Thread: Band saw_V_Table saw_Advice sought

That's some thick hardwood you've got there..
IMHO I'd use a table saw, the bigger the better as to do it on a bandsaw resawing you'd need a even bigger unit.
Others with more experience will give better advice, I'm sure.
The other thing, you might just take the timber to a local shop & ask them to rip it for you.
Cheers, crowie

I would hate to do that kind of job on a bandsaw unless you intend to buy a big bugger industrial one.
Cheers
Wolffie

I would hate to do it on a table saw!

220mm wide by 115mm thick: you're not going to do that in one pass on a typical table saw. Even a 12" saw has maximum 4" depth of cut. You'll be cutting one side (with the blade guard removed), flipping and cutting again. Timbers like that are going to be very heavy and hard as rock. I wouldn't even attempt it.

A bandsaw would be more likely to be able to handle a cut of that size, but it will be very tough work. The average hobbyist bandsaw would most likely struggle. And you'll have a hell of a time with blade drift etc.

Personally, I would either leave them in their original sizes, which is part of the appeal of old bridge timbers anyway, or I would be using a chainsaw with a milling attachment to resize them and maybe a powered hand plane, belt sander or possibly a thicknesser to dress them if required.

I would most definitely not do this on a standard 3HP Table saw. For a start you will have to make the initial ripping cuts in two passes as the biggest blade you can realistically put on a 3HP saw is 300 mm. The biggest cut you can make with this is 100 mm but seeing as you want to cut at least 115 mm this is VERY hard on the motor since it will mean the blade will be cutting buried in the wood which loads up the motor enormously. Then you would have to flip it over and cut the remainder. You could cut it with two 60 mm deep passes but the load on the first pass will still be high as the top third of the saw will still be buried in the wood will have a similar load to a 100 mm deep cut.
To cut 115 mm you would need a 350 mm blade and a twin belt drive. Some high end TS do have this capability but you will be paying a lot of money

With a sharp low TPI blade even a 2HP bandsaw will rip 200 mm in one pass. It will be slow but it will do it without loading up the motor anywhere near as much as a table saw.

Personally I would be extremely careful about ripping used stuff that has been anywhere near a road as blue metal chips have a way of making their way into small cracks. These also cannot be detected with a metal detector.

Perhaps the safest cheap way to at least break up the pieces into more managable pieces it is with a Lucas mill or a small chainsaw mill with a narrow kerf bar/chain. You'd need about a 50 (preferably 60) cc or biggest electric chainsaw.

Originally Posted by BobL

The biggest cut you can make with this is 100 mm but seeing as you want to cut at least 115 mm this is VERY hard on the motor since it will mean the blade will be cutting buried in the wood which loads up the motor enormously. Then you would have to flip it over and cut the remainder. You could cut it with two 60 mm deep passes but the load on the first pass will still be high as the top third of the saw will still be buried in the wood will have a similar load to a 100 mm deep cut.

When cutting in from both sides to half way with a tablesaw you dont have to go all the way to half way in one pass. You could go 30mm in from each side then wind the blade up to 60mm and go again on both sides. That would take a lot of pressure off the saw, but make the job twice as big as twice as many passes would be required.

I have a 12 inch tablesaw and a 21 inch bandsaw, both 3hp 15 amp units. I have cut some very hard and very thick timber on both machines. Every job is different and I have not tackled timber of the length that ISuckAtWoodwork is talking about

Assuming we are talking minimum 3 to 4 metre lengths, the downside for this job with either a tablesaw or a bandsaw is that the saw remains stationary while the timber has to be moved through the blade. With the smaller pieces that are used on most amateur jobs this is the best way to go. But with large heavy pieces like this, managing the workpiece as it passes through the blade would create a number of challenges.

Infeed support, outfeed support, maintaining a consistent rate of feed to avoid overworking the saw if its too fast or burning the timber if its too slow. with big heavy pieces like this, keeping the timber in contact with the rip fence requires a certain amount of skill and practice even if featherboards are being used, and they should be! These considerations apply equally to a tablesaw and a bandsaw.

