Pane sole Flattening

[bugbear]

PS pleased to see that my suggestion of a magnet has caught on so widely!

Whose suggestion?! :shock:

Your first post including the word magnet:

post515917.html?hilit=%20magnet#p515917

2010.

My first post including the word magnet:

post132461.html?hilit=magnet#p132461

2006.

Common knowledge on OLDTOOLS back in 2000.

http://swingleydev.com/archive/get.php? ... t_thread=1

And here, in 1997, the Late Jack Kamishlian mentioned it.

http://swingleydev.com/archive/get.php? ... 30#message

Still, it IS a good idea, well worth promoting.

BugBear

 

[bugbear]

I go for flat instead of cosmetically perfect.

Having got the sole flat using coarse grit, getting it shiny (if you want to) is really quick. Just work through finer grits on a small block, same as sandpapering wood. The finer grits won't substantially alter the flatness.

BugBear

 

[D_W]

I agree, but running the burrs off with some fine sandpaper is definitely quicker.

I can imagine that the deal to run through the grits would be cosmetic, because increasing friction and decreasing any surface area that could hold wax wouldn't be a great idea. To get a surface cosmetically perfect to 400 grit or so is a tall order (though it's pleasing to the eye). Even tall on 220, and it requires cosmetically good after 80 grit, or it looks funny.

 

[D_W]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP74IuFljY

Have a look at the speed of lapping that I'm talking about, Jacob. About 11:30 in this video. used sandpaper (but still fast cutting).

I don't do this often, but I did it and recorded it because so many people spend time filing frogs and all kinds of other nonsense not required to set up a stanley plane.

I did it because I dropped another 4 and replaced it because I broke the wood on the other (fortunately, that's all the damage it too, but I like 4s enough that it doesn't hurt to have a couple).

The only thing I wish I would've done in the video is prepared the piece that was being planed (spur of the moment) and flattened out the initial camber with a second sharpening on the iron (something that naturally occurs in use).

I could've spent another minute or minute and a half on this plane getting the entire sole shiny (there's darkness left in the middle), but it was good at the ends and around the mouth, so I didn't do that.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Does a smooth, polished surface have more friction than a surface finished with a coarse abrasive and then 'flashed over' with a finer one to take the peaks off?

In engineering practice, a smoother surface is usually a lower-friction one, and a rough surface is regarded as poor practice. That generally applies with or without lubrication.

I'm not trying to start a war here, I genuinely am not sure whether good engineering practice applies in the case of a plane sole working over a wooden workpiece.

 

[Jacob]

Does a smooth, polished surface have more friction than a surface finished with a coarse abrasive and then 'flashed over' with a finer one to take the peaks off?

In engineering practice, a smoother surface is usually a lower-friction one, and a rough surface is regarded as poor practice. That generally applies with or without lubrication.

I'm not trying to start a war here, I genuinely am not sure whether good engineering practice applies in the case of a plane sole working over a wooden workpiece.

Try it and see.
I realised it when I bought a new plane many years ago which was fairly coarse ground but in straight lines parallel to the sides. When first used it felt as though it was on rails. I thought it was faulty but before I got around to doing anything I realised it had self corrected after a bit of use - the sharpness had worn off.
The point is - the points (the tops of the ridges) aren't rough if they've been dulled down and polished up by use or fine grit, so the surface making contact isn't rough even though the scratches are still deep.

 

[Sgian Dubh]

No need to spray mount if you use thin paper-backed abrasive, wet. It really is much easier and much flatter.

I don't use thin paper backed stuff, so sticking down heavy paper backed abrasive works for me. I'm sure your method works fine too. Plane sole flattening, I'm sure we can agree, isn't a particularly challenging or involved task, and doesn't take long, even if the plane sole is badly concave to begin with, assuming the job starts with a suitably long and aggressive (coarse) abrasive paper held firmly to a flat surface.

No need to polish it serves no purpose.

I did say much the same. Slainte.

 

[D_W]

Does a smooth, polished surface have more friction than a surface finished with a coarse abrasive and then 'flashed over' with a finer one to take the peaks off?

In engineering practice, a smoother surface is usually a lower-friction one, and a rough surface is regarded as poor practice. That generally applies with or without lubrication.

I'm not trying to start a war here, I genuinely am not sure whether good engineering practice applies in the case of a plane sole working over a wooden workpiece.

What jacob said - the peaks aren't rough to begin with, except if you use them straight from the coarse paper and don't do anything to knock the burrs off (even then, the effect is only transient).

I couldn't say for certain what's what, but on the smooth polished planes I've used, friction is the highest. I don't know if I have two of the same weight to compare, though.

