Oh what a difference it made...

Were the old pullies equal in size to each other and are the new pullies equal in size to each other?

...

Be careful you're not exceeding rated tip speed of your blades...

(rpm/60 x radius-inches/12 = linear-ft/sec)

Have you calculated the new arbor rpm?

Made me look. I have 2.5 on the arbor, 3.0 on the motor as original - 1.2

• 3450 = 4140

His at 2.25 and 2.5 respectively = 1.1 * 3450 = 3833

Sounds like the "additional rpms" might be illusory.

I think that should be ((RPM/60) x (Radius in inches x 3.14)) /12 = linear feet per second.

Yeah I was wondering myself as IIRC both TS's that I have had, had same diameter pulleys.

Sorry, yeah, I accidently deleted the pi by an inadvertent edit to fix another typo... :(

The possible concern was addressed in the other post where the sizes are given...

In that regard a 1.2/1.1 ~10% rpm increase from a somewhat slow initial speed may well be noticeable...

CRAP. Should be

((RPM/60) x (diameter in inches x 3.14)) /12 = linear

or

((RPM/60) x (2 x Radius in inches x 3.14)) /12 = linear

you gotta add pi in there. :~)

LOL... I corrected you wrong also. See my next comment. ;~)

I didn't actually measure them, I was recalling my discussion with the sales person when I purchased it at a recent WW show. I'll go home and measure this evening and post a follow up tomorrow.

Uh, read the post. His are the 1.1/1 , original to at least my 34-410 are

Blades are normally rated for an RPM, their diameter being known to the manufacturer beforehand.

Did the same thing to my Craftsman contractor's TS a while back - I don't know about all this fuzzy math stuff, but it just seemed to cut so much better. I also put a Freud blade on it, which also seemed to improve performance. Cuts were smoother with no bogging down.

I'm putting a link belt on my Delta DP - I'm also going to put them on my jointer and my bandsaw -

Nick B

If I'm not wrong, it is the rpm x the circumference. The latter is Pi x D(iameter), not Pi x r(adius). Maybe you are thinking pi r squared which is for area of a circle.

No, you're not wrong. Specifically, the calculation is (rpm / 60) * (diameter in inches) * 3.14 / 12 = linear feet/sec.

But why does anyone care? I've *never* seen a saw blade marked "max tip speed xxx linear feet/sec", but I *have* seen *plenty* of blades marked "max RPM xxx".

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Yes, And I caught that and corrected that also.

The best source for link belts I have found is HF. It's on line. They don't carry it in the local store. Cast/machined/balanced pulleys are available at any good bearing supply store. Make your own tune up kit

- do the math first to get the best pulley sizes.

Because in the end, the tip speed is the ultimate limiting factor. Simply staying at or under the rpm indicated on the blade simplifies making sure the tip speed is not too high.

Yep, noticed that right after I sent the comment. Sorry.

Yes, I *know* the tip speed is the limiting factor. But since blades are labelled to indicate max rpm, *not* max tip speed, what's the point in knowing the tip speed?

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

To be more knowledgeable. ;~)