Good point. And also, why are they using a hot dog and not pancetta?Originally Posted by Erik Loza
Guest
Good point. And also, why are they using a hot dog and not pancetta?
[OP]
Member
*salsiccia
Member
will have to try the tacos this year
Member
It's not too surprising that somebody has finally decided to come up with a more realistic/elegant safety technology - it can't be rocket science. Maybe it's only us amateur punters that are thought ready to pay every time a safety device fires?
Judging by this story the SS people are involved in it too: http://www.fdmcdigital.com/ArticleDe...2/Default.aspx
If it's pneumatic there's possibly an accumulator maintained at pressure with a very short connection to a cylinder - with maybe a pilot operated big bore valve of some sort triggered by a small sensor and electronics operated pilot valve?
Wonder does it seek to brake the blade as well as retract it? Wonder if it maintains it's alignment over repeated firings? Should be feasible. (cushion the stop) Wonder too if it's patentable? Mechanical device inventions tend to be hard to protect in this way.
Guessing that the need to build it into a saw design almost from scratch is one of the bigger barriers to entry, but might it be the beginning of a generally applicable/industry wide safety device?
Last edited by ian maybury; 07-11-2015 at 4:34 PM.
[OP]
Member
There's also Tacos & Beer on Paradise Road across form Del Frisco's and Gordon Biersch. About a 5 min drive from LVCC. http://tacosandbeerlv.com
Worth checking out post-show.
Member
I think SS would be starting to become concerned now what with Bosch and now this as well so they are electing to get on the bandwagon with another manufacturer and that was never going to be with Bosch.
Chris
Everything I like is either illegal, immoral or fattening
Contributor
For all the vitriol armed at Steve Gasse and Sawstop, their actions seem to be the catalyst for a long overdue revolution in shop safety.
Member
It usually is the case with stuff like this, the pioneers cop the criticism and flak.
Chris
Everything I like is either illegal, immoral or fattening
Member
Not criticism, more that there's a a pretty standard (mass market) product life cycle that tends to play out in a particular way. Viewed from a generalised R&D management perspective being a pioneer is typically a high risk undertaking - they get the benefit of a wide open market, but one that's populated by buyers they have to spend to educate. Which means that (a) many will not see the need, (b) many will hold back to see where it goes, and (c) a few early adopters (those of that psychology) will tend to buy. It's unusual for the pioneering variants of a technology to survive longer term, something significantly better (developed with the benefit of improved technology, for larger volume markets, and in the light lots of user experience) tends to pretty quickly appear and sweep the original away. Inventors/pioneers tend to again to be of a particular mindset that leads them to do what they do....
For sure in this case the market has been opened up - but (and its easy to be wise after the fact) it's no great surprise that a user re-settable variant would be next up. By the model above the people that commercially do best/come to dominate a market tend to be those that come in just after the technology and the market has stabilised enough that it's not subject to radical changes in direction or petering out, but well before it's (usually after a decent period/when patents etc run out etc) progressed to the point where it's become a widely produced commodity and prices have dropped way down.
It depends after that on your business model. The inveterate pioneer/inventor will by then have long moved on to this next opportunity. Even the players that have come to dominate a market may sell the business on to others more specialised in low cost production, or more likely will seek to maintain it by introducing improved variants of the product. Until such time as something happens to change the whole ball game, usually an external event like competition from a low cost economy, a competing alternative method that uses very different approach, or a shift in markets or whatever.
Wonder when we'll develop something to replace the most highly optimised finger removal and dust distribution device there is completely - the saw blade...
Last edited by ian maybury; 07-12-2015 at 8:01 AM.
Contributor
In that second video, I can clearly hear the blade spinning down, albeit much shorter than normal, so I assume there is some type of magnetic or DC brake at work. Also, this is my question: Why is Griggio doing this? Not a knock against them (they make fine machinery) but they aren't a major player when it comes to slider mfg. Europe doesn't (to the best of my knowledge) have any safety requirements along these lines so this is an interesting play by Griggio to invest this much into such a platform. I'm definitely going to ask the Italians about this next week.
Erik
Ex-SCM and Felder rep
Contributor
Contributor
Erik, why not? I personally think it is great that a major slider manufacturer is investing in this technology. This is the type of machine I would be very interested in purchasing, although needs to come on a CU300 or CU410 type of combo. Accidents can and do happen, technology to save is always welcome.
Contributor
Last year at IWF one of the reps at the Martin display made the comment and hinted that they were working on a SS type of system and that it would not ruin a blade when it tripped. I can see someone like Martin picking up and improving on existing technology.
Contributor
It will be very interesting to see how the system works mechanically. To retract and stop a 14-16" blade is a whole different deal than the 10" max used until now. The stress on the arbor assembly and bearings must be much higher. Seeing how the build is beefed up to deal with that stress interests me more than the politics of the discussion. Dave
Contributor
This thread will not be allowed to evolve into a SS/anti-SS discussion.
Ken
So much to learn, so little time.....
Reply With Quote
