PDA

View Full Version : Upside-down 16-32



Roman Hruska
01-07-2009, 4:10 AM
I am building a flip-top tool stand with my DeWalt 733 on one side and a Jet 16-32 on the other. I'm not really concerned about the effects of hanging upside down on the Dewalt, I figure I will just engage the lock to keep the head from moving.

I am a bit concerned with the Jet sander, I was wondering if anyone on the board has any experience with mounting one of these on a flip stand and what effects, if any, it has on it. My concern is with the long lever arm of the sanding drum and its attachments to the cast-iron frame.

I really hope that there is nothing truly bad about hanging one of these upside down because I can really use the space in the shop.

Roman

Anthony Whitesell
01-07-2009, 8:51 AM
I have a 16-32 and can't imagine trying to hang it upside or flip it over. the 16-32 is one HEAVY machine. Another concern would be in regards to the unsupoorted end of the open end drum being inverted and what effect will that have on the alignment/setup as the weight load is righted and inverted as the top is flipped over and over.

If or when you get it done, make sure to post pictures. This is something I've got to see.

glenn bradley
01-07-2009, 9:54 AM
I can't speak to the 16-32 but I flip my 734 without locking the head. Done it for years, no problem. I always turn the handle to clear the sides and unlock the head when I am done with the planer so I don't forget later.

Phil Thien
01-07-2009, 10:00 AM
Well, if I was gonna flip my 16-32, I'd add one of those open-side clamps similar to what Laguna has on their entry-level 16-32. Then, before flipping it, I'd lock the open side down wherever it is. I'd think this would eliminate alignment problems from having the weight of the long, cantelievered head inverted.

You can certainly make a similar clamping mechanism yourself from a little plywood or aluminum.

Ben Franz
01-07-2009, 11:46 AM
Maybe I'm being a Pollyanna but it seems like the forces exerted on the drum arm during operation would be more than gravitational forces from being inverted. Impact and shock forces from any rough stuff during transition what would concern me more.

Then, again, I get a migraine from physics.

You might call Jet tech support to see what they think.

Ben Franz
01-07-2009, 11:49 AM
Have to ask - any relation to the senator from Nebraska (IIRC)?

Dewey Torres
01-07-2009, 12:44 PM
The weight of this machine would turn me off to flip-top options but I will stay tuned to see how this turns out for you.

Doug Shepard
01-07-2009, 12:48 PM
The weight of this machine would turn me off to flip-top options but I will stay tuned to see how this turns out for you.

Same here. Assuming the Jet is an exact clone of a Performax 16-32, that's 175 Lbs. Wouldn't want to be on the pendulem end of that if you lose your grip on it as you're trying to lock it in position.

Dewey Torres
01-07-2009, 12:50 PM
Same here. Assuming the Jet is an exact clone of a Performax 16-32, that's 175 Lbs. Wouldn't want to be on the pendulem end of that if you lose your grip on it as you're trying to lock it in position.


Yes Doug... it is the exact same tool (WMH tool group)

Jason Beam
01-07-2009, 1:06 PM
Maybe I'm being a Pollyanna but it seems like the forces exerted on the drum arm during operation would be more than gravitational forces from being inverted. Impact and shock forces from any rough stuff during transition what would concern me more.

I agree. The forces involved seem trivial if you're not slamming it into stuff on the trip around.

Picture what happens when you send something through it. Say you're putting a door through it. The door gets held down by the rollers on both sides of the drum, and the drum goes to work in between. The material about to be removed is pushing that first roller up a little higher than the drum and second roller. Plus, the little "ramp" made by the drum will also see some upward forces. These forces are likely to be stronger than having the thing dangle upside down would be.

I can't imagine it being an issue, honestly. If it is, then I'd be surprised they even hold together when chewing away at a full-width piece of wood.

chet jamio
01-07-2009, 1:15 PM
I have pretty much the same setup you're building. Mine has a 735 on one side and a 16-32 on the other. It works great.

Wade Lippman
01-07-2009, 1:27 PM
I have pretty much the same setup you're building. Mine has a 735 on one side and a 16-32 on the other. It works great.

I was planing to start work on that same combination.
The sander is almost twice as heavy as the planer. Any trouble rotating it?

I used to have the 735 on the shelf below the sander. It made planing real unpleasant.

Roman Hruska
01-07-2009, 5:15 PM
Consolidated reply.

Doug: The 16-32 itself is closer to 110 lbs, the 175 lb number is shipping weight. The DeWalt is right at 80 pounds, so I'm hoping that these will mostly balance each other out. I am planning to mount these to the table in such a way that they would be balanced fairly well.

Glen: Glad to hear no problems with the DeWalt. Hopefully I will remember to lock the head, but it is nice to know that if I forget to. It will probably not damage anything.

