I am thrilled to see the work that we did get modified with such great success! The design changes are fantastic and the volume of material you're able to handle far exceeds my results. (I run much finer, lower volume material) I like it so much that I want to rebuild mine. 😀 Great work and thank you for posting your results! I look forward to making some of your updates to my system.
Hi Tim, Thank you for your kind words. It is my honor to be able to further develop your design. Without your videos this channel would not have existed! I am currently putting the finishing touches on the 3D files of MK2, which I will put this week on GitHub. The video that goes into more depth will only be available in a few weeks. I am still working on designing the silence box and want to show the system in its entirety and hanging on the wall together with the Camvac it is designed for.
My separator cylinders are made from 1mm clear acrylic. Although the stretch does not break, it is easy to compress. Because I prepared it according to the original, and in this case the airflow was from the front, the separator would expand, so I inserted the separator into a 4 mm PVC cylinder, which serves as a frame... Now I think that the only remaining option is a fan at the beginning... maybe it will be better.
You did a very nice job in making the separator. It is not 3D printed, right? You can also consider adding a pressure release valve. The disadvantage is that they are often difficult to adjust, so they only open when the under pressure threatens to become too high.
@@CapturingDustI didn't have the opportunity to use a 3D printer. So I cut a double cone out of plywood. (for example, under Dunn). I made the wings from acrylic 3 mm thick. I sealed it with epoxy and covered it with automotive putty. Then he built a cone, a frame made of wood... Covered it with mesh and covered it with automotive putty, which contained fiberglass. I epoxyed the wings again in the same way...then painted them.
I think it makes perfect sense to have the blower running on suction when it's connected to the end of the colector. I don't like sawdust getting into the fan wings. But I can say one thing... if sawdust is stuck somewhere, then the collectors should not shrink due to vacuum. I'm a little afraid of this. I haven’t tried it either to connect in front of the collector I haven’t made a normal fan yet. I think 4kW power will be enough.
Have you tested this with a table saw or miter saw? They produce finer wood dust which is more of a problem in a wood shop. Jointers, planers produce large wood shavings/particles, they are not good to test performance of separator. so the 99.63% doesn't tell much actually. But nice work anyways.
Not yet tested that exact setup. I did plane MDF on the minimum height of the planer which created very fine dust. Only that was not that much kg of the total.
No one answered me whether it is better to connect forward or backward...😢 so I don’t know yet either. Observation required. When you have a leaf blower or vacuum cleaner in the back, does it suck up small particles from the containers?
In my case i do not see small particles suck up from the containers. The question is whether this is really visible to the naked eye, but it had no measurable difference in efficiency I can see the collection containers shrink when the hose closes. They must be strong so that they do not implode. The separators themselves are strong enough in my case. The PVC pipe is 3mm thick and sufficiently strong. As soon as you place the fan at the front, the collection containers will only expand. In my opinion that is an advantage. However, I am of the opinion that you need a little more power to achieve the same result. 4kW should indeed be sufficient, my CamVac is 2kW.
@@LT-gj3rm Correct point. I also thought about this problem. We don’t work on iron in my workshop, but it’s possible that self-tapping screws or self-tapping screws might get into the blower wings.
hi As far as I understand, you have horizontal suction manifolds. The original fan is located at the beginning of the collectors. I also assembled this manifold from two parts and could not decide which option to choose. Should I put the fan at the beginning or at the end?
Nice that you responded @pauna7. I've seen your videos too! You did a nice job! The original Harvey has the fan at the beginning. The sawdust then passes through the impeller. The CamVac i have is not made to pull sawdust through te motor. So i did not have the option to set it at the begin. Underdun and Tim from Pilson Guitars also had the fan at the beginning so I was unsure at first whether my version would work. But in my case it's going very well. The camvac is a high volume and high pressure extractor. More or less a tripled up Shop Vac. I think a regular extraction fan is not the same. Did you test the in front and at the end options?
Cool looking build on the Harvey GYRO. This a nice looking setup. It you have time I’d like to ask a few questions. I’m looking at a diy build and am intrigued by creative solutions and choices. 1. How is it with finer dust on the efficiency since the lighter stuff seems to flow to the last depository? 2. Any benefits from horizontal vs vertical (opinion) besides fitting it in a space requirement? 3. Dust extractor vs camvac, why did you choose one over the other; for smaller and larger tool versatility? 4. Any major decrease in suction worth noting?
My goal for this build is to explore all of your questions I had myself and could not find good answers for. I am building a better test setup to do so. With sensors to log all the data real time (that’s te goal). About the Dust extractor vs CamVac that was easy for me because I only had a CamVac available. It is a really great extractor with high CFM and pressure in a small build volume.
Hey, that's a real awesome design! Love what results you have achieved! Really want to build one on my own now 😉 the footprint is just a bit too big for me 🫤 out of curiosity have you ever tried to use it at a 90° angle, means vertical instead of horizontal? Therefore the festool boxes would have to be replaced with hoses to guide the material in bins. From the functional aspect of centrifugal force this should be feasible, or? Keep on going with your project, love to see further updates! Br
Vertical will not work on the way it is designed now. You can run a centrifuge vertical with the inlet on top and outlet on the bottom. And than the dust output on the outside of the tube on the bottom into a bin. What is the footprint you have available and the hose diameter off your blower?
@@CapturingDust thanks for your fast reply! I guess we are talking about the same approach, maybe I explained it not so great :) something like 120cm, but for the entire setup, that has to include a separator for big pieces, your separator and finally tue camvac. Heigth isn't a problem, that's why I was thinking this way - otherwise I would have to mount 90° pipings on both ends of your device to not exceed this limit
It really looks excellent! But why is it so complicated? Normal cyclone takes air in from side at tangent creating the rotation. Then it has a straight tube for vacuum in middle at top, and finally a taper at bottom far enough from the initial stages of cyclonic separation to not be sucked back up and drizzle into a sealed bin. It seems to me all the complexity solves issues that is introduced by the design itself?
It just looks amazing and I don’t had the space for a normal cyclone. I almost purchased the Harvey system to put underneath my workbench. Only the price in Europe was 6K and like the technical challenge. I had the same question about complexity vs efficiency comparing it with a normal cyclone. So I did order a Oneida-Air Super Dust Deputy 4/5 Cycloon to find out the difference in efficiency and CFM/pressure drop. it is in backorder for 2 months now so time to build a testing setup 😉
@@CapturingDust I've made cyclones since 2012 mostly for myself, people I got to know through local hackerspace as well as for the hackerspace. The hackerspace ran a large shopbot as well as some other woodworking tools on a single cyclone made from about half a casting pipe with a top lid cut from a thick sheet of MDF and the bottom cone made by cutting slots in the cardboard and closing it into a cone using hot-glue. It's nice one can make them pretty much any size like this. If wear on the initial impact sizes for larger chunks is a problem one can always add a steel plate at that point. I am not sure how your design saves any space though, it seems much bigger? Your dust collector bins look really really nice though! But they are so small? I used to use a 110l wheeled thick-walled plastic dustbin with a bag-bracket inside. Lid was sealed by pressing on one of those car/trunk-gaskets.
I will hang this system on the wall above the planer and without the bins it is only 180mm so I can still walk underneath it. I share the space my planer is standing and can’t put a cyclone in the corner. When the setup is ready I will show it! I totally agree that building a cyclone is far less effort 😅. And I want something that just looks really amazing as a center piece in the wood shop.
@@CapturingDust Yeah, I used a 300mm diameter tube for most of the designs. That matches well with the 100mm ducting leaving 2x diameter for cycling and 100mm for outlet in middle. When hung on the wall attached to a tub on the floor for dust it doesn't take up too much room. Have to remember though, with high vacuum you can lift the dustpail off the ground as the spiro is collapsing by the vacuum! Normally during a clog. That's why a under pressure relief valve by the inlet of the cyclone is a good idea. (Since the fan is on the outlet sucking and just exhausting outside or through a final filter.)
Wat gaaf dat je dit hebt gefinetuned! In mijn werkplaats wil ik er graag een paar plaatsen. Kun jij die tegen betaling produceren? Ik hoor graag je reactie in een comment.
Hoi Rik! Leuk dat je interesse hebt! Harvey is echter erg strikt op Tim geweest dat hij de files niet mocht verkopen vanwege de patenten. Dus ik bied dit project als open source aan en kan ze dus niet produceren voor de verkoop.
Jointer is operarated on the second table, pushing the wood like that is planing on the jointer which really doesn’t make sense as then you could just use the planer. Testing dust separation with chips is silly anyway, you might consider studying atleast the bare minimum before going into problem solving.
It took people long to figure this out and comment on it! +1 for you 😉. Separating the chips is just to solve my own dust problem I have with my CamVac and filling up the dustbin to fast. Cleaning it is not fun to to every 20 minutes. Yes, For the real separating tests I need more fine material. I did run a small batch of MDF at the lowest jointer setting to make fine dust and it did well on that.
I am thrilled to see the work that we did get modified with such great success! The design changes are fantastic and the volume of material you're able to handle far exceeds my results. (I run much finer, lower volume material) I like it so much that I want to rebuild mine. 😀 Great work and thank you for posting your results! I look forward to making some of your updates to my system.
