New tool idea -- need your opinions! (Hint: one machine instead of a planer AND A jointer)

Page 2 of 3  

scribbled:

Ok, your lightsabre is intriguing. Once you've filed your patent and it's no longer a "Nukleer Seekrit", come back and tell us about it. I'm sure we'll all be very interested and you will no doubt get a bunch of pointers.
As an economist, I can appreciate the joke. To try to do a market study at this point is a little premature: assuming a can opener won't get the can opened. Besides, this economist doesn't take canned food into the bush: too heavy for hiking and much better food can be taken along. Anyway, who ever heard of people going into the bush without a knife, which is perfectly adequate to open a can. So, show us the can and we'll tell you how to open it.
BTW, don't brag about having an MBA, it gives you no credibility with this group. :-)
Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/antifaq.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Woodworking
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:03:31 -0800, Luigi Zanasi wrote:

Glad the "desert island"/can-opener reference was instantly recognized! I have an undergrad degree in economics, from which I mostly remember (a) as per Father Guido Sarducci's Five-a Minute University, "Supply and Demand" (and maybe guns-and-butter), (b) IS-LM ... ummm ... one's like ... monetary... flow-y ... things, and the other is, like ... ummm ... products and stuff?; and (c) most people who offer up their opinions on national affairs should have taken at least basic econ before so doing. >;-)
And - I wasn't meaning to brag about the MBA. It's actually sort of hanging, dusty (sawdust, of course) and unused, on my wall - I might sell it on eBay for the $60k (USD) it cost me. The point was to fend off all the "invention advice" that gets offered up at the drop of a hat whenever anyone mentions Inventions in any gathering of two or more Men Who Like To Make Things.
Especially if any of them have beards. Or still have a slide rule in a drawer, somewhere. Red Green comes to mind. ;-)
Finally -- looked at the torsion box and Galleria project. I bow to you. Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:19:53 -0600, Duane Bozarth wrote:
[snip]

Excellent point.
Here's where I have to again invoke Nukleer Seekrits. I can't answer your question at the moment by telling you HOW I do it.
You're right, though -- take a cupped/bowed/twisted hardwood board, say 4-6" wide and maybe 5' long.
Try to run it under a rotating planer head.
You need rubber drums to hold it down and feed it against the force of the knives pushing it back at you. Those feed-drums have to squish the (flexible) board against the table to keep the board from kicking right back out the infeed side. So they also have to squish it into a flat profile.
Once they're done trimming, the board springs back into its previously cupped/bowed/twisted state, and the "flat" face you just put on it -- ain't.
----------------------
A jointer works for this task BECAUSE it uses a flat table reference surface, using YOU for the feed force (not rollers -- and I didn't even mention the snipe that feed rollers invariably cause). You "average" the bottom surface, based on where the board contacts the infeed and outfeed tables (which is why jointers need MUCH longer tables than a planer). The bits of the bottom surface that stick out the most get shaved off, over multiple passes, until the surface has been "averaged" down to a flat, REFERENCE surface, as you mentioned.
-----------------------
So - I can't tell you HOW my machine design DOES avoid these problems -- I'm patenting some of the key ideas and can't disclose them publicly. But, if you don't need to "squish" the wood with rollers -- you avoid the problem.
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:51:33 -0800, charlie b wrote:

