidents can still happen. With the guards
that come standard on MOST saws, I view an equal to more risk of injury from
flying debris. AND, while I believe I learned many years ago to wait for
the blade to stop spinning before making adjustments I realize an accident
can still happen. If I feel the need for more safety equipment I might go
with the Bies style guard but probably will move up to the Saw Stop.
>
>>I personally feel
>>better with out the guard than with
>
> Thank you.
>
>>and I have been injured after the saw
>>was turned off. Guard or no guard, you still have to be careful and still
>>stand the risk of being injured with any tool regardless of your
>>experience.
>
> No argument there.
Thank you Doug, I think we covered both views pretty well. If a user has
the guard and feels better using it I certainly do advise using it. The
less you worry about during the cut, the more attention you can pay to the
cut.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 23:21:40 GMT, "Leon"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Nova" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:Nsw0h.27$dx4.10@trndny05...
>>
>> It the unplugging/plugging in the saw to rotate the blade that eats up the
>> time.
>
>
>Exactly.... ;~)
>
I see the wisdom in Leon's method, but I don't unplug the saw to
rotate the blade when I need to reference a blade tooth to line up a
cut.
I use a full, or nearly full-length, wooden pencil's eraser to move it
into position. The same eraser is also awesome for clearing small
cutoffs away from the blade and additional light support for small
parts in my various sleds.
This is why I don't like mechanical pencils. <G>
In article <[email protected]>, David <[email protected]> wrote:
>NO. I'm not going to stick my feet in my lawnmower and I'm not going to
>put my hands into my tablesaw blade.
Please read the "rant" posted earlier by 'zap'...
Just because you haven't *yet* does not mean you never will.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> Not exactly, but he *did* say that he adjusts the board as needed after he
> sees where the cut starts:
>
> "I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut"
> in
> relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the
> board
> left or right and proceed with the cut."
Ok to clarify, Do you ever have a slight bit of tear out on the back side
of a cut that gets sanded off? I don't cut that much into the lead of the
cut. I push the wood up until the blade, let me say this again, "begins" to
cut the wood. Read that as when the blade touches the wood I stop pushing.
The amount removed during that initial approach usually gets sanded off to
ease the edge during finish sanding.
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>
>>>>
>>> What does it matter how much time it takes. The blade spins back to
>>> where it was when I let go.
>>
>> Damn, must be nice to have such loose bearings. Or maybe something needs
>> balancing?
>>
>
>That would be the set in the 3 belts.
Link belts do a pretty good job of reducing that problem.
Or you could adjust the belts from time to time so that the sets in the three
belts don't line up with each other...
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Dave Jackson" wrote in message
> A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
> chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included)
is
> slim to none.
You're right about that ... however, as a builder, I often count fewer
fingers on jobsites than should be.
> However, I recently bought a cabinet saw for the shop and would like to
find
> a decent guard. I tried the excalibur guard I got at auction out today
and
> find it a little clunky at the blade cover, although with some re
> engineering I think I can make it workable. --dave
I really like my Uniguard ... has an excellent splitter, two guards that can
be used independently and/or swung up out of the way, and it can be removed
in less time than it takes to tell.
In short, it is "convenient" ... a quality which fosters use.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/06
In article <[email protected]>, "Upscale" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:jYm%g.14271
>>
>> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable without
>> the guard than with it?
>
>I'd guess that some feel more comfortable when they can see the blade as
>compared to a guard that partially obscures seeing the whole blade.
I've heard people say that before, and could never understand it -- why the
heck does anyone "need" to see the blade on a table saw during a cut??
Band saw or scroll saw, sure -- it's awful tough to make a freehand cut if you
can't see where you're cutting, but nobody with any sense makes freehand cuts
on a table saw.
So what purpose does it serve to be able to see the blade on a table saw while
you're cutting? Proper cutting technique on a table saw means using a guide of
some sort, be it a rip fence, tenoning jig, miter gauge, crosscut sled, or
whatever. Once you set the guide and place the wood against it, the blade is
gonna cut where it's gonna cut, whether you can see it or not. Any adjustment
that may be needed (checking blade height against the thickness of the wood,
or aligning a pencil mark left-right against the blade, for instance) can, and
should, be done with the blade *stopped*. Once the saw haw been started,
though, what possible reason is there to see the blade?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <[email protected]>, Bruce Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Doug Miller) writes:
>
>> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more
>> comfortable without the guard than with it?
>
>I didn't make the post, but I can see the point.
>
>I'm a hobbyist. When I use the saw I
> 1) Take my time and don't rush
Safety Rule Number One, for any power tool. For most hand tools, too, for that
matter.
> 2) Use fingerboards/sleds/etcs so my hands never get within a
> foot of the blade
Another good idea, although a foot is perhaps a bit overcautious IMO.
> 3) Keep my eye on the blade, especially when it's spinning.
Why? What's it gonna do?
>
>I tend to turn off the saw when I'm done with a cut. Not very
>efficient, but I feel comfortable with this.
It's excellent safety practice, in my opinion. And the impact on "efficiency"
is very, very minor. I've timed my saw: it goes from stopped to full speed in
much less than one second, and when switched off, coasts to a complete stop in
less than ten.
>
>But while that blade is spinning, I'm watching it.
WHY? What's it gonna do?
>
>If it had a guard, I might take my eyes off it, and forget about the
>blade. So the guard might make me more comfortable, and less cautious.
>
Sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense. You don't need to see the blade
in the first place, so taking your eyes off of it doesn't matter. You don't
(or at least shouldn't) need to be able to see the blade in order to remember
that it's there, and that it's dangerous. You don't need to see it in order to
make a proper cut, because the cut path is determined by the setting of your
rip fence, miter gauge, or whatever you're using to guide the wood past the
blade. So what purpose does it serve to watch the blade?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <[email protected]>, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Larry Kraus" wrote in message
>> "Leon" < wrote:
>>
>> >I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut"
>in
>> >relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the
>board
>> >left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a
>portable
>> >circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
>> >blade to align the start of the cut.
>>
>> If you have to move the board left or right after the blade "begins to
>> cut", you have already mis-cut the board.
>
>He did not say that he moves the board _during the cut_
>
Not exactly, but he *did* say that he adjusts the board as needed after he
sees where the cut starts:
"I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut" in
relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the board
left or right and proceed with the cut."
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <[email protected]>, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Doug Miller" wrote in message
>
>> Not exactly, but he *did* say that he adjusts the board as needed after he
>> sees where the cut starts:
>
>While this is getting way too religious/fixated for further participation, I
>will say again what you left out of my quote ... it's damn hard to argue
>with Leon's results.
I wouldn't know -- I haven't seen his results, and that wasn't the subject of
the thread anyway -- but I do know that I'm not going to ask him for safety
tips.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Mike Marlow wrote:
> With all due respect to your profession, skill and experience David, I find
> the above statement to be beyond belief. Saw guards are far from fool proof
> and if you truly have seen that many table saw injuries, I find it very hard
> to believe you've never seen a hand injury on a saw with a guard.
>
> Likewise, I was a paramedic for 12 years in a rural area. In all of that
> time I never took in a single patient from a table saw accident, though
> there are plenty of table saws in garages and basements around here. For
> you to attend 1-2 per week for 15 years, your experience is at the very
> least, contrary to my own. Must be these people drive themselves in for
> treatment?
In nearly 15 years as an orthopedic nurse in a hospital setting, I can only
recall taking care of 3-4 table saw accidents myself. I saw what he wrote and
wondered but I didn't really think about it. Now you make me think about it.
Are all these guys outpatients?
I don't really want to question him since he's agreeing with my position but his
numbers are a bit odd. His conclusions, however, are right on. Obviously the
man is a genius. <G>
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> The "advantages" you've indicated are purely illusory. There are in fact
>> no
>> advantages at all, and it's not *me* having trouble wrapping his mind
>> around a
>> simple concept. Statically aligning the pencil mark is every bit as
>> accurate,
>> perhaps even more so, than trying to align to a spinning blade -- as long
>> as
>> you pick the right tooth (which seems to be where you're having trouble).
>>
>> It's faster, it's safer, and the only reason for not doing so is "I've
>> never
>> done it that way before."
