OldTools Archive
Recent | Bios | FAQ |
121275 | Andrew Midkiff <annarborandrew@y...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
I hope people reply to the list as I'm sure I'm not the only other person interested in this. I've seen several books that talk about this, but I'm still interested in hearing first-hand accounts. Andrew --- "John R. Wilson" |
|||
121269 | "John R. Wilson" <luddite@t...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Help with dimensioning stock |
I am currently working on a 7 shelf and double raised panel cupboard in the shaker style. It will be used by a local artist to store her work in progress. The hard maple stock I am using is 5/4 with rough faces and edges. The wood looks nice but it is center cut and may cup if I mill it thin (7/16 or less). I intend on working the material down by hand because I need to reduce the carcass sides to 1 inch or 15/16 thick. I have a full stash of old and new bench planes from #1 to #8 and scrapers to match the widths of most of my bench planes. I own a scrub plane (#40) and some large owner made woodies (I'll show you sometime when I get the courage). My question is basic --- If I was in a hurry I would reduce the stock with my loud dusty portable power planer --- How do I do it with hand tools? My benches are both western (with end vise and dogs) and European (two front vices, no holes, no dogs, good support jack for edge work. The maple is without twist, cup or wind, but it looks like I will be removing at least 3/16 material from over 75 board feet of stock! I am looking for suggestions for jigs, methods, etc. Any good suggestions will be attempted and appreciated. So far I have squared and smoothed the edges of 4 - 50 inch boards and the satisfaction was worth the effort. For the faces of the boards I will need a good systematic old tools solution. How did the venerable old wood grubbers do it? Rex Wilson |
|||
121280 | T&J Holloway <holloway@n...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Rex and All-- After reading this query a couple of times, I'm a little confused (not all that different from my permanent condition, I'll admit). The rough stock is 5/4, and must be taken to 4/4 or a little less (15/16). That sounds like the amount to be removed is more like 5/16 than 3/16. In contemplating this much dimensioning of lumber with hand tools, the difference is significant, if only in the amount of grunt labor involved. But back to basics: Several procedures will probably work, but the time-honored process, with no jigs other than bench dogs and end vise/dog or similar device to secure the piece, is incorporated in the FEWTEL acronym: Face, Edge, Width, Thickness, End, Length. Details are as follows: 1) Make one Face of the board flat and smooth. This becomes the 1st reference surface. I would do this mostly with a jack plane, or jumbo jack (Stanley #5 1/2), or a #6 foreplane. The surface is not "final," just removing the sawmill roughness and getting it even and reasonably flat. No scrubbing yet. This is where you try to take out any wind (long I sound, not blowing air) or twist, or convexity along the length, or other deviations from "reasonably flat." Winding sticks can be useful here. 2) Make one Edge square to the smoothed face, and straight ("jointed"). This is the 2nd reference surface. 3) Rip to Width, and square and joint the second edge, using the 1st face for square reference and the 1st edge for width reference. At this point, you use a marking gauge to scribe lines along both edges, from the 1st reference surface, just short* of the thickness you want to achieve. (Just short, because you'll be planing down *to* that line. If you plane past the mark you've made, you have no way of telling where you are, in reference to the thickness you want, short of repeated use of caliper gauge, mullet, or similar.) 4) Plane to desired Thickness. This is when the fun, or work as some used to call it, begins. Now is the time to put your scrub plane (#40 or a wide-mouth jack with heavily cambered grind on the iron) to use. Use diagonal strokes, full across and working evenly along the whole surface, alternating the diagonal directions of each pass. You want to keep an eye on where the edge of each pass comes out at the edge, in relation to your scribed mark, and don't try to get to close to it with the scrub. When hogging off wood like this, it is easy to go too far. When your scrubbing approaches the line, switch to the same jack or foreplane you used to smooth the 1st reference face, and continue working the surface, now removing the ridges left by scrubbing, until you are just down to (but not past) the scribed thickness mark. In the final stages, check the mark frequently. It is easy at this stage, making nice long passes with a sharp plane, for one or more corners to be reduced beyond the line, where you don't want to go. 5) When the thicknessing is complete cut one End square. 