PM2000 Above table DC?

[Frank Snyder]

I finally tested out the dust collection in my shop today. I was planning on making provisions for above-the-table dust collection on my PM2000, but after doing a couple of test cuts with the factory blade guard installed, I'm wondering if this is really necessary? The under table DC seems to be extremely effective. I didn't see any dust on the table after the cuts, and only by running my finger across the fence rail did I pick up a smidgeon of superfine dust. Would installing an overhead DC blade guard (like the Shark Guard) be an improvement upon this?

I was also considering modifying the existing blade guard to accept a DC connection. The sides of the guard move independantly from one another, so instances like bevel cuts, the guard maintains its enclosure around the blade. I'm not sure that the Shark Guard works this way. Even still, the blade shroud underneath the table appears to provide the best collection method I've seen to date.

Any thoughts or observations appreciated.

[Noah Katz]

Frank,

"The sides of the guard move independantly from one another, so instances like bevel cuts, the guard maintains its enclosure around the blade. "

I hadn't thought of that, you have me rethinking getting the SG (I'm planning on ordering a PM2000 soon).

Maybe Lee can come up with a round-to-rectangular adapter piece that attaches to the fixed center part of the PM2000 guard.

I'll notify him of this thread.

Thanks

[Steve Dewey]

I'm running a 0 clearance insert on my PM2000. Seem to have dust everywhere...:mad: 4" line to a 2HP grizz DC (not cyclone). Someday I'll add overhead collection to it.

Maybe I should put the standard insert back in?

[Frank Snyder]

I'm just using the factory insert plate. I'm also running 2hp Super Dust Gorilla and the suction is pretty scary. I've not tried a zero clearance plate.

[Noah Katz]

Forgot to add that I'm envisioning the PM2000 with an overarm or ceiling-mounted hood, so that there can be DC at all times.

Lee, as an alternative to trying to use the PM guard, how about combining a couple of previously mentioned ideas - a single-piece hood, narrower at the bottom than your current hoods, with a left side angled over at 45 deg to allow mitering and to make the top wide enough for a 4" port.

Thanks

[Bryan Lord]

At some point, unless you have a scoring blade on your saw, you will go to a zero clearance insert to avoid tear out. At that time you will start getting dust and chips being thrown by the blade.

I have the PM66 without the scoring blade option and use a zero cleanace insert. I bought the Excalibur overhead guard/DC and am extremely pleased with the result. I've been using it for 3 years now. When not needed the tube slides into itself and totally out of the way for working on tall things.

Unless they have changed the mounting method on the PM2000 vs PM66 it wasn't extremely fast to remove the guard for doing dados etc. With the overhead there is nothing to remove or install.

[Noah Katz]

"Unless they have changed the mounting method on the PM2000 vs PM66""

They sure have

[Lee Styron]

Thanks for the invitation, Noah.
Let's get right to it. :)

The PM2000 is a fine saw. It does come with one of the nicest OEM guards I have seen. That said, it does lack in a few areas. Dust collection and the fact that the guard has to be removed for some cuts. I know they now offer a shorty riving knife that can be used when the guard has to be removed, but you have to swap it out with the guard's knife. That's not difficult at all on the 2000 though. It does have a tooless quick change mount. Great improvement.

With any design of any blade guard, there are drawbacks or bad points. Some worse than others. There are many factors that should be considered when you choose an aftermarket guard if you even choose to do so.

Some guys just aren't as bothered by dust as others. Some wear at least a dust mask when sawing. It really is a personal choice.

I had a chance to look at the 2000 guard when I was adapting the Shark Guard to this saw. One thing was very clear. It is not designed for dust collection. The steel portion of the guard is directly in the way of a good spot to put a port. The split guard isn't very sealable. The saw itself does have a nice bottom port of course and that does help to reduce dust on the top, but you will get more or less dust on different types of cut and using different throat plates. ZCTP's are notorious for slinging more dust topside. Cleaning up the edge of a board is also a mess maker. MDF is worse than pine and so on...

The Shark Guard does tilt with the blade. It lifts one side as it tilts and this is it's drawback for beveled cuts. It does still collect dust while tilted though, especially with a Megashark and 4" port. On this particular saw, it works extremely well because you never have to remove the riving knife unless you are using a dado blade. Now some guys still like to use the overarm covers when dadoing and that's okay, but it's really ineffective during those cuts. Some guys like to use a Gripper and the RK on this saw easily lets you do this safely.

