Tissue paper cutting saw - GIF

[Frank S]

Full rotation of the cutter seems like a lot of wasted motion and . Push pull would seem easier and faster?

Reciprocating motions are immensely more complex and troublesome to maintain due in part because every cycle must start and stop twice to complete a full cycle . Not to mention in this circumstance if the saw blade was traveling in the reverse direction the possibility of the tissue stack unfolding the top layers could be an issue. Rotary motions take advantage to continuing kinetic energy built up in the flywheel effect greatly lowering the power requirement

[Hoosiersmoker]

Reciprocating motions are immensely more complex and troublesome to maintain due in part because every cycle must start and stop twice to complete a full cycle . Not to mention in this circumstance if the saw blade was traveling in the reverse direction the possibility of the tissue stack unfolding the top layers could be an issue. Rotary motions take advantage to continuing kinetic energy built up in the flywheel effect greatly lowering the power requirement

Not sure I buy "immensely more complicated", locomotive action is very simple and used in massive machinery that runs for years. Also, the wear factor if it's an electrically operated saw would be much higher given the methods of power transfer. I could see a maintenance crew replacing contact discs every few days and dropping a leg would be potentially catastrophic to an electric motor. I can't tell, but if it's a pneumatic powered saw, then slightly less wear of the connections and seals and much simpler overall. The rotating motor takes considerably more space too, which isn't always a major issue. I think the way it's being held down would eliminate the issue of flipping up the plies of tissue during cutting. There's always more than one way to approach these things and neither is any more right. I imagine your design and mine would vary greatly but function equally well (well, maybe mine a little more equally than yours )

By the way, congratulations on #1 Tool Builder!! Just edged out rgsparber, way to go!

[Frank S]

Not sure I buy "immensely more complicated", locomotive action is very simple and used in massive machinery that runs for years. Also, the wear factor if it's an electrically operated saw would be much higher given the methods of power transfer. I could see a maintenance crew replacing contact discs every few days and dropping a leg would be potentially catastrophic to an electric motor. I can't tell, but if it's a pneumatic powered saw, then slightly less wear of the connections and seals and much simpler overall. The rotating motor takes considerably more space too, which isn't always a major issue. I think the way it's being held down would eliminate the issue of flipping up the plies of tissue during cutting. There's always more than one way to approach these things and neither is any more right. I imagine your design and mine would vary greatly but function equally well (well, maybe mine a little more equally than yours )

By the way, congratulations on #1 Tool Builder!! Just edged out rgsparber, way to go!

Agreed there are many avenues of design approach available for many cutting processes reciprocating or loco motion happens to be one of them either horizontally with a rotating blade or vertically as in a guillotine action would be a couple of ways. To achieve reciprocating motion other than a cylinder with valves there is usually a shaft with a connecting rod or arm mounted off center to the axis of a rotating member which could be direct mounted to the shaft of a motor or may require the need of some gear reduction depending on the capacity of the motor to be driven at the desired cycle rate. The same would also go for a rotary motion arm both in this instance would have a rotating cutting disk. having the cutting disk simply negates the requirement for any linier sliding activity which starts and stops at each end of the stroke the rotating cutter would never stop on either. For a guillotine device the blade would only have to have a rapid enough travel to slice through the stack of tissues cleanly However the cutting action is more brute force shearing than slicing. Another way would be to have a high speed wire or band cutter like a band saw still requiring a motor to power the blade plus a power source to move the blade in and out of the cut.
For this reason the system design shown is probably a good if not better trade off of most designs of one thing there is no pass through stop and return motion everything is in a continuous rotational motion. All of the above designs require a minimum of 2 separate power sources the guillotine excepted
But that is just how I see it.
As far as edgine out rgsparber for the #1 spot. Rick is one of in my opinion most respected tool makers we have he has made many very useful tools some of which I have saved the documents he published in my computer for future references as I have done for many other tools posted here

[Hoosiersmoker]

Agreed there are many avenues of design approach available for many cutting processes reciprocating or loco motion happens to be one of them either horizontally with a rotating blade or vertically as in a guillotine action would be a couple of ways. To achieve reciprocating motion other than a cylinder with valves there is usually a shaft with a connecting rod or arm mounted off center to the axis of a rotating member which could be direct mounted to the shaft of a motor or may require the need of some gear reduction depending on the capacity of the motor to be driven at the desired cycle rate. The same would also go for a rotary motion arm both in this instance would have a rotating cutting disk. having the cutting disk simply negates the requirement for any linier sliding activity which starts and stops at each end of the stroke the rotating cutter would never stop on either. For a guillotine device the blade would only have to have a rapid enough travel to slice through the stack of tissues cleanly However the cutting action is more brute force shearing than slicing. Another way would be to have a high speed wire or band cutter like a band saw still requiring a motor to power the blade plus a power source to move the blade in and out of the cut.
For this reason the system design shown is probably a good if not better trade off of most designs of one thing there is no pass through stop and return motion everything is in a continuous rotational motion. All of the above designs require a minimum of 2 separate power sources the guillotine excepted
But that is just how I see it.
As far as edgine out rgsparber for the #1 spot. Rick is one of in my opinion most respected tool makers we have he has made many very useful tools some of which I have saved the documents he published in my computer for future references as I have done for many other tools posted here

And let's not forget ultrasonic cutting although this stack might be thick enough to present a challenge. I've seen some very interesting applications for ultrasonics. With enough power, big enough transducer(s) and horn(s) you could line them up side by side and cut 8 or 10 rows at a time instead of 1. That was my thought with a linear cutting motion; several rows instead of one.

I probably have some of your tools on my computer too!