6) Finally, cut to Length. Your dimensioned board is complete. A couple of othr hints: If you will need to glue up panels or make one wide board from two or more narrow ones in the course of your project, I would suggest leaving the stock slightly thicker than the final dimension, and work it on down to desired thickess (with a finer set, approaching final smoothing) *after* the panels are glued up. With dimensioning by hand, there *will* be some small irregularities in thickness that are best worked out after edge jointing and glue up, that you need to allow for. Others can chime in regarding use of a 'mullet' to check thickness and other ancient practices, but this should give you a place to start. Good luck, Tom Holloway On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 07:04 AM, John "Rex" Wilson wrote: > I am currently working on a 7 shelf and double raised panel cupboard > in the shaker style. It will be used by a local artist to store her > work in progress. The hard maple stock I am using is 5/4 with rough > faces and edges. The wood looks nice but it is center cut and may cup > if I mill it thin (7/16 or less). I intend on working the material > down by hand because I need to reduce the carcass sides to 1 inch or > 15/16 thick. I have a full stash of old and new bench planes from #1 > to #8 and scrapers to match the widths of most of my bench planes. I > own a scrub plane (#40) and some large owner made woodies (I'll show > you sometime when I get the courage). My question is basic --- If I > was in a hurry I would reduce the stock with my loud dusty portable > power planer --- How do I do it with hand tools? My benches are both > western (with end vise and dogs) and European (two front vices, no > holes, no dogs, good support jack for edge work. The maple is without > twist, cup or wind, but it looks like I will be removing at least 3/16 > material from over 75 board feet of stock! I am looking for > suggestions for jigs, methods, etc. Any good suggestions will be > attempted and appreciated. So far I have squared and smoothed the > edges of 4 - 50 inch boards and the satisfaction was worth the effort. > For the faces of the boards I will need a good systematic old tools > solution. How did the venerable old wood grubbers do it? > > Rex Wilson |
|||
121286 | Bill Kasper <dragonlist@i...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
actually, tom is going to be bringing some 6/4x12"x20' hard, curly maple stock down to 4/4x11"x6' at the bagathering on the 6th...using occam's razor and a copper hammer*. bill felton, ca *right, tom? On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 11:30 AM, Nichael Cramer wrote: > T&J Holloway wrote: >> Rex and All-- >> [...much snippage, regretfully done...] > > For those just learning to do this, I would suggest that the > one thing comparable to Tom's totally excellent essay would > be to actually _see_ a master doing this work. And for this > I would most heartily recommend getting your hands on a copy > of Jim Kingshott's "Bench Planes" tape, which covers this > material in great detail. > > N > > Archive: http://www.frontier.iarc.uaf.edu/~cswingle/archive/ > To unsubscribe or change options, use the web interface: > http://galoots.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=oldtools > |
|||
121282 | cantos@s... | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
I would like to second that please. As well, if anyone has information on making a set of winding sticks, type of wood, if there is a recommended size, etc. I know this is a necessary part of this process, but haven't had much time or luck in finding detailed information. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Midkiff |
|||
121289 | Brent Beach <brent_beach@t...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Tom provides the basics of the stock preparation business with hand tools. I am sure most of us work pretty well to this scheme. I would add a couple of points and ask a question. 1 I work against a stop, rather than between stops, so the board is free to move during planing. This requires that the ends be close to square to the length first. It also means that the sides have to be roughly square to the faces. 2 I would cut the boards down to the rough length first - long boards are harder to plane than shorter boards. 3 I prefer to do each step (as outlined by Tom) to all the boards before moving on to the next step. 4 The question. Do people use the mullet method? It seems to me that having a good line on the edge and planing down to that line is much better. I work the scrub to a few scrub thickness of the line, then the jack to a few jack shavings of the line, then the smoother. The last smoother stroke removes the top of the mark (an ideal I shoot for, but never achieve for the full length of the board, but at this point the shavings are pretty thin so the errors small.) Near the end I can flip up the board and see how I am doing along the full length and react (remove the high spots) accordingly. If the first thing you do is remove the gauge marks it seems to me it must be much harder to check your progress. Aside from the big ideas in dimensions stock (face, edge, ...) I think some of these smaller ideas are also important and would be interested in other's approaches to these details. Brent T&J Holloway wrote: > ... > 1) Make one Face of the board flat and smooth. This becomes the 1st > ... > Others can chime in regarding use of a 'mullet' to check thickness > and other ancient practices, but this should give you a place to start. |
|||
121293 | T&J Holloway <holloway@n...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 11:53 AM, Bill Kasper wrote: > actually, tom is going to be bringing some 6/4x12"x20' hard, curly > maple stock down to 4/4x11"x6' at the BAGathering on the 6th...using > occam's razor and a copper hammer*. > bill > felton, ca > > *right, tom? Well, no, Bill. I have a couple of froes laying around the place, and I was gonna let you dimension the piece in question with froe and club, for the edification of those assembled. Scott Grandstaff is all set to supply the brake. Alternatively, I've trained my border collie dog to dimension stock with his teeth, thus avoiding the "scrub plane" stage. It's quite a show. Tom |
|||
121294 | T&J Holloway <holloway@n...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 12:40 PM, Brent Beach provides some amendments: > 1 I work against a stop, rather than between stops, so the board is > free to move during planing. This requires that the ends be close to > square to the length first. It also means that the sides have to be > roughly square to the faces. I was trying to avoid taking Ian Kirby's name in vain in this discussion, but it seems to me that when dimensioning rough stock it is a major advantage to be able to secure the piece in such a way that it can be worked without worrying about it sliding around. Conversely, I see no advantage to leaving the board "free to move." Even with a Kirby-style stop-only bench, it is fairly easy to rig up a simple system to keep the workpiece in one place. For example, put the piece against the stop, and at the other end, clamp a lath or board thinner that what is to be planed, close to the end of the workpiece. Use a scrap about as wide as the bench, and secure it with a short bar or C clamp to each edge of the bench. Then use a narrow wedge to close the space between the lath and the end of the workpiece, thus securing it between lath and stop. If the bench is even more Normitic, with just a plain flat surface, two such clamped cross-pieces, with one wedge, can make it Galoot-compatible, without resorting to nailing blocks to the top of the bench, boring dog holes that you don't want to have to explain to the Normite next door, or other brutality. To anticipate a detail that has come up before: securing a workpiece for planing (with time-honored vise-and-dog, wedges, or similar systems), does *not* imply squeezing it to the point of bowing or distorting. It just means "securing." > 2 I would cut the boards down to the rough length first - long boards > are harder to plane than shorter boards. > I will certainly agree with this. Not *final* length, but within an inch or so of what the final dimensions will be. Same goes for width, for that matter. Leaving the rough cutoffs unplaned not only saves work, but leaves them to be used in a different way on a different day. Tom Holloway |
|||
121283 | Nichael Cramer <nichael@s...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
T&J Holloway wrote: >Rex and All-- > [...much snippage, regretfully done...] For those just learning to do this, I would suggest that the one thing comparable to Tom's totally excellent essay would be to actually _see_ a master doing this work. And for this I would most heartily recommend getting your hands on a copy of Jim Kingshott's "Bench Planes" tape, which covers this material in great detail. N |
|||
121295 | Bill Kasper <dragonlist@i...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
