what Ebay is to auctions. Except Ebay actually works most of the time. But they are both 800 pound gorillas in their respective fields, largly because they were successful early on.
Not only that, but those who want to contribute to Nielsen ratings are often self selecting. I had some roomates at one time who wanted to be involved in the Nielsen ratings. They applied and got the diary type rating system. They even joked about lying about their ratings to pick and choose what they wanted to rate high or low. Maybe things have changed, but not everyone gets a set-top box. My info is 10 years old, so maybe they have some sort of accountability when it comes to diarys, but I doubt it.
Hmmm. Raytheon. That is a big company. So how many Raytheon employees with implanted electronic medical devices has this been tested on? "Oh, don't worry, it won't penetrate beyond 1/64th of an inch." Is it a number larger than zero?
Well, I think you've identified a perfect testing ground for the weapon: US embassies. I sure we have one somewhere that gets protests often enough that the weapon won't collect dust. Plus, it will freak out the natives. Excellent idea.
Well, it seems that the military has this large group of people whom it can call upon for such testing. They fit the discription of your classic insurgents: young, fit and ready to kick butt, namely military personnel. Now, if you are worried about the effects of your "non-lethal" weapons on a bigger cross section of society, like older persons, children, and handicapped persons(some of whom might have electronic devices that enable them to live), well, you might need a good old peace protest to test this out on. So what is the military's goal on this? I mean really? One poster suggested that this device would be good at an embassy if the natives get restless. OK, fine, test them by installing them in embassies worldwide. Then let's see how they go over. Or how about the [polical party] National Convention? there are always troublemakers there. If it is so safe, why isn't it deployed in the field?
If they feel that this is the right way to go about testing new non-lethal weapons. Who is this enemy they are developing these "non-lethal" weapons for? The public? Americans who don't buy the party line? Iraqis? Disgruntled union workers?
Yeah, I remember the first time I used mosaic. I was like "well, that's well and good, but how do you find anything?". It seemed a little before its time, at the time.
Then the search engines came along... Webcrawler anyone?
Because the blade braking system is an aluminum block which gets thrust into the spinning saw blade. I don't know what the blade looks like after a braking event, but I imagine that the blade might get warped and be embedded in the aluminum blade brake. The braking block has to be replaced afterwards and I do not believe the blade would be salvagable afterwards. Everything I have read states that the blade is ruined in the process. Better than losing a finger or worse.
I think that an arbor brake combined with a new blade mounting standard would be the best bet. These days, it should be trivial to make a splined hole in the blade and use an arbor brake, which can also retract using the angular momentum mechanism. This would also enable the user to also use a dado cutter. This wouldn't infringe on any patents(unless the retraction portion is patented). Now, the sensing aspect of the SawStop tech might be patented, so one would have to either develop another sensing mechanism, or find a way to challenge that aspect of the patent (I'm thinking of lamps which turn on by touching a metallic part of the lamp). The blade retractor alone would be an excellent safety feature, but requires an extremely fast acting mechanism to drop a blade several inches (depending on how high it was set). The SawStop's brake travels a fraction of an inch extremely quickly. A disk or drum braking mechanism is similar in the sense that the distance of travel to actuate it is also a small fraction of an inch. Then again, one could possibly also do the braking electronically using a three-phase motor and a VFD control (maybe I need to get into the table saw business). Make the blade mount a ISO standard(or the standards body of your choice) and make the specification available to any manufacturer. No blades ruined, greater flexablity in blade choice (dado for example) and more fingers saved, less downtime. Personally, I think the best place for this type of safety saw is in schools and colleges, where you have inexperienced users. I'm sure a school would get tired of spending money on the SawStop's brakes and new blades everytime, however, I also think it would be in the school's best interest to spend the money on this, because in the big scheme, it isn't that much money. SawStop is to table saws as airbags are to cars. It should be more of a non-destructive safety mechanism.
Well, where I have seen them (at a Briggs & Stratton plant for one), the operator would put the stock into the machine with his own hands. So the two button system made sense in that particular case. Used to be, they would use a foot pedal, so the operator can put a sheet into the press, and step on the pedal. Then they would get sloppy and accidently get their hand in the press. Maybe OSHA was OK with your setup because the press was machine fed instead of having the operator feed it.
There is another post in this thread where an operator circumvented a light curtain with mirrors. Sure enough, he was injured as a result. I'll agree with your last statement. God always creates better fools. I don't think foolproof is the goal, just fool resistant. I just think that any plant should always be on the lookout to make the manufacturing process safer for the worker. I really don't think it is OSHA's responsiblity, but the plant's.
Well, I won't dispute you. I haven't worked in an environment like that(but I've seen some), but I could swear that a mechanism which would defeat the two hand safety button system that easily would not get past OSHA. I'm not clear on the C-shaped piece and how it holds your hand to the button, but if it is that easy to defeat, then there is a problem in my opinion. I also realize that there are old plants (or smaller shops) out there which don't get inspected very often (you said your's was inspected often) so I wouldn't be suprised if there are machines out there that wouldn't pass OSHA if they were ever called out there.
I do know that there are smarter two button systems which cannot be easily defeated by a simple device holding the button down.
The blade retractor is a side benefit. When the saw blade is abruptly stopped by the blade brake, the angular momentum from that causes the blade to retract. I always wondered why they don't just put a massive brake on the arbor. Well, a saw blade has a round hole in it and is held by friction between two washer shaped disks. So if you were to stop the arbor, the blade could come loose from the arbor and continue to spin. The guy put a lot of thought into the device.
In the US a safety that could be disabled by wedging cardboard in it wouldn't get past OSHA. They have thought of that and require the buttons to cycle, so you cannot just wedge it. I believe that in Europe, light curtains are also used. They are used in the US too, but not by themselves, because OSHA has very high standards for a light curtain system.
Yes, I think that someone will make a better blade stopping mechanism which doesn't trash the blade every time and also require the purchase of a new blade stopper after every trip. That hypothetical saw will probably sell better. I imagine a brake on the saw arbor, but I also imagine a table saw blade quickly loosening on the arbor and continue spinning. Maybe they need to make a arbor brake, and use special blade with a splined hole so it has a positive grip on the arbor. Either way, it is about time that the table saw was made such that it doesn't cut off your finger.
I work with metalworking machines mostly, and on a Bridgeport type mill, there is a brake on the spindle that can stop it virtually instantly, even with the motor running. This isn't so much a safety feature, as is speeds up production, because you don't have to wait for the spindle to coast to a stop.
There was a large table saw comparison review in Fine Woodworking recently. His saw was one of the top rated. It is good that he has built an excellent saw (one that is excellent, even if it didn't have the safety features) that can compete with the best saws in the industry. His was also expensive, but I imagine that having fingers re-attached costs a lot more. The saw blade gets trashed when the safety fires, but again, a saw blade is cheap compared to a trip to the hospital.
As far as kickback, a saw with a splitter helps a lot to prevent it. I'm nervous around the table saw as well. I also like those with the sliding table, I believe that that also makes a table saw safer.
I don't need a license to buy a gun. My statement was what I feel should be in place. I don't want guns registered, I want it to be at least as hard for someone to get a gun as a driver's license. To drive a car, you need to demonstrate some skills and knowledge. To buy a gun, you need to show that you aren't a felon and you are the appropriate age. You do not need to demonstate any skill or knowledge about guns or gun handling. I'm not anti-gun. But I wasn't being completely serious, as I really believe you should be able to buy drugs or chemicals or guns if you want them. If you commit a crime using your purchase (whether it is drugs, chemicals or guns), then you should be punished for the crime.
I should have just left out the "same with guns" bit, but sometimes that is how I feel. Any idiot can get a gun.
Somtimes I feel that alcohol, guns, drugs, etc. should all be legal, only if you are the manufacturer. And then I'd make the wholesale manufacture of alcohol, guns, and drugs illegal. So then, any individual who decides to take the inititive to manufacture alcohol, or grow tobacco, or make a gun for himself, to have the liberty to do so. If he decides to crank out guns(or alcohol, or tobacco) like Henry Ford, for the purpose of selling, he'd be busted. Then only those skilled with gun manufacture would have guns. But, I'm not in charge here. Sometimes I have wacky ideas. Good thing I'm not a legislator
Exactly. Well put. I think that if all drugs (prescription and illegal) were suddenly made legal and available, after a crazy transition period, the actual usage in the population would basically stay the same as it is now. And you'd still have the same substance abuse problems you have now, only without the legal system involved. As a result, I really think that the quality of life for everybody would go up, not because of the drugs, but because there wouldn't be all these divisions made with regards to legal/illegal drug use. Crime would still exist, rape, murder, etc. would still be there. Right now, the War on Drugs is clogging the legal system. The medical profession has its own problems, and I believe that it is clogged for some of the same reasons(people want their problems solved, and many feel that [prescription] drugs will solve them). People who do drugs usually quickly learn what suits them and what doesn't suit them. I know plenty of people who don't smoke marijuana, not because it is illegal, but because they don't like the way they react to it. I don't care for alcohol myself. It really kills my motor skills.
