plane technique

[engineer one]

so having finished the top of my workbench to take my veritas bench dogs, i decided to hand plane a pice of 40x40 oak about 1200 long.

being dumb i decided to get rid of the bows first.

clamping between two dogs i was able using my LV No6 fore plane, bevel down, and eventually get it flat on the concave side, by starting at each end and working back to the middle, then eventually running the whole length. i am sure i can speed up with practice, and a decent smooth surface. finished it off with my LV 162 BU . of course the problem is finding a proper straight edge which is long enough. because the stock is 40 wide i believe that i have kept the plane square.

then on to the opposite side, to get rid of the convex , that really is a PITA.
firstly ensuring that the stock is flat on the table, then deciding where to start. (if only the stock was 80 wide it would make good tapered legs :lol: )

to start with i used a 1200 spirit level and marked where the curve was most prevelant and then planed away from that. still using the no 6. getting decent shavings but not complete all along so it is obviously rocking a little.

so the next question is how do you hand plane a number of separate pieces to the same thickness/width or is the beauty of hand work that all the pieces are not quite to the same accuracy of a machined piece?

i do understand gauging, but am just wondering how we ensure that each piece is planed to the same point on the gauge mark. :?

oh its english oak by the way. well seasoned in my workroom. so i hope it won't move any more but still. :roll:

paul :wink:

 

[mr]

Shouldn't there only be one point on the gauge mark? I guess it may depend on whether you have pin or blade. If blade and the blade bevel is up (towards the waste) then isn't there a "flat" line which is the one point you're aiming at ?
In reality though I guess a vernier might always measure different thicknesses.

With regards to a straight edge that's long enough I'm not sure I understand what you mean but isn't your bench flat enough for that sort of thing? (and / or the edge of your no 6)?

Cheers Mike

 

[Bainzy]

so the next question is how do you hand plane a number of separate pieces to the same thickness/width or is the beauty of hand work that all the pieces are not quite to the same accuracy of a machined piece?

I've just been reading 'The Handplane Book' by Garrett Hack that arrived today (fantastic book, worth it's weight in gold), and he mentions that when planing several boards there will always be a slight discrepancy as regards to thickness, and the book takes you through the process of planing to thickness, jointing (in this case with simple butt joints), and then recommends planing again after the pieces are joined together. If you're not joining them together, maybe you could clamp them together temporarily, but either way good technique and proper use of a marking gauge should get you pretty damn close anyway.

 

[engineer one]

mike, sorry i did not make myself clear, there is a thiokness to a gauge mark, and depending upon how aggressive you are i think you might hit it at the top, middle or bottom on each piece.

as for the other point about re-planing when you join, i guess that is the whole point about thicknessing as it were.

the problem with a number of single pieces that are for instance going to be table legs, is holding them all together to get the final thicknesses.

interesting thought though. now must check out another garrett hack book :roll:

paul :wink:

 

[Paul Kierstead]

Yes, for glue ups the glue up rarely goes perfectly (machine or handwork); ok, I have never had a glue-up go perfectly. I leave them a hair oversized and finish plane in the end. The downside of this is that if your glue up is not all in the same direction, grainwise, it can be quite a bother to plane; you'll need a very sharp plane with very light cuts. You could also, of course, sand or scrape. Or both.

 

[JesseM]

ok, I have never had a glue-up go perfectly.

I am in the process of building a laminated plane and I built a prototype just to see how it would go and found the same problem with glue up. So I built another and used guide dowels this time and glue up is absolutely no problem. Don't know if its reasonable on something as large as a table top, but it prevents shifting.

 

[Paul Kierstead]

ok, I have never had a glue-up go perfectly.

So I built another and used guide dowels this time and glue up is absolutely no problem. Don't know if its reasonable on something as large as a table top, but it prevents shifting.

I have never used dowels, but have used biscuits quite a few times; they can get you very close, but you can still feel (and see) a bump here and there. It is certainly possible dowels are more accurate, might be worth a try.

 

[Paul Chapman]

the problem with a number of single pieces that are for instance going to be table legs, is holding them all together to get the final thicknesses.

If you have your bench top drilled to take Veritas bench dogs and pups (as you said in your original post), then it should be quite simple to clamp all the pieces together on the bench top and to take a few final shavings to bring them all to the same thickness. Preferably you will have drilled several rows of dog holes so that you can clamp the pieces across the width as well as along the length? But when doing this, ensure that the grain direction on each piece is pointing the same way so that you don't get any tear out.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Alf]

Paul, to what level of accuracy are we talking about here? You can get away with murder on say, a set of table legs, because they're far enough away from each other not to notice. But a couple of clamps to hold them together while you plane them to "match" is perfectly feasible. If you want more accuracy you just need to take finer shavings as you approach the gauged line. Charlesworth's Hand Planing DVD is a pretty good visual explanation on how to go about it for accuracy to point something something if that's what you have in mind.

