Dust Collection, Ad Nauseum

[Mark Hepburn]

I know there are some old threads on this, but thought I might show what I’ve done and ask a couple of questions. I apologize for the length of the post.

First, my setup:
Shop is small – 9 x 26 x 9’ high – so about 2100 cubic feet. I have a 1.5 hp Grizzly cyclone DC with a .5 micron filter, a Shop Fox 1830 hanging filter and 2 Shop Fox fine air filters (1746). I also have a downdraft sanding table I made from a squirrel cage motor with 2-stage filter. And I have a Trend “Darth Vader’ air shield that I wear (and not just at the lathe).

I’ve been turning less than a year, working at a Jet 1642 and really only turn small bowls and boxes. The only spindle work I’ve done are some tool handles. My dust collection concern was focused mainly on sanding bowls, and as a new turner, I do a LOT of sanding . I don’t try to collect until the sanding stage (but I am wearing the Trend).

Because I tend to sand right at the top of a bowl or tool handle – say at about the 10 or 11 o’clock position – I thought it would be best to collect from there. The bowl is spinning and so it would seem logical that the dust would spin off and up due to its velocity.

I also wanted something that would be out of the way, that I could adjust and leave in place and that could rotate to horizontal for bowl interiors, etc. I've posted a couple of photos of what I’m using for DC at the lathe during sanding:



It’s mostly a collection of jig parts and scrap pine mounted to the ceiling out of the way and mostly I’m pleased. I can work with the hood only inches from the work piece and can see the dust flying off and into the hood.

But still, after a turning session, I find that there is fine dust all over my shop. So, I have the Shop Fox filters running and leave them running when I’m not in the shop, and I also turn on the downdraft table just to create some air movement in the shop. Later on, I’ll go out with a leaf blower and just blow the air around to try to get more movement to the filter and it seems to work with limited success. Lately I’ve also added an 18†floor fan to the mix (when I’m not in the shop).

The DC is rated @775 CFM, the Shop Fox hanger at 400 CFM and the little filters at 200 each. All told, I should be changing out shop air 20+ times an hour (and that is cutting manufacturer’s optimistic ratings in half).

Anybody have any other ideas on how to get those tiny suspended dust particles out of the air more efficiently? Is my overhead dust collection hood inadequate and should I add another hose at the bottom, or do I need to replace my Grizzly DC for something more powerful?

 

[Bill Boehme]

The dust has a high velocity at the point that you are sanding so I think that it is better to place the pick up funnel about 1/3 the way around the turning at about the three to four o'clock position. Also angle the funnel upwards a bit to catch the dust that has already spread away from the turning. Put the funnel as close as possible to what you are sanding. Once you get more than three or four inches away from the funnel nothing gets picked up. If you use a portable light you can position it to see the the dust stream and that will give you a good idea of where the dust is going. Keep the lathe speed slow. If you sand at high speed, the dust is more likely to escape the capture range of the funnel. Also, if possible, have a funnel that can somewhat surround the object being sanded. Of course, nothing beats a powerful dust collector.

Hopefully, Andy Chen will see this thread. I saw his dust collection set up a few days ago and was very impressed with it. I wish that I had taken some pictures.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Thanks Bill. I can modify the funnel pretty easily since it's just acrylic sheet. I have three bright lamps pointing at the work. I've been sanding at about 250-300 rpm. Does that sound right to you? I've seen all sorts of opinions on speed but this seems comfortable to me - and my fingers!

 

[Bill Boehme]

Thanks Bill. I can modify the funnel pretty easily since it's just acrylic sheet. I have three bright lamps pointing at the work. I've been sanding at about 250-300 rpm. Does that sound right to you? I've seen all sorts of opinions on speed but this seems comfortable to me - and my fingers!

That sounds like a good speed range.

 

[Dean Center]

Mark,
Are you sanding with the work piece turning top towards you, in the usual direction for turning, or are you sanding with the top rotating away from you, opposite to the direction when turning? In either case, the location suggested by Bill would work better, with a small tweak depending on which direction.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Dean,

I reverse the direction when sanding almost all of the time. So I'll move the collector to four o'clock and breathe easier

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

Bill suggested just the setup I use. Even with my wide mouth large (shop made) collector there will be some escape. I cannot get my current setup to move all the way up to swallow the sanding piece so some loss there. For me the hard part is making the collector funnel "easy" to move or adjust. At one time I had it setup on a pole and could move up, down , left and right. Unfortunately was hard to adjust back or forward. I like your idea with the jig hardware. Does it hold steady and how easy is it to adjust?

 

[robo hippy]

Did you ever do one of those paint things at a carnival where you put a bunch of different paints on a pallet, and then they spin it so every thing sprays/streaks out from the center? Your sanding plume/cloud will do the same thing. Most of it will come off directly behind your abrasives, but a bit of it follows the spin of the bowl. So, the more enclosed your piece is that you are sanding, the more dust you will collect. If you turn dry wood, you will also generate a lot of fine dust. Most of what I turn is wet, so the water spray is the problem, not the dust. However, when shoveling up the shavings, that generates a lot of dust. Sanding with the lathe at slower speeds helps as the dust doesn't get thrown as far. Power sanding also throws out a lot of dust.

