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

CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

lumafield.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 206 posts

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#31

Post by dyauspitr »

bsder wrote: post #7
WillAdams wrote: post #2

Does making tools more expensive really benefit anyone other than the companies which own the patents which make them more expensive? Of these 30,000 injuries per year, how many happen when the blade guards are removed? How many happen when a push stick is not used? How many happen when a person stands in the direction that a piece of wood will be thrown by kickback? Once all those are subtracted are there enough inj…

The saw manufacturers all blew off SawStop because they were worried that they would now be liable for any injuries which still occurred. Simply make table saw manufacturers liable for any injury from the saw and this kind of mechanism will instantly become default.

That’s terrible though. You can’t make knife manufacturers responsible for everything a knife does.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#32

Post by lazide »

dyauspitr wrote: post #29
davesmylie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes mill my own lumber from windfall on my property - in the first instance somehow I managed to put a single piece of near green lumber (~40% moisture) in the same rack as some lumber I knew was dry. A few weeks later I needed some scrap for something, grabbed the piece closest on hand, pushed it into the blade and immediately triggered the wet wood alert and the blade spun down slowly. I knew that the wood…

How does it distinguish between wet wood and a finger? Also does this mean you can’t use the saw stop on fresh pressure treated lumber?

1) it can’t really tell reliably.

And

2) correct.

You can manually disable the auto—trigger mode in those situations though (bypass mode).

It also doesn’t like anything conductive - so anything coated with Mylar, any kind of conductive dust or debris, etc. is also a crapshoot.

Very much edge cases though, unless you’re dealing with a lot of randos. A workshop I used to share had a wall covered with sawstop ‘trophies’, due to people doing weird stuff.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#33

Post by lazide »

isatty wrote: post #12
chewbacha wrote: post #10

Wait, so is it a one time function? Can the wire be reset?

AFAIK all sawstop catridges are one time use only and also destroys the disk. This is not really a bug.

Yeah, reliably stopping a heavy very fast spinning object in just a few degrees of rotation is necessarily violent.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#34

Post by GuB-42 »

jchw wrote: post #22

I would be glad to see better table saw safety mechanisms, though I'm skeptical that 1. This will actually happen 2. That patent is the only one that will wind up mattering. I can't help but wonder if a big part of the reason the number of incidents is so high is because we're intentionally hyperbolic about risks when it comes to warning labels, for liability reasons. As an example, many appliances will warn that you…

My grandfather is 90, he was a woodworker, he lost two fingers to a table saw. Few woodworkers of his age have 10 fingers. Workshops are much safer today and woodworkers can expect to end their career with all their fingers. That SawStop thing is one of the many things that can contribute to it.

The idea that safety features cause complacency has been debunked several times. Statistically, well designed safety features or equipment reduce accidents, even if it may cause some people to get complacent.

And you are right to be afraid of kickback, and one of the risks associated with kickbacks is inadvertently touching the blade, that is the issue SawStop is designed to address. The blade guard helps too, but AFAIK, there are many instances where you can't use it.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#35

Post by davesmylie »

dyauspitr wrote: post #29
davesmylie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes mill my own lumber from windfall on my property - in the first instance somehow I managed to put a single piece of near green lumber (~40% moisture) in the same rack as some lumber I knew was dry. A few weeks later I needed some scrap for something, grabbed the piece closest on hand, pushed it into the blade and immediately triggered the wet wood alert and the blade spun down slowly. I knew that the wood…

How does it distinguish between wet wood and a finger? Also does this mean you can’t use the saw stop on fresh pressure treated lumber?

You can use wet wood or pressure treated lumber or even foil coated acrylic - but the key is that you need to be expecting this, and you put the saw in to by-pass mode.

At that point, it's just another dumb saw that will chop your finger off, but it won't trigger the cartridge, and you can make what ever cuts you need.

The way it tries to determine if it's wet wood / a body part is the capacitance change. Slightly different profile which they can use to make an educated guess (obviously erring on the side of caution).

This is why for some time they would give you a free cartridge if yours triggered on flesh - they wanted the data on there from real-life flesh contact to improve their calculations.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#37

Post by bawolff »

Animats wrote: post #28
bsder wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The saw manufacturers all blew off SawStop because they were worried that they would now be liable for any injuries which still occurred. Simply make table saw manufacturers liable for any injury from the saw and this kind of mechanism will instantly become default.

Yes, they did. They even tried to legislate against SawStop. See "H.R. 8181: Preserving Woodworking Traditions and Blocking Government-Mandated Monopolies Act"[1] Didn't go anywhere. There is supposedly woodworker opposition.[2] "Many woodworkers argue that the implementation of SawStop technology has disrupted traditional woodworking practices. Some feel that it has altered the craft in a negative way by making it l…

> "Many woodworkers argue that the implementation of SawStop technology has disrupted traditional woodworking practices. Some feel that it has altered the craft in a negative way by making it less reliant on skill and attentiveness, instead placing an emphasis on technology to prevent accidents. This shift in focus is seen as a departure from the fundamental principles and values of woodworking."

Wow. This is basically: real men enjoy getting their fingers cut off.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#38

Post by DannyBee »

fasthands9 wrote: post #16

Mostly unrelated, but I don't think SawStop is releasing its patent anytime soon like the article states. That SawStop press release was the CEO saying they would do so if the CPSC rule was passed, but the rule wasn't voted on. And even then they were only releasing one of their hundreds of patents.

They've pretty explicitly been willing to release all of the relevant patents. The truth is it was always a red herring for their competitors. The major players all have systems that don't rely on these patents.

Lawsuit discovery showed all of them had developed their own technology that was fine, patent wise. But it would have eaten into their profit.

Personally, I have an altendorf handguard sliding table saw, which will stop as fast as the sawstop, but not destroy the blade.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#39

Post by DannyBee »

Animats wrote: post #28
bsder wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The saw manufacturers all blew off SawStop because they were worried that they would now be liable for any injuries which still occurred. Simply make table saw manufacturers liable for any injury from the saw and this kind of mechanism will instantly become default.

Yes, they did. They even tried to legislate against SawStop. See "H.R. 8181: Preserving Woodworking Traditions and Blocking Government-Mandated Monopolies Act"[1] Didn't go anywhere. There is supposedly woodworker opposition.[2] "Many woodworkers argue that the implementation of SawStop technology has disrupted traditional woodworking practices. Some feel that it has altered the craft in a negative way by making it l…

#2 is becuase woodworkers as a group are fairly conservative.

TTI and friends were very effective at riling them up. I belong to a number of significant woodworking forums/etc, and have watched the manipulation over the years firsthand.

This was mostly in the form of "big daddy government wants to make you pay for more saws because of dumb people", so the take they have there around the craft itself is pretty funny.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#40

Post by bawolff »

dyauspitr wrote: post #31
bsder wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The saw manufacturers all blew off SawStop because they were worried that they would now be liable for any injuries which still occurred. Simply make table saw manufacturers liable for any injury from the saw and this kind of mechanism will instantly become default.

That’s terrible though. You can’t make knife manufacturers responsible for everything a knife does.

I think the idea is that if someone advertizes their saw as safe, but it isn't, then there should be some liability. Like if you make a fake safety saw or imply its much more safe than it actually is you should get in trouble.

But surely there must be some middle ground between a company making a fake safety saw, and a good faith effort that isn't quite perfect.

Post reply on HN