Table-Saw Technology Aims to Save Fingers

[pfekete]

Interesting story on NPR radio today about coming table saw technology.

You can learn more and hear the audio at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4182602

Paul

[BostonBullit]

it's been "coming" for about 3yrs now. nice to see that it's finally "here", well mostly anyway. I still think the companies attempt to force legislation is BS.

[HarmsWay]

I don't think I'd buy one because of the extra cost and because personally I think it gives you a somewhat false sense of safety but I'd sure like to see one in action. The latest FWW has pictures of one after it stopped a blade. Quite distructive, must make a heck of a noise. I can't recall how much it costs to replace the module but I guess if you've saved your finger(s) it's worth it.

Bob

[sscherin]

They have videos of it in action on their web site

http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm

They have started shipping their Cabinet saw but it starts at $2500
It is the only Cabinet saw I've seen with a riving knife like the BT though.

[mudder]

quote:Originally posted by HarmsWay

I can't recall how much it costs to replace the module but I guess if you've saved your finger(s) it's worth it.

His web site lists the brake cartridge at $59.00 for a 10" blade.
You will also need another cartridge if you plan on using a dado and he only lists one for an 8" dado at $69.00 so if you have a 6" dado I guess your out of luck.

That of course does not account for the ruined blade that will have to be replaced. and I agree that his attempt to force legislation is BS.
Hey make me an instant billionaire.

Mudder

[BostonBullit]

don't get me wrong, I think the technology is pretty amazing. IF you could assure a 99.5% accuracy rate, meaning for both stops and non-stops then it's worth the $2,500; at least to me. BUT if there is any measureable failure rate, either with the saw not stopping when in contact with skin OR with the saw stopping when it's not supposed to then it's a no-go. As with most cutting edge (no pun intended) stuff it's going to take a while for this device to prove itself in the field. One thing that 8yrs of software development have proven to me is that people do stupid things that you would never expect them to do; things you can't even to predict ahead of time. We'll see if this saw magnifies the worst parts of human nature by A)making people careless because they think they can't get hurt and B)litigating to the hilt when they do get careless and the device doesn't work as advertised or better yet, it does work and they get upset that they have to buy a new blade!

[Ken Weaver]

I think its very interesting technology and I can see the inventor's interest in asking the Product Safety Commission to rule that his technology be required for all 10" saws - like Mudder says "instant billionaire." On the other hand, seems the tool companies should be interested in making their product safer. Peter makes a point about the reliabilty issue though. What I would be afraid of is using technology to replace the brain. Might lull us into being less aware and the blade is still sharp. What I thought was interesting was the production shop owner they interviewed in the story who said he was ordering two StopSaws because the minimum wage guys in his shop would come in hung over and he wanted to avoid a worker's comp case.

[mehranh]

I have always been a pro-new technology and pro-support from consumers for such inovations. I have been reading about this device for a couple of years. I think it's a good feature once becomes mainstream and less expensive.
However I would only consider buying this when instead of the hotdog, the inventor does a "live demo". Let him put his finger in front of that blade !!!Then and only then I may consider purchasing this devise.
Until then...I'll keep my low-tech, highly trusted, and PIA blade gaurd. [8D]

[stewchi]

Once the technology has been in the field for awhile and the patent runs out I think it will adapted and perfected and fitted to all kinds of equipment that should not contact human skin.
I wonder what the first guy to invent the airbag was told by Ford “so you want to put a small bomb in the steering wheel that will explode during a collision to thrust a giant bag into a drivers face … NEXT”
There were all kinds of problems with airbags when they first came out. I think the same will be true with this, in about 20 years it will just work and rework and we wont have to worry about and pay to fix it each time. But until then I think it is only a fit for targeted use, like one cabinet shop owner on the program said “I have minimum wage guys coming in with a hang over from the night before bent over a table saw for 8 hours. One worker comp payment will buy two saws”

[LarryG]

quote:Originally posted by stewchi

I wonder what the first guy to invent the airbag was told by Ford “so you want to put a small bomb in the steering wheel that will explode during a collision to thrust a giant bag into a drivers face … NEXT”

I once saw a little write-up asking the reader to imagine that automobiles were only now being invented, but using the level of technology and sophistication of modern cars rather than starting at the Horseless Carriage stage. It was in the form of a hypothetical Congressional Q&A that went something like this:

CHAIRMAN: This "automobile" of yours ... what's it good for?

INVENTOR: Personal transportation. They'll be cheap enough that anyone can own one. People will be able to go anywhere, at any time.

CHAIRMAN: How will they get from one place to another? Will these "automobiles" of yours just take off out though some farmer's field ...?

INVENTOR: No, no, we'll need a network of what we call "roads." The owner of each automobile will guide it along the roads using the steering wheel.