Hi Tim, Thank you for your kind words. It is my honor to be able to further develop your design. Without your videos this channel would not have existed! I am currently putting the finishing touches on the 3D files of MK2, which I will put this week on GitHub.
The video that goes into more depth will only be available in a few weeks. I am still working on designing the silence box and want to show the system in its entirety and hanging on the wall together with the Camvac it is designed for.
Hi Tim, I published the STEP-files to github:
github.com/Makerr-Studio/CentrifugalDustSeparator-
Don’t hesitate to ask if you have any questions.
Love the way you mirrored the impeller. I did mine system few months back....works really well. Pilsonguitars did an amazing job.
My separator cylinders are made from 1mm clear acrylic.
Although the stretch does not break, it is easy to compress.
Because I prepared it according to the original, and in this case the airflow was from the front, the separator would expand, so I inserted the separator into a 4 mm PVC cylinder, which serves as a frame...
Now I think that the only remaining option is a fan at the beginning...
maybe it will be better.
You did a very nice job in making the separator. It is not 3D printed, right?
You can also consider adding a pressure release valve. The disadvantage is that they are often difficult to adjust, so they only open when the under pressure threatens to become too high.
@@CapturingDustI didn't have the opportunity to use a 3D printer. So I cut a double cone out of plywood. (for example, under Dunn). I made the wings from acrylic 3 mm thick. I sealed it with epoxy and covered it with automotive putty. Then he built a cone, a frame made of wood... Covered it with mesh and covered it with automotive putty, which contained fiberglass. I epoxyed the wings again in the same way...then painted them.
This is a really awesome design. Thanks for sharing!
I think it makes perfect sense to have the blower running on suction when it's connected to the end of the colector.
I don't like sawdust getting into the fan wings.
But I can say one thing... if sawdust is stuck somewhere, then the collectors should not shrink due to vacuum.
I'm a little afraid of this.
I haven’t tried it either to connect in front of the collector I haven’t made a normal fan yet.
I think 4kW power will be enough.
Have you tested this with a table saw or miter saw? They produce finer wood dust which is more of a problem in a wood shop. Jointers, planers produce large wood shavings/particles, they are not good to test performance of separator. so the 99.63% doesn't tell much actually. But nice work anyways.
Not yet tested that exact setup. I did plane MDF on the minimum height of the planer which created very fine dust. Only that was not that much kg of the total.
No one answered me whether it is better to connect forward or backward...😢
so I don’t know yet either. Observation required.
When you have a leaf blower or vacuum cleaner in the back, does it suck up small particles from the containers?
In my case i do not see small particles suck up from the containers. The question is whether this is really visible to the naked eye, but it had no measurable difference in efficiency
I can see the collection containers shrink when the hose closes. They must be strong so that they do not implode. The separators themselves are strong enough in my case. The PVC pipe is 3mm thick and sufficiently strong.
As soon as you place the fan at the front, the collection containers will only expand. In my opinion that is an advantage. However, I am of the opinion that you need a little more power to achieve the same result. 4kW should indeed be sufficient, my CamVac is 2kW.
Honestly I did the test around 4 months ago....its better sucking when the motor is in the front but risky if you have mix metal with the dust.
@@LT-gj3rm Correct point. I also thought about this problem. We don’t work on iron in my workshop, but it’s possible that self-tapping screws or self-tapping screws might get into the blower wings.
hi
As far as I understand, you have horizontal suction manifolds. The original fan is located at the beginning of the collectors. I also assembled this manifold from two parts and could not decide which option to choose. Should I put the fan at the beginning or at the end?
Nice that you responded @pauna7. I've seen your videos too! You did a nice job!
The original Harvey has the fan at the beginning. The sawdust then passes through the impeller. The CamVac i have is not made to pull sawdust through te motor. So i did not have the option to set it at the begin.
Underdun and Tim from Pilson Guitars also had the fan at the beginning so I was unsure at first whether my version would work. But in my case it's going very well. The camvac is a high volume and high pressure extractor. More or less a tripled up Shop Vac. I think a regular extraction fan is not the same.
Did you test the in front and at the end options?
Cool looking build on the Harvey GYRO. This a nice looking setup. It you have time I’d like to ask a few questions. I’m looking at a diy build and am intrigued by creative solutions and choices.
1. How is it with finer dust on the efficiency since the lighter stuff seems to flow to the last depository?
2. Any benefits from horizontal vs vertical (opinion) besides fitting it in a space requirement?
3. Dust extractor vs camvac, why did you choose one over the other; for smaller and larger tool versatility?
4. Any major decrease in suction worth noting?
My goal for this build is to explore all of your questions I had myself and could not find good answers for. I am building a better test setup to do so. With sensors to log all the data real time (that’s te goal).