Good point. Remember, crack was invented in the U.S. Why? capitalism. I can take this powerder I imported from Columbia and sell it @ $60 a gram. Or I can take that gram, convert it to crack and sell 20 rocks @ $20 each. (an example, the numbers might be off a bit).
This is because of escalation of the War on Drugs. Substance A: you can grow it anywhere, but you can smell it, and it stays in your system for ~30 days. So, lets move to Substance B: it isn't even illegal yet. Oops, the authorities made B illegal. Lets see if we can cook up Substance C. The high isn't as good, but I can buy all the stuff to make it @ Shop-Mart. Now the authorities have to really watch the precursors. So now I have to sign a book and show a license whenever I go and buy cold medicine. So then the people seeking to get their mood altered, move on to some other substance, and on and on.
A large percentage of the population would be happy if marijuana was legal. The weirder and weirder drugs are primarly being produced to get around the prohibition.
Now, there are a few chemists who are doing this out of curiosity, and maybe their own desire to get better "highs" but I feel that crack isn't really a popular thing on the menu if you had a choice of other drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
what Ebay is to auctions. Except Ebay actually works most of the time. But they are both 800 pound gorillas in their respective fields, largly because they were successful early on.
Not only that, but those who want to contribute to Nielsen ratings are often self selecting. I had some roomates at one time who wanted to be involved in the Nielsen ratings. They applied and got the diary type rating system. They even joked about lying about their ratings to pick and choose what they wanted to rate high or low. Maybe things have changed, but not everyone gets a set-top box. My info is 10 years old, so maybe they have some sort of accountability when it comes to diarys, but I doubt it.
Hmmm. Raytheon. That is a big company. So how many Raytheon employees with implanted electronic medical devices has this been tested on? "Oh, don't worry, it won't penetrate beyond 1/64th of an inch." Is it a number larger than zero?
Well, I think you've identified a perfect testing ground for the weapon: US embassies. I sure we have one somewhere that gets protests often enough that the weapon won't collect dust. Plus, it will freak out the natives. Excellent idea.
Well, it seems that the military has this large group of people whom it can call upon for such testing. They fit the discription of your classic insurgents: young, fit and ready to kick butt, namely military personnel. Now, if you are worried about the effects of your "non-lethal" weapons on a bigger cross section of society, like older persons, children, and handicapped persons(some of whom might have electronic devices that enable them to live), well, you might need a good old peace protest to test this out on. So what is the military's goal on this? I mean really? One poster suggested that this device would be good at an embassy if the natives get restless. OK, fine, test them by installing them in embassies worldwide. Then let's see how they go over. Or how about the [polical party] National Convention? there are always troublemakers there. If it is so safe, why isn't it deployed in the field?
What does it do to a pacemaker or implanted defillabrator(sp?). Does it have a warning sign for the target(s) that microwaves are in use?
Yes, like US Airforce personnel. They did volunteer for service, and they are healthy individuals. Plus they are paid.
Perfect solution. Just ask our nuclear veterans.
If they feel that this is the right way to go about testing new non-lethal weapons. Who is this enemy they are developing these "non-lethal" weapons for? The public? Americans who don't buy the party line? Iraqis? Disgruntled union workers?
But making fun of two recently deceased Silicon Valley icons, both of whom are still deeply respected by many in the industry, is pretty poor form.
You're right, we shouldn't be making fun of HP and Sun.
Oh, wait, you were refering to Mr. Hewlett and Mr. Packard. You're right, they shouldn't be making fun of them.
Myspace is full of people trying to get into each other's "portals"
Yeah, I remember the first time I used mosaic. I was like "well, that's well and good, but how do you find anything?". It seemed a little before its time, at the time.
Then the search engines came along... Webcrawler anyone?