On the whole though, I think you need to consciously think to yourself "this is not precision engineering" before you start. Enjoy the wood, rather than the reading on the vernier calipers. Of course if the caliper bit is what gives you satisfaction then fair enough, you crazy engineering type... :roll: :wink:

Cheers, Alf

 

[engineer one]

thanks again alf, as you say it is important to get a little away from the engineering mind set.

if it was engineering, i would have a surface block, and then put engineers blue on it and rub the pieces on the block to get the colour transfer, etc.

my bench at this time is pretty flat, but i prefer to hold the wood up to the light and see any problems, bending down over the bench, and hoping to see the light is not for me.

i guess the only other concern is that if each piece is not the same thickness, then when making stretching pieces, you get some other difficulties, but i guess then, that is what my shoulder planes are for :lol: :lol:

after the plane advice, section, i thought re peating this was a good idea. it is easy to get your self initimidated by the things you can't quite do, when in fact you should bask in the light of what tasks you can do quite well, and practice to make them better.

paul :wink:

 

[Paul Chapman]

i guess the only other concern is that if each piece is not the same thickness, then when making stretching pieces, you get some other difficulties, but i guess then, that is what my shoulder planes are for :lol: :lol:

But the measurements for the cross rails will be between the inside faces of the legs and any discrepancy in leg thickness will be on the outside faces, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[engineer one]

you are of course right paul, i am still thinking engineering wise too much :?

actually this reminds me as to why we put shadow lines on things to divert the eye from such slight errors.

it's is just that like everybody, i would like to gang mark and cut the stretchers, and if each is different that is more of a problem

but not as much as it could be since we are only talking about a couple of parts of a mill it should not be too much of a problem.

paul :wink:

 

[ByronBlack]

There is no reason why you can't get each piece to within a 10th of a mill of each other. If your guage is set the same for each piece and you 'creep' on it with fine shavings, checking with a digital caliper as you go also helps, then you can get each piece very accurate to each other. I did just this on a course (after spending a number of days sharpening and fettling the plane to take a thin shaving).

I can still get this kind of accuracy on flat boards - bowed and twist are another matter, I still need to practice on that. But when it comes to flat boards, it's quite easy to creep on a very specific measurement of thickness.

 

[Colin C]

One thing that I have used for this is a cutting gauge with the bevel up, it does make it a bit harder to use ( the bevel will want t push the gauge away from the edge ).

If you are carefully, you can get a good line that is easy to plane too, as you plane to the line the top of the line will have a thin flap of wood that you can see, this does make it easier to get your parts the same size.

I hope that is clear but it not try it on a piece of scrap and all will become clear then ( if you have a cutting gauge that is :roll: )

 

[Scrit]

On the whole though, I think you need to consciously think to yourself "this is not precision engineering" before you start. Enjoy the wood, rather than the reading on the vernier calipers. Of course if the caliper bit is what gives you satisfaction then fair enough, you crazy engineering type

Hooray for that sensible comment....

 

[mr]

One thing that I have used for this is a cutting gauge with the bevel up, it does make it a bit harder to use ( the bevel will want t push the gauge away from the edge ).

If you are carefully, you can get a good line that is easy to plane too, as you plane to the line the top of the line will have a thin flap of wood that you can see, this does make it easier to get your parts the same size.

I hope that is clear but it not try it on a piece of scrap and all will become clear then ( if you have a cutting gauge that is :roll: )

Not just me then Hurrah
Cheers Mike

 

[engineer one]

thanks for the valuable input guys, honest i was not trying to be too anal :lol: , nor too much the engineer, just wished to see how the experts go :roll:

paul :wink:

 

[engineer one]

some further thoughts.

i am not i know approaching this properly since i am aiming to thickness the piece rather than doing proper face and edge. but i figured that getting the piece flat and even was a more effective use of my time than doing face and edge and then screwing up the thicknessing. :roll:

i thought about paul chapman's idea, but in fact drilling the holes for the bench dogs was such a PITA, and i think i have overheated the spade bit, so at the least may need to re-sharpen it, or get another one for my trend bit set. also i have only two dogs at this time, so that would not work,since i don't yet have an end vice. also what would worry me was trying to ensure that the two or more bits of wood are in the same tension, since otherwise, they would spring when released, which would kind of stuff up the accuracy anyway.

bb, remember i am talking about flattening a piece which is both cupped and bowed in one plane, ie top and bottom, so the problem with gauging is knowing where to start, and making sure that you do not tip the plane as you move into and out of the hump. i have i hope cracked doing the cupped bit, it is now the convex side which is causing more problems, but the old skills are coming back, to their original low level. :roll:

cc will try your idea too, but i have to say so far i am pretty happy with how i am getting on. whether the legs will be only10x10mm is something i am hoping to avoid, since now they are going to be 35x35 :twisted:

what you do notice is that you produce tonnes of shavings, even with very thin ones coming off the blade. and since i can't burn them, what else can i do??????

thanks for taking it seriously guys

paul :wink:

 

[woodbloke]

engineer one wrote:

mike, sorry i did not make myself clear, there is a thiokness to a gauge mark, and depending upon how aggressive you are i think you might hit it at the top, middle or bottom on each piece

Paul - a recent article in F&C, MrC addressed this issue. If you use a gauge with a pin where a flat has been ground on it and have the flat facing inwards towards the stock, then in use this will leave a 'flat' mark on the timber when the exact thickness of the timber has been reached. As you come down the this zero point you will see marks in the timber where the rounded part of the pin has made a mark, as soon as these disappear then you are down the gauge setting. Easy peasy :lol: - Rob

 

[engineer one]

oh it's so much easier in metal :lol:

but the fact is surely that the grainalso has some impact on where the gauge marks go,or is there a good way to ensure that you cut across the grain? :?

anyway, am working my way down to a level item, now lets hope it's not tapered :lol:

paul :wink: