Kity planer/thicknesser set up

[Andy Self]

I have a Kity 1637 planer/thicknesser. I bought this machine because I was fed up to the gunnels with the awful quality of the dressed timber I had been buying. I have been using the machine for a while (I bought it just before Kity went bust, nice of the retailer not to mention that) but mainly with shorter lengths, where the force required to keep the work piece against the fence was not high. This weekend, a press-ganged friend and I were running some long Jarrah (3m) through and we realised just how awkward the fence system is.

There is no positive detent or alignment mechanism that allows the fence to be locked perpendicular to the table and application of torque to the locking screw tends to move the fence. In use, pulling the work piece towards the fence tends to cause the locking screw to loosen, hence allowing the fence to move.<O

Having spent a while staring at the problem, if you are looking for precision the Kity fence is difficult to set up. If you use a square to set the angle to 90 degrees and then tighten the locking screw, the final tightening always (trust me) moves the fence out of perpendicular. This problem has only manifested itself as I looked closely at how the fence works. In the past, I have set the fence to 90 degrees, clamped or cramped it up and done the job, no problem.

With the higher forces involved in long and unwieldily timber, having set the fence to close to 90 degrees (not close enough), and tightening the locking screw as hard as you can, the amount of effort required to put the fence out of square is laughingly small, being in the loosening direction.

Does anyone have any useful suggestions? Nitro-glycerine would not be all that helpful, but may be considered.
<O

All contributions gratefully received!

[ozwinner]

The name should have given it away, Kity, ie Pussy, ie C***.
Just goes to show, you should have bought some good crappy Tiawanese stuff.
Can you retro fit something else as the fence.

Cheers, Al

[Andy Self]

Thanks, Al, I was hoping for some practical advice. I can make a fence from scratch, but I was hoping that it was possible to work with the OEM version without resorting to the drawing board. Although, since yo started it, as Norman Schwarzenegger apparently said, about the Gulf War, going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your piano. Back on the PC track, the fence needs a positive detent at 90 degrees, and I can do that, but I was hoping that a positive fence location would be included in the list price!

[Bob Willson]

Andy, why does the fence kick out of square when you tighten the locknuts? Kity had/have a very good name and they were/are considered a premium machine.


Is it possible to replace the present locking screws with something a bit sturdier? Ie. drill and tap the screw holes to a much larger size and then use a bolt instead of a screw?

[ozwinner]

Geez, no wonder your peeved, I just looked through the Carbatec cattledog and saw the price..


Al

[Andy Self]

I bought the machine based on reputation and advice (from the retailer, you would think I would learn). As you tighten the bolt (not a screw, I misled you) that fixes the angle between the table and fence, it moves the fence towards the table. As you pull the work-piece towards the fence, it tends to loosen the bolt and open up the fence. After messing with this thing today, I can assure you that it is nigh impossible to set the fence to 90 degrees and tighten the fence sufficiently to hold it in position whilst you run timber through it and hold the reference surface against the fence.

[Andy Self]

Thanks for the reminder, Al! I did not pay that price, I bought it I the Carba-Tec sale two years ago, but it is still a $2K machine, or near enough. It is a pity you do not live in God’s country, because then you could come and have a laugh at it.

[ozwinner]

Do you have a piccy?

It might help in getting you problem solved.

Al

[Andy Self]

I am seriously keen for help, despite my supprssed humour, so I am off to the garage to take a photo. Thanks.

[Andy Self]

Sorry about the delay. The photographs were 3 MB and I had to reduce them to less than 100 kb to get on the forum. Then first photograph shows the view from the outfeed table (yes, I know the fence is not at right angles). The nearest bolt with a handle on it fixes the fence perpendicular to the table. The other one fixes the fence across the table, not an issue. As you tighten the handle/bolt, you are tending to reduce the angle between the fence and the table to less than 90 degrees. The base of the fence is not flat (unlike the top-yes, I know, it looks like the top of the fence should be the base, it isn’t), so the fence has to be set perp to the table using a square but when you tighten the bolt, you inevitably skew the fence. Conversely, as you use the fence, you apply force in the opposite direction (but counter clockwise) and pull the fence away from the table. It is stupidly easy to increase the fence angle beyond 90 degrees. Picture two shows the arrangement from the fence side.

[AlexS]

Andy,
The ML392, which is a rip-off of the Kity, has two oppose bolts where yours has just one. Tightening them both at once avoids the problem of the angle changing,

Also, the silver-headed bolt is supposed to be a positioning stop. If you can get the fence at right angles to the table, loosen the lock nut and screw the bolt through until it just touches the fence.

Its a pity that both machines have such a flimsy fence.

[ozwinner]

Have you tryed another ( two washers ) next to the adjust handle, or some grease.

I am thinking that when you tighten up the locking lever, it is gripping the fence and makeing it move.

Al

[ozwinner]

Also can you take out the bolt and reverse it?

So the adjust handle works in the oppisite direction?

Al

[ozwinner]

It is a pity you do not live in God’s country,

Who's God?

Al

[Andy Self]

Thanks, Guys. I did reverse the bolt, then it fouls the horizontal locking bolt and I messed this for a while until I went for a beer, too much playing around but a good thought.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>

I dunno who God is, either, but if there was one, he would live in Queensland. Or so I am told. I will let you know after Wednesday night.

<o></o>

The silver bolt is like tits on a bull. If you set it correctly i.e. just tight when the fence is perpendicular, that does not guarantee that the fence is perpendicular to the infeed and outfeed parts of the fence, since it acts on the centre of the fence only. More importantly, it certainly does not do anything about the fence moving away from the table when force is applied to place the reference surface against the fence. That seems to be the whole point of the fence, but what would I know?

<o></o>

The grease idea is fine, but when you are seeking the last few parts of a degree, any torque applied to the bolt will lead to a movement of the fence. This is exacerbated by the fact that the bolt works against the fence, rather than the supporting bracket i.e. torque applied to the bolt is transferred to the fence support rather than the body of the machine. See picture 2, as the bolt tightens; it acts on the bracket attached to the fence rather than the (green) body of the machine. Since the bolt tightens onto the bracket, no matter how much grease is used, the torque applied to the bolt will be transferred to the bracket, which will distort the fence.

<o></o>

The only reasonable idea I have had was to fix the fence (either with known reference wood, aluminium or kryptonite) and then tighten the bolt, but even then the aluminium fence will distort to some extent as the bolts are tightened and then spring back when the former is removed. This is made worse by the fact that the fence has to be removed to change from planer to thicknesser configuration.

<o></o>

Part of the problem is that even if you get the fence perp, after lucking onto a setting, it is so easy to distort that setting by pulling the work-piece towards the fence that it is a waste of time getting the static reference angle right in the first place.

<o></o>

I tend to think that the design is just rooted, but maybe somebody out there has done something to solve it.