|
|
|||||||
|
Hi Gang, After completing some saw plate orders for customers I was puttering around in the shop last night and started working on some saw teeth templates. If you don't know what a saw tooth template is, here's the skinny on it. Say you have a saw and you want a new pitch to the teeth. Like it's set for 14 ppi rip and you want 12 ppi crosscut. What do you do? Well you can send it to someone with a Foley Retoother and have them punch new teeth in it. OR you can file down all the teeth and then file in the new ones using a paper template that has the correct spacing on it.Another solution is to use a another saw (that has the filing you want) as a template. You simply clamp you old saw plate and the "template" right on top pf one another and "transfer" the pattern from one to another. But what if you don't have a saw with the proper filing? Well, that's where these come in. I'm thinking of offering a set of saw tooth templates for sale. I have these pieces of 2" wide x 27" (ish) long x 0.020" thk 301 SS that would be just about perfect for them. Why 27" and not 28"? Well, 28" is the limit of the Foley Retoother. And you need a bit of wiggle room on each side to make it easier to center on the carrier bar. Making it exactly 28" means you have to place it EXACTLY dead center each and every time you punch it. And if you screw up you've ruined the template. Not fun. Not fun at all. ![]() I used 301 SS because it's rust resistant,......and I have a bunch of it. I could probably use 0.025" thk. But that's not as available. And these are just templates. They don't need to be "beefy".Here's one I made up last night. ![]() ![]() It has 15 ppi Rip on one side and 15 ppi Crosscut on the other. My questions are:
Any (realistic) suggestions or recommendations would be welcomed. Thanks, |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hi Dom. I Initially thought it would be nice to have a x cut and rip. But after all the reading I have been doing lately, I think the ppi is enough. The pitch is defined, or altered when you file the teeth anyway. Is it not? And you are filing the whole tooth in, as opposed to repunching them. This would help to limit the number of templates you would have to have on hand providing you are stocking them for inventory. Just my humble 2 cents. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Neato. I could really use some of these, since *every* old saw I seem to file has a couple of hard spots that really screw up my filing. As for your question, I think Ron hit the nail on the head where the filing for rip and xcut are concerned. Now, for the length of the plates, are you wanting these to be used in a retoother? I've never used one, so I don't know how it all works, but I would say that the longest that a plate needs to be is about as wide as a saw vise. Any longer is just wasted material, unless someone has a homemade vise that runs the length of all their saws. Now, if these are intended for retoothers, then you might also want to make the extra-long fine-tooth templates for use with miterbox saws. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
I will be watching this thread with great interest, not having sharpened a saw yet but will be starting soon I hope. I think you are on to something here Dom. Steve |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hi Dom, I've laser cut patterns and use them a lot! I file just one little notch so it doesn't matter to me wich rake the pattern has (my are all 0° rake) What about two pitches per pattern instead? Cheers Pedder |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Window Guy said: +! I too plan to start down the slope of reconditioning saws. This will be an interesting topic. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom, I would recommend just rip, and cutting different tpi's on each side of the template. I use a template more to establish a new tpi. Rip or crosscut for me is simply a matter of how I file and set the teeth. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Great input so far! Sounds like the consensus is to have rip teeth punched in and to have two different PPI per template (1 per long edge) But how about the length? I think that standardizing on one length is a good idea less to stock that way. And how about a way to punch numbers into the steel? Any of our resident machinists have any suggestions? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom I think this is a great idea also and would like to buy sometime. Like Pedder said "What about two pitches per pattern instead? " As to the numbers all machinists like me and in the past used punches with 1/16 to 3/4 and inbetween sizes. Arlin |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hey Dom, Somehow those look strangely familiar............ I think I made a full set back in 2002. I just use mine for an initial spacing mark and then remove it, so shape really doesn't mean anything. Having a different ppi on each edge is not a bad idea.
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
What about offering two lengths, one for back saws and one for regular hand saws? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom, I'd be interested in a set of templates, but for my purposes, they only need to be about 1" x 2" in size. I would want them to be punched with a 30 degree rake angle. I would only need the smaller sizes from 10PPI and smaller. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
My last thought on length of the template. I say 18" long. 1) This is long enough for most back saws with the exception of miter saws. 2) The 18" length will also allow you to over lap by about 8" for those miter saws and 28" saws to make sure your pitch is consistent. You will have to move the saw in the vice anyway. 3) The 18" length will be easier to store in a shop drawer out of the way when not being used and help prevent rust. Of course, you can always drill a hole in them to be hung. 4) Less material used = lower price point, hopefully. That's all I can think of at the moment. Best of luck. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Daryl, yeah, it took me long enough to get to them eh? I think we talked about these two years ago. ![]() What did you use to punch the number in the saw plate? And what thickness steel did you use? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
MarvW said: OK, now you got me curious. Why a 30 deg rake angle? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Bibliophile 13 said: Mostly because I'm trying to minimize the number of blanks I have to keep in stock. You wouldn't think so, but this steel takes up a fair amount of room. Especially when you've sheared it to a set number of sizes (like saw plates). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom Quote: Because when notching there is no need for concern about rake angles. And with the notching tool that I use, the 30 degree angle will match the angle of the guide that is part of the tool. I'd like to correct the dimensions of the templates for my purposes that I mentioned in my previous post. A template that would work best for me would be a 2" square with a different PPI on each edge. And The notches that you punch should all be the same depth but with different spacing. In other words, A template for say, 10PPI should be no deeper than the template for 15PPI. I could even get by with cold roll steel. Say, about 18 ga. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
