Best pipe size for CamVac and tablesaw

[Danmickread]

Hi, I appreciate these sort of questions come up alot but I can't find a simple answer to what I'd like to know.
I have a new type CamVac single motor extractor and want to connect to my dewalt dwe7485 jobsite table saw. The saw has a 63mm outlet I believe, and the CamVac has a 100mm outlet.
I understand that for table saws Hvlp extraction is better but if the CamVac is LVHP why does it have the 100mm outlet and if I use 100mm hose and reduce at saw am I going to get enough movement of air or would a reducer and 63mm pipe straight from CamVac work better as its a LVHP extractor?

Thanks in advance
Dan

 

[Jameshow]

Best to use larger pipe to the machine I believe.
Then reduce as close as possible to the machine.

 

[Sachakins]

With a single motor camvac, you should have no problem reducing to 63mm.
I do the same with a twin motor camvac, running through a 100mm cyclone from Axminster but can only run it on single motor if I do reduce to 63mm.
If I try it both motors the 100mm flex hoses collapse, causing the collection bin to try and implode, but I fitted a pressure relief valve to prevent it happening again. Once was scary enough, toppling the motor, cyclone and bin off its mounting.

 

[RobNichols]

I bought the AirLock Y Splitter Hose Kit | DEWALT . Works fine. Got it before I got my CamVac. Tend to use them in combination with a Dust Commander and a Record Power DX1500B 100-32mm Reducer 2m 32mm Hose for HPLV Extractors

 

[Danmickread]

With a single motor camvac, you should have no problem reducing to 63mm.
I do the same with a twin motor camvac, running through a 100mm cyclone from Axminster but can only run it on single motor if I do reduce to 63mm.
If I try it both motors the 100mm flex hoses collapse, causing the collection bin to try and implode, but I fitted a pressure relief valve to prevent it happening again. Once was scary enough, toppling the motor, cyclone and bin off its mounting.

Hi, it's not so much whether it's a problem but what would give me best peefornance?

 

[Sideways]

It's sheer stupidity having a 100mm connector on a single motor camvac.
Reduce it to 35mm.

Post number 11 in this recent thread explains why
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/cyclone-festool-midi-for-makita-2012nb-planer.145772/

 

[Danmickread]

It's sheer stupidity having a 100mm connector on a single motor camvac.
Reduce it to 35mm.

Post number 11 in this recent thread explains why
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/cyclone-festool-midi-for-makita-2012nb-planer.145772/

Thanks for this. Totally baffles me then why they put 100mm connections on the CamVac and other similar extractors.
So if I was to introduce a cyclone into the system then one with 50mm connections with reducers and connecting the whole thing up in 35mm pipe would give best performance?
It's making me wonder whether I should cancel the order if its not really going to give me any more performance than something like a festool.
I just wanted something with reasonable dust extraction, appreciate won't be perfect on a table saw, 0.5micron filtration, not to noisy and something where I wouldn't have to keep replacing bags.

 

[llywmog]

I use 63mm hose for all machines, including table saw, using twin motor camvac with no issues

 

[Sachakins]

I use 63mm hose for all machines, including table saw, using twin motor camvac with no issues

Is that 63mm rigid or flex.

 

[llywmog]

Rigid apart from connections to the gates

 

[Stuart Moffat]

Likewise, 63mm everywhere and always both motors running. No pressure relief valve, just a simple rule I stick to, never close a gate until you’ve first opened another!

 

[Sideways]

Thanks for this. Totally baffles me then why they put 100mm connections on the CamVac and other similar extractors.

There will be three reasons:

First is that a lot of machines are made with a 100mm outlet so having a matching inlet on the vac means the buyer can easily hook the two up with a simple hose and no reducers.

Second is that having a 100mm port implies to the buyer that the extractor is suited to the task. It's a subtle marketing con because this absolutely isn't the case. Doesn't matter whether it's a camvac or a Numatic/Axminster NV(D)750 or whatever, they aren't HVLP extractors.

Third is a more genuine excuse. These machines are made in one, two and three motor variants. The three motor version moves more air and although a 63mm hose would be a good fit, that can make a better claim to a 100mm connection. From a production point of view, it's then cheaper to make one standard base (canister) for all models in the range and just have 1, 2 and 3 motor heads.


There will be little difference between a single motor camvac style vac and a Festool type in overall airflow. The motors used have similar power, similar dimensions, same basic design so why would there be.
You are choosing features. A strong tin can with a big capacity, option of multiple motors and simple (but multiple) filters vs something single motor, mobile, with variable suction, more sophisticated but expensive filters and gizmos like auto clean and power tool take off.

The argument for a 2 or 3 motor camvac is stronger than the case for a single motor model. You don't have the sophistication of a good shop vac but you are getting more airflow and you keep the advantage of strong suction.
HVLP extractors, though they move much more air, are annoyingly bulky and don't like long hoses or poorly designed / undersized fixed pipework.

