Toothed blades for bevel-down planes

[bugbear]

The only planes I've ever seen in the UK with toothing blades are toothing planes (!).

There seem to be two different and quite distinct uses for toothed blades. The common one (as far as I can ascertain from the research I've done) is in preparing groundwork for veneering. I've also seen references to their use by, for example, makers of musical instruments where they are working in thin, exotic timbers subject to tear-out.

What we saw at West Dean was their use in stock preparation, where you would use the blade in situations where a scrub-type or heavily cambered blade would normally be used - and the big advantage of the toothed blade is the lack of tear-out.

I had certainly not seen them used for this purpose in the past and haven't seen any references to this type of use in published material. Maybe that's why there seems to be a scarcity of bevel-down toothed blades - they simply weren't commonly used in the past for stock removal work.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

Agreed - stock prep with toothed blades seems to be that rarest of things - a genuinely new woodworking trick.

BugBear

 

[Paul Chapman]

Agreed - stock prep with toothed blades seems to be that rarest of things - a genuinely new woodworking trick.

And we read about it first on here \/ :lol:

 

[pam niedermayer]

Well, maybe it's a new trick in the UK, but several of us have been doing this for 6 or 7 years, at least. It was greatly facilitated by the toothed blade for the LN LAJ.

Pam

 

[Paul Chapman]

several of us have been doing this for 6 or 7 years, at least.

Even so, it has not acquired the status of common knowledge as far as I have been able to ascertain (although it probably has now ).

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

Well, maybe it's a new trick in the UK, but several of us have been doing this for 6 or 7 years, at least. It was greatly facilitated by the toothed blade for the LN LAJ.

Pam

Considering most technique's ages can be counted in centuries, 6-7 years is new, assuming we're talking serious stock removal.

The use of toothing planes to avoid tearout in difficult timbers under "moderate" stock removal, is of course one of the two main uses for toothing planes (the other being glue surface prep), and is not new at all.

These planes were always of the coffin type. I think the notion of toothed jack planes is rather new.

BugBear

 

[woodbloke]

If I recollect the traditional toothed blade in a coffin woodie had a 'v' shaped profile and scraped away the surface, blade usually set at some obscenely high angle. The blade we saw at West Dean look like a row of old battlements (I wonder if they have them in 'Murrica as well :-k) in other words, each tooth was like a small chisel so the cutting action is very different to the usual toothed veneering version - Rob

 

[Paul Chapman]

You are correct, Rob - the shape of the teeth on the LN blade are slightly different. The ones on my Kunz blade are more 'V' shaped. However, from what I recollect from trying out Deneb's plane at West Dean, the effective result of the two blades is very similar.

Details of the LN blades here http://www.lie-nielsen.com/?pg=4 The description confirms that the blades for bevel-up planes like Deneb was using have square teeth.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

Re: tooth shapes

(reposted from OLDTOOLS
http://swingleydev.com/archive/get.php? ... 89#message
)

I wrote of my hasty observations and guesses
of blades in my possession.

As it transpires, my first diagram was not very accurate,
but what I wrote/drew were enough to strike
a chord with the remarkable old tool knowledge
of Don McConnell.

He remembered a process that was a remarkably good fit
with what I'd presented, and went off to his library.

He found...

"A Treatise on Files and Rasps", published by the
Nicholson File Co., Providence, RI, 1878.

In it the following illustration:

Which is a remarkably good match with my second, more careful,
diagram of a toothing plane blade.

(Diagram of old toothing plane blade, upper is edge as seen, lower is perpendicular cross section of blade)

Don quoted text from the pamphlet as follows:

"In cutting files by hand, the operator is seated before an
anvil of special construction, which is mounted on a block;
the [file] blank to be operated upon, is, by means of the
feet, held down to the anvil by two leather straps, the
tang end of the blank being toward the operator. Wth a
chisel in one hand, held at the proper angles, and a hammer
of peculiar shape, in the other, he strikes his first blow
upon the chisel, which is placed at the point of the file;
this throws up a barb or ridge, extending across its surface.

"The chisel is then replaced on the blank, and is slid
up until it encounters the barb already made, when the second
blow is given, and so on, until the first course of teeth
is completed, so far as this face of the file is concerned."

Summary;
In conjunction with my observations of my blades,
it appears that we now have very good circumstantial
evidence to claim that we know how toothing blades
were made.

This may be genuine "reclaimed" lost knowledge

BugBear

 

[jonbikebod]

Well, maybe it's a new trick in the UK, but several of us have been doing this for 6 or 7 years, at least. It was greatly facilitated by the toothed blade for the LN LAJ.

