19 ms·
Despite Proven Technology, Attempts to Make Table Saws Safer Drag On
- msie 9y agoSad, sad, sad. Greed trumps safety. I wonder how many other safety inventions have not reached mass adoption?
- bluejekyll 9y agoIs it greed exactly? Wouldn't the saws just cost more? I suppose the R&D on building the components into their current products is something they don't want to do, so maybe that's the greed aspect?
- taneq 9y agoI think the greed mentioned here is that SawStop is lobbying to make it mandatory for saws to use their technology while trying to stop others from bringing similar systems to market, all so that they can price-gouge a captive market. IIRC last time it was discussed here, they were trying to charge ~$100 per saw to license their tech, when the usual margin on a saw was about a quarter of that. If they just accepted a reasonable licensing fee, their tech would be ubiquitous already and they wouldn't need to try and use regulatory capture to force people to use it. Relevant quote from TFA: > CPSC Acting Chairman Ann Marie Buerkle said she was also concerned that the rule might force companies to license technology from SawStop, which she said might create a monopoly.
- flukus 9y agoI wonder if they'd be happy with a kickstarter like campaign to put the patent in the public domain.
- bluejekyll 9y agoThanks for putting that into better light. So it's SawStop that is asking for too high a license, they aren't getting bites at that price point, and now trying to get legislation to force other companies to pony up. Now I get the greed aspect, should have been more obvious. I was thinking in terms of component cost and not licensing cost, how naive of me... Though in this case, at least they did create something novel making the patent legit.
- joosters 9y agoI don't see it as being greedy. If you invent something clever, and we have a whole patent infrastructure for protecting inventors, why wouldn't you want to get paid for people using your inventions? No-one is seriously claiming that these patents are bad, or trivial, or obvious. The patents exist, they are available for companies to license, it's just that the competitors don't want to pay for it.
- AstralStorm 9y agoThey are also prevented from inventing their own similar solutions due to prior art and broad patent. The solution in SawStop qualifies as super obvious to a person not even well versed in art. As such it should not be patentable. However making a patent invalid in the US is extremely hard.
- cr0sh 9y ago> I think the greed mentioned here is that SawStop is lobbying to make it mandatory for saws to use their technology I don't think they are lobbying for saws to use their technology, but rather for saws to use -a- technology to stop the saw. They just happen to have a patent on a technology with proven results that it works. The patent probably covers the sensing, the stopping of the blade, and reactive retraction system to move the blade downward quickly. Another manufacturer would have to come up with alternatives to all or more of these to implement the same safety feature; or license the tech from SawStop. Manufacturers have done the math, and have come to the conclusion that they want the profits over their customer's safety; maybe they also got input from their customers, and found that most wouldn't pay over a certain amount extra for the feature, and that amount was much lower than what R&D for a new method, or licensing SawStop would cost. So - what's going on can be looked at as either SawStop being greedy, or they really want some kind of this technology to be put on saws (and other tools could benefit likely) - whether it is their's or something else. You can't fault them, though, for pursuing a lawsuit on patent infringement, if the it is being infringed. That's the point of patents. It could be argued that this is somewhat about greed, though, because SawStop has been pursuing this with the FTC since they came to market with the tech. But I doubt that they are trying "regulatory capture" here - that would be fairly blatant, and I doubt even the current FTC would abide by that. It could turn out, though, that their tech is (so far) the only way to reliably stop a saw blade from spinning instantly. Ultimately, we'll know what the truth is when the patent runs out: If all the table saw manufacturers adopt a similar system, but charge only a little extra (but not the huge difference that SawStop does - which is likely a combination of R&D recovery, plus being a small manufacturer with different margins to recoup) - then they care about their customer's safety. I'm cynical, though - I guess I've lived too long. I expect they'll either adopt something then charge just as much or more as SawStop does currently, or they'll not do anything (but likely increase their prices anyhow).
- msie 9y agoThanks, I didn't realize that. So it's greed from all sides not just the toolmakers reluctant to make their saws safer. Damn one-sided reporting.
