Band Saw questions

[dpb]

...

... I didn't read it all either, other than skim it. I would wonder if the dynamic analysis of the loads during heavier usage wouldn't factor in over the static analysis...just a thought; I've really not considered it in great detail.

There is one self-limiting factor I'll agree with, though, and that is the maximum tension force one can manage to apply to a small saw is limited by the small blade capacity. If one were to try to put a large resaw blade and tension it properly on such a small saw, it's at least a decent chance you'd collapse the frame before ever starting so the motor hp to pull it wouldn't matter... :)

--

[Tom Veatch]

That's a mistake. The value, 33,000 foot-pounds/minute, is for a 1 HP motor. 3 HP = 99,000 foot-pounds per minute. (as an explanation for the error, I can only offer the though that it was written in the wee hours of the morning during a bout of insomnia)

That means all the motor loads in my previous treatise should be multiplied by 3.

1 HP = 60 pounds 2 HP = 120 pounds 3 HP = 180 pounds

Also, the calculation of the percentage increase in loads from increasing motor is as follows:

Load in the lower bearing from blade tension = 875 pounds (no change from the original post)

Load in the bearing from maximum cutting load with 1.5 HP motor = 90 pounds. 3 HP motor = 180 pounds.

Total load with 1.5 HP motor = 875 + 90 = 965 pounds Total load with 3.0 HP motor = 875 + 180 = 1055 pounds

Percent increase = (1055/965) - 1 = 9.3%

So instead of a 3% increase, there's almost a 10% increase in load on the bearings. That is beyond calling it a trivial increase, but still should be well within design margins of the saws structure.

I am embarrassed by, and apologize for, the arithmetic error. If it were possible, I would delete the previous post and replace it with a corrected version.

Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA

[Leon]

. Agreed!

[Max]

"Tom Veatch" wrote

Especially when it's a Craftsman.

Max

[Woody]

About 15 years ago, I bought a used 14" Rockwell/Delta bandsaw. It had (and still has) a 1/3hp motor. Since acquiring the saw, I've managed to resaw 6" wormy chestnut and other hardwoods (slowly). Feeding too fast caused the saw to stall. Never had an issue with cutting hardwood "on the flat" as long as the blade was sharp.

Current versions of this saw can be purchased with a maximum of 1hp motor. I believe that Norm Abram uses this model and relies on it to do resawing when needed.

~Mark.

[dpb]

...

...

...

That seems in realm; no slight intended and I didn't look at it hard enough to catch the arithmetic but it did somehow just seem to have too little of an effect.

The strength of usenet is also at times a weakness--once it's in the ether, it's never to be reclaimed... :) [and :( ; I've more than once wished for the same facility]

--

[Leon]

But that was 15 years ago and it was used then. They don't build'em like they usta. HP rating are now exagerated. As a side note, I just retired and sold my 30 year old Rockwell DP that had a 1/3 hp motor, it never stalled regardless of what size forstner bit it was spinning.

[Jack Stein]

I'm glad you said that because my 55 year old Rockwell/Delta 14" bandsaw has a small motor, I think its 1/2 hp but could be 3/4. It has never felt underpowered to me. I never installed a riser block so it only cuts 6" deep, and I've resawn white oak and hard maple to near that depth. I can't even imagine a 4 1/2 HP motor on a bandsaw? Wow! The other thing is I hate 1/2" blades on the thing, not because of power issues though, but because of turning radius issues. My favorite blade was aways a 3/16th inch skip tooth. I bought one when I was cutting names out of 2x4 lumber and needed speed and small turning radius. Turned out I liked that blade for everything, including resawing.

Anyway, my BS has never disappointed me and I wouldn't trade it for anything less than one of those "$320,000 Laguna bandsaws with a 1/2 micron thick 3" wide titanium/diamond equipped bandsaw blades" that some of you have.

I'd have to replace the blade though:-)

[Phisherman]

But, a Horsepower 55 years ago is a lot more powerful than today's horsepower. What's so crucially important is how well the bandsaw is tuned. Even an underpowered one will resaw with ease, it will just take a little longer.

[Jack Stein]

Jack Stein wrote:>>

I'm glad you said that because my 55 year old Rockwell/Delta 14" bandsaw

Phisherman wrote:>

But, a Horsepower 55 years ago is a lot more powerful than today's

Yes, that was Leon's point I think. Someone here said to look at the amperage of the motor, and 1 hp should use like 12 amps. This at least should be fairly consistent you would think.

Still, 4.5 hp seems like a hell of a lot to me for a BS. I never resawed a 12" hunk of Oak and I figure that would take around 2x the power of my saw or 1 to 1 1/2 hp? I can't get at my motor now to read the HP rating but it certainly in not more than one HP, and memory and size tells me it's 1/2.

If I were buying a bs today, I would buy the best one I could afford. To me, the bs is my most used tool. Perhaps the drill press is used as much but I would think even a cheap DP would do the job. A band saw needs to be high quality to work right and adjust easily and the bigger the better, and more expensive. Cheap saws probably can work fine, but are difficult to set up right and STAY that way.

In that regard, Leon's bs sucks, in the nicest possible way:-)

[Leon]

Yeah, It "sucks" goooood. LOL. The last resawing for a kitchen "re-do was in October, I was resawing 3/4" thick and 6" wide hard maple. I was getting

5 veneers just a hair under 3/32" thick from each board. With the 4.5 hp I was able to resaw the 6" maple about as fast as I could push the wood through the blade. Probably as fast as simply ripping 3/4" thick hard maple on my cabinet saw.