About the Dust extractor vs CamVac that was easy for me because I only had a CamVac available. It is a really great extractor with high CFM and pressure in a small build volume.
Hey, that's a real awesome design! Love what results you have achieved! Really want to build one on my own now 😉 the footprint is just a bit too big for me 🫤 out of curiosity have you ever tried to use it at a 90° angle, means vertical instead of horizontal? Therefore the festool boxes would have to be replaced with hoses to guide the material in bins. From the functional aspect of centrifugal force this should be feasible, or?
Keep on going with your project, love to see further updates!
Br
Vertical will not work on the way it is designed now. You can run a centrifuge vertical with the inlet on top and outlet on the bottom. And than the dust output on the outside of the tube on the bottom into a bin. What is the footprint you have available and the hose diameter off your blower?
@@CapturingDust thanks for your fast reply! I guess we are talking about the same approach, maybe I explained it not so great :) something like 120cm, but for the entire setup, that has to include a separator for big pieces, your separator and finally tue camvac. Heigth isn't a problem, that's why I was thinking this way - otherwise I would have to mount 90° pipings on both ends of your device to not exceed this limit
It really looks excellent!
But why is it so complicated? Normal cyclone takes air in from side at tangent creating the rotation. Then it has a straight tube for vacuum in middle at top, and finally a taper at bottom far enough from the initial stages of cyclonic separation to not be sucked back up and drizzle into a sealed bin. It seems to me all the complexity solves issues that is introduced by the design itself?
It just looks amazing and I don’t had the space for a normal cyclone. I almost purchased the Harvey system to put underneath my workbench. Only the price in Europe was 6K and like the technical challenge.
I had the same question about complexity vs efficiency comparing it with a normal cyclone. So I did order a Oneida-Air Super Dust Deputy 4/5 Cycloon to find out the difference in efficiency and CFM/pressure drop. it is in backorder for 2 months now so time to build a testing setup 😉
@@CapturingDust I've made cyclones since 2012 mostly for myself, people I got to know through local hackerspace as well as for the hackerspace.
The hackerspace ran a large shopbot as well as some other woodworking tools on a single cyclone made from about half a casting pipe with a top lid cut from a thick sheet of MDF and the bottom cone made by cutting slots in the cardboard and closing it into a cone using hot-glue. It's nice one can make them pretty much any size like this. If wear on the initial impact sizes for larger chunks is a problem one can always add a steel plate at that point. I am not sure how your design saves any space though, it seems much bigger?
Your dust collector bins look really really nice though! But they are so small? I used to use a 110l wheeled thick-walled plastic dustbin with a bag-bracket inside. Lid was sealed by pressing on one of those car/trunk-gaskets.
I will hang this system on the wall above the planer and without the bins it is only 180mm so I can still walk underneath it. I share the space my planer is standing and can’t put a cyclone in the corner. When the setup is ready I will show it!
I totally agree that building a cyclone is far less effort 😅. And I want something that just looks really amazing as a center piece in the wood shop.
@@CapturingDust Yeah, I used a 300mm diameter tube for most of the designs. That matches well with the 100mm ducting leaving 2x diameter for cycling and 100mm for outlet in middle. When hung on the wall attached to a tub on the floor for dust it doesn't take up too much room. Have to remember though, with high vacuum you can lift the dustpail off the ground as the spiro is collapsing by the vacuum! Normally during a clog. That's why a under pressure relief valve by the inlet of the cyclone is a good idea. (Since the fan is on the outlet sucking and just exhausting outside or through a final filter.)
What's the pressure drop from having it in place? Brilliant design BTW.
Not jet measured that. I will do that in a future video 👍
Wat gaaf dat je dit hebt gefinetuned! In mijn werkplaats wil ik er graag een paar plaatsen. Kun jij die tegen betaling produceren? Ik hoor graag je reactie in een comment.
Hoi Rik! Leuk dat je interesse hebt! Harvey is echter erg strikt op Tim geweest dat hij de files niet mocht verkopen vanwege de patenten. Dus ik bied dit project als open source aan en kan ze dus niet produceren voor de verkoop.
@@CapturingDust Dank voor de snelle reactie en de uitleg! Dan ga ik zelf aan de slag.
Jointer is operarated on the second table, pushing the wood like that is planing on the jointer which really doesn’t make sense as then you could just use the planer. Testing dust separation with chips is silly anyway, you might consider studying atleast the bare minimum before going into problem solving.
It took people long to figure this out and comment on it! +1 for you 😉.
Separating the chips is just to solve my own dust problem I have with my CamVac and filling up the dustbin to fast. Cleaning it is not fun to to every 20 minutes.
Yes, For the real separating tests I need more fine material. I did run a small batch of MDF at the lowest jointer setting to make fine dust and it did well on that.