Hi all,
I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
doing more after this project ;-)
The key, though, is finishing this project, which requires that I get
around obstruction #1, which is a brick half-wall. The wall is roughly
48" wide, and the flooring runs parallel to that wide side of the
wall. My problem is basically that I'm not wonderful at math, so I'm
hoping someone here can help me figure this out:
According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
blade?
Thanks.
brian.
"Mike Marlow" wrote in message
> I disagree that freehanding "anything" on a
> tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
Although I see freehand table saw use done all the time on job sites by
modern day "carpenters", it is usually done with an underpowered saw that
would easily bog down before it bit back at you.
While you might get away with it over time, it is definitely not the safest
practice on any table saw ... do it on a cabinet saw and you're just asking
for trouble.
Just my tuppence ....
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04
In article <[email protected]>, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, "Mike
>Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >If your brick wall runs true, so that the runout is fairly straight from
>0
>> >to 1/4in, then I'd just strike a chalk line or a pencil line from 0 to
>1/4in
>> >on the floor board and freehand it on the table saw.
>>
>> Either (a) you misspelled "band saw" or (b) you're an idiot. Freehanding
>> *anything* on a table saw is *very* dangerous, and advising other people
>to do
>> it is both dangerous and stupid.
>>
>
>Well, I did mean table saw but that may or may not make me an idiot. I have
>free handed a great number of things on a table saw over the years without a
>problem and more importantly, without the suggestion of a problem in the
>making.
And so you conclude that it's safe. I conclude that you've been lucky.
>If you can rip a board with a fence in place then why would it be
>dangerous to guide a like board without that same fence in place?
Because without the fence, you have nothing to guide it with, and the board
can easily become skewed. It takes only a very slight degree of skew to cause
a kickback.
>Slow and easy is the key to a good cut. I disagree that freehanding "anything" on a
>tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
You might be the only person to hold that opinion.
"Never cut freehand under any circumstances!" -- Kelly Mehler, "The Table Saw
Book"
"Never freehand on a table saw! ... I've watched some old-timers do this and
get away with it -- at least while I was watching. But I've also noticed that
many of them can't count to ten on their fingers..." -- Jim Tolpin, "Table Saw
Magic"
"Never crosscut freehand on a table saw! If you inadvertently twist the stock
even a tiny bit, the blade will jam in the kerf and throw the piece off the
table with tremendous force." -- Tolpin
Suture self... it's your fingers. You've been lucky so far. But don't advise
other people to adopt practices that are universally recognized as unsafe just
because you haven't gotten hurt -- yet.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
"brian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
> However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
> and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
> doing more after this project ;-)
>
> The key, though, is finishing this project, which requires that I get
> around obstruction #1, which is a brick half-wall. The wall is roughly
> 48" wide, and the flooring runs parallel to that wide side of the
> wall. My problem is basically that I'm not wonderful at math, so I'm
> hoping someone here can help me figure this out:
>
> According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
> with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
> to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
> board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
> straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
> my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
> figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
> blade?
>
> Thanks.
> brian.
If your brick wall runs true, so that the runout is fairly straight from 0
to 1/4in, then I'd just strike a chalk line or a pencil line from 0 to 1/4in
on the floor board and freehand it on the table saw.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 17 Sep 2004 15:41:25 -0700, [email protected] (brian) wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
>However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
>and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
>doing more after this project ;-)
>
>The key, though, is finishing this project, which requires that I get
>around obstruction #1, which is a brick half-wall. The wall is roughly
>48" wide, and the flooring runs parallel to that wide side of the
>wall. My problem is basically that I'm not wonderful at math, so I'm
>hoping someone here can help me figure this out:
>
>According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
>with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
>to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
>board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
>straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
>my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
>figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
>blade?
>
>Thanks.
>brian.
I *think* this is right...
tan (X) = .25/48
Solving that X=about 0.3 degrees.
If it were me and I had one to do, I'd cut it freehand with a circ saw
or jigsaw and clean it up with a sander.
HTH,
Paul
Find a short marking piece for each side of the cut out, mark it and transfer to the real piece. Draw a straight line
from each cut out side and cut.