- WalterBright 9y agoIt adds $200 to the cost of a saw. You can buy sawstop saws on Amazon. The trouble as I see it is it's patented technology, and SawStop sues infringers. It would certainly be a jackpot for SawStop to get a law requiring their patented technology on every saw - look what happens to drug prices with patent monopolies. SawStop could easily impose a ruinous patent fee on competitors, and completely monopolize the saw business. Is it any wonder other saw companies oppose this law? The patents expire in 2021, that should change the game.
- pfranz 9y agoYeah, I think it's fair to debate now if it's worth making mandatory, but I don't have a strong opinion either way. I think he should be able to enforce his patent for the duration and after it expires there's a stronger argument for making it mandatory.
- lsiebert 9y agoThey don't and wouldn't have to mandate that specific technology. They would specify it by the nature of the injury, not the nature of the prevention.
- nippples 9y agoOff the top of my head, I can think that the saw getting false positives or being incapable of cutting anything conductive, which may be my precise goal as a tool user, as dealbreakers on this feature. Nothing to do with greed.
- joosters 9y agoLuckily, the creators of this technology also thought of these cases and provide ways to pre-test the safety check (e.g. damp wood) or to override it on specific cuts.
- AstralStorm 9y agoGood. So why not override it by disabling it completely?
- jessaustin 9y agoYeah this would be the first action taken by most contractors I've met.
- virmundi 9y agoI do wonder if this is an issue of misaligned incentives. If a person has workers' comp insurance through their company, why not give a reduced price to the company if they deploy this tool? The owner can show they reduce the risk of high payouts. The insurance company should, rationally, drop the bill by 50-100 a year. Even 30-50 could make the price difference of the saw worth it then.
- pfranz 9y agoMy local community workshop has it. You're also responsible for paying for a new blade and cartridge if you trigger it. If you're a community workshop it seems like a no brainer because of liability. But on the flip side, some construction workers pin back the blade guard on circular saws because it can get in the way.
- readams 9y agoThey don't mention if it's possible to build saws without sawstop patents. Is this guy lobbying for all saw companies to be required to license his technology? EDIT: It appears that they're currently suing Bosch for developing their own similar technology.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- antongribok 9y agoNot just suing, they have an injunction and at the moment you can't buy a saw in the USA with Bosch's REAXX technology, which actually works quite differently than SawStop. Here are two videos where you can compare for yourself: SawStop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE Bosch REAXX: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4heF0Y2-QYc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4heF0Y2-QYc Here's an article that talks about the lawsuit: https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/sawstop-vs-bosch-reaxx-lawsuit-not-yet/26066/ https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/sawstop-vs-bosch-reaxx-l...
- Sniffnoy 9y agoClarification: If I'm understanding this right, the stopping the saw works differently, but the detection works the same.
- randyrand 9y agoSo they are patenting capacitive sensing in the context of detecting a finger? you know, like a touchscreen? Wow. The USPO fucking sucks. For the record, I don't even know how the sensing actually works in the saws. I'm just guessing because its fricken OBVIOUS.
- joosters 9y agoSo many things seem obvious after they are explained. Fact is, no-one had built this kind of thing before sawstop. If it were so obvious, how come only one company did it?
- inb4dangshitban 9y agoFrom what I saw, the entire system is more or less single use, resulting in a destruction of the sawblade and the catch. As well as severe shock to the drive. I'm not one bit surprised there is serious opposition to the idea, capitalism and all
- pfranz 9y agoWell, you'd only lose your blade and cartridge if you would have otherwise cut yourself...so it sounds like a good trade. Yes, it does get triggered if you have a stray nail in your wood (bad idea) or if the wood is too wet. But from the little experience I have, it'd only be triggered by wood that's wetter than you'd want to cut in the first place. SawStop is used at our community woodshop. I've seen it go off (someone touched by blade after they turned off the table saw, but before the blade at stopped spinning), but I haven't heard of it harming the table saw in any way.
