FS Guide Rail T-Square - latest creation

[rmwarren]

Been fiddling with my latest gadget, a heavy duty t-square attachment for a FS guide rail. It's made of 1/4" 6061 aluminum, cut on a water jet (I think) and the 90 degree leg is 450mm (~16"). It should have the same level of accuracy as the large (450/600MM) woodpecker's square.

[attachthumb=1]

[attachthumb=2]

[attachthumb=3]

[attachthumb=4]

[attachthumb=5]

[attachthumb=6]

There is a tad of adjustment where the 2 pieces screw together, ~0.1mm. Attaches to the rail with the guide clips from my Rip Dogs over the little black posts so it installs/removes in seconds. The guide clips angled geometry pulls the rail into the edge so it should always be @ 90 degrees.

The edges are a bit rougher than I would like due to how they were cut but that is just cosmetic I guess.

[attachthumb=7]

It's a pretty good chunk of aluminum so it should take a beating. I'm interested in any feedback anyone may have.

Thanks, 

RMW

 

[Gwerner]

I like it. Since I don't already have a T-Square for my rails I'd be onboard to buy one of these.

 

[ScotF]

Looks great. I think that having some adjustment for 90 degrees is key. How much does it way? Are you able to add an auxiliary fence to it?

 

[rmwarren]

Looks great. I think that having some adjustment for 90 degrees is key. How much does it way? Are you able to add an auxiliary fence to it?

[member=6605]ScotF[/member]

So happens I have a postal scale handy, 2.5#.

The adjustment is minimal, since the edges touching the guide rail are designed to be 90 degrees from the line of holes, I made the upper holes 8.2mm for an 8mm cap screw.

By auxiliary fence are you thinking about something like a t-track/scale to set up repeatable cuts? If so, I guess it is possible but not readily apparent to me how at this point.

RMW

 

[whitesys]

I like it and would be interested.

 

[peter halle]

Are you intending to make these for sale?

Peter

 

[Jozsef Kozma]

I would be interested
I can see this improving accuracy and speed things up

 

[rmwarren]

Are you intending to make these for sale?

Peter

[member=1674]Peter Halle[/member] - right now I'm just fiddling around with it. Need to see if it works as expected, and was looking for feedback on the idea.

RMW

 

[ScotF]

Looks great. I think that having some adjustment for 90 degrees is key. How much does it way? Are you able to add an auxiliary fence to it?

[member=6605]ScotF[/member]

So happens I have a postal scale handy, 2.5#.

The adjustment is minimal, since the edges touching the guide rail are designed to be 90 degrees from the line of holes, I made the upper holes 8.2mm for an 8mm cap screw.

By auxiliary fence are you thinking about something like a t-track/scale to set up repeatable cuts? If so, I guess it is possible but not readily apparent to me how at this point.

RMW

Exactly. This would make lots of cuts faster right at the pile vs. Marking each one. Also, a longer arm would in theory help make it more accurate on wider cross-cuts.

 

[Theshipstore]

Rich  As always count me in

 

[rizzoa13]

Ill field test it for you Richard! I'll be down at the cove on Saturday your welcome to let me have one free of charge  [big grin]

 

[fshanno]

That sir, is a fine piece of work. 

But I'm not interested in any solution that includes attaching a Festool guide to a t-square.

I'd like to see a one piece, 1/4" thick aluminum t-square that a track saw can ride on.  It needs to provide a 48" crosscut, a full sheet.  Screw a rectangular bar on top that the channel in the saw bottom rides on. 

In this application the friction tape on the bottom of the guide is not only useless, it is counter productive.  No kind of square has friction tape on the bottom, that's just stupid.  The t-square needs to float as effortlessly as possible while sitting flat on the top of the plywood.  Nothing fights against registration against the reference edge.  You can effortlessly slide the the t-square up to your mark while it's lying flat on the workpiece. 

Just rabbet the bottom of the edge of the T so that the standard Festool anti-chipout strip can be attached.

 

[fshanno]

And then one more thing would make it the wonder of Planet Earth.

Some sort of stop.  That way we wouldn't have to fiddle with making a mark with sliding the t-square up to the mark.  And fudging because our anti-chipout strip is worn out.  We'd be crosscutting like a sliding table saw.

That would make your t-square the most important aftermarket product in the history of Festool.

 

[DrD]

I would definitely be on board with your creation so long as they are not priced like the OTTs and anodized red.

 

[rmwarren]

That sir, is a fine piece of work. 

But I'm not interested in any solution that includes attaching a Festool guide to a t-square.

I'd like to see a one piece, 1/4" thick aluminum t-square that a track saw can ride on.  It needs to provide a 48" crosscut, a full sheet.  Screw a rectangular bar on top that the channel in the saw bottom rides on. 

In this application the friction tape on the bottom of the guide is not only useless, it is counter productive.  No kind of square has friction tape on the bottom, that's just stupid.  The t-square needs to float as effortlessly as possible while sitting flat on the top of the plywood.  Nothing fights against registration against the reference edge.  You can effortlessly slide the the t-square up to your mark while it's lying flat on the workpiece. 

Just rabbet the bottom of the edge of the T so that the standard Festool anti-chipout strip can be attached.

[member=2018]fshanno[/member] - totally agree that would be a superior setup. Not sure it is doable in the real world however, in my limited experience once you get past 16-18" it is very costly to have produced (like Festool costly times Woodpecker costly plus BCTW costly) and perhaps not even possible. Hence the need to incorporate the guide rail into the design.

I would love to be educated on this further by one of our brethren with more experience @ custom machining/production work - [member=22]greg mann[/member] ...

I also wonder if the non-stick approach would backfire and move while cutting?

Thanks,

RMW

 

[rmwarren]

Ill field test it for you Richard! I'll be down at the cove on Saturday your welcome to let me have one free of charge  [big grin]

[member=20320]rizzoa13[/member] - weather has been incredible this week, warm but not hot and no humidity. Doubtless the cove will be mobbed.

I have a date with some countertops that are begging to be installed. Drop me a line if you have time and perhaps we can share a libation.

RMW

 

[rmwarren]

Looks great. I think that having some adjustment for 90 degrees is key. How much does it way? Are you able to add an auxiliary fence to it?

[member=6605]ScotF[/member]

So happens I have a postal scale handy, 2.5#.

The adjustment is minimal, since the edges touching the guide rail are designed to be 90 degrees from the line of holes, I made the upper holes 8.2mm for an 8mm cap screw.

By auxiliary fence are you thinking about something like a t-track/scale to set up repeatable cuts? If so, I guess it is possible but not readily apparent to me how at this point.

RMW

Exactly. This would make lots of cuts faster right at the pile vs. Marking each one. Also, a longer arm would in theory help make it more accurate on wider cross-cuts.

[member=6605]ScotF[/member] turns out that would not be too tough. My first try at this was made of 2 pieces of 1/4" by 2" aluminum that I just drilled and tapped, I added a t-track plus to give it a scale:

[attachthumb=1]

[attachthumb=2]

It worked okay, problem was it did not take much of a whack to knock it out of square so I was forever checking it before each use.

Wouldn't be too hard to add a piece of TT+ to this one either:

[attachthumb=3]

[attachthumb=4]

[attachthumb=5]

I'll play around with it over the weekend & report back.

RMW

 

[fshanno]

[member=2018]fshanno[/member] - totally agree that would be a superior setup. Not sure it is doable in the real world however, in my limited experience once you get past 16-18" it is very costly to have produced (like Festool costly times Woodpecker costly plus BCTW costly) and perhaps not even possible. Hence the need to incorporate the guide rail into the design.

I would love to be educated on this further by one of our brethren with more experience @ custom machining/production work - [member=22]greg mann[/member] ...

I also wonder if the non-stick approach would backfire and move while cutting?

Thanks,

RMW

I've seen ordinary alloy plate 24 x 48 x .25 for around $175 at online sites.  So I figured larger plate was available wholesale. 

Movement while cutting would be a concern wouldn't it?  One hand would have to stay on the t-square.  Maybe a handle of some sort could be rigged. 

Why don't I build a prototype out of plywood?  If I think it's so super duper great.

 

[rmwarren]

[member=2018]fshanno[/member] - totally agree that would be a superior setup. Not sure it is doable in the real world however, in my limited experience once you get past 16-18" it is very costly to have produced (like Festool costly times Woodpecker costly plus BCTW costly) and perhaps not even possible. Hence the need to incorporate the guide rail into the design.

I would love to be educated on this further by one of our brethren with more experience @ custom machining/production work - [member=22]greg mann[/member] ...

I also wonder if the non-stick approach would backfire and move while cutting?

Thanks,

RMW

I've seen ordinary alloy plate 24 x 48 x .25 for around $175 at online sites.  So I figured larger plate was available wholesale. 

Movement while cutting would be a concern wouldn't it?  One hand would have to stay on the t-square.  Maybe a handle of some sort could be rigged. 

Why don't I build a prototype out of plywood?  If I think it's so super duper great.

I don't disagree with you that the concept is awesome super duper great, I would sign up for a one-piece cross-cutting guide if it were available. 

In my (again) unprofessional understanding, the issue is not so much the size of the stock as the availability of a machine capable of precision milling 48"+. Actually, my 55" rails are too darned short to properly cross-cut 48" stock, so the final "perfect" rail would need to be around 60".

I also found on these guides that the stock is not perfectly flat, which I assume is due to the imperfection of 1/4" sheet material.

I am pretty sure from Woodpecker's video ads for the OTT square that they machine them from larger blanks of plate, milling down to a final /14" thickness, which is how they achieve the high precision.

You should make one up to see how it works out, to cut cost and make is easier to work with you might consider using one of the aluminum clad plastic panels. You can work that stuff pretty easily with a standard router bit, & it would save some weight. I would love to see how it turns out.

RMW

 

[rvieceli]

You might want to take a look at MIC6 cast aluminum plate. High tolerances for thickness and flatness even in 1/4 inch. Alcoa says +/- .005 on thickness and within .015 on flatness. Better for thicker stock.

The only problem is that it isn't cheap.

https://www.alcoa.com/industrial/en/products/product.asp?market_cat_id=534&prod_id=619

If you can find a place that uses it in a process, you should be able to get drops cheaper.