Folks,
I have heard the many cries about go with hand tools and such and I am trying my hand at it. I have several planes ranging from block to extra long jointer planes and I am trying to joint the edge of a board and I notice that the board is always slanted from the back of the board to the front. I’m right handed and i have the board in a vice and i’m pushing from left to right. Is this something common that will happen because of my stance or is it something I can fix relatively easy? Thanks in advance for all the help.
Bio
Replies
Practice. It may help to hold the plane so your fingers ride on the face of the stock while you're planing to help you "feel" 90 degrees. Or, some mfgrs, like Lee Valley, make fences to hold the plane perpendicular to the face. Also, you can plane both boards to be jointed, faces together, at the same time. That way, the error cancels out.
Mike Hennessy
Pittsburgh, PA
Ok, basically you are saying to double up the board so the entire sole of the plane has something to rest on which will in turn make thing 90?
Bio
The wider surface will help make them 90 but if you put them in the clamp so they line up like they will when glued up only folded in on themselves it will allow you to not really have to worry about it that much because they will match up even if you are off a bit, as what you sloped in the one you will get back in the other. So you have two reasons this works better then just jointing them one at a time (well three reasons if you count that it allows you to do two boards at once.)
Doug M. (Not by any means to be confused with one of the master hand plane users. )
Ok, I'm just trying to learn right since I am learning and that is why I want to try to get them as close to 90 as possible.
Yes. Double it up. While a wider surface will help keep things square, if you do that, the cut doesn't have to be exactly 90 because if you're off 5 deg, it will be 95 on one and 85 on the other -- they'll be flat when you join them. (Opposite Interior Angles, if I recall my HS geometry.) Like this:
_________________ _________________
Mike HennessyPittsburgh, PA
Got you :)
I am much better at learning from knots than being able to offer useful advise. That being said I would find it very clumsy (also being right handed) to push the plane from left to right.
I do it right to left, sorry made a mistake.
Bio
Having a wider support for the plane helps, but training the wrist muscles to hold the plane at 90° takes practice, I think. His two-board, face-to-face suggestion also means that any off-90° angle on one board will be offset by exactly the corresponding angle on the other.
Was there anything u did Ralph to learn the training?
You might try taping a level across the plane and do some "air planing" (blade retracted). Watch the bubble as you hold the plane initially, and as you move through a stroke.
"...Also, you can plane both boards to be jointed, faces together, at the same time. That way, the error cancels out."
Well, that's not really true. Square, side to side, is much easier to achieve than straight along the length. Match planing, as suggested here, doubles the error along the length of the edge. Okay, so some suggest you clamp the h*ll out of the boards to close up the gap left by not getting the edges straight. If you do that, you'll find any out of square edges cause a problem because the joint creeps as you apply pressure. You really can't keep the boards aligned if you have angled edges.
I haven't seen a single old text suggest match planing except for very thin stock like veneers and then it was suggested the planing be done on a shooting board. Learning to plane square isn't all that difficult. Two different techniques are very effective. The first is a cambered iron and controlling the angle of the edge through placement of the plane on the edge. The second is learning to use a reference surface to judge how plumb the sides of the plane are when in use. You actually have a remarkable ability to judge plumb and level all you need to do is learn to apply it to woodworking. You use that ability when you walk or even carry a full glass of water. If you can carry a full glass of water, you can plane a square edge.
Mr W,"..Square, side to side, is much easier to achieve than straight along the length".As a relative novice to planing (I've used planes as an amateur for only 2 years) I find the opposite to be true. It's easy to get a long plank dead straight with a jointer plane. What isn't easy is to get the edge square to the sides along its whole length. Not only is getting it square difficult but so too is keeping the edge free of a very slight twist along its whole length (eg from 89 to 91 degrees end to end).Go on - tell me the plane sole is twisted (it isn't but I might be)."You really can't keep the boards aligned if you have angled edges".You can if you use a biscuit or three; or use a Plano press to keep the boards co-planar in their faces as well as joined at their edges when being glued-up."I haven't seen a single old text suggest match planing...."So what - my experience (and that of thousands of others) is that match-planing works very well to give gap-free edge joints, which may then be easily sprung-gapped along the central section of the edges with a shorter plane. It's a lot easier than planing boards singley to perfectly-matching 90 degree edges. Of course, this is merely my experience rather than the Law of the Woodworking Universe handed down from a fifth-cycle interpretation of Aloysius Cantanker's Bible of Woodworking (1769). :-)Lataxe, who is probably cack-handed and walks canted over a bit with his left arm waving about to keep from going in circles.
Practice is about all that will fix it. Here's an exercise that can help:
- take a a pine scrap - like 1x3 or 1x4 whatever you have
- rip on edge on the table saw so it is square to the wider faces
- use a marking (preferably wheel) gauge referenced on the just cut side to mark the other edge 1/32nd from the present edge all the way around the board
- plane to the scribed line (try different things like having some of your front fingers - i.e., left hand / on the knob ones -) trail under the sole and feel the face of the board
- repeat
- repeat
This should help you see more quickly that a try square where you need to adjust your form and stroke to keep the plane more level and to get the "feel" of level.
In the mean time - match planing (i.e., 2 board at once to form complementary angles) is an excellent suggestion.
Sounds good!