As I said a couple of paragraphs back, having to move the timber while the saw stays on the spot is the downside for the tablesaw and bandsaw. Others have suggested chainsaw mills or lucas-style mills. the workpiece remains in place and the blade moves, which is a better proposition when working with large heavy pieces. Once again there is a downside, these types of mills generally rely on the weight of the workpiece, usually a large log, to hold the workpiece in place while it is cut. I feel that these beams are a bit light to do that by themselves and they would need to be secured in place by some means.

Its one of those jobs that is in "no mans land" its too small for a mill but it is a bit bigger than most of us would be confident of taking on in a amateur workshop.

Many may disagree, but I dont think a chainsaw or lucas-style mill is the way to go so that brings us back ot the tablesaw/bandsaw question.

My bandsaw has a 3hp motor and runs a one inch tungsten carbide 2tpi blade. I think that cutting through nine inches of redgum even with this combination would be a slow and laborious process. This is old and very hard timber and any problem with the tuning of the bandsaw will result in blade drift and runout problems which may make it impossible for a novice to complete the cut, and cause some problems for very experienced operators as well. With a bandsaw you must complete the cut in one pass, you cant go halfway, Its all or nothing. setting up a bandsaw to make cuts of this type accurately is not something a beginner should take on as a first project. If ISuckAtWoodwork had a bandsaw and some experience at using it my advice may be very different here. My financial outlay for the bandsaw and blade was over $2000.00.

My tablesaw has a 3hp motor and I can fit a variety of blades to it. It has a maximum depth of cut of 100mm. Setting up a tablesaw is a matter of making sure that certain points are parallel or perpendicular to each other. Measuring equipment can quickly determine whether it is right or wrong. setting up a tablesaw is therefore a science. it is measureable and duplicatable and no level of skill or intuition is required beyone being able to measure accurately. Setting up a bandsaw is more of an art. there is no right or wrong answers, just some that work and some that dont, and of those setups that work some work better than others. For a beginner it would be easier to set up a tablesaw than a bandsaw.

With a tablesaw you can control the depth of cut taken on a given pass, earlier I said maybe 30mm per pass. If you want to you can make that 1mm for 30 passes to make the same depth, it would just take 30 times as long. Unlike a bandsaw it isnt "all or nothing".
Using the tablesaw there would be no blade drift issues, the blade would just work its way through in a straight line as long as the workpiece is fed in straight. My tablesaw cost about $700.00.

I apologise for the long post, but I think I needed to go into that much detail since the original question was posed by a member who admits to not much experience and I want to help him understandthe differences in approach with the different equipment.

ISuckAtWoodwork, I hope this helps you to work out which way to go but if it all becomes too difficult for you and you decide to abandon the project, send me all that yucky old bridge timber and i will dispose of it safely for you

Doug

I have cut 8" square blocks into 8x2 slabs with my Alaskan mill. It's no big deal, you just have to work out how you're going to secure it and support it while you're cutting. You may have to stop and reposition your supports if the offcut is too thin.

However if I was doing this, I wouldn't worry about sizing down to 200x100, I would leave them as is. But to break a 220x115 up into 100x115 I would do it with the chainsaw mill and I have a bandsaw and a tablesaw too

Non-through cuts on a tablesaw mean removing the blade guard and possibly the riving knife/splitter depending on the saw.

To the OP, if you go the tablesaw route, make sure you buy one that has a riving knife which travels up and down with the blade and which is cleared by the top of the blade.

Originally Posted by doug3030

When cutting in from both sides to half way with a tablesaw you dont have to go all the way to half way in one pass. You could go 30mm in from each side then wind the blade up to 60mm and go again on both sides. That would take a lot of pressure off the saw, but make the job twice as big as twice as many passes would be required.

Making more shallower blind cuts does not take as much pressure of the saw as much as one might think.

The majority of load is always on the top part of the blade which still buried in the wood whether this is a deep or shallow blind cut.

Originally Posted by doug3030

As I said a couple of paragraphs back, having to move the timber while the saw stays on the spot is the downside for the tablesaw and bandsaw. Others have suggested chainsaw mills or lucas-style mills. the workpiece remains in place and the blade moves, which is a better proposition when working with large heavy pieces. Once again there is a downside, these types of mills generally rely on the weight of the workpiece, usually a large log, to hold the workpiece in place while it is cut. I feel that these beams are a bit light to do that by themselves and they would need to be secured in place by some means.