Tools needed - pencil.
brian wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
> However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
> and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
> doing more after this project ;-)
>
> The key, though, is finishing this project, which requires that I get
> around obstruction #1, which is a brick half-wall. The wall is roughly
> 48" wide, and the flooring runs parallel to that wide side of the
> wall. My problem is basically that I'm not wonderful at math, so I'm
> hoping someone here can help me figure this out:
>
> According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
> with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
> to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
> board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
> straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
> my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
> figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
> blade?
>
> Thanks.
> brian.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (brian) wrote:
[snip]
>According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
>with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
>to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
>board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
>straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
>my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
>figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
>blade?
Here's the math:
angle = atan (rise / run)
where atan is the "inverse tangent" function (shown as Tan -1 on some handheld
calculators, or accomplished by using the Inv and Tan buttons on others; in
the Windows calculator, check the Inv box, and click the "tan" button).
In this case:
angle = atan ( 0.25 / 48 ) = atan ( 0.0052 ) = approx 0.3 degrees
You may have a tough time setting up a taper jig to cut a taper that shallow
on a table saw.
Here's how I'd do it:
1) mark the cut line on the board
2) trim the board close to the line; preferred tool is a bandsaw, but a saber
saw will work
3) finish up with a hand plane
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "Mike
Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >If your brick wall runs true, so that the runout is fairly straight from
0
> >to 1/4in, then I'd just strike a chalk line or a pencil line from 0 to
1/4in
> >on the floor board and freehand it on the table saw.
>
> Either (a) you misspelled "band saw" or (b) you're an idiot. Freehanding
> *anything* on a table saw is *very* dangerous, and advising other people
to do
> it is both dangerous and stupid.
>
Well, I did mean table saw but that may or may not make me an idiot. I have
free handed a great number of things on a table saw over the years without a
problem and more importantly, without the suggestion of a problem in the
making. If you can rip a board with a fence in place then why would it be
dangerous to guide a like board without that same fence in place? Slow and
easy is the key to a good cut. I disagree that freehanding "anything" on a
tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On 17 Sep 2004 15:41:25 -0700, brian <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
> However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
> and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
> doing more after this project ;-)
>
You probably spent too much on tools . . .
You don't want to calculate anything.
What you want to do is take a compass and use it to scribe the profile
of the wall onto your plank. You probably want to leave a 1/4" gap at
the edge, which you'll cover with your baseboard.
Once your plank is scribed, cut it with a sabre saw or a band saw.
You might want to get one of the many books on the uses of a steel
square. There are very few things that you need to do in the shop that
can't be done with a square.
An adage from higher math comes to mind: Numbers are the enemy. Avoid
using them. In math, that means you simplify first, then plug in the
numbers. In the shop, I'd turn that around: Mark your measurements on
a story stick and never use numbers until the next project.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> >Well, I did mean table saw but that may or may not make me an idiot. I
have
> >free handed a great number of things on a table saw over the years
without a
> >problem and more importantly, without the suggestion of a problem in the
> >making.
>
> And so you conclude that it's safe. I conclude that you've been lucky.
I conclude that there is no problem when proper care is taken in feeding the
stock.
>
> >If you can rip a board with a fence in place then why would it be
> >dangerous to guide a like board without that same fence in place?
>
> Because without the fence, you have nothing to guide it with, and the
board
> can easily become skewed. It takes only a very slight degree of skew to
cause
> a kickback.
This is not true at all. It takes a reasonably high degree of skew to
potentially cause kickback. It is also quite easy to guide the piece so
that you never reach that point.
>
> >Slow and easy is the key to a good cut. I disagree that freehanding
"anything" on a
> >tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
>
> You might be the only person to hold that opinion.
Obviously not in light of the comments you saw fit to place below. I have
seen it done by more experienced woodworkers than I can count and I have
done it myself. That makes for a pretty good base of experience. Much more
so than what I may have read in a book.