>
>LOL.... I sincerely hope you never actually start to post anything that is
>of any importance as I will miss it.
>
IOW... you know you lost the argument, but won't admit it... LOL
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:10:28 GMT, [email protected] (Doug Miller) wrote:
>In article <%[email protected]>, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>
>>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I took mine off 25 years ago and left it off util a year and a half ago. Then I caught my the first finger of my left
(non-dominant) hand in the blade. It was 95% off, just hanging by the skin and one small artery. After two hours
in the operating room and six months of physiotherapy, it is now slightly functional. It goes up and down but
it doesn't bend as the blade went through the PIP joint. My physiotherapist learned the word 'kerf'.
The blade guard has stayed on (except for dados) every since.
The pain in the finger is minor but ever-present. Cold weather bothers it a lot as the circulation is buggered up.
Getting older is going to be a bitch as it will become seriously arthritic.
If you insist on keeping the blade guard off, move to a country with socialised medical system.
Nigel
Frank Boettcher wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2006 17:35:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> On 25 Oct 2006 12:07:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> >> On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
> >> >> >> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >I don't believe it.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
> >> >> >> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
> >> >> >> thousand a year.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
> >> >> >but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
> >> >> >were not adequately successful.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
> >> >> >> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
> >> >> >> technical experts in depositions.
> >> >> >
> >> >> E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
> >> >> >is not likely to even consider suing.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not accurate.
> >> >
> >> >How is that not accurate?
> >> >
> >> >> Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
> >> >
> >> >I didn't deny that cases are filed or won. I speculated that
> >> >a home-user who removed his guard is not likely to even
> >> >consider suing. That implies that such suits would be rare,
> >> >not nonexistant, although no one in thid thread has presented
> >> >an example of such a suit--yet, despite the fact that we have
> >> >had examples of accidents presented.
> >> >
> >>
> >> And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
> >
> >But you actually discuss a matter not dispositive as to
> >the question of what proportion of the injured sues or
> >seriously considers suing.
> >
> >It is not that your comments are wrong or even questionable,
> >they just don't address that particular question.
> >
> >>
> >> >> Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
> >> >> either puts them in a bad position in an action.
> >> >
> >> >Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
> >> >themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
> >> >They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
> >> >but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
> >> >if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
> >> >manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
> >> >
> >> >Another reason may be that most of the injuries that do require
> >> >professional treatment are (hopefully) relatively trivial--mere
> >> >stitches
> >> >required.
> >> >
> >> >Keep in mind that there is a reason why you see news items about
> >> >people winning seemingly trivial suits--they are rare. If they were
> >> >commonplace, they wouldn't be newsworthy.
> >>
> >> And I would contend that you are in error with this statement also.
> >> I've served on the liability committee of a fortune 100 company (not
> >> the woodworking machinery company) and can assure you that the vast
> >> majority of cases are settled without going to court simply because it
> >> cost the defendant less to do so, win or lose.
> >> The vast majority of those potential cases were without merit.
> >
> >I didn't argue that meritless (dare I say fraudulent) suits are
> >not an expensive problem, only that it is rare for a plaintiff
> >to win one that actually DOES go to trial.
>
> OK please tell me how that matters.
How much it matters turns on the antecedent for 'they'.
if 'they' are people who make the news by winning
trivial cases then I was right and you presented a
reason why I was right. If the antecedent for 'they'
was all of the people who filed, then I was wrong
for the reasons you presented.
I apologize for the ambiguity.
Now, you are also concened with the trangential issue
of importance to the defendant, right? This is tangential
to the discusison, because it is achange in direction of
the discusion, not because it is unimportant.
Here is one way 'it' matters to the defendant:
It affects the dollar amount at which the decision is made
to defend rather than to settle. The more likely it is that
the defendant will lose, the more that defendant will be
willing to pay to settle out-of-court.
That is why limit on punitive damages encourage insurance
companies to lowball legitimate claims. The statutory
limit on punitives limits their exposure if they act in
bad faith. And companies who act in good faith can
thereby find themselves financially uncompetative with
those that do not.
OTOH, companies that justifiably fight fraudulent claims
to the bitter end rack up legal fees that also make them
financially uncompetative.
Beter enforcement of the prohibitions on perpetrating
a fraud on the court would help but that's a difficult
area.
> If most are trivial or without
> merit and most are settled by paying off the those intitiating the
> suit, how does that matter whether it goes to trial other than
> semantics.
The question you pose above is about a different aspect of the
subject than were the statements you challenged. I don't
dispute the veracity of your points, I just observe that they
are not contradictory with mine.
You questioned two statements.
One, was that the frequency of table saw accidents was
probably much higher than the frequency of lawsuits stemming
from such accidents. The other was that one seldom hears
about plaintiffs with seemingly trivial complaints winning large
judgements because such cases are rare. I already addressed
the second above.
Now back to the first:
You ignore the possibility that most _accidents_ never got
your attention in the first place. THAT was the point I
was making and as you will recall, expressed thus:
"For every meritless suit there may be ten or more
equally injured people who lack the chutzpah to sue."
>
> ... However, my opinion, formed as an individual who ran an
> operation that made a high volume of table saws, remains the same. And
> your opinion is based on.......
That is based on four tablesaw injuries with which I am
personally familiar and several that have been related
here--none of those involved a lawsuit.
Correct me if am wrong but you were not in a position to know
how many people were injured, only how many sued, right?
--
FF
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:21:29 -0400, "Locutus"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Frank Boettcher" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
>>
>
>I would speculate that your speculation of his speculation is merely
>speculation.
>
Well it's a rainy afternoon and I'm waiting for some glue to dry, so
why not...
Frank
On 25 Oct 2006 17:35:47 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> On 25 Oct 2006 12:07:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> >> On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >I don't believe it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
>> >> >> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
>> >> >> thousand a year.
>> >> >
>> >> >Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
>> >> >
>> >> >My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
>> >> >but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
>> >> >were not adequately successful.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
>> >> >> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
>> >> >> technical experts in depositions.
>> >> >
>> >> E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
>> >> >is not likely to even consider suing.
>> >>
>> >> Not accurate.
>> >
>> >How is that not accurate?
>> >
>> >> Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
>> >
>> >I didn't deny that cases are filed or won. I speculated that
>> >a home-user who removed his guard is not likely to even
>> >consider suing. That implies that such suits would be rare,
>> >not nonexistant, although no one in thid thread has presented
>> >an example of such a suit--yet, despite the fact that we have
>> >had examples of accidents presented.
>> >
>>
>> And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
>
>But you actually discuss a matter not dispositive as to
>the question of what proportion of the injured sues or
>seriously considers suing.
>
>It is not that your comments are wrong or even questionable,
>they just don't address that particular question.
>
>>
>> >> Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
>> >> either puts them in a bad position in an action.
>> >
>> >Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
>> >themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
>> >They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
>> >but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
>> >if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
>> >manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
>> >
>> >Another reason may be that most of the injuries that do require
>> >professional treatment are (hopefully) relatively trivial--mere
>> >stitches
>> >required.
>> >
>> >Keep in mind that there is a reason why you see news items about
>> >people winning seemingly trivial suits--they are rare. If they were
>> >commonplace, they wouldn't be newsworthy.
>>
>> And I would contend that you are in error with this statement also.
>> I've served on the liability committee of a fortune 100 company (not
>> the woodworking machinery company) and can assure you that the vast
>> majority of cases are settled without going to court simply because it
>> cost the defendant less to do so, win or lose.
>> The vast majority of those potential cases were without merit.
>
>I didn't argue that meritless (dare I say fraudulent) suits are
>not an expensive problem, only that it is rare for a plaintiff
>to win one that actually DOES go to trial.
OK please tell me how that matters. If most are trivial or without
merit and most are settled by paying off the those intitiating the
suit, how does that matter whether it goes to trial other than
semantics.
I prepared a point by point response to your post, but then thought
about those papers I signed about conflict of interest, release of
sensitive or damaging information, etc. etc. Since it is a gray area
and this is Usenet and not worthy of taking a chance, I deleted it
all. However, my opinion, formed as an individual who ran an
operation that made a high volume of table saws, remains the same. And
your opinion is based on.......