MarvW said: OK, thanks for clearing that up. ![]() MarvW said: 2" square! Pretty sure I can't punch teeth in a blank that small. I could punch a long piece and shear it to 2". But the minimum spacing between the clamp bars on a Foley's carrier bar is about 6" to 7"MarvW said: I understand what you are driving at. And it would make manufacturing a bit easier. For some reason I'm resisting the idea because I have this picture in my head of these templates looking just like saw plates. Go figure. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom, Quote: When notching, the notches locate the gullets. We don't care about the teeth at this stage. Punching with rake angles would hinder when doing the notching, especially with the bigger teeth, not so much with the smaller teeth. But if your punched shape is the same angle on both sides, it is easier to center the file when we do the notching. Also, you might give some serious thought to making your templates from 18 ga. Cold Roll steel or similar. The only concern here would be clamping a template and a saw plate in a common saw vise that isn't adjustable. As for making templates for my purposes, it would work to punch longer ones with only two edges punched, but I would only use about 2" of a template. I would end up with a few more templates, but that's ok. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom, My strips are made from .026" galvanized steel. Since they are soft, number stamps worked fine. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
Quote:
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
While the templates are very nice wouldn't a paper pattern that you could glue on the blade work as well and be cheaper to make ship and print? You could even make them with progressive pitch. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Ok gang, Here they are. Here's the first production run of the saw templates. I only made three since that was all the material I had on hand at the moment. ![]() ![]() Each is made from a piece of 2" x 18" x 0.020" thk 301 SS and feature a convenient 1/4" dia "hang hole" drilled in one end. ![]() The teeth feature a 30 deg rake angle to make them easier to index on. ![]() And each template has (1) pattern along each (long) side. These (3) are 11/12ppi, 13/14ppi and 15/16ppi. For ease of identification, I used an engraver to label each side. ![]() As soon as I get the pricing in order, I'll make an ad in the Swap and Sell Forum.
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Looks good Dom, Just one suggestion to make it easier for you to make and for the user to use. Punch all the teeth the same depth. In other words, the smallest PPI would all have points but as the teeth get bigger there would be flats between the notches. Having smaller notches makes it easier for the user to center up the notch to the template. The template is showing the user where the gullets will be. Each notch filed in a new saw plate is where the gullets will ultimately be filed. Perhaps 1-1/2" wide strips would be quite adequate. The smallest teeth would most like be only used for the smaller saw plates. This might be a consideration for determining the different lengths for different PPI,s. For example, I would not contemplate filing 15PPI on an 18" tenon saw with 4-1/2" below the back. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Thanks Marv. I'm limited by the capacity of the Foley. 1 1/2" wide stock is just a shade too narrow to comfortably use. At that width the hardware holding the blade in place comes too close to the punch. when it does, it jams up and the work piece gets ruined. And I can't make the teeth any deeper than they are. The punch which is used for punching all PPI teeth is basically the same shape as a tooth (Vee shaped). So fitting more of them in an inch means that the teeth get shorter. Exposing more of the saw plate to punch just generates more waste and the teeth still come out the same height. Believe me, I've tried.
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom ....... those look great and can't wait to see your pricing. Are you going to offer larger like 5 - 6, 7 - 8 or 9 - 10 etc. as well. These would sure help a newbie like me for sure and not have to use paper templates cause I don't have a printer that works .Steve |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Steve, we plan on making a bunch of templates in a variety of sizes. Keep an eye on S&S for the pricing. It should be coming out soon |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Dom, I don't think you understand what I'm suggesting about punching all the templates with the same depth of punch. Lets see if I can explain it a little differently.. Lets say you punch a template for 15PPI and punch so that the teeth are pointed. Now, without changing your punch depth stops, punch a template for say an 8PPI template. If you punch the teeth the same depth as the 15PPI, there will be flats between the punches for the 8PPI. Your templates will look like they've been notched and not look like saw teeth. You change the bars but don't change the depth of the notches, make them all small on all the templates regardless of PPI. Wish I knew how to do you a sketch. Think of an 8PPI tooth edge with the teeth half ground off. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
This may have been answered already. But, Marv. You are looking for gullets per inch rather than points per inch. Yes? There would be a couple of ways to do this depending on length of the template vs shear. Punch all the templates normally then shear off the points such that the gullets are all the same distance from the edge. This would give you templates of slightly different widths. Or mark the carrier bars so that the opposite edge is always the same distance from the toothed edge. The smallest teeth would have points and the larger teeth would have progressively longer flats in between dependent upon the tpi chosen. But the gullets would be the same depth. Make sense? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Hi Ron, Yes, that is it exactly. When I notch a saw plate, I use the gullets in the template as the guide. The smaller the punched template is, the easier it is to center the file for making the notch in the saw plate. When using your retoother, can you just punch the smaller teeth first, then change the bars for bigger teeth and not change how deep the punch is punching the saw plate? If you can do that, there would be no need to shear off or grind off the points on the bigger teeth, end up with flats between the punches. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Here you go Dom. I think this is what Marv. was talking about. A couple of notes from the user stand point. There will be some slight variance on the gullet depth due to the deflection of the plate when punched. (There is a gap between the plate and punch top and bottom). 2) The smaller teeth, higher ppi. may need to be jointed a bit to get all the gullets the same depth. There seems to be only about 1/32nd to 1/64" play with the carrier bars. So a 15gullets per inch may be slightly deeper than a 17 gullet per inch. That variance I mentioned. Lastly they are a bit of a pain because of having to index the carrier bar hold downs,(not all milled exactly alike). A one time deal. Of course the 2" strips of metal, Stainless, galvanized, 1095, etc. must all be a uniform width at 2". Goes back to that variance factor. Sorry for the terrible pics. Hopefully you will be able to see the variance in gullet depth.
|