Update on TS alignment question

For those of you following my saga (aka previous thread)

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=31221

I have an update. Last night, I took the face off the fence (PM Accufence on PM64A saw) and tried the one off the other side, same burning and chatter marks resulted. Then I replaced the UHMW face with a piece of 1/2" MDF cut to roughly the same size. When measured, this took out all the wiggle that I saw with the UHMW faces. Wiggle was in the +/- 0.002 range and toed out ~0.004" at the far end. Tried another cut (using 3/4" maple as my test board), and saw same chatter and burning. Convinced that it couldnt be my relatively newly sharpened Forrest WWII blade I put in my older, DeWalt thin kerf blade and everything worked fine. No chatter, no burning, cuts like 'buddah. Whats up? Everything must be aligned right or else the DeWalt blade wouldnt work, right?. I thought, well, the WWII got some pitch on the inside edge of each tooth, so I cleaned it well and tried it again, first cut, chatter, burning, and pitch buildup, from one cut. Again I ask, whats up?

For those of you following my saga (aka previous thread)

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=31221

I have an update. Last night, I took the face off the fence (PM Accufence on PM64A saw) and tried the one off the other side, same burning and chatter marks resulted. Then I replaced the UHMW face with a piece of 1/2" MDF cut to roughly the same size. When measured, this took out all the wiggle that I saw with the UHMW faces. Wiggle was in the +/- 0.002 range and toed out ~0.004" at the far end. Tried another cut (using 3/4" maple as my test board), and saw same chatter and burning. Convinced that it couldnt be my relatively newly sharpened Forrest WWII blade I put in my older, DeWalt thin kerf blade and everything worked fine. No chatter, no burning, cuts like 'buddah. Whats up? Everything must be aligned right or else the DeWalt blade wouldnt work, right?. I thought, well, the WWII got some pitch on the inside edge of each tooth, so I cleaned it well and tried it again, first cut, chatter, burning, and pitch buildup, from one cut. Again I ask, whats up?

Jason,
If your arbor is OK (as the Dewalt blade suggests) you might check the runout of the blade. I can't recall if you did that last time, but maybe the blade isn't true/flat.
-Rob

Forrest recommends using that blade with several teeth above the board, ie having the blade higher than you normally would. To repeat myself, I have good luck with a splitter that is .005" thicker than the blade. If you are using a zero clearance insert, you can buy such a creature from Microgrip. I have friends that have had good results with these.

Another thing on the Forrest blade, magazine tests have shown the the Ridge Carbide blade is less prone to the burning issue on ripping than the Forrest. I have both and find that this is true, especially on fruit woods like cherry and oak.

CPeter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason Morgan

For those of you following my saga (aka previous thread)

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=31221

I have an update. Last night, I took the face off the fence (PM Accufence on PM64A saw) and tried the one off the other side, same burning and chatter marks resulted. ....... Tried another cut (using 3/4" maple as my test board), and saw same chatter and burning. Convinced that it couldnt be my relatively newly sharpened Forrest WWII blade I put in my older, DeWalt thin kerf blade and everything worked fine. No chatter, no burning, cuts like 'buddah. ........ so I cleaned it well and tried it again, first cut, chatter, burning, and pitch buildup, from one cut. Again I ask, whats up?

---

Now you know why they make dedicated ripping blades with 24 teeth. Ripping cuts are best made with a dedicated ripping blade. Yes you can make ripping cuts with crosscut or combination blades, but the performance is usually less than you would get with a ripping blade. The same is true when cross cutting. A 60 tooth blade will give a superior cut to a 40 tooth blade. It doesn't matter who made the blade. Likewise and 80 tooth blade produces a smoother cross cut than a 60 tooth blade.

Your thin kerf blade needed less power to make the cut (it was removing less wood) and therefore didn't slow your saw down. Slow blade speed will produce more brning than a faster blade speed. A higher Hp saw would have done a better job cutting with the thicker blade.

Just my 2 cents worth.

thanks again for the comments. I guess I need to have more than one blade at my disposal.

CPeter James,
I did not know that about the Forrest blade. I was only using 1/2 a tooth higher than the material. Tonight Ill try raising the blade up some.

Rob,

Ill check the runout tonight also. Forgot to do that before.

All in all much was learned and thats what counts right. I also think I like the MDF face on my fence, for now anyway.

I use only Forrest blades and run them with the gullet clearing the wood to ensure clearing any debris.