- Super_Jambo 9y agoGoing to depend on the strength of the axle, also if saw stop are insisting on licensing the tech at 100$ a saw then people will be priced out of the market completely.
- WalterBright 9y agoIf the blade had slowed down substantially before it was set off, the potential for damage would be greatly reduced.
- AstralStorm 9y agoOh and why not just instead use a clutch to disconnect the drive instead? There is one already I bet. Without motive force the blade stops in your hand without explosions. It has low mass so low momentum. (This won't work for massive blades but neither will exploding them. You will need an active brake.) However the patent is on the dumb detector and is overly wide.
- 9y ago
- sumoboy 9y agoIf big companies won't adopt it, startup a company and build a better saw and people will buy it. Table saws are dangerous, I remember in high school having a piece of wood splinter and fly past my head hitting the ceiling. People don't seem to have problems buying safety with cars, I see it as just an industry full of cheap ass power tools that constantly need replacing. I'd buy such a saw just so when my dumb ass neighbor borrowed it he wouldn't cut off his fingers. I laughed at him when he asked for the chainsaw.
- DigitalJack 9y agoThe sawstop guy did just that. Power tools are an area where brand matters more than normal.
- AstralStorm 9y agoSo why did he patent it instead of releasing the relatively trivial invention into public domain?
- mrob 9y ago>People don't seem to have problems buying safety with cars Compare the introduction of three-point seat-belts. These were legally required while they were still under patent, but unlike SawStop, Volvo shared their invention with other manufacturers for free. They didn't try to use regulatory capture to force people to pay them. https://www.media.volvocars.com/uk/en-gb/media/pressreleases/20505 https://www.media.volvocars.com/uk/en-gb/media/pressreleases...
- birdman3131 9y agoAs far as I know sawstop will trigger on wood that is lightly damp. And at ~$100 per occurrence it gets expensive fast ($70 for sawstop cartridge and 15-50 for a new blade.) Yes there is a bypass but you don't always know if the wood is too wet or not.
- makomk 9y agoBosch have a better system that doesn't destroy the blade or require the cartridge to be replaced every time because it merely retracts the blade very quickly into the bed, but SawStop are using their patents to stop Bosch from selling it. Apparently they went to the effort of patenting every possible approach that doesn't require the expensive but profitable single-use cartridge even though they have no intention of using them, just to stop competitors from doing it.
- thanksgiving 9y agoAs horrible as patents are, this seems like an abuse even if the patent system. I think all patents should expire no more than five years from application date or one year from certification date whichever is longer.
- vilda 9y agoLooking at the system, it looks like even Bosch needs to replace some components after the safety system kicks in.
- AstralStorm 9y agoYes, the explosive fuses at $1 a pop. It could be improved to use resetable fuses but those are slower. There is a safety trade-off here.
- justin66 9y agoPeople tend to sue when their patents are violated. Like it or not, that's the point of obtaining a patent.
- 9y ago
- analog31 9y agoI own and use a tablesaw for home maintenance, and occasionally building utilitarian furniture, loudspeaker boxes (musician here), etc. My saw is an ancient Sears Roebuck that a buddy found at a garage sale. I'm aware of the SawStop technology, but haven't felt motivated to buy a brand new saw. The deal for me is simply that I don't have enough use for a saw, to justify buying a new one. I wouldn't recommend this approach to anybody else -- just using myself as an example of a person who has somehow rationalized keeping the old technology. My approach is to limit what I do with the saw. My hands never go anywhere near the blade. For smaller workpieces, intricate cuts, etc., I use hand tools or just figure out a different design. I'm willing to waste wood rather than try getting one last cut out of a scrap. Also, I simply don't use it very often. Most of the time it sits with the blade retraced, covered with bicycle parts. But in a lot of fields, it's impossible to discuss safety, or to get a straight answer about safety questions. Every technology has detractors with arguments that it is actually more dangerous. (Try reading web forum threads about bike helmets).
- Gibbon1 9y agoTip buy a CNC router and throw the table saw out. Along with a bunch of other tools.
