Need some advice regarding the best blade angle to level and smooth qtr-sawn white oak. I’ve not planed any Q-S before so this will ne a fun new experience. I’m building a 10′ draw-leaf dinning room table so I imagine I will be getting lots of opportunity to put this advice to use.
Thanks = Doug
Replies
Funny.
Mr Vodoo,
Shurely you mean "not funny". Perhaps not. I know you enjoy a sneer, self-issued or otherwise.
Metod,
You should be a little ashamed.
Aunty Lataxe
I don't tend to use oak, so maybe quarter sawn oak is a different animal than say quarter sawn cherry, maple, or walnut, but my expereince with these woods is that planing quartersawn is not much different than planing flat sawn, rift sawn, bastard grain, etc.
Dr. Cohen, paging Dr. Derek Cohen.....
Do you own any planes or are you contemplating your first purchase?
Yes, No.s 4 and 5. I have a regular and a high-angle frog that is interchangeable on both of them. I am fairly new to hand planes hence was question to those with more experience, especially on Q-S stock.Doug
Slap the HA frog in there and you should be fine. If for some reason that doesn't feel right try the regular frog.You have what you need between the two.
Edited 12/8/2008 4:11 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
Thanks.
Have fun.
Every new experience is fun. Sometimes scary, but fun.We're off to visit the family for the holidays so the table project will have to wait. We wish everyone a joyous and peaceful holiday season.Doug
Plane some scrap pieces first....MERRY CHRISTMAS!
Use the lowest angle that will avoid undue tearout. Some tearout might be unavoidable if thicknessing and or removing any cup, warp or twist no matter what you use when taking these thicker shavings. A lower angle plane will push much easier and the sharpeness last longer.
I have done a lot with both Red and White Oak that is QS. I don't think I ever used a high angle to plane it. Frequent honing to maintain a good sharp blade when it comes to something other than reducing thickness or removing warp/twist, but not high angles.
Whether wood planes or metal, scribble some wax frequently onto the soles to make planing easier.
Take care, Mike
"Use the lowest angle that will avoid undue tearout."
Wouldn't this call for some experimentation and (personal) evaluation and comparison of the results?
Best wishes,
Metod
If by "experimentation" one means simple and quick "observation" then, yes.
However, it is a fact that the lower the cutting angle the cleaner the result of the cut surface. The issue comes, if one desires to analyze what happens when pushing a blade across a surface, is that at some point in lowering the cutting angle, fibers begin to lift in front of the blade. Which results in tear out.
Conversely, raising the effective cutting angle increases resistance, creates more heat at the cutting edge and the result to the plane iron is quicker dulling and a "fuzzier" surface on the wood. It does, however, counteract a given piece or species of wood when being cut to "run ahead," resulting in tear out.
In general, QS woods if planed in the direction of grain run out, are easier/nicer result woods to plane within any given species.
Planes bedded at 45 degrees are generally well suited to our US domestic wood species, especially when QS.
Take care, Mike
Mike,
Thanks for your great explanation. Actually my post was a bit sarcastic (particularly un-nice in this Christmas season of good will...). I was implying that the OP could take a swipe with his planes and judge for himself (no particular cost involved...) the quality of the resulting surface. After all, he is not a beginner woodworker.
It is difficult to help those who have little initiative to help themselves.
But enough being judgmental...
Best wishes,
Metod
Hah. Well, sometimes I am a bit dense and subtleties escape me!
Warning...more babble ahead...
When it comes to hand tools, the number of times I have needed to buy a new tool to accomplish something over a 30 year period has been few. Key being "needed to."
I do enjoy adding or making what are suppose to be tools to make tasks easier or more assured. A few duds over the years, but many great tools. Absent from those purchases are basic tools, especially bench planes.
There have been a few times I have needed a high angle plane. Mostly the two high angle planes I have are used on what in the US are called exotic woods with interlocking grain and or grain reversals, really dense exotics and somewhat really figured Maple (which I rarely used).
For me, leveling and finish planing are not very challenging tasks. Good design, well done joinery and decorative elements have been more so.
Well, time to head off to work. Have a great day.
Take care, Mike
Mike,
Maybe a babble to you, but it was a pleasant read for me. Much of a kindred spirit.