ah. use the froe on the wood and the club on my head...lol. occam's razor, indeed. see you next weekend... bill felton, ca just say tom has one very, very well trained board, er, border collie... On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 01:50 PM, T&J Holloway wrote: > > On Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 11:53 AM, Bill Kasper wrote: >> actually, tom is going to be bringing some 6/4x12"x20' hard, curly >> maple stock down to 4/4x11"x6' at the BAGathering on the 6th...using >> occam's razor and a copper hammer*. >> bill >> felton, ca >> >> *right, tom? > > Well, no, Bill. I have a couple of froes laying around the place, > and I was gonna let you dimension the piece in question with froe and > club, for the edification of those assembled. Scott Grandstaff is all > set to supply the brake. > Alternatively, I've trained my border collie dog to dimension stock > with his teeth, thus avoiding the "scrub plane" stage. It's quite a > show. > Tom |
|||
121284 | "Steve from Kokomo" <stjones@k...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
GGs; > As well, if anyone has information on making a set of winding sticks, > type of wood, if there is a recommended size, etc. I know this is a > necessary part of this process, but haven't had much time or luck in > finding detailed information. An alternative to winding sticks that I learned here on the Porch requires a single spirit level and maybe a shim: (1) Place the board on the bench and shim a corner as necessary until the level placed across the end is level. (2) Place the level across the other end. (3) If it's level, there's no wind; if not, you can easily determine the amount of wind by lifting the end of the level away from the bubble until it centers. This approach has three advantages: (1) it's much easier on old geezer eyes; (2) the spirit level can't develop any distortions as wood sticks can; (3) since it's a one-piece solution, you don't have to keep two sticks together. Of course, a spirit level may not be as sexy as a nice pair of winding sticks; you'll have to decide for yourself. OTOH, this approach may provide a use for that fine Davis or Starrett level just sitting around your shop. Steve - another Kokomo galoot |
|||
121285 | Louis Michaud <louis_michaud@u...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Tom's basics: >repeated use of caliper gauge, mullet, or similar.) > 4) Plane to desired Thickness..... At this point I like to add a bevel on the thickness that will be removed. The gauge mark is the lower edge of the bevel and the bevel goes all around the piece. It's a great visual reference, you don't have to bend all the time and look for the gauge mark, and it helps prevent tearout along the edges when you're going at it in diagonals with a scrub plane. The bevel gets narrower and narower as you get close to the final thickness. Don't remember where I picked this up, Wearing? Hope this helps. Louis Michaud Rimouski, Quebec |
|||
121297 | Scott Murman <smurman@s...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
>> repeated use of caliper gauge, mullet, or similar.) >> 4) Plane to desired Thickness..... > > At this point I like to add a bevel on the thickness that > will be removed. The gauge mark is the lower edge of the > bevel and the bevel goes all around the piece. > Louis Michaud how do you avoid tearing out when you put on a bevel across the grain? seems like an opportunity for much wailing and lamenting of the women* to put a cross grain bevel on a piece using a roughing jack plane. * obligatory Arnold quote required of all California residents. -SM- RWC, CA |
|||
121300 | Kirk Eppler <keppler@g...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
I've got a Veritas Bench, and I created two stops to scrub against. Each is about 1/2" tall. One is 2 holes long, the other is 3 holes long. Since the dog holes are symetrical I can alternate which goes where. I create an L, and just push in to it. For reversing the scrub, I move one stop to the other end, and keep going. I also created something similar to a softdog, which is a 3/4" dowel with a thin piece of UMHW on top, for the really thin stock. I take the muzzles off the Veritas dogs, and push them as far down into the bench as needed, but have yet to plane against them for anything less than 8/4 stock, being basically a coward about having to grind out big nicks with my hand grinder. There great for clamping, or holding for sawing or chiseling or.............................. Veritas Bench at http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.asp?page=31152&cate- gory=1,41637&ccurrency=2&SID= Andy Wilkins wrote: > I'm interested