who has veritas bevel up smoother or low angle smoother?

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Jacob, you're being deliberately obtuse. You are like a child in a classroom that must be heard but has nothing to say.

Off to the corner you go!

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Jacob]

............

The height of a work bench also changes the angle at which we plane. ....

What if you stand on a box?
So if you raise the bench it's equivalent to having a bevel up plane, or have I got that wrong?
What about tilting the bench?

 

[Corneel]

I see your point about the hang angle of the rearhandles. A given handle kind of dictates how you push it, but like Jacobs sais, you still have a lot of freedom. Push a bit more with the heel of your hand and the direction of your blue arrow becomes immediately a lot more horizontal. In fact we do that all the time, pushing harder on the front onthe start of the cut for example. The frontknob is an essential part of all this and can't be left out of the equation.

You can't leave out the wood though. The wood presents the resistance. The cutting blade plowing through the fibres. The fibres pushing down on the sharp blade and presenting a downward force until the blade dulls and the wearbevel at the back of the blade presents an upwards force. We, at the other end of the plane must resist these forces and overcome them. With all types of planes which came to us from history this is possible without too much difficulties. So somehow we adjust how we push against the handle and the frontknob, despite the shape they have.

At this point we need real meassurements to see what a difference another handle really makes.

One thing for sure, the bedangle doesn't make a difference. At all. I allready demonstarted that with the Bedrock example.

The saw anology isn't comparable. On the one hand we can't tilt the plane like you did with the dovetail plane. You would pull the edge out of the cut. A comparison could be made with the hangangle from the saw. With a more horizontal sawhandle, you can press the teeth harder into the wood, thus making the saw more agressive. But in a plane you can't push the edge harder into the wood. The planesole prevents that. The only thing happening is that the resistance increases, like you allready wrote. The lesson we can learn from this is that we shouldn't push any harder on the plane then neccessary to keep the edge into the cut. With a sharp blade we don't need to push down very hard. And a bit of wax on the sole helps a lot too.

Regarding your shooting board test, yes I read both articles. In both you are testing the BU plane at 37 degrees, the BD plane at 45. So any increase of wear at the edge is a result of that increase in cutting angle. The wear on the edge is a result of the woodshavings against the edge, and because the wood doesnt see more then 0.2 mm of the iron, the bevel orientation is completely irrelevant.

 

[Trafalgar]

So what you are saying is that;
1. a badly designed handle is uncomfortable
2 a handle for normal use might not be comfortable at say knee level, or above your head.
I think I get it now.

On the one hand Derek informs us about how easily these planes are pushed then in other threads/posts discusses the logic of using machines to do the "donkey work." Why not simply use these beautiful, easy to push planes and let the machinery go? In what context does 'easy to push' apply, when taking half thou shavings on the last few smoothing passes? When was that ever hard work with any kind of plane? Are we hogging off end grain now? I'd love to see that. In what context is all the physics even being applied? Certainly not the "donkey work," Derek uses machines for that. One presumes, then, smoothing and maybe tickling up and tidying end grain.

I have a Marples Razee jack and it's really no easier to push than a standard wooden jack by the way. It's cute though, sort of reminds me of a whale when looked at from the side. It would be kind of neat to paint it blue, give it eyes, and a blow-hole. Maybe paint it white and name it Moby Razee.

I can give a shout out to LV customer service while I'm at it. I ordered a plane a while back and it accidentally shipped without the little packet of magic pixie dust (maybe magic powdered metal pixie dust?) that comes with each one. I called customer service and the FedEx'd one to me the next day. Makes all the difference in the world, this pixie dust.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

Hi Corneel

You and I will have to agree to disagree. I don't think we are on the same page. I am not sure what "Bedrock example" you provided. I have actually measured the effect the bed angle has in edge wear. I am not sure what you base your comments on.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Corneel]

The one you didn't understand.

 

[G S Haydon]

Thanks for the response Derek, this is an interesting area of tool design.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

That is the one where you superglue a blade to a BD frog and call it a BU plane? Yes, i can see why you believe that is proof. Of what I am not sure :lol:

No, Kees, I think that we are done.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Trafalgar]

That is the one where you superglue a blade to a BD frog and call it a BU plane? Yes, i can see why you believe that is proof. Of what I am not sure :lol:

No, Kees, I think that we are done.

Regards from Perth

Derek

The easier a plane is to push from behind (due to handle position, etc.) the harder it has to be pushed down on the nose to keep it cutting.

It's basically a wash. You aren't accounting for the pressure needed on the front knob, or the front of the plane on a wooden jack, for instance.

Anybody who gets over the initial change in 'feels' (which aren't terribly significant themselves) of the BU vs. BD cannot honestly say with anything resembling a straight face that there is a material difference in the physical effort needed to use one vs. the other. There just isn't.

Tool catalog sales puffery makes for bad physics - whether the latest printing from Lee Valley or vintage catalogs from 100 years ago.

