Successful router dust collection with CamVac

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

llywmog

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2022
Messages
65
Reaction score
40
Location
London
Posting this in case it's of use to somebody else. I wanted under bench dust extraction for the bench router so built myself an extraction box in which there is no trace of dust after routing.
It works pretty good with just one vacuum of the 286 running but is flawless with both. The additional Incra Cleansweep plates obviously make a difference too.

Incra Mast-R Life II with Cleansweep inserts
AUK router with external switch and speed controller which is mounted above the bench
Record Power CamVac CGV286-3-WALL
63mm dust extraction tubes and gates
Baffle box with sound insulating foam situated under the bench

The whole extraction system is working great with all tools: general vacuuming via dedicated gates for 50mm hose, bandsaw, planer, thicknesser, sander etc.
 

Attachments

  • VID_20230830_153100.mp4
    23.1 MB
  • IMG-20230830-WA0011.jpeg
    IMG-20230830-WA0011.jpeg
    953.8 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG-20230830-WA0013.jpeg
    IMG-20230830-WA0013.jpeg
    815.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Air flow is not needed for cooling, I had almost exactly the same set up with an old scheppach 1hp on 4" pipe, worked a treat for over ten years with no holes in it, holes are only needed to stop the suction from the work being moved over the cutter
 
Air flow is not needed for cooling, I had almost exactly the same set up with an old scheppach 1hp on 4" pipe, worked a treat for over ten years with no holes in it, holes are only needed to stop the suction from the work being moved over the cutter
My understanding is that holes are needed in order for the vacuum to operate. Without them the vacuum wouldn't work as it would have no air to suck which would force the vacuum motor to work harder - like when you put your hand over the suction end of a vacuum cleaner.
 
My understanding is that holes are needed in order for the vacuum to operate. Without them the vacuum wouldn't work as it would have no air to suck which would force the vacuum motor to work harder - like when you put your hand over the suction end of a vacuum cleaner.
You're right in saying a vac needs a source of air but without it the motor speed will increase because it's not doing any work, ie, moving air. The speed increases because there's nothing to stop it. Analogy, car speeding downhill with throttle closed; the engine is racing but it's not 'working' or even trying to.
Brian
 
Last edited:
The Camvac will be more than happy to work on just a 27mm pipe, everything cut against the fence will have more than enough room to work as it should, and when "trenching" as soon as the cut is made there is room for air flow as the cut piece is no longer there, the only time you are likely to be heating up the router is if you are cutting 100 mtr lengths continuously
 
Hi all, this is an interesting discussion. I am building up my new workshop. I have just finished my sound baffle box for my floor standing twin motor Camvac (it works a treat). It is mounted on the wall on the exhaust side of the vac.
20230901_133953.jpg


My next project is to build my router table. I have the same Incra/AUK set up as the OP (it is still in boxes LOL). I had planned to build a similar under the benchtop extraction housing but I hadn't planned on adding any extra air inlet holes into the box. As per the previous poster the Camvac is a HPLV vac and will work very well on small diameters whilst maintaining pressure. My assumption was that the Cleansweep inserts would be sufficient and actually give a more direct airflow. I.e. the extra air holes may provide a path of least resistance and bypass the inserts or at least reduce the airflow at that point? I guess it would be an easy task to test the theory by blocking the air inlet holes and see what happens. It would be interesting to find out and I am open to changing my plans LOL.
 
If you are going to do the same, gravity is your friend, put the pipe work on the bottom, and make it 100mm, oh and get a 100mm cyclone, cleaning out camvacs is not nice
 
If you are going to do the same, gravity is your friend, put the pipe work on the bottom, and make it 100mm, oh and get a 100mm cyclone, cleaning out camvacs is not nice
From my research and having used the CamVac with 100mm and 63mm hosing, I find it has better suction power with 63mm.
 
Ah now that would seem to be logical. There are 3 factors to consider; pressure, velocity and flow rate. If we assume the pressure is a constant, which I think we can in a HP system (to a degree), then the velocity is a function of the area. The Camvac flowrate is rated at circa 108 l/s at the inlet which is 100 mm. RP don't provide the pressure curves0. Assuming the flow rate is maintained then as the area is steeped down then ergo the velocity must increase, hence the better 'suction'. This logic is why I theorised about whether the additional air inlets would help or hinder.
 
Hi all, this is an interesting discussion. I am building up my new workshop. I have just finished my sound baffle box for my floor standing twin motor Camvac (it works a treat). It is mounted on the wall on the exhaust side of the vac.
View attachment 165624

My next project is to build my router table. I have the same Incra/AUK set up as the OP (it is still in boxes LOL). I had planned to build a similar under the benchtop extraction housing but I hadn't planned on adding any extra air inlet holes into the box. As per the previous poster the Camvac is a HPLV vac and will work very well on small diameters whilst maintaining pressure. My assumption was that the Cleansweep inserts would be sufficient and actually give a more direct airflow. I.e. the extra air holes may provide a path of least resistance and bypass the inserts or at least reduce the airflow at that point? I guess it would be an easy task to test the theory by blocking the air inlet holes and see what happens. It would be interesting to find out and I am open to changing my plans LOL.
It looks excellent, How did you build the sound baffle box, I have the same Camvac twin motor Vac and would like to build one like that, as you said it works a treat
 
I have a 2 motor Camvac and when it’s running 100mm hose on one motor all is fine, but run 63mm hose on one motor and the idle motor outlet allows air to be drawn in thus reducing the suction. I have fitted a homemade blast gate to the second motor outlet to shut it off when not in use, this increased the suction considerably when running just one motor.
I hope this is of some use.
 
It looks excellent, How did you build the sound baffle box, I have the same Camvac twin motor Vac and would like to build one like that, as you said it works a treat
I followed this design, although modified it to include two inlets and outlets (running via the same chamber) instead of one and had sound insulation on underside of lid too: Camvac silencer

There is also this method: CamVac noise reduction with a baffle tube
 
I have a 2 motor Camvac and when it’s running 100mm hose on one motor all is fine, but run 63mm hose on one motor and the idle motor outlet allows air to be drawn in thus reducing the suction. I have fitted a homemade blast gate to the second motor outlet to shut it off when not in use, this increased the suction considerably when running just one motor.
I hope this is of some use.
Thank's Jaydee, yes that is a great help
 
Back
Top