in you working against a stop. I've seen another galoot > do this too, but it's never worked for me - the board skips over the > stop, or slides sideways or something. Maybe my planing method isn't > smooth enough? But how on earth does the stop hold the job when you're > scrubbing (at roughly 45deg)? - must be awfully annoying, no?! > > Does anyone else curse their "Veritas Wonder Dog" when doing thin > pieces? Too many times have i heard a "bang" of steel against steel, > rather than the "swish" of steel planing wood - the plane has taken a > bite into the dog's top (which appears to be made of steel).... i wish > they made a version that sits closer to the bench. -- Kirk Eppler Global Mfg Science and Technology Eppler.Kirk@g... |
|||
121304 | "C N Schwartz" <kjworz@c...> | 2003‑08‑28 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
-----Original Message----- how do you avoid tearing out when you put on a bevel across the grain? seems like an opportunity for much wailing and lamenting of the women* to put a cross grain bevel on a piece using a roughing jack plane. * obligatory Arnold quote required of all California residents. ------------------------------ No tearout at 45degrees to the grain. None at 90degrees either. Not really. You're not going against the grain, you are going across it. Otherwise you could never make a raised panel. In this way I 'crush my wood fibers and see them driven before me * ' That said. Be careful with the scrub plane as it can take a bigger bite than you expect. Yank a divot right out of there. Especially around contrary grain. This is why I don't get TOO far to the gage line. I also bevel the edge as a cheap for a topside indicator of how close I get. That way I don't have to squint. I don't bevel RIGHT to the gage line. That way I can get the jack, plane of the rest and still get that whisker when I switch to a finer plane. Like the Pit-Bull Stunning Jointer. |
|||
121312 | "Jeff Gorman" <amgron@c...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
: -----Original Message----- : From: Steve from Kokomo [mailto:stjones@k...] : Sent: 28 August 2003 19:47 : To: oldtools : Cc: oldtools@c... : Subject: [oldtools] Re: Help with dimensioning stock : : This approach has three advantages: (1) it's much easier on old geezer : eyes; And on the knees, although the exercise could be beneficial! Also in my shop, there's limited space between the ends of the bench and the wall. One snag is that the tested surface does have to be flat (or concave), otherwise the level can rock. For those who might be interested, I did some work on the geometry of twist that is now on my web site. Please look under 'Planing Notes' - 'Coping With Twist'. (I fear that the formatting of the text could do with some improvement). Jeff -- Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK Email: amgron@c... http://www.amgron.clara.net |
|||
121299 | "Andy Wilkins" <andy.wilkins@c...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Dear All, There's no way i use any "mullet", Brent. I'm interested in you working against a stop. I've seen another galoot do this too, but it's never worked for me - the board skips over the stop, or slides sideways or something. Maybe my planing method isn't smooth enough? But how on earth does the stop hold the job when you're scrubbing (at roughly 45deg)? - must be awfully annoying, no?! I clamp between dogs and vice, etc. But for very thin long strips i screw their end to a piece of wood which i then clamp to the end of the bench and plane away from the clamp. (That reminds me - if any galoots have got small children, it's very easy to replicate the "Thomas and Friends" wooden railway tracks - you can even buy stock that's basically already dimensioned (42mm x 13mm), for the straight ones and "risers" (steam bend the wood) anyway.) Does anyone else curse their "Veritas Wonder Dog" when doing thin pieces? Too many times have i heard a "bang" of steel against steel, rather than the "swish" of steel planing wood - the plane has taken a bite into the dog's top (which appears to be made of steel).... i wish they made a version that sits closer to the bench. a Brent wrote, amongst other things: > 1 I work against a stop, rather than between stops, so the board is > free to move during planing. > 4 The question. Do people use the mullet method? It seems to me that > having a good line on the edge and planing down to that line is much > better..... |
|||