I took the suggestions you laid out and it worked much better. One thing I did was attached a little magnetic torpedo level to the side of my plane and used that to keep my plane relatively square. It worked like a charm, a little slower, but slow and easy wins the raise :)
One thing I found a little easier to do was to flatten a face because after taking out the humps it was realatively easy to get everything flat. Thanks for all the help!
Bio
That's great.
Look out below, everyone! Here's another one coming down the slippery slope of hand planing!!! And FAST TOO!
I wouldn't say all that. Honestly, I really wonder why you would want to hand joint an edge of a board? I really think that is a lot easier done on a power jointer. I will admit though that it was fun learning to flatten a board by hand.
Bio
Well then you still ain't doing it right! ;-)
Oh, I definately agree that there is still some learning to go with it, but I can take 1-2 swipes on the power jointer and done. I assume I could eventually get there by hand but this is one of those cases that I think the power tool could be as helpful as the hand. I do agree however it is 10x better to flatten a board with my Bailey No. 5 that this ole lady gave me :)
Bio
p.s. I hope that is the right plane to use for this kind of job :)
Congrats on taking up hand planes. Would just like to add a couple of reasons for going beyond just getting a jointed edge square. I once read that the difference between an amateur musician and a pro is that the armature practices a piece until he can play it right and the pro practices until he can't play it wrong. Planes are probably the closest thing to a musical instrument in the wood world. Once you've practiced enough, you'll find it will do some amazing things that machines won't. For example, if you skew the plane a tad as you move from the end of a board toward center, and then back to straight as you move from center to the other end, you’ll end up with a slight gap at the center of your edge joint that will ensure the ends are tight when you clamp-up. You’ll also find that you can take just a few thousandths off the edges of a drawer to make a perfect fit – hard to do with a jointer. On top of it all, they make a great, pleasant sound when used properly, something a jointer will never do. And on and on and . . .
Happy journey!
Many years ago I had the same problem. I have a stanley smoother that I attached a fence to. I drilled a hole at each end of the plane, two round head screws thru the plane to a piece of hardwood for a fence.That's it.
Make sure the fence is tight against the board,weight on the knob when starting, switch your weight to the tote before going off the edge. When you get a lot of experience you won't need the fence.I did an entire kitchen this way because I didn't own a jointer at the time.
mike
Thanks for the info. I have TONS of shavings learning how to do this today. The irony is this. I'm right handed and I was planing from rhe right to the left with my left hand in front and my right hand trailing on the handle. I switched and was going from left to right with my right hand forward and left on the handle and suprisingly I get the square edge right off. Did I have my hands wrong originally?
Bio
"I switched and was going from left to right with my right hand forward and left on the handle and suprisingly I get the square edge right off. Did I have my hands wrong originally?"I think it's a matter of adopting the technique that works best for you. I'm more comfortable holding the rear handle with my right hand, and working from right to left on the board. But, if you're getting good square edges the other way around, go for it.Another option that I don't think has been mentioned here is that of using a long "shooting board" where the side of the plane is supported by the reference surface. That assures that the sole (base) of the plane (now in a vertical orientation on the shooting board) is square to the edge of the board, but the squareness of the resulting cut is dependent on how the iron is sharpened. One could have a square-sharpened iron for this use, and a cambered/crowned/radiused iron for normal flattening use.
Edited 10/21/2008 11:56 am by RalphBarker
I'm lefthanded, I plane with my right hand on the knob,left on the tote and plane from left to right.This is the second way you planed. If you are comfortable it doesn't make any difference.The first way when you planed right to left with right hand on the tote is probably the way most righties plane.
mike
Thanks a million!
Hi Bio
Just checking ...
Is you blade square to the sole of your plane?!
Regards from Perth
Derek
Ok here is my two bits:
Be sure the face of the board is flat, out of wind etc.
Use a square to check where the edge is going out of square and also a straight edge to be sure the edge is straight.
Mark with lumber crayon.
Plane the high areas off and you got ninety degrees/square.
One problem I ran into was taking off too much during the final adjustments and chronically creating a problem behind me.
Two things to consider. If you are a person who sharpens for a straight across blade edge as apposed to a blade edge with a bit of radius to it then you may need to tilt the blade a bit in relation to the plane bottom to take off wood where you want.
Also if you have a bit of a radius to your blade make your final pass right down the middle for the whole length of the edge and the outer edges of the edge of the board will tend to come together for as close to a gap free joint as is possible.
Plane your mating board the same way then stack on edge vertically and if you can put a straight edge across the face of the two together you are winning.
I have on occasion, when things were not going well, resorted to a very small very accurate plane like a #1 or a Veritas low angle block plane to remove wood just were I needed to.
I find allot of the better $200 + planes may still not be accurate enough (sole flatness) to just make pass after pass until the edge is straight.
I wind up planing a convex shape along the length no matter how careful I am with technique.
To correct for this I find the best is to plane a bit of a hollow in the middle by taking more passes there then judging with an accurate Starrett straight edge where to bring the end portions down to flat.
I have two Veritas straight edges that I like and use but they are out just enough to make perfect edge to edge joints in very hard wood difficult. If I use the Starrett things go better. Judging by sighting through joint with light on the opposite side.
I have a Starrett pink granite surface plate and so can accurately judge these straight edges. Maybe some day I will get around to correcting the Veritas ones.
