Whirlwind--Competitor to Sawstop?

[Paul Wunder]

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/02/149843...eets-table-saw

NPR radio did the above piece today on a blade safety device called the Whirlwind which the inventor claims can be retrofitted to just about any existing table saw. The inventor is a retired engineer/hobby woodworker. Just as with the SawStop, the inventor says that the manufacturers of table saws have shown little interest in his device. NPR closed the piece by stating that the Consumer Product Safety Commission is in the process of writing new rules on table saw safety.

Paul

[Ron Natalie]

He's been around a while. When you press him for details he gets cagey. It involves a lot of fiddly stuff you're forced to do to get the saw on. It then relies on the fact that your hand goes under the oversized blade guard long enough to get his motor brake to stop the blade to avoid injury.

http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

[frank shic]

that's an interesting strategy although i would imagine that the injuries are much more common from not having the blade guard in place. i'd still go with the sawstop technology if i could do it all over again.

[Bruce Page]

Please leave the politics out of the discussion.

Thanks

[Michael Peet]

I remember reading about this some time ago. From the website:

"STOPS the saw blade in 1/8 OF A SECOND"

At a speed of 3500 RPM with a 40-tooth blade, 291 teeth go by in 1/8 of a second. Just sayin'.

Mike

[frank shic]

rule #1 use a blade guard
rule #2 don't shove your hand or fingers under the blade guard

those two have prevented me from losing my fingers over the years although they didn't prevent kickback...

[Van Huskey]

I remember reading about this some time ago. From the website:

"STOPS the saw blade in 1/8 OF A SECOND"

At a speed of 3500 RPM with a 40-tooth blade, 291 teeth go by in 1/8 of a second. Just sayin'.

Mike

Not arguing the merits but just pointing out the idea of this approach seems to rely on starting the blade stopping procedure BEFORE hand meets blade. This would reduce the number of teeth meeting flesh by how much certainly depends on a lot of factors.

[Dave Lewis]

He's been around a while. When you press him for details he gets cagey. It involves a lot of fiddly stuff you're forced to do to get the saw on. It then relies on the fact that your hand goes under the oversized blade guard long enough to get his motor brake to stop the blade to avoid injury.

http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

Ron:

I heard that NPR piece this afternoon and agree it seems to be complicated after briefly reviewing the site - thanks for the link.

It also seems doubtful that this product could be sold retail as "desert" - i.e. w/o the main (machinery) course.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Not arguing the merits but just pointing out the idea of this approach seems to rely on starting the blade stopping procedure BEFORE hand meets blade. This would reduce the number of teeth meeting flesh by how much certainly depends on a lot of factors.

Bingo! I'm surprised others didn't catch that!

[Ken Fitzgerald]

With all due respect to everybody, if I had a device I was trying to market to large corporations or patent..or both......I'd be cagey too. Why would anyone provide somebody else with enough information to possibly decide to go into competition?

[Mike Henderson]

With all due respect to everybody, if I had a device I was trying to market to large corporations or patent..or both......I'd be cagey too. Why would anyone provide somebody else with enough information to possibly decide to go into competition?

Generally, you have one year after publication (meaning demonstrating or telling people about the product without a non-disclosure agreement) to file a patent. Once you tell people about the product, you just as well tell all because you're going to be protected by a patent, assuming you file for a patent. If you don't file for a patent, anyone can legally copy the product and you'd probably fail in the market.

You can't sell your product without telling people the details about the product - no rational buyer would buy the product if they didn't understand the basics of how it worked and were convinced that it would do the job. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to ask for more details about the product. And if the inventor does not wish to disclose additional details, he should simply say so (giving a reason would be a nice extra touch) and not attack a potential buyer for the word choice used.

Mike

[Note that SawStop gave pretty complete details of how their system works, and will answer detailed technical questions about the system. It's not unreasonable to ask a SawStop competitor to do the same.]

[Van Huskey]

Ken, thats twice in the same thread we have been of one mind.

[Van Huskey]

You can't sell your product without telling people the details about the product - no rational buyer would buy the product if they didn't understand the basics of how it worked and were convinced that it would do the job. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to ask for more details about the product. And if the inventor does not wish to disclose additional details, he should simply say so (giving a reason would be a nice extra touch) and not attack a potential buyer for the word choice used.

Mike

[Note that SawStop gave pretty complete details of how their system works, and will answer detailed technical questions about the system. It's not unreasonable to ask a SawStop competitor to do the same.]

He isn't trying to sell the product to end users currently unless his business model has changed recently, if he were I would agree 100%. The word "cagey" has perjorative implications and "could" be construed as a personal attack which is not allowed here. I think a more apropo adjective would be savvy, then again taken out of the context used cagey means cautious and prudent which I think is fair.

I agree SS gives a lot of details as to how their system works BUT I do not remember them doing this BEFORE they had a product on the market but maybe right before its introduction. Even if competition was a non-issue the fact that design changes for what ever reason while bringing the product to market might change operating aspects and might leave a bad taste in some peoples mouth.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Generally, you have one year after publication (meaning demonstrating or telling people about the product without a non-disclosure agreement) to file a patent. Once you tell people about the product, you just as well tell all because you're going to be protected by a patent, assuming you file for a patent. If you don't file for a patent, anyone can legally copy the product and you'd probably fail in the market.

You can't sell your product without telling people the details about the product - no rational buyer would buy the product if they didn't understand the basics of how it worked and were convinced that it would do the job. It's perfectly reasonable for someone to ask for more details about the product. And if the inventor does not wish to disclose additional details, he should simply say so (giving a reason would be a nice extra touch) and not attack a potential buyer for the word choice used.

Mike

[Note that SawStop gave pretty complete details of how their system works, and will answer detailed technical questions about the system. It's not unreasonable to ask a SawStop competitor to do the same.]

Mike.....You might release details to potential buyers but not to every Tom, Dick or Harry. You don't know how far along SawStop was before they released any details. Since the owner/inventor of SS is a patent lawyer, you can bet he was protected before he released anything.

I can tell you that in diagnostic imaging equipment, when I was in management, I saw medical imaging devices that were experimental, going through trials and no information was released and when we were given the tour, we were instucted to keep it to ourselves. It's not unusual to keep detailed information close and private.

Furthermore, I fail to see why someone not releasing details about a device is a bad thing or warrants being criticized.....I don't see being "cagey" as a bad thing. It's his device. At his website he says he won't sell you one....even his prototypes aren't for sale. If you go to the site, the guy says he's retired, not interested in starting a company to produce them and is looking to sell the device. It's his device and he has a right to not give any information about it. Gass tried to sell the rights to SS. It was only after he was rejected by the major manufacturers that he decided to go into production himself.

If someone is serious about the device, has the financial means and is interested, I'm sure their lawyer could contact the guy, and that person would get the details.

[frank shic]

welcome david and thank you for trying to make the table saw a safer device!