CHAIRMAN: You said people will be able to go anywhere, at any time. What if it's raining? What about when it's really cold, or really hot?

INVENTOR: There are wipers to remove the rain from the windshield. There's a heater to keep the occupants warm during the winter, and air conditioning for the summer. There's even a stereo system to entertain them on long trips.

CHAIRMAN: How fast will these things be moving?

INVENTOR: Well, most people will drive them at around 50 or 60 miles per hour, but they can easily go over a hundred miles per hour.

CHAIRMAN (looking and sounding alarmed): A hundred miles per HOUR?!? That sounds awfully fast, and extremely dangerous. How are you going to keep these things from running into each other?

INVENTOR: Oh, we've got that figured out. What we're going to do, see, is paint these lines down the middle of the road ...

[wassaw998]

I've seen a recent article on the safety device and the saw it is on. Apparently they have gone through a ton of hassle to get the saw into production. The device appears to work. I think it is a really great idea. Wish I had one on all of my "bladed" tools (plus, I have kids, so this stuff really interests me). Wish every manufacturer was working on the device and it was avail at a negligible cost. Maybe if the demand got high, the price would adjust. ..(?)

Regarding the govt legislation deal, that is another issue. I will say that a lot of stuff we take for granted are govt mandated saftey items.

And, even if the device only works 50% of the time, that is pretty good compared to what I have now, which you are 100% sure if you put anything in the blade it is gona cut it. Guess you should always practice good safety no matter what. Just like we would driving a car with a seat belt, for example.

[430752]

Wasn't there another safety device for cutting similar in safety but different in operation involving vibrations or something? What I mean is that instead of rotating a blade, it vibrated or otherwise maunvered a blade at a certain frequency or something which would cut its intended medium, but not flesh? Thus, a saw for wood, saw for stone, etc. but never for flesh.

I know it sounds vague and silly, but I heard about this a few years ago on Nova or other PBS or etc. and they showed what looked like a circular saw and reciporcating saw combined that would cut wood easily, then stuck a hand in there while going and nothing. it "vibrated" the hand, but no cut. at the time, they said the same technology could be used for other types and methods of cutting such as metal shears, tile saws, etc. and also table saw type contraption.

did anyone else see this? anyone else hear anything about this?

or am I alone in my own make believe world?

thanks,

curt j.

[Tundra_Man]

quote:Originally posted by 430752

Wasn't there another safety device for cutting similar in safety but different in operation involving vibrations or something? What I mean is that instead of rotating a blade, it vibrated or otherwise maunvered a blade at a certain frequency or something which would cut its intended medium, but not flesh? Thus, a saw for wood, saw for stone, etc. but never for flesh.

It's not a table saw, but I believe this is how the Fein Multimaster works...

[HarmsWay]

I think it's a great idea too, but I wouldn't pay the premium for it at this time and I don't believe they've done enough testing to make it mandatory. I think one day it will. How long did it take for seat belts and air bags in cars? Quite a long time. And yes, if it saved a finger 50% of time that one was thrust into a moving blade that would be great. However I agree with mehranh - when they are willing to demonstrate with a real hand (dry, cracked and calloused), I'll be more convinced. I'd also like to see more evidence of what will NOT cause it to trigger (i.e. wet, green wood).

BostonBullit makes a good point about human nature. People seemed adopt a acceptable level of personal risk. Make something safer and they'll just be less careful. I'm part of a safety committee where I work and there was a perception from some staff that our private road was unsafe (winding and limited visibility). A suggestion was made that by blasting some rock on the corners, visibility would be improved and thus safety. Our consultants, however, all agreed that with the increased visibility, people would only drive faster and therefore safety would not be improved.

Bob

[LCHIEN]

What price safety?

If we had to give up 4 other ww power tools to get the safest possible saw, what 4 tools would you give up? Oh, you couldn't give up the DC because that protects your health. Well, you'd have so much fun with your one tool I guess you'd give up woodworking and that would be safer still.

I could buy the safest car, build a house only out of completely safe materials, buy the safest lawnower, the safest saw, and live in the safest neighorborhood. Drive on the safest streets where the speed limit was 10 MPH and fly only the safest airlines.

Would be completely broke, but safe. Safety is a compromise between likelihood and cost.


Incidentally, the patent for air bags was issued in the 1950's to an engineer. Unfortunately for him he was able to patent the idea, but a practical way to inflate the bags was not made until many years later when the electrochemical reaction that expands the bags fast enough was patented. Even then the air bags were too costly until the 90's when the low cost semiconductor accelerometers were developed that cost about $10 each. Needless to say the original inventor was ahead of his time and made no money. The subsequent inventors made money (probably mostly for their respective companies) as few individuals have the resources to develop the technology on their own.