>
>That the vast majority of cases are settled out-of-court
>does not address the question of what proportion of the
>injured has (seriously) contemplated suing. For every
>meritless suit there may be ten or more equally injured
>people who lack the chutzpah to sue.
>
>Despite having Usenet access I still think that decent
>(even if careless) people are the majority.
Give it time. You'll learn why that is not necessarily the right place.
There is a time and place where we all of think we are 10 feet tall ,teflon
coated and bullet proof. Good luck with that one.
Mike
"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:E1f%[email protected]...
> Mine is in place. Far end of the shop, top shelf.
>
> "Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:B0e%[email protected]...
>> Quite true -- and keeping the guard in place makes it less likely that
>> you
>> will do that.
>
>
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> A *lot* of people have said that, but nobody has explained why. And at least
>> one person has pointed out that you *can't* see the part of it that's going to
>> bite you while it's moving... so what purpose is served by being able to see
>> the blade?
>
>I like to see the blade so that I can align my mark up with where the teeth
>are "actually" cutting when cross cutting. Aligning with a stationary
>tooth does not always result with a dead on cut.
If it doesn't, you need to use better blades, or a saw with less run-out.
>All teeth cut a bit
>differently. If you ease the board and mark up to the spinning blade you
>can see where the cut begins in relation to the mark. Other wise it tends
>to be a bit of trial by error.
Again -- if there's so much difference between the static position and the
actual cut, you need better equipment.
>
>Additionally, I have seen small pieces of cut off waste apparently get bound
>up between the guard and blade and come shooting out.
Yep -- I've seen that too. I've also seen offcuts walk into the blade from
vibration and come shooting out when there was *not* a guard in place. Not a
valid argument for removing the guard IMO.
>I personally feel
>better with out the guard than with
Thank you.
>and I have been injured after the saw
>was turned off. Guard or no guard, you still have to be careful and still
>stand the risk of being injured with any tool regardless of your experience.
No argument there.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:vVf%[email protected]...
> I've never used a guard, but I bought a new saw recently and thought I'd
at
> least try using the guard. Well, after two cuts or so, the guard was
> removed, and there it sits. As in the past, I felt more comfortable
without
> it.
> That said, I really want to find a blade guard that works. It seems there
> are so many different styles of guard out there, that one shouldn't have
any
> excuse why they're not using something! Anyway, I recently acquired an
> Excalibur overhead guard and just got it installed yesterday. I haven't
> tried it out in use yet, but I do like that the guard can be moved out of
> the way and returned easily without removing it from the saw. This is a
> step in the right direction for me - being able to keep the guard attached
> to the saw means I'm more likely to use it! --dave
>
>
Likewise, I've never owned a table saw with a guard, so I don't use a guard.
That said, my miter saw came with a guard and I have no philosophical or
practical problem with it in place. Since I've never had a blade guard,
I've come to look at my table saw in the same manner that I look at my chain
saw or my circular saw. All of them have exposed business ends and require
a certain attention on the part of the operator.
Contrary to the alarmist voices, it is no more a matter of "when" than any
other equally harmful accident is. The presence or absence of a guard in no
way affects "when" anything will happen. In fact assuming that the guard
affects "when" is probably a more dangerous position. Pay attention to the
irrevocable laws about saw safety as they relate to the physics of things
and you are far more likely to avoid an accident than by relying on the
false security of a guard. A guard will not protect against bad cutting
practices and trusting in devices like this may well be the very downfall of
what one trusts as a safe program.
I would not have any philosophical or practical issue with a guard on my
table saw, if it had one. As it is, I have always known a table saw to be a
tool with a pretty significant business end and have approached the use of
it as a tool accordingly - just like my chainsaw and my circular saw. It
becomes the way you view the tool. You approach it with more than respect,
you approach it with a knowldege and a certainty of what the blade can do.
It's simply the way it is.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ABI%[email protected]...
> >I suppose you'd have a big crisis if I mentioned I am also perfectly
> >comfortable cutting something freehand on a table saw as well! --dave
>
> No, I won't have a big crisis from you mentioning it, but *you* will some
day
> from *doing* it. That's just not a smart idea.
>
Not necessarily at all Doug. I'd agree that short cuts done free hand offer
a significant potential for problems. The smaller the piece, the more
likely it is that you can't control the travel of the piece through the
blade accurately enough to maintain a proper straight path. However, long
rips do not pose the same threats. He's not in any way guaranteed to have a
problem by cutting freehand - depending on what the definition of freehand
is. I have been forced to make many free hand cuts on a table saw over the
years. It's not my prefered technique or approach, but I've done it. You'd
have to do more than simply assert that this is something that *will* some
day result in a big crisis.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
You think I should move it to the next shelf down?
"Mike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:a6A%g.80716$073.13454@trnddc01...
> Give it time. You'll learn why that is not necessarily the right place.
>
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:21:31 GMT, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I use one with a splitter because it is safer than without. When
cutting dados--no guard.
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:21:31 GMT, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
>Question: Do you use one?
Yes, Uniguard. Also has a very good splitter
Frank
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Well I certainly am not to be compared to Sam Maloof but I suspect that he
>and I have similar methods of making cuts. I had to chuckle the other day
>while watching Modern Masters on TV.. Sam Maloof was one of the artists
>being recognised.
>He was rounding over the edges of a 2" wide leg for one of his rockers with
>a large router. He was holding the router with only one hand while
>holding the leg with the other. He said that he had his share of scars from
>not having always done things in a more conventional way.
Some people just don't have the common sense God gave a stump.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or however
> far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction exposed? It's
> not like they're set in random positions--they'll either be alternate left
> and right or left, center, right so you don't have to rotate more than
> teeth worth.
>
What does it matter how much time it takes. The blade spins back to where
it was when I let go.
I'll do it my way, you do it yours.
On 10/24/2006 2:59:08 PM, wrote:
>
>Samson wrote:
>> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>
>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
>Yes. Unless cut is not "through". Makita 2704 has very nice guard,
>splitter, anti-kickback pawls. In/out in 30 sec.
>
>Push-sticks are in-hand before commencing cut, unless both hands
>will remain at least 10" away from blade, at absolute minimum.
>
>Failing-safe very important too- continuously tracking highest possible
>threat to extremities, and limiting that to zero. Stuff happens fast.
>
>J
I use push sticks all the time, mostly because table saw scares the
crap out of me.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Keeping the blade uncovered so you can see it *does* increase the hazard
> (you
> even agreed with that) and it does *not* provide any advantages.
Not using the guard can increase the hazard. Correct, no one disputes that.
that horse is dead.
There are advantages as I have indicated. If you cannot wrap you mind
around that perhaps a coloring book would help.
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:SKI%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, David
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >NO. I'm not going to stick my feet in my lawnmower and I'm not going to
> >put my hands into my tablesaw blade.
>
> Please read the "rant" posted earlier by 'zap'...
>
> Just because you haven't *yet* does not mean you never will.
>
Well, to be fair, if one were to take zap's rant too much to heart, one
would never venture into the shop since life is full of so many fluke
accidents.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Some people just don't have the common sense God gave a stump.
>
>
>BOY YOU can say that again.
Yep. IMO that includes people with a history of multiple table saw injuries
who still haven't figured out that using a blade guard is a good idea.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I use the stock Jet guard whenever it is physically possible - which
is probably 99% of the time. Before the guard comes off, I will try
very hard to find some other method or tool to make the desired cut.
If the guard absolutely HAS to come off, I use feather boards and push
sticks to ensure that I do not need to place flesh in harms way.
Replacing the guard and checking the splitter alignment takes about 45
seconds, substantially less than the healing time for any injury I can
imagine.
In article <[email protected]>,
Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut" in
>relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the board
>left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a portable
>circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
>blade to align the start of the cut.
>
>
So tell me, how does this work out for you when you are ripping a
sheet of plywood? :)
--
No dumb questions, just dumb answers.
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore, Maryland - [email protected]
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Blade will have teeth set like \, |, and /, right? So if your pencil mark
> is
> left of the blade, align it to *any* tooth that's set like \ . That's all.
> There's no need to rotate the blade any more than two or three teeth to
> get
> one that's set in the proper direction.