>
> "Never cut freehand under any circumstances!" -- Kelly Mehler, "The Table
Saw
> Book"
>
> "Never freehand on a table saw! ... I've watched some old-timers do this
and
> get away with it -- at least while I was watching. But I've also noticed
that
> many of them can't count to ten on their fingers..." -- Jim Tolpin, "Table
Saw
> Magic"
As the author states - they got away with it - yet, he attempts to convince
the reader that the practice is so dangerous. The author loses credibility
with comments like his closing comment.
>
> "Never crosscut freehand on a table saw! If you inadvertently twist the
stock
> even a tiny bit, the blade will jam in the kerf and throw the piece off
the
> table with tremendous force." -- Tolpin
If that were absolutely true then all of the misaligned table saws in the
world would be killing and maiming their unfortunate owners since they would
be experiencing the skew he talks about - even a tiny bit.
>
> Suture self... it's your fingers. You've been lucky so far. But don't
advise
> other people to adopt practices that are universally recognized as unsafe
just
> because you haven't gotten hurt -- yet.
>
You presume that I and others who have guided stock through a saw freehand
have been lucky. You have no basis for that but you're entitled to believe
it. The practice of carefully guiding a piece through is not universally
recognized as unsafe. It has been done and still is done by woodworkers
today. It requires care but so does every aspect of operating a table saw.
Any cut on a table saw can be made to be dangerous, and this one, no more so
than any other.
I respect your position not to do this and my only point is in response to
your original reply to me. Chose to follow whatever degree of safety
practice makes you most comfortable, but also recognize that despite what a
book says, or what has become something of a mantra in a group like this,
every day, common experiences prove the absoluteness of your claim to be a
bit much. Many woodworkers chose not to freehand cuts. That's fine. Many
chose to do it. Equally fine. The practice has not generated the amount of
injuries that some warn are inevitable.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Australopithecus scobis <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:41:25 -0700, brian wrote:
>
>> straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
>> my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
>> figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
>> blade?
>
> tan(theta) = opposite/adjacent
> sin(theta) = opposite/hypoteneuse
> cos(theta) = adjacent/hypoteneuse
>
> theta = arctan(opposite/adjacent) = 0.25/48 = 0.3 degrees ~= 18
> arcminutes.
>
> That's the math. One or more of the tablesaur guys will tell you how
> to set up the saw without the math.
>
Rip it straight, and get out yer trusty hand plane. This won't take an #8,
willit? ;)
Patriarch
In article <[email protected]>, JAW <[email protected]> wrote:
>Find a short marking piece for each side of the cut out, mark it and transfer
> to the real piece. Draw a straight line
>from each cut out side and cut.
>
>Tools needed - pencil.
And a bandsaw. :-)
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Like I said -- it's your fingers. But to advise others to adopt practices
that
> are known to be dangerous, especially without warning of the attendant
> hazards, is irresponsible.
>
As is exaggerating the dangers of a common practice.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
measure how wide at one end of the wall where the board needs to be. measure
at the other end of the wall. transfer measurements to board. draw line. cut
on line.
"brian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm really new to woodworking. In fact, I haven't really done any yet.
> However, I am laying my own wood floor (5"x3/4" plank cherry, nailed),
> and I've bought just about every tool under the sun by now, so I'll be
> doing more after this project ;-)
>
> The key, though, is finishing this project, which requires that I get
> around obstruction #1, which is a brick half-wall. The wall is roughly
> 48" wide, and the flooring runs parallel to that wide side of the
> wall. My problem is basically that I'm not wonderful at math, so I'm
> hoping someone here can help me figure this out:
>
> According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
> with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
> to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
> board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
> straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
> my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
> figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
> blade?
>
> Thanks.
> brian.
In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> In article <[email protected]>, "Mike
>>Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
> ...
>And so you conclude that it's safe. I conclude that you've been lucky.
>
>>If you can rip a board with a fence in place then why would it be
>>dangerous to guide a like board without that same fence in place?
>
>Because without the fence, you have nothing to guide it with, and the board
>can easily become skewed. It takes only a very slight degree of skew to cause
>a kickback.
Doesn't having a splitter and anti-kickback pawls have any effect?
>>Slow and easy is the key to a good cut. I disagree that freehanding "anything" on a
>>tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
>
>You might be the only person to hold that opinion.
