Plane Making

[Anonymous]

...a

 

[Anonymous]

...b

 

[Philly]

PeterPan
Hold on a sec-excuse me if I missunderstand you.
You are saying a jointer (or hand plane with a long sole) is NOT necessarily better at planing a flat surface than a smoother (plane with a shorter sole).
You sure about this?
And that a long soled plane does NOT help when trying to make a surface "flat"?
I appreciate that the natural tendancy of a hand plane is to plane a slightly convex surface, hence the "couple of swipes thru the middle" practise. And that springing a joint is a well used method of jointing edges (is this because of the convex curve a plane introduces??), but my experiences have shown that a longer soled plane will cut a flatter surface than a shorter soled one when preparing timber.
I understand that if you machine prepare your timber before final prep with a plane you only need a smoother (or super-smoother, David Charlesworth style) as the flattening has been performed (hopefully) mostly by the machine. But a longer soled plane gives a flatter surface.
Now please tell me I totally misunderstood you :roll: :lol:
Cheers
Philly

 

[Anonymous]

...f

 

[engineer one]

knew i would regret this, my head is spinning :-({|=

but i do remember the past telling me that the best joint, and one
which would stay stuck together was the so called "rubbed joint"

in my view modern glues may make this a better joint for
stopping end cracks than springing, because the stresses are
greater, but they benefit from the two boards to be joined
being rubbed together to properly spread the glue.
this works even better with the "never used" biscuits :lol:

but where this helps in making the wooden plane i am not sure. :lol:
paul

 

[Philly]

PP
So you don't think longer soled planes are any help when it comes to planing a surface or edge flat. You believe that it is down to the skill of the user and that any plane can be used for that. Correct?
I do agree that having a jointer plane does not guarantee a result and that the users skill and judgement need to be used to produce the results you are after. But a beginner will have a flatter piece of timber if using a jointer plane to do this than using a smoothing plane. And why is the jointer plane in the toolbox of every Master cabinetmaker I could name? Are they all just misled by marketing?
You say you don't think hand planes are indexed for flattening work-I thought that was the reason for their existence? Could you elaborate?
(PP, I am so near to wanting to believe what you are saying because you obviously are talking a lot of sense, and I'm really enjoying this discourse. I hope I'm not putting your nose out by "arguing" )
Cheers
Philly

 

[Alf]

knew i would regret this, my head is spinning :-({|=

You and me both. This is one of the best arguments for forgetting the theory and just doing the job that I've ever read. :lol:

1) Accuracy, the longer base is more accurate;

2) Spans more bumps.

It spans more bumps, ergo it's more accurate I'd have thought.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Shady]

I'm with Alf here: Peter, you write with confidence, and obviously know what you're doing, but I'm gonna stick with using my jointer to make long jointing surfaces... All getting too circular for this bear of little brain.. :?

 

[engineer one]

this is obviously a case where too little knowledge is a good thing
and too much dangerous :lol:

i think it is a case of sticking with what works for you, and as your
confidence expands you can try other things, but rather like
breadboard ends, it also depends upon what you are making. :wink:
paul

 

[ByronBlack]

Here's some newbie experience for you:

When I was at the bruce luckhurst course recently, we spent the majority of the first 3 or 4 days planning wood to size, and flatness.

I used a scrub, no.5 and a jointer, and guess what? It was much much easier to get a flat surface with the plane that had a longer sole! Also when I was preparing edges for glueing, again the jointer prepared the best edge for a good good line, when using the no.5 it was much harder.

For me that is enough practical evidence to tell me that you use a jointer to create nice flat glue surfaces for edge-jointing.

We also practiced the technique for spring-jointing, but in my short-experience (guitar building, and panel-making) a standard flat-edge joint has always proven to be strong joint - and was created with a jointer.

 

[Anonymous]

....

 

[MikeW]

...On the other hand, a lot of people making a buck will joint the wood on the planer, and still hand plane it with a jointer plane for a better joint. There are no bumps on the machined surface, except for the tiny ripples from the blade action, and these could certainly be removed with a smoothing plane if that was the point, yet many craftsmen hand joint the edge. It isn't in order to span the bumps! Touché!

It isn't? Guess I've been leading a deluded life.

My opinion, fwiw, is that a machine jointer cannot make as straight a board as I can with the old Ohio #8. At least up to 8 foot. Which is one [minor] reason why I sold my PM 54A.

Look, my goal in edge joining boards is to be able to balance to boards on edge and with a clamp at one end--right near the end--is to squeeze the boards and not have the other end lift off. I then try it from the other end. And if I can see light in the center I plane it out. And I use a square to check that the boards line up across the faces.

Guess you can tell I eschew sprung joints :lol:

Ok, cranky is going back out to the shop.

Mike

 

[Anonymous]

....

 

[Philly]

You say you don't think hand planes are indexed for flattening work-I thought that was the reason for their existence? Could you elaborate?

PP
You seem to have not seen this question? Any details?
Philly

 

[MikeW]

The fact it planes in spring does not mean you have to use it. In your example you could have dropped all the clamping and unclamping, just planed the spring in and backed it out, no fuss no measuring. I would probably not do that on an 8 footer because it sounds like work, with a 22 inch plane.

Even if a board over that distance appear to not be sprung (due to sag even on an edge) doesn't mean that it is either sprung or that there is a hump. The clamp will reveal it. Takes mere minutes. I waste more time getting another cup of coffee.

But then, what's the point of planing it in and back out? That's rhetorical. No need to answer.

SNIP

I do wonder how they did it in old shops when they didn't use clamps. I would have done it as I describe, cause you can carry on a conversation, and never need take the plane out of your hand. Works for seminars too. But I don't know how it really was done.

You assume clamps didn't exist in the old shops? Must be really old shops. They've existed for longer than I've been able to trace my ancestors.

The second half of your paragraph makes no sense.

But, I'm tired. It's night-night time for me.

Take care, Mike

 

[Anonymous]

I've removed the offending posts.

 

[Scrit]

...On the other hand, a lot of people making a buck will joint the wood on the planer, and still hand plane it with a jointer plane for a better joint. There are no bumps on the machined surface, except for the tiny ripples from the blade action, and these could certainly be removed with a smoothing plane if that was the point, yet many craftsmen hand joint the edge. It isn't in order to span the bumps! Touché!

I'll hold my hand up to "post planing" with a jointer here. I suppose it's tradition to use a jointer, maybe something in the back of my head is saying that having just used a planer with a long infeed table (in my case 1.2 metres, but some machines are available with 2m or longer) it may well introduce inaccuracies to then shoot the edge with a smoother. But I tend to do my planing and thicknessing in longish sessions, sometimes 3 or 4 hours worth and planing the edges gives me a fresh edge to glue which I am told by the glue manufacturers will produce a better bond (something to do with oxidation, free radical migration, etc - another debate :roll: ) In the small shop with a short bed planer the use of a jointer plane may well produce a straighter joint than the machine itself can, so post planing has its merits in certain instances. Maybe I should change over to one of those Japanese straight line planers so in vogue in the 1970s and early 1980s in the USA and "cut-out the middle man"? Robinson's of Rochdale et al were making their precursors in the 1850s, but I think I'd have a problem finding one now!

My opinion, fwiw, is that a machine jointer cannot make as straight a board as I can with the old Ohio #8. At least up to 8 foot. Which is one [minor] reason why I sold my PM 54A.

I find that rather curious. If I have it correct a Powermatic 54A has a 33in infeed table (66in overall table length), making 9 inches it longer than your Ohio #8 jointer plane (assuming that the Ohio plane is the same length as the Stanley, Record, Sargent, et al). Yet the Powermatic cannot produce as straight an edge? Please explain.

Surely one of the points to come out of this discussion is that glues (and therefore cramping techniques) have changed radically over the last 150 years. Modern glues are far superior to hide glues in almost every way, although I still don't like having to wear a respirator when mixing and using UF glues (fortunately the arrival of D3 cross-linked PVAs will probably see an end to this). Modern T-bar cramps can squeeze a joint dry if so required, and I can "spot weld" a joint with the RF glue curer to free the cramps for the next glue-up in a few minutes, so sprung joints are really an anachronism. They are a throw-back to the days of pinch dogs which will only work properly if the joint is sprung. I suppose if you were so inclined you could argue that a sprung joint if clamped from the centre outwards will maintain a better joint than a straight joint. Modern glues are not designed to be gap filling, so ideally you are looking for the least amount of gap between the two surfaces to be glued - and it probably matters little if that edge is straight or banana shaped, so long as the joint produced is tight. Having to pull up a joint up under heavy cramping is asking to squeeze out the glue, thus starving the joint, and is possibly introducing (unnecessary) extra stress into the joint into the bargain.

Scrit

 

[ByronBlack]

PP

Just because some of us in this discussion don't hold the same opinions of yourself, doesn't mean you should throw your toys out of the pram and 'remove the offending posts', there's nothing offensive about them, and not only does it ruin this thread for a future reader, but you have given us information - whether right or wrong (doesn't matter) that may benefit someone.

I hope that you can continue to contribute as it makes interesting reading AND discussion for all.

Scrit - I agree with you regards the sprung-joint, in this age of adhesives/glues there doesn't seem a real 'need' to create them, the joints i've created with perfectly squares edges and no-spring have all been super strong and succesful.

 

[Alf]

Well I've been musing on the sprung joint thing over night and starting to wonder why I do it. There are two things that seem to make it worth doing, at least as far as I'm concerned. Firstly, the DC argument. That is a slight hollow is preferable to a bump (see David Charlesworth DVD Part 2: Hand Planing). Secondly, it seems to me to make clamping up panels easier; get one clamp across the middle and it naturally springs the ends together. Now that may just be what I want to perceive, and I'm currently looking into hot glue more seriously and at the delicate negotiation stage over some Planos with TPTB so that'll likely change my habits anyway, but at the moment, that's my excuse. Er, argument.

Cheers, Alf

 

[Scrit]

Well I've been musing on the sprung joint thing over night ....
.... it seems to me to make clamping up panels easier; get one clamp across the middle and it naturally springs the ends together....

You'll find that even if (sorry when) you get your Planos you'll still be tightening from the centre outwards in order to "roll" the pressure line out consistently. My theory, anyhow :lol:

Scrit