Precicely. I do not want to rotate the blade at all. Typically the blade
wants to return back to the previous positiion after you let go and you are
back where you started. Its just an extra step that I do not widh to take.
>
> So, tell me, how do you align your pencil mark with the spinning blade?
I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut" in
relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the board
left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a portable
circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
blade to align the start of the cut.
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 06:09:34 -0500, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Dave Jackson" wrote in message
>> A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
>> chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included)
>is
>> slim to none.
>
>You're right about that ... however, as a builder, I often count fewer
>fingers on jobsites than should be.
>
>> However, I recently bought a cabinet saw for the shop and would like to
>find
>> a decent guard. I tried the excalibur guard I got at auction out today
>and
>> find it a little clunky at the blade cover, although with some re
>> engineering I think I can make it workable. --dave
>
>I really like my Uniguard ... has an excellent splitter, two guards that can
>be used independently and/or swung up out of the way, and it can be removed
>in less time than it takes to tell.
>
>In short, it is "convenient" ... a quality which fosters use.
When I cut sheet goods I use a guard that I made from plywood that
encompass the blade and that is attached to a section of 1-1/2" pipe,
which is connected to the dust collector. It is suspended from the
ceiling over the saw.
This is a great comfort, particularly when cutting MDF, as the flow
from both above and below takes away most of the offending dust.
When I cut solid stock, particularly "interesting" stock that may be
reaction wood and needs a bit of visual monitoring, I take the guard
off.
I also do not use hearing protection when doing this.
I want to see and hear and feel how that piece is going through that
saw.
If the accumulated wisdom of my senses tells me to bail on that cut, I
want to be able to shut that saw down with a clear understanding of
the problem that made that necessary.
I, like you, have been running equipment for about forty years.
This is my choice of how to get by with good results, both from the
safety and the production end.
I have, as do all of those that I respect, all of my digits.
The mind is the best and most appropriate safety device.
I understand that when talking on the Wreck we are addressing multiple
understandings of the process and multiple levels of experience.
I would simply like to preach the gospel of mind as the premier safety
device, as slavish dependence on contrivances does not answer fully.
Regards,
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
Sorry -- I didn't mean to start a battle of numbers. I am one of only a
couple hand surgeons in a community west of Cleveland. My practice is
limited to hands and wrists, and my affiliation with the Cleveland
Clinic draws a lot of referrals. I also keep a part of my day open for
emergency patients, increasing my availability for these problems, and
probably the number I see relative to a hand surgeon who tries to see
only elective patients. Most of the injuries are "warning shots" -
requiring little more than dressing changes, motion exercises, wound
care, and a few sutures. Most are able to bring themselves, or find a
ride to the ER or office, rather than requiring the services of a rescue
squad. Just about everything surgical below the wrist is managed as an
outpatient now (with fingertip and nail injuries repaired in the
office), except for procedures requiring a microvascular repair.
As a woodworker, I always find time to ask how it happened. I've
actually learned quite a bit from other's "experience". Often it opens
them up to share some stories. At follow-up visits, some have brought
in pictures of their projects, and a few brought in some smaller works.
I've been astounded by some of the craftsmanship, and find it a
rewarding part of my practice. I might have even convinced a couple of
them to use guards, pushsticks, splitters, outfeed support, etc. Or not.
. .G>
David
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> Bruce Barnett wrote:
>
>>>I don't really want to question him since he's agreeing with my
>>>position but his numbers are a bit odd.
>>
>>He did say he was a hand surgeon.
>
>
>
> Yeah, but his patients would become my patients if they become admitted to the
> hospital. I work with orthopedic surgeons every day at work; that's the area I
> work in. We're an orthopedic/neurosurgery/med-surg floor.
>
> I used to work on a combination orthopedic joint/urology unit at a large
> teaching hospital. I called it : "bones 'n boners".
>
>
>
Hi,
I try to use the guard/splitter/antikick back thing when I can.
There are times such as when cutting dadoes when it does not work. I
have practiced installing and removing the guard so that the process is
relatively quick. Also I try to plan my cuts to minimize switching cut
types. I do not have a guard on my cutoff sled, mostly, because I have
not figured out a good design, that would not get it the way of my
product runs of 100 identical pieces.
With that said, my biggest safety feature has been the constant
training of myself to put my full attention on the saw if the blade is
spinning. If there is a distraction or I feel even a bit dazed or
tired, the saw gets turned off immediately. No "One more cut."
Thanks
Roger Haar
*******************************************************************************
Samson wrote:
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> With all due respect to your profession, skill and experience David, I
>> find
>> the above statement to be beyond belief. Saw guards are far from fool
>> proof
>> and if you truly have seen that many table saw injuries, I find it very
>> hard
>> to believe you've never seen a hand injury on a saw with a guard.
>>
>> Likewise, I was a paramedic for 12 years in a rural area. In all of that
>> time I never took in a single patient from a table saw accident, though
>> there are plenty of table saws in garages and basements around here. For
>> you to attend 1-2 per week for 15 years, your experience is at the very
>> least, contrary to my own. Must be these people drive themselves in for
>> treatment?
>
>
> In nearly 15 years as an orthopedic nurse in a hospital setting, I can
> only recall taking care of 3-4 table saw accidents myself. I saw what he
> wrote and wondered but I didn't really think about it. Now you make me
> think about it.
>
> Are all these guys outpatients?
>
> I don't really want to question him since he's agreeing with my position
> but his numbers are a bit odd. His conclusions, however, are right on.
> Obviously the man is a genius. <G>
Maybe he runs the day shift in the Grand Rapids ED or something--some place
where there's a lot of woodworking going on. Still, not one with a guard is
kind of surprising. I do wonder how he _knew_ whether the guard was used
though--if the place is that busy (and for him to have seen that many table
saw cuts I'd expect it to be a _very_ busy ED) I'd be really surprised if
any surgeon in the ED had time to talk about matters peripheral to the
treatment.
Upscale <[email protected]> wrote:
: "Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:jYm%g.14271
:>
:> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable
: without
:> the guard than with it?
: I'd guess that some feel more comfortable when they can see the blade as
: compared to a guard that partially obscures seeing the whole blade.
I never have a problem seeing the blade doing the cutting while using a
guard -- I've never understood this argument.
It's also worth noting that no one can see the *teeth* of the sawblade while
the motor is turned on. So what one thinks of as the blade, visually, is
actually only part of the blade (and not the part farthest forward, nor the
part that can take a finger off).
-- Andy Barss
Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
: When I cut solid stock, particularly "interesting" stock that may be
: reaction wood and needs a bit of visual monitoring, I take the guard
: off.
But this is irrational. Reaction wood is dangerous because it
can twist and bind against the blade and/or fence, and cause
kickback and kickup. With a splitter and guard you have protection
against this. Whithout them you just plain don't.
: If the accumulated wisdom of my senses tells me to bail on that cut, I
: want to be able to shut that saw down with a clear understanding of
: the problem that made that necessary.
You don't seem to understand how rapidly kickback occurs, when it
does occur.
: The mind is the best and most appropriate safety device.
No one is saying it isn't. Just as it's the most appropriate
safety device when driving. That doesn't negate the
actual, verifiable safety advantages of wearing a seatbelt.
: I understand that when talking on the Wreck we are addressing multiple
: understandings of the process and multiple levels of experience.
: I would simply like to preach the gospel of mind as the premier safety
: device, as slavish dependence on contrivances does not answer fully.
Sure. But you're solving the equation wrong. Attendant
mind + guards/igs/splitters outsafties attendant mind alone.
You sound like one of those people (and I've known a bunch) who don't
wear seatbelts in cars (they want to, variously: be able to
get to the other side to avoid a side collision; get out of a burning car;
be thrown free [through the windshield] instead of stuck in a wreck), and
don't wear helmets on a motorcycle (they impair vision!!!).
Doesn't make it smart.
-- Andy Barss
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> So in other words, you're:
>>
>> (a) leaning over a spinning, unguarded blade so you can see where it's
>> hitting
>> the board -- because that's the only way you can see where the blade
>> actually
>> contacts the leading (bottom) edge of the wood -- and
>
> Correct.