- AstralStorm 9y agoIf you use it once in a blue moon, rental is smarter.
- analog31 9y agoThat's certainly an interesting thought. For now, I'm in maintenance mode, so my most important tools are the ones that I can throw in a bucket and carry to the point of use. And, stuff that's not related to woodworking at all: Repairing appliances and messing around with old bikes.
- blackguardx 9y agoOne of the most common uses of a table saw is preparing stock for other operations like ripping (cutting longitudinally) long boards or cutting a sheet of 4'x8' plywood into panels. You would need a pretty big CNC router to be able to do that.
- lightedman 9y agoLast time I tried one of these, I warped the drive shaft so badly the saw was entirely unusable ever again. And that was a brand-new demo unit put on the floor specifically to show it off. I'll take my chances and use the time-tested method of using a custom-built wooden jig to hold the piece while it goes through the blade.
- libeclipse 9y ago> let's make this amazing new safety feature mandatory for everyone! oh but let's make everyone licence it off us and punish anyone that doesn't want to pay us for safety fuck off
- randyrand 9y agoYa, no. Besides the horrendous patent issue (say goodbye to market competition), this will double the price of table saws. No thanks. Consumer protection laws are not about making obvious choices for me. Its supposed to protect me from the unknown unknowns - things that the average consumer would not know is dangerous. Everyone has heard about these safer saws for over a decade now. Everyone knows saws are dangerous. If people wanted them, they'd buy them. This law will not making these saws any cheaper or make saws any safer, it's just removing consumer choice. This is a ban. This is not why we have consumer protection.
- Latty 9y agoWhat about employees or students who have to use the equipment? They can't force their employer or educator to spend the money, but it's their fingers that'll be lost. Maybe laws to ensure that if you are employing or in any way requiring someone use your saw you need the safety features. The patent stuff is it's own issue for sure, and yet another example of how crappy the system is.
- iDemonix 9y agoAs someone who accidentally put a thumb through a table saw, this technology is awesome and I hope to see it become more mainstream.
- Sleeep 9y agoWhat was the outcome? Did you require stitches or lose the thumb? Do you have lasting nerve damage or similar?
- netcan 9y agoIs this fundamentally a story about bad/criminal actors, or another strange outcrop of an insurance-centric industry? The facililty described in the article seems to be a criminal racket. But my question in these cases is usually: is this a spectrum? How many places are on the seedy-but-not-criminal portion of that spectrum? Kickbacks and body brokering might be ilegal, but the ultimate goal of these isn't: find clients with insurance you can bill, bill clients as much as the insurer will pay. There are options that aren't criminal, but also aren't a good allocation of resources.
- yladiz 9y agoI remember seeing this either on Science or Discovery channel when I was younger, talking about great inventions. I remember thinking it was a good idea, but forgot about it until last week when I saw an article pop up about the patent issue but that the FTC is thinking about contemplating making it mandatory. I think it should absolutely be mandatory, but I hope that the FTC can deal with the patent issue and let companies use the technology (or similar technology) for free rather than having to deal with paying royalties (or at least not have to pay 8% of profit from the tool). I think the argument that, "you should know that this item is unsafe" is stupid, because just because something is unsafe doesn't mean a good, quality of life saving feature should be excluded. You could make the same argument about having seatbelts or airbags in cars, because you know it's dangerous but you're taking the risk anyway. Accidents happen, taking measures to prevent them or mitigate the damages should be done, if possible. This isn't something I use, since I don't often create things from wood, but I would pay more for a technology that saves my finger in the off chance I accidentally move my finger towards the blade or something else happens, like the table accidentally shifting because my dog ran into it.