Ben: Yes, he was my grandfather. And yes he was from Nebraska.

Chet: As you have one of these setups are there any issues that I should look out for? I was planning on using a piece of half-inch black pipe as my pivot(preferred, as it is on hand,) or do you think it would be better to use either three-quarter black pipe or a piece solid steel rod?

Wade: With the weights involved do you find the you have any trouble flipping the rig over? Do you think a cheater bar would required. If so would it be worth the hassle?

Phil: Thanks for the heads up on the Laguna clamp, I did not know such a critter existed. I will look into this to see if it is something that might be worthwhile.

Thanks to all for their responses. The issues brought up here were some of the ones that I had come up with. I am encouraged that there are others that have done the same thing. I will definitely post on it when the thing is finished,if not before.:D

Roman

chet jamio
01-07-2009, 11:28 PM
I used a 5/8 solid steel rod. I have bronze bushings in the support walls and ball bearings in the MDF top. The hardware is inexpensive and available at Lowes. I used 5/8 because it was the only non-metric bearings they had. Also, I made my cart tall enough to include a 4" tall drawer in the bottom. The drawer is more useful on my other cart which carries 3 sanders (seen in background), but I recommend one anyway. Also, the box around the drawer provides stability to the frame.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrRYhy-IvtY

Scott Rollins
01-08-2009, 8:05 AM
Very nice Chet.

Doug Shepard
01-08-2009, 8:24 AM
Consolidated reply.

Doug: The 16-32 itself is closer to 110 lbs, the 175 lb number is shipping weight. The DeWalt is right at 80 pounds, so I'm hoping that these will mostly balance each other out. I am planning to mount these to the table in such a way that they would be balanced fairly well.
...


Sorry for the faux pas. I cant even find the Amazon page now where I lifted the 175 LB weight from. Even the official shipping weight on WMH's site appears to be less than 175. The 110 LB works better for my plans of making a rolling cab (not flipping though) for mine too:)

Anthony Whitesell
01-08-2009, 8:25 AM
On the weight-flipping issue. I have a Delta 22-560 on a flip top cart with nothing on the other side and even at 70 pounds it's not an issue to flip (as long as 2 of the caster are locked:D).

As for the pivot, any any that runs from one side to the other all the way through the top will have significantly more strength than two pivot pins that only go a few inches into the edge of the top. I think this is the one thing most people change from the Wood Magazine plans. If the pivot rod is run through a channel in the top the of the same size, the pivot rod won't be able to flex because it's capture the entire length. Honestly, I think that you might be able use a 1/4" solid rod run through a 1/4" diameter (or width) channel in the top and through both sides without an issue. But I didn't even try it.

Michael McCoy
01-08-2009, 8:34 AM
I have pretty much the same setup you're building. Mine has a 735 on one side and a 16-32 on the other. It works great.


Chet
Do you have the infeed/outfeed tables on your sander? I would be interested a couple of pics of your setup since I have the same machines.

edit to say
I just noticed you have a link to you tube. I'll have to book mark that since I can't access it from my current location.

Roman Hruska
01-09-2009, 3:29 AM
The current plan (revision M or possibly N) is to use a full length piece of 1/2 ID black pipe trapped in the spacers between the sides of the flipping top. The pipe will be trapped and pinned into the top, and the ends will either ride in a bearing of some sort, or possibly in a hard maple "bearing" that will attach to the doubled plywood sides of the case.

The only issue that I have encountered so far is that the motor side of the 16-32 is so much heavier than the open side. After completion of the top I pushed the pipe through and set the sander on it to see how it balanced. Obviously the motor side was on the benchtop. Just for giggles I thought that I would see how much weight would be required to hbring it into balance. I ended up stacking about 35# of lead on the edge of the top before it was even close to balanced! I am not planning to use any additional weight on the stand, but this definitely gave me an idea as to how far off-center I am going to have to moiunt the DW733 to try to bring the whole assembly into some semblance of balance.

Roman

Anthony Whitesell
01-09-2009, 8:13 AM
I'll agree from left to right the system is heavy to the motor side, but I think from infeed to outfeed the system would be pretty well balanced. Too bad it was not thought of ahead of so the design could have been modified to allow sander to be mounted such that the motor shaft was parallel to the pivot. In other words, rotating they way you have it currently mounted and thereby balancing the load.

chet jamio
01-09-2009, 9:08 AM
Do you have the infeed/outfeed tables on your sander?

No. I've made my workbench the same height as my table saw and my flip carts are about 4" lower. When I mount a planer or drum sander, I shim them up so that the infeed/outfeed height matches the other surfaces. When I use them, I roll the cart between the bench and saw which I use as my infeed and outfeed.