Thread: I framed my saw

Great work CK. Nice to be able to bring home more than photos! Same thing happened with my adjustable handle on my crosscut saw. Had to redo threaded rod.

You certainly put more effort into your frame than I did, Ck. Mine was an experiment just to see what a frame saw felt like to use, so I didn't go to a lot of trouble over the frame. Basic, is the word - the end pieces are Celtis (a light but 'strong' wood) & the spacer (compression?) bars are camphor-laurel, also quite strong for its density. (Unglued) M&T joints connect the parts :

Framesaw b.jpg

My bolts are 3/8", and the retaining pins are 2mm nails. So far, I haven't had any problems with metal failure, but my blade is just a bit of 3/4" bandsaw blade, which is quite thin & probably easier to tension than your heavier blade. As a saw, it works fine & cuts quickly, but is difficult to keep straight due to the narrow blade. It wanders either way & pre-kerfing the cut is mandatory.

This one was a "proof of concept" project that hasn't progressed in the 7 years since I made the prototype - I think I've only used it 3 or 4 times! If I ever get around to the production model, it will have a longer, wider blade - at just under 600mm this one is far too short for a good stroke on a 300mm wide board. I would also not fuss so much about the frame weight, my experience with this saw suggests a bit more weight in the frame could be a help rather than a handicap.

As to your hypotheses on speed of cut (viz:
- The new saw kerf is thinner,
- the rake might be smitch more aggressive,
- I believe I do make longer strokes and use more the entire 700mm length.
- and maybe others )

My take is:
1. The thin blade makes very little difference, a thicker blade with the same tpi cuts just as quickly, it simply takes a little more effort because you are removing a little more wood. Over the relatively narrow range of thicknesses I've been able to compare, the difference in effort was very slight, but would probably add to fatigue on long cuts.

2. Yep, within a reasonable & practical range, a higher rake bites deeper & cuts faster. But if the rake is too aggressive, the saw will feel very rough when cutting straight across the grain. As with any ripsaw, angling the cut makes the saw cut far more smoothly. Large gullets (i.e. fewer tpi) also feed into this equation, you need plenty of sawdust-carrying capacity in a wide cut.

3. Absolutely - that could well be the main factor in your particular example above!

4 Others? I would suggest from my limited experience with my saw that the frame weight would be a significant factor affecting both cut speed & general ease of sawing. If/when I get around to #2, I'll make the frame a bit heavier rather than go for the lightest weight as I did for #1. It would be a safe experiment because I can easily reduce weight if I over-do it...

Cheers,
Ian

P.S. Radiata is not the best wood to test saw-tracking with. It has a very pronounced difference in hardness between late-wood & early-wood & a saw tends to skate along the hard late-wood rings & follow the soft early-wood. So if you just let the saw track freely as you do when testing, it is liable to slide along the path of least resistance (the early-wood), & if these are angled away from your line it will give you the impression the saw is cutting to one side even though the teeth are evenly set.

Originally Posted by IanW

You certainly put more effort into your frame than I did, Ck. Mine was an experiment just to see what a frame saw felt like to use, so I didn't go to a lot of trouble over the frame. Basic, is the word - the end pieces are Celtis (a light but 'strong' wood) & the spacer (compression?) bars are camphor-laurel, also quite strong for its density. (Unglued) M&T joints connect the parts :

Thanks Ian. It is a good opportunity for me to practise some techniques like stopped chamfers, etc. If the shaping is not perfect I do not mind as it is not leaving my shop.

The timber I used is the spotted gum for the stretcher, which you identified on my last visit and the red eucalyptus. I think you suggested it could have been one of the stringy barks. Anyway, it is what I had. I also did not glue the frame up. The M&T joints do not move once it is tensioned up.

Originally Posted by IanW

4 Others? I would suggest from my limited experience with my saw that the frame weight would be a significant factor affecting both cut speed & general ease of sawing. If/when I get around to #2, I'll make the frame a bit heavier rather than go for the lightest weight as I did for #1. It would be a safe experiment because I can easily reduce weight if I over-do it....

What you said makes sense and funny you mentioned the weight. I actually did a rough test. I placed a block of wood on my kitchen scale and rested the saw with roughly middle of blade on it. Only slightly supported at the handle. Like if I am trying to cut it.



I did this with my S&J saw as well as the frame saw.

The S&J saw came to 500g and if I pit some pressure like going to cut on it to 1.5kg

Whereas the frame saw have 2.3kg resting and with pressure up to 4kg.

Again, not very scientific, but good enough for indication I'd say.

Originally Posted by IanW

As a saw, it works fine & cuts quickly, but is difficult to keep straight due to the narrow blade. It wanders either way & pre-kerfing the cut is mandatory.

True. It is hard to control on it's own. The blade I have is 40mm high. I noticed once it goes off track it I cannot bring it back. I have to start again. But if it stays in the kerf from the kerfing plane it just runs through. I have to make the kerf and then make sure I start it well until it is established.

But then I find it more relaxing then the panel saw. I only have to move it back and forth and can just go in a steady rhythm and let the saw do its work.

When resawing with the panel saw I usually have the workpiece on an incline in my vice and saw parallel to the bench. I have to rotate the wood a few times to make sure I stay straight.

Now with this saw I have to orient my timber to saw towards the bench. Otherwise I have to lean half way over the bench and that will not be as comfy. However, this is mainly due to my workshop arrangement. End of year I want to build a new bench and readjust my workspace.

Anyway....

Originally Posted by IanW

P.S. Radiata is not the best wood to test saw-tracking with. It has a very pronounced difference in hardness between late-wood & early-wood & a saw tends to skate along the hard late-wood rings & follow the soft early-wood. So if you just let the saw track freely as you do when testing, it is liable to slide along the path of least resistance (the early-wood), & if these are angled away from your line it will give you the impression the saw is cutting to one side even though the teeth are evenly set.

Thanks for that tip. I shall check the straightness of cut on some other timber later again and adjust further if needed.

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk