As mentioned last week, we will be conducting independent testing on Bosch OSC114C oscillating multi-tool metal-cutting blade and two competitors’ blades.
Here, in Part 2 of the series, is an outline of the oscillating tools that will be used to conduct testing, and the measurement tools that will used to collect data.
In case you missed it, check out the Project Overview first. The Overview (Part 1), discusses what will be tested and why. This post is the first part of how they will be tested.
Advertisement
Oscillating Multi-Tools
Bosch MX30E
Bosch’s MX30E is their latest corded oscillating multi-tool. It features a variable speed motor, OIS blade interface, and quick-change blade holder.
Power: 3.0A
Speed: 8,000 – 20,000 OPM
Oscillation Angle: 1.4° L/R, 2.8° total
Buy One(via Amazon)
Dewalt DWE315K
Dewalt released their DWE315K multi-tool a few months ago, so it’s only been on the market a short time. Following release of the multi-tool, Dewalt introduced a new line of universal oscillating multi-tool blades and accessories.
Advertisement
The quick-change holder works best with Dewalt blades, but other brands’ blades can be used with the included non-quick-change adapter. The Dewalt tool is unique in how it has a variable speed trigger instead of a speed selection dial.
Power: 3.0A
Speed: 0 – 22,000 OPM
Oscillation Angle: 1.6° (presumably 3.2° total)
Buy One(via Amazon)
FMM 250Q MultiMaster
Fein’s 250Q MultiMaster features a quick-change blade holder and is an absolute pleasure to use. This is the oscillating multi-tool I purchased for personal use back in 2011 (it was the “Start” no-frills package), and I have absolutely no regrets.
Power: 250 Watt (~2.0A)
Speed: 12,000 – 21,000 OPM
Oscillating Angle: 3.2° total
Buy One(via Amazon)
Test & Measurement Tools
GoPro Hero 3+
A GoPro Hero 3+ video camera will be used to capture video footage as the blades-under-test are used to cut through various materials.
Time stamps extracted from video footage will be used to provide time of cut data.
Buy One(via Amazon)
Mitutoyo Micrometer and Calipers
Mitutoyo 0-6″ calipers (500-196-20 or 530-312) and 0-1″ micrometers (293-340) will be used to measure blade thickness and other blade dimensions of potential interest or relevance.
Buy One: Vernier Caliper, Digital Caliper, Micrometer
(Links are to Amazon purchase pages for the same models we own and will be using.)
Flir E4 Thermal Imaging Camera
A Flir E4 thermal imaging camera will be used to measure blades’ temperatures and temperature profiles following individual or multiple series of cuts.
A borrowed video-capture-capable thermal imaging camera, thermocouple-based temperature meter, or infrared thermometer might also be used.
Buy One(via Amazon)
Fluke i30 Hall Effect Current Clamp
A Fluke i30 Hall Effect current sensor will be used to noninvasively measure current draw of tools that are being used with the blades under test.
Motors draw more power when under heavier loads. This means that current measurements could potentially be used for time of cut measurements, and also to verify that one blade is not being pushed harder than another during testing.
Additionally, power draw could indicate comparative efficiency of different blade and tool combinations.
Here is a discussion about the dilemma surrounding whether the i30 would be suitable or not.
This might not actually work as intended, so power draw measurements are not an official part of the test just yet.
Buy One(via Amazon)
Extech Line Splitter
An Extech line splitter will be used so that the Fluke current clamp can measure current and power draw of the corded oscillating multi-tools noninvasively and without requiring disassembly and modification of the tools.
Buy One(via Amazon)
Agilent 34461A Digital Multimeter
An Agilent 34461A multimeter will be used to log current measurements via the Fluke i30’s voltage output. The i30 outputs 100 mV for every 1.0 A of measured current.
A second multimeter might be used to periodically verify power line voltages.
Buy One(via Amazon)
Other Tools
A stopwatch – and possibly a triggered timer – will be used for rough time of cut measurements.
A dSLR camera with macro lens (50mm or 100mm) will be used to photograph blades after being tested, and possibly between cuts. Additional photo or video footage will be captured as needed.
Additional tools and accessories will be used, but these are the major measurement and supporting tools that will be used to collect and capture data.
Table of Contents
Part 1: Comparison Overview
Part 2: Testing & Measurement Tools (Current Page)
Part 3: Test Setup Optimization
Part 4: Final Test Setup
Part 5: Best Cutting Speed
Part 6: Cutting Performance
Part 7: Durability
Javier
WOW! You are taking tool testing to a whole ‘nother level. You don’t mess around. I wonder if Bosch is getting scared of the degree of accuracy your tests will reveal.
Good job in advance Stuart! You might have to open up a new business venture, ToolGuyd Labs
Adam
I am very excited to see the results of you testing Stuart, I am sure you will do an excellent job of avoiding bias and give us a fair and balanced comparison. It would not be very constructive criticism though if I didn’t mention that I feel it would be nice to see some comparison on some more variables that play a role in blade selection in a real world situation. I work as a finish carpenter and there are times I choose a blade based on the finish of the cut for example. These tools are used in tight places and I will spend more if it saves me time going back and cleaning up a cut to get it paint ready.
Also I can appreciate the thought going into measuring the voltage draw of the tool, yet I can’t see the relevance of it in any real world situation. I use power tools everyday to make my living and have for many years. When it comes to power tools I have never once based my choice of picking up one brand over another based on the power it draws. I was wondering if you could elaborate in your report on what role this may play for someone who uses these items in a daily situation. Not to say that there isn’t a value to such data, the more the better in all cases, I just don’t feel it would ever affect a purchase choice for me personally.
Also I would love to see some comparison data on materials used in the construction of each tool. I know this comparison is about blades and that may be limited but for any future comparisons I would love to know about materials used in construction of the tool, types of plastics and such.
I hope this is constructive feedback and taken as such and I don’t mean to offend. I just feel like you have the skills for a comparison I would find useful and is more then just a review that uses lines like “feels” or “powerful” and gives me the real data.
Thanks
Adam
fred
Adam:
Like you I’ve been buying tools for many years (over 40) and derived much of my living from my – but mostly others – use of the tools I’ve bought. At one point I looked at amperage rating of tools, like saws and heavy-duty drills, as a better indicator of power than the manufacturer’s claims about horsepower. I also paid some attention to this – when buying tools for use on residential jobsites – where a 20 Amp draw might not work out so well. the same went for tools that I knew would be subjected to line-drop at the end of a long extension cord.
Not wanting to second-guess Stuart – but maybe a difference in an oscillating tools’ current draw (one blade to another) in the exact same testing conditions – would tell something about a blade’s cutting efficiency.
Stuart
Yes, that’s exactly along the lines of what I was thinking of!
Stuart
“Cut finish” is definitely something I plan to look at, but interpretation of results might be difficult.
Regarding power, lower current draw often means less load, which means easier work for the tool. I aim to look at power draw as a potential backup means to measure cut time, but if I’m taking the measurements anyways, I may as well look at other ways it can be used to describe or compare the blades being tested.
Ease of cut is a property Bosch wants looked at, but this is a largely subjective factor based on feel. What I am thinking is that power draw might reinforce or reject any feelings with hard quantitative data. Or the data might be too confusing so as to be unusable.
If the same power tool with Blade A cuts a nail in 4 seconds with 180 W of power draw, and Blade B cuts also cuts a nail in 4 seconds but with 250W of power draw, it could mean that Blade A provides greater ease of use. Maybe Blade A is sharper. Maybe its tooth profile is better. That’s why I think this will be an interesting aspect to look at.
As mentioned, it’s also a check to ensure fairness. If Blade A cuts through a nail in 8 seconds and Blade B takes 15 seconds, the current and power draw could potentially tell you whether the test was fair or not. if blade A was pushed through with 10 pounds of force and blade B with 2 pounds of force, the power draw profiles will look quite different when using the same tool.
TJ
Maybe I missed it but will all the tools be tested with all the blades for cross comparison purposes?
Stuart
Yes; 3 tools x 3 blades = 9 total combinations.
Bill K
Stuart, how will you document or consider the exertion or applied force variable?
Stuart
I am experimenting with a test fixture, and will know this week as to whether it produces repeatable and consistent results. Otherwise testing will be done completely manually.
Bill K
Love your work, Stuart! Your fixture could provide constant force & measure feed rate or constant feed rate and measure force. (Wouldn’t it be nice to have an Instron for this.)
Stuart
The fixture, if I can get it working as intended, will use small weights and gravity to control feed rate. I considered using a power feed, but don’t think the added complexity would provided any benefit.
Bill K
Constant force does seem to make the most sense, especially if the cut times are significantly different between blades.
Hang Fire
That picture… who really cuts off a copper pipe flush with a floor? That’s pretty much admitting defeat on just removing it altogether, isn’t it?
fred
There are occasions when you need to trim tubing/pipe at or even below floor level to accommodate certain styles of decorative escutcheons. The old Ridgid 102 internal (wheeled) tubing cutter did just this task – with a clean cut. I don’t think that it was a big seller – and is probably not available anymore – but I know a guy (me) who has one. Ridgid’s larger cousins to this tool (#108 and #109) – part No’s 83240 and 83290 are much more useful for trimming shower drains at or below floor level – a much more common task than trimming small diameter copper pie/tubing.
http://www.amazon.com/Ridgid-83240-Internal-Tubing-Cutter/dp/B0019MPFK8
skye
I’m really looking forward to this. I have been enjoying your website lately quite a bit. I am a finish carpenter and project manager for a residential remodeling company in Portland Oregon. Thank you for putting in so much effort, I’ve been telling my friends about your website.
Brock
This looks like a very interesting study! Has there been any updates? Or preliminary results?