i have done snare shells similar to yours...I've often wondered if spiral gluing veneer using a proper jig and clamping wouldn't me easier and give a better solidity to the shell. Have you ever considered doing it that way?
If i may make a suggestion. It appears that the sled for the saw seems to run a bit sticky in the guide slot. I found that just a little rub with a piece of normal paraffin-wax candle along the guide that runs in the slot lubricates the runner that fits in the guide and makes for a smoother movement of the sled over the top of the saw. It helped me a lot, and i suspect that it may work the same on the band-saw as it did on my circular saw.
Win Michaels Yeah, I show the glue up stage in one of my videos. If you have a look through my play list called "Drum Making Videos" you should find it.
Your procedure is very interesting. But I disagree that you are saving any wood. Between the extra saw cuts and the off cuts at the end of each segment I suspect that the waste on either method will be about the same. Additionally you say that you get four segments from one isn't quite accurate as each of the new segments is only 1/4 the size of the original. Also using the band saw to cut segments to length probably does not produce the finest end cuts so I suspect you are having to sand the ends to produce acceptable glue joints. Then when you factor in your time for all the additional cutting and sanding I expect your additional labor outweighs any materiel costs.
It really depends on the segment length. The pieces I was making in the video clip aren't the best example, (a 10 segment ring) but when the segment length increases then the benefits of this method are more significant. For example, to make a 14" dia. ring (1" deep) with just 6 segments, thick enough to make a 3/8" thick shell after turning, I could cut all six segments out of block 7.1" long x 4.5" wide x 1" thick. That's 32 cubic inches of wood. To make the same ring the other way, making a hexagon first, I would need a strip of wood 45" long x 1.35" wide x 1" thick which is 61 cubic inches! The saving in materials is much less significant when working with shorter segments, for example making a ring with 12, 16 or 20 segments, I just work the conventional way, but when working with 6, 8 or 10 segments per ring I do it my way. The other benefits of working my way is that you can tell what each segment is going to look like after turning, before you have even turned the shell, and there's also a smaller surface area of wood to sand when flattening the rings, so that part of the process is easier and quicker. It's also easier to make sure all the rings are lined up correctly when stacking the rings together and finally you have much less wood to remove when turning the shell. I take your point however that the initial cutting out the curved pieces then having to sand the ends prior to gluing, takes a bit longer than cutting the straight segments on a table saw, so you might be right that the extra time involved outweighs any savings in material costs, but that would depend on whether you are working with inexpensive wood like Oak or Maple, (which costs about £10 to £20 for enough wood to a make a 14 x 6.5 snare shell) or something exotic like Gaboon Ebony, which would be well over £100 for enough wood for a 14 x 6.5. I sometimes work with even more expensive woods such as Snakewood, Amboyna Burl, etc, which are incredibly expensive, so then any reduction in material wastage would make a big difference.
i have done snare shells similar to yours...I've often wondered if spiral gluing veneer using a proper jig and clamping wouldn't me easier and give a better solidity to the shell.
Have you ever considered doing it that way?
If i may make a suggestion. It appears that the sled for the saw seems to run a bit sticky in the guide slot. I found that just a little rub with a piece of normal paraffin-wax candle along the guide that runs in the slot lubricates the runner that fits in the guide and makes for a smoother movement of the sled over the top of the saw. It helped me a lot, and i suspect that it may work the same on the band-saw as it did on my circular saw.
Very smart. Are you going or have you don a video on completion of the project
like they say in Russia - simplier is always better then simpliest...tis is enough simple to be the best...)))
If you could invest in a laser cutter you could do these quite accurately and with very efficient time management .
you should sell these template
great
the hole you use on the floor is always the same ?
Did you ever do a video on the glue up on these?
Win Michaels Yeah, I show the glue up stage in one of my videos. If you have a look through my play list called "Drum Making Videos" you should find it.
Win Michaels th-cam.com/video/tTvS4qQuZi4/w-d-xo.html
Your procedure is very interesting. But I disagree that you are saving any wood. Between the extra saw cuts and the off cuts at the end of each segment I suspect that the waste on either method will be about the same. Additionally you say that you get four segments from one isn't quite accurate as each of the new segments is only 1/4 the size of the original. Also using the band saw to cut segments to length probably does not produce the finest end cuts so I suspect you are having to sand the ends to produce acceptable glue joints. Then when you factor in your time for all the additional cutting and sanding I expect your additional labor outweighs any materiel costs.
It really depends on the segment length. The pieces I was making in the video clip aren't the best example, (a 10 segment ring) but when the segment length increases then the benefits of this method are more significant. For example, to make a 14" dia. ring (1" deep) with just 6 segments, thick enough to make a 3/8" thick shell after turning, I could cut all six segments out of block 7.1" long x 4.5" wide x 1" thick. That's 32 cubic inches of wood. To make the same ring the other way, making a hexagon first, I would need a strip of wood 45" long x 1.35" wide x 1" thick which is 61 cubic inches! The saving in materials is much less significant when working with shorter segments, for example making a ring with 12, 16 or 20 segments, I just work the conventional way, but when working with 6, 8 or 10 segments per ring I do it my way. The other benefits of working my way is that you can tell what each segment is going to look like after turning, before you have even turned the shell, and there's also a smaller surface area of wood to sand when flattening the rings, so that part of the process is easier and quicker. It's also easier to make sure all the rings are lined up correctly when stacking the rings together and finally you have much less wood to remove when turning the shell. I take your point however that the initial cutting out the curved pieces then having to sand the ends prior to gluing, takes a bit longer than cutting the straight segments on a table saw, so you might be right that the extra time involved outweighs any savings in material costs, but that would depend on whether you are working with inexpensive wood like Oak or Maple, (which costs about £10 to £20 for enough wood to a make a 14 x 6.5 snare shell) or something exotic like Gaboon Ebony, which would be well over £100 for enough wood for a 14 x 6.5. I sometimes work with even more expensive woods such as Snakewood, Amboyna Burl, etc, which are incredibly expensive, so then any reduction in material wastage would make a big difference.
You on valium or something? Excessive yak and hand movement, Get on with it.