I have been nonchalant with this and regretted it. That is: using a thousandth or .0015" inch feeler gauge under straight edge rather than sight the joint as above and depending on clamps to bring joint together. Nope, Nope the Starrett and sighting using light is much better with very hard wood. Make the the final judgement with magnification along the "show" side of the joint and if that looks perfect then glue up.
Several of the masters say forget the fingers on the bottom of the plane grip and learn to watch the throat and where the wood is coming off the blade and use your square and straight edge to tell where to plane. After much trial and err I agree.
The power jointer may be the way to go in the end. One plus for the plane however is on wood prone to burning and with less than fresh blades in the power jointer the wood will be burnished and will accept glue in a less than ideal manner. One cannot beat the strength of glueing fresh planed edges. It has been shown that if the boards set for days after planing and before glue up the glue wets the surface better if the surface tension/oxidation is reduced with a pass with a plane or lightly kissed with sand paper.
But then as I always say I am not trying to make a living with my wood working.
Edited 10/21/2008 8:05 am by roc
I just never understood the use of feeler gages, surface plates and precision ground straight edges and .001 tolerences when working with a material that will change five-ten times that amount with a few percentage points difference in the relative humidity from day to day? How did those Goddard’s, Townsends, Seymour’s, etc ever build all that wonderful work without those expensive tools??? <!----><!----><!---->
Why didn't dudes of old need to work to thousandth tolerances? >How did those Goddard’s, Townsends, Seymour’s, etc ever build all that wonderful work without those expensive tools???Two answers that seem to contradict: 1. what makes you think they didn't ?
and2. They were not building dining tables out of eight quarter bubinga. (I could see the glue joint gap) and a work bench from purple heart. (I left the gap)This stuff is so stout I supported a seven foot plank on the ends (plank face parallel to the floor) and stood on it. It only sagged a few hundredths ! There is no hope of crushing the gap together or bowing two planks that are that thick and ten inches wide with clamp pressure.To have a joint that disappeared those are the empirical facts. The extremes I had to go to.Have a go at the above and let me know what are your experiences. But you are going to have to take real measurements not guess if you want to compare data.Also it is possible to work to these tolerances by eye! That was part of what I was saying!If there is light coming through then I plane the high points to close the gap. The point being the gap may be even less but turned a better result than the feeler gage.For grins try this. Run your glue joint on your power jointer or how ever else until you are happy with the result. Now take a one thou or .0015" (which is more common in the set) and put that between some where along the middle portion of your jointed edges stacked vertically. Now shine a light on a wall or light colored surface and stand on the other side of the joint and sight through the gap. Use magnification if needed. Doesn't that look like a big gap? With hard wood like oak, purple heart, cocobolo etc. try gluing up with the feeler gage in place and tell me you like the glue line. Go ahead I will sit here while you try it. : )Well?Several articles recommend not sighting the gap but just go down the plank using paper as a feeler and then to refine it further go down the surface dragging the straight edge and were ever the straight edge pivots when touching a high spot that is where you plane until you get a an even friction draw along the length of the straight edge. That is probably a technique the gentlemen you refer to used. The straight edge will pivot like a compass needle on less than two thou so they would probably hit the spot not knowing the exact measure of it.Well the Varites straight edge was about two thou bellied out. So I plane until it does not pivot as mentioned above. Now I got a two thou concave. Then I do the same on the mating plank. Put then togeather and NOW I HAVE A FOUR THOU GAP ! ! ! Oh good a sprung joint right? Just what we want right? Yah if you can close up the middle. Good luck.I want the joint to come together on that day at that humidity. Once glued up every thing moves together. It is true if you cut a set of dovetails during low humidity and attempt to put them together during a rain the joint may not go together I agree with you there.Toshio Odate explains in his book how to make two wooden straight edges used by reversing them and planing errors to make extremely accurate straight edges to check the finish PLANE SOLES and then correct the soles by scraping. I assure you these tolerances are less than a thousandth and make the difference in the sole adjustments of the planes.The shokunin were using this technique hundreds of years ago. They had these marvelous tools hundreds of year ago. Light gap between boards less than a thou and straight edges to correct planes accurate to less than a thou.Argue for your limitations and they are yours.Edited 10/21/2008 5:35 pm by rocEdited 10/21/2008 5:37 pm by roc
Edited 10/21/2008 5:56 pm by roc
Wow that is a lot to take in; I just plane them till they fit, I didn’t know you had to do more…. I figure my eye is good enough and I have never seen the need for all those machinists’ tools. I have cut many glue joints in hard tropical woods and after all these years they are still tight and all I used were a good old #7 and enough time. I do my best to make the process as uncomplicated as possible, but that is just my view of the craft. I don’t need a science experiment. <!----><!----><!---->
Napie,
I've read your opinions on sharpening. And now this post.
You are in need of serious help. It appears that you are more interested in working wood than in using as many tools as possible.
Crazy talk, I call it.
Ray
Napie, this is really to the person with whom you are bantering with a little. I think it might illustrate your point...
The link goes to a wider picture than I would want to directly display here--scrolling and all that.
The top (and bottom) are 13" wide. Too wide to resaw the original 2 1/2" thick piece of Bubinga using my band saw that has a capacity of 10". So it was ripped in two (not in the center), the resulting 2 pieces resawn into two more pieces, the two pieces for the top and two for the bottom planed in short order and glued back together to their respective mates.
