NEW OF 1010 R dust shroud design improvement

[mcooley]

The fact the "dust shroud" is now open on the OF 1010 R is more reason for one of us to design and 3D print a similar solution for the 1400. The design on that unit is really bad. Of course, the angle of suction on the new 1010 has got to be a big part of the "open solution" but still one of us can figure this out for the 1400, right? I really dislike the 1400's approach to this.
https://www.festool.com/blog/news/of1010r

 

[semenza]

  Not sure if the open top will be better or worse?  More air flow but more space for chips to escape.

  Definitely more room for large bits to fit through. Although there are work around for that on the 1400. Being able to use the D36 hose on the 1010 will be a big improvement.

  On the other hand I've always had a good DC experience on the 1400. 

Seth

 

[mcooley]

The 1400 dust collection is way too cumbersome for me and restrictive not to mention the way the clear plastic part clicks together. Mine cracked a long time ago and I just leave off the "ring" enclosure near the bit now.

It's a shame the way they approached that 1400 part. It could have been so simple and robust. Instead it is more like a plastic part to a model which is fragile and yet intrusive.

For instance, the fact the rigid part interfaces with the hose so far out makes for a very strong "tension point" which here in the new 1010 we at least see a "transitional design" which hopefully makes that part way less prone to disengaging or breaking etc.

I never understood why on the 1400 the clear tube was used and not something lower profile and slightly more flexible.

A bit like the jigsaw port which in a lot of situations the clearance one needs with it to make a turn is a real problem.

Anyhow, I do wish Festool would better integrate a lot of these features and dare I say it seems like they don't do a lot of outside consulting by people who know this stuff better from different industries. The design article from years back stated most of their designs were the result of one senior and one younger designer along with something like 20+ engineers. That to my mind is the issue. Not a lot of "integrative design thinking" here but instead engineering solutions without enough thinkers on the design and user end addressing the tool holistically. 

Furthermore, I use a lot of their tools but there is a pattern in their design approach where these really simple thoughtful solutions don't get addressed and if they do it takes them a really long time to address it.

Anyhow ever think the 1400 router handle will ever get a slightly grippy ergo handle? Or how about the TS 55 and the plunge handle being slick still? Even the knob design without some kind of quick release button on top for engaging and disengaging the plunge feature is a no brainer. Turning a large knob on the front of the machine while supporting it from behind on a stick, really? Don't get me wrong I like the stick handle but it requires a different approach to securing the plunger to my mind.

It sounds dumb (and is dumb of me) to always point these issues out but in day to day use handling the tool quickly is a must without having to protect it so much. Same for the DF 500 we all know putting our hand on the back of the unit away from the so-called "barrel grip" gives the most control and yet that area of the tool does not address one's hand at all. In fact one's hand there is just too close to interfering with the plug-it cord which over the years is prone to damaging the pins on the socket.

It's a bit like in design school and dare I say even in an undergraduate program where these things would never get past a good "critique culture" and so many other solutions would come to fruition even after all the usual excuses about additional costs and manufacturing procedures around tooling and the like.

 

[semenza]

There are certainly things that could be better. Which is probably how the new 1010 improvements came about. Gotta' start somewhere.

EX- (as you say) the 1400 shroud could be more robust and so now we see that on the 1010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are also things that no amount of product research will solve completely because they are actually personal preference.

EX- I hate grippy material on on power tool handles. And I have never liked or been a proponent of gripping the Domino at the back end. Personally for me, that hold introduces more leverage and less steady plunge control.

    Can't please everyone all the time. Especially me.  [smile]

Seth

 

[ChuckM]

Snip.

    Can't please everyone all the time. Especially me.  [smile]

Seth

Woodworkers are known (notorious?) for being diverse in their preference, taste and background. Including their choice of tool color!!! [tongue]

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Strangely enough, the dust port on the DF500 is far more comfortable for a left-handed user, but that never really occurred to me until I needed to use it with my right hand.
Agreed that the ring around the dust port on the OF1400 is a little fiddley, but it does work well, especially with the 36mm hose. I don't run my OF1010 hard enough to really be concerned about fitting the bigger hose, but choice is nice.

Maybe an "improved" version for the OF1400 should be something that the 3D printing guys should be looking at?

 

[ChuckM]

Strangely enough, the dust port on the DF500 is far more comfortable for a left-handed user, but that never really occurred to me until I needed to use it with my right hand.Snip.

The dust chute on the DF500 is on the right, where the hose also goes. If you held the barrel with your left hand (as a left-hand user does), the hose would be between your left hand and and body. How or why was that more comfortable?

 

[semenza]

Strangely enough, the dust port on the DF500 is far more comfortable for a left-handed user, but that never really occurred to me until I needed to use it with my right hand.Snip.

The dust chute on the DF500 is on the right, where the hose also goes. If you held the barrel with your left hand (as a left-hand user does), the hose would be between your left hand and and body. How or why was that more comfortable?

  More space for your hand. Left handed means you don't have to fit your hand in between the dust port / hose and the tool body.  I am right handed and I angle the hose connection outward to make a little more room.

Seth

 

[ChuckM]

Snip.

  More space for your hand. Left handed means you don't have to fit your hand in between the dust port / hose and the tool body.  I am right handed and I angle the hose connection outward to make a little more room.

Seth

Seth,

From this " fit your hand in between the dust port / hose," I gathered that you hold the tool as shown in the first and second images, at or near the front part of the barrel/handle.

I don't, and that's why I didn't understand how holding the tool with the left hand was better, even though the hose could be touching the body.

I have small hands, and hold the tool at the end of the barrel -- as I get better leverage in pushing, as shown in the third image. My dominant (right) hand is never in contact with the hose while in use.

 

[mcooley]

Strangely enough, the dust port on the DF500 is far more comfortable for a left-handed user, but that never really occurred to me until I needed to use it with my right hand.
Agreed that the ring around the dust port on the OF1400 is a little fiddley, but it does work well, especially with the 36mm hose. I don't run my OF1010 hard enough to really be concerned about fitting the bigger hose, but choice is nice.

Maybe an "improved" version for the OF1400 should be something that the 3D printing guys should be looking at?

I agree, more 3D printed simple add-on accessory solutions.

A simple LED light for the 1400 that clips on and even a small "traction foot" for the back of the DF 500 preventing it from spinning out on table tops or material while the hose is still connected.

A more serious design improvement is finally get rid of the "plastic guides" for the routers on the tracks and offer a robust aluminum version similar to what Rob did so brilliantly for the flimsy hinge on the MFT table and track etc.
https://dashboardpws.com/?ss_source...eca8f3b93a094397f343&ss_campaign_name=Declare+your+independence+with+the+Dash-Board%C2%AE+Portable+Workshop&ss_campaign_sent_date=2020-07-04T20%3A55%3A20Z

 

[semenza]

Snip.

  More space for your hand. Left handed means you don't have to fit your hand in between the dust port / hose and the tool body.  I am right handed and I angle the hose connection outward to make a little more room.

Seth

Seth,

From this " fit your hand in between the dust port / hose," I gathered that you hold the tool as shown in the first and second images, at or near the front part of the barrel/handle.

I don't, and that's why I didn't understand how holding the tool with the left hand was better, even though the hose could be touching the body.

I have small hands, and hold the tool at the end of the barrel -- as I get better leverage in pushing, as shown in the third image. My dominant (right) hand is never in contact with the hose while in use.

Yes, exactly. I don't like the oft prescribed "hold on the back end" at all. Holding the back end is nothing but trouble for me.

Seth

 

[ChuckM]

I think I might know the kind of trouble you could be referring to. 

For one thing, when I plunge the machine, my arm gently tucks along my body for stability so the machine doesn't move up or down or sideways. I never over grip the handle with force which could be tiring soon after, and the plunging is always done in a smooth, steady pace -- in other words with good control. A loose grip is good enough.

 

[semenza]

    [member=32478]mcooley[/member]  Sorry, didn't mean to take this OT about the Domino.

      I don't have any trouble with it when holding around the main part of the body.

      Different strokes plunges for different folks.  [big grin]

Seth

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Apparently I have bigger hands, because I definitely feel the hose on the back of it when plunging from that side. It's certainly not a dealbreaker, but it is there. From the left side there is much more space.
For a lefty, the biggest issue with any of the tools with a trigger and a lock button, is that button. It ends up under your palm, rather than fingertip. The OF 1400 and 1010 for example.

 

[Coen]

Not the best picture if the point is good dust collection  [eek]

Especially with that plunge cut.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I haven't seen it mentioned, but from that pic, it looks like they have added a rotating style micro adjust on the depth stop.

That does look a bit bad. I wonder where it's coming from? It's not readily apparent from that pic. You see the dust flying to the side, but not behind?

 

[Coen]

Maybe the workpiece is already open to the bottom and side. Or there was dust all over the place from a previous cut. Also see the side of the MFT full of dust.

 

[mino]

If you look closely, it is not dust per se but the bigg particles. First ejected by the bit, then sucked "up" by the airflow and, eventually, being big, the air flow is not sufficient to suck them into the dust port. So they continue and fly out between the bit and the dust shroud.

This should mean that the micro-dust is caught while the bigger particles can escape.

I see this as a compromise to allow visibility, full-plunge with the dust shroud in place and using the full 35mm bits again with the shroud in place all at the same time.

This can be only improved if you make a special dust shroud compatible with smaller bits only that will close the "top" partially. But that will also make it impossible to see what you are doing - so is not a universal solution.

I believe they should make an optional dust shroud that will be like that - for those jobs when you do not need to see where the bit is going. Say accepting max 20mm bits or so to take care of the round-overs etc. etc.

On my Narex router the dust shroud is closed like that from top but is quick-remove. So when I need to see, I remove it and work without dust extraction - but with excellent visibility.

Here it could be similar.
With the difference that good-enough DE is always available and can be improved on with a more closed shroud.

 

[mcooley]

If you look closely, it is not dust per se but the bigge particles, first ejected by the bit, then sucked "up" by the airflow and eventually, being big, the air flow is not sufficient to suck them into the dust port os they continue and fly out between the bit and the dust shroud.

This would mean in practice that the micro-dust is caught while the bigger particles can escape.

This is a compromise to allow visibility, full-plunge with the dust shroud in place and using the full 35mm bits again with the shroud in place.

This can be only improved if you made as special dust shroud compatible with smaller bits only that will close the "top" partially. but that will also make it impossible to see what you are doing - so is not a universal solution.

I believe they should make an optional dust shroud that will be like that - fof those jobs when you do not need to see where the bit is going. Say accepting max 20mm bits or so to take care of the round-overs etc. etc.

Or how about all the users online do this with 3D printing? Seems like an easy enough solution. So many large and small companies have gotten into the accessory market some of these solutions seem like low hanging fruit so to speak.

As for the picture, yes, I also think those are mostly chips but I also agree it is a funny image in that it isn't showing off the dust extraction very well. If anything it shows the tool is On and not Off. The fact the hand is on the tool and being plunged is another marker of it being an "action image" but something tells me those at Festool in marketing liked the idea that the chips fit the action image category more than the health and well being category etc.

But back to the dust shroud problem the Pantorouter has a similar solution but obviously facing horizontally. It also seems to get all the fine particles but some of the chips escape. In fact if one looks at that design the clear plastic housing wraps around the bit area and sort of creates a mild vortex of air while the longer bristles face upward stopping some of the chips from flying out. The bristles are their "flexible" material solution but in the case here one could probably do something similar but with more visibility of the router bit itself.

That transitional space between where the bit is cutting to the chuck area is critical I would think. Even an accordian material that would quickly retract for bit inspection but easily retract upwards could work. Almost like a very fine and stretchy dust hose but scaled way down and made of a less rigid material that can easily move.

It reminds me a lot of integral designs that use "solutions" found in nature but then applied differently in industrial design solutions, for example, a clear stretchy little "sock" that is lightweight and snaps down and up is the gist of the solution.

 

[Coen]

The OF-1010 always came with a cover that would close off the transparant open cilinder around the bit. But that piece would be broken if you let a bigger bit come up with the machine still running...