Art Bianconi
07-07-2009, 9:05 PM
After several iterations in the CADD model, I finally opted to build two seperate but identical units. It's not as if I had any choice. The bottom of the saw's base is divided into three compartments by structural ribs that appear to be about 0.080" thick and 5.5" from each end. The 5.5" by 17" base board and the add-on pieces are sized to fit those compartments.
It's not a big deal really, each unit consists of a stringer or base onto which 4 additional pieces (2 at each end) have been glued. The wood was all scrap and when I ran short of 1x6 white pine for the 5.5" squares, I grabbed some MDF. The eight 3" carriage bolts provided the clamping needed plus a few hits with the nail gun.
They are almost a snug fit to the compartments in the base. Tight enough so as to not move around but still easy to push into place with the saw raised off the floor.
The first assembly went in without a hassle. However, when I went to install the other assembly, the first one fell out, cocked at an angle and wedged itself under the base. Working alone was a challenge and I did scare myself a few times but I managed to get it free and back up into the base where I held it with a clamp.
I then drilled four holes in the top of the base and drove one wood screw into each corner being sure to miss the carriage bolts. These screws serve no purpose but to hold the base assemblies in their compartments until the saw is lowered to the floor and the four wheels loaded by the weight. They aren't going anywhere!
It doesn't appear to matter whether the base board is on top of the assembly or underneath. In the rendered model it's one way but in the photograph, it's the other.
I've enclosed some renderings, photos and a dimensioned drawing as PDF files. I didn't dimension the holes or the height above the floor because that will be a function of the casters you purchase. As it turns out, however, the bottom of my band saw is 3.75" higher than it was casters with 3" diameter wheels. The load capacity of the wheels is far in excess of the weight of this machine The drawings are for one assembly. Obviously, you will need two.
I got my casters from Harbour Freight. All four are castering units. Two of them lock. In retrospect I should have gotten all four with wheel locks. It would only have been two bucks more and I'd have had a way of locking the base from any side, regardless of its position. The total cost, not counting the scrap wood I used, was under $20. That includes the fasteners for the casters. That's less than 1/3rd the cost of the Fox unit.
I could have designed the base with a larger footprint. I also could have hung the casters off the sides. However, I did a quick analysis of the bending loads being imposed and felt uncomfortable when it appeared possible for the caster or metal tube to fail eventually. The cantilever design imposes substantial torque loads on everything and the inherent flexing common to that design will eventually fatigue something.
As for the increased foot print of a larger base; it's not needed. The wheels are at the corners and directly under the base. There is just enough of the wheel lock showing to chock the wheels. When locked the machine appears stable enough for the purpose. The universal "Fox" base I bought from Grizzly swayed a lot. They took it back, no questions asked. This one is solid.
Working alone was a challenge and while it all got done, I did scare myself more than once. Those of you who are smarter than me won't attempt installing these assemblies alone.
Finally, a thanks and a tip of the hat to Russ Massery whose earlier post on the saw's internal base geometry saved me a lot of wasted effort.
Art
It's not a big deal really, each unit consists of a stringer or base onto which 4 additional pieces (2 at each end) have been glued. The wood was all scrap and when I ran short of 1x6 white pine for the 5.5" squares, I grabbed some MDF. The eight 3" carriage bolts provided the clamping needed plus a few hits with the nail gun.
They are almost a snug fit to the compartments in the base. Tight enough so as to not move around but still easy to push into place with the saw raised off the floor.
The first assembly went in without a hassle. However, when I went to install the other assembly, the first one fell out, cocked at an angle and wedged itself under the base. Working alone was a challenge and I did scare myself a few times but I managed to get it free and back up into the base where I held it with a clamp.
I then drilled four holes in the top of the base and drove one wood screw into each corner being sure to miss the carriage bolts. These screws serve no purpose but to hold the base assemblies in their compartments until the saw is lowered to the floor and the four wheels loaded by the weight. They aren't going anywhere!
It doesn't appear to matter whether the base board is on top of the assembly or underneath. In the rendered model it's one way but in the photograph, it's the other.
I've enclosed some renderings, photos and a dimensioned drawing as PDF files. I didn't dimension the holes or the height above the floor because that will be a function of the casters you purchase. As it turns out, however, the bottom of my band saw is 3.75" higher than it was casters with 3" diameter wheels. The load capacity of the wheels is far in excess of the weight of this machine The drawings are for one assembly. Obviously, you will need two.
I got my casters from Harbour Freight. All four are castering units. Two of them lock. In retrospect I should have gotten all four with wheel locks. It would only have been two bucks more and I'd have had a way of locking the base from any side, regardless of its position. The total cost, not counting the scrap wood I used, was under $20. That includes the fasteners for the casters. That's less than 1/3rd the cost of the Fox unit.
I could have designed the base with a larger footprint. I also could have hung the casters off the sides. However, I did a quick analysis of the bending loads being imposed and felt uncomfortable when it appeared possible for the caster or metal tube to fail eventually. The cantilever design imposes substantial torque loads on everything and the inherent flexing common to that design will eventually fatigue something.
As for the increased foot print of a larger base; it's not needed. The wheels are at the corners and directly under the base. There is just enough of the wheel lock showing to chock the wheels. When locked the machine appears stable enough for the purpose. The universal "Fox" base I bought from Grizzly swayed a lot. They took it back, no questions asked. This one is solid.
Working alone was a challenge and while it all got done, I did scare myself more than once. Those of you who are smarter than me won't attempt installing these assemblies alone.
Finally, a thanks and a tip of the hat to Russ Massery whose earlier post on the saw's internal base geometry saved me a lot of wasted effort.
Art