While not all my joints end up disappearing so well, I doubt anyone can find the seam. Point is, no feeler gages, no straight edges. Just planing one, planing the other and plopping one piece on top of the other after a few strokes and thinking, yeah, that fits now. Glue the buggers back up and go.
http://wenzloffandsons.com/temp/display/joint_0001.jpg
I admit to not understanding the actual use of high precision tools such as feeler gages or reference surfaces beyond my scarred and stained bench top. Whether they be for fettling a new to me plane nor a piece of wood. I think I vaguely understand the desire to use such tools in these endeavors. It's an evil tendency that should be resisted.
Take care, Mike
If you want to plane boards independantly and join them together, you'd better be pretty darn good. Let's say for sake of discussion the boards are 1" thick. If you plane one at 89 degrees and the other at 90, the gap will be .017", which I think is a lot. Remember that .017" is also the amount the bubble will be off in the level you taped your the toe of your plane. And let's forget about whether the front of your work bench is plum or not. (I'm not sure the level is a good idea)
Clearly if you want to go this route, you need to plane that board probably to within a 1/4 of a degree to the face. BTW, if you glued the two boards in the previous example, you'd have a nearly 3/16" hollow if they were 10" wide each and over a 1/4" if they were 15" wide. That's a lot of face planing.
If you match plane two boards at 89 degrees you get no hollow and no gap. But Larry mentioned creep and he's right. If you apply clamp pressure, there will be a component causing the boards to separate. In the old days, guys probably didn't apply clamps or didn't generate much clamp pressure. So this issue didn't exist for them. But for us, Titebond requires 150-250 psi to develop full strength.
So let's look at 1" with 200lbs of clamp pressure. The creep force is then .0174x200=3.5 lbs. That's not a lot of force. It's reacted by friction. So I called Franklin to see if they had a coefficient of friction for Titebond III. They didn't (nor do they have it's modulus, BTW). But they did say the coefficient of friction would change based on how much glue you apply, the temperature of the shop, and the amount of time the glue sits before you start clamping.
My experience is that Larry is right about the creep. As you apply the clamps, the boards will shift. I keep a mallet and a block of pine handy to bring them back straight as I crank up the clamp pressure. More pressure creates more creep force which should exacerbate the problem. But in my experience it doesn't. As the glue line gets thinner the coefficient of friction must inscrease enough to resist the creep force (I should have a joke about creep force but I don't- sorry).
My feeling about this issue is that match planing is really much easier to produce a good quality "seamless" joint. But that it's not true that the angle "doesn't matter". You should try to keep your match planing fairly square, especially if you are using PVA.
Adam
You should try to keep your match planing fairly square, especially if you are using PVA.
Or use cauls of some sort.
You know, I don't really care how people join edges. I can say one thing for certain though. When one match planes then turns the two edges to where they mate, any error on straightness is doubled. You don't have that problem when you joint one edge to match another just as Wenzloff wrote about. In fact when doing one edge at a time you have the first true edge to check the second against as you work. It's easy, fast and direct. The checking is simple, just put the first edge against the second. Match planing isn't so simple to check. You have to disassemble your assembled pair to check them. If you're not dead straight, you have to either introduce stress into your joint with clamping force or put the whole mess back together and start over. I really don't like doing things over two or three times. Those who get frustrated with the tinker method of match planing might want to try the easy traditional way to joint stock. Planing one edge at a time also allows for using a slightly cambered iron as an aid to getting the edge square while keeping the sole of the plane in contact with the edge at all times. Don't try match planing with a traditional cambered iron, you'll never get matching edges.
I don't know if I agree with you here. I know what you mean and that you will have issue with gap, but if you do it the other way you will have issue with gap (but only half as much) but now you have more issues with getting a 90 degree joint. So you gain some in the gap issue (assuming you do not mess up in the same spot on both boards, it could happen) but you lose on the angle. So is this a net gain or not? From my (limited) use of a plan for this I think that I am much more likely to mess up the angle then the strait edge. So the double trick helps with my weak point, at a minor cost in my strong point. Heck the plan is doing most of the work at getting the board straight, not me, but I am doing most of the work at getting the angle to 90 degrees, not the plane.
One hand giveith the other hand take ith away.
Doug M
I'm not sure what was done "traditionally" (whenever that was). I don't think Moxon mentioned match planing. Pretty sure he didn't.
I know some early probabte inventories listed "glewing" jointers in additionl to "long" [try] planes. But this doesn't tell us whether they match planed or not.
As you can guess, I've done quite a bit of this work and I've had the exact experience you describe with fitting boards. Now it depends on the length of the boards. It's fairly easy for me to straighten boards that are no longer than twice the length of my plane. But when we start talking about 8 footers, I have to plane and then check my work. A sprung joint is actually easier in this case than a perfectly straight edge.
The problem , as you described, occurs when you dry fit, find a problem then have to realign the boards in your vise/holdfasts. In the worst cases, you have to redo some planing just to bring the two edges back match each other, then hope you did a better job.
What I've done in one instance I recall is dry wall screw the boards together. This just served as a way to index them together. I think I recall boring a hole for a dowell. The issue in both cases was that the boards were not the same width or had irregular free edges. The dowel or screw was placed where the bread board would be so these didn't "cost" me length.
So I'm just agreeing here. This is a problem I too have encountered. Guys should be aware of it. That said, I agree with whoever said it- you don't have to choose one way or the other. I prefer to match plane, but I don't always. These are two different techniques. But I've found match planing an spring joints works particularly well with Titebond and lots pipe clamps. I've even done long joints with a single clamp, and that seemed to work.
