Needs Pictures: 0
Results 46 to 60 of 104
Thread: Ducting update.
-
28th October 2016, 08:41 PM #46.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
Consider the following scenarios.
A rectangular hood sealed flat all round on the table saw table would have no airflow except through the throat slot, but would leak no dust or sawdust.
As the hood is raised off the table air would begin to flow under all the edges. All the airflow should be inward and no fine dust would escape.
Remember fine dust goes where the airflow goes.
If the airflow is fast enough saw dust sized particles would also not escape. This assumes that the dust extractor has sufficient suction to produce sufficient negative pressure inside the hood so that all airflow is into the hood. As the hood is raised higher the air velocity under each edge will decrease and while all the dust should still be caught, more and more of the larger particles will escape against the lower air velocity. Removing the back of the hood would exacerbate this problem.
The only edge that really matters as far as chips is the front edge of the guard. The blade alone generates a flow that draws air into the hood from the back and sides and squirts it out the front.
This photo shows what the blade alone does to air flow (DC is OF)
Now turn the DC on - blade is on even though it doesn't look like it
The key question is, is the net air speed/flow into the front of the hood enough to decelerate the visible dust particles being spun off by the blade.
Like you said the air speed out under the hood edge depends on the size of the gap and having the back open will reduce that speed.
But narrower gaps only produce increased air speed up to a point, then boundary effects kick in very rapidly which slow the air down - that is why a throat plate is near useless at producing any kind of flow.
I have done many measurements of this effect but they are 1) gap size, 2) DC suck power and 3) hood geometry, dependent plus we have no idea of the aerodynamic braking of the particles so they are of limited use but I will show one example.
The maximum speed of the visible particles as the leave the blade will be the same as the blade speed i.e. ~50m/s.
Below are the air speeds (in m/s) measured for very small gaps with the DC ON, which are less than 1/5 of the blade speed.
The question is how quickly does the particle decelerate from the blade to the hood edge - obviously not enough otherwise the dust would not sneak past the edge.
Having a longer path length to decelerate the big particles like DomAU's hood will be an advantage.
Now we need to factor in the vertical air speed of the air going upwards into the dust port. for a 100 mm duct drawing 400 cfm that's a speed of around 23 m/s inside the duct.
This is why having BMH will really help because it generates maximum flow and high air speeds further out in front of the open port.
That's the big advantage of having the port as close as possible to the blade front edge.
A vector sum of horizontal particle speed and sufficient air speed vertically upwards should at the very least result in the particles hitting the top of the front of the hood and once again being swept up provided there is enough flow but the back must be open to generate this flow
However all of this is less relevant if a flexible edge is used across the front edge of the hood as this will definitely slow the dust particles speeds down rapidly so that when they collide with the edge should be swept up by the air flow provided there is sufficient flow, and this is why it is essential for the back to be open. The sides can have also have some gap under them to aid the flow and because the big particles have little sideways momentum to overcome.
-
28th October 2016 08:41 PM # ADSGoogle Adsense Advertisement
- Join Date
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
-
28th October 2016, 10:07 PM #47SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Brisbane (Macleay Is)
- Posts
- 271
Bob
Pictures 1 & 2 in your last post seem to say it all. All the rest appears to be irrelevant regarding fine dust. The second photo with the extractor on shows all threads pulled into the hood even with the blade spinning. Does this not indicate that air is moving into the hood all round the lower edge of the hood? How can fine dust escape from the hood under such conditions? I notice that your hood in photo 2 is very close to the table. Ironically because the table saw hood is a semi enclosed environment it may not need large airflow to completely contain submicron dust. Larger particles may be a different matter
Your use of threads to show air flow is excellent - thanks for the idea
Could you please block the back of your hood to see if the wool threads are actually pulled in harder. If so blocking the back of the hood would not let fine dust escape and may help to also retain larger particles. To prevent larger particles from escaping it appears that we need more air entering at higher velocity at the front of the hood not the back.
So the remaining Q is what conditions produce an air speed between the front of the hood and the table that prevents the larger "sawdust" from also escaping.
Today I took the time to actually observe how sawdust (larger particles) were actually leaving the unguarded blade and where they ended up on the table. On my saw it was difficult to see all the dust as it left the blade, but it was clear that some if not most was actually coming from the back of the blade particularly when the wood had advanced such that the rear of the blade was also in the wood. Sawdust was distributed to the sides of the table on both sides of the blade ( even over the fence) as well as to the front of the table. Not all sawdust was thrown forward by the blade.
I have now decided to build a prototype where I can shift the duct entry between the front & rear of the hood. I will also try partially removing either the front or back to see which works the best. Doms use of fingers at the front may actually let in air at this end improving sawdust retention. Perhaps Dom might report whether his fingers at the front are sucked in or pushed out. He might also like to temporaily block the back of his guard to see if it improves sawdust retention. All food for thought
Ron
-
28th October 2016, 11:49 PM #48.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
I found some interesting data I measured back 2012 that I never reported on what a spinning blade does in terms of air movement.
A 100 toothed 12" blade will move at net amount of ~30 CFM from under the table to above the table into the hood.
A 40 toothed saw will move around ~60 CFM
This effectively over pressures the hood so the air drawn from the hood must be at least that much even before centrifugal forces are taken into account.
This is why vacuum cleaners attached to saw guards may struggle because they in practice can only generate about 100 CFM and by the time filters clog and they leak they will be down to less than 50 cfm.
Something really important I forgot to mention last time is that it is difficult to maintain a very small gap between the bottom of the guard and a piece of wood at all times.
For example even a piece of wood wider than the guard has an exit point where it is cutting the last few cm - the wood is still under the guard lifting it above the table and then as that back edge of the wood passes under the front edge of the guard it leaves an ever widening gap and this is where I observe most of the chips escape and if there is insufficient flow fine dust will escape from here as well.
Having a longer guard means that gap is open for longer than if the guard is shorter.
If the wood is narrower than the front of the guard the same gap is there during the entire time the wood is being cut.
So you should never rely on being able to achieve a small gap, just like always DCs leak there will at some time be gaps under the hood at least equivalent to the thickness of the wood being cut.
A flexible front edge of the guard can help in reducing those gaps.
Could you please block the back of your hood to see if the wool threads are actually pulled in harder. If so blocking the back of the hood would not let fine dust escape and may help to also retain larger particles. To prevent larger particles from escaping it appears that we need more air entering at higher velocity at the front of the hood not the back.
My previous hood is the hood in post 46 posted but with a bristle guard edge on three sides and the back open.
However this meant the port entrance is an even longer way from the blade edge and this is mainly why I wanted to upgrade the hood.
The highest velocity is needed between the blade and the port and this helped by making that path as short as possible.
The more I think about it the less I worry about air speed at the front edge and more about increasing the air speed between the chip source and the port as that is what ultimately controls the pick up of chips.
It may even be aided by closing the back and opening the front.
In the picture below the to maximise D the second option would seem better than the first as A would to some extent cancel B.
Some more measurements needed I think.
Guard1.jpg Guard2.jpg
So the remaining Q is what conditions produce an air speed between the front of the hood and the table that prevents the larger "sawdust" from also escaping.
I have now decided to build a prototype where I can shift the duct entry between the front & rear of the hood. I will also try partially removing either the front or back to see which works the best. Doms use of fingers at the front may actually let in air at this end improving sawdust retention. Perhaps Dom might report whether his fingers at the front are sucked in or pushed out.
-
29th October 2016, 12:19 AM #49GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
- Posts
- 1,439
Bob in your post above with the front of the hood open. Would a hi speed jet of air from a compressor at point A aid in pushing the dust and chips into the hose inlet at point C?
Pete
-
29th October 2016, 01:47 AM #50.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
I would worry about a high speed air jet disrupting any sort of smooth flow into the port.
OTOH it might already be so turbulent that it might not matter.
Rather than a jet I would think an air curtain or air knife would be better but they use quite high volumes of air.
To maximise air speed you either increase flow by adding more air or reduce gap area but any increase in air speed by forming a narrow gap is very localised.
I might have measured 10 m/s at the gap but that is only for a few mm close to the gap and immediately either side of the gap the air speed will drop quickly.
A chip with sufficient momentum opposite to any air flow at the gap appears to easily penetrate a local small volume of high speed air found in such a gap.
It would depend on the aerodynamic braking of the chip.
gap.jpg
-
29th October 2016, 03:46 AM #51GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
- Posts
- 1,439
Thanks Bob. I was thinking it could be tested by directing the blast from an air nozzle under the lip of the guard while making a cut to see what the effect was. Naturally you would need a second person to work the nozzle for a test cut. Air pressure could be played with to see how much air would be effective and what pressures and airflows might create turbulence in the hood if at all.
Pete
-
29th October 2016, 09:13 AM #52.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
It's worth a try. My concern is that unless a back pressure is right across the full width of the hood gap I think it might scatter some dust out of the hood,
Moving dust by blowing is akin to herding cats. I watched a bloke yesterday using compressed air to sweep the shed. He sure did get rid of all the stuff on the low down surfaces and the floor and you could see the big bits going out the door. However after doing this a few times unfortunately with the DC turned off there is now a pall of fine dust on all the higher surfaces he cannot reach.
-
29th October 2016, 10:21 AM #53SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
- Location
- Australia
- Posts
- 660
We used a trick back in the old factories; that is a bucked of sawdust and add water. Throw wet sawdust on ground then sweep it up. Keeps the fine dust under control. Appears to work surprisingly well. Knowing what I know now about fine dust, I just wonder how well it did work.
-
29th October 2016, 03:51 PM #54.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
Not that well - you 'd have to get the wet sawdust over evenly over every surface in the factory i.e. even machinery.
Sweeping a shed that has poor dust extraction raises the fine dust levels in a shed to about the same extent as RO sanding for about 15 minute which send the air well above any recommended OHS level,
-
30th October 2016, 12:35 AM #55GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
- Posts
- 1,439
That's why I don't like cats. Not herd animals.
I had to clean out my father's shop after he passed away a number of years ago. A leaf blower was more effective than compressed air. It also helped that the shop had low ceilings and a garage door across the end. I see it as being akin to pulling air with a DC compared to a vacuum cleaner. The larger volume of air takes the fines away better than a concentrated stream at higher velocity.
Sorry for the little hijack.
Pete
-
30th October 2016, 02:04 AM #56.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
A leaf blower will be no better at moving fine dust than a compressor. What folks forget is that they both move dust by generating a high pressure stream of air (the leaf blower just moves more air) but in doing so the blower has to create a low pressure volume in the vicinity of its air intake. The air stream propels visible dust because they are heavy or have a large cross sectional area. Eventually the air stream loses speed and the visible particles fall out of suspension but the invisible particles will ride the air currents and guess where they end up going? Well right back to the low pressure volume generated by the blower. In essence blowers rapidly recycle fine dust over and over again and generate every increasing concentrations of invisible dust.
This is why it is better to suck up all dust and transport it via ducting to be captured/filtered, or vented across a physical barrier like a shed wall.
-
30th October 2016, 09:04 AM #57GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Melbourne, Vic, Australia
- Posts
- 1,255
All very interesting. It makes me want to try a few experiments myself, but the motivation just isn't there, as despite any shortcomings in the guard's design the results are at the point where I don't want, need or expect any noticeable improvement.
I'm doubtful that opening the front and closing the back would be successful in controlling the ejection of chips; they just have too much energy and need a hard-stop to contain them (unless you direct most of the airflow through the top guard rather than the cabinet perhaps).
And yes, the front "fingers" of my guard are pulled slightly in (why wouldn't they be?). If I close the 6" port that goes to the table saw cabinet the vacuum is too great and basically collapses the overhead guard down onto the table if it is down, or pulls the front rubber fingers right around the front edge if the guard is raised up. It also makes a hell of a noise.
As an aside, I played with the idea of fitting a compressed air jet directed at the blade underneath the table to clear dust off the blade before it was carried back around and fired out the top, however the noise it made was ridiculously, painfully loud. I imagine directing compressed air at the blade from the top would have a similar effect.
-
30th October 2016, 10:06 AM #58.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
I agree, the law of diminishing returns eventually kicks in.
I'm doubtful that opening the front and closing the back would be successful in controlling the ejection of chips; they just have too much energy and need a hard-stop to contain them (unless you direct most of the airflow through the top guard rather than the cabinet perhaps).
And yes, the front "fingers" of my guard are pulled slightly in (why wouldn't they be?). If I close the 6" port that goes to the table saw cabinet the vacuum is too great and basically collapses the overhead guard down onto the table if it is down, or pulls the front rubber fingers right around the front edge if the guard is raised up. It also makes a hell of a noise.
As an aside, I played with the idea of fitting a compressed air jet directed at the blade underneath the table to clear dust off the blade before it was carried back around and fired out the top, however the noise it made was ridiculously, painfully loud. I imagine directing compressed air at the blade from the top would have a similar effect.
This might assist in "wiping" some dust off the blade before it carries it out of the cabinet.
I put one of these on my big belt sander and it makes a big differences to the dust the belt can carry away from the collection hood.
This effect happens already to some extent for saws with a zero throat plate so would probably be of more benefit to saws which did not have a throat plate.
Any zero gap plate placed inside a cabinet would need to be attached to the trunion so it could tilt with the saw.
Although it will add to the noise the more I think about it, the more I wonder why this is not done.
-
30th October 2016, 06:57 PM #59GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Location
- Melbourne, Vic, Australia
- Posts
- 1,255
It's funny you mention zero clearance inserts. I understand what you mean by placing an additional zero-clearance insert under the table to scrub chips off the blade and it makes sense to me that this would work, however my experience with actual zero-clearance inserts at the table-surface in my table saw is that the amount of dust fired out the top is greater with a zero clearance insert than without. That is, the dust collection is better without a zero-clearance insert. I guess because there more air pulled into the cabinet through the insert for a normal insert.
-
30th October 2016, 09:12 PM #60.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 27,792
Similar Threads
-
Ducting
By Kevin-R in forum DUST EXTRACTIONReplies: 6Last Post: 13th September 2012, 02:11 AM -
Ducting
By K>60 in forum DUST EXTRACTIONReplies: 11Last Post: 18th September 2007, 09:43 PM -
Ducting Efficiency
By Grunt in forum DUST EXTRACTIONReplies: 32Last Post: 13th September 2004, 09:00 PM