What is m14 thread type on RAS 115?

[Cheese]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] - Do you happen to have a part number for the Milwaukee band file accessory? Is it this one?
https://www.ereplacementparts.com/bandfile-head-assembly-kit-p-135982.html

Also, did it happen to fit the RAS 115 arbor? If not, can you upload a photo of the threaded adapter? If it's not to convert from a U.S. standard to M14 then I'm wondering if a tool (like the RAS 115) with an M14 arbor can fit the attachment minus the need for an adapter. 
Thx.

Hey [member=64030]TinyShop[/member] that Milwaukee item you've linked to looks the same as mine. I don't believe they've changed much at all through the years. My band file attachment is probably at least 15 years old...probably older.

The Milwaukee band file attachment does NOT have a dust port like the Festool one does.

And now for the bad news... [sad]

The collar that the Milwaukee band file attaches to needs to be 46 mm, the Festool collar is 50 mm.

[attachimg=1]

The arbor on the Milwaukee tool is 5/8" while on the Festool it's 14 mm.

[attachimg=2]

The drive shaft attachment is pretty straight forward. A simple threaded tube with some knurling on the outside to grip the belts.

[attachimg=3]
[attachimg=4]
[attachimg=5]

Here's a shot of the Milwaukee set-up.

[attachimg=6]

Another slick item that can be added to a RA grinder is this style of belt drive/belt sander. I've used it on stainless tubing but there's no reason it couldn't be used on wood as long as one end is accessible.
The large metal washers limit the sideways movement of the sanding belt while the black rubber tube becomes the drive mechanism for the belt.

[attachimg=7]

There has to be a 90º twist in the belt so that it grips the rubber drive while also sanding the tube, pipe, baluster. This particular belt is 1/2" x 24", however belts up to 1" in width could be used.

[attachimg=8]
[attachimg=9]
[attachimg=10]

 

[TinyShop]

[member=44099]Cheese[/member] - 4mm?! So close! The arbor difference I was expecting but the collar diameter I was not. Oh well. If only I was a machinist....

BTW I've since found several other power file attachments produced by several European companies but the cheapest, produced for/by Bosch, approaches US$300 (only available as a spare part since the associated machine has been discontinued, sound familiar?) while the others go up from there. I've got some searches saved on eBay.de, .uk, .ch, .es, .fr & .be just in case the Festool version ever pops up but, for now, the Chinese novelty version will have to do.

Thanks so much!

 

[TinyShop]

More info for posterity:

So, after I realized that I can source all manner of third-party produced 115mm (4-1/2") abrasives and related wire wheels and pads and other accessories (featuring M14 x 2 threading) for the RAS 115 that's set to be delivered to my doorstep sometime this week, I was completely flummoxed why I couldn't find anything in the world comparable to the FiberFix backing pad (485298):

Well, it finally dawned on me why.

So, for anyone out there hoping (like I was) to use a readily available "standard" 115mm (M14 x 2) backing pad like this:

[Source:https://www.weldingoutfitter.com/pr...-2-0-backing-pad-assembly?variant=19323707782]

...along with the machine's integral dust shroud, listen up:

It appears that the (so it turns out) unique-in-the-world FiberFix pad is unique because, without its thick profile (and absent a jury rigged threaded spacer/standoff to make up the difference - maybe one removed from a cheap standard backing pad since M14x2 threaded spacers are hard to come by), a fiber sanding disc would sit well shy of the hard plastic rim/lip of the dust shroud.

As you can see from the following snip, the shroud is quite deep:

[attachimg=1]

Here's a clearer image:

[attachimg=3]
[Thanks Cheese! ]

Moreover, even with a thick pad installed (this shows one of the hook and loop pads but same diff), the paper sits just shy of the brushes:

[attachimg=2]
[Thanks Paul! ]

Now just imagine how far shy of the brushes the paper would sit if a low profile backing pad is used! I'll know once I have the machine in hand, but it may be that there's not even enough clearance to mount a low profile backing pad when the dust shroud is attached - it sure looks like it.

Getting back to the FiberFix pad...since no other manufacturer or user has any need for such a "thick" backing pad (given that no other machine in the marketplace features a dust shroud like the RAS 115's), it appears that Festool (or ProTool or whoever) had to design a special "extra-thick" fiber backing pad around their innovative dust shroud (as opposed to the other way 'round); an accessory which, from what I can tell, is 100% proprietary (so stock up!).

As a curious aside, even though Festool sells - in Europe and Oz - a standard backing pad (#439580) - basically a Festool-branded version of the one shown above:

[Source:https://www.festool.com/accessory/439580---st-d1150-el]

...there is no associated warning included in the UK-version of the RAS 115's manual (I don't speak German so can't easily compare to the German-language version). Similarly, there's also no heads-up provided in the guidance that comes with the accessory itself (which is because there isn't any):

[Source:https://industrie-restposten-kurz.d...hleifteller-st-d115-0-el-stuetzteller-439580/

In other words, minus common sense (in short supply with me apparently) - and before now - there wasn't anything that would otherwise alert a user to the incompatibility issue that arises when one attempts to use a standard "low-profile" backing pad in conjunction with the dust shroud. I'm willing to bet that more than one customer over the years has unexpectedly run headlong into this issue and shaken a fist in Wendlingen's general direction.

Anyways, consider yourself forewarned.

Yup, it turns out that even thinking outside the box has its limitations!

[Edit - IOW while you should feel free to use a standard fiber backing pad with 115mm (4-1/2") fiber discs, just don't expect to be able to use the dust shroud at the same time. This combination just won't work (unless, I suppose, you're comfortable employing the use of a separate threaded spacer on a shaft spinning at upwards of 4000RPM in order to build the backing pad out the required distance).]