Pam

Just to confound the historical confusion, the Stanley original #62 of the LN LA jack was never supplied with a serrated blade but the more utilitarian Stanley #64 butchers block plane was supplied with normal and serrated blades according to Patrick Leach. http://www.supertool.com/StanleyBG/stan9.htm
Of course that implies end grain at least was being worked with low angle jack planes nearly 100 years ago. So more a slow transition than new idea?
Jon.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Just a quick update on my bevel-down toothed blade. Despite setting the cap iron back I was still occasionally getting some shavings trapped between the cap iron and the blade. This was as far back as I could get it

So I decided to shorten the cap iron. A few minutes on the high-speed grinder had the job done. This is how it now looks. Nice long shavings and no more problems with them getting trapped

Still delighted with the blade. Excellent for removing lots of material with no tear out.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

This is how it now looks. Nice long shavings and no more problems with them getting trapped

Still delighted with the blade. Excellent for removing lots of material with no tear out.

Of course you don't get tear out; you're taking a fine cut

Here are some "shavings" from that task

BugBear

 

[Paul Chapman]

I use an axe when cutting up my logs for the fire :lol:

On the tear out, I also don't get any with much thicker shavings.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

I use an axe when cutting up my logs for the fire :lol:

Yes - that was also the preliminary tool for the piece I used

BugBear

 

[ydb1md]

You are correct, Rob - the shape of the teeth on the LN blade are slightly different. The ones on my Kunz blade are more 'V' shaped. However, from what I recollect from trying out Deneb's plane at West Dean, the effective result of the two blades is very similar.

Details of the LN blades here http://www.lie-nielsen.com/?pg=4 The description confirms that the blades for bevel-up planes like Deneb was using have square teeth.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

For their bevel down planes, LN makes a toothed blade for no4 & no5 planes. For their bevel up planes, they make a toothed blade for the low angle jack.

 

[bugbear]

Following Paul's impressive dem of his Kunz equipment Record #07 at DaveL's bash

https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/view ... ork#292750

I went away and renewed some enquiries.

Both Salaman (Dictionary of tools) and Dunbar (Restoring, Tuning & Using Classic Woodworking Tools) only speak of two uses for a toothing plane; roughing a surface for glueing (discredited by modern research into glue action AFAIK), and stock removal without tearout.

However, they are clearly talking about the traditional coffin bodied tool with a near vertical blade, and the cutting action (in Dunbar's photos) is only removing dust, albeit quite rapidly.

I can find no reference to the use being discussed here, which is with near-45 effective pitch, and taking a substantial cut.

The nearest is the ECE toothing plane, with bedding angle 70°;

http://www.ecemmerich.com/metallhobel.html

(or http://www.fine-tools.com/divhob.htm which claims 75° ; I also
note the spare blade at € 17.30, which would be a nice fit for a philly plane)

Perhaps the continental European traditional is different.

Anyhow, since I own 3 coffin bodied toothing planes, I though I'd photograph the tooth shape:

The teeth are 17 tpi for the top two, and 16 tpi for the bottom photo.

BugBear

 

[Paul Chapman]

Thanks for that additional information, BugBear - very interesting 8)

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

Thanks for that additional information, BugBear - very interesting 8)

Cheers :wink:

Paul

I was having so much fun googling and photographing that I forgot
something important that I thought of last night.

When having the unending debate on BU vs BD, it's fairly self evident that as far as the cutting edge of the blade is concerned, it doesn't really matter, since both facets (bevel and back) of the blade are polished.

(although Brent Beach's diagrams showing wear on top and bottom of a blade may give you pause...
http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpe ... 0wear.html
:shock:
)

However, in the case of a toothed blade we have a DEFINITE difference in nature between the bevel and the back, and depending on the BU/BD configuration the teeth are either on the top or the bottom (opposite the bevel, obviously ).

It seems likely that there would be differences between the cutting actions of a toothed blade BU vs BD, although I have no idea what these differences would be.

BugBear

 

[Paul Chapman]

It seems likely that there would be differences between the cutting actions of a toothed blade BU vs BD, although I have no idea what these differences would be.

I think it would be necessary to try out the BU and BD blades side by side. I had a go with Denib's BU Lie Nielsen at Westonbirt and, from what I can remember, the cutting action was very similar to my BD blade.

There is another difference. The toothing on his BU blade was square shaped whereas on mine it's triangular.

The bottom line is that both blades do the job very effectively, so I think any differences would be minimal.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[bugbear]

The bottom line is that both blades do the job very effectively, so I think any differences would be minimal.

Not so, at least at the level of "how". It is quite feasible that the two blades have differing actions (the how), but generally similar results (the what).

I readily acknowledge that many people are only interested in the "what".

BugBear (interested in the how)

 

[MIGNAL]

Time to resurrect this thread seeing as I'm now in possession of a toothing blade.
Actually mine is an old Peugeot feres and is quite fine at some 25 TPI. It appears as though the teeth are more like the square profile rather than V shaped. They don't seem to come to a sharp peak although it is possible that someone has tried to flatten the back, somehow I get the feeling this has not been the case.
I could barely get the thing sharp or working effectively. I simply could not remove the burr despite many attempts on soft and hardwood. In the end I resorted to a very slight back bevel using a 8,000 waterstone. That really did improved matters although I still think it could perform better.