Blade stabilizer

[cgallery]

Blade stabilizers are kinda like religion. And until recently, I was agnostic.

But on occasion I have experienced some very slight vibration which reduced cut quality. It was slight, but it was there.

I had done everything possible, getting runout to the point where most blades measured +/- .001" just below the gullets. And yet, after a cross cut, when pulling the sled back towards the front of the saw, I'd hear that occasional non-linear "zing!" I could stop pulling the stock back and I'd often hear a very faint "zing zing zing zing."

The thinner the blade, the more vibration I'd experience. My yellow Dewalt blades, for example, were more susceptible than my thin-kerf WWII blade.

So I purchased a Forrest 5" stabilizer. They (Forrest) suggest placing this on the left hand side of the blade, between the blade and the outer washer. But on the BT3K saw, the extra thickness of the stabilizer means the nut doesn't thread onto the saw's arbor all the way.

So I ordered a new 1/8" thick arbor spacer from McMaster and replaced the 1/4" stock Ryobi spacer (leaving the stock 1/2" spacer in place), and placed the Forrest stabilizer on the right-hand side of the blade.

Initial tests are impressive. Those tell-tale sounds after a cross-cut are now completely gone.

The downside is that my maximum cutting depth is 2-1/2" with the stabilizer in place. Which isn't a big deal because I can easily remove it if need be. Normally, if I were cutting deeper than 2-1/2" (maybe once a year) I'd make several passes and I'd use a FK blade anyhow.

For saws that run at slower RPM's, and especially saws with full-kerf blades, this is probably a non-issue. I just think a thin kerf blade running on a high-RPM saw is more susceptible to some vibration.

YMMV.

[LCHIEN]

so, all it did was subjectively improve the sound???
Did it improve the cut any that you could tell if you did a blind test?

[leehljp]

I am not an "agnostic" on the issue. If they are needed, I will use them; if not needed, I won't use them.

If a blade and machine work fine without it, what is the advantage of using one?

[cgallery]

so, all it did was subjectively improve the sound???
Did it improve the cut any that you could tell if you did a blind test?

Absolutely.

Those "zings" I spoke off caused blade-shaped swirls in the cut edge. Almost like what you can occasionally get when you stop in the middle of a cut to reposition your hands. However, I had never stopped and always maintained even and consistent feed pressure.

In cross-cuts, I'd often check for square and notice a little bit of light sneaking under the rule here and there. And that is where those zings had occurred, as well.

My thin-kerf WWII exhibited the problem less than some of my other thin-kerf blades. However, none of my TK blades were completely immune.

Now mind you, I'm sort of nitpicking. It was possible to sand-away those swirls. And I could use the jointer to remove them before edge-gluing boards.

Its just nice to reduce them to pretty much zero.

[cgallery]

If a blade and machine work fine without it, what is the advantage of using one?

I think you answered your own question there, Hank.

Note the "YMMV" disclaimer I included in my post.

[pelligrini]

I've had some similar problems, especially with my TK 30T WWII. There's some similar discussion in this thread: http://www.bt3central.com/showthread.php?t=45846

I ended up getting the 5" Forrest stabilizer from woodcraft. It fit on my 21829 just fine without having to change any spacers. I think there are a few threads still open. I have not noticed any zings since I added the 5" disk. (good name for it too)

I have cracked one ZCTP and kept thinking my saw height adjustment was going bad, which was due to forgetting about the stabilizer. One other drawback is the even smaller cutting height when using a sharkguard. A couple times I wasn't paying attention during setup and my thicker wood stopped at the block, and I couldn't raise it any higher because of the stabilizer. I think I'll try out a 4" version.

[cgallery]

I came up with a test which I hope will demonstrate the before and after.

For the test, I used my sled to cut a piece of BB plywood that is approx. 7 or 8" wide. I then used a black marker to color the cut edge.

Next, I placed the wood back on the sled, and ran it into the blade five times. On the fifth pull back to the front of the saw, I paused for five seconds.

The top is the piece w/ no stabilizer in place, the bottom piece had the stabilizer in place.

Besides seeing that the piece cut w/ the stabilizer in place is "more black," I can also tell you that it is straighter, with fewer light gaps than the piece cut w/o the stabilizer.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

YMMV.

[cgallery]

I've had some similar problems, especially with my TK 30T WWII. There's some similar discussion in this thread: http://www.bt3central.com/showthread.php?t=45846

I must have missed that thread.

I, too, have noticed that the stabilizer runs into the ZCTP if I run the blade up too high. Luckily I never have to run the blade up quite that few, and my plates are plywood and just bend a little bit if I go too far.

But the explanation of what you experienced in your thread is exactly, spot-on with what I experienced.

I thought of going with the 4" stabilizer, but I think I have enough cutting height w/ the 5". And honestly, I don't think I'd want more than 2-1/2" of TK blade buried in any wood, I'd just as soon swap-out to a full kerf blade.

[leehljp]

I am not an "agnostic" on the issue. If they are needed, I will use them; if not needed, I won't use them.
If a blade and machine work fine without it, what is the advantage of using one?

I think you answered your own question there, Hank.

Note the "YMMV" disclaimer I included in my post.

Apologies for not making my post clear. My post was not in relation to "YMMV" but in replying in terms of those who use them in a "cult" like fashion. (Mixing a Japanese mindset with American redneck does this at times. )

I can understand doing some things as a matter of principle or discipline; some I cannot. This is one that I do not understand.

[cabinetman]

I have a few stabilizers, tried them, and don't use them. If there was any improvement (none detected even for TK), it didn't justify losing the depth of cut and time to change it out.
.

[Knottscott]

I have a few stabilizers, tried them, and don't use them. If there was any improvement (none detected even for TK), it didn't justify losing the depth of cut and time to change it out.
.

My experience with stabilizers has been similar....not enough difference to notice so I don't bother, but I can certainly see them helping with some vibration issues if they exist.

[cgallery]

My experience with stabilizers has been similar....not enough difference to notice so I don't bother, but I can certainly see them helping with some vibration issues if they exist.

The more I think about it, the more I think cabinet saws like your Shop Fox (with the massive trunnions and massive other stuff, along with the slower RPM's) probably would see much less improvement (if any) by adding a stabilizer.

I have a couple of those Leitz (sp?) made Irwin rippers I got at Woodnet and noted a lower frequency (compared to any other blades) vibration while running them on my BT3K. Not unusable, mind you, they work fine. The lower frequency just struck me as odd. Almost like the arbor holes were every so slightly off center (which is unlikely as the entire blade plate is laser cut).

One of these days I'll get a router speed control and see if I can dial the vibration out of one of them by reducing RPM's.