Because the blade braking system is an aluminum block which gets thrust into the spinning saw blade. I don't know what the blade looks like after a braking event, but I imagine that the blade might get warped and be embedded in the aluminum blade brake. The braking block has to be replaced afterwards and I do not believe the blade would be salvagable afterwards. Everything I have read states that the blade is ruined in the process. Better than losing a finger or worse.
I think that an arbor brake combined with a new blade mounting standard would be the best bet. These days, it should be trivial to make a splined hole in the blade and use an arbor brake, which can also retract using the angular momentum mechanism. This would also enable the user to also use a dado cutter. This wouldn't infringe on any patents(unless the retraction portion is patented). Now, the sensing aspect of the SawStop tech might be patented, so one would have to either develop another sensing mechanism, or find a way to challenge that aspect of the patent (I'm thinking of lamps which turn on by touching a metallic part of the lamp). The blade retractor alone would be an excellent safety feature, but requires an extremely fast acting mechanism to drop a blade several inches (depending on how high it was set). The SawStop's brake travels a fraction of an inch extremely quickly. A disk or drum braking mechanism is similar in the sense that the distance of travel to actuate it is also a small fraction of an inch. Then again, one could possibly also do the braking electronically using a three-phase motor and a VFD control (maybe I need to get into the table saw business). Make the blade mount a ISO standard(or the standards body of your choice) and make the specification available to any manufacturer. No blades ruined, greater flexablity in blade choice (dado for example) and more fingers saved, less downtime. Personally, I think the best place for this type of safety saw is in schools and colleges, where you have inexperienced users. I'm sure a school would get tired of spending money on the SawStop's brakes and new blades everytime, however, I also think it would be in the school's best interest to spend the money on this, because in the big scheme, it isn't that much money. SawStop is to table saws as airbags are to cars. It should be more of a non-destructive safety mechanism.
Well, where I have seen them (at a Briggs & Stratton plant for one), the operator would put the stock into the machine with his own hands. So the two button system made sense in that particular case. Used to be, they would use a foot pedal, so the operator can put a sheet into the press, and step on the pedal. Then they would get sloppy and accidently get their hand in the press. Maybe OSHA was OK with your setup because the press was machine fed instead of having the operator feed it.
There is another post in this thread where an operator circumvented a light curtain with mirrors. Sure enough, he was injured as a result. I'll agree with your last statement. God always creates better fools. I don't think foolproof is the goal, just fool resistant. I just think that any plant should always be on the lookout to make the manufacturing process safer for the worker. I really don't think it is OSHA's responsiblity, but the plant's.
Well, I won't dispute you. I haven't worked in an environment like that(but I've seen some), but I could swear that a mechanism which would defeat the two hand safety button system that easily would not get past OSHA. I'm not clear on the C-shaped piece and how it holds your hand to the button, but if it is that easy to defeat, then there is a problem in my opinion. I also realize that there are old plants (or smaller shops) out there which don't get inspected very often (you said your's was inspected often) so I wouldn't be suprised if there are machines out there that wouldn't pass OSHA if they were ever called out there.
I do know that there are smarter two button systems which cannot be easily defeated by a simple device holding the button down.
The blade retractor is a side benefit. When the saw blade is abruptly stopped by the blade brake, the angular momentum from that causes the blade to retract. I always wondered why they don't just put a massive brake on the arbor. Well, a saw blade has a round hole in it and is held by friction between two washer shaped disks. So if you were to stop the arbor, the blade could come loose from the arbor and continue to spin. The guy put a lot of thought into the device.
In the US a safety that could be disabled by wedging cardboard in it wouldn't get past OSHA. They have thought of that and require the buttons to cycle, so you cannot just wedge it. I believe that in Europe, light curtains are also used. They are used in the US too, but not by themselves, because OSHA has very high standards for a light curtain system.
r elpath=/pages/content/en_US/setonalerts/articles/0 904/0904_mach_safeguard.jsp
This is a good summary of the issues: http://www.seton.com/seton/internalHtmlAction.do?
By splitter I mean a riving knife. Wikipedia calls it a splitter. I couldn't remember the name.
Yes, I think that someone will make a better blade stopping mechanism which doesn't trash the blade every time and also require the purchase of a new blade stopper after every trip. That hypothetical saw will probably sell better. I imagine a brake on the saw arbor, but I also imagine a table saw blade quickly loosening on the arbor and continue spinning. Maybe they need to make a arbor brake, and use special blade with a splined hole so it has a positive grip on the arbor. Either way, it is about time that the table saw was made such that it doesn't cut off your finger.