>
>"Never cut freehand under any circumstances!" -- Kelly Mehler, "The Table Saw
>Book"
>
>"Never freehand on a table saw! ... I've watched some old-timers do this and
>get away with it -- at least while I was watching. But I've also noticed that
>many of them can't count to ten on their fingers..." -- Jim Tolpin, "Table Saw
>Magic"
Well, I had some sheet stock that was wider than my entire saw table -
so I couldn't use the fence. I pushed it through freehand - with my
hands about one foot to each side of the blade. The entire guard,
splitter, anti-kickback pawls set of equipment was in place.
I don't see how my fingers would end up in contact with the saw blade.
>"Never crosscut freehand on a table saw! If you inadvertently twist the stock
>even a tiny bit, the blade will jam in the kerf and throw the piece off the
>table with tremendous force." -- Tolpin
I most often use my sled for cross-cutting, but sometimes just use the
miter head. When using the miter head, there is more chance for
rotation - but for small stock (e.g. 2" or so across) the cut is
finished before the wood gets to the "going up" rear of the blade. That
seems to nearly eliminate the chance of kick back - doesn't it?
> ...
--
--henry schaffer
hes _AT_ ncsu _DOT_ edu
In article <[email protected]>, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> >Well, I did mean table saw but that may or may not make me an idiot. I
>have
>> >free handed a great number of things on a table saw over the years
>without a
>> >problem and more importantly, without the suggestion of a problem in the
>> >making.
>>
>> And so you conclude that it's safe. I conclude that you've been lucky.
>
>I conclude that there is no problem when proper care is taken in feeding the
>stock.
A conclusion entirely unsupported by the evidence.
>
>>
>> >If you can rip a board with a fence in place then why would it be
>> >dangerous to guide a like board without that same fence in place?
>>
>> Because without the fence, you have nothing to guide it with, and the
>board
>> can easily become skewed. It takes only a very slight degree of skew to
>cause
>> a kickback.
>
>This is not true at all. It takes a reasonably high degree of skew to
>potentially cause kickback.
Absolutely false. To cause a kickback, you need skew the board only enough to
bring the wood in contact with the teeth at the rear of the blade. This is a
tiny fraction of an inch.
> It is also quite easy to guide the piece so
>that you never reach that point.
Sure is -- if you use a fence.
>
>>
>> >Slow and easy is the key to a good cut. I disagree that freehanding
>"anything" on a
>> >tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
>>
>> You might be the only person to hold that opinion.
>
>Obviously not in light of the comments you saw fit to place below. I have
>seen it done by more experienced woodworkers than I can count and I have
>done it myself. That makes for a pretty good base of experience. Much more
>so than what I may have read in a book.
>
>>
>> "Never cut freehand under any circumstances!" -- Kelly Mehler, "The Table
>Saw
>> Book"
>>
>> "Never freehand on a table saw! ... I've watched some old-timers do this
>and
>> get away with it -- at least while I was watching. But I've also noticed
>that
>> many of them can't count to ten on their fingers..." -- Jim Tolpin, "Table
>Saw
>> Magic"
>
>As the author states - they got away with it - yet, he attempts to convince
>the reader that the practice is so dangerous. The author loses credibility
>with comments like his closing comment.
>
>>
>> "Never crosscut freehand on a table saw! If you inadvertently twist the
>stock
>> even a tiny bit, the blade will jam in the kerf and throw the piece off
>the
>> table with tremendous force." -- Tolpin
>
>If that were absolutely true then all of the misaligned table saws in the
>world would be killing and maiming their unfortunate owners since they would
>be experiencing the skew he talks about - even a tiny bit.
>
>>
>> Suture self... it's your fingers. You've been lucky so far. But don't
>advise
>> other people to adopt practices that are universally recognized as unsafe
>just
>> because you haven't gotten hurt -- yet.
>>
>
>You presume that I and others who have guided stock through a saw freehand
>have been lucky. You have no basis for that but you're entitled to believe
>it. The practice of carefully guiding a piece through is not universally
>recognized as unsafe. It has been done and still is done by woodworkers
>today. It requires care but so does every aspect of operating a table saw.
