LAS - can anyone help?

[Alf]

actually, good point, should you have a cambered blade on a bevel up plane, except at the very corners to relieve them??? :roll:

Why not? Just needs more camber than bevel down to compensate for the lower bedding angle. On the plus side, it's very easy to get the slightest camber for smoothing.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

I feel the 20ish degree bedding angle is more suitable for high angle EP and type 2 shavings, as the bed is stiffer and the sharpening angles more convenient.

If one wanted to build a bevel up plane dedicated entirely to fine finishing of impossible woods one might wish to experiment experiment with a 30 degree bed? A home made Krenov or Gordon style plane like this might be an interesting experiment...........

Hi David

For BU planes, notably those designed for smoothing where the cutting angle is high (60 degrees and better), I only see benefits for a higher bed, preferably 25 degrees. I think that 30 degrees leaves fewer choices, but certainly would represent a dedicated smoother for difficult surfaces.

A 25 degree bed is a compromise to permit cutting angles of 50 - 65 degrees (using a bevel of 25 - 40 degrees - compare that with the 38 - 53 degrees needed with the current crop of 12 degree beds), which I think make honing an edge easier, provide an edge with greater penetration (i.e. sharper), and will leave a reasonable wear bevel.

So far I am getting a terrific performance from the 25-degree bed, BU smoother I recently built (out the the Stanley #3 shell).

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[David C]

Derek,

And of course the next question is;

"do you feel any difference between bevel up plane with 60deg EP and bevel down plane with 60deg pitch, i.e. Terry Gordon"?

best wishes,
David

 

[engineer one]

derek and david what about camber on bevel up?????

does it have real value or not? :twisted:

paul :wink:

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

And of course the next question is;

"do you feel any difference between bevel up plane with 60deg EP and bevel down plane with 60deg pitch, i.e. Terry Gordon"?

David

That is an excellent question. And I cannot provide a definitive answer since I do not have planes that are identical save for their bedding arrangements.

I do expect the only difference experienced (assuming all other factors are equal) would be in the area of centre of gravity (the BU has a low C of G, while the BD has a high C of G). Of course, the Gordon is quite a low plane compared to 19th Century coffin smoothers.

When I use a smoother like the Gordon on Aussie hardwoods, I take very fine shavings (.001" or less). There is not much resistance experienced when planing. Ditto the Stanley BU as it is set up as a finish smoother. So they both feel very similar in this context.

Food for thought.

derek and david what about camber on bevel up?????

does it have real value or not?

Methinks Paul is stirring the pot!

I will leave this one to David, only to note that I use a small amount of camber on all my smoothers, including BU. The BU ones require more camber than the BD planes for the same effect. This is due to the different angle at which the cambered edge enters the wood.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Methinks Paul is stirring the pot!

I will leave this one to David, only to note that I use a small amount of camber on all my smoothers, including BU. The BU ones require more camber than the BD planes for the same effect. This is due to the different angle at which the cambered edge enters the wood.

Methinks Paul can't read - I already said that. :lol:

Cheers, Alf

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Apologies Alf - methinks Derek can't read!

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Alf]

Well I didn't like to say*... :wink:

Thinking about this higher bevel up bedding angle thing (which I'm also of a mind would be a Good Thing for those persons who have frequent need of high effective angles) - well exactly how low a bedding angle can one sensibly make in wood? It would be kinda fun to have a go, but 30° might be a bit high to start with (would even that be too low for the wood anyway?) and I really don't want to get into making infills just so I can try... :roll: Just speculatng, mind. 90% of things I think would be "kinda fun" never see the light of day.

Cheers, Alf

*Whereas obviously I have ab-so-lute-ly no compunction about being rude to a self-confessed engineer. Nay, even see it as my duty... :wink:

 

[David C]

I will third the advice from both Derek & Alf, camber is almost always a good thing, and you will need more on the low angle planes for the wood to "see" the same shape as it does on a regular 45 deg bench plane.

Try looking at a coin or round disc when it is vertical, tilted 45 degrees and then 12 degrees.

Alf,

I think a chap called David Fink, ex Krenov student who has written a book has made wooden planes at 30 deg pitch or even lower, but can't absolutely confirm without checking.

David

 

[dedee]

Steve,
If you are after very fine W&D then http://www.abrasivesplus.com (CSM Abrasives) do a 1500, 2000 & 2500 in a mixed pack of 10 for £7.99

Product Page


Andy

 

[Alf]

This 'un? Ack, someone witha copy please take pity and kindly check for me, would you? Save me from setting foot on the wooden-planes-and-how-to-make-them-book-buying Slope 8-[

In fear of imminent collapse of bookshelves, Alf

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

It would be kinda fun to have a go, but 30° might be a bit high to start with (would even that be too low for the wood anyway?)

Alf

30 degrees is a doddle! I made a woodie with a 15 degree bed (used BU, of course :lol: ). It is Jarrah and I designed it as a chamfer plane. I have used it over a period of about 5 years and it shows no signs of wear.

The butterfly nut is deliberate as this enables very quick adjustment to the depth of cut. I have one LA iron for end/cross grain and one HA iron for edge/face grain

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[engineer one]

gee alf i like to offer you some easy targets occassionally :twisted:

i guess having seen and understood dc's cambering on bevel down i could understand but did not see same with bu, so thought to ask the question

one question though, who designs tools, engineers or woodworkers :lol:
is that why they all have to be modified. :roll:

although my personal view is that in most cases these days, all tools are designed for big companies by accountants :lol: :lol:

paul :wink:

 

[Alf]

Now, Derek, I said wood, not those iron deposits you have Downunder that some joker put false leaves on and called "trees"... :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[David C]

Alf,

John M Whelan's book, Making Traditional Wooden Planes,

Astragal Press, ISBN 1-879335-69-7 shows "two typical American mitre planes" on page 44.

These are presumably something like Beech and are bedded at 32degrees.

However I think he is referring to bevel down as he states, "the iron chosen for any low angle plane must be ground at an angle that is more acute than the pitch of the bed (except for certain metal soled planes equipped with bevel up irons).

Any way, Dereks splendid chamfer plane suggests that 30 deg. bevel up is viable.

On checking more carefully I don't think Finck shows any bevel up planes.

David

 

[Alf]

Ah right, so 30° we definitely think is okay. Derek, using upsidedown wood reckons 15°. I reckon, given I don't want a super high angle (in this purely hypothetical situation) that an EP of 50° would make most sense to me. How low can I take the bevel on, say, a "spare" A2 blade I might have about the place without it sulking on me? O1 can go a bit lower methinks? Could be looking at trying a 25° bedding angle perhaps... :-k Purely hypothetically mind you. 8-[

Cheers, Alf

 

[Philly]

Flicking through Perch and Lee's "Wooden Planes and how to make them" I found a plan for a low angle plane with the bed at 17.5 degrees......in wood.
Cheers
Philly

 

[Alf]

Must be something in the air.

Cheers, Alf