[MikeWhy]

I must be fooling myself about the seriousness of my work, then. 1/2 HP is just fine. The blade makes much more difference in the quality and ability to cut. Certainly a larger motor is nice, but mostly, it's a matter of marketing and pandering to consumer bias.

(I saw your earlier analysis. Can't say I can find fault with it. ;)

Folks tend to forget it's not just the riser block that limits the resaw height. I'm more limited by what I can flatten on the 6" jointer. (Serious work, indeed.)

It does depend on what you're cutting, of course. And the blade you use.

Yes, I'm an affirmed member of the holy church of best blade for the job. I need not worry about having to drop in at the borg for mediocre blades, though. I have a small collection of superior quality blades, and any one of them will substitute in a pinch if the "best" blade happens to break, prove dull, etc. I'm not on a production schedule, you see, and FedEx rings my doorbell even on Saturdays.

But here's the punchline. Every single blade I use for wood is plain, ordinary high carbon steel. No bi-metal, no high speed steel, no welded carbide teeth.

Phooey on that. ;) Thinking back only the 12 years since they made my bandsaw, only the marketing focus has changed, not the work or the material.

[Leon]

Have you resawed a 6" wide piece of hard maple on a Laguna LT16 HD with a

1.25" wide Resaw King blade yet? If not and you get the chance to do so you might rethink some of your above answers.

Before getting a Laguna BS I resawed 6" hard maple on a 12" 1/2 hp BS with a brand new 3 tpi premium quality steel blade. It took approximately 2-3 minutes to make a single pass to resaw the 24" long pieces.

I did the same a few months ago with the Laguna taking about 10 seconds per pass to resaw a 6" wide, 48" long piece piece of hard maple.

I also did this with the Laguna and a 1.3 tpi steel blade in about the same amount of time but the smoothness of the cut dropped dramitically. With the bi-metal ResawKing I was able to get more pieces from the 3/4" stock.

[Tom Veatch]

Perhaps "serious" has the wrong connotation. "Heavy" might be closer to what I intended. There was no intent to imply that small, thin, light, etc. was frivolous or lacking in skill or craftsmanship. If you inferred that, be assured that was not my intention.

Tom Veatch Wichita, KS USA

[MikeWhy]

Sort of, and more or less routinely. Not a big deal. Not quite 6"; 5-1/2" is about all that will fit under the guard. Despite all that, I haven't felt limited by the tool.

I haven't had the pleasure. Is that an invite?

For sure, a 48" pass in 10 seconds is doing justice! But maybe we part company on the need to do so. A worthwhile slab that benefits from resawing to veneers is an unusual find. The money I didn't spend on machinery and diamond studded blades buys a lot of bookmatched flitches. ;) But I do understand your doing so. Just having the tool, I expect I would welcome the opportunity to put it through its paces.

I have a basically stock 14" Delta open stand made mid-90 something. Setting it up for resaw, I take paper thin cuts on whatever I have on hand to prove out the fence drift and setup. That's as good as I need it work. It's worth repeating, as it was the point I was trying to make in my original post: I don't feel limited by my bandsaw. The jointer is a bit small sometimes, but even that matches the bandsaw.

[Leon]

Yeah! Come'on down. ;~)

Actually I just needed thick veneers for the refacing of the kitchen cabinet face frames. I basically turned 2, 8' 1x6 s4s pieces of hard maple into

1. I did not want to resaw 5 in half and plane to 3/16"

I had my old BS for about 20 years and seldom used it. The new one is such a pleasure to use with limitless posibilities that I use it much more often. I found that I can quickly cut up dried firewood for my BBQ smoker and often find prize pieces when doing so. ;~)

[MikeWhy]

I couldn't agree more. A good bandsaw opens up possibilities we might otherwise miss. It appeals most to my frugal side, as under-nourished as that half is. The ultra thin kerf and ability to turn one board into 2 or 3 are its main attractions. Timbers I had been hoarding because they were too special and too precious to waste with the cavernous cuts of other tools found their way out of the shop when I rediscovered the bandsaw. But that's also the side that rebels when thoughts turn to upgrading. Herr Helshoj still writes me (personally, I'm sure) from time to time, following up from when I wrote him for literature and DVDs. Don't get me wrong. I'm extremely envious of your Laguna, and probably wouldn't even remember the cost to complain a week after it shows up. But until then, the quiet little voice that says, "No! Do you have ANY IDEA how many board feet you can buy with that?" wins out. C'est la vie. ;) The old Delta works fine enough. For now.

[Leon]

I hear you. If mine was not helping me make money I would probably still be using the old one.

[Steve Turner]

I do a fair amount of that with my MiniMax. I have a Weber kettle and probably

98% of my barbecuing is done with hardwood scraps and cutoffs from woodworking projects (the rest with charcoal) that I've cut into manageable pieces on the bandsaw. I pretty much have more barbecue fuel than I know what to do with! But I'm workin' on it, and I don't call myself "bbqboyee" for nothing! :-)

[Pat Barber]

The current Delta collection of 14" bandsaws:

the motor sizes, which have changed very little > I have a basically stock 14" Delta open stand made mid-90 something.