>
>>
>> (b) adjusting the position of the wood back and forth while directly
>> adjacent
>> to said spinning, unguarded blade
>
> Correct.
>
>>
>> because you don't want to take the "extra step" of rotating the (stopped)
>> blade a couple of teeth to make a static alignment.
>
> Correct.
>
>>
>> A static alignment that you will *not* have to readjust when you start
>> the
>> saw.
>
> Correct.
>
>>
>> Think it through. You're *not* saving *any* time at all. And you *are*
>> increasing the hazard.
>
> Yes, saving time and the hazaed does increase. I can live with that.
Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or however
far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction exposed? It's not
like they're set in random positions--they'll either be alternate left and
right or left, center, right so you don't have to rotate more than teeth
worth.
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Nova" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Nsw0h.27$dx4.10@trndny05...
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or
>>> however far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction
>>> exposed? It's not like they're set in random positions--they'll either
>>> be alternate left and right or left, center, right so you don't have to
>>> rotate more than teeth worth.
>>
>> It the unplugging/plugging in the saw to rotate the blade that eats up
>> the time.
>
>
> Exactly.... ;~)
Geez, you people are nuts.
"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Geez, how much time does it take to rotate the blade 20 degrees or
>> however far you have to to get a tooth set in the right direction
>> exposed? It's not like they're set in random positions--they'll either
>> be alternate left and right or left, center, right so you don't have to
>> rotate more than teeth worth.
>>
> What does it matter how much time it takes. The blade spins back to where
> it was when I let go.
Damn, must be nice to have such loose bearings. Or maybe something needs
balancing?
> I'll do it my way, you do it yours.
Enjoy your fingers while you have them.
"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> To be fair, you will never get into my shop with that attitude.
Well, that's fine.
>
> I, too, am a safety freak. I guess I got that way growing up around stupid
> people who were NOT safety freaks and hurt themselves on a regular basis.
I
> just looked at them and said that I was going to be different.
Likewise, I have seen, and the evidence is certainly contained in the
archives of this group - that being a safety freak in no way ensures safety.
This group is full of stories about incidents in the shop where all of the
safety gear was in place. It is full of stories from "safety freaks" who
put pieces of wood through walls, into body parts, who posted pictures of
stiches, etc. Being a safety freak does nothing to ensure you will not be
hurt. The post by zap was a collection of freak accidents that didn't even
correlate to the discussion at hand.
>
> Yes, there are those freak accidents that happen from time to time. But
the
> occur in many places, not just shops.
And you point is?
>
> I have taken a number of injured people to the hospital. In every case,
> they screwed up. And most of them knew it too. Interestingly enough, some
> people learned from this experience. and some did not.
>
Ummmmmm... of course they screwed up. And the point is?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
In article <Hb4%[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:%[email protected]...
>>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>
>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>
>No I do not, but should I decide that I should, I'll buy a SawStop instead.
>
A guard is lot cheaper... <g>
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included) is
slim to none. There are many of us who feel more comfortable seeing the
blade and watching the cut rather than having it obscured. Without the
blade guard you learn to pay very close attention to the task at hand, which
is a good skill to have running a table saw anyway (with or without the
guard.)
However, I recently bought a cabinet saw for the shop and would like to find
a decent guard. I tried the excalibur guard I got at auction out today and
find it a little clunky at the blade cover, although with some re
engineering I think I can make it workable. --dave
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:jYm%[email protected]...
> In article <vVf%[email protected]>, "Dave
> Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I've never used a guard, but I bought a new saw recently and thought I'd
>>at
>>least try using the guard. Well, after two cuts or so, the guard was
>>removed, and there it sits. As in the past, I felt more comfortable
>>without
>>it.
>
> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable
> without
> the guard than with it?
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>
> So tell me, how does this work out for you when you are ripping a
> sheet of plywood? :)
LOL,,, I use the cursor on the fence to set the width. The days of
measuring from a tooth are long gone EXCEPT when I have the dado blades on
my saw. It being a left tilt requires this old way of doing things.
I don't believe it.
"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'll side with Mortimer and Nigel. As a hand surgeon, I've probably
> cared for close to 1000 table saw injuries in my career.
Frank Boettcher wrote:
> On 26 Oct 2006 12:56:19 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> ><much rambling snipped>
> >>
> >> ... However, my opinion, formed as an individual who ran an
> >> operation that made a high volume of table saws, remains the same. And
> >> your opinion is based on.......
> >
> >That is based on four tablesaw injuries with which I am
> >personally familiar and several that have been related
> >here--none of those involved a lawsuit.
> >
> > [unsnip] Correct me if am wrong but you were not in a position to know
> > how many people were injured, only how many sued, right?
> Well that certainly qualifies you as an expert on the two points I
> make.
You are correct if you suppose I have no first-hand knowledge
of any such suits.
>
> The first is that in this thread and others, I strongly suspect, that
> certain individuals are posting information about their personal
> knowledge or involvement with table saw hand injuries that, when
> projected to a total population of table saw hand injuries is
> significantly more than the reality. The posts, I believe, are in
> many cases, simply trolls. They are generally posted with no
> authentication. I believe I'm right on this, and I sincerely hope I'm
> right.
>
> Secondly, I indicated that you were in error in your statement about
> the population of suits and who might have the propensity to do so.
> I will offer no more information about what I know to support the
> statement for reasons previously mentioned.
>
> You certainly may hold and post any opinion you wish. And those that
> haven't become completely bored with this thread and continue to
> follow it may draw their own conclusions.
>
That's cool.
--
FF
On 26 Oct 2006 12:56:19 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
><much rambling snipped>
>>
>> ... However, my opinion, formed as an individual who ran an
>> operation that made a high volume of table saws, remains the same. And
>> your opinion is based on.......
>
>That is based on four tablesaw injuries with which I am
>personally familiar and several that have been related
>here--none of those involved a lawsuit.
>
Well that certainly qualifies you as an expert on the two points I
make.
The first is that in this thread and others, I strongly suspect, that
certain individuals are posting information about their personal
knowledge or involvement with table saw hand injuries that, when
projected to a total population of table saw hand injuries is
significantly more than the reality. The posts, I believe, are in
many cases, simply trolls. They are generally posted with no
authentication. I believe I'm right on this, and I sincerely hope I'm
right.
Secondly, I indicated that you were in error in your statement about
the population of suits and who might have the propensity to do so.
I will offer no more information about what I know to support the
statement for reasons previously mentioned.
You certainly may hold and post any opinion you wish. And those that
haven't become completely bored with this thread and continue to
follow it may draw their own conclusions.
Frank
In article <vVf%[email protected]>, "Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I've never used a guard, but I bought a new saw recently and thought I'd at
>least try using the guard. Well, after two cuts or so, the guard was
>removed, and there it sits. As in the past, I felt more comfortable without
>it.
[Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more comfortable without
the guard than with it?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Nigel Burnett wrote:
> The blade guard has stayed on (except for dados) every since.
>
> The pain in the finger is minor but ever-present. Cold weather bothers it a
> lot as the circulation is buggered up. Getting older is going to be a bitch
> as it will become seriously arthritic.
I use my overhead guard pretty much all the time and I still wait for the blade
to stop before I reach for things.
As for your particular situation, I had an incomplete amputation of my right
forearm many years ago in a plane crash... lost about 2" off each bone that had
to be regrown. Some nerves ultimately reconnected; others didn't. Luckily my
injury wasn't right through the joint as yours was but rather was midshaft.
Some encouraging words: the "barometric" effect you feel now gets much better
with time. In fact, everything gets better with time, except arthritis. That
you'll have to live with. At some point in the future if it becomes
debilitating you might consider letting them fuse your finger joint. But give
it time, because what you live with today will probably be much different in 5
years. I no longer have any trouble out of my arm; my hand just doesn't
supinate (rotate as if to cup). But I have no pain.
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
If you leave the blade guard off, don't stick your hand in the blade.
"Nigel Burnett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:10:28 GMT, [email protected] (Doug Miller) wrote:
>
> If you insist on keeping the blade guard off, move to a country with
socialised medical system.