Here is my sanding hood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZsVc7qVx7A

robo hippy

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Bill suggested just the setup I use. Even with my wide mouth large (shop made) collector there will be some escape. I cannot get my current setup to move all the way up to swallow the sanding piece so some loss there. For me the hard part is making the collector funnel "easy" to move or adjust. At one time I had it setup on a pole and could move up, down , left and right. Unfortunately was hard to adjust back or forward. I like your idea with the jig hardware. Does it hold steady and how easy is it to adjust?

Gerald, it's pretty easy to adjust and very stable once tightened. I adjust the middle arm and then the bottom arm (at the funnel) moves along that, so I can move along a path parallel to the work. I can move it along a spindle, but the thing is that it does have to be moved if working even a 12" long piece. The few tool handles I've done I have had to do move along it but it's easy to do and hasn't been a big deal.

On the other hand, have you seen robo hippy's setup? Amazing, and I see a change in my future.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Did you ever do one of those paint things at a carnival where you put a bunch of different paints on a pallet, and then they spin it so every thing sprays/streaks out from the center? Your sanding plume/cloud will do the same thing. Most of it will come off directly behind your abrasives, but a bit of it follows the spin of the bowl. So, the more enclosed your piece is that you are sanding, the more dust you will collect. If you turn dry wood, you will also generate a lot of fine dust. Most of what I turn is wet, so the water spray is the problem, not the dust. However, when shoveling up the shavings, that generates a lot of dust. Sanding with the lathe at slower speeds helps as the dust doesn't get thrown as far. Power sanding also throws out a lot of dust.

Here is my sanding hood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZsVc7qVx7A

robo hippy

That is a fantastic idea robo Hippy! I can't believe I didn't see it before now. I happen to have two of those barrels in my shop being used as trash cans. They're about 24" diameter but seems one could be cut down to fit on my lathe (Jet 1642)? Do you think my current DC has enough power to operate this hood? I really like the idea of not ever having to adjust the collector. I also have a second lathe coming in so am using a Y with two blast gates and a fifteen foot run (about) to each.

 

[Andy Chen]

....Hopefully, Andy Chen will see this thread. I saw his dust collection set up a few days ago and was very impressed with it. I wish that I had taken some pictures.

Mark, what Bill saw was contained in the thread: http://www.aawforum.org/vbforum/sho...t-collection-images&highlight=dust+collection. I have pictures of my setup in that post. The height of my dust port is sufficient to cover all the turning I sand so I do not have to adjust the vertical location of the port. The articulation allows the port to be positioned anywhere along the length of the bed. the articulation has just the right tension so the port will stay where I want it by just pushing it there. The light stand on the other arm can crisscross with the dust port without interfering with each other. In addition, I made the holder for the dust port such that the port can be turned 90° for long spindle work without moving the port.

 

[robo hippy]

My plan B for that hood is to get a larger sized one for chip and spray containment, and have it mounted permanently for the length of the lathe. I would add baffels inside for when I am turning longer or shorter. I don't like eating dust.

robo hippy

 

[Mark Hepburn]

My plan B for that hood is to get a larger sized one for chip and spray containment, and have it mounted permanently for the length of the lathe. I would add baffels inside for when I am turning longer or shorter. I don't like eating dust.

robo hippy

I was going to ask you about turning longer items. I'm getting a bigger lathe (but for bowls so a larger swing) and was going to ask about making the barrel expandable, sort of like a sleeve of one barrel sliding inside the other. This sounds a lot easier.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Mark, what Bill saw was contained in the thread: http://www.aawforum.org/vbforum/sho...t-collection-images&highlight=dust+collection. I have pictures of my setup in that post. The height of my dust port is sufficient to cover all the turning I sand so I do not have to adjust the vertical location of the port. The articulation allows the port to be positioned anywhere along the length of the bed. the articulation has just the right tension so the port will stay where I want it by just pushing it there. The light stand on the other arm can crisscross with the dust port without interfering with each other. In addition, I made the holder for the dust port such that the port can be turned 90° for long spindle work without moving the port.

Andy, so how do you adjust the tension on the fittings so they stay in place? Are these standard pipe joints and fittings, and is that UHMW plastic you're using between the joints? I really like the articulation and to tell the truth, am thinking about stealing your idea for lighting. I'm now into a trifocals lens and my vision isn't what it was, so can't have too much light.

 

[Andy Chen]

Andy, so how do you adjust the tension on the fittings so they stay in place? Are these standard pipe joints and fittings, and is that UHMW plastic you're using between the joints? I really like the articulation and to tell the truth, am thinking about stealing your idea for lighting. I'm now into a trifocals lens and my vision isn't what it was, so can't have too much light.