Best wishes,
Metod
I posted this question to get the advice of those more skilled with the use of hand planes. I am no novice at woodworking but a relative beginner with planes. I find your insinuation that I am unwilling to take some initiative to help myself to be undeserved and insulting.
Doug,
That's two tellings-off for poor old Metod in one post! As he intimates hisself, time for him to eat a mince pie (as well as a humble one) and get into the Christmas spirit, which he might retain for Spring, Summer and Autumn too.
****
Metod,
What is causing this behaviour? Tell Dr Lataxe so he can recommend a calming procedure (although those pies might be enough do it). :-)
Lataxe, who has learnt a thing or two from this thread, despite its bad start.
Lataxe,
"this thread, despite its bad start"
Funny - it looks that we both agree on that one. <g> I should practice a lot how to say it - and be in tune with you not just on the content but also in the form.
Best wishes,
Metod
Stupidity is ignorance on life support (Metod)
I did not mean to be insulting, and apologize for it.
It was not my business to judge your 'approach'. If it works for you, keep it by all means.
Metod
This whole thing has gotten absurd what with "credibility" being invoked (and implicitly others' lack thereof) and all the rest of the garbage.The gentleman has a plane with an interchangeable high-angle frog (I assume it's an L-N smoother in Larry's 'York pitch' or whatever the hell, it's a 50* frog). If it takes him more than twenty minutes to tease out the best configuration, regular frog or high-angle frog, I'd be shocked.Let's encourage a little self-discovery.
Edited 12/11/2008 12:22 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
Charles, this thread has scared the crap out of me. I'm never gonna use QS white oak for anything. I would have thought curly cherry, maple, and walnut would have prepared me a bit, but this QSWO sounds like the ultimate wood from hell. I'm ascared.
I just shat my pants at the thought of the beastly, ghastly stuff.
Edited 12/11/2008 12:34 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
Samson,
You lads! Can't a chap ask a question without being told to "just do it" no matter what he asks? Larry Williams gave some well reasoned advice from his extensive experience. He likes to mention that this lends credibility to his words, which it does.
Of course, there is any amount of another type of advice, which ranges from wild speculation to statements of the obvious, through that useless "just do it" sneer from the Brassy Crank. In this thread we even have some completely unalloyed sneering with not even a "just do it" attached. For some reason, I prefer the credible posts that offer some useful help.
Still, I suppose it bigs some blokes up in their own eyes, to belittle others and their desire to give or get knowledge. Perhaps such blokes aquired the habit whilst bullying nerds at school because they were not au fait with the latest fashion in hairstyles or designer-label jeans? Who can know.
Oops, I have sneered at the sneerers. Now then, does that make me one or is it just another symptom of my paradoxia?
Lataxe, surprised to find himself defending a savage dawg like that Larry, who even now may be drawing back his lip to issue a bite.
Perhaps if we talk about it enough the wood will just remove itself from the stock in question.
Edited 12/11/2008 3:54 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
Mr V,
Ah ha! Now I understand your problem. You have failed to realise that this talkin' stuff can cause an intent to form in the human brain, which can then be manifest as an action of the person to do this rather than that, in one way rather than in that other way. This is called "communication" and has the purpose of allowing one human to "educate" another.
Thus the talking does, in a very real sense, cause the wood to be removed from the stock, perhaps in a more pleasing and efficient fashion than heretofore. Shurely you didnae think it was just the wind from one's gobole that peeled off the shavings?
Now then, if these concepts are a bit strange and currently beyond your ability to grok, I can recommend a fine school which is very good at not just the grammar and syntax but also the semantics. Your wee brain will be transformed! On the other hand, your wetware may have ossified from being hardwired for so long so perhaps we had best leave the delicate appartus alone.
Here is a test. Say to yourself, "I will change my mind about something" and see if there is a terrible pain starts up in the paretal regions. If so, go to your shop and stare fixedly at the nearest ball and claw.
Lataxe
The OP has a smoothing plane with an interchangeable frog.He has what he needs to finish plane the white oak he mentioned in his post.Run along.