Adam
"I'm not sure what was done "traditionally" (whenever that was)."In the old days, we surfaced (beat) the large, soft stones with much harder small ones, carefully sighting across the surface of the large stones. Requesting too much dry fitting quickly made one unpopular with the lifting gangs. ;-)
Adam,
There is a movie made in 1964 called Man's Favorite Sport. Even though you don't look like Rock Hudson you sure remind me of his character, Roger Willoughby.
Ha, one of my all-time favorite movies along with Bringing Up Baby. Gotta love screw-ball comedy.
Wore out the VHS, working on the DVD. Going to have to watch it again now.
Take care, Mike
Huh? I was born in 1964, Larry. Now I've heard of Rock Hudson, and may have seen one of his pictures. If I remind you of him, you're starting to scare me Larry. Not that there's anything wrong with that. See you in a couple weeks sailor.Adam
Of course, one should remember not to stretch metaphors too hard. In this case, even good ol' Roger caught fish.
Mike
Gawdpreserve us, verily.
I just read this whole thread, and a sort of headache initiated mainly by comrade Roc progressed, to be further accelerated by Adam....
Nobody actually taught me hand tool work, but I was given C Haywards books when a youth which no doubt had a good influence.So I was chuffed to see this :
"You know, I don't really care how people join edges. I can say one thing for certain though. When one match planes then turns the two edges to where they mate, any error on straightness is doubled. You don't have that problem when you joint one edge to match another just as Wenzloff wrote about. In fact when doing one edge at a time you have the first true edge to check the second against as you work. It's easy, fast and direct. The checking is simple, just put the first edge against the second". *
Because a) that appears to be a logical, uncomplicated, quick and reliable technique and b)when I worked in a factory the apprentices came back from polytech school having been taught that way by Journeymen from the British system- master craftsmen in other words.
I was always under the impression (actually still am) that match planing was only good for Short and Thin boards like from 4 mm to say 10 at most, to help get them square, when not using a shooting board. definitely not good for long boards of the usual furniture making thickness.
*Further to that: a quick rub back and forth and you can a) hear and feel that there is good contact (no rocking etc) and b) some woods will let you see a different surface where contact was made.
I would say that items such as feeler gauges, dial test indicators, dumpy levels, digital calipers , thoughts of thous/ hundredths of millimeters etc are best divorced from woodwork and applied to metal things: since wood is relatively soft, almost alive (with reference to climate) and mighty diverse they will cause serious neurosis, I believe, when applied to wood.
Philip Marcou
Philip,How many times can I say this: All I was saying was if you put one board on top of another, vertically edge to edge, and plane the high spots causing a gap that it winds up a better joint than any other way. I was only quantifying it by going back and looking at the quantities involved and saying how a straight edge that is out can cause problems. I demonstrated how an apparently small error can, in a tolerance stack up, compound in to a significant gap.Please tell me again, without all the quotes of others which I got lost in while reading your last post, how best to make up a glue joint using a hand plane. : )Edited 10/25/2008 4:53 am by rocEdited 10/25/2008 4:53 am by roc
Edited 10/25/2008 5:08 am by roc
ROC,Them olde bookes and them theories one may read are all very well and may even expand one's understanding (when they're not confining it) but in the end its experience that counts. I find I can easily get 1" thick 6 - 8 feet long plank edges straight with a 22 inch Vertitas BU jointer. Why would that be hard? It is much harder to keep the edge at 90 degrees to the faces - in my experience (which is all that counts to me).Yes, other more experienced and less cack-handed fellahs can do 20 foot planks and get a 90 degree edge for the whole length; but not me.So, when I match-plane two of the big planks, there are no gaps (I can get the edges straight, no bother). I then put the sprung-joint gap in with a swipe of four of the smoothing plane. The Plano press (one could use cauls) and sometimes a biscuit or three aid in alignment and stop any edges slipping sideways agin each other when clamped.It works for me. The last three 6 X 3 ft tabletops I made (4 - 8 planks each) show no gaps nor even a glue line where the grain matches.****Still, if Aloysius Cantanker (1699 - 1797) says it can't be done......Lataxe, a heretic probably in need of burning slowly to give him time to confess his sinful thoughts and unholy actions with the planks.
What kind of wood in the above tables generally?In your experience; have you had table ends split or open up from not springing the joint?Edited 10/25/2008 5:50 am by roc
Edited 10/25/2008 5:51 am by roc
ROC,Of the tables I've made using handtools rather than machine tools (i.e. in the last two years) the four big ones (6 foot or longer) have been in old-growth pitch pine (2 of), afromosia (1 of) and English oak (1 of). I've also made a number of smaller items in which the joined planks have been 2 - 4 ft long. These have been in oak, beech, cherry, maple, teak, afromosia and ash.Many of the planks have contained ornery wood - twisting or rising grain; pin and other live knots, etc.. I use high cutting-angle blades in the planes for these naughty woods: in that 22 inch Veritas BU jointer or in Marcou smoothers.I like to make a relatively wide sprung joint gap - up to 1mm or eben a bit more in the centre of 6 foot or longer plank-pairs. I've never had one of mine open at the ends. But we do have a large oak trestle table in our hoose made by Albert Jefferies of North Yorkshire, in which the top consists of 4 2" thick planks each around 8-9" wide and 6' 6" long. The ends have opened up between the planks, probably because the table spent some time in a too-warm/dry conservatory at my parent-in-laws'; and it isn't breadboarded.So this table was a lesson to me and I spring all my edge joints to a greater or lesser degree, even if the a top will be breadboard-ended or the end-grain otherwise covered. Sprung joints are easy to do and why take the risk of those nasty end-gaps appearing? The Plano press (plus 2 or 3 T-bar cramps for longer planks) squish up the sprung gaps easily. Lataxe
Lataxe,Thankx for info.
