MFT and Guide Rail Alignment
- Thread starter Qwas
- Start date
Corwin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 2,624
nickao said:
The setup described above is ready now, but I'll dress it up a bit and get some pictures of that setup in the next day or three. Same basic idea I've used for some time, but much slicker now that it incorporates this 'hole' idea. This was to be one of several setups in an upcoming thread, but that will take much time while this one setup is easy to post soon.
I've been practising a bit this morning in order to finalize my own approach.
Here is a quick description with pics
Rail setup, once for all
- install the guide rail so that it rests agains vertical dogs (pic #1)
- secure the Festool brackets to secure the rail in this position (pic #2)
- rotate it upward
Cutting a piece of wood
- install the workpiece resting against horizontal dogs.
- Set a stop on my straight ruler, so that it sits at the cut length minus 185 mm
(185mm = distance between left side of rail and left side of blade). Place
the ruler lying flat on the workpiece (pic #3)
- rotate the rail downward and rest it on the workpiece, and slide the workpiece
so that ruler end rests against left side of rail (pic #4)
- secure rail bracket clamps and cut
The idea of referencing the left side of rail comes from John Lucas Woodshopdemos
web site. As he suggests, I'll cut one of my ruler at the 185mm location so that I can
directly rest it against the rail, thereby avoiding the error prone substraction.
Here is a quick description with pics
Rail setup, once for all
- install the guide rail so that it rests agains vertical dogs (pic #1)
- secure the Festool brackets to secure the rail in this position (pic #2)
- rotate it upward
Cutting a piece of wood
- install the workpiece resting against horizontal dogs.
- Set a stop on my straight ruler, so that it sits at the cut length minus 185 mm
(185mm = distance between left side of rail and left side of blade). Place
the ruler lying flat on the workpiece (pic #3)
- rotate the rail downward and rest it on the workpiece, and slide the workpiece
so that ruler end rests against left side of rail (pic #4)
- secure rail bracket clamps and cut
The idea of referencing the left side of rail comes from John Lucas Woodshopdemos
web site. As he suggests, I'll cut one of my ruler at the 185mm location so that I can
directly rest it against the rail, thereby avoiding the error prone substraction.
It seems to me that mhch's method will only give cuts that are as accurate as the width of the splinter guard on the guide rail. Cutting the ruler at 18.5 cm takes the width of the guide rail into account, but does not address the different kerf widths of the different saw blades, or the distance of the blade from the right edge of the guide rail. For most of my work, this would be fatal. I need accuracy to
The 185 mm measure has been obtained as follows
- Guide rail resting on wood blocks so measurement can be made under it.
- TS55 set for a 90 degree angle cut, and resting on the guide rail as it would for a normal cut.
- Blade plunged 10mm to have 2mm of its teeth visible under the guide rail
- Measurement made with a combination square, its arm resting against the left side
of the guide rail, and the end of its ruler resting against the blade teeth.
Please let me know if you think I made a mistake
- Guide rail resting on wood blocks so measurement can be made under it.
- TS55 set for a 90 degree angle cut, and resting on the guide rail as it would for a normal cut.
- Blade plunged 10mm to have 2mm of its teeth visible under the guide rail
- Measurement made with a combination square, its arm resting against the left side
of the guide rail, and the end of its ruler resting against the blade teeth.
Please let me know if you think I made a mistake
poto said:
That's right.
Cutting the ruler at the 185 mm position is thus not appropriate. I think I need
a more elaborate ruler, with a stop on the rail side which stays at a fixed
position most of the time, but can be calibrated after a change of blade.
Thanks for your remarks. Without them, I would have missed that point
Now pretty accurate square cuts are easy with the MFT, thanks to Qwas idea
and Poto's remark. Here is the modified procedure:
The rightmost stop on the ruler is set after blade is manipulated (changing it or
even changing the cut angle). The first picture shows the small ruler overhang which
accounts for the width of the splinter guard.
The leftmost stop is set at the cut distance.
A similar approach can be used when cutting on the right side of the blade,
with the appropriate detail adjustments.
To comply with the picture required policy of this forum, and satisfy picture cop
and Poto's remark. Here is the modified procedure:
The rightmost stop on the ruler is set after blade is manipulated (changing it or
even changing the cut angle). The first picture shows the small ruler overhang which
accounts for the width of the splinter guard.
The leftmost stop is set at the cut distance.
A similar approach can be used when cutting on the right side of the blade,
with the appropriate detail adjustments.
To comply with the picture required policy of this forum, and satisfy picture cop
Corwin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 2,624
You're getting close. When I get my hole situation resolved I'll post the jig I have. This accommodates blade changes and has a much greater degree of accuracy -- in combination with the hole drilling kit, you should be able to make your own MFT top that will be about as accurate as the Festool offering. Maybe I'm too fussy with accuracy, but some operations may be the better for it...
I've been using similar setups both on and off the MFT, but the MFT setups can now be put in place so much faster by locating off the holes. Also, some jigs may now be readily offset by a multiple of 96mm with ease. Lots of advantages in setting up for various operations -- and now I will not hesitate to tear down my usual configuration for a special setup, as it will all go back much easier.
Sorry if it takes another day or two for pictures, but I do think you may find it worth the wait.
I've been using similar setups both on and off the MFT, but the MFT setups can now be put in place so much faster by locating off the holes. Also, some jigs may now be readily offset by a multiple of 96mm with ease. Lots of advantages in setting up for various operations -- and now I will not hesitate to tear down my usual configuration for a special setup, as it will all go back much easier.
Sorry if it takes another day or two for pictures, but I do think you may find it worth the wait.
Corwin,
I think I have some idea of what you are trying to do, and while making pics
this morning I gave it a try to use the Incra bits and pieces I have, locating
the track on the side opposite to the one the ruler is on my pics
Unfortunately my Incra tracks came with sliding imperial scales, which I discarded,
so I could no go very far
I leave it to you now.
When you are done, may be Qwas or you could initiate and own a specific thread in the
FOG reference section, to provide forum visitors and web search engines a good summary document on
all of this, including text and pictures extracted from this thread.
I think I have some idea of what you are trying to do, and while making pics
this morning I gave it a try to use the Incra bits and pieces I have, locating
the track on the side opposite to the one the ruler is on my pics
Unfortunately my Incra tracks came with sliding imperial scales, which I discarded,
so I could no go very far
I leave it to you now.
When you are done, may be Qwas or you could initiate and own a specific thread in the
FOG reference section, to provide forum visitors and web search engines a good summary document on
all of this, including text and pictures extracted from this thread.
Corwin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 2,624
mhch said:Unfortunately my Incra tracks came with sliding imperial scales, which I discarded,
so I could no go very far
Incra scales are available separately and are relatively inexpensive. They offer a good range of Imperial scales and also offer a very limited range in metric -- the metric scales are included with metric racks as a conversion kit. These kits readily convert their incremental track, flip track and the original incra jig (currently a Rockler exclusive) from Imperial to metric.
I have plenty of Imperial scale. If you like, I would be happy to send you a replacement free of charge. Just send me a PM if you are interested.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2007
- Messages
- 636
petiegolfer said:
With the grooves in the table top, I have accomplished the same and I only need grooves in the back and sides.
[attachthumb=1]
This fence will slide on the aluminum bar on the back of the table. It can slide to whatever length of cut is needed. And it can be used for crosscuts or parallel cuts depending on which part of the fence I use to align the board.
The 2 fence parts are kept at 90 degrees by the aluminum bracket in the top left corner. Before tightening that bracket, I put the fence parts on the aluminum bars going across the back and the left side of my table. This guarantees a perfect 90 degree with the fence. Works great.
[attachthumb=2]
Hey Steve - you'd better be careful using the curved side of the stationary clamping element for your square: since the radius of curvature is not centered at the center of the hole, any rotation of the clamping element in the hole will throw off your square. The sides won't line up parallel to the hole centers. You'd be better off with something cylindrical in the holes, as mhch did with the PVC.
Love the parallelogram!
Love the parallelogram!
poto said:
Press the workpiece against the flat sides of the dogs. This will self align them
unless they are very strongly screwed from underneath. Doing so against the
curved side won't work as well since the aligning force is applied much closer
to the center of rotation (I'm not sure this last sentence is very clear).
Could that explain the unexpected angle discrepancy, 27 degrees instead of 30,
that you reported earlier for angle cuts ?
Similar threads
