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

111–120 of 206 posts

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#111

Post by zitsarethecure »

moooo99 wrote: post #85
Freak_NL wrote: post #83

The question that bothers me whenever SawStop comes up: why does it appears as if this isn't much of a thing outside of the US? Or is it and I'm just not seeing it from my Dutch viewpoint? Does anyone know of anyone who has written about this discrepancy with some numbers (emergency room admissions, SawStop sales) backing it?

> why does it appears as if this isn't much of a thing outside of the US? Patents. SawStop does not sell outside the US/NA to my knowledge and they hold all the patents required. In 2015 Bosch introduced a system that did essentially the same thing as SawStop, but with a slightly different mechanism. SawStop sued in the US and won against Bosch. Since 2017 SawStop is part of Festool, which explains why their tech is…

Bosch REAXX has a significant advantage, that being it is non-destructive to the saw blade when it activates. All you have to do is press a reset button and you are back to work. Not having the option of buying this tech instead of SawStop's in the US was a net negative for consumers, IMO.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#112

Post by rcxdude »

stavros wrote: post #88
DannyBee wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually not. My handguard saw will do as well as the sawstop non-destructively (independently tested and verified, so you don't have to take their word for it). They do it (basically) by predicting whether your hand will touch the blade, rather than waiting until it does touch the blade. If you wait until someone actually touches the blade, then yes, you have to operate very very fast. That is unavoidable due to phy…

But what can happen that will mean that your finger will touch the blade in a quarter of a second? I can't think of anything, short of dropping a person on the saw.

Finger movements are generally on the order of 1-2Hz, a hand holding a large piece of wood will generally be much lower than that, which means that at the hundreds of millisecond level most of the movement can be predicted from momentum alone. Something which identifies and tracks hands in a view and fits a second order model to the movement can likely predict accurately enough at that timescale to make for a meaningful safety improvement (especially because if it's non-destructive you can tune it to err more on the side of caution than a destructive option)

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#113

Post by lazide »

WillAdams wrote: post #101
wat10000 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that injuries don’t count if the operator’s actions contributed to them and they’re not worth preventing?

I'm suggesting that people should have a sense of personal responsibility when operating potentially dangerous equipment, and that a person should not be required to pay extra for a business or hobby just because some well-to-do patent lawyer has come up with a business model which has an end-game of requiring that patents from his company be required in products.

Just wait until you hear about building codes requiring mandatory AFCI and GCFI breakers.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#114

Post by stavros »

rcxdude wrote: post #112
stavros wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what can happen that will mean that your finger will touch the blade in a quarter of a second? I can't think of anything, short of dropping a person on the saw.

Finger movements are generally on the order of 1-2Hz, a hand holding a large piece of wood will generally be much lower than that, which means that at the hundreds of millisecond level most of the movement can be predicted from momentum alone. Something which identifies and tracks hands in a view and fits a second order model to the movement can likely predict accurately enough at that timescale to make for a meaning…

Hm yeah, I guess you're right, if it's non-destructive it doesn't matter much if it's wrong.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#115

Post by delichon »

ragingroosevelt wrote: post #93
jwr wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reason could also be that the US woodworking culture treats a table saw as an essential tool (especially the basic table saw, without a sliding table), while elsewhere track saws are used more, it seems. If you run commercial production, then you do need a table saw (but one with a sliding table!), but for hobby work you might as well spend some time for track saw setups and be much safer.

I think you're probably right. I have an older Delta table saw and recently decided to sell it because a miter saw + track saw + some other tools you need anyhow does nearly everything a table saw would do, but uses space way more efficiently.

My table saw is space efficient because I also use it (covered) as a table in the middle of my small shop, sometimes to support work I cut with a track saw. And I added a router table to the extension, which just disappears as part of the table. It's a space dense with utility.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#116

Post by DannyBee »

stavros wrote: post #110
danielheath wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holding a piece of wood and sliding it along a table saw (to cut it) is the canonical method for losing a finger, and you could definitely pick that out with a relatively simple bit of computer vision.

Yes but there's no way for me to not be able to pull my hand back in a quarter of a second for that.

Are you saying you tink you will notice and react?

Because that's what doesn't happen and people lose fingers.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#117

Post by DannyBee »

Fraterkes wrote: post #79
DannyBee wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually not. My handguard saw will do as well as the sawstop non-destructively (independently tested and verified, so you don't have to take their word for it). They do it (basically) by predicting whether your hand will touch the blade, rather than waiting until it does touch the blade. If you wait until someone actually touches the blade, then yes, you have to operate very very fast. That is unavoidable due to phy…

Ive looked at the saw you mention in another comment, and in all honesty Id much rather have a safety precaution that works based on very simple physics (like sawstop) than some black-box ai hand detection algorithm.

To each their own. Computer vision of this kind is not like cutting edge ai. This is pretty standard fare and has been for decades

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#118

Post by DannyBee »

fasthands9 wrote: post #53
DannyBee wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, whic…

That table saw looks very nice, but also $7,000? That's not the same market that people are talking about. I'm not so sure if other companies have the ability at a sub $2000 price point! Bosch came out with their own system that they thought was different. The product was on shelves for a year and then SawStop successfully sued. If a major company like that is unable to do it even after their lawyers gave them the cl…

Sure it's a pro saw.

Evidence from the lawsuits says they could do it at the 299 or 399 price point. Cost per saw was like 50 bucks.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#119

Post by Arainach »

jwr wrote: post #89
Freak_NL wrote: post #83

The question that bothers me whenever SawStop comes up: why does it appears as if this isn't much of a thing outside of the US? Or is it and I'm just not seeing it from my Dutch viewpoint? Does anyone know of anyone who has written about this discrepancy with some numbers (emergency room admissions, SawStop sales) backing it?

One reason could also be that the US woodworking culture treats a table saw as an essential tool (especially the basic table saw, without a sliding table), while elsewhere track saws are used more, it seems. If you run commercial production, then you do need a table saw (but one with a sliding table!), but for hobby work you might as well spend some time for track saw setups and be much safer.

They're very different tools, and neither is inherently safe. You can absolutely have kickback-like issues with a track saw if you're not careful when making plunge cuts, for instance.

A track saw is more convenient and arguably safer when breaking down a huge piece of plywood. After that it's no table saw replacement. You can't easily do repeated cuts of identical stuff width, you can't work on small parts, you can't make most of the common jigs, you can't do dadoes or box joints, etc.

Re: CT Scans of New vs. Used SawStop

#120

Post by xattt »

stavros wrote: post #86
hettygreen wrote: post #64

I bought my sawstop shortly after my partner started working in the medical field, where they'd see saw related injuries or amputations come in weekly. Saw was expensive, yeah.. but they hold their value on the second hand market, if you ever even see them for sale. I had a cabinet maker over last week, after he noticed my sawstop he showed me his 2 partially missing fingers. The company also isn't playing games, the…

> they hold their value on the second hand market With the topic under discussion, this is an amazing pun.

No way of getting a five-finger discount on these.
Post reply on HN