>
> Nigel
The guard is on my saw except for non-through cuts. I'm thinking about
making an overarm guard so it is always on for the same reason I have a
chainsaw with a chain brake. I plan to do everything within my power to
keep all my parts intact. Others mileage may vary (IE. if your parts don't
matter to you, go for it).
Mike
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
>themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
>They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
>but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
>if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
>manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
More likely IMO is that they are *not* in fact that smart, but the lawyer(s)
they contact *are*... <g>
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
(snip) I disagree completely. I think a lot of accidents in the shop happen
to people
who are knowledgeable and aware, but whose attention slips briefly at just
the
wrong moment.
I have to disagree with your disagreement. To operate table saw safely it
requires the operators full undivided attention. If someone is not
disciplined enough to give it their full attention, there is a good chance
that there will be an accident in their future with or without a guard.
As an example, if you get American Woodworker mag, check out page 28 in this
months issue. The owner of a small woodworking shop and operator of a new
SawStop says he was in a hurry batch cutting stock when his finger went
under the blade guard and hit the blade. Of course the brake saved him for
major injury, but, as you noted, accidents can happen when attention wanders
even briefly. This is the part of running a machine that takes discipline.
IMHO, if one can give their machine their full undivided attention at all
times, the chances of an accident are small.
BTW, I do not think I'm invincible or anything because I can run a table saw
comfortably with no guard, or believe for a second that an accident could
never happen to me. I run a table saw almost daily and am disciplined
enough to not let anything distract me while I'm running it. Regardless of
whether or not it has a guard, MY fingers are at stake here, and the saw
has my full undivided attention at all times. This has played the key role
for me in keeping all 10 intact.
I do think, however, that it is very possible that people who do use a guard
may get a false sense of security and may become a little more relaxed with
regards to giving their undivided attenion to the saw during a cut.
With that said, I certainly don't recommend anyone remove their guard but to
run their table saw as if it wasn't there at all. The guard is merely to
HELP prevent accidents, not eliminate them. Safe use of a table saw still
lands squarely on the operators shoulders. --dave
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ABI%[email protected]...
> In article <ugy%[email protected]>, "Dave
> Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>(snip) If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade
>>guard!
>>
>>I'm not trying to argue anything here. Just because YOU use one doesn't
>>mean everyone else should.
>
> My point, which you appear to have missed, is that the failure of
> construction
> workers to use guards means absolutely *nothing* with regard to whether
> doing
> so is a good idea, or not -- in my experience and observation, most
> construction workers use little if any safety equipment, even something as
> basic as goggles when running a Sawzall *overhead*.
>
>>Have you ever run yours without a guard? And if
>>so, why are you using one now.
>
> Yes, I have -- some cuts are impossible to make on my saw with the guard
> in
> place. (I'm using the factory guard, which has an integral splitter. The
> splitter has to come off for a dado or rabbet, which means the guard does
> too.)
>>
>>(snip) If you have not already learned to pay close attention, you
>>shouldn't
>>be
>>> operating the tool *with* a guard, let alone without one.
>>
>>On the flip side, if you *truly* have learned to pay close attention to
>>the
>>task at hand why would you need a guard?
>
> Mostly because it provides a little extra protection for those moments
> when,
> for whatever reason, that close attention wanders a bit.
>
>> Guards surely prevent accidents,
>>but accidents in the shop generally don't happen to someone who is aware
>>of
>>, and more importantly knowledgeable, about what they are doing.
>
> I disagree completely. I think a lot of accidents in the shop happen to
> people
> who are knowledgeable and aware, but whose attention slips briefly at just
> the
> wrong moment.
>>
>>I suppose you'd have a big crisis if I mentioned I am also perfectly
>>comfortable cutting something freehand on a table saw as well! --dave
>
> No, I won't have a big crisis from you mentioning it, but *you* will some
> day
> from *doing* it. That's just not a smart idea.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <leU%[email protected]>, "Dave Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>(snip) I disagree completely. I think a lot of accidents in the shop happen
>to people
>who are knowledgeable and aware, but whose attention slips briefly at just
>the
>wrong moment.
>
>I have to disagree with your disagreement. To operate table saw safely it
>requires the operators full undivided attention. If someone is not
>disciplined enough to give it their full attention, there is a good chance
>that there will be an accident in their future with or without a guard.
Isn't that pretty much what I just said?
>As an example, if you get American Woodworker mag, check out page 28 in this
>months issue. The owner of a small woodworking shop and operator of a new
>SawStop says he was in a hurry batch cutting stock
Isn't that pretty much what I just said? <g>
>when his finger went
>under the blade guard and hit the blade. Of course the brake saved him for
>major injury, but, as you noted, accidents can happen when attention wanders
>even briefly. This is the part of running a machine that takes discipline.
>IMHO, if one can give their machine their full undivided attention at all
>times, the chances of an accident are small.
Add to that the further stipulations that the operator is fully knowledgeable
of proper operating procedures, and is using all appropriate guides, guards,
hold-downs, pushsticks, etc. -- *and* that the wood being milled contains no
hidden defects that could cause unanticipated problems -- and we're close to
being in agreement.
>BTW, I do not think I'm invincible or anything because I can run a table saw
>comfortably with no guard, or believe for a second that an accident could
>never happen to me. I run a table saw almost daily and am disciplined
>enough to not let anything distract me while I'm running it.
I hope you're right about your level of discipline and attention. Fact is,
though, all of us are only human, and IME most of us are not as good at
anything as we think we are. That's why there are guards on machines.
> Regardless of
>whether or not it has a guard, MY fingers are at stake here, and the saw
>has my full undivided attention at all times. This has played the key role
>for me in keeping all 10 intact.
Let us hope that full undivided attention never wanders.
>I do think, however, that it is very possible that people who do use a guard
>may get a false sense of security and may become a little more relaxed with
>regards to giving their undivided attenion to the saw during a cut.
Perhaps.
>With that said, I certainly don't recommend anyone remove their guard but to
>run their table saw as if it wasn't there at all. The guard is merely to
>HELP prevent accidents, not eliminate them. Safe use of a table saw still
>lands squarely on the operators shoulders. --dave
And on *that* point we are solidly in agreement.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"jack the ripper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Warning- I am biased- I manufacture a safety tool for ripping.
>
> But you shoud really know- there is a better way to rip wood than using
> your fingers.
>
> I have ripped over 5 million linear feet of thin, knotty, warped, and
> cupped lumber over the last 15 years at woodworking shows without
> kickbacks or fingers near the blade.
> I get to see the short fingers for three days per weekend at
> woodworking shows. A question I ask is "Has anyone in this group (of
> 10 or so) tangled with a tablesaw?" Almost always someone has.
> Usually the fingers have been sewed up or back on, but do not work as
> well anymore.
>
> The key to finger safety when ripping or dadoing is to use something
> other than your fingers to hold the wood against the fence, down (both
> before and after the blade), and use something other than your fingers
> to push the wood by the blade.
>
> Question:
> How often do you use a featherboard instead of your fingers?
> The reason you don't is that clamped feather boards take too long
> to clamp in place and remove. You use them only when you have to.
>
> The solution is a magnetic featherboard or roller feeder that sets up
> with one hand, as quick as putting your fingers there- Something you
> actually use. It exists- and 250,000 table saw owners use it on every
> rip, and jointer cut.
>
> I apologize for the rant, but I have seen too many short fingers to
> keep quiet.
>
> Jerry Jaksha
> http:// www.grip-tite.com
>
> PS: we are giving away 25 Grip-Tites to public school shop programs
> this fall- please tell any shop teachers you know about this.
>
Good for you.
I have no problem with a manufacturer weighing in on an on topic discussion.
Good luck with your safety products.
And you are right. No matter how good a job the doc does. It rarely equals
the original finger.
No, gets in the way.
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
In article <%[email protected]>, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
I do, whenever possible. The reason is simple: the blade is inside the guard.
If you keep your fingers outside the guard, they can't come in contact with
the blade.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
My guard, splitter and anti-kickback pawls are mounted on the TS at
all times except for dados. Any reason not to use is just
rationalization and self-delusion.
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:21:31 GMT, "Samson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
>Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
On 25 Oct 2006 12:07:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> On 25 Oct 2006 07:25:59 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Frank Boettcher wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 01:02:05 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I don't believe it.
