Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 226 posts

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#101

Post by sjs382 »

yladiz wrote: post #92
sjs382 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently it's just saws from SawStop (now owned by Festool, IIRC?). Bosch released a saw with similar tech (called Reaxx -- https://www.boschtools.com/us/en/more/news-and-extras/specia... ) but they were forced to stop selling it. To answer your first question, you can't buy a SawStop at Home Depot or Lowes. If this tech was mandatory, it would force other saw manufacturers to charge $200 more per saw to cover paten…

Let's say the patent issue was rendered unnecessary (maybe courts require safety tech but also require the patent to be allowed royalty free) -- how much would this add to the cost of the saws? If the patent was still valid and they had to license it, are you sure it would add $200? The tech seems simple enough that I have a hard time believing a $400-ish saw becomes $600 due to this.

The Reaxx is comparable (almost the same saw, just without the safety component) to the saw that I use (Bosch 4000-09) and IIRC it cost $1499 before the injunction, compared to the 4000-9's $600.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#102

Post by joosters »

jessaustin wrote: post #76
joosters wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Which bits of the technology were infeasible prior to this?

2004 was a long time ago. Can we just assume for the sake of discussion that the state of the art in electronic devices was different then?

We're talking about a small piece of circuitry that detects a current. This was possible in 2004, it was hardly the dark age of electronics back then.

Besides, the more complex part of the sawstop, at least to my eyes, is the part where you have to stop a big metal blade from spinning very fast ASAP. Just putting some brake pads on it like a bicycle wheel is not going to be good enough.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#103

Post by baumandm »

luckydude wrote: post #95

My wife, when we were dating, bought me a Unisaw, one of the so-called dangerous saws. (She's also the woman who would say "I'm going out to get some milk, do you need more clamps? Woodworker joke, sorry :) I have no intention of getting a sawstop saw. Why? Because my shop is full of dangerous tools. My 1930's drillpress ripped some of my hair out, my 1940's metal lathe can take your arm off, my bandsaw is way more d…

Isn't this like saying you're not going to wear a seatbelt, because driving is still unsafe and you don't want to get complacent? I get what you're saying, but I would want to utilize as many safety precautions as possible, no matter what I'm doing.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#104

Post by syrrim »

raverbashing wrote: post #27
antongribok wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just suing, they have an injunction and at the moment you can't buy a saw in the USA with Bosch's REAXX technology, which actually works quite differently than SawStop. Here are two videos where you can compare for yourself: SawStop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE Bosch REAXX: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4heF0Y2-QYc Here's an article that talks about the lawsuit: https://www.protoolreviews.com/ne…

It would be fun if Bosch countersued with some of their patents (but I guess most of table saw patents are expired now) Yes, this seems like rent-seeking on SawStop so they can go and eat a sausage. As a sibling comment said, detecting the finger is the obvious part (and there should be ample prior art)

They aren't suing based on the finger detection - they're suing based on the retraction method.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#105

Post by sjs382 »

yladiz wrote: post #93
Bartweiss wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do they sell and advertise saws with this at Home Depot, Lowes, etc. where most people buy their power tools? Yes, they did. Both companies carried Bosch REAXX saws, which have injury detection sensors, and are advertised accordingly. ^edited to past tense because there's apparently an injunction banning US sales of REAXX. So they tried to, and the reason they don't is that the company advocating for this law won't…

I mean, beyond this specific issue, it does seem they were infringing on the patent, so he has a right to sue to stop it being sold or get royalties from new and previous sales. I think this tech should be mandatory in all saws, but I also think that one company shouldn't have control over the licensing and it probably shouldn't be something companies have to pay for.

If it's mandatory, the licensing should be both compulsory and FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-descrimatory).

I'd be happy if my saw had the tech.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#106

Post by joosters »

rasz wrote: post #57
joosters wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many things seem obvious after they are explained. Fact is, no-one had built this kind of thing before sawstop. If it were so obvious, how come only one company did it?

>So many things seem obvious after they are explained but randyrand guessed (I assume correctly, its so obvious I didnt bother checking, googling now ... yep capacitive coupling) without prior explanation. This is one of those 'X, but on a smartphone' patents.

