[QUOTE=Pygmy Rugger]
If the wood were as damp as a hot dog, you’d be able to tell before even cutting it. I worked in a carpenter shop for a couple years, and we never had to cut wood that damp.
[/QUOTE]
I do a fair bit of woodworking myself - I’m certain it wouldn’t work for me as I use a lot of reclaimed timber - sometimes this has pockets of moist resin in it, sometimes it has rust residues from removed nails - I’m not sure if these would set off the sawstop, but I suspect that under certain circumstances, they might. I guess if you’re working in ideal conditions with new timber that has been stored properly, there’s less risk of false positives.
[QUOTE=gotpasswords]
Gloves often make you less safe for a variety of reasons.
First is the “I’m wearing gloves!” mindset of a false sense of security. A misplaced sense of invincibility is dangerous.
Second is reduced dexterity - unless you’re wearing surgical gloves, you may as well be wearing oven mitts for how poorly most gloves fit.
Another issue is you don’t know exactly where the fingertips are - loose gloves have a nasty way of getting snagged on moving parts and dragging your hand in.
You’re working with machinery that will effortlessly go through thick chunks of wood. Steel and carbide will always win over canvas or leather.
[/QUOTE]
I agree - I thought I’d read somewhere that ordinary gloves should not be worn when using certain types of fast-moving machinery that could snag them. For example, the parts of chainsaw gloves that aren’t armoured are designed to tear apart without snagging, I think.
[QUOTE=jeepus]
Even careful people can make a careless mistake.
[/QUOTE]
Not if they’re being careful. That’s what it means.
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
I do a fair bit of woodworking myself - I’m certain it wouldn’t work for me as I use a lot of reclaimed timber - sometimes this has pockets of moist resin in it, sometimes it has rust residues from removed nails - I’m not sure if these would set off the sawstop, but I suspect that under certain circumstances, they might. I guess if you’re working in ideal conditions with new timber that has been stored properly, there’s less risk of false positives.
[/QUOTE]
Neither of these would have any real chance of tripping it: there’s got to be an electrical connection between the conductive material and you, to create the necessary capacitance.
[QUOTE=Princhester]
Neither of these would have any real chance of tripping it: there’s got to be an electrical connection between the conductive material and you, to create the necessary capacitance.
[/QUOTE]
Right. There’s a very mild electric current that runs through the blade. That determines if it’s cutting through meat or wood.
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
I agree - I thought I’d read somewhere that ordinary gloves should not be worn when using certain types of fast-moving machinery that could snag them. For example, the parts of chainsaw gloves that aren’t armoured are designed to tear apart without snagging, I think.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know about the gloves, but I know what happens when you touch a running chainsaw to your leg while wearing chaps! It’s scary as hell, but the nylon webbing inside the chaps tangles the blade up pretty quick, bogging it down. You feel pressure on your leg, but no cutting. I’ll tell you what, though, it’ll make you hand off the saw before your turn is up in a hurry!
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Surely it must be possible to design a system that does something like this, but doesn’t stop destructively, requiring such an expensive reset?
[/QUOTE]
Sooner or later I’m sure someone will. Really, though, $250 is peanuts as compared to the cost of an accident, especially to an employer, where an accident is going to be either
a) Expensive,
b) Really goddamned expensive, or
c) Catastrophically expensive.
In the last 10 years, two colleagues have lost digits in table saw accidents. I, for one, applaud this technology. I have been ultra-careful myself when using my table saw, but recognize all it takes is a second to end up thumbless.
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever]
Right. There’s a very mild electric current that runs through the blade. That determines if it’s cutting through meat or wood.
[/QUOTE]
If there was no risk of false positives, they wouldn’t have included an override button. Yes, the cost of replacing the cartridge is more than the cost of amputated fingers, but lots of people won’t see it that way, because the cost of replacing the cartridge is greater than the cost of not needing to.
I’ve worked in places where a couple of false alarms with a device like this would just end up with an unwritten policy of perpetual override put in place.
Pfft - look at the end of that video. That hot-dog still suffered a nasty graze. $200 and you’d still need a Band-Aid.
Seriously though, that’s neat. Would have been even neater if the demonstrator had the balls to use his finger instead of the sausage…
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
If there was no risk of false positives, they wouldn’t have included an override button. Yes, the cost of replacing the cartridge is more than the cost of amputated fingers, but lots of people won’t see it that way, because the cost of replacing the cartridge is greater than the cost of not needing to.
I’ve worked in places where a couple of false alarms with a device like this would just end up with an unwritten policy of perpetual override put in place.
[/QUOTE]
Um…oops? Just because you’ve got safety features, including one that’s digit-saving, doesn’t mean you can’t have an automatic shut-off button. Besides, I’m sure it’s there for legal reasons.
[QUOTE=Colophon]
Seriously though, that’s neat. Would have been even neater if the demonstrator had the balls to use his finger instead of the sausage…
[/QUOTE]
Or his balls.
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever]
Um…oops? Just because you’ve got safety features, including one that’s digit-saving, doesn’t mean you can’t have an automatic shut-off button. Besides, I’m sure it’s there for legal reasons.
[/QUOTE]
No, they actually say that the override is there so that materials that are conductive (or that might otherwise set off the device) can be cut without triggering the device.
I’m going to stop arguing about this now because the dialogue here has already pushed me to what appears a more resistant position than is actually the case. I think it’s a great invention, I just think there are going to be situations where it’s impractical to implement.