Lataxe,
I think you misunderstand me. I wasn't mocking the OP. And Larry's exceptionally credible experience comports with my meager stock of the same:
I never figured out how to identify what kind of white oak I was working with. I can't look at a quarter sawn white oak board and predict how well the rays will stay in place while you're planing.
Indeed, I find this true more generally with cherry and other hardwoods as well, quartersawn and otherwise. Indeed wood is strange stuff in that it can vary in its reaction to a given plane and set-up from one board to the next, even if both are from the same tree. As such, it is often the case that when the first plane I pick up doesn't do what I'd like no matter how I come at the wood, I'll next try a BU or HA, etc. until I find something that works. In various ways, I think this is what every poster on this thread has been telling the OP. Some have said so tongue in cheek, etc., but I've taken all these posts as good natured. Not sneering, but more like commiserating and chuckling that "yeah, we all wish for precise and universal answers, but most times, none exist."
S,
Well I'm relieved that you're not really ascared; or even pretending to be in a slightly mocking tone of voice. :-)
Lataxe
PS I confess I just feel my way in such matters as well. Still, feeling about in a space lit by even a small light is better than stumbling about in the dark.
I stumbled on this post from Rob Lee (3/04) on the Woodwork UK forums. I think it is a valuable summary:
Hi - It's not about the planes - it's about the wood, and how the wood fails.A plane is a carrier for a blade used to induce controlled wood failure.Much of the confusion over which plane is best, or which angle is best really comes down to which wood are you using... tougher, more "failure resistant" woods can be well worked with a low angle plane.... Y'all have have a bunch of tough, failure resistent woods down there - which may run contrary to the experiences N Americans and Europeans have with their common domestics.Wood failure generally falls into two types - Type 1 and Type 2 chip formation (creative naming, eh?). Type 1 is typical at lower bevel angles (angle between the bevel and the wood), and involves having the wood "splinter" ahead of the blade...usually evidenced by tear-out... For a really tough wood - this may not happen!Type 2 chip formation is where the wood fails right at the cutting edge - essentially, the wood fibres are severed by the blade before they fracture. Type II chip formation (or behavior) is what we strive for, for a clean surface..Now, there will be some exception woods to all of this...Really soft/fragile woods can be difficult to get Type 2 failure .... so now we have to discuss Type 3. This is where the blade actually pushes the wood fibres ahead of the blade, inducing a compression failure - often leaving a fuzzy or furry surface. It looks a lot like the way a snow plow pushing sticky snow does....you can picture that, eh? (couldn't resist!)This is why softer pines don't scrape well.... there's compression failure....So - now we come to plane geometry...Standard angle planes have a 45 degrees effective cutting angle, and are generally bevel down - a generic "best" angle for NA and European domestic woods...Keep in mind too, that planes were developed a century ago, when the quality of wood used was far better (more plentiful, old growth woods, and lots of mahogany) - today we work generally more "demanding" woods....Low angle planes are generally below 45 degrees, and are typically bevel up...High angle planes are generally 45 degrees plus, and bevel down...So why bevel up/bevel down? Well - there are engineering constraints imposed by each method of construction... If you want an adjustable mouth - then there's a limit to how small an included bed angle you can have. Using a frog – it’s larger. Using an adjustable sliding plate ahead the blade – it’s smaller. With a low bed angle – a bevel up configuration gives a cut angle of “bed angle + bevel angle” – with modern blade steels – this can effectively be as low as 12+20 , or as high as 12+ 78… (a 58 degree range)A higher bed angle – with a bevel down blade – is fixed at 45 degrees (or whatever the bed angle is). In order to increase the effective cut angle – we have to introduce the concept of a “back-bevel”…. Using back-bevels – the effective cutting angles can range from “ bed angle” to 90 degrees … (a 45 degree range for standard planes). Additionally – using a back bevel has the advantage of strengthening the edge on the blade – as the included angle on the blade tip is greater.So for bed angles – there are also performance differences. Lower bed angles make the plane sole more susceptible to distortion – as tightening the lever cap can exert enough force to cause sole deflection. This is commonly observed in LA shoulder, rabbet (rebate) block planes etc., and is a technique often used purposefully to “adjust” blade projection.Low bed angles do have the advantage that the blade is held in an orientation more in-line with the force applied – with should resist chatter more effectively than a higher bed angle plane made to the same tolerances. A list of “truisms” (not really rules) I’d put forth would be:1 - A back bevel works at least as well as a change in bed angle - and possibly better if the blade is not perfectly bedded, as a blade more in-line with the applied force can resist chatter better. (note - an adjustable mouth is usually necessary if using back bevels) 2 - A bevel up plane will work at least as well as a bevel down plane with the same effective cut angle - same reason as above... 3 – a low bed angle (bevel up) plane gives you the widest range of cut angle choices (rapidly changeable, if you have extra blades!)4 – A narrow mouth with a light blade feed may allow a plane to “emulate” type 2 chip formation by reducing the possibility of the wood tearing-out (the sole ahead of the blade reduces the magnitude of, or stops the type 1 chip)5 – how the wood you’re using fails is really the most important factor in determining which cut angle is best…All of these factors (and there are more - like skewing a plane to reduce the effective cut angle) can make for a real witches brew when it comes down to interpreting why one configuration works, and another doesn't...but it's really about the wood...Cheers - Rob
Samson,
Thanks for bringing that post to light. I find it to be very valuable an excellent hype destroyer.