Are there other tools that detect fingers and stop heavy machinery instantly? Did they exist prior to sawstop? Just because someone can guess how an invention works doesn't mean it was obvious, you've also got the benefit of being told of the idea in the first place. It's an invention that saves over ten life-changing injuries a day, if it was so inherently obvious, why did no-one else think of it before?

So many comments on here seem to focus on the electrical side of the patent, yet it's only part of the invention. There's also the non-trivial discovery of how to safely stop the fast spinning blade instantly.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#107

Post by rainforest »

jasode wrote: post #97
toomuchtodo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Table saws are mostly used by competent people and the injury rate is pretty low. When an accident does happen it only involves a single person and usually requires a few stitches. 4000 people a year suffer from being mangled by a table saw. That's losing digits or an appendage (their entire hand). (NPR had a story about this a week or two ago) EDIT: Let's say, conservatively, each accident on average costs $100K i…

>Just a hunch, but adding the safety break seems like a clear win. Human behavior is counterintuitive and maybe the situation would be worse. See excerpt: >Data supplied by SawStop concerning the number of table saw units sold and the number of reported blade contact incidences, proves that operators are nearly five times more likely to contact the saw blade of a SawStop saw as opposed to the operator of a convention…

Forgive my lack of knowledge, but what's the difference between a European sliding saw and a table saw with a sled?

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#108

Post by rthomas6 »

aligibbs wrote: post #85
randyrand wrote: post #25

Ya, no. Besides the horrendous patent issue (say goodbye to market competition), this will double the price of table saws. No thanks. Consumer protection laws are not about making obvious choices for me. Its supposed to protect me from the unknown unknowns - things that the average consumer would not know is dangerous. Everyone has heard about these safer saws for over a decade now. Everyone knows saws are dangerous.…

"CPSC commissioners in favor of the rule point out that the $200 price difference is dwarfed by the financial cost, and pain and harm caused by 30,000 ER visits and more than 4,000 amputations every year. CPSC's analysis puts the annual cost of table saw accidents at around $4 billion." Yet it would be cheaper overall.

Negative externalities? What's that?

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#109

Post by dpcx »

baumandm wrote: post #103
luckydude wrote: post #95

My wife, when we were dating, bought me a Unisaw, one of the so-called dangerous saws. (She's also the woman who would say "I'm going out to get some milk, do you need more clamps? Woodworker joke, sorry :) I have no intention of getting a sawstop saw. Why? Because my shop is full of dangerous tools. My 1930's drillpress ripped some of my hair out, my 1940's metal lathe can take your arm off, my bandsaw is way more d…

Isn't this like saying you're not going to wear a seatbelt, because driving is still unsafe and you don't want to get complacent? I get what you're saying, but I would want to utilize as many safety precautions as possible, no matter what I'm doing.

Sort of, but not really. The reason you wear a seatbelt (for the most part) is because of things that are outside of your control: other drivers. In the case of woodworking, there are no other woodworkers that are going to do something stupid.

And yes, I know that you also wear a seatbelt to remove potential injury from only you driving (think if you lose control, etc). You do the same in woodworking; you use clamps to prevent things from moving, you use push blocks to keep your hands from the blade, etc.

Re: Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On

#110

Post by yladiz »

sjs382 wrote: post #101
yladiz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say the patent issue was rendered unnecessary (maybe courts require safety tech but also require the patent to be allowed royalty free) -- how much would this add to the cost of the saws? If the patent was still valid and they had to license it, are you sure it would add $200? The tech seems simple enough that I have a hard time believing a $400-ish saw becomes $600 due to this.

The Reaxx is comparable (almost the same saw, just without the safety component) to the saw that I use (Bosch 4000-09) and IIRC it cost $1499 before the injunction, compared to the 4000-9's $600.

Wow, that's a 250% increase... I feel like that price is due to pricing the research into it rather than the cost of the actual product itself. Ideally if the tech becomes mandatory it won't be a significant increase.
Post reply on HN