 

[Mikebart]

Couple of points 100 mm cuffs that screw onto flexi pipe work
Axminster hose is right hand thread.
Record Power is left hand thread.
Don’t ask me how I know
My ts200 table saw has a 35mm hose from the crown guard to a 100 mm outlet and a 50mm ish hose underneath the blade guard to the same 100mm outlet and the extraction is very poor.
I have made a base for it with its own outlet and a job for this year is to remove part of the bottom guard to hopefully improve things plus make a zero clearance plate for the blade.
I have found that my extraction system ( chip extractor) works fine on my router table /pt but useless on my bandsaw due to the location of the port (another job).
But I have also purchased a dewalt wet/dry extractor that works well with the sander and track saw.
Plus a cartridge filter on top of the extractor with solid piping with blast gates around the garage.
My small single garage means everything is on movable bases hence the need to have a flexible dust extraction system but it’s not a cheap option.

 

[Sideways]

Bandsaws are poorly designed for dust extraction.
I've had useful success with an NVD750 2 can type vacuum attached just where the blade enters the lower box if you have a diagonal piece of mdf that boxes off just that corner to concentrate the suction from a shop vac type extractor. Some machines are designed with this.
But even with that dust builds up everywhere and an HVLP extractor hooked up to a port at the bottom of the lower box would have been a help to keep the top and bottom boxes clean. We just hoovered it out every few days instead.

 

[Mikebart]

Bandsaws are poorly designed for dust extraction.
I've had useful success with an NVD750 2 can type vacuum attached just where the blade enters the lower box if you have a diagonal piece of mdf that boxes off just that corner to concentrate the suction from a shop vac type extractor. Some machines are designed with this.
But even with that dust builds up everywhere and an HVLP extractor hooked up to a port at the bottom of the lower box would have been a help to keep the top and bottom boxes clean. We just hoovered it out every few days instead.

I have a Rp350sabre bandsaw with the 100mm port at the bottom of the machine and my thoughts are to do the same as you have done to attempt to reduce the dust from getting into the machine rather than try to remove it afterwards.

 

[Sachakins]

Gonna try something like this idea fir bandsaw dust collection later this year.

 

[llywmog]

Likewise, 63mm everywhere and always both motors running. No pressure relief valve, just a simple rule I stick to, never close a gate until you’ve first opened another!

oh yes

 

[Danmickread]

There will be three reasons:

First is that a lot of machines are made with a 100mm outlet so having a matching inlet on the vac means the buyer can easily hook the two up with a simple hose and no reducers.

Second is that having a 100mm port implies to the buyer that the extractor is suited to the task. It's a subtle marketing con because this absolutely isn't the case. Doesn't matter whether it's a camvac or a Numatic/Axminster NV(D)750 or whatever, they aren't HVLP extractors.

Third is a more genuine excuse. These machines are made in one, two and three motor variants. The three motor version moves more air and although a 63mm hose would be a good fit, that can make a better claim to a 100mm connection. From a production point of view, it's then cheaper to make one standard base (canister) for all models in the range and just have 1, 2 and 3 motor heads.


There will be little difference between a single motor camvac style vac and a Festool type in overall airflow. The motors used have similar power, similar dimensions, same basic design so why would there be.
You are choosing features. A strong tin can with a big capacity, option of multiple motors and simple (but multiple) filters vs something single motor, mobile, with variable suction, more sophisticated but expensive filters and gizmos like auto clean and power tool take off.

The argument for a 2 or 3 motor camvac is stronger than the case for a single motor model. You don't have the sophistication of a good shop vac but you are getting more airflow and you keep the advantage of strong suction.
HVLP extractors, though they move much more air, are annoyingly bulky and don't like long hoses or poorly designed / undersized fixed pipework.

Thanks for this. I spoke to CamVac who told me that there 52 litres per second rating is based on a 100mm hose and reducing the hose size would obviously increase suction but reduce airflow so the best thing to do is use the 100mm hose and reduce at the machine.

So although air flow rating is similar on this to other vacs such as a festool this is using a 100mm hose on the CamVac and 32mm hose on the festool therefor the CamVac is less likely to suffer from any blockages of bulkier waste due to the larger hose Is that a correct view?

If I was to use a cyclone would one with 100mm connections be best then do you think?

 

[Danmickread]

Thanks for this. I spoke to CamVac who told me that there 52 litres per second rating is based on a 100mm hose and reducing the hose size would obviously increase suction but reduce airflow so the best thing to do is use the 100mm hose and reduce at the machine.

So although air flow rating is similar on this to other vacs such as a festool this is using a 100mm hose on the CamVac and 32mm hose on the festool therefor the CamVac is less likely to suffer from any blockages of bulkier waste due to the larger hose Is that a correct view?

If I was to use a cyclone would one with 100mm connections be best then do you think?

Also is there an adaptor to make it easy to reduce the 100mm to the 63mm for table saw connection and split off to the blade guard?

 

[Stuart Moffat]

My experience with two motor cam acts is that if by split off, you mean have it suck in two places at the same time, neither place will have enough suck.