Best wishes,
Metod
Sean,
Thanks too from me for another chunk of stuff to add to the knowledge-base. Now then, although I am enjoying the dog-fights and even growling from the sidelines, it's a pleasure to hava a thread where a significant thing is learnt, such as all this about m-rays in oak.
Another large dawg has waded in now - Richard the St Bernard. That experience with oak that he relates is valuable as I'd failed to realise that those m-rays can be quite so ornery. The quarter-sawn oak I've used recently (i.e.with the planes rather than sanders) must have been of that more stable "diving under the surface" type that Richard mentions, as I haven't had noticeable problems with it.
But (following the making of a memorial bench in that bluddy iroko) Ill be making two oaken items which I hope to have showing much m-ray. It'll be useful to know what this thread has taught before starting, as surely those big flakey rays will eventually come my way.
Is this to be a rare occasion for the use of the scraper plane, which generally lies gathering dust, as the high cutting-angle BUs seem to manage virtually everything? I'm almost looking forward to coming across the ornery m-rays!
Lataxe
Charles,
In part you wrote, "This whole thing has gotten absurd what with "credibility" being invoked (and implicitly others' lack thereof) and all the rest of the garbage...."
As is often the case on the Internet woodworking forums, a read of the responses leaves one wondering if people understand the issues involved in a given question. I'm sorry but Doug's question was legitimate, he's involved in work that can be more than a little difficult. When I read the responses I was left shaking my head. If people had actually done this before, how did they end up so oblivious to the problems involved? I tried to offer some strategies to help Doug but by no means do I have a sure solution to his question.
You know, Charles, all four of the workbenches in our shops are made of white oak. They're made of white oak because that's what we always had around and what most of our work was made of during the 15 years we were doing architectural work. We now work mostly beech and the two new benches on the drawing board will be beech. If one was to research the contemporary resurrection of traditional bed angles and cutting geometry, they'd find the search leads to my door. We're largely responsible for this and were having a lot of success with it before anyone else out there. Call Thomas Lie-Nielsen and ask him what inspired their introduction of York and middle pitch frogs in their planes. I have asked him and I know the answer.
The point that I have tried to make consistently in this thread is that the OP already has what he needs to plane the wood.
Edited 12/12/2008 2:57 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
You know Larry, you can sometimes come across poorly.
Your "points" were not really any different from most made in this thread. But, you come in, puffed up that only you know the real issues the OP is/will face. Only you have spouted forth the proper answer all the while shaking your head at the idiots (I am assuming you include me in this assessment).
Geez. Please read through the "idiotic" posts before you blow your horn so loudly.
And, if you would remove your hand that is patting your back so proudly, perhaps one of us could give it a pat as well.
Take care, Mikewho is surely now back on the crap list...(if he was ever off it)
I agree Mike. While Larry rails at all those whom he accuses of having vested interests, he is in fact the worst offender of self advertising. No one does it better than Larry. It is rare that I slam anyone on the internet, but we inevitably have abusive exchanges. He brings out the worst in one since his tone and manner are so derogatory. Yet I have no doubt that he is a font of wisdom ... somewhere in side it is bursting to come out. Many are aware of this and are intimidated by his "name". Only a few are not willing to put up with his obvious intimidatory tactics. When they do, as you are now, you should know you not alone in recognising his style.
