FESTOPPER - an inexpensive Dust Extractor mounted cyclone

Status
Not open for further replies.

sandy

Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
115
While it is clear that the addition of a preseparator can significantly extend the life of the vacuum bags, the existing options all had problems that I believe I have now solved.  While I have, and like, Dust Deputy cyclones, the ones that I have in my shop are unwieldy as are the ones that I have seen mounted to the tops of Festool Dust Extractors.  This is particularly true of those that are mounted on top of the Festool Dust Extractor.  The Oneida design, which is adapted to be mounted on top of the Festool Dust Extractor is extremely tall, as are the DIY versions that I have seen.  Further, at $299 each, Oneida's Ultimate Dust Deputy Kit (https://www.oneida-air.com/dust-deputy/ultimate-dust-deputy-cyclone-kit-festool-vacs ) is by no means inexpensive.

Since its introduction, I have noted a great deal of interest in the newly introduced Festool CT Cyclone CT-VA-20 (https://www.festoolusa.com/products/dust-extraction/pre-separator/204083---ct-va-20 ).  However, there is no question that $375 is a bit more than most hobbyists, and even many professionals, are eager to spend on a preseparator, even one that carries the Festool name.

I recently became aware of a relatively new product called a Dustopper (http://dustopper.com ).  The Dustopper is a "Thien-type" baffle that is sold at Home Depot and is ready, out-of-the-box, to be mounted on a Home Depot "Homer" 5-gallon bucket.  The Dustopper carries a list price of only $39.97 (https://www.homedepot.com/p/Dustopp...ia-with-2-5-in-hose-36-in-long-HD12/302643445 ).  Problems that have been reported by users include the unit's failure to adequately seal to "standard" 5-gallon buckets, although Home Depot's response has been that their "Homer" buckets are made to much higher tolerances than typically available 5-gallon buckets, whereby the sealing issue is not present when an actual "Homer" bucket is used.  Another problem that has been reported is that the clips that attach it to the bucket are prone to break if the Dustopper is repeatedly attached to, and removed from, the "Homer" bucket.

It occurred to me that I could build a plywood box that has a bottom configured to fit the top of my CT 22 E and CT 26 E Festool Dust Extractors so that it would lock onto the top of the Extractor, just like the Oneida and Festool designs do.  However, when I initially attempted to modify a Homer bucket to be fitted to such a box I learned that the diameter of the bucket (about 285 mm) is extremely close to the width (295 mm) needed to fit the top of the box, whereby once the circular opening was cut into the top it would provide no support for the bucket.  Nevertheless, after several design iterations, I discovered a way to modify a Homer bucket to fit and connect to the top of the dust collection box, to make the device airtight, and to have the collection box's top removable to empty the collected sawdust, whereby it would not be necessary to remove the Dustopper from the top of the collection box in order to empty the sawdust, thereby eliminating the clip breakage issue.

In making the various modifications, I also discovered that I could modify the Homer bucket in two different ways.  In the first, I retained the portion of the bucket that includes the handle.  While this results in a somewhat taller unit, it does provide the user with a convenient handle to move the Extractor with the Festopper attached.  In the second version I eliminated the handle portion of the bucket, resulting in a lower overall height, which could be a benefit to those wishing to be able to place their Extractor under their MFT/3 table.  In either case, the overall height of the collection box can be modified so as to minimize the height of the Festopper or, alternatively, to increase the capacity of its collection box.  The cost of the Festopper, including the purchase of the Dustopper, the Homer bucket, and various other items was about $60.

If there is interest in the design, and the various "tricks" needed to connect the modified Homer bucket to the collection box, I would consider making a set of plans and instructions available.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0725.JPG
    IMG_0725.JPG
    84.7 KB · Views: 4,786
  • IMG_0724.JPG
    IMG_0724.JPG
    90.9 KB · Views: 2,556
I would really enjoy seeing your plans or reading more about how you made this. Your "festopper" looks absolutely brilliant!
 
Thank you for sharing.  Here is an idea -- put in a narrow vertical plexiglass window to see how full it is getting. I have several Festool vacs and some other brands. Oops --must be full when it quits working!  Right when someone is in the middle of something.
 
[member=3194]sandy[/member] , very interesting design. I too would be interested in the plans.
Thanks.
 
I would love to see some plans? Have anything you could share? Even some more detailed pics of the build would help. Thanks!
 
Firstly, thank you all for the kind comments.

In answer to some of the questions that I have seen raised, I have in mind a way to make it possible to stack additional Systainers above the FESTOPPER if that is something that others want.  Also, while others have mentioned the capacity of the FESTOPPER or the "advantage" of Festool's Cyclone with regard to having multiple bins, so that they can be emptied off site, please note that it is possible to make (quite cheaply) multiple collection bins for the FESTOPPER, and that they can, when filled, be sealed by a simple top with a handle to make them easy to carry.

Sandy
 
As I have been advised by the administrators that I should not use the FOG for distributing plans, anyone who wants information regarding the plans should email me at sandy@asman.com with the Subject "FESTOPPER" and your email address.  Please do not reply here, and please do not send me a message on the FOG.

Sandy
sandy@asman.com
 
[member=4518]Mike Goetzke[/member]

First, I did not design the Dustopper unit that I use in making the FESTOPPER.  The Dustopper is sold by The Home Depot, with whom I have no connection (other than as a customer).  Nor do I have any connection with the company that produces the Dustopper. All I claim to have done is to come up with a design for a "collection box" that can be connected, like a Systainer, to the top of a Festool Dust Extractor with a removable top that integrates the Dustopper.

Next, and meaning no disrespect, whatsoever to Phil Thien (whose name is actually J. Philip Thien), who singularly researched, published, and popularized the so-called "Thien Baffle", here (as Paul Harvey used to say) is "the rest of the story".  On November 23, 2009 Mr. Thien filed U.S. Patent Application, Ser. No. 12/624022 entitled "DUST SEPARATOR" seeking a U.S. patent on his design.  The file history ("Image File Wrapper") was published as Publication No. 20100132317 on June 3, 2010, and it is publicly available at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office website (http://uspto.gov ).  In any event, the Patent Examiner rejected Mr. Thien's application based on the disclosures of two earlier patents, namely, Nos. 6,251,296 and 6,767,380.  Following that rejection, Mr. Thien abandoned his application without further amendment or argument.

Also, for what it's worth, I have seen prior art that discloses the same baffle design that Festool now uses in its CT Cyclone.

Sandy
 
[member=3194]sandy[/member]

sandy said:
[member=4518]Mike Goetzke[/member]

First, I did not design the Dustopper unit that I use in making the FESTOPPER.  The Dustopper is sold by The Home Depot, with whom I have no connection (other than as a customer).  Nor do I have any connection with the company that produces the Dustopper. All I claim to have done is to come up with a design for a "collection box" that can be connected, like a Systainer, to the top of a Festool Dust Extractor with a removable top that integrates the Dustopper.

Next, and meaning no disrespect, whatsoever to Phil Thien (whose name is actually J. Philip Then), who singularly researched, published, and popularized the so-called "Thien Baffle", here (as Paul Harvey used to say) is "the rest of the story".  On November 23, 2009 Mr. Thien filed U.S. Patent Application, Ser. No. 12/624022 entitled "DUST SEPARATOR" seeking a U.S. patent on his design.  The file history ("Image File Wrapper") was published as Publication No. 20100132317 on June 3, 2010, and it is publicly available at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office website (http://uspto.gov ).  In any event, the Patent Examiner rejected Mr. Thien's application based on the disclosures of two earlier patents, namely, Nos. 6,251,296 and 6,767,380.  Following that rejection, Mr. Thien abandoned his application without further amendment or argument.

Also, for what it's worth, I have seen prior art that discloses the same baffle design that Festool now uses in its CT Cyclone.

Sandy

Thien not Then - correct?

I work at a company that likes to protect their IP. Even though Phil (J. Philip) may not have protected his invention in my opinion he should be mentioned as at least a contributor to this design. When I saw this I said "WHAT - this is Phil's."

Mike
 
TinyShop said:
Here's some of the backstory as it appears on the Thien forum.

This IP and patent saga seems to be as much a story about "open source" versus "proprietary" as it is about the morality (or lack thereof?) of Person "A" liberally making use of the updated concepts and designs of person "B" (as proudly displayed on their open source online forum) to build a finished product only to then contact person "B" and enquire if they might be willing to accept some crumbs (from the commodification of "Person B's" design) for their initial "contribution". It's conceivable to say that if the Thien forum didn't exist (and, therefore, if Thien had never otherwise made his efforts public) that the Dustopper would never have come into being. Some might naturally wonder, then, how much of the same can be said for the creation of the Festool CT-VA 20? I would answer that there's a BIG difference, which is that Festool's design departs from Thien's enough that one would never mistake Festool's for Thien's (or vice versa). But Thien's and Dustopper's? Oh yes.

As an aside, the appearance of the word "Cyclone" in the name of Festool's product (even though a cyclone it is not) might be a deliberate effort to move the needle even further away from any mistaken notion that their product is a Thien baffle. Just guessing here.

Which also has me thinking about how much the "Festopper" steals from Festool's CT-VA design and whether it is OK that sandy wants to profit from his cobbled together version of their unique take on "the baffle"? Festool saw fit to unlock this thread so I guess this answers the question. Admittedly, I could care less since I plan to build my own systainer'ized Dustopper creation and to thereafter post my efforts on the FOG, taking extra care to disclose all of the parts I used in its construction and a quick "how-to" so that others can freely benefit. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I don't see the need to pay to acquire what is common sense and I also don't think anyone else should have to either.

Then there's the accompanying issue of the Dustopper guy having actually applied for a patent. Does this single action show how he was never really interested in a true partnership with Thien? Who knows. But, I'm most baffled why, when your plan is to patent someone else's work, that you would send them written correspondence in advance in which you divulge that their work is the basis for your idea. That doesn't seem real smart. Who knows, maybe the guy had a twinge of conscience. Too bad the whole project was morally and ethically deficient from the get go. But, hey, that's capitalism, right?!
 
[member=64030]TinyShop[/member]

First of all, I have been a Registered Patent Attorney for almost 50 years.  As a Patent Attorney I have prosecuted approximately 500 patent applications before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and I have litigated scores of IP cases in about a dozen U.S. District Courts.  I have also handled many, many IP licensing and transactional matters, whereby I know that I am qualified to speak as an expert on IP matters.  I am not sure, though, what (if any) qualifications you may have in that regard.

With regard to your comment about, "... how much the Festopper steals from Festool's CT-VA design..." the answer is zero.  Had you actually read what I wrote, you will note that I do not claim that I did anything other than design and implement a "collection box" that has a bottom that locks onto a Festool Dust Collector, and a top that interfaces with the commercially available Dustopper device sold by The Home Depot.  Can you design something that will do the same?  Frankly, I don't know, but feel free to do so, as I am sure that when you attempt to do so you will have a far greater understanding and appreciation for the fact that it was not a trivial exercise.  I am also quite certain that the design of the FESTOPPER is such that, at $60 in parts, it accomplishes pretty much the same result that the $300 Oneida and the $375 Festool versions accomplish at a cost that is far more palatable to hobbyist (as well as many professional) woodworkers.  By the way, as shown in the attached photo, the FESTOPPER can be placed under an MFT/3 table, something that the Oneida unit cannot do.

Regarding the design used in Festool's CT-VA, as I said in my earlier post, it is different from the design promoted by Phil Thien, as well as from the Dustopper design, but it, too, is virtually identical to prior designs that I have seen.  Again, I am speaking from the perspective of one who has actually seen the inside of the CT-VA, something that you, clearly, have not done, or you would realize that the CT-VA uses a disk at the bottom of a tube that has a rectangular opening which is keyed to be oriented at a particular angle from its input.  Neither Phil Thien's version, nor the Dustopper, have anything similar.

As far as the use of the word "cyclone" is concerned, you should be aware that that term came from meteorology, rather than woodworking.  As such it refers to the rotation of the airflow, rather than the means that created the rotation, whereby those who think that a "cyclone" separator requires a conical device, such as the Dust Deputy, are simply incorrect, by definition.  Consequently, all of the devices that use rotational air flow to separate sawdust, etc. are "cyclone separators".

Sandy

 

Attachments

  • IMG_0765.JPG
    IMG_0765.JPG
    2 MB · Views: 1,870
[member=4518]Mike Goetzke[/member]

Whoops on the misspelling of Mr. Thien's name.  I have now corrected it in my post.

Sandy
 
sandy said:
[member=4518]Mike Goetzke[/member]

Whoops on the misspelling of Mr. Thien's name.  I have now corrected it in my post.

Sandy

[member=3194]sandy[/member] - spellchecker must have gotten you - should see some of the texts I write on my phone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top