>> >> >
>> >> Nor do I. But at least it is more believable than the guy who was
>> >> posting on the Saw Stop thread that his wife was a surgeon that does a
>> >> thousand a year.
>> >
>> >Keep in mind that some injuries require multiple operations to repair.
>> >
>> >My neighbor, who lost two fingers to a table saw had one restored,
>> >but after two years had it re-amputated as the previous operation(s)
>> >were not adequately successful.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> It doesn't correlate statistically with my experience as a maker of
>> >> saws in defense of personal injury claims and providing individuals as
>> >> technical experts in depositions.
>> >
>> E.g. a home-user who removed his guard
>> >is not likely to even consider suing.
>>
>> Not accurate.
>
>How is that not accurate?
>
>> Cases are filed, just not necessarily won.
>
>I didn't deny that cases are filed or won. I speculated that
>a home-user who removed his guard is not likely to even
>consider suing. That implies that such suits would be rare,
>not nonexistant, although no one in thid thread has presented
>an example of such a suit--yet, despite the fact that we have
>had examples of accidents presented.
>
And I would contend that your speculation is in error.
>> Manufacturer has the obligation to "Guard and Warn" failure to do
>> either puts them in a bad position in an action.
>
>Yes, that is one reason why I expect that most people who injure
>themselves after removing their guards never consider suing.
>They may not have been smart enough to avoid injury
>but maybe they are smart or honest enough to realize that
>if they ignored the manufacturer's warnings and removed the
>manufacturer's safety device, they don't have a case.
>
>Another reason may be that most of the injuries that do require
>professional treatment are (hopefully) relatively trivial--mere
>stitches
>required.
>
>Kep in mind that there is a reason why you see news items about
>people winning seemingly trivial suits--they are rare. If they were
>commonplace, they wouldn't be newsworthy.
And I would contend that you are in error with this statement also.
I've served on the liability committee of a fortune 100 company (not
the woodworking machinery company) and can assure you that the vast
majority of cases are settled without going to court simply because it
cost the defendant less to do so, win or lose. The vast majority of
those potential cases were without merit.
Frank
Mike wrote:
> "B A R R Y" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Po5%[email protected]...
>> Samson wrote:
>>> Question: Do you use one?
>> A shop-made overhead guard, made of Lexan. I built mine following a
>> woodcentral.com article, complete with a dust fitting.
>
> Does your's resemble the pictures on WoodCentral? I ask because their's
> looks loike it is connected to the ceiling.
>
Yes and yes!
The main differences are: the top plate of mine is maple (I ran out of
lexan <G>), I used 6-32 cap screws (I had them) and I used a 3" threaded
PVC connector as the dust port, which takes a 4" hose nicely.
I'm extremely happy with that guard and glad I built it. I like the
idea of screwing parts together without glue, in case a replacement is
needed. The saw is cleaner, too!
In article <[email protected]>, "MNFabLab" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't care how experienced, careful, knowledgable or invincible you
>are, WHY would you leave that spinning blade out in the open when you
>can put something over it.
That's the whole discussion in a nutshell.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"B A R R Y" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Po5%[email protected]...
> Samson wrote:
>>
>> Question: Do you use one?
>
> A shop-made overhead guard, made of Lexan. I built mine following a
> woodcentral.com article, complete with a dust fitting.
Does your's resemble the pictures on WoodCentral? I ask because their's
looks loike it is connected to the ceiling.
Mike
In article <S%[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:aHb0h.358>
>> If it doesn't, you need to use better blades, or a saw with less run-out.
>
>Not necessarily so. Proper alignment of the blade to the miter slot is to
>use a single tooth tip to take front and back measurements. Teeth are not
>always in perfect alignment with each other. I use WWII's and a relatively
>new Jet cabinet saw with .0005 run out at the arbor the last time I checked.
>I get really smooth/burnished cuts.
Same here on all counts. When I'm cutting to a pencil mark, I routinely line
up a single tooth against the mark (with the saw off, of course) -- and I have
*never* observed the actual cut to deviate from that position. If that *does*
happen for you, your saw has more runout than you think, or there's something
wrong with your blade.
>
>>>All teeth cut a bit
>>>differently. If you ease the board and mark up to the spinning blade you
>>>can see where the cut begins in relation to the mark. Other wise it tends
>>>to be a bit of trial by error.
>>
>> Again -- if there's so much difference between the static position and the
>> actual cut, you need better equipment.
>
>Nope. Not all teeth on blades cut on both sides of the kerf.
Yes, I know that.
> I simply like
>to use the actual kerf vs. picking out the tooth that will establish the
>particular kerf edge that I am looking for
I repeat: if there's so much difference between the static position and the
actual cut that it becomes a trial and error process, you have an equipment
problem.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 08:27:57 -0700, Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Luck is when somebody shoots at you and misses :-). And yes, I've had that
>happen as well.
Her husband was a bad shot? ;)
.
.
.
.
(just kidding)
J. Clarke wrote:
> Maybe he runs the day shift in the Grand Rapids ED or something--some place
> where there's a lot of woodworking going on. Still, not one with a guard is
> kind of surprising. I do wonder how he _knew_ whether the guard was used
> though--if the place is that busy (and for him to have seen that many table
> saw cuts I'd expect it to be a _very_ busy ED) I'd be really surprised if
> any surgeon in the ED had time to talk about matters peripheral to the
> treatment.
Au contraire. It's been my experience very few of these guys are all business.
I'd be surprised if they didn't take the time to ask. Hell, I'd ask. It's one
of the ways I assess level of consciousness and orientation. Kills two birds
with one stone... professional and personal curiosity.
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
Tom Watson wrote:
>
> I also do not use hearing protection when doing this.
>
> I want to see and hear and feel how that piece is going through that
> saw.
>
> If the accumulated wisdom of my senses tells me to bail on that cut, I
> want to be able to shut that saw down with a clear understanding of
> the problem that made that necessary.
With all due respect to your experience, good quality hearing protection
will allow you to hear far more audio detail than without protection.
As the overall sound pressure level goes up, your ears become less
sensitive to certain frequencies, and the overall level will mask the
problem. You may already suffer from hearing damage due to your years
of exposure to site and shop noise, so your personal experience may differ.
I can hear chip out, cracking, binding, etc... much sooner when I'm
wearing good muffs than without.
"Locutus" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> The reason the book says otherwise is because it's the right thing to do.
>
>
Yes, it's the right thing to write to keep from getting sued.
Ever seen Leon? He stands about 12'6" and weighs in about 500. He's from
Texas you know:)
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So tell me, how does this work out for you when you are ripping a
> sheet of plywood? :)
>
>
In article <[email protected]>, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Keeping the blade uncovered so you can see it *does* increase the hazard
>> (you
>> even agreed with that) and it does *not* provide any advantages.
>
>Not using the guard can increase the hazard. Correct, no one disputes that.
>that horse is dead.
>
>There are advantages as I have indicated. If you cannot wrap you mind
>around that perhaps a coloring book would help.
The "advantages" you've indicated are purely illusory. There are in fact no
advantages at all, and it's not *me* having trouble wrapping his mind around a
simple concept. Statically aligning the pencil mark is every bit as accurate,
perhaps even more so, than trying to align to a spinning blade -- as long as
you pick the right tooth (which seems to be where you're having trouble).
It's faster, it's safer, and the only reason for not doing so is "I've never
done it that way before."
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
In article <[email protected]>, Bruce Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>
>> No kidding. I'd rather not be in the same shop as a person who can
>> use a tool to cut off a 2 x 4, and yet not realize that it is dangerous
>> unless he can see the spinning blade!
>
>That's not the point at all. Are you telling me that people who had
>accidents with a table saw didn't THINK it was dangerous?
>
>The cause of most accidents are (I would guess) inattention,
>stupidity, and ignorance. And I bet that most seasoned woodworkers
>have accidents with tablesaws because of inattention.
That's why the guard is there.
>
>My attention won't wander while I'm watching that blade.
Just because it hasn't *yet* does not mean it never will.
The point is that the guard provides additional protection in case it does.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
(snip) If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade
guard!