Anyway, you are probably only second on Larry's Shyte List .. to me! :)
Regards from Perth
Derek
Edited 12/12/2008 10:10 pm ET by derekcohen
Mike & Derek,
You lads are over-sensitive to them Larry tones. I suppose he does get "personal" but this is a feature to enjoy and have a giggle about, not to get all steamy over. (Which will meet the objective of the naughty man in winding you up). Also, you under rate the average Knotter if you think Larry will sell more stuff from the impression he gives in his posts. I woudn't dare buy owt o' his as I couldn't feel worthy enough. :-) And there is that waiting list of course.
As you mention, he is a font despite his high perch way up at the top of his column, from where he lectures in a reedy and pedantic tone, so I for one seive out the burrs and beetles from his holy water to get the good stuff .
Of course, he hasn't bit me personally as I am just an oik and not worthy even of an odd slap. :-) I often wish he would so I could escalate the matter. Ah well, I suppose I must let you lads have some fun as well.
Lataxe, a Larry-butterer, albeit enjoying dog fights to left and right, as well as getting the odd bite in hisself. (But OUCH, my bum)!
PS Derek, surely you are pleased to know that you alone are responsible for all of Lee Valley's plane sales. That is an amazing feat and surely Mr Williams needs to employ you as his advertising executive. :-) I know others are afraid that you will use your Svengali-ike powers to become Ruler of the World.
Hey Master L, howzit going?
Yeah, I should allow the odd nibble now and again. I have, and do, get tired of being puked on. I should get a new pair of rubbers for my shoes and perhaps it wouldn't be a big deal. Instead I could get all giddy and do a course of singin' in the rain as I stomp through the muck 'n' mire.
Hope all is well with you and yours. And may your stockings catch some gold coins this season.
Take care, Mike
Mike,Perhaps you can show me who before me mentioned leaving the rays on the surface of QS white oak intact? Maybe some who mentioned how to read the grain? How about scraping or sanding? You might even go back and look for where I suggested anyone was an idiot. If you feel like one, maybe you should be asking why?We've been over this before, Mike. Last time was in Mel's long thread. I gave a couple examples of your posts where what you posted about couldn't be done the way you described and that you would have known if you had actually tried it (37729.288). You responded by threatening to go back and find our first e-mail exchange and post it. It took a bit of strength to avoid saving you the trouble and posting both my e-mail and your response. I have some ethical problems with making private e-mail public or even threatening to do so. Check your in box, I've saved you the trouble of finding those e-mails. Read 'em again, Mike. Do you really think there's anything there I am in any way ashamed of? I believe time has shown my suspicions were both well founded and accurate and that you were less than forthcoming about it all. Assuming there are any, we'll test your ethics this time. Take your time, in about 24 hours I'll be where I won't be able to reply. There's still a lot I need to get done before I leave so I'll be pretty busy. I don't know when I'll be back or what condition I'll be in when I get back. You and the posse can have yourselves a real good time but, if you look, I've forwarded both e-mails to another person here as well. I hope he'll watch for any creative editing.
You are quite a person, Larry. You wrote:
You responded by threatening to go back and find our first e-mail exchange and post it. It took a bit of strength to avoid saving you the trouble and posting both my e-mail and your response. I have some ethical problems with making private e-mail public or even threatening to do so.
So I had to go back to that overly long thread to see what I said. I didn't remember threatening to make any thing public. Here's what I wrote that I guess you are referring to:
I too have a first impression of you. About my first post to the OT list. Remember your accusatory email your sent me? The following couple exchanges? I still have them on my old computer if you need a refreshing look at them.
And you today did what I would have: forwarded them to you.
Your incredulous accusations border on libel, Larry. If this "another person" your forwarded our December of 2005 correspondance to is privy to both sides of this weird issue cares at all, he should reign you in.
Take care, Mike
Just to add fuel to the fire...