I actually stole Gary Sanders' light stand's (now a Oneway product) idea and made the articulation to fit my own needs. I don't know how to weld but I know how to use a metal lathe. So, I modified standard pipe fittings for all the components. I did not use UHMW because it is not a good material to machine. Instead, I used Delrin (acetal) which is very machinable. The machining is a little involved but I had created a step-by-step instruction for the construction of the whole thing. I'd be happy to share it with you if you desire. (Send me a private message.)

As far as the light goes, the ever-popular Moffatt lights used by many turners are way over-priced. I use a full-spectrum CFL (100 or 120 w incandescent-equivalent, 25 - 30 w power draw, like http://www.1000bulbs.com/product/53632/FC23-FEIIS23W64.html) in an inexpensive articulated desk lamp from Ikea (http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/20370383/). This particular lamp is all metal and can handle the extra weight of the CFLs (droop-free). Not only does this setup provide bright lighting but also the quality of light is superior to other soft daylight types of CFLs.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I didn't know what a Moffat light was and Googled it. Yep, way overpriced. Woodcraft had them or something similar on sale - with magnetic base - for $19.95 around Christmas time and I bought one to try it out. It won't stay where it's pointed, and the adjustment is just a simple nut - not even a wing nut - and can't be easily adjusted without a tool. I do like that articulated lamp and at 9 bucks. Cheap.

I have used CFLs all over the place, and lately have been putting LED lights in my fixtures and have been happy so far with the results. But I can see the advantage of using a color-corrected daylight type bulb. I might give them a try. The light from the LED can be kind of harsh.

I see you're in College Station. Texas A&M by any chance?

 

[Bill Boehme]

I prefer LEDs over CFLs. Some of the CFLs specify a color temperature, but that doesn't imply much about their color spectral content. In general, fluorescent lights, CFLs included, emit light at a few narrow wavelengths and therefore things viewed under their illumination can suffer badly from metamerism when compared to daylight. If you find CFLs with a high CRI then they should be good, however, that information is not published for most CFLs. There are LEDs available that have better spectral content than CFLs in the long red wavelengths and short blue wavelengths. The cheap LEDs are generally worse than CFLs.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I prefer LEDs over CFLs. Some of the CFLs specify a color temperature, but that doesn't imply much about their color spectral content. In general, fluorescent lights, CFLs included, emit light at a few narrow wavelengths and therefore things viewed under their illumination can suffer badly from metamerism when compared to daylight. If you find CFLs with a high CRI then they should be good, however, that information is not published for most CFLs. There are LEDs available that have better spectral content than CFLs in the long red wavelengths and short blue wavelengths. The cheap LEDs are generally worse than CFLs.

Bill, I agree that a cheap LED is no bargain and now that they're coming down in price there's little reason to buy them. As to CRI, is it the case that an LED with superior red and blue will have a higher CRI, and the inverse, that going by the CRI rating one can expect better color fidelity? Or have I misunderstood?

 

[Andy Chen]

I prefer LEDs over CFLs. Some of the CFLs specify a color temperature, but that doesn't imply much about their color spectral content. In general, fluorescent lights, CFLs included, emit light at a few narrow wavelengths and therefore things viewed under their illumination can suffer badly from metamerism when compared to daylight. If you find CFLs with a high CRI then they should be good, however, that information is not published for most CFLs. There are LEDs available that have better spectral content than CFLs in the long red wavelengths and short blue wavelengths. The cheap LEDs are generally worse than CFLs.

Bill, are you familiar with 1000bulbs.com? They are in Mesquite, TX, I think, practically your backyard. They have very good selection of all sorts of light bulbs and they give a lot of information on the products they carry, such as color temp, lumens CRI, etc. I bought all my "full-spectrum" CFLs from them more than 8 years ago when they were >$15 a pop. Back then LED's weren't even on the horizon. I have used one LED but it is still on the yellow side. Since CFLs last a long time, I doubt I will be replacing them with LEDs any time soon. Besides, if you check the CRI (whatever that is) in their catalog, both CFLs and LEDs are rated 80 CRI.

Initially I bought the full-spectrum CFLs because I was tired of paying big bucks on BCA 250 bulbs for photographing my turnings. They were very hot (not just color temperature but also heat) and lasted only a few hours. I also had to purchase ceramic sockets for them because of that heat. I have been using these CFLs for illuminating my turning and I think the results are pretty good judging from what I posted here on the forum. I have seen criticism on "full-spectrum" CFLs for photography here on the forum but I am sticking with them.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Since I got an x-rite color profiling kit a few months ago, I have been able to create custom profiles for shooting with fluorescent lights and get excellent color fidelity. Prior to that, I simply did a white balance with a WhiBal card or an x-rite white balance card. However, the custom profile is far better in my opinion.

I still have a supply of 500 watt 4800K photo floods. They are expensive at about $12 and have an average life of six hours. So far, I haven't found any CFLs that can produce nearly as many lumens of light in a single bulb. The brightest ones are about 25% as bright.