Yes, let's torch Master Lataxe at once...
I have used various heretical methods to joint boards. Still do at times. (Well, did. Workshop time making stuff is pretty scarce these days.)
I've owned a pair of LN's little #95s that I have used on thin boxes, even drawer sides (instead of ganging them). I have owned a Stanley #386 jointer fence for the times my brain can visualize a square edge better than the hands can perform. Even owned a wood rabbet plane that had a wood fence added to the side by someone in the forgotton past. Unless the person used it for a 1 1/2" width rebate a lot, I suspect it was for squaring long edges--most likely to square a length already made straight by another longer plane.
Dare I say it? I have even match planed.
The point of my post wasn't to prescribe a better method. More a railing against using absolute aids in woodworking. In part it was also to say the long plane can also be used, without aid, on more demanding woods.
So there's room on the pyre for me.
Take care, Mike
So, you'd recommend against me adding a laser-guided gyro-stabilizer to my #7 Record? ;-)
Roc, not now , dude, I got a head ache. (;)
Also, I have a dreadful secret when it comes to this joining of edges- I am afraid of divulging the details on this here august forum- but it works every time.Philip Marcou
Over the years I've used all sorts of ways to to get a good edge for edge joints.
I've found for probably 90% of the edge joints I've ever created using hand planes that I planed one edge at a time to match its partner. It is quick and efficient from a hand woodworker's point of view. I don't really follow the argument put forward by one or two contributors that it is difficult to plane an edge square with a hand plane, and that squareness to a 1/4 of a degree really matters. I don't find it especially hard to create an edge that is pretty darned close to square to the wide reference face; and even if my edges are not perfectly square then it's my experience that whatever errors I do put on those edges aren't significant to the overall performance of an edge glued joint over time.
Match planing, the now common name it seems for slapping two planks together and doing both edges at once is, in my experience, generally slower, less accurate, and more fiddly. It doesn't work well for thick boards and/or long boards because too much effort is needed to move the plane, and more effort leads to more innaccuracy. It works satisfactorily for short and thin stock; it is very handy for instance for creating drawer bottoms out of solid wood where the panels created are between about 6 and 12 mm thick and glued together in a panel gluing board.
I don't think there is much mystery to the processof creating good edge joints with hand tools-- plane accurately pretty much sums it up. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
Just a little data for those interested.The OP of a similar KNOTS thread paid me a visit this afternoon with 2, 6+' 5/4 walnut boards in tow. These book matched boards had a live edge, with widths ranging from 16" to over 19". The edge to be joined was concave length-wise with easily 1/2-3/4" of gap between them. We "closed the book", put them on the holdfasts, and removed the concavity with a fore plane. A 30" joiner completed the job. That took about 15 minutes. Pulled them out of the Nicholson bench, put the boards together, joint was perfect. All told, including tite bond 2 and 8 pipe clamps, the job took about 30 minutes. Is that a long time? I too have done this every which way. I don't think I've found an easier way to get these results. Note that this job gets harder when the boards are thicker and wider. It's harder to pull up a 19" board because it's moment of inertia is the cube of it's height.BTW- I'm really glad I invited this "stranger" into my home. I've done this a couple times before and every time I've done it, it's reaffirmed my belief that woodworkers are great people. What an amazing demographic. This guy was terrific. We shot the bull for a couple hours and did all sorts of stuff together. I really encourage everybody to put their location at least in their profile and share your woodworking with someone else.Peace outAdam
Hey Adam,
Unlike the Klausz / Cosman DT YouTube videos, I don't think it's a race. I think, for myself, it is finding a viable method amongst the lot that clicks, that works. In that regard, whatver time it took was perfect. Don't know if I could have done the edges any faster--nor would I try 'cause it isn't a race.
I do generally only have one speed. Trouble comes for me trying to be too deliberate or go faster than I ought.
One question. Did the visitor do this with your guidance or was it you? Just curious.
I would echo the visitor sentiment. It's always a good time. Which is the prime reason I am looking forward to Berea. I lead a fairly cloistered life, feeling I have little time for naught else.
I owe you and Larry a beverage of y'alls choice.
Take care, Mike
>moment of inertia is the cube of it's height..Ooohhh don't use language like that ! We just got the scaredie cats calmed down.Say stuf like ya it's easy I just use an old bent plane and take my glasses off. Any body can get a glue joint with this technique. I don't know what the big deal is.
"Is that a long time?"
Yah, Adam, it is not too shabby, especially as there is no need for hurry (;).
But it sounds as though, when you say the edges were "live" or waney, that you merely straightened them rather than removed the sap wood?
As an aside, and assuming a need to do it with less effort all by hand, I would have wanted to saw the edges straight before jointing, and that would have saved some time too I think, especially if the sap wood had to go.Philip Marcou
But it sounds as though, when you say the edges were "live" or waney, that you merely straightened them rather than removed the sap wood?
