Woodgears.ca power feeder

[WilliamHodge]

There is a certain amount of pride involved in inventing and building something that can make work easier. Buying an off the shelf solution to a problem isn't interesting enough to merit a You Tube video, or a discussion here. Criticizing the technique is not criticizing the person or his intelligence.  

I see two discussions going on here. One is about  a guy in a garage inventing something with the lamest of materials, and making a high speed video of his woodworking performance. Another discussion is about how hazardous this, and many of his other shop antics, are; and it is cheaper ($425.), faster, and safer to use a readily available stock feeder.

What matters is encouraging other people to do dangerous stuff for no good reason. It sounds like the professionals in this thread, including me, are cringing watching this video.  It doesn't bother me that much when professionals do risky stuff, because they know what is likely to happen.

Encouraging hobbyists to take unnecessary risks pushes me to make a suggestion, which is to buy the right tool. It would pay for itself in one job.

[Phil Thien]

So he's brilliant but has no common sense.  Newbies see this stuff and some will think it's OK to emulate.  That's the real danger.  Norm was the biggest offender because of the scope of his audience, but Mattias has a following, too.  

John

Yes, the feeder is okay to emulate.  Because it improves safety whether the user employs a guard/splitter or not.

I hope you understand the ramifications of your position, because you're actually advocating against a practice that should improve safety, because it isn't perfect (because the author didn't employ a guard/splitter).

You've got a pretty good nirvana fallacy going there.

[Phil Thien]

Criticizing the technique is not criticizing the person or his intelligence.  

...

Encouraging hobbyists to take unnecessary risks pushes me to make a suggestion, which is to buy the right tool. It would pay for itself in one job.

Well first of all, his intelligence has been questioned here.

Also, keep in mind that he does come from a professional woodworking background.  I am under the impression that his father supported the family at least partly via a small cabinet shop and sawmill he operated (and for which Matthias mentions he sometimes worked).

Matthias later went-off to college to earn an engineering degree, and then went on to be instrumental in inventing all sorts of technologies that made smart phones possible (he is undeniably a genius, just look up all the patents on which he is listed).

Finally, you are guilty of the same sin as John (above).  You're disregarding a technique which improves safety because Matthias didn't also use a guard/splitter.

That is akin to me telling someone that doesn't wear their seatbelt to skip buying a car with collision avoidance or airbags.

[woodhead]

I think what he came up with is safer than using a TS and feeding by hand. A quick add of Board Buddies and a splitter would make it safer.  I came from the era that threw out the stupid, poorly designed guard and worked with no splitter. I now have a splitter, thanks to the guys here.  Norm came from the same teachings, but the show cleverly covered their butt "removed for the camera"!!! LOL

I think its a great idea on the cheap!  You guys...work as you want. If you are not comfortable with his actions, don't do it!  FWIW...been in the field since 81' and never seen a splitter or guard on a table saw.


Al

[Stwood_]

I think what he came up with is safer than using a TS and feeding by hand. 



I came from the era that threw out the stupid, poorly designed guard and worked with no splitter. I now have a splitter

Absolutely .



Same here.

[jteneyck]

Yes, the feeder is okay to emulate.  Because it improves safety whether the user employs a guard/splitter or not.

I hope you understand the ramifications of your position, because you're actually advocating against a practice that should improve safety, because it isn't perfect (because the author didn't employ a guard/splitter).

You've got a pretty good nirvana fallacy going there.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.  I have no problem with my position.  His feeder is poorly designed/implemented.  That's not my opinion; that's my conclusion based on watching the video.  You can see the wheel slip.  Coupled with no splitter nor anti kickback pawls a kickback is almost guaranteed if the work piece bows or twists a little because his feeder won't provide enough resistance to prevent it like a true, articulated, multi-wheel power feeder would.  Had he used a spitter, anti kickback pawls, and a top guard I probably would have made no comment at all, but he didn't and some people, you among them it seems, will take it to be a safe operation as he showed it. 