I ran out to my shop at the house and grabbed one of the few planes there. A plane of the type Leach loves to roast (figuratively and literally). The blade is from a late era junk coffin smoother. While never used, the blade was originally ground out of square and the lateral lever wouldn't fully compensate. So I used our stationary belt sander. It had a 150 grit belt on it. Sufficient for this task.
While I was at it, I pulled down both of the only Oak boards I have left. One actually had rays on it. Both the pieces were the ones I mentioned previously, Borg Oak.
I took fairly heavy shavings using a plane most would consider junk that is bedded at 45 degrees, an iron of dubious quality sharpened to all of 150 grit.
View Image
View Image
View Image
No lifting of rays. Reasonably heavy cut.
I guess I need more practice as the results are obviously crappy. Perhaps I'll next try my C&W smoother...Well, I would but I cannot take such a heavy shaving. I would be smoothing that sucker all day to remove as much wood as the little transitional can in ten minutes.
Take care, Mike
Mike,
Greetings from Galgate, where woodworkers are still sane and have not declared war (yet) on each other. :-)
I too have planed a fair bit of oak recently with the m-rays showing and had no trouble other than the normal issues with everyday grain behaviour. However, I read Larry's and Richard's post most careful-like and believe they may be talking about lifting in those big rays that appear when the wood is quarter-sawn, the growth rings are near straight (big tree) and the grain of the plank is not rising to one face or the other. I have a ginormous 3" thick plank of such stuff donated to me by a friend and it's faces are indeed full of these geet big splodgey rays.
So, I'm assuming that it is the fact that the ray-stuff is fully revealed on a face, not diving down into it, that might mean it is more likely to lift-off. (At this point I'm wondering what the ray-stuff is made off. It always looks vaguely crystalline or brittle).
Anyway, in a month I'll be having-at this plank and others, so the very least I can do is keep an eye on what them big rays do and see if there is any inclination for them to incline (lift).
****
Meanwhile I have connected a steam engine to the computer and it is keeping the Christmas lights ablaze as long as this thread is up.
Very best wishes to you and yours this Christmas, a season of good fellowship (unless one is a badger with a brain-boil, it seems).
Lataxe
Yeah, I chose to take pictures of the piece one could actually see rays instead of little flecks on. So I shot the rift to flat sawn piece because of the size of the rays. The QS (techincally strong rift to qs) piece wasn't photogenic zoomed in with a hand-held camera. Planed the same, though. I suppose I could grab the tripod from home...Maybe even actually buy a new piece of wood just for fun. I can always make more boxes.
To tell the truth, Sycamore has caused me more issues--that and especially Australian Lacewood. But that's why I have a good drum sander.
My favorite holiday has come and gone. Thanksgiving. Just good folk, food, and a bit of grog (or mead as this year). Christmas I tend to hide from folk, reveling with close family. But Thanksgiving we often have lots of folk around.
Take care, Mike
"At this point I'm wondering what the ray-stuff is made off. It always looks vaguely crystalline or brittle"
Mostly cellulose and hemi-cellulose, like the rest of the tree, but it has a specific function; it nourishes the heartwood xylem through transportation of necessary foodstuffs and many medulla are also parenchyma, ie, food stores.
You may find no problem whatsoever when you plane up your board, but if you do have some you'll be in a better position, I hope, to puzzle out what is going on. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Has really nothing to do with hand planing if information is needed from an expert. I am FAR from an expert when using a plane. To me it either works or does not.
The quarter sawn Sapele I am using now is full of rays and flecks (At least it sort of looks like that found in American Oak. I have never used Oak from any other country so it my be very different.)
I am finding that .. It always looks vaguely crystalline or brittle.. Is brittle!
I can use my low angle plane (a junker that works) on the edges and end grain of any 'stick' with no tare-out at all. The faces of the 'stick' are a very different matter. My low-angle works pretty well if I plane (holding the plane at a skew) while going at an approximate 45 degree angle across the width of the board. If I try to plane down the length of the board, all hell breaks loose!
I get the best results wiping the face of the board with a damp cloth (not wet) and using my new Veritas Scraper plane with very little hook. I have the scraper blade tipped almost all the way forward (as toward the front knob). Not sure what angle that would be but I would think the blade is not cutting much off of the 'hard' ribbons of wood and just 'a kiss shave' of the soft rays and flecks.
My Sapele does not even like my drum sander with 220 grit in it.
A very pretty wood but it reminds me of the problems 'I' have ran into working with some birdeye maple where the 'eyes' pop out when sanding or planing.
However, my Sapele 'is much different' than any Oak I have used. The grain runs in alternating 'ribbons' of hard wood and the softer 'ribbons' (like good old pine) of rays and flecks. Also, the grain is not straight and runs somewhat serpentine along the length of the face.
Something for your book?
Edited 12/15/2008 10:18 am by WillGeorge
I think from your description WillG that what you are encountering, and is causing you the most problems, is the reversed grain caused by the tree's habit of alternating the direction that growth rings spiral up the tree. Here I am talking about the quarter sawn (radially sawn) faces you describe as giving you trouble.
Zebrano is another wood that commonly grows like this and similar tearing out is characteristic. Plane one way and one ribbon planes nicely and the ones either side tear out. Plane the wood from the opposite direction and the smooth and rough ribbons switch over.
Planing across the grain, or roughly diagonally, often works well, especially when your planes are very sharp. Rippled grain as in sycamore or maple is another grain form that often responds well to planing across the grain. The idea with this form of planing is that the cutting edge is better able to severe the fibres cleanly with much less tendency for the long grain to lift ahead of the cutting edge. Scrapers too work comparatively well, again largely because you aren't lifting the fibres up out of the surface of the board.
I cannot personally recall experiencing much problem with the rays found in sapele, so your report of difficulties with them is interesting. I also find it interesting that sanding does not seem to be effective for you. I have never used a drum sander, having always used an oscillating thicknessing belt sander for this type of task. I'm therefore perhaps not best placed to offer advice, but if I do use sanders for this job I usually start with something a lot coarser, eg, 80 or 100 grit. I only use 220 grit as the final sanding grade, having worked through all the other intermediate grits. After that it's down to a bit of hand sanding prior to polishing procedures. You of course may already be following such a routine, but it's not clear that that is the case from your mention of using 220 grit on the drum of your machine.
And, of course, I could just simply be all wet, and all wrong, on all accounts. Slainte. Richard Jones Furniture
Regarding the Oak - that's what I'm talking about. Hoopla-free planing. I hope the professional fettlers and sharpening wonks are tuned in.
Edited 12/13/2008 6:58 pm ET by TaunTonMacoute
Mr W,
You are one bitter bloke! I would like to fill you with a cream tea and buttery scones until you mellow, whereupon I will suck out your woodworking wisdom whilst readying a pitchfork and a long-sleeved jacket, just in case the scone wears off.
You are mad as a badger with a sore paw.
Lataxe
Doug,
I've stayed out of this because I try to keep my mouth shut when I don't have a good answer to a question. It seems though that no one really understands what you're facing. I understand but I don't have definitive solution.
You're faced with two problems. First is that the mechanical bond between the rays of the oak and the normal wood fibers can be weaker than the resistance to the cut. The other is that you need to learn to read grain direction.
I can help a lot with the second problem. Throw away all the BS out there about grain direction. Ignore the annular rings every one tells you to follow. Look at the rays. On the tangential surfaces of the edges you can see which way the rays are oriented. The mechanical bond between the annular rings is a lot stronger than the bond between the rays and the wood next to them. Follow the rays the way conventional wisdom says to use the annular rings when reading the grain. This is actually a much more accurate way to read grain for all woods rather than following the annular rings. You'll have more success with this, I guarantee it.
The problem of the mechanical bond between the rays and the normal wood seems is more variable. The strength of that bond seems to vary between boards. It probably has a lot to do with which particular kind of white oak the board came from. While we worked many thousands of board feet of white oak, I never figured out how to identify what kind of white oak I was working with. I can't look at a quarter sawn white oak board and predict how well the rays will stay in place while you're planing. Lower cutting angles will be very prone to lifting the rays, avoid them. Finish plane diagonally across the grain. Reading the ray direction on the end grain of the board will help.
York pitch (50º) or half pitch (55º) will probably be best and which works best will probably also vary between boards. Most important is to keep the iron very sharp and take very light cuts. No matter what you do, you'll probably have to resort to a scraper in places so you're going to have to sand all your work. It's okay, sanding is allowed and very traditional.
