Using mitre guide AND fence

[WestofLongBeach]

I regularly see, when it comes up, knowledgeable woodworkers (and, for that matter, the instructions to the 3100) who say you should never use the mitre guide and the fence at the same time.

But, I need to cut some square stock to maybe 35-50 uniform 1 1/2" lengths, and it seems to me that butting the stock up against SOMETHING, while squaring the piece with the mitre guide, would be the way to keep things sort of regular.

So is there a better way to address this issue than using both? What, in fact, is the hazard that puts everyone off so?

Thanks.

Don.

[kirkroy]

Use a stop block on the fence to set the length. Then push it through with the mitre table.

[LarryG]

As Kirkroy says, attach a stop block (using a clamp, or T-nut) to the rip fence that is positioned entirely AHEAD of the blade. When you set your rip fence the desired distance from the blade, add in the thickness of the stop block. I made a block that is exactly 1" thick, to keep the arithmetic easy: if I need a 4" long piece, I set the fence 5" from the blade.

To make the cut, slide the workpiece sideways against the SMT fence until its end lightly contacts the stop block. The push the SMT forward. Note that to be the most safe, the workpiece should clear the stop block completely before the blade teeth contact the workpiece. If this is not possible, the workpiece should at least clear the stop block before the leading edge of the workpiece passes the centerline of the blade.

The danger of not doing this is that the small offcut piece can rotate sideways slightly between the blade and rip fence as the cut completes, triggering a kickback. By using a stop block, you give the offcut piece some "breathing room."

Kirkroy's sketch below illustrates the concept perfectly.

[kirkroy]

Visual for this:

[LCHIEN]

yes, the stop block method is the answer to your question. It indexes the length perfectly which gives you repeatable cut off lengths BUT it does allow the cutoff piece to move freely away from the blade without being hurled (kick back) due to the piece twisting and getting trapped bwteen the fence and the blade.

HInt, Kirkroys pic is very good. But is you make a longer stopblock you can use a clamp behind the workpiece to hold it to the rip fence, and the clamp won't be in the way.

[Uncle Cracker]

You might instead want to consider putting a stop on the SMT fence to control length, and not using the rip fence on the end of the piece, as this will prevent the workpiece from bearing on 1 moving and 1 fixed piece at the same time, which might, in itself, twist the workpiece should the rip fence bind on either the workpiece or the aux stop block shown in the diagram.

[RodKirby]

Here are two more...

[Pakaderm]

I was watching David Marks on WoodWorks the other day. He uses a big crosscut sled which runs on both sides of the blade. He was using the sled and the rip fence together. I assume this is different because his sled gives support on the back of the "cut-off" piece so it will not bind. Or is this still an "unsafe" action?

-Pak

[BobSch]

I was watching David Marks on WoodWorks the other day. He uses a big crosscut sled which runs on both sides of the blade. He was using the sled and the rip fence together. I assume this is different because his sled gives support on the back of the "cut-off" piece so it will not bind. Or is this still an "unsafe" action?

It may not be unsafe in his configuration, but I'M not going to try it!

[LarryG]

Cracker: Yours is certainly the method I'd use for a longer "keeper" piece, but note that Don says he wants to cut a bunch of pieces that will be only 1.5" long after cutting. That little material left of the blade would be difficult or impossible to safely hold against the SMT fence.

Pak: I've seen DJM do that, too, and my reaction matches Bob's. In theory the sled keeps both sections of the workpiece moving at the same speed, and both are being pushed by the sled's fence, so I guess it's a safer situation than using a one-sided sled like the BT's SMT. But it's not anything I'd do, on any saw, with any setup.

[John Hunter]

Here is a link to a Gauge Block I built and use all the time http://www.newwoodworker.com/buldgagblk.html

[Uncle Cracker]

Cracker: Yours is certainly the method I'd use for a longer "keeper" piece, but note that Don says he wants to cut a bunch of pieces that will be only 1.5" long after cutting. That little material left of the blade would be difficult or impossible to safely hold against the SMT fence.

I'd use a hold-down on the SMT for pieces that short.

[LarryG]

I'd use a hold-down on the SMT for pieces that short.

You can't, though. (Forgive me if I'm appearing argumentative.) A piece that short will be resting fully on the BT's fixed main table, not on the SMT. This is, incidentally, one reason I was never a big fan of the SMT. With a crosscut or panel-cutting sled, as is typically used on a conventional table saw, the material is supported right up to the blade.

What one could do is clamp the workpiece to the SMT fence, as long as it wasn't too tall, and as long as the fence had a facing similar to that shown in Rod's second photo. You'd need this because the tapered, black plastic ends on the SMT fence wouldn't give a clamp any purchase. But the problem I'd have with this solution is that I really don't like having an extra element like a clamp that close to a moving blade.

[Tom Hintz]

Stop block, also called gauge blocks, make this simple, safe and very accurate. See the link below for a story on this technique if you have not heard of it before.

http://www.newwoodworker.com/usegagblks.html

[jonmnelson]

Hope I'm not hijacking the thread, but does anyone use the fence and miter gauge when making a non-through cut, such as a dado, or is that considered a bad idea as well?