- falsedan 9y ago> I would pay more for a technology that saves my finger Same, and I'm horrified to consider that professional tradesmen whose livelihood depends on their fine muscle control would choose not to pay more for a tool like this. Part of it is the mindset of "I'm not an idiot, I'd never accidentally position my hand anywhere near the blade"; but wood is a natural product with variations, and hitting an unexpected dense section might cause the piece to kick back. Then you might move rapidly to avoid it, and trip & fall onto the blade, or stumble & reflexively put out a hand…
- AstralStorm 9y agoYou know why heavy gloves are used? Work clothing? Why there are safety rules and mandatory training? Why there are emergency stops? See, there are other ways to provide safety in this situation. And you cannot make anything really idiot proof. World will find a better idiot. This automated solution has a major drawback when sawing through anything too capacitive, wet wood, wood with nails etc. The company pushing the legislation has a major agenda that is not safety - patent licensing.
- mdekkers 9y ago"None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be used to finalize any rule by the Consumer Product Safety Commission relating to blade-contact injuries on table saws," the rider on the budget bill reads. What the actual fuck.
- sersi 9y agoExactly my reaction. That's corruption.
- Pigo 9y agoI came in hoping to stumble upon an explanation on the cast saw used in hospitals that won't cut skin at all. I believe I seen an explaination once, but it didn't sink it apparently. This must be a completely different technology.
- hsod 9y agohttps://myria.com/how-does-a-cast-saw-work-without-cutting-you https://myria.com/how-does-a-cast-saw-work-without-cutting-y... tl;dr it vibrates instead of rotating which doesn't break skin because skin is flexible
- Zigurd 9y agoThe meta meaning of this thread is the most interesting part. Otherwise intelligent people are running straight into the buzz saw of obvious cognitive biases. Phrases like "Table saws are mostly used by competent people and the injury rate is pretty low" commenting on an article that spells out the injury rates and costs veer into near self-parody. Obviously humans are highly capable of over-estimating their own competency, in the face of graphic and statistically compelling evidence.
- luckydude 9y agoMy wife, when we were dating, bought me a Unisaw, one of the so-called dangerous saws. (She's also the woman who would say "I'm going out to get some milk, do you need more clamps? Woodworker joke, sorry :) I have no intention of getting a sawstop saw. Why? Because my shop is full of dangerous tools. My 1930's drillpress ripped some of my hair out, my 1940's metal lathe can take your arm off, my bandsaw is way more dangerous than a table saw, don't get me started about my shaper, etc. Tablesaws, treated with respect, are very safe. But why not have an even safer tablesaw? Because I don't want to get complacent around one tool and have that feeling linger when I go use the next tool. They are all dangerous and all need to be treated with respect. Unless there is a way to make them all safe (there isn't), it doesn't make sense to me to have one safe one.
- abakker 9y agoYeah, I'm with you to some extent. My mills, lathes, etc. are all very dangerous when treated wrong (Anything with a reasonable amount of horsepower is). Routers still freak me out since there is virtually no chance of reattaching things hit with a router. "A fine spray on the wall" is about all that's left. However, I'll also say that de-risking tools is a good idea. If you want to avoid complacency, then avoid it. If you can't take the vigilance you have around a lathe or a shaper and apply it to a tablesaw, just because the tablesaw is safe, I'd say you should probably reconsider your safety practices. There is a difference between good process and complete paranoia. At present, I have a standard delta saw, because it's what I have. It is "dangerous" and also kind of lousy. Because of the way the trunion mounts the blade carriage, it is not possible to adjust the blade to 45° without a few thousandth of pinch. I know my next saw will be a saw stop. They are safer, yes, but they are also incredibly nice saws. Compared to the powermatic I used to have, they are even better. When I move next, my Delta won't be coming with me, and I'll be ordering a saw stop.
- octothorp3 9y agoAside from safety, what do you see as nicer about the sawstop? I love my Powermatic 66, they can pry it from my cold, dead hands :)
- nsnick 9y agoWe can all be for consumer rights, but I can't understand how anyone runs a business with a table saw without retracting technology. It seems like insurance companies would require this because if you don't have it in your table saw, you are being negligent with your employees.
- jsjohnst 9y agoMy question is this, what happens when cutting wet wood? Or wood that has nails in it? Did you just cost yourself $$$ by doing it?
