I went and bought some drawer guides today for my DIY mortiser. There turned out to be way too much vertical slop after installing them. The roller skate bearings performed WAY better.
Watch my progress below: (I plan on keeping an up to date log of my progress below:)
strongly that you make your mechanism _very _rigid. The Laguna mortiser (ordered August 29, 2009, arrived December 3, 2009) I received was a different model than that shown in the web-site video, and claimed to have a 3HP motor. The Rating plate claimed 2200W, which at 220v is 10A, which seems low for a 3HP motor.
Even tho the motor was wired for 220V, it came with a molded NEMA 5-15P line cord where one of the blades had been twisted with a pliers
90 degrees to create a faux NEMA 6-20P pattern. I cut this off and replaced it with a standard 6-20P plug.The redesigned table was clearly inferior to that shown on the website video. There was no milled slot lengthwise in the table for a mitre gauge, unlike that shown in the video, which required me to build a custom fence for mortising the ends of aprons and rails. The provided mitre gauge is completely useless, at 90 degrees to the bit.
As usual with Laguna, the instructions were minimal, and included no instructions on assembly.
The biggest issue is the rigidity of the column supporting the mortising head. It moves a fair bit when cutting mortises causing the width of the mortise to vary by a few hundredths which leads to ill-fitting loose tenons.
Wasn't particularly expensive (less than 1k), so you get what you pay for, I guess. I've rigged a brace from the wall to the top of the column which improved the stability (and quality of the mortise) considerably.
On the other hand, I love my LT-16.
scott
Ouch, sad story. Can't believe you didn't return it. I rarely do that but of they sent something different than what I was sold and then it had such performance issues...
I think money spent on a used Maka would be better spent. I can't wait to get one... some day.
1 HP is roughly 745 watts, so, _at_100%_efficiency, a 2200 watt motor is very close to 3HP.
And, I can say, with the _utmost_ confidence, it's a *much* more accurate number than any modern _vacuum_cleaner_ rating. Where they routinely manage to get "6+ HP" on _less_than_ 15A @ 120v.
Hmmm. I wonder if one could use one of those vacuums as the basis for a perpetual motion machine. less than 1800 watts electric in, over
4500 (6hp is 4470) watts out. assume only _50% efficiency in driving a generator, and you've still got an 'excess' output of 450 watts, beyond what is needed to be self-sustaining.More realistically, I wonder if the above could be used to get the FTC to impose some 'rational' standards on the vacuum advertising.
Hey, somebody could sue the vacuum cleaner companies for withholding the perpetual motion machine from all of us.
That would really get everybody's attention concerning their false advertising, etc.
Ever wonder why a vehicle with only a 100HP engine needs brakes that can absorb 1000HP to stop the car?
HP is a power rating that is instantaneous and involves no time factor.
Rev your vacuum cleaner up and stick a piece of wood in the fan. It probably generates ten times the rated HP of the motor for about 1 mSec. Then there is that ball you have to develop your wrists to steer...LOL
1 HP is roughly 745 watts, so, _at_100%_efficiency, a 2200 watt motor is very close to 3HP.And, I can say, with the _utmost_ confidence, it's a *much* more accurate number than any modern _vacuum_cleaner_ rating. Where they routinely manage to get "6+ HP" on _less_than_ 15A @ 120v.
Hmmm. I wonder if one could use one of those vacuums as the basis for a perpetual motion machine. less than 1800 watts electric in, over
4500 (6hp is 4470) watts out. assume only _50% efficiency in driving a generator, and you've still got an 'excess' output of 450 watts, beyond what is needed to be self-sustaining.More realistically, I wonder if the above could be used to get the FTC to impose some 'rational' standards on the vacuum advertising.
Yes. Have you ever seen a 100% efficient motor? I had this discussion with a support engineer at Laguna. It may be just a labelling issue, I haven't taken the housing off to read the actual motor nameplate and the FLA rating.
scott
Here is another approach done by somebody...
for the Z axis. Neat idea.
_Every_ electric motor I've seen efficiently transforms 100% of the electricity into it into "something else".
'Horsepower', _unqualified_, is a nebulous/ambiguous rating term. It is _not_necessarily_ equivalent to 'shaft horsepower', or 'brake horsepower', or other similar terms with a specified measurement criteria.
The Budweiser beer wagon has 8 horsepower. So does my lawn mower. Care to make any bets on which can pull harder?
"J. Clarke" wrote
They both can mow the lawn.
Although one method is a little more messy and hands on than the other. :-)
Actually, Clydesdales are rated at considerably more than one horsepower.
The 'horsepower' derives from the animals once used in English mining operations. They are relatively small specimans.
That aide, 'which can pull harder' is a matter of the torque generated, not the horsepower. With a sufficiently high 'down' ratio in a gear-box, that lawnmower engine -will- move loads that the Clydesdales can't budge w/o mechanical assistance (e.g., a multi-sheave rope-and-pulley arrangement).
It won't move such a load very fast, but it _will_ move it.
I'd love to have 350 Budweiser grade horse power in my truck!
Those horses are rated at 4-5 horses each. They and Morgans are the big horses on the block.
Mart> >>
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.