It's not that hard, I have to clamp all my pieces when they get that small. Two saw horses and two clamps and a CS mill would rip each of these puppies in about 2 minutes.

I would not advocate using a CS mill to mill them up completely - that would turn turn too much of them into sawdust - Maybe just in half so they could be tackled more easily on something else. Somewhere there is a thread by Martix about milling sleepers with a cheap electric chainsaw. I'll see if I can find it.

Perhaps one of these Protool saws might be the go



Sword saw UniverS SSP 200 EB

Originally Posted by ian

Perhaps one of these Protool saws might be the go

For that price you can buy a much more robust Stihl 2.3 kW electric chainsaw (with twice the cutting width), a small Granberg alaskan (Horizontal) mill and a Granberg mini (vertical) mill.

Originally Posted by BobL

For that price you can buy a much more robust Stihl 2.3 kW electric chainsaw (with twice the cutting width), a small Granberg alaskan (Horizontal) mill and a Granberg mini (vertical) mill.

so basically the choices for the OP come down to

a really big table saw -- probably requiring 3 phase power
a mid level bandsaw with a low TPI blade -- both these will probably require the construction of a table extension or carriage of some sort to carry the beams past the blade
a portable (hand held) bandsaw
a sword saw
a chain saw mill
a lucas or similar mill

based on your milling experience, where would the inexperienced OP likely find the "sweet spot" in terms of
ease of use
safety
price
resale value
need for additional jigs, etc -- eg a stationary band /table saw would likely require table extensions or some sort of carriage to pass the beams past the blade

There are other many ifs and buts on this
- how many pieces need to be milled
- how much space have you got to store big pieces of machinery
- how much time do you have
- how soon do you want to recover any investment made on machinery
- do you have other uses for the machinery
- what other skills do you have
- what do you already have
- how much help do you have available

eg
If you already had a chainsaw and a welder and knew how to weld you could knock up a minimill in the morning and mill half a dozen sleepers in the afternoon.

Overall, if I had to start from scratch, I would go with a bandsaw. There will be a learning curve and you may even mangle a blade in the process but once you learn how to rip big pieces of hard wood with a BS it will remain a very useful skill and it is also one the most useful machines in a WW shed.

Originally Posted by BobL

Overall, if I had to start from scratch, I would go with a bandsaw. There will be a learning curve and you may even mangle a blade in the process but once you learn how to rip big pieces of hard wood with a BS it will remain a very useful skill and it is also one the most useful machines in a WW shed.

The trouble is that there is a good chance of destroying a blade or two while developing the necessary skills quickly because the OP apparrently has no smaller jobs to develop the skills on and build up slowly. A bandsaw blade that is capable of doing the job is not cheap. This could add a lot of unexpected costs to the project budget.

ISuckatWoodwork has already said he has neither tablesaw or bandsaw but may purchase one to do the job. there is not such a steep learning curve on a tablesaw as there is on a bandsaw and far less risk of damaging blades and the initial purchase can be a lot cheaper. We arent talking about what a qualified tradesman would use to do the job given a choice; we are advising a new woodworker how to do a particular job safely and economically. I seriously think that a 12 inch tablesaw with making multiple passes would be the best way for a beginner to get this job done.

Doug

IMHO a big table saw doing blind cuts on hard timber is WAAAAAy more dangerous than any bandsaw operation. If the kerf pinches the top of the cut it could throw spears of wood back at the operator like a javelin. I still cannot get out of my head the picture I once saw of a large sliver of timber that had entered an operators wrist and came out just above the elbow. The surgeons had to deconstruct the guys arm to get all the splinters out.

Originally Posted by BobL

IMHO a big table saw doing blind cuts on hard timber is WAAAAAy more dangerous than any bandsaw operation.

I tend to agree with you BobL

However, given the OP's self confessed lack of experience, my thoughts are tending towards a small chainsaw mill or a sword saw, with the sword saw leading
yes it's more expensive than a small chainsaw mill, but I'm thinking the OP could dispose of the Protool at the end of his project and not show too big a net outlay
I'm told Festool gear retains it value very well, and know of no reson why Protool stuff wouldn't be similarly regarded.