If you want it, I can give a brief resume that illustrates I have the knowledge and experience to at least suggest a little credibility.
Mr Williams,
You mention that: "I have the knowledge and experience to at least suggest a little credibility".
Just so; and your knowledge concerning the quarter-sawn oak has gone into my "small book of excellent and practical advice". Thank you muchly.
There is always plenty to learn when a bloke with experience is willing to speak plainly (forgive the pun) and to give out the reasons as well as a description of the actions involved in the process.
Lataxe
If it is a highly figured quarter sawn white oak it can be difficult to plane effectively. By highly figured I mean you have prominent large flakes of cream/white medullary rays appearing on the face of the wood-- table top in your case.
As Larry Williams has mentioned these rays are sometimes poorly attached to the surrounding wood. This means planing, using any particular frog angle in the tool, sometimes results in the cutting edge of the blade catching on and lifting the outer edge of the flake of medullary ray as the blade encounters it. Once the edge lifts I have found that there is a good chance a large part of the medullary ray will lift. Once this occurs there's a good chance that a large part of the exposed ray will detach from the wood.
In the past I used to pretend this did not matter and I'd go ahead and finish preparing and slapping a bit of polish over the top. Later I'd find the loose ray hadn't magically reattached itself to the wood and could be depressed back into place with a finger. Anyway, the end result was not satisfactory so I learnt that when I came across some of the most flamboyant figuring, ie, great big splotches of the stuff, the orientation of the meddulla was pretty much dead parallel with the show surface of the wood, and also sometimes very thin, fragile, and not well attached to the wood underneath it. I have found in this situation that any tendency for the medulla to delaminate from the surrounding wood is enhanced. Less flamboyant figuring is better attached, and I've worked out that this is mainly because the medullary rays are not so nearly perfectly aligned with the show surface-- they go into the body of the wood at a steeper angle and this helps hold those medulla in place.
So, where is all this going? My experience is that the final planing of highly figured oaks is a real pig on fairly rare occasions, whatever plane is to hand. When faced with this task I'll try a bit of planing and if it's not going well the planes go back in the tool box. The next tool out of the tool box is a scraper or scraper plane.
If that doesn't work to my satisfaction I slam the bloody panel through the thickness sander or shove it on to the stroke sander and save myself a lot of aggravation. After sanding, the odd loose medullary ray needs finding and either glued back down-- cyano acrylate glues can be useful for this, or carefully cut away with something like a scalpel. Follow this up with a bit more sanding to remove any glue or depressions and add your polish of choice.
To sum up then, if your planing experiments don't get you where you want to go, get your best scraping and sanding gear out and be done with the job. It will look great whichever way you do it, assuming you do a good prep job and a decent polish job. Slainte.
Richard Jones Furniture
Edited 12/13/2008 8:47 am by SgianDubh
All this talk about rays lifting almost at will got me to wondering. A dangerous--and all too easy a thing without enough coffee in the system.
I don't know where y'al get your Oak. Me, I use to buy it from the local mill. Good ol' boys one and all. I use to buy all my Black Walnut from local sources too. Lots of both out here.
Point being, this local Oak had all been sawn in years past, left in great stacks through the edge of the forests. Some stacked in old barns to dry. Wonderful flitches and boards to pick from. Even at that, it would take a couple years for the wood to acclimate and be usable once purchased, except for the stuff one could mill up into smaller pieces that would then dry faster.I have never had rays lift on it that I can recall.
Makes me wonder if you boys on the other side of the country simply get overly kiln dried stuff. Even so, I remember a couple boxes I once made as Christmas gifts with nicely figured QS White Oak from the Borg. Even so I do not recall having any particular issues beyond some botched DTs. Aside from my own failings in joinery, it was hard stuff to work (as in hard on plane blades and chisels).
Take care, Mike
Much good and conventional widsom in that post.
When the planing's not going well it is time to either scrape or sand or a little of both. One hasn't sacrificed one's manhood in this circumstance. There's certainly no need either to go on a six month (year?) sabbatical from actual woodworking in search of "the answer."
Edited 12/13/2008 8:28 am ET by TaunTonMacoute
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled