Would it be too much to have the plug-it connections to face the same way?

[Crazyraceguy]

I suspect it mainly comes down to how the parts of the tool come together. There will generally be a clam shell design with two plastic pieces. The plug-it connector, as shown above, has mounting tabs either side oriented 180 degrees from each other, so these will screw into one half of the clam shell.

They would either have to design the plastics specifically to change the alignment of the connector, or make multiple connector components to cope with different designs.

Good point.

It is clear that "same orientation" was never a design target as the connector - by design - effectively prevents that. They would have to go to a different connector, likely one with 4 "wings" instead of two so it can be flipped around.

[member=58857]Crazyraceguy[/member]
IMO this is a good thread, but possibly you can try to put it in a summary - including what benefit/why Festool should change the approach - and then pass it on to Festool for consideration.

I see two obvious improvements:
- clear mark on the tool an connector on what the connector position is to be when pushing in (and, optionally, when locked)
- design the next gen connector parts in tools such a way that consistent rotation angle is achievable, this should be possible at least for tools which operate on sheet goods as there is a "plane of reference" one can use

There is nothing preventing cross-compatibility, so is something what can be introduced gradually as the tools/cables are refreshed.

I'm thinking that it is purely a speed/simplicity thing. As mentioned above by [member=71889]festal[/member], if you always held the plug-it cable the same way (by marking it in some way) and pointed it at the back of any tool, it should just go in....simple. Guys who only have a single tool, sure no big deal, plug it in once and leave it. I on the other hand, might be swapping back and forth between several at a time. It is not uncommon to have the TS55, DF500, RO125 (or ETS EC) and one of the OFs all out and in alternating use. I plug them into the Plug-it and CT hose at each swap. This is why I preferred the ribbed hose ends too, it was just easier.

 

[guybo]

"This is why I preferred the ribbed hose ends too, it was just easier."
hi, these can be printed if you know someone.plus the 36 to 27 adapater end screws off and will thread onto a ribbed hose just no rotating endhttps://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2156417

 

[mino]

Seems like you could add shims/washers to one side until you achieve the desired angle inside 0 or 180 degrees.  Within reason of course and might have to get longer screw(s).

Yes, in theory. But the tool parts have detents for where the screws go. Most tools you cannot even flip it 180 degrees without some modification of the tool chassis.

The 0/180 symmetry is really about the freedom for the Festool designer as they use the same PlugIt parts for various tools. I.e., depending how the chassis parts meet, they still have two ways how to *design* the end product. Once the moldings are done, there is generally only one way left.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

But, why isn't that "one way" all the same? Seems like someone missed a very obvious boat.

 

[Bob D.]

But, why isn't that "one way" all the same? Seems lie someone missed a very obvious boat.

Agree, but I can see how it happened, or could have. Tools developed spread out over years and by different design teams.

No master doc that defines the orientation of the Plug-It connector on new tools for designers to refer to in the future.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

But, why isn't that "one way" all the same? Seems lie someone missed a very obvious boat.

Agree, but I can see how it happened, or could have. Tools developed spread out over years and by different design teams.

No master doc that defines the orientation of the Plug-It connector on new tools for designers to refer to in the future.

That seems like one of the first parameters that should be standardized? "Hey, how did they do this last time?"
They obviously had some continuity. The Plug-it cables are the same. Well, within amperage rating  (US version) anyway.

 

[Cheese]

But, why isn't that "one way" all the same? Seems lie someone missed a very obvious boat.

Agree, but I can see how it happened, or could have. Tools developed spread out over years and by different design teams.

No master doc that defines the orientation of the Plug-It connector on new tools for designers to refer to in the future.

That seems like one of the first parameters that should be standardized? "Hey, how did they do this last time?"
They obviously had some continuity. The Plug-it cables are the same. Well, within amperage rating  (US version) anyway.

I agree...the Engineer should have been the first to catch it and if he/she missed it they would have been spanked and then it's the Product Managers responsibility to maintain product line similarity/cohesiveness.

 

[mino]

That seems like one of the first parameters that should be standardized? "Hey, how did they do this last time?"
They obviously had some continuity. The Plug-it cables are the same. Well, within amperage rating  (US version) anyway.

Two critical aspects are missed here:
- the mere acknowledgement that it matters
- that it matters enough to offset the more complex molds needed and/or the increases the assembly/repair/warehousing costs

To me, it is clear that aspect was not considered as being of a (sufficient) significance to offset the costs it would trigger.

And to be fair, when PlugIt was introduced, Festool/Protool had no idea for which tools (and how) it will work out so they slapped it pretty much on anything as an option. And then reversed on some (especially rough-work) tools. On most tools it was also a retro-fit with only small tuning of the existing cable-only chassis designs.

The initial (current) design is 100% geared for manufacturability - the connector is placed in such a way as to make assembly and repair easy while being able to use /mostly/ the same part across tools.

Hence I believe this should go to Festool in a nicely-written and articulated form, so it can get passed along to the right folks.

Please excuse my ignorance, but I believe you are one of the most qualified folks to write this up hence the suggestion (or ask ?).

I too believe there is a time for PlugIt Plus of sorts.

 

[Bob D.]

"To me, it is clear that aspect was not considered as being of a (sufficient) significance to offset the costs it would trigger."

I understand what you are saying but if this had been addressed in the initial design there is no additional cost, it's all on paper at that point so to speak, so just rotate it to agree with all the other tools.

 

[mino]

"To me, it is clear that aspect was not considered as being of a (sufficient) significance to offset the costs it would trigger."

I understand what you are saying but if this had been addressed in the initial design there is no additional cost, it's all on paper at that point so to speak, so just rotate it to agree with all the other tools.

There is.

Currently, the tool-side of PlugIt just "plugs" into a standard molding design in place of a cable fixing assembly. This allows
- the same assembly part# being used across tools
  => less (different) parts, less costs
- the plug-it screws always face to the user when opening the chassis
  => lower assembly/service costs
- no R&D cost in figuring the "proper" direction
    => this not that easy as many tools do not have this obvious
- I am sure I forgot something

Overall, the only way I can imagine this to work is to have 4 different PlugIt tool-side connector designs. One for each angle of the PlugIt in reference to the "chassis-bonding-plane". Possibly more to cover 45 degree angles for some tools. And then use the one suitable to the given tool. This would also make them swappable/tunable easily when a suboptimal direction choice is identified ex-post. The good think about that is it would also allow retrofits to older tools.

Everything else would create other issues, at a minimum with the screws not accessible.

Can it be done? Sure.
Would be same cost as the simpler setup? No way.

Is it worth it?
A) In 90s where PlugIt was a Festool/Protool joint solution with a huge tool variety available? I do not think so.
B) Today, when Festool focuses on Woodworking and from it mainly sheet processing? Yes, I would pay $5 more per tool for this.

 

[tsmi243]

Seems like you could add shims/washers to one side until you achieve the desired angle inside 0 or 180 degrees.  Within reason of course and might have to get longer screw(s).

Wouldn't recommend this. 

I've retrofitted a whole bunch of off-brand stuff for Plugits, and the thing you notice first is that twisting the cord on actually takes quite a bit of torque.  You need them to be mounted VERY rigidly.

I pretty much exclusively use epoxy now.  You lose the reversability but it's the only good way to make sure they don't tear out over time from normal use.