- GuiA 9y agoYes, it does not work with wet wood. You rarely want to cut wet wood though. As for wood with nails, you NEVER cut wood with nails in a workshop. Nails + metal blades = sparks, and woodshops, even with ventilation and vacuums,have wood dust everywhere on the floor, the air, etc. It'd be the surest way to start a fire.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- abfan1127 9y agohave you seen his price point? Nobody wants his tech because its crazy expensive. The brake isn't reusable, so you have to have a spare lying around so your project doesn't get delayed. I don't want it because proper safety keeps your fingers attached. Its not rocket science.
- jschwartzi 9y agoYeah, this article is completely ignorant of the fact that he's using the legal system to try to force manufacturers to buy his technology.
- reilly3000 9y agoThis. I feel we should all be wary of a for profit institution trying to manipulate the government to force adoption of their product, be it a small or very large business. What if Comcast was forcing a commercial internet safety product?
- emiliobumachar 9y ago"The brake isn't reusable, so you have to have a spare lying around so your project doesn't get delayed." Is the false positive rate non-trivial? Because losing a brake and saw only when otherwise someone would lose a finger seems like a great deal, even from a detached, purely economical perspective taking into account health care and disability costs.
- Doxin 9y agoYou really don't want to buy an expensive saw and discover that the false-positive rate is high.
- gozur88 9y agoThis system is expensive enough that its purchase really ought to be left up to the consumer. A rule mandating sawstops would double the price of entry level saws and put them out of reach of hobbyists.
- yazan94 9y ago"CPSC Acting Chairman Ann Marie Buerkle said she was also concerned that the rule might force companies to license technology from SawStop, which she said might create a monopoly." I think this is a valid sentiment. Why should the federal government literally award a monopoly to one company? This is not consumer protection. People know what they are getting into when dealing with a saw. This is government overreach. If people want the safety, and if a $400 stopsaw is has equivalent functionality (excluding sensing tech) as a $200 normal saw, than the increased demand will prove that the extra $200 is necessary.
- jdavis703 9y agoIf SawStop wants to show good faith they'll open source all of their patents. Otherwise this looks like blatant regulatory capture.
- oliwarner 9y agoDo you also resent your goverment for legislating the cars are safer? There are more than glancing similarities between SawStop and airbags. That this is currently patent-encumbered isn't really relevant. It would be trivial to write the law now but defer its enforcement. We're only 4 years away. It's time to let manufacturers know this is what they'll be building.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jdavis703 9y agoCars should be made safer WRT to the people outside the car who might have to deal with the consequences. For example, a car with spikes on the outside should probably be illegal. But as long as the danger is knowingly and exclusively contained to the occupant of a vehicle I see no reason to make it illegal. Motorcycles, for example, lack standard safety features like seatbelts and airbags, and yet we haven't made them illegal.
- oliwarner 9y ago
- cr0sh 9y agoThe stupid thing is, this technology could be applied to more than just table saws; most woodshop machines are fairly dangerous if you don't keep your mind and eyes on things. The thing is, even experts can get lulled by "having done this 100 times before" - and a terrible accident happens. There are tons of power tools, shop tools, and other machinery that could be made safer. Yes, it will cost money, and consumers may not want to pay it. But I know if I ever purchase a table saw, it's going to be one of SawStop's - because my fingers are part of my livelyhood as a software engineer, and worth the money, easily. How it works is kinda neat, but it does have some limitations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SawStop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SawStop Chief among them that if you want to use a dado blade system, it won't work. But for general crosscutting and such, not a bad piece of insurance.
- Doxin 9y agoIn general you really shouldn't be using dado blades. It's an easy and dangerous way to skip setting up a router and a temporary fence. There's a reason dado stacks aren't sold in europe.
- nsnick 9y agoFestool is going to acquire Sawstop. Looks like these are going to be some really nice saws. http://toolguyd.com/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-festool-parent-company/ http://toolguyd.com/sawstop-to-be-acquired-by-festool-parent...