Also, the highest friction I've experienced has been with premium metal planes. I couldn't say for sure if it's the flatness or the polish that causes the problems. I can say that I've never noticed any detriment in a coarsely sanded and then burrs removed type of plane, they aren't the planes I have where I notice the friction the most.

All of them work well with paraffin wax scribbled on the soles.

 

[Jacob]

I had a Record 5 1/2 from new (1980 ish) which I'd been using for years. A visitor picked it up and said "look at the dog rough finish on the sole of this typical 1980s etc etc". I'd never noticed. True it wasn't shiny polished but it was very low friction without a doubt.
And ditto the shiny premium plane high friction - it might just be the excessive weight!

 

[Zeddedhed]

Maybe its not friction at all.
I'm no physicist but I've often noticed that two smooth flat surfaces together are hard to move. Two panes of float glass for example. Lay one flat on the other and then try and slide the top one without touching the edge (just the top) - it can sometimes seem as though it's stuck there.

On the other hand maybe I'm talking pea's.

 

[Jacob]

Maybe its not friction at all.
I'm no physicist but I've often noticed that two smooth flat surfaces together are hard to move. Two panes of float glass for example. Lay one flat on the other and then try and slide the top one without touching the edge (just the top) - it can sometimes seem as though it's stuck there.

On the other hand maybe I'm talking pea's.

Not bowlox at all it has a name: "stiction"

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Oxford Dictionaries - Flexures provide quasilinear translation without stiction and friction, but flexure-based-translational motion is inherently arcuate.

Got that? :? :lol:

 

[Zeddedhed]

I knew that. 8-[

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Maybe its not friction at all.
I'm no physicist but I've often noticed that two smooth flat surfaces together are hard to move. Two panes of float glass for example. Lay one flat on the other and then try and slide the top one without touching the edge (just the top) - it can sometimes seem as though it's stuck there.

On the other hand maybe I'm talking pea's.

No, you're not talking peas. If anybody is familiar with engineering slip gauges (Johansson gauges, slip blocks, Joey blocks, etc) they'll know that small blocks of metal can be 'wrung' together face to face with quite amazing holding power. The matching faces need to be lapped VERY flat and VERY smooth to achieve that, though - a very different proposition to even a nicely-polished plane sole.

For what it's worth, I don't know the answer. I did once have (still got, somewhere...) a very rough-soled Record plane that to me at least always seemed a bit 'grippier' than smoother-soled planes. It's a long time since I've used it, though.

Since I don't have two metal-bodied planes of equal size with differently finished soles, I can't do a proper trial. One thing mentioned that I do wholeheartedly agree with is that a bit of candle-wax or beeswax on the sole of almost any metal plane reduces the effort of pushing the plane quite noticably, though the effect doesn't always last very long, for me at least.

It's not really a big issue, though. Planes with smooth or linished soles both work; a plane sole would have to be REALLY rough to stop it working at all! It was just idle curiosity as which was 'slicker'. Jacob - as always - was very quick to give us his opinion (several times), and it seems a couple of others hold much the same view. I must admit to being not wholly convinced, but I'll have to dig out the old Record sometime and try for myself.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Oxford Dictionaries - Flexures provide quasilinear translation without stiction and friction, but flexure-based-translational motion is inherently arcuate.

Got that? :? :lol:

Jacob will be along shortly to tell you why that's all wrong. :lol:

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Where exactly do corrugated soles fit into this discussion? If a perfectly polished sole has less friction ...
Are a dozen large corrugations significantly different to a couple of hundred small ones?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Where exactly do corrugated soles fit into this discussion? If a perfectly polished sole has less friction ...
Are a dozen large corrugations significantly different to a couple of hundred small ones?

Good question. I've never owned a corrugated sole plane, so can't speak from experience. I do recall reading a couple of forum posts, possibly on SMC, by someone who said he'd tried both and couldn't tell the difference, but that's only one opinion.

 

[Jacob]

Oxford Dictionaries - Flexures provide quasilinear translation without stiction and friction, but flexure-based-translational motion is inherently arcuate.

Got that? :? :lol:

That's what I've been saying all along!

 

[Jacob]

...
For what it's worth, I don't know the answer. I did once have (still got, somewhere...) a very rough-soled Record plane that to me at least always seemed a bit 'grippier' than smoother-soled planes. It's a long time since I've used it, though.....

Luckily I do know the answer, bin there dunnit: if you used the plane for long enough ( a few hours praps) it'd soon be slipping along like a dose of salts.

 

[bugbear]

The point is - the points (the tops of the ridges) aren't rough if they've been dulled down and polished up by use or fine grit, so the surface making contact isn't rough even though the scratches are still deep.

So if you polish something rough, it becomes smoother, and slides better.

Keep the revelations coming, oh wise one. :roll:

BugBear