I'm not trying to argue anything here. Just because YOU use one doesn't
mean everyone else should. Have you ever run yours without a guard? And if
so, why are you using one now.
(snip) If you have not already learned to pay close attention, you shouldn't
be
> operating the tool *with* a guard, let alone without one.
On the flip side, if you *truly* have learned to pay close attention to the
task at hand why would you need a guard? Guards surely prevent accidents,
but accidents in the shop generally don't happen to someone who is aware of
, and more importantly knowledgeable, about what they are doing.
I suppose you'd have a big crisis if I mentioned I am also perfectly
comfortable cutting something freehand on a table saw as well! --dave
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Ryx%[email protected]...
> In article <g2x%[email protected]>, "Dave
> Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>A little backround....I'm a carpenter for a living and can say that the
>>chances of finding a blade guard on any jobsite table saw (mine included)
>>is
>>slim to none.
>
> So?
>
> I've worked construction before, and I've seen plenty of construction
> sites.
> And I can say that the chance of finding eye or ear protection on any of
> the
> people working there is slim to none.
>
> Doesn't mean it's a good idea.
>
> If anything, you're making a good argument *for* using the blade guard!
>
>>There are many of us who feel more comfortable seeing the
>>blade and watching the cut rather than having it obscured.
>
> The question remains unanswered: why do you "feel more comfortable" when
> you
> can see the blade? It isn't going anywhere...
>
>>Without the
>>blade guard you learn to pay very close attention to the task at hand,
>
> If you have not already learned to pay close attention, you shouldn't be
> operating the tool *with* a guard, let alone without one.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
I've never used a guard, but I bought a new saw recently and thought I'd at
least try using the guard. Well, after two cuts or so, the guard was
removed, and there it sits. As in the past, I felt more comfortable without
it.
That said, I really want to find a blade guard that works. It seems there
are so many different styles of guard out there, that one shouldn't have any
excuse why they're not using something! Anyway, I recently acquired an
Excalibur overhead guard and just got it installed yesterday. I haven't
tried it out in use yet, but I do like that the guard can be moved out of
the way and returned easily without removing it from the saw. This is a
step in the right direction for me - being able to keep the guard attached
to the saw means I'm more likely to use it! --dave
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> So in other words, you're:
>
> (a) leaning over a spinning, unguarded blade so you can see where it's
> hitting
> the board -- because that's the only way you can see where the blade
> actually
> contacts the leading (bottom) edge of the wood -- and
Correct.
>
> (b) adjusting the position of the wood back and forth while directly
> adjacent
> to said spinning, unguarded blade
Correct.
>
> because you don't want to take the "extra step" of rotating the (stopped)
> blade a couple of teeth to make a static alignment.
Correct.
>
> A static alignment that you will *not* have to readjust when you start the
> saw.
Correct.
>
> Think it through. You're *not* saving *any* time at all. And you *are*
> increasing the hazard.
Yes, saving time and the hazaed does increase. I can live with that.
"Larry Kraus" wrote in message
> "Leon" < wrote:
>
> >I ease the wood up to the blade and watch where the blade "begins to cut"
in
> >relation to the mark. If it is not where I want it, I simply move the
board
> >left or right and proceed with the cut. Not totally unlike using a
portable
> >circle saw and beginning the cut. I never use any thing but the spinning
> >blade to align the start of the cut.
>
> If you have to move the board left or right after the blade "begins to
> cut", you have already mis-cut the board.
He did not say that he moves the board _during the cut_ ... furthermore, you
can argue the method, but you can't argue with the results once you've seen
any of Leon's work.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/06
"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>
> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
Is this a trick question? I don't use it for the same reasons you don't use
it.
Well My Friend, There are some who can, and will, learn by what others
have experienced, but there are always some who insist on learning the
hard way, insisting that they just have to do it their way.
Every one of us who got cut up on a saw, or banged up on a motorcycle
was sure that it would not happen to us, we were just too good and
careful.
Have fun in the Emergency Room of the hospital, and when you come out,
please write and tell us about your blade guard and if it is still on
your shelf gathering dust.
I myself have no problem with you leaving your blade guard off, It's not
my fingers that will be gone, it will be like my son who lost his finger
just that way. Thought he could work faster without the blade guard, but
now is slower just because he is trying to make the other fingers (which
were damaged) still work. Well you have had enough warnings, now go
ahead and have your accident. It's your privilage to do so.
Zap
CW wrote:
> "zap" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Rxd%[email protected]...
>
>>The first time that you put your finger or hand into the spinning blade,
>>it will make a lifelong believer of you to use that blade guard.
>>
>>I was a young and stupid teenager when I did it, and the only thing that
>>saved me, and only left me with a scar, was that I had just as stupidly
>>put the blade on backward.
>
>
> The sure way not to get cut is not to stick your hand in the blade.
>
>>Remember this, it is not a question of IF, it is a question of WHEN!!!
>
>
> For you, maybe.
>
>
[email protected] writes:
> No kidding. I'd rather not be in the same shop as a person who can
> use a tool to cut off a 2 x 4, and yet not realize that it is dangerous
> unless he can see the spinning blade!
That's not the point at all. Are you telling me that people who had
accidents with a table saw didn't THINK it was dangerous?
The cause of most accidents are (I would guess) inattention,
stupidity, and ignorance. And I bet that most seasoned woodworkers
have accidents with tablesaws because of inattention.
My attention won't wander while I'm watching that blade.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
[email protected] (Doug Miller) writes:
>> 3) Keep my eye on the blade, especially when it's spinning.
>
> Why? What's it gonna do?
[snip]
>You don't need to see it in order to
> make a proper cut, because the cut path is determined by the setting of your
> rip fence, miter gauge, or whatever you're using to guide the wood past the
> blade. So what purpose does it serve to watch the blade?
It's dangerous after the cut as well. In repetitive cuts, I have to
move my hands, wood, etc in preparation for the next cut. Some
accidents occur when people watch other things, and forget about the
blade.
If I take my eyes off the blade, I might get careless. It's hard to
forget about the blade if your eyes are on it.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
David <[email protected]> writes:
> As a woodworker, I always find time to ask how it happened. I've
> actually learned quite a bit from other's "experience". Often it opens
> them up to share some stories.
Sounds like a good topic to share with the group.
What are the most frequent causes to accidents with tablesaws?
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
[email protected] writes:
>> The cause of most accidents are (I would guess) inattention,
>> stupidity, and ignorance. And I bet that most seasoned woodworkers
>> have accidents with tablesaws because of inattention.
>
> Agreed.
>
>>
>> My attention won't wander while I'm watching that blade.
>>
>
> Why would it wander if there was a guard over the blade?
I'd do the same thing if I had a guard.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
[email protected] (Doug Miller) writes:
> [Curious here, not argumentative] Why? How can you be more
> comfortable without the guard than with it?
I didn't make the post, but I can see the point.
I'm a hobbyist. When I use the saw I
1) Take my time and don't rush
2) Use fingerboards/sleds/etcs so my hands never get within a
foot of the blade
3) Keep my eye on the blade, especially when it's spinning.
I tend to turn off the saw when I'm done with a cut. Not very
efficient, but I feel comfortable with this.
But while that blade is spinning, I'm watching it.
If it had a guard, I might take my eyes off it, and forget about the
blade. So the guard might make me more comfortable, and less cautious.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> writes:
> In nearly 15 years as an orthopedic nurse in a hospital setting, I
> can only recall taking care of 3-4 table saw accidents myself. I
> saw what he wrote and wondered but I didn't really think about it.
> Now you make me think about it.
>
> I don't really want to question him since he's agreeing with my
> position but his numbers are a bit odd.
He did say he was a hand surgeon.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:fq4%[email protected]...
> In article <Hb4%[email protected]>, "Leon"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>"Samson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:%[email protected]...
>>>I haven't used a blade guard for years, but was reading a book
>>> today on table saws that insisted to use them whenever possible.
>>>
>>> Question: Do you use one? If not, why not?
>>
>>No I do not, but should I decide that I should, I'll buy a SawStop
>>instead.
>>
> A guard is lot cheaper... <g>
LOL, yes, much cheaper. But I like to see what's going on and I cut dado's
on the TS and that was the only time so far that I have been injured using
the TS.