Re: sliding table saw: parallel fence vs 2nd crosscut fence? #k700s
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýYou guys are kidding yourself. ?+/-1.0 mm would be more sloppy than the original Felder unit. ?The required spec is +/- 0.01mm or better. ?What I produced was +/-0.0003-inches or +/- 0.008mm otherwise I scrapped them - a lot of them. ?The narrow distance between the pivot point and the point of 90¡ã registration is woefully inadequate and a flawed design IMO. I did the best I could to work with the existing design and the tolerances is required with the existing Felder design are extreme. ?And like I said before, there¡¯s more to this than machining T-nut and mating bushing. ? If you really want to put energy into finding a solution here I suggest you focus on a new design that uses the P-channel (angled top prism feature) for registration with two points of contact via mating saddles to provide the 90¡ã registration - similar to how the outrigger table attaches to the slider. ?If you want something that does angled miters a new approach similar to the following is the right strategy, or use the EGL/DGL. ? David Best DBestWorkshop@... https://www.flickr.com/photos/davidpbest/collections/ https://www.youtube.com/@David_Best On Oct 18, 2024, at 6:39?AM, imranindiana via groups.io <imranindiana@...> wrote:
|
David P. Best