I work with metalworking machines mostly, and on a Bridgeport type mill, there is a brake on the spindle that can stop it virtually instantly, even with the motor running. This isn't so much a safety feature, as is speeds up production, because you don't have to wait for the spindle to coast to a stop.
There was a large table saw comparison review in Fine Woodworking recently. His saw was one of the top rated. It is good that he has built an excellent saw (one that is excellent, even if it didn't have the safety features) that can compete with the best saws in the industry. His was also expensive, but I imagine that having fingers re-attached costs a lot more. The saw blade gets trashed when the safety fires, but again, a saw blade is cheap compared to a trip to the hospital.
As far as kickback, a saw with a splitter helps a lot to prevent it. I'm nervous around the table saw as well. I also like those with the sliding table, I believe that that also makes a table saw safer.
His vacuum cleaners are pretty good too.
I don't need a license to buy a gun. My statement was what I feel should be in place. I don't want guns registered, I want it to be at least as hard for someone to get a gun as a driver's license. To drive a car, you need to demonstrate some skills and knowledge. To buy a gun, you need to show that you aren't a felon and you are the appropriate age. You do not need to demonstate any skill or knowledge about guns or gun handling. I'm not anti-gun. But I wasn't being completely serious, as I really believe you should be able to buy drugs or chemicals or guns if you want them. If you commit a crime using your purchase (whether it is drugs, chemicals or guns), then you should be punished for the crime.
I should have just left out the "same with guns" bit, but sometimes that is how I feel. Any idiot can get a gun.
Somtimes I feel that alcohol, guns, drugs, etc. should all be legal, only if you are the manufacturer. And then I'd make the wholesale manufacture of alcohol, guns, and drugs illegal. So then, any individual who decides to take the inititive to manufacture alcohol, or grow tobacco, or make a gun for himself, to have the liberty to do so. If he decides to crank out guns(or alcohol, or tobacco) like Henry Ford, for the purpose of selling, he'd be busted. Then only those skilled with gun manufacture would have guns. But, I'm not in charge here. Sometimes I have wacky ideas. Good thing I'm not a legislator
Exactly. Well put. I think that if all drugs (prescription and illegal) were suddenly made legal and available, after a crazy transition period, the actual usage in the population would basically stay the same as it is now. And you'd still have the same substance abuse problems you have now, only without the legal system involved. As a result, I really think that the quality of life for everybody would go up, not because of the drugs, but because there wouldn't be all these divisions made with regards to legal/illegal drug use. Crime would still exist, rape, murder, etc. would still be there. Right now, the War on Drugs is clogging the legal system. The medical profession has its own problems, and I believe that it is clogged for some of the same reasons(people want their problems solved, and many feel that [prescription] drugs will solve them). People who do drugs usually quickly learn what suits them and what doesn't suit them. I know plenty of people who don't smoke marijuana, not because it is illegal, but because they don't like the way they react to it. I don't care for alcohol myself. It really kills my motor skills.
Good point. Remember, crack was invented in the U.S. Why? capitalism. I can take this powerder I imported from Columbia and sell it @ $60 a gram. Or I can take that gram, convert it to crack and sell 20 rocks @ $20 each. (an example, the numbers might be off a bit).
This is because of escalation of the War on Drugs. Substance A: you can grow it anywhere, but you can smell it, and it stays in your system for ~30 days. So, lets move to Substance B: it isn't even illegal yet. Oops, the authorities made B illegal. Lets see if we can cook up Substance C. The high isn't as good, but I can buy all the stuff to make it @ Shop-Mart. Now the authorities have to really watch the precursors. So now I have to sign a book and show a license whenever I go and buy cold medicine. So then the people seeking to get their mood altered, move on to some other substance, and on and on.
A large percentage of the population would be happy if marijuana was legal. The weirder and weirder drugs are primarly being produced to get around the prohibition.
Now, there are a few chemists who are doing this out of curiosity, and maybe their own desire to get better "highs" but I feel that crack isn't really a popular thing on the menu if you had a choice of other drugs.
You're right. Look at the Hoover Dam. Who knew he was a crossdresser?