Woodgears.ca power feeder

[JGrout]

I knew two different PhD engineers that were avid woodworkers (both passed now).  One of them had a Unisaw that never wore a guard or splitter.  The second was a madman that made the first look like a safety nut.  I'm not aware of either ever having a serious woodworking accident.

It was clear when watching them work, that all their machines were setup for maximum work speed.

A guard or knife may have to come off for sled or non-through cuts.  They were simply unwilling to spend the time.

They both questioned the riving knife on my new saw, telling me it added too much time to blade changes (changing-out to a dado stack).  I said I use the router table for grooves.  "Too slow," one of them said.

It doesn't change the fact that they were both geniuses and if either told me he had a safer way for me to do something, I'd have been all ears.

All I can deduce from the above is that everyone should have a PHD in engineering to operate machinery 





What are we thinking us mere mortals that make a living at WW  
  Safely I should add  


The school of hard knocks just made us ignorant fools .............Silly us, I mean throwing our support behind proven safety items that are supplied with machines 

[Phil Thien]

All I can deduce from the above is that everyone should have a PHD in engineering to operate machinery 





What are we thinking us mere mortals that make a living at WW  
  Safely I should add  


The school of hard knocks just made us ignorant fools .............Silly us, I mean throwing our support behind proven safety items that are supplied with machines 

Not understanding why you continue to make this confrontational, it sure isn't helping get your message across.

I'm not advocating unsafe work habits, just pointing-out that it isn't at all unusual for extremely smart people to forgo safety gear.

That isn't going to prevent me from judging a device like the feeder from Woodgears.ca on its own merits.

[jteneyck]

I knew two different PhD engineers that were avid woodworkers (both passed now).  One of them had a Unisaw that never wore a guard or splitter.  The second was a madman that made the first look like a safety nut.  I'm not aware of either ever having a serious woodworking accident.

It was clear when watching them work, that all their machines were setup for maximum work speed.

A guard or knife may have to come off for sled or non-through cuts.  They were simply unwilling to spend the time.

They both questioned the riving knife on my new saw, telling me it added too much time to blade changes (changing-out to a dado stack).  I said I use the router table for grooves.  "Too slow," one of them said.

It doesn't change the fact that they were both geniuses and if either told me he had a safer way for me to do something, I'd have been all ears.

I have known, not surprisingly, lots of people far smarter than me.  A few I would classify as brilliant, genius, take your pick.  Many of them also had common sense, but some didn't.  The two engineers you described above clearly didn't.  The fact that they never had an accident proves nothing other than good fortune.  Mr. Wendell wasn't so lucky.  The news media is littered with stories of people hurt far worse, some with life altering injuries, as often reported here.  

Not using the splitter/riving knife and top guard on a TS is about like driving w/o a seat belt.  Both are a minor inconvenience.  Both can prevent serious injury.  I choose to use both.  

John

[Phil Thien]

I have known, not surprisingly, lots of people far smarter than me.  A few I would classify as brilliant, genius, take your pick.  Many of them also had common sense, but some didn't.  The two engineers you described above clearly didn't.  The fact that they never had an accident proves nothing other than good fortune.  Mr. Wendell wasn't so lucky.  The news media is littered with stories of people hurt far worse, some with life altering injuries, as often reported here.  

Not using the splitter/riving knife and top guard on a TS is about like driving w/o a seat belt.  Both are a minor inconvenience.  Both can prevent serious injury.  I choose to use both.  

John

Common sense doesn't stand a chance against rationalization.

[JGrout]

Common sense doesn't stand a chance against rationalization.

you mean using safety features provided with equipment is just common sense and rationalizing (as you are and continue to do)  is just the lack of common sense




thanks for the endorsement now this can just die much the way the first post should have based on common sense 

[Phil Thien]

you mean using safety features provided with equipment is just common sense and rationalizing (as you are and continue to do)  is just the lack of common sense




thanks for the endorsement now this can just die much the way the first post should have based on common sense 

My point was that when we look around and see people behaving in ways that we don't find consistent with common sense, they've either rationalized their behavior, or they've evaluating differently (they're assigned higher/lower weights to various risks and rewards).

It would defy common sense to try hardcore drugs or drink heavily if we know we might be driving, for example.  But people are engaging in those behaviors as I type this, because they've rationalized.  "I won't get hooked, I'm in total control," the future drug-addict thinks.  "I can stop any time," thinks the guy that will kill a young mother on his way to pickup his own children after school.