Noah, I have thought about the angled guard like you mentioned above.
The smaller port shark is a little less than 1 3/4" ID at the base. The blade is in the middle of this. The 4" port one has the same distance from the fence side of the guard to the blade. The extra is on the left side.
When the guy sent me a guard for the Saw Stop, it was a brand new one that he had to buy because the other guard got into his blade. It was because the guard is so narrow. He said it was done with normal use. Now the SS's guard is also a nice heavy duty guard, but had enough flex to get into the blade.
The short of it is that I don't want to encroach any closer to the blade with the guard part. It's not conducive to safe operation and lifespan of the guard. In other words, its a trade off as well.
One other aspect of the sides being tilted that wouldn't work so well for the shark is because the shark rides on it's vertical slots at the rear. These slots are in the vertical sides. If the sides were angled, I don't know how I would attach it anymore. ;)

I am always looking to improve my guards. The version now is 8.0 and has been improved with each version. Will there be a 9.0 or 10.0? Maybe. It has been woodworking forums and guys with ideas that have advanced the shark to what it is today. Guys with ideas just like you posted above. I am always game for ways to improve these or to make something entirely different. I think the shark is really a product for woodworker's designed by woodworkers. I certainly couldn't have done it alone.

Sorry about running on. I'm a little passionate about these things sometimes. :D

[Noah Katz]

Hi Lee,

I mistakenly thought I had seen you here before, thanks for coming.

I see your point on guard width/deflection, though it seems an overhead supported guard would make the mounting logistics moot.

Anyway, as long as the guard is wide enough to contain the blade at maximum bevel angle and elevation, which I believe it is, no problem.

"Now some guys still like to use the overarm covers when dadoing and that's okay, but it's really ineffective during those cuts."

Could you elaborate?

I can see there's not a lot for the guard to do during most of the cut where the stock is blocking chips from being thrown toward the front of the saw.

Are you saying the guard would be overwhelmed by the volume of the chips at the end of the cut? If so, this is where it seems a mustache would help a lot.

Thanks

[Frank Snyder]

Hi Lee,

Thanks for contributing to this thread. I'm sure that you will be a very popular member on this forum;).

I did have one question with one of you statements regarding the OEM blade guard in terms of it not being very sealable. Would you really want the blade guard to be completely sealed? It needs some form of intake in order for the suction to work, then wouldn't the gaps between the parts act as intake sources? And if the DC beneath the table (or above the table) is pulling air, then the air is being sucked through the gaps of the blade guard and the dust should want to move from above the table and into the path of air flow, not out the gaps in the blade guard. I suppose this depends again the suction power of your DC, the air space between the blade and the throat plate, the material being cut, and the type of cut being performed. I'm no DC expert (nor do I play one on TV) so I'm really just trying to understand how this works and what works best.

I would also presume that the under-the-table DC on the PM2000 would be superior for dado cuts over any overarm DC system. I've yet to make any dado cuts on my saw, but I can only presume that this would be the case since it is concentrating the DC closer to where the material is being removed and is not blocked by the work itself as would be the case for an overarm DC arrangement.

I think you make a fantastic product and it provides an effective means of DC above the table. But I guess what I find perplexing is which method of DC is more effective for a multitude of cuts being performed on a TS...under-the-table or over-the-table (overarm)? There are many types of cuts where an overarm guard is not feasible (i.e.; using a tenon jig) so having the DC under-the-table appears to be the best option for those types of cuts.

I think PM did the right thing by focusing the DC location as close to the blade as possible. It makes me scratch my head as to why this method isn't more common, especially on contractor-style saws. But as I was asking in my original post, would an above-the-table DC improve upon the DC of a saw like the PM2000?

Thanks again for reading and I look forward to learning more about this subject.

[Lee Styron]

Thanks for contributing to this thread. I'm sure that you will be a very popular member on this forum;).

Thanks, Frank.

I did have one question with one of you statements regarding the OEM blade guard in terms of it not being very sealable. Would you really want the blade guard to be completely sealed?

No, not really. What I meant was the front portion wasn't sealed and this is where a lot of dust gets slung out. This is a thorn in the side of most all topside DC's though, so nothing new there. The sides moving
independantly are actually a good feature if you aren't concerned about the dust. They do act as a good finger bearier.