GOOD questions. First, see my previous post about the existing over/under designs. Also - my design gets the same oomph from a smaller motor (yes, TEFC, but I can do a similar depth-of-cut with about half the horses due to how it works -- and, sorry, that gets into Nukleer Seekrits). I HAVE tested this a bit on the usual B.E. maple, walnut, cocobolo, etc., as well as my Terror Test: Ipe'. It's a nasty, tool-eatin' wood. If you've never worked Ipe' -- Google it. It has fine silica particles which blunt tool-edges fast, often roey grain, and is both hard and tough. GORGEOUS, though, and cheap as heck. The big, interesting problem with it is that they mill it in the rainforest to finished size, then ship it up to us with our -- let's say SLIGHTLY different -- humidity. So some of my Ipe' boards have been doozies.
1. Yes, it'll do twisted -- see Ipe', above ;-). I'm still refining that part of the design, but so far, it's pretty good.
2,3. Not sure yet. I'm working on increasing the usable width-of-cut, so there're a lot of variables to be worked out: motor HP, depth-of-cut, width, etc. (Please realize that YOUR question has a few variables left out -- you can take a much deeper cut, at a higher feed rate, in clear pine or DF, than in red oak. >;-)
4.) Again, not sure. I do have some local tree-cutters drop off some log-sections -- lately got a few hundred lbs. of unsplit black walnut and figured olive, nearly 12" across, unchecked, and probably 20+" long) in a load of FIREWOOD, for heck's sake! They're sitting in the shop with paraffin on the ends for a while as I think about what to do with 'em. But - I don't usually work with wet/green wood until it's stabilized, so I don't know. Resinous -- I'd be glad to test that out -- what do you suggest, or have the most problem with?
5-6.) It's HSS at this point. It's also got a nifty design that allows the end-user to sharpen the cutting parts VERY easily, without needing high-precision. (KEY BENEFIT: unlike all common jointers/planers, the blades can be sharpened and re-installed WITHOUT recalibration or complicated setup/tweaking.) Current guess: the parts can be sharpened quite a number of times, then replaced for something like $20-40 total.
7.) How thin? VERY thin. Think guitar fretboards of REAL brazilian rosewood.
8.) No, at least, not yet. Currently, I'm just working on a machine to do two flat, parallel opposing faces. So, the "traditional" function of a jointer -- to do EDGES -- is not part of this. Ironic, I know. However, that's part of "Phase II". And it's easy to "joint" an edge with a router and a straightedge, or a tablesaw (which is what I do), so that's not such a big worry at this point.
9.) I think I understand your question -- can you keep the depth-of-cut setting on the planer, but joint the first-face on a new board? I'll have to think about that. How important is that? Wouldn't you joint the first face of all your boards first, then start to thickness-plane them?
10.) Dust collection is excellent. Probably considerably better than either jointers or planers.
11.) Setup is pretty straightforward. Can you elaborate on what you dislike about setup with either a jointer or a planer? (Table height difference on a jointer, e.g.?)
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I noticed the short beds a few weeks ago also. This would be ideal for a hobbyist though as the length of the in deed and out geed would handle 6' and shorter boards pretty well. Also, Rikon does not manufacture. They have tools made to their specs. I noticed that they have a Tormek alternative that looks a lot like a Tormek and is much cheaper.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 21:56:53 -0800, theblacksheep wrote:

I've been aware of a number of over/under combo machines (a few other posters mention Rojek, MiniMax, and a bunch of other European mfgs.).
I'm not worried:
A) They don't sell at all well in the U.S. Hey - the Euro combo "5-in-1" machines are nifty, too, but this market just doesn't go for them, either.
B) They're fairly expensive, as someone else points out, below (one reason maybe they don't do so well).
But the big reason is this:
C) They ALL still basically use the SAME design that current jointers AND planers use -- a rotating drum, with feed rollers for the planer part.
So - they all will have varying problems with scalloping and snipe, and have a high part-cost. NO over-under drum design avoids these fundamental problems -- they can only tweak the engineering & mfg. better (which gets more and more expensive).
My design produces a ready-to-finish, (YES, really!) scraper-smooth surface, with no snipe, far less tearout on roey grain or tricky woods like B.E. maple, Brazilian (real) rosewood, or (gasp) ebony. And, yes, I've tested it and it works.
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Rikon product doesn't do what the original poster said. It won't plane a flat surface on board, it will only plane a surface parallel to the other side.
Wasn't the original proposal for a tool that would actually flatten one side before planing the other?
snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 12:08:10 -0600, Mike Berger wrote:

Yep (says the Original Poster) -- the tool I'm working on WILL do both.
(Why do you say the Rikon won't? It looks like a jointer on top / planer underneath combo.....)
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Umm Yes it will. It is a jointer on top and a planer underneath.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:38:35 +0000, Leon wrote:

Ummm -- sorry -- YOU misunderstood. The ORIGINAL proposal (which was mine), does NOT have a jointer on top and a planer underneath).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:38:35 +0000, Leon wrote:

Oops - sorry - now I understand what you meant. I suppose the Rikon would, indeed, do that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

:~) No prob.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
scribbled:

Already been done, many European manufacturers make jointer/thicknessers. Jointer on top, thicknesser under. See:
http://www.griggio.it/categoria_prodotti.php?grp 0&grptitle=PLANER/THICKNESSER&linea=1&lang http://www.minimax-usa.com/jointer-planer/fs30.html http://www.rojekusa.com/PHP/msp310m.php http://www.felder.co.at/d_main_produkte_details.php?id_lang 00000004&id_produkte00000110&uid_p_kat_lang00000034&id_p_kat_lang00000090
etc.

This I would like to see. The European machines are great but cost an arm and a leg. Depending on the quality, I might buy one.

There, you have my two cents (Canadian).
Luigi Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/antifaq.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Woodworking
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andrew,
In addition to the other advice and links you've received, here's another tip for you as an "amateur inventor": next time you have an idea, don't broadcast it all over usenet (or anywhere else) - if it's a good idea, someone will grab it and run with it so fast it'll make your head spin. Take it in person to a few knowledgeable people and have them sign a non-disclosure agreement beforehand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreement
B.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And: http://www.owwm.com/PhotoIndex/detail.asp?id 66
JOAT Just pretend I'm not here. That's what I'm doing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mon, Nov 21, 2005, 2:31am snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net (BuddyMatlosz) doth sayeth: <snip> next time you have an idea, <snip>
Might want to research it first.
JOAT Just pretend I'm not here. That's what I'm doing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(Buddy Matlosz) doth sayeth: <snip> next time you have an idea, <snip>
Might want to research it first.
You can start here: http://www.uspto.gov /. There is help for inventors with a new invention, and you can check the patent archives to see what has already been patented. Your patent has to be useful, but it also has to be novel and non-obvious.
Once you have the patent application filed, you can go ahead and figure out how to manufacture, distribute and sell it. If you thought the original invention was a difficult challenge, you will find these to be nearly insurmountable and it is where most new inventions founder and die. It is a really good idea to find some company that can already provide these functions and license the invention to them. Royalty income is a nice addition to whatever you really live on, and keeps you from having to spend all your time on activities that probably don't interest you. And even if you like manufacturing, you may hate distribution or sales.
If you figure out a relatively painless way to solve these problems, let me know. I have a novelty ruler that measures in astronomical units, atoparsecs. Every amateur astronomer should have one.
Good luck, Steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:57:10 +0000, Steve Peterson wrote:

Thanks, Steve.
I think I just posted something to the effect of: I know the patent system well. (In fact, I've searched every possible patent in the particular class I need, and have about 2-300 patents retrieved and printed out -- I have a script that fetches them from uspto.gov and converts them to PDFs.) I'm in Silicon Valley, have an MBA from a top-3 school, and know intellectual property law pretty darn well -- but, sincerely, thanks!
I'm intrigued by your ruler that measures in attoparsecs (you misspelled the unit) -- but I find 1.21483474 inches, or 3.08568025 centimeters, to be an inconvenient unit of measure. That's just me.
By the way, how much do you weigh in yottadaltons?
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I already weigh too much in pounds. Now you want to know in daltons? I don't want to think about it. Steve
btw, I have 15 patents. just trying to steer anyone in the right direction.
(Buddy Matlosz) doth sayeth:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/21/2005 2:30 PM Nobody mumbled something about the following:

61464.602 here.
--
Odinn
RCOS #7 SENS BS ???
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.