We're both rationalizing over this feeder.  I am willing to risk some danger of a malfunction of a shop-made device in exchange for the reward I perceive, which is it keeps my body and hands out of the most dangerous areas during machining and if something does go awry, I will by the very nature of the device be in a position less likely to suffer the consequences.

You're assigning a higher likelihood of a catastrophic failure that will result in serious injury, and are unwilling to trade that for the little effort you see as being saved.

[JGrout]

My point was that when we look around and see people behaving in ways that we don't find consistent with common sense, they've either rationalized their behavior, or they've evaluating differently (they're assigned higher/lower weights to various risks and rewards).

It would defy common sense to try hardcore drugs or drink heavily if we know we might be driving, for example.  But people are engaging in those behaviors as I type this, because they've rationalized.  "I won't get hooked, I'm in total control," the future drug-addict thinks.  "I can stop any time," thinks the guy that will kill a young mother on his way to pickup his own children after school.

We're both rationalizing over this feeder.  I am willing to risk some danger of a malfunction of a shop-made device in exchange for the reward I perceive, which is it keeps my body and hands out of the most dangerous areas during machining and if something does go awry, I will by the very nature of the device be in a position less likely to suffer the consequences.

You're assigning a higher likelihood of a catastrophic failure that will result in serious injury, and are unwilling to trade that for the little effort you see as being saved.

you are still trying to make this viable. 

I know better, not only from experience but from similar attempts by others to overcome the sheer expense of a power feeder. You are unwilling to accept that underpowering a undersized in many ways driven skate wheel is not the answer. You also are willing to forego standard safety items that should be used in conjunction with this as unnecessary and by using your engineer friends somehow as the final answer to the issue 

None of the above is true. Your engineer friends were very lucky or just foolhardy enough to get by for whatever time they fooled around in a shop. Just like everyone else who has rationalized away the guards on a machine does. So much so that when I deemed the contraption a POS and unusable you just went off on a tangent to prove me wrong. I am not wrong, not this time and to say anything different is to say that everyone who uses this is going to benefit from having it. I know better have seen similar things attempted in different ways and to date not one of these so called solutions was worth the effort it took for even me to write this post.

[Phil Thien]

I know better, not only from experience but from similar attempts by others to overcome the sheer expense of a power feeder. You are unwilling to accept that underpowering a undersized in many ways driven skate wheel is not the answer. You also are willing to forego standard safety items that should be used in conjunction with this as unnecessary and by using your engineer friends somehow as the final answer to the issue 

I know you think you know better, but honestly you have only opinions.  You know the old saying about your opinion and fifty cents being worth a cup of coffee, right?

And I think you misunderstood the story about my friends, I was trying to explain how even very intelligent people can rationalize-away the importance of safety gear, that is all.

None of the above is true. Your engineer friends were very lucky or just foolhardy enough to get by for whatever time they fooled around in a shop. Just like everyone else who has rationalized away the guards on a machine does. So much so that when I deemed the contraption a POS and unusable you just went off on a tangent to prove me wrong. I am not wrong, not this time and to say anything different is to say that everyone who uses this is going to benefit from having it. I know better have seen similar things attempted in different ways and to date not one of these so called solutions was worth the effort it took for even me to write this post.

Undoubtedly my friends were very lucky.  And while you know that, and I know that, I'm not sure they'd ever have admitted it, rationalization is very powerful.

And I'm not off on any tangents to prove you wrong, the video and his track record speak volumes.

I do not know what you're trying to get at with the section I've bolded.  If sounds like the classic "if even one person gets injured using this thing" argument.  But of course, we have to take a more panoramic view.  I'm sure there have been injuries while a conventional power feeder was employed.  But of course, we have to count the injuries saved by the conventional power feeder against those.

[Alan S]

No convincing of one another seems likely.

I apologize for paraphrasing, but it seems to me that Phil is saying "Yes, there are problematic aspects to the way he's using it (primarily the lack of splitter), but having a stock feeder lets you get your hands away from the blade, and the kickback direction is predictable. So it's safer than what many are doing." Joe is saying "There are minimal safety standards required, and below that it's not worth making distinctions because it might keep you from doing what really needs to be done."

[Tony Z]

Question: this thread has got me thinking (a very dangerous thing) about placing a power feeder on my table saw (I have two cabinet saws-Unisaw and a Shopfox top end). Where should the feeder be placed for ripping operations (in front of or behind the blade) and would one of the "baby" feeders (all look like, but labeled Delta, Grizzly, Cometic, etc.) be sufficient for ripping operations.