Hmm. I read it that the live edges went to the outside--probably because that's what I would typically do for the cathedral grain thing. Funny about the internet, isn't it!
Take care, Mike
You got it right. I only mentioned it because Larry brought up the problem of dry fitting then realigning the boards. It's a real issue. When the edges are all parallel, and the boards are the exact same width, match planing is easier because it's easier to realign the boards after a test fit reveals a problem. In this case, it came out fine on the first attempt. And while that's usually my experience, I've had it go the other way too.Adam
While realignment, reclamping boards for match-planing is more fussy than doing them singly, it isn't an onerous task.
I don't know if I mentioned it already--or if someone else has--but here's how I do it.
I put both edges of the boards to be match planed down on my bench, the desired faces against each other. I then use a couple hand screw clamps on each end fairly tight. Flip the assembly, clamp in the face vise, crochet, board jacks (I've even used roller stands in a pinch) and tighten the vise. On really long boards, I'll try to also use a holdfast--even if I have to drill a new hole to do it.
Do the plane thing, undo whatever needs to be undone to test the boards. If they need to go back into the vise, repeat from the beginning. Realigning the edges just planed by setting the edges being jointed on the bench top helps to make sure there is as little offset as possible--I hate having to plane down just to hit the second board.
While on the topic again, I do this when I have made multiple drawer sides of the same width as well. Though there is the extra step of after the first edges are jointed, cutting them down individually to width. In this circumstance, the first jointed edge goes on the bench, hand screwed together, the outer boards marked as to final jointing width, the assembly placed in the vise and plane to the lines. Not on topic, but what the hey...
Take care, Mike
To give an Idea of what I would be up against to match plane my current project:10" wide planks 7 quarter dressed ~ fifty lb each I could probably wind up scratching up my bench while rotating the pair after putting edges down on table top to clamp (or braking a clamp handle off) then turning over to put on the face of the bench.or dropping one or both while attempting to clamp upright while aligning the business edges.Sounds like for light stuff might be the way to go.My girl friend says tell bio : " the simplest way is to accept that there is no simple way".(to get 90° with a hand plane)
"A man's gotta know his limitations."
Or some such application of Clint's advice.
Ganged planing (the drawer side example) or match planing isn't appropriate in all circumstances even if it is the person's prefered means of jointing edges that will later be glued together. Your example is proof it isn't always a possibility or desired.
I think of these topics much like the sharpening threads I try to avoid. I think that more people should buy old books. They do answer much of these issues--even if one experiements with other methods, at least they give (typically) sound advice to always return to.
One issue is that old books sometimes presume a base knowledge. I think that in those cases newer works such as Charlesworth's et al are definitely good purchases. If someone is a visual learner, buying some of the newer DVDs or taking a class is a definite suggestion.
Another is to join one of the guilds and or local SAPFM chapters (at least if one is near enough). Then one can get instruction from others, often one-on-one, for the cost of yearly dues.
Take care, Mike
>old books sometimes presume a base knowledge.Yes. Cook books especially I have found while living on my own. I now live with a chef. Or I should say my partner was a chef for many years. Good thing she can read between the lines.Only down side is I have had to punch more and more new holes in all my belts : )You take care as well
I am going to the shop ! ( to see if I can plane off some of the excess)
roc
"Okay, I got it now"....So it is established that the live edge is that which is being worked on and does not mean a waney edge.
Now I am wondering how it is that these boards are not parallel edged , assuming they are rough sawn boards.
All the more reason to saw them // first, and avoid clamping difficulties, not to mention appearance and or having to dimension the glued up top which is now more cumbersome.
Philip Marcou
Live = Waney
I can think of only one for leaving them on altogether. That would be for a top where the live edge would remain on the finished piece. Else it makes clamping with something more than windlassed rope problematic.
Take care, Mike
I've got two macro shots of the joint. These were taken after the joint was smoothed. The joint looks like this for the entire length. The third shot shows the live edge. The match planing took about 15 minutes to execute. The boards are over 6' long. The plane was a $35 30"+ wooden jointer. See if you can find the joint in 6283! I had to blow it up in iPhoto to make sure I didn't make a mistake. The joint is slightly to the right of center. Adam
Edited 10/26/2008 5:31 pm ET by AdamCherubini
Adam,He he - good evidence always trumps the theories and idealogies.Mind, Mike & ROC have a point about the big fat boards that weigh a ton. I turn to the tablesaw then, followed by some reet careful block-planing to get rid of any TS saw blade marks (although these modern rascals with their hollow-ground sides to the teeth don't half make a clean cut). Wot you do, since you have banned the TS from your shed?Lataxe
Table saw for thick stockYes Sam Maloof says his commercial table saw will cut glue ready edges in thick walnut. He calls walnut a friendly wood because it will "give" a little. Says macassar and rosewood is a whole different ball game.I want to see it done this easy with rock maple, bubinga etc.I would like to have one of the nice old wooden jointers. Maybe that will be my next year hand tool project to look one up or make one just for the heck of it. Wooden planes sure glide easier.A beautiful joint for sure! Thanks for photos !