>Any cut on a table saw can be made to be dangerous, and this one, no more so
>than any other.
"The practice of carefully guiding a piece through" is synonymous with using a
fence, sled, miter gauge, etc. Freehand is not guiding, it's pushing. And to
state that it is no more dangerous to freehand than to make any other sort of
cut is just plain absurd.
>
>I respect your position not to do this and my only point is in response to
>your original reply to me. Chose to follow whatever degree of safety
>practice makes you most comfortable, but also recognize that despite what a
>book says, or what has become something of a mantra in a group like this,
>every day, common experiences prove the absoluteness of your claim to be a
>bit much. Many woodworkers chose not to freehand cuts. That's fine. Many
>chose to do it. Equally fine. The practice has not generated the amount of
>injuries that some warn are inevitable.
Like I said -- it's your fingers. But to advise others to adopt practices that
are known to be dangerous, especially without warning of the attendant
hazards, is irresponsible.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Snip
>
> You might want to get one of the many books on the uses of a steel
> square. There are very few things that you need to do in the shop that
> can't be done with a square.
>
I'll second that emotion. I just bought off e*ay a book that's 450
pages of small print on the uses of the steel square. You can figure
out the friggin meaning of life given a steel square and a pair of
dividers.
I know it's a little off the topic of the OP, but now every time I
pick up my framing square, I do so with a small sense of awe.
-Phil Crow
In article <[email protected]>, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>If your brick wall runs true, so that the runout is fairly straight from 0
>to 1/4in, then I'd just strike a chalk line or a pencil line from 0 to 1/4in
>on the floor board and freehand it on the table saw.
Either (a) you misspelled "band saw" or (b) you're an idiot. Freehanding
*anything* on a table saw is *very* dangerous, and advising other people to do
it is both dangerous and stupid.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
I'm thinking the variance is not exactly constant over the length of
the brick wall. If you want the edge of the board to match the wall
exactly, rip to the widest dimension, scribe to the wall and fit with
jig saw, coping saw and/or belt sander.
[email protected] (brian) wrote:
>According to all the measurements I've taken, my flooring is parallel
>with both an exterior wall, and the interior wall which runs parallel
>to it. If the brick half-wall was also straight, I'd need to rip a
>board to be about 2" in thickness. However, it isn't perfectly
>straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
>my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
>figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
>blade?
>
>Thanks.
>brian.
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:41:25 -0700, brian wrote:
> straight. The variance is roughly 1/4" over the 48". So I need to rip
> my board with that in mind. Does anyone know the calculation for
> figuring out the angle to set my board as it goes over the table saw
> blade?
tan(theta) = opposite/adjacent
sin(theta) = opposite/hypoteneuse
cos(theta) = adjacent/hypoteneuse
theta = arctan(opposite/adjacent) = 0.25/48 = 0.3 degrees ~= 18 arcminutes.
That's the math. One or more of the tablesaur guys will tell you how to
set up the saw without the math.
--
"Keep your ass behind you"
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Mike Marlow" wrote in message
>
> > I disagree that freehanding "anything" on a
> > tablesaw is *very* dangerous.
>
> Although I see freehand table saw use done all the time on job sites by
> modern day "carpenters", it is usually done with an underpowered saw that
> would easily bog down before it bit back at you.
My saw as well as plenty of others that I know of are well capable of going
past the bogging down point. Clearly, the more power, the greater the risk
of any kind of problem, but my original reply as quoted above was really
taking exception to the very dangerous statement - that's why I included
Doug's use of the astericks surrounding the word very.
>
> While you might get away with it over time, it is definitely not the
safest
> practice on any table saw ... do it on a cabinet saw and you're just
asking
> for trouble.
I've seen it done on a lot of cabinet saws and frankly beyond the fact that
I respect more powerful tools even more than I respect lesser powered tools,
I never gave another moments thought to one saw versus another. In fact I
might be more concerned for a woefully underpowered saw - I'm not fond of
saws that will stop and start on their own bases on whether a piece of wood
is on them or not.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]