 

[Corneel]

Am I really the only one who sees a low angle plane when looking at the inclined bedding of the frog of a Bedrock?

 

[MIGNAL]

Don't know but my bevel down Stanley SW 4 feels like a bevel up Plane!

 

[J_SAMa]

Deja vu?
This came up a while ago...
Again i think the only advantage that a BU plane has is it rides much lower and therefore better for one-handed block planes (easier to hold than a bevel down).
Despite what a lot of people have been saying LA planes aren't better shooting planes than BD's. Bedding angle 13+ bevel 30= 43 degrees. 2 degrees lower than 45 degrees common pitch, why bother?

+1 on Kees' blindfolded test idea

I'm afraid that you are way off understanding how a BU smoother works with a statement like this. Just to educate you, the cutting angle of a BU plane can be made much steeper with a high microbevel. For example, a 50 degree microbevel would create a plane with a 62 degree cutting angle. This would smooth just about any interlocked grain without tearout.

I have wanted to reply to Kees but do not know where to start. Corneel, I'm sorry, but I do not understand any of your writings. They just do not many sense to me. Perhaps it is too much Christmas pudding

To BB, I think that you and I are on the same wavelength - whew! My use of a windsurfing term is to try and describe that (let's call it "gravity") can be shifted around, that we do this either by designing it in or we do it in the way we hold or use a tool (in this particular case, a handplane). "Hang" may indeed be an alternate term. I use "hang" to describe the relationship of a saw handle to the saw plate. I can see how you would use it with a handplane -the relationship of the handle to the cutting edge.

Mignal, the razee design is intended to lower the centre of gravity.

Regards from Perth

Derek

What about a back bevel on a BD plane :?
Also I think the ability to use a chipbreaker in a BD plane makes up for it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for "razee" (this is the first time I've heard of the term per se, but I have seen planes of that style), I think the lowering of the tote is to allow for a center of thrust closer to the cutting edge rather than for a lower center of mass.

Sam

 

[J_SAMa]

The BU plane has a four finger grip versus 3 finger grip of the BD plane...

Wait wooot? BD planes are meant for 3 finger grips and not 4 :shock: Are my hands that small

 

[J_SAMa]

That is the one where you superglue a blade to a BD frog and call it a BU plane? Yes, i can see why you believe that is proof. Of what I am not sure :lol:

No, Kees, I think that we are done.

Regards from Perth

Derek

I think Kees is saying that gluing a BD plane's iron to its frog is like directly bedding it on the frog bed (since the iron and frog has become one piece), just like how a BU plane's iron is bedded to a bed directly and there is no frog...

 

[David C]

"Am I really the only one who sees a low angle plane when looking at the inclined bedding of the frog of a Bedrock?"

Probably yes.

The details of blade support near to the edge seem to have escaped you? Also the clearance angle will be different if the BD blade is sharpened at the conventional 30 degrees.

David Charlesworth

 

[Jacob]

"Am I really the only one who sees a low angle plane when looking at the inclined bedding of the frog of a Bedrock?"

Probably yes.

Yes Dave you are on your own on this one.
It's a very silly fiddly design the bedrock. You have to loosen and tighten 3 screws and then re-set the blade. Adjustable mouths are the future IMHO.

 

[Jacob]

The BU plane has a four finger grip versus 3 finger grip of the BD plane...

Wait wooot? BD planes are meant for 3 finger grips and not 4 :shock: Are my hands that small

Seems so. Finger fattening exercises? Count yourself lucky that you don't have 6 fingers! (per hand that is).
Have you thought of supergluing your head to the tote?

 

[Jacob]

I see your point about the hang angle of the rearhandles. .....

Should that be the hand dangle of the rearhangles? it's all very confusing.

 

[Corneel]

"Am I really the only one who sees a low angle plane when looking at the inclined bedding of the frog of a Bedrock?"

Probably yes.

The details of blade support near to the edge seem to have escaped you? Also the clearance angle will be different if the BD blade is sharpened at the conventional 30 degrees.

David Charlesworth

It was a mental excersize David, to demonstrate that BU or BD don't make a difference in the amount of force you feel when pushing the plane or how the force of pushing the plane is presented to the wood. If one and the same plane can be regarded as both BU and BD without actually changing anything, then there is no difference.

I don't mind to explain once again. Look at this picture. Imagine that blade and frog are one thing. And because the don't move relatively to each other during a planing stroke, that is a valid assumption. The green line is the new face, the red line is the new bevel. Now you have a bevelup, low angle plane. Which cuts exactly the same as the BD plane before this mental excersize. Conclusion, BU or BD doesn't matter.



In how far the extra support under the blade in a BU plane makes a difference is something which should be tested. I suspect the difference is minimal because the BD plane has a chipbreaker, giving support even closer to the edge. At some point the amount of support is enough. When you get a smoothly planed surface, any extra support doesn't help and is just along for the ride.

Nobody cares anymore, but I am sick so I have nothing better to do.

 

[David C]

Well, just trying to inject some tiny facts into this fruitless wrangle.

David