121319 | Louis Michaud <louis_michaud@u...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Hi Scott, >how do you avoid tearing out when you put on a bevel across the grain? OK, maybe tearout is not the correct word. Blow out, splinters, divots ? In difficult hardwood this occurs sometimes along the edges when using a scrub and planing along a diagonal. The bevel is planed along the edges "with" the grain first, then planed on the cross grain edges. No blow outs at the ends. I use the bevels mainly for a visual reference. I can scub/plane a lot faster without having to bend and squint at the gauge lines. Insurance against blow out is secondary. The final plane strokes, along the grain, with a #6 or #7 bring it to the final thickness. Best, Louis Michaud Rimouski, Quebec |
|||
121322 | John Lederer <john@j...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
I more and more find that my "techniques" simply compensate for my errors and inadequacies. I have lots of strips of hardwood with dowel legs that fit in my dogholes that I use as stops. I shim them so the top of the strip is the thickness I want on the stock and use them as a visual indicator (and a bit of a jig, |
|||
121323 | "Foster, Jim" <james.foster@e...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
>=20 > Dear All, >=20 > There's no way i use any "mullet", Brent. >=20 > I'm interested in you working against a stop. I've seen another > galoot do this too, but it's never worked for me - the board skips > over the stop, or slides sideways or something. Maybe my planing > method isn't smooth enough? But how on earth does the stop hold > the job when you're scrubbing (at roughly 45deg)? - must be awfully > annoying, no?! >=20 When I'm doing this I clamp a side stop at a right angle to the=20 end stop, so I've got a 90deg corner that the work butts against. This keeps the work from running away when going diagonally.=20 Jim Foster Minnesota |
|||
121333 | Dean Roehrich <roehrich@s...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
>From: T&J Holloway |
|||
121336 | Brent Beach <brent_beach@t...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
Andy Wilkins wrote: > I'm interested in you working against a stop. ... > Does anyone else curse their "Veritas Wonder Dog" when doing > thin pieces? I inset a dado into my bench top, about 1/4" deep and 1" wide, and screwed an 8" long 3/4" wide stop into the slot. The 1/4" width difference leaves a little room in the front of the stop for sawdust and shavings to collect for easy removal. The stop is about 1/4" above the bench top. The dado comes right out to the edge of the bench so I don't have to lean across the bench when planing. The top of my planing bench is a sacrificial piece of 2x8 western red cedar - softer than all the wood I work with. I intended it to be sacrificial, but 6 years on I am still using the first piece. Every couple of years I plane off the top few shavings to renew the surface. For very thin stuff, I replace the standard stop by one that is thin enough to allow the stock to be planed. When making the sliders for my plane iron sharpening jigs, where I have to plane down to 0.06", I use a stop that is about 0.10" above the bench top, and put various thickness stuff (usually scrapers) under the thin strips as the thickness gets near the goal. In this case I do not mark the sides of the stock, but use a vernier calliper as a mullet. Use your hardest wood for a stop that only meets the work in 0.04" or so, and countersink the screws in the stop. One problem with a thin stop is that very tall stuff tends to tip over the stop. I have found that just putting an intermediate sized piece of wood (piece of 2x4) between the work and the stop prevents this. This piece just rests against the stop. Brent |
|||
121340 | T&J Holloway <holloway@n...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
On Friday, August 29, 2003, at 04:17 PM, Brent Beach wrote: > I inset a dado into my bench top, about 1/4" deep and 1" wide, and > screwed an 8" long 3/4" wide stop into the slot. The 1/4" width > difference leaves a little room in the front of the stop for sawdust > and shavings to collect for easy removal. The stop is about 1/4" above > the bench top. An interesting solution. I did something similar, by adding a board across the end of my bench, hanging on hanger bolts that are inserted horizontally. The board, of the same maple as the bench itself, has diagonal slots by which it hangs on the bolts protruding from the end of the bench, secured by wingnuts. Its height is thus infinitely variable from even with the benchtop (ie, out of the way) to about 3/4" high, at the flick of a wingnut. Easier to use than describe. It's what I often plane against when not engaged in scrubbing or otherwise rough stock dimensioning. I thought Ken Greenberg had a picture of his version of this device on his website, but I can't seem to find it there now, and I don't have a website of my own to refer to. Tom Holloway |
