Vertical Panel saw with KAPEX?!?!?!

jmbfestool

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
6,646
I had a thought?!?!?   Would it be possible just to get the chop saw section for the Kapex.  So all the bits which attached to the two rails only.  So no base nothing but the bit which slides across the rails and the bit what cuts the wood ofcorse. I then would get two long poles weld them together with a plate same distance apart as the rails on the kapex now so you can attach the kapex to the rails and you than can use it on a home made vertical panel saw with the plunge capability really its would be a large chop saw. Very similar to the universal vertical panel saws for the circular saws.

I might build something in my work shop(when I get to build the shop) with a kapex if its possible. Has any one already done this and tell me how they done it or something similar.  ( I did think of using my makita chop saw but I soon realised wouldnt work because it doesnt slide on rails but its attacht to the rails slide which slide in and out)

Cheers JMB
 
Here I have done a very quick Mod to a picture so dont judge the quality of the editing. This photo is showing what I am trying to say.
 
from an engineering point of view you will find that there will too much deflection in the rails if you keep the same size. you rwally could not make the rails much longer than they are without very poor results.
 
tallgrass said:
from an engineering point of view you will find that there will too much deflection in the rails if you keep the same size. you rwally could not make the rails much longer than they are without very poor results.
I don't know.  What if you went to a heavier wall tube?  Just a thought.
 
Yeah if the walls where thicker it wouldnt flest and what if you filed them with some hard resin or something making thme soild ?!?!?!? Its not like their is any downward weight because its a vertical panel saw so its up and down the tubes and because the tubes are side by side you wont get much side ways movement because they are two.
 
jmbfestool said:
Yeah if the walls where thicker it wouldnt flest and what if you filled them with some hard resin or something making them solid ?!?!?!? Its not like their is any downward weight because its a vertical panel saw so its up and down the tubes and because the tubes are side by side you wont get much side ways movement because they are two.

JMB,

Simply filling the tubes with resin wouldn't strengthen them in any way, as the resin would be more flexible than the tube. You might get them stiffer by stringing carbon fibres through, then filling with resin to hold the fibres. I have seen that done to make aluminium tube more rigid, not sure if the same trick would work with steel though, as it's already pretty strong. TBH I don't think you'd need it. I think stainless steel tube would be more rigid than chromed carbon steel, but I'm not 100% sure.

It is an intriguing idea though. Not sure how ergonomic it would be - if the panel was near vertical, the handle (and therefore your wrist) would be at an odd angle when at the bottom...
 
jonny round boy said:
jmbfestool said:
Yeah if the walls where thicker it wouldnt flest and what if you filled them with some hard resin or something making them solid ?!?!?!? Its not like their is any downward weight because its a vertical panel saw so its up and down the tubes and because the tubes are side by side you wont get much side ways movement because they are two.

JMB,

Simply filling the tubes with resin wouldn't strengthen them in any way, as the resin would be more flexible than the tube. You might get them stiffer by stringing carbon fibres through, then filling with resin to hold the fibres. I have seen that done to make aluminium tube more rigid, not sure if the same trick would work with steel though, as it's already pretty strong. TBH I don't think you'd need it. I think stainless steel tube would be more rigid than chromed carbon steel, but I'm not 100% sure.

It is an intriguing idea though. Not sure how ergonomic it would be - if the panel was near vertical, the handle (and therefore your wrist) would be at an odd angle when at the bottom...

You could say the same using the Panel saw which use circular saws. You hand would be at a funny angle at the bottom. I would have the panel saw a foot of the ground to start with so its not starting fully from he ground. But I Know what your saying.  It was just an idea. When I finally get to build my workshop. I dont want to waist space having a large bench saw in the middle so a vertical panel saw would be a good space safer and a lot better on my back so I would of removed the bulk of the material.    I thinking of building my own so its how I want it with modz so I could do more maybe.  And thought the kapex would be easy to fix because of the holes where the rods go. Also having a depth stop on it could be handy and the plunge action could maybe come in use?!?!?

I dont know thought bring it up for discussion.
 
I haven't used my panel saw since I bought my first Festool.  If you want the capabilities that you just mentioned, buy a panel saw.  There are even panel saws available in Europe that use the Festool saws.

That being said, your post has given me a really crazy idea. 

Peter
 
wall thickness is of little help. it the cross section that is the prime determiner in in calculating deflection. wall thickness and composition are interesting and have small impacts, in the situation in question. i will admit i thought the current festool rail system is a great idea ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
 
tallgrass said:
wall thickness is of little help. it the cross section that is the prime determiner in in calculating deflection. wall thickness and composition are interesting and have small impacts, in the situation in question. i will admit i thought the current festool rail system is a great idea ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

As tallgrass stated filling the core would have a negligible effect reducing deflection.  Increasing the rail diameters has a significant (~ exponential) improvement on them.  The other obvious solution would be to create supports at both ends of the rails (if that fits into your design). 
I don't have any experience with panel saws (aside from the box store variety) but for precise cuts I can't imagine that you could do better than the Festool system with the ply sheets layed out horizontally on a cutting table where you aren't fighting gravity as with panel saws.
 
RonWen said:
tallgrass said:
wall thickness is of little help. it the cross section that is the prime determiner in in calculating deflection. wall thickness and composition are interesting and have small impacts, in the situation in question. i will admit i thought the current festool rail system is a great idea ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

As tallgrass stated filling the core would have a negligible effect reducing deflection.  Increasing the rail diameters has a significant (~ exponential) improvement on them.  The other obvious solution would be to create supports at both ends of the rails (if that fits into your design). 
I don't have any experience with panel saws (aside from the box store variety) but for precise cuts I can't imagine that you could do better than the Festool system with the ply sheets layed out horizontally on a cutting table where you aren't fighting gravity as with panel saws.

Oh yeah ofcorse both ends would be supported at all times thats always been part of the design. Increasing the diameter wouldnt be possible as the kapex holes wouldnt fit onto a larger diameter tubes. The only thing which could increase the strength would be increasing the thickness of the walls.

about ripping down sheets I am not planning on ripping down sheets with a vertical panel saw because like you said gravity so unfortunately I will have to lay them flat for that but for cross cutting thats what I really want it for.

JMB
 
Instead of increasing the wall thickness, or increasing the diameter, one could consider to have a couple of tubes snugly fit around the tubes (as the Kapex sliding part), and connect them in two orthogonal planes through some iron rib. This extra device can slide together with the Kapex sliding part, and reinforce the tubes 'externally'. I'm not an ME, so I cannot do the calculations for what is needed. The tubes need some extra length where the extra 'riggers' can slide to when the saw is at its outer positions.

Best, CJ'60
 
jmbfestool said:
RonWen said:
tallgrass said:
wall thickness is of little help. it the cross section that is the prime determiner in in calculating deflection. wall thickness and composition are interesting and have small impacts, in the situation in question. i will admit i thought the current festool rail system is a great idea ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

As tallgrass stated filling the core would have a negligible effect reducing deflection.  Increasing the rail diameters has a significant (~ exponential) improvement on them.  The other obvious solution would be to create supports at both ends of the rails (if that fits into your design). 
I don't have any experience with panel saws (aside from the box store variety) but for precise cuts I can't imagine that you could do better than the Festool system with the ply sheets layed out horizontally on a cutting table where you aren't fighting gravity as with panel saws.

Oh yeah ofcorse both ends would be supported at all times thats always been part of the design. Increasing the diameter wouldnt be possible as the kapex holes wouldnt fit onto a larger diameter tubes. The only thing which could increase the strength would be increasing the thickness of the walls.

about ripping down sheets I am not planning on ripping down sheets with a vertical panel saw because like you said gravity so unfortunately I will have to lay them flat for that but for cross cutting thats what I really want it for.

JMB

Well, yes you could certainly increase the rail diameter by whatever size you choose -- set the (new) travel rails outside of the width of the original Kapex rails & make a mouting bracket that utilizes the original kapex rail holes that also mounts your new linear (travel) bearings on the new larger rail C.L.'s.  By doing it that way you are no longer committed to round (precision) rails -- you could use rectangular tubing, angle, etc. and use common bearings bracketed to travel on those rails.
 
Back
Top