Author Topic: Ct 26 efficiency  (Read 7061 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pilotboat

  • Posts: 7
Ct 26 efficiency
« on: January 09, 2017, 12:40 PM »
I have a CT-26 for my Festools.  I purchased a dust deputy kit that fits on top of the CT 26.  I am wondering how much  performance (if any) does the dust kit cause.  Anyone have an opinion?

Festool USA does not pre-approve the contents of this website nor endorse the application or use of any Festool product in any way other than in the manner described in the Festool Instruction Manual. To reduce the risk of serious injury and/or damage to your Festool product, always read, understand and follow all warnings and instructions in your Festool product's Instruction Manual. Although Festool strives for accuracy in the website material, the website may contain inaccuracies. Festool makes no representations about the accuracy, reliability, completeness or timeliness of the material on this website or about the results to be obtained from using the website. Festool and its affiliates cannot be responsible for improper postings or your reliance on the website's material. Your use of any material contained on this website is entirely at your own risk. The content contained on this site is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice.


Offline Holmz

  • Posts: 3544
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2017, 01:05 PM »
Please not any "opinions"... One could measure the Lessing of flow with something like a kestrel anemometer. And I believe that some measurement have been made.

Basically a DD pulling out the majority start off worse, but gets to be the same as the bag gets full.

Offline demographic

  • Posts: 275
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2017, 01:24 PM »
Can't remember who it was but someone on here has tested it (Peter Parfit maybe? and the loss of suction, although measurable was pretty much insignificant.

Offline Dovetail65

  • Posts: 4449
    • Rose Farm Floor Medallions and Inlays
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2017, 01:35 PM »
I used to have the nice metal units years ago, sold them here actually.

My memory of those combined with how I use my units units now(the bags get packed so tight with dust they are like a brick) I would say there is no noticeable loss in real world use when using them. A loss might be measurable on some kind of meter, but that's it.
The one who says it can't be done should avoid interrupting the person doing it.

Offline rst

  • Posts: 1399
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2017, 01:42 PM »
I have two of the steel Oneidas and an Ultimate, there is no noticeable loss and not having to empty bags is great.  My two steel units sit on 25 gallon paint/grease drums and I can go months without filling.  Best yet, the vac filters look unused.

Offline copcarcollector

  • Posts: 1308
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2017, 01:57 PM »

Offline kasezilla

  • Posts: 14
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2017, 10:04 AM »
I agree. I recently purchase the Ultimate and found it to have almost no difference in efficiency. The ability to suck up anything and know I am not going to paying to replace bags make the CT26 all the more useful. It also fits nicely on the vacuum and pulling around the unit works just as well as it did when I didn't have it attached. I recommend getting one you will be happy you did.

Offline them700project

  • Posts: 62
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2017, 08:57 AM »
I run the ct26 for kapex, domino,of1400, and all sanders. I ran it at 65% or so and added ultimate dust deputy and just added 10% or so. It ddnt seem to impact me at all. The added benefit will be not clogging bags.

I just emptied my DD on friday and was amazed at how fine the stuff it was collecting actually was. 

Offline rand17

  • Posts: 19
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2017, 10:43 AM »
Im using my CT26 with the Kapex....so far I'm hoping once I get the 36MM hose the dust collection will improve...so far its not all that.... if I had to guess i would say with the 27mm hose it leaves behind about 30% of the dust....maybe I'm expecting to much...IDK...

Offline rst

  • Posts: 1399
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2017, 11:50 AM »
I cut plastics more than anything.  I recently decided to check my DD as I had gone about six months since the last time I emptied.  there was a depression in the center that would barely hold a soup can...checked the filter... clean.  Love my DDs.

Offline mleny77

  • Posts: 52
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2017, 12:23 PM »
not having to buy replacement vac bags sold me on the unit.

Offline RobBob

  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2017, 01:53 PM »
Funny how much everyone likes the results that the small Dust Deputy cyclones provide, while some other people think that the shorter full size cyclones can't possibly separate fine dust very well.

Maybe some don't work well, but I can tell you my Laguna works as well as any other full size cyclone that I have seen.

(I have an Ultimate Dust Deputy on my CT26 and a regular Dust Deputy on an old Crapsman shop vac.)

All three work just fine, imo.

Offline Huxleywood

  • Posts: 121
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2017, 02:23 PM »
Funny how much everyone likes the results that the small Dust Deputy cyclones provide, while some other people think that the shorter full size cyclones can't possibly separate fine dust very well.



The issue is not the height but the relationship of the diameter vs the height.  The shorter full size cyclones can work fine if the diameter to height relationship it kept at the optimum ratio if not it loses efficacy.  They normally don't keep the ratio (in order to maximize flow) however for many uses the difference is negligible, where you really see the difference is when using a large drum sander or a wide belt.  In general you can't outsmart physics and dust separation science is a very mature discipline.  Put a well designed cyclone like a Torit up against any of the short cyclones and run them on a widebelt and I guarantee you will see a significant demonstrable difference in separation.  The real world impact is just the need to clean and replace the filters more often, not a huge deal in a hobby shop.  The short cyclones absolutely have their place since many don;t have the height to install an optimally sized cyclone. 

Offline RobBob

  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2017, 04:00 PM »
Baloney.  Man has been finding new ways to use physics to his advantage since the dawn of time.  How long had man been trying to fly before someone figured it out?  Same with going to the moon.  Same with using physics to make a safer table table saw.  I could go on and on.  Computer simulation and design helps to find new ways to tweak a design or add a component to make something work better. Does not matter how mature a discipline is, someone will eventually come along and build a better mousetrap.

How often has Man proverbially hit his forehead with his hand and said, "Why didn't I think of that."

(I am speaking in general here, not specifically about Laguna short cyclones or dust collection.)
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 04:03 PM by RobBob »

Offline Huxleywood

  • Posts: 121
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2017, 05:31 PM »
Baloney.  Man has been finding new ways to use physics to his advantage since the dawn of time.  How long had man been trying to fly before someone figured it out?  Same with going to the moon.  Same with using physics to make a safer table table saw.  I could go on and on.  Computer simulation and design helps to find new ways to tweak a design or add a component to make something work better. Does not matter how mature a discipline is, someone will eventually come along and build a better mousetrap.

How often has Man proverbially hit his forehead with his hand and said, "Why didn't I think of that."

(I am speaking in general here, not specifically about Laguna short cyclones or dust collection.)

You folded the two phrases together into a single meaning.  You can't fight physics, well you can but you lose, every time.  As for the industry being mature it is, and I do agree there is always potential tweaking but the most efficient ratio hasn't changed for about 100 years.  There are some things that over time reveal themselves as an absolute.  There has been some work on splitting airstreams with light weight particulates and increasing velocity and getting better seperation but that isn't what we have here.  Hobby sized cyclones are a byproduct industry and leave of the research that has been done for large scale separation in industry.  There is a reason you see the same ratios in all industrial separators for similar particle size and weight. 

The shorter cyclones simply don't have as high of a separation rate as taller cyclones with proper proportions in the sub-micron range, the main issue is the increase in maintenance and long term running costs as long as you have high MERV filters.  If a person doesn't have the room and/or budget then it is not relevant to them, well all make sacrifices.  Most of us choose not to vent outside since we condition the air in our shops, that alone is a big compromise but we do it. 

Finally, keep in mind the particular size that will have the lowest separation will be the sub-micron particles and are basically invisible to the naked eye and without some serious analysis you aren't even going to see those or be able to quantify the amount.  My point was simply the DD though small is actually better proportioned than the short cyclones and you can't make the leap you made as it is not about height alone it is the ratio of height to diameter that is important and of course the DD can be smaller overall and still be efficient due to the significantly lower flow they are designed for. 


Offline RobBob

  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2017, 07:49 PM »
I do not agree at all with your central point.  (Forget dust collection)  It is not about fighting physics.  It is about tweaking a design, adding a new part, discovering something that was not known before.  Even NASA has said that there are things about Saturn and the rings around Saturn that defy our current understanding of physics. 

How do you think the big advances happen?  Something new is tried or discovered.

Your thinking is like saying global warming is settled science.  The phrase "settled science" is contrary to what science is about.  Science is always open to learning new things and never "settled".

If you do a little research you will find that dust collectors really are not all that important anyway as far as health is concerned.  It does not matter if dust collectors capture only larger particles and wood chips.  The most effective method of capturing sub-micron particles is by using an air filter. 

Stop trying to use a vacuum cleaner to purify the air you breathe.

Unrelated comment, but interesting - Approximately 50% of medicine is based on simple observation and only the other 50% is based on actual doubled blind studies using the scientific method.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 08:14 PM by RobBob »

Offline antss

  • Posts: 836
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2017, 09:30 PM »
We're all glad you like your Laguna dust collector - but Torbin hasn't magically developed on his first try what others have spent lifetimes working on.

He's a fabulous marketer, and sells some nice products.  But a better mousetrap designer ?  Come on, no ones even invented a better one of those in what, 50 years ?

But, you're certainly free to disagree -

Offline RobBob

  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ct 26 efficiency
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2017, 09:42 PM »
We're all glad you like your Laguna dust collector - but Torbin hasn't magically developed on his first try what others have spent lifetimes working on.

He's a fabulous marketer, and sells some nice products.  But a better mousetrap designer ?  Come on, no ones even invented a better one of those in what, 50 years ?

But, you're certainly free to disagree -

Oh brother, here we go again.  You guys are being obtuse dumb-asses.  I never said it was a better mousetrap.  Do you really think Torbin did the designing and tweaking all by himself?  What if it is just a cosmetic change from last years model?

~ I own the machine.  You do not.
~ I have used the machine.  You have not.
~ I have compared the results using the same jointer/planer to a Clear Vue and an Oneida.  You have not.

There is no discernible difference.  Any difference not seen is irrelevant if you are using a dust mask and air filter.

Two points that seem to get lost:
1. The separation is good enough (see number 2).  It seems to be no different than the results friends get from their Oneida and Clear View dust collectors.  We have compared the results.  Does not matter if the sub-micron particles are not captured or if the filter clogs faster, etc...

2. An air cleaner is the proper tool to clean the air of sub-micron dust.  Not a glorified vacuum cleaner.

From Rockler: "The fact is, much of the dust created in a woodshop never enters your dust collection system at all. In spite of your best efforts to set up an efficient, powerful dust collection system, some amount of the fine dust created by the tools it services will always escape into the air in your shop. Dust created by hand-held sanders, for example, is among the finest dust created in the shop and is extremely difficult to completely capture.

Over time, the fine dust problem multiplies. The fine dust particles missed by your dust collection system remain in your shop, ready to be stirred into a dust cloud by the slightest movement of air; you'll add to the problem every time you use your shop.

The answer is air filtration."
« Last Edit: March 12, 2017, 10:39 PM by RobBob »