|||
121341 | T&J Holloway <holloway@n...> | 2003‑08‑29 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
I said: >> I was trying to avoid taking Ian Kirby's name in vain in this >> discussion, but it seems to me that when dimensioning rough stock it >> is >> a major advantage to be able to secure the piece in such a way that it >> can be worked without worrying about it sliding around. Then on Friday, August 29, 2003, at 12:53 PM, Dean Roehrich wrote: > Seems I recall that Kirby has stated, in both books and magazine > articles, > that he uses only a #7 jointer and a #4 1/2 smoother. I take this to > mean he > doesn't dimension rough stock with hand tools. You are correct. And that's what I was trying to imply, without getting beat on for appearing to direct criticism at my betters. I agree that it is good convergence of forces when you can accomplish what you want by planing only against a stop. But I can't agree that such a system is adequate for scrubbing/rough dimensioning. And what Galoot could agree that all you need is two bench planes? Tom Holloway |
|||
121343 | "Jeff Gorman" <amgron@c...> | 2003‑08‑30 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
: -----Original Message----- : From: Brent Beach [mailto:brent_beach@t...] : Sent: 30 August 2003 00:18 : To: oldtools : Subject: [oldtools] Re: Help with dimensioning stock : I inset a dado into my bench top, about 1/4" deep and 1" wide, and : screwed an 8" long 3/4" wide stop into the slot. The 1/4" width : difference leaves a little room in the front of the stop for sawdust : and shavings to collect for easy removal. The stop is about : 1/4" above : the bench top. Hitching onto Brent's post (apologies for the pun), the following is from 'Planining Notes' - 'Fundamentals' on my web site, where alongside you will see a drawing of a temporary equivalent to Brent's device. A particular frustration when planing wide work is the need to constantly shift the job so that your plane always aims at the bench stop. If you don't, the work will slew around and probably clatter onto the floor, inevitably landing on a corner. The back edge of the blade of the planing stop must, of course, rest against the bench stop. Make the stock with a slightly tilted upper surface. When fitting in the vice, you will need to press the 'stock' downwards to form a bit of springiness that will hold it flat against the bench top. Jeff -- Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK Email: amgron@c... http://www.amgron.clara.net |
|||
121369 | "Ken Greenberg" <ken@c...> | 2003‑08‑31 | Re: Help with dimensioning stock |
On 29 Aug 2003 at 19:42, T&J Holloway wrote: > An interesting solution. I did something similar, by adding a board > across the end of my bench, hanging on hanger bolts that are inserted > horizontally. The board, of the same maple as the bench itself, has > diagonal slots by which it hangs on the bolts protruding from the end > of the bench, secured by wingnuts. Its height is thus infinitely > variable from even with the benchtop (ie, out of the way) to about 3/4" > high, at the flick of a wingnut. Easier to use than describe. It's > what I often plane against when not engaged in scrubbing or otherwise > rough stock dimensioning. > I thought Ken Greenberg had a picture of his version of this device on > his website, but I can't seem to find it there now, and I don't have a > website of my own to refer to. It's there, but not in an obvious place - projects other than furniture, which includes the bench. http://www.calast.com/personal/ken/other.htm It's the second project down, just below the Shaker stepstool, and there's a thumbnail of the stop Tom is talking about - click on it to make it bigger. Unfortunately, one of the downsides of a poplar benchtop is that the hanger bolts used to attach this seem to not hold well at all. Any impact against the stop (even from positioning a board) will worsen the situation, and eventually you reach the "threshold of disengagement" and the thing falls on the floor. I have not had the stop attached in the new shop, but I really like the solution since I work with thin stock when I'm building what I want to build. (This hasn't got much to do with what I've built lately.) So I'm thinking that some sort of threaded insert with a corresponding screw would be better for me. I kind of miss the little bugger :-). -Ken Ken Greenberg (ken@c...) 667 Brush Creek Road, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 woodworking page: http://www.calast.com/personal/ken/wood.htm |
|||
Recent | Bios | FAQ |