Roc,I know you meant to reply to Adam (that bloke who made them joins pictured).Wooden planes! Shurely they will just wear out on that rock maple or teak!? I have an ebony-bodied Mujingfang that seems to be standing up to the orneries though......and it only cost fifty quid. I believe Adam makes his great wooden canoe-like things from old C18th cabinets that have fallen to pieces. Most of them suffer this fate, if not already burnt because of excesssssive ugliness and pointless ornamentation. :-) Let us hope one doesn't fall in a river as it will jam under the bridge and cause a flood.Good steel and brass has a lot going for it and you can spend loads on sharpening gear for them - and polish. (Kidding - modern plane blades only need sharpening once).Lataxe of C21st
Real nice, Adam. Which is what I expected...So is this for a table top? Whatever it is, it's going to look nice I think.
Gee, my jointer is only 28". I wouldn't have been able to do that <g>.
Take care, Mike
That is all quite correct , especially the mentioning of thin and short stock of 6mm to 12 mm thickness....(;)Philip Marcou
Edited 10/26/2008 1:57 am by philip
Adam,What a good post you made.Experience counts. But of course there are different experiences of different procedures, all of which will work to achieve the final objective (well-joined planks in this case). I prefer match-planing after finding the other methods difficult. Perhaps it needs more experience to be able to do the try-by-eye fitting of single planks that Mr W and the other Mr W describe? For amateurs like me, there is unlikely to be enough time left that can be devoted to getting that experience. I am near-60 and have a thousand other activities on the to-do list besides planing plank edges. I've found (by trial and error) that match-planing works best for me, as handtool method.So, match-planing has proved easiest for me to learn in obtaining well-fitting sprung edges that "disappear" the join (if the grain is a good match) and never open up. For everyone that has that experience there are no doubt many others who find one of another 8 possible methods equally to their taste and jibing with their personal motor-skils, eyesight or other attributes.***Always I wonder - why do some lads want there to be only one way and it's their way? I blame the vicars and priests; and ultimately that Plato.Lataxe, who also once made perfectly good disappearing joins with straight/square edges using a router, a TS, a jointer, a belt-sander and other unholy objects of the motorised ilk.
Worth a peek; article from old FWW # 25Read his thoughts on miter gap tolerances and glue joints. He is speaking to gaps of .002 inch being needed " . . . would be acceptable from the stand point of strength and appearance."http://www.taunton.com/finewoodworking/SkillsAndTechniques/SkillsAndTechniquesPDF.aspx?id=2049
>Level on the level
Keep in mind if you use the level that the work bench must also be level. The vise jaw or way of holding your board must be perpendicular to level or "plumb". Other wise, to exaggerate, picture your plane level but the work being held out of plumb you Will Not achieve your goal of 90°.
Here is an interesting exercise that Ian Kirby recommends and that is quick and valuable. He sets up a stop on the bench to plane against. With the board sawn on the edges approximately square(ish) he balances the board on its edge and begins to plane the upper edge. Use a shim here or there to keep it roughly plumb. Straighten and square this upper edge enough to allow the board, when flipped over with the other edge up, to stand without shims. Now begin to plane seriously for straight and square.
He says if the board falls over it is an immediate feed back that you are planing out of square with the table. This is valuable for short boards that you want to quickly get into shape without a lot of clamping and unclamping. With practice you will be able to edge plane small boards down to 3/8 inch thick by several inches wide this way. After that wider longer stock will be a cinch.
He then flips over the top edge that you are working so it is now down on the bench and then hold a square on the table and near the board it is easy to see if the edge is square and you can use the table top as your straight edge and check for teeter along the length or gaps between table and the edge. Then taking note of where to plane next just flip it back the way it was and plane until straight and square.
I did not find an article here by him specifically on edge planing but there is an article in Woodworker's Journal 2000 August issue p. 26
Ian Kirby recommends curling your fingers under the plane to sense the bottom for edge planing as some have mentioned.
BioHaz1906
re: le method ala philip/C Haywards
Welp that's all she wrote. Some stories end in mystery and intrigue. But we learned some things. The dangers of mucking about with "scientific" instruments for the untrained. Softer woods are fun to work. One measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions. But what about Naomi.? and watch out for the riders of zebra.
Fun videos on planing were done by Jim Kingshott. Educational and entertaining.
Work Safe, Count to 10 when your done for the day !!
Bruce S.
Ok, this topic has blown up way more than I expected. I thought there would be a simple you plane 90 by ...... some guys have given math and geometry lessons to answer the question :) Thanks for all the advice guys.
Bio
>a simple you plane 90 by ......Maybe this artical is what you expect:http://www.taunton.com/finewoodworking/SkillsAndTechniques/SkillsAndTechniquesPDF.aspx?id=2652
Edited 10/26/2008 1:32 am by rocIt is just what everyone has been attempting to say here. Perhaps it will be in a view that will make the light bulb go on.Or maybe you want one of these to play with:http://www.lie-nielsen.com/catalog.php?sku=95I have one but it is not for jointing boards just making quick 90's for trim carpentry etc.If you want a 90° edge: face a board flat, put a square against it to see where the edge is out of square and plane until square. What else can we say ? ! ? ! ?
Edited 10/29/2008 2:06 am by roc
>videos by Jim KingshottI totally agree ! I say get these treasures while you can. Seeing the big old infill jointer in use was worth the price of admission and there is so much more. Great videos !When I bought mine they had nothing but VHS with rumors of DVD. I held out and bugged them as long as I could. They never got the DVDs in stock until after I had a complete set of VHS. Isn't that always the way.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled