Thread: Should I get old belt driven jointer with separate electric motor?

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

419
The tab you mention is completely missing on my machine and like you, I don't know what it is for. In fact until I saw your pix I did not even know what was missing.

I think all it can do is stop thin stock sliding under the fence or support the fence. Can't see that the fence needs support as the locks and engineering at the other end make it rock solid without the tab as a support. But it's not ideal to stop thin stock sliding under the fence as it could work just as well as an unwanted stop block if the stock goes slightly off parallel to the fence.

Anyway, I cleaned it up and made it slide nicely, so it's there when I finally work out what it does.


Attachment 528358

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I have a dust collection pipe available that you can see behind the jointer but I have never set it up because I need a transition piece to go from rectangular to round. Fortunately, the jointer makes shavings rather than dust and I just clear them up off the floor when I think of it. I have not done it for a while.

I'm just getting into what might become serious woodwork but I'm becoming somewhat neurotic about dust collection, although fortunately for me it seems that apart from noticeable if fairly minor long standing reactions to pine and man-made 'timbers' in enclosed spaces I'm pretty okay.

I was thinking about dust collection for this machine with a chute under it connected to a dust collector, but as it already has a closed base under the machine I decided I'd just scribe a couple of bits of ply/ MDF / Masonite on the inside of the open arcs on the pulley and opposite side of the machine and cut the arcs slightly over size. This will fully enclose the area under the cutter, although some dust or shavings will blow up above it. The pulley side will be fixed permanently to the timber base and the other side will be removeable, so I can vacuum or sweep out the accumulated shavings and dust when it's close to full. Much easier than hooking up dust collector etc every time I use it.

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I still have to work out a return spring mechanism. (Any suggestions from Forum members would be welcome.)

I offer this at the risk that it might produce much derision from some people, but it works fine.

My cheapo Aldi thicknesser /jointer came without a guard, so I made this out of timber with a big rubber band on an existing projection for a return 'spring'.

IMG_1463.jpg

IMG_1464.jpg


IMG_1465.jpg

EDIT: 1. Yes, I know the hook on the guard has split the MDF and I'll need to make a solid timber version if this one proves itself over time.
2. The round hole is so I can see the height scale on the infeed table.

I would be very careful with that gap under the jointer fence. We used to have an old Woodfast jointer at Tafe and a student the year before me got a piece of wood jammed under it (not sure if linked to the slide down plate as we had that too), and tried to force it through the cut and slipped and had their hand hit the blade.

Originally Posted by Toomnus

I would be very careful with that gap under the jointer fence. We used to have an old Woodfast jointer at Tafe and a student the year before me got a piece of wood jammed under it (not sure if linked to the slide down plate as we had that too), and tried to force it through the cut and slipped and had their hand hit the blade.

Thanks for that. It reinforces my intention to make a false fence that covers the gap. The original fence is attached to the infeed table and the gap is necessary to allow that table to be lowered. I assume that the large gap is to allow rebating, but I won't be doing that very often, it at all. I would generally be taking very small bites, so the false fence would reduce the gap to a couple of millimetres and I won't be putting anything anywhere near that thin through the jointer.

Originally Posted by 419

...the sliding tab on the outfeed side of the fence as shown in the last photo. Is this to stop thin work sliding under the fence or for something else?

Yes, I believe they are to stop thin strips sliding under the fence. They are called "gates" - or at least that's what the guys on the Canadian forum call them (so we almost certainly call them something else ).

Cheers, Vann.

Originally Posted by Vann

Yes, I believe they are to stop thin strips sliding under the fence. They are called "gates" - or at least that's what the guys on the Canadian forum call them (so we almost certainly call them something else ).

Thanks, Vann.

Gate would work fine to stop timber sliding under fence if:
1. Adjust, and remember always to adjust, gate to suitable depth every time fence rises or falls with infeed table, at least to any height that allows timber to get into gap.
2. Make sure not to feed thin timber under fence between cutter head and gate, otherwise gate achieves nothing.
3. Make sure to feed timber exactly parallel to or slightly away from fence so it doesn't catch on gate, as gate adds a potential obstruction to feed and whatever safety or timber damage problems flow from having timber trapped on cutter head while searching in a possible panic for the not very prominent light switch which operates my jointer.
4. After consistently using jointer for timber higher than gap, which is likely in my case, and not needing to consider risk of jamming thin timber into gap or adjusting gate, try to avoid being surprised after jamming thin timber into gap when I have clearly addressed the risk here.

My gate still doesn't operate smoothly after being cleaned up and dry lubed. Maybe the consequence of micro changes over half a century of expansion, contraction and whatever else happens to alter old cast iron over that time, a bit like the mystery of what happened to my originally pretty tight body over the same period. I could easily fix it (the jointer, not my body) up with a bit of careful light grinding, but if I'm likely to be using timber that could slide under the gap I'd still prefer to make a false fence.

Cheers, 419

Originally Posted by 419

I was thinking about dust collection for this machine with a chute under it connected to a dust collector, but as it already has a closed base under the machine I decided I'd just scribe a couple of bits of ply/ MDF / Masonite on the inside of the open arcs on the pulley and opposite side of the machine and cut the arcs slightly over size. This will fully enclose the area under the cutter, although some dust or shavings will blow up above it. The pulley side will be fixed permanently to the timber base and the other side will be removeable, so I can vacuum or sweep out the accumulated shavings and dust when it's close to full. Much easier than hooking up dust collector etc every time I use it.

Made a modified version of this, with ply on the outside. Probably traps about 3/4 of shavings in closed collector under jointer. The rest blows out about 2/3rds on pulley side of cutter head and the rest on the other side, probably because workpiece and guard cover the cutter and somehow favour the pulley side for ejection, probably because that's the side nearest the workpiece. Could probably fit suction on the pulley side but it's already dispersing before it would hit where suction head could be mounted and probably not worth the effort for a modest reduction. Not sure about micro-dust, but I'd guess the bulk of it gets blown outside the machine around the cutter heads.

Originally Posted by 419

My gate still doesn't operate smoothly after being cleaned up and dry lubed. Maybe the consequence of micro changes over half a century of expansion, contraction and whatever else happens to alter old cast iron over that time, ..... but if I'm likely to be using timber that could slide under the gap I'd still prefer to make a false fence.

Changed my opinion expressed above.

1. Revisited the sticky gate / tab issue and cleaned it up further by hand with wire brush and 120 grit sandpaper and took it back to bare metal on sides and back. Now operates smoothly, without dry or any other lube. It's now probably the way it left the factory.

2. The gate at maximum extension sits 3mm above the outfeed table, which presumably is to accommodate lowering the infeed table to the maximum depth of cut. I doubt anyone is going to run 2.9mm or thinner timber over the jointer, so that gap should be safe.

3. The gate also sits a minimum 0.1mm behind the face of the fence, so as long as the timber is held firmly against the fence it won't snag the timber, which previously I had identified as a possible malfunction or injury risk. There is a possible risk of snagging if the leading edge of the timber against the faces is a bit ragged, but I doubt that 0.1mm on the outfeed side of the gate recess in the fence is going to be a serious problem.

In light of 2 and 3 above, I don't think I need to make a false fence, just leave the gate at maximum extension and be careful to hold the timber firmly against the fence face.

The Gill brothers obviously knew what they were doing designing and building this machine to careful, durable and safe tolerances 50 to 60 years ago. The same can't be said for some modern machines

IMG_1466.jpg

Two 1/4" threaded holes are on my machine on the ledge surrounding the operator side of the cutter head bearing, as shown below. Are these original factory threads? If so, are they for a rebate fence or something else? If not, any ideas on what would be fitted to them? Thanks for any information.

IMG_1467.jpg

Originally Posted by 419

...2. The gate at maximum extension sits 3mm above the outfeed table, which presumably is to accommodate lowering the infeed table to the maximum depth of cut...

That doesn't sound right.

I would have thought that with both tables level (zero depth of cut) the 'gate' would reach the outfeed table. It should have a long enough slot to allow it to rise up into the fence as the infeed table is lowered to it's maximum.

However as you say, if it reaches to within 3mm of the table, the gap shouldn't be a problem.

I think some have springs so that they don't need to be manually raised as the infeed table is lowered - but still need to be manually lowered as the infeed table is raised.

Cheers, Vann.

Originally Posted by Vann

That doesn't sound right.

I would have thought that with both tables level (zero depth of cut) the 'gate' would reach the outfeed table. It should have a long enough slot to allow it to rise up into the fence as the infeed table is lowered to it's maximum.

Cheers, Vann.

You're half right.

In light of your quoted post I checked the machine again, and my original measurement stood. Then I checked the alignment of the tables as I'd been fiddling with them in recent days without checking the alignment as it wasn't being used. The infeed table dropped slightly at the outer infeed end. I checked the locking knob under the infeed table and it was tight. Then I lifted the infeed table at its outer end against the full weight of the machine and it lifted slightly and allowed a tighter turn on the locking knob, and the tables were aligned. So I've learned something about aligning and locking heavy tables.

Obviously the slight drop on the infeed table increased the gate gap at the outfeed end of the fence which is attached to the outer end of the infeed table.

Without wishing to be churlish, you're only half right because the gate is still clear of the outfeed table by about 1.5mm at full extension. This seems a reasonable gap.

The gate is held by a wing nut on the back of the fence. I was using it fixed in place. Maybe it's intended to slide in its groove, which is long enough to accommodate much more than a 3mm fall in the infeed table, with the wing nut held loosely. This would agree with your view that it should rise and fall with the infeed table, but I think a loosely held wing nut might come undone with vibration in use. Only one way to find out.

Thank you for your continuing contributions to my education in the mysteries of old machines.

Thanks, 419.

Originally Posted by 419

Made a modified version of this, with ply on the outside. Probably traps about 3/4 of shavings in closed collector under jointer. The rest blows out about 2/3rds on pulley side of cutter head and the rest on the other side, probably because workpiece and guard cover the cutter and somehow favour the pulley side for ejection, probably because that's the side nearest the workpiece. Could probably fit suction on the pulley side but it's already dispersing before it would hit where suction head could be mounted and probably not worth the effort for a modest reduction. Not sure about micro-dust, but I'd guess the bulk of it gets blown outside the machine around the cutter heads.

That failed.


Enclosing the shavings didn’t work too well as the shavings fill the enclosure fairly quickly while a lot escapes through the cutter head, and any benefit in capturing shavings will be largely lost in the time removing the front block, clearing out the shavings and replacing the block.


Adapted a dust collector hood to the shaped base of the Gilbro and it’s now about +95% efficient for visible shavings and dust collection. In case anyone else wants to do it, or adapt this to a similar machine, here’s how I did it. Not pretty, but it works very, very well.

1. Remove cutter head guard which sits below cutter head and blows a lot of shavings out of the gaps between the cutter head, tables and bearing ends. Replace bolts with washers of same thickness as guard, in case that thickness matters to bolt penetration into bearing heads, on top of original washers. The picture below is looking at the bottom of the guard (it’s marked in case I wonder what it’s for in a few years, or maybe even weeks) which is the underside of how it sits under the cutter head.

2. IMG_1478.jpg


3. Block hole on belt drive side with ply or similar screwed to ply strip or similar on inside to clamp both pieces to machine base, with extra screws at bottom to reduce risk of timber slipping down and getting entangled in belt and pulleys. Durability under vibration yet to be determined, so keep an eye on it.

4. IMG_1475.jpg


5. Cut dust hood to fit shaped top part of machine base under work side cutter head bearing. Difficult to scribe accurately

without removing tables, but worked well enough for efficient dust extraction with tables in place.
6. IMG_1469.jpg


7. Determine and rip timber angle to keep dust hood aligned with base.
8. IMG_1470.jpg


9. Screw dust hood to timber base. See picture 6.


10. Drill holes in timber base and machine base timber to take fasteners. I used T bolts. The extra holes in the timber attached to the dust hood are due to failed attempts to get the bore as close as possible to the 50x50mm angle iron base behind the timber so that the T bolts are trapped by the angle iron and won’t turn when the handles are tightened.

11. Cut out the bars across the exhaust on the dust hood as it might trap shavings.

12.Fit dust hood and its timber base and it sucks out about +95% of the shavings and visible dust with my as usual cheapo old Ozito 4 inch dust extractor, with occasional escapes from the pulley side bearing area. I suspect that the slight gaps between the dust hood and the gaps around the bearings actually improve dust extraction by improving an airstream to carry the shavings and dust into the extractor.



IMG_1474.jpg

IMG_1472.jpg