It needs some form of intake in order for the suction to work, then wouldn't the gaps between the parts act as intake sources? And if the DC beneath the table (or above the table) is pulling air, then the air is being sucked through the gaps of the blade guard and the dust should want to move from above the table and into the path of air flow, not out the gaps in the blade guard. I suppose this depends again the suction power of your DC, the air space between the blade and the throat plate, the material being cut, and the type of cut being performed. I'm no DC expert (nor do I play one on TV) so I'm really just trying to understand how this works and what works best.

Suction power is critical when determining what the best setup will be. Everyones equipment is different as are the types of cuts they make most often. It's been my experience that rarely is a dust cover ever really sealed onto the stock. It does need to draw air from somewhere and unless you are cutting a lot of smooth plywood, it's gonna get the air ....at least eventually. If the cover is pulled down tight on the plywood during the cut, then at the very least, nothing up top is escaping. The bottom is getting most of the action, however, the blade is moving air as well. Lots of it actually. Right through the kerf and it's gullets. Some dust will still get sucked up even with a good seal or as good as plastic to wood can be. Then what happens at the end of the cut is it sucks the rest of what's needed from the front and effectively clears the shroud. This scenario is extreme, and intended only to show what happens. Rarely is a dust shroud sealed to the stock completely.
The bottom collection point won't be trying to suck air from the top either. There is just too much excess air below to get it from.
I have found that by using a blast gate between the upper and lower ports, you can actually regulate the amount of flow from he two ports.

I would also presume that the under-the-table DC on the PM2000 would be superior for dado cuts over any overarm DC system. I've yet to make any dado cuts on my saw, but I can only presume that this would be the case since it is concentrating the DC closer to where the material is being removed and is not blocked by the work itself as would be the case for an overarm DC arrangement.

Right. This may help to elaborate on Noah's question too. When making dado's and rabbets, the blade is usually burried and only protrudes right at the end of the cut. As I mentioned before, this is the thorn in the side of all topside dust collectors. Unless it was equiped with some sort of brush or "mustache", it would still sling dust forward past the front. Not necessarily bad, just not optimal.

I think you make a fantastic product and it provides an effective means of DC above the table. But I guess what I find perplexing is which method of DC is more effective for a multitude of cuts being performed on a TS...under-the-table or over-the-table (overarm)? There are many types of cuts where an overarm guard is not feasible (i.e.; using a tenon jig) so having the DC under-the-table appears to be the best option for those types of cuts.

Thanks a bunch. No safety device can work with every setup. PM did the right thing in more ways than one on this model. I personally feel that the riving knife is a more important aspect of safety here. The bottom side DC is a definate plus and is rather easy to do with saws that use riving knife technology. I won't mention what saw I use, but it too uses a riving knife and a great dust shroud below.
Some guys are very averse to dust. They have more of a safety concern with it that any other aspect of woodworking. These riving knived saws are probably better equiped than others to handle both types of safety issues because of their design.

Ultimately it is up to you to learn about the aspects of what you are doing. Learn as much as you can by asking questions and reading as much as you can. You will be better informed and prepared both when you setup to make a cut or purchase any safety aid.

I think PM did the right thing by focusing the DC location as close to the blade as possible. It makes me scratch my head as to why this method isn't more common, especially on contractor-style saws. But as I was asking in my original post, would an above-the-table DC improve upon the DC of a saw like the PM2000?

Well, yeah, especially if you are gonna let me toot my own horn. :D
The Shark guard was designed for a saw similar in setup and function to the 2000 with a riving knife and bottom side dust shroud.
I can honestly say that is the most cost effective and versatile soloution for safety and topside dust collection going for this saw so far.
This message has been brought to you by.....:eek:
I hate sounding like a commercial, but you did ask. ;)

Thanks again for reading and I look forward to learning more about this subject.

[Frank Snyder]

Thank you for the comprehensive and informative response, Lee. I may have to give your product a try sometime in the near future. For now, I'm still amazed by how well the PM2000 collects the dust, having come straight from a Ridgid contractor saw prior to this saw. And I agree with you that the riving knife makes a greater contribution to user safety than does the under table DC, at least in a short term vs. long term danger comparison.

Thanks again for the post.