Holding a slew of patents doesn't count for much in another field.  I hold over a dozen US Patents myself and a bunch more international ones, none related to woodworking so what good are they when I'm working wood?  About as useful as those related to smart phones.  I know all about prototypes.  My engineering career was littered with a few astounding successes and some flaming disasters.  Regardless, they were just prototypes.  Nothing got released to prime time until they were refined, thoroughly tested, and proven to meet both functional and safety requirements.  That's the problem with YouTube; anything can be and does get posted.  

John

[Steve N]

Encouraging hobbyists to take unnecessary risks pushes me to make a suggestion, which is to buy the right tool. It would pay for itself in one job.

Amen. Proven if anyone ever went out and priced a new hand.

Several of the Ney's have pointed out the biggest foul is that we, nor Matthias have any control over who watches this, and decides it's a good idea, or NOT. We are voicing an opinion based on experience that it is not a good idea, do with that knowledge as you please. We are simply trying to make you take a reasonable look here.

[Phil Thien]

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.  I have no problem with my position.  His feeder is poorly designed/implemented.  That's not my opinion; that's my conclusion based on watching the video.  You can see the wheel slip.  Coupled with no splitter nor anti kickback pawls a kickback is almost guaranteed if the work piece bows or twists a little because his feeder won't provide enough resistance to prevent it like a true, articulated, multi-wheel power feeder would.  Had he used a spitter, anti kickback pawls, and a top guard I probably would have made no comment at all, but he didn't and some people, you among them it seems, will take it to be a safe operation as he showed it. 

Holding a slew of patents doesn't count for much in another field.  I hold over a dozen US Patents myself and a bunch more international ones, none related to woodworking so what good are they when I'm working wood?  About as useful as those related to smart phones.  I know all about prototypes.  My engineering career was littered with a few astounding successes and some flaming disasters.  Regardless, they were just prototypes.  Nothing got released to prime time until they were refined, thoroughly tested, and proven to meet both functional and safety requirements.  That's the problem with YouTube; anything can be and does get posted.  

John

Way to double-down on your nirvana fallacy.

Last I checked, serious kickback requires a ride across the top of the blade, but his wheel is applying substantially more hold-down force than any human operator would likely apply.

Ask yourself this:  Does the fact that one can use a commercial feeder w/o a splitter, guard, or anti-kickback pawls make the commercial feeder inherently unsafe?

Of course not, that would be absurd.

As is your position.

Again, any contraption that keeps the hands of the operator away from the danger zone = an improvement.

[Phil Thien]

Amen. Proven if anyone ever went out and priced a new hand.

Several of the Ney's have pointed out the biggest foul is that we, nor Matthias have any control over who watches this, and decides it's a good idea, or NOT. We are voicing an opinion based on experience that it is not a good idea, do with that knowledge as you please. We are simply trying to make you take a reasonable look here.

Ugh.

Once again, ANYTHING that keeps hands away from the danger zone = an overall improvement.

[JGrout]

I've given it some thought, and I pretty much disagree w/ everything that has been said questioning the safety of this idea.

ANYTHING that keeps fingers away from blades and operators away from stock, especially during long (repetitive) tasks, is a blessing.

His feeder doesn't preclude using a splitter or guard, he just never uses either.

Again, this was just a prototype.  But if I had to run hundreds of board feet w/ or w/o his feeder, I'd take the feeder.

There is really no other argument to be made that doesn't require silly assumptions.

Zero antikickback protection 

Wheel is too hard to grip 

the drive arm is too skinny/flexible 

The drill is finite on power batteries die 

his addition of a spring is undersized 

Go look at a proper power feeder and tell me you still have no concerns 

that is one of the best examples of BME 

and It is FUBAR because of it

I hope you understand the ramifications of your position, because you're actually advocating against a practice that should improve safety, because it isn't perfect (because the author didn't employ a guard/splitter).

Again it is so much more than that. You are supporting a dangerous and impractical solution to an age old issue by continuing to advocate for this 

This is no nirvana situation, it is far from it and adding it this as a potential solution is only making the issue of guards and splitters WORSE