Let me know how it works for you.
-
It's time to cast your vote in the April 2025 Turning Challenge. (click here for details) -
Congratulations to Steve Bonny for "A Book Holds What Time Lets Go" being selected as Turning of the Week for 28 April, 2025 (click here for details) -
Welcome new registering member. Your username must be your real First and Last name (for example: John Doe). "Screen names" and "handles" are not allowed and your registration will be deleted if you don't use your real name. Also, do not use all caps nor all lower case.
Richard Raffan's modest shop, with dust collection details
- Thread starter Steve Tiedman
- Start date
I usually rough-round my blanks, but I never thought about it terms of eliminating shavings. Plus those cutoffs make good firewood.
When you band saw the blank to round you save 20+ percent of shavings. Band saw the bottom for more savings. Then use a forstner type bit and remove a good portion of the bowl's inside on the drill press. Granted, the forstner creates shavings but easier to clean up than turning shavings flying all over.
With all the above you might get 50% less shavings. Time saving plus the non-carbide folks might save a couple of sharpenings. This is the way we do it on the CNC where time is money.
By the way, shavings make great fire starter. I throw in a bunch and hit them with a splash of lighter fluid. I realize a lot of folks can't use woodburning fireplaces these days. Bummer.
I make just enough hand plane shavings throughout the year that I keep my neighbor supplied in fire starter, both for his fireplace and grills.
@John Kananis , I tried setting up my 3520 to collect dust thru the ways like I did on my Laguna 12”. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work as well on the larger lathe. I guess the ways are just too far from the spindle. Even with a Raffan style box behind it doesn’t work well. Moving the intake into the box worked much better. I will post a pic in the other thread.
Thanks, Mike. I was wondering how the larger size would affect.
Jon, I live in your "hood". If you are going to be at the the May. 2 FRWT meeting I would like to talk to you about your design thoughts. Perhaps you could draw me a picture. Todd BowenYou make a good point about Raffan's box... Guess that intake would generally suck anything in from within the box.
Your bowl intake is great!Guess it won't miss much.
From a physics standpoint, at least as I understand it, the nature of airflow with a bellmouth is pretty optimal. The size of things like the boundry layer, resistances to flow, creation of turbulence, etc. are all fairly optimized with bellmouth inlets/hoods. IIRC elliptical designs are best, including designs with a bit of a curled-over outer edge to the inlet. I wonder if there is something out there that could be used to create a nice, large bellmouth hood for use with a lathe like that. Your bowl is nice and smooth, but the design of it, with the lip pointing at the lathe, is probably limiting the capture potential. If you could find something with that same kind of smooth surface, but where....not sure how to describe it, kind of an inverted shape...instead of curving in towards the hose from a lip at the outer edge that points towards the lathe, you would want a lip that flared away from the lathe, and then curved towards the hose, smoothly. Even more optimally, if the outer lip was actually curved back from the lathe just slightly. That should, at least according to the theory, produce the greatest capture potential for not just things directed right into the area of the inlet, but even things that miss it and fly off out past the rim. It would all be captured, and quite efficiently too.
