Replies

1. 
   DavidxDoud | Jul 07, 2002 09:36am | #1

    Should I plane panels on a planer after glue-up or should I consider hand planing to a finish? 

   perhaps both,  depending on the quality of your glue-ups -  

    If I did opt for hand planing would I still need to sand the panels or can the planing be the final finish?

   the planing can and should be your final finish -  

    Lastly any finishing suggestions? 

   altho there will be other opinions,  I like raw linseed oil, applied with a brush,  allowed to soak in and then wiped with a cloth - I sometimes follow a few days later with boiled linseed oil,  applied with a brush and wiped with a cloth - the raw soaks in,  the boiled will form a film which is fine as long as it is not thick on the wood - cheap and easy - there will be other suggestions I'm sure - try them out on scrap and use whatever trips your trigger -

   as an aside,  have you considered 'raising' the panels?  set your table saw at about 12-13*,  stand the panel on edge,  and rip it down to about 1/4" at the edge - or use a shaper - here's a pict - a poor pict,  but a nice effect, IMO -

   
1. 
   racwood | Jul 07, 2002 09:10pm | #3

   David, Thanks so much for the info.  Regarding your last comment I will infact raise the panel with a shaker style bit that will give me a slight bevel (22 degrees) on the panel edge and of course provide for a good interface between panel edge and rails/stiles.  Thanks for sending along your photo.  I will proceed with the hand planing as my final finish, perhaps using a planer to bring glued up panels down close to my final (to be determined!) thickness.  Any tips on planing a 42" long panel?  Again, thanks in advance, Rich Collins

   PS.  I did some experimental planing with a freshly sharpened, 50 year old Craftsmen smoothing plane I inherited from my incle in original box.  The doug fir came out STUNNING in apperance.  Sure seesm like the way to go.

1. 
   DavidxDoud | Jul 10, 2002 04:37am | #9

   yes,  it's fun attacking pretty,  straight grained panels with a well tuned hand plane -

   Any tips on planing a 42" long panel? 

   well - analyze your power thicknesser snipe and keep your glued up panels long enough that it is not a factor (do you have a wide enough planer?) - 1/2 the job is the plane,  about which you have recieved much good advice - the other half is holding the panel as you operate the plane - set your bench up for the job,  so as to make sure the panel is held securely so you can concentrate on your stroke,  engaging and exiting the face cleanly - the panel face will be straightforward,  the beveled sides and ends a little more difficult - if there is any cup to the board,  getting a clean job on the end grain will be difficult,  so do a good job jointing the glue up edges - skew the plane as you attack the end grain and find an angle where the tool slices cleanly - this is a good place to have a separate plane set up for end grain -  you describe a 10" plane - my favorite plane measures 9 1/2" (#4 stanley) and is a little clumsy doing the end bevel,  but still do-able -

   as a philosphical point,  personally,  I don't concern myself much with 'perfectly' flat and such, work systematicly with a slightly crowned iron,  and let the resulting slightly undulating surface testify to the hand of the craftsman (artist?) - one of my earlier pieces is our dining table, the top of which is 2 pieces of 17" wide walnut salvaged from a wainscot - it has ridges from the rather high crowned iron the craftsman used, you can follow each stroke, and decipher how he approached the one small knot common to the bookmatched pieces,  so as to not tear out - I find it infinately more interesting than a piece that is sanded flat -

   you realize that if you hand dress the panels,  you have about commited yourself to treating the frame the same?  if you don't,  it'll show - and... - this 22 degree angle seems rather acute for this size of panel - if I may,  I'll suggest you scrounge up some plywood or such and make a  panel with your 22* bit,  and one with angles of 12-13 degrees,  tack them up with the frame and look at them for a few days -

   I'll leave you with another pict - this of my favorite hand planing tool,  a 19th century wood dressing bench - love this digital camera - (pay no attention to the chop saw)

   
2. 
   Alan | Jul 07, 2002 09:43am | #2

   RW,

   First off:  I am a self professed Luddite and heretic when it comes to power tools.  So now you know what to expect.

   IMHO hand planing does produce a finish that is much superior than the best finish obtainable with machine planing and sanding.  I think (INE) this is mainly because it does not compress the wood fibers, as do all power planers and jointers; it cuts them cleanly.  The finish from hand planing is much clearer or "deeper" somehow.  It's almost as though you can see way down into the wood.  It's also pleasing to the touch, to feel the gentle undulations left by the plane.

   I have found that I can dispense entirely with sanding if I hand plane, followed, if necessary, with a card scraper.  Scraping is not always called for:  it depends on which plane I use and what sort of finish I'm looking for.

   You can have the best of both worlds.  You can run the stock through your thickness planer (if you have one) to dimension it, and then hand plane to clean up the surface.

   (Please excuse me if I'm now telling you things you already know.)  I would use either a number 3 or 4 with the iron honed into a Very gentle arc:  1/32" or so (I'm not a believer in low angle planes on long grain:  I guess I'm a heretic even among hand tool users).  Plane generally along the grain and "uphill" into the rising grain (so the iron will cut through the grain and not try to dive down into it).  Set the iron very fine and take a thin full length shaving from every square inch of the good side.  If you use a wide-iron smoother you can skew the plane a bit; that makes for easier planing and a longer lasting iron.  If there's any tear-out or ridges, you can clean them up with a sharp card scraper.

   If you're going to do a raised panel you can still hand plane all the exposed surfaces.  Just be sure the shoulder is no thinner than the iron on your narrowest plane.  Or, you can make your raised panel as I do:  with a panel raising plane!  (You knew that was coming, didn't you?)

   I've made several pieces of furniture out of doug fir.  With hand planing, a light stain and either a wet-sanded oil (BLO, tung or Danish: my favorite is BLO with no stain) or a good oil based varnish, quarter sawn fir is spectacular.

   Alan

1. 
   racwood | Jul 08, 2002 12:18am | #4

   Alan,  LOVE all your info. Thank you!  A couple of questions:  What is a card scraper?  Does it refer to the size?  Shape?  Other?  What is BLO in reference to finish?  Overall I am looking for a nice deep finish.  I agree with you as to the resultant look of the handplaned DF - outstanding depth and feel.  I am not looking for a "machine perfect" finish nor am I trying to accent the ahnd done nature of the work.  I am more inclined to showcase beauty of the wood via the best technique and not make it so apparent how it was acheived.  Lastly, your refernece to a no 3 or 4  refers to plane size i assume.  Please advise.  Kind regards, Rich Collins

1. 
   Alan | Jul 08, 2002 09:16am | #5

   Rich,

   A card scraper is a scraping blade that is either hand held or used in a special holder.  It is made of spring steel, generally about .032" or less.  It can be any size, I suppose, but is usually about the size of a file card (3" x 5"?).  There are specific steps to sharpening a scraper that makes a very small, turned cutting edge.  Properly sharpened and used it produces very, very fine shavings.  Improperly sharpened or used it creates dust.  But even when they make dust they can still make a very smooth finished surface.

   So called "bench planes" are numbered 1 through 8.  They are made of metal (there are wooden bodied and transitional wood and metal bodied planes with the same names) and the term generally refers to the Bailey or bedrock style planes which are characterized by a bevel down iron (or less correctly a "blade") a back iron or "double" iron, and a lever cap.  There are some intermediate fractions such as a 4 1/2 or a 5 3/4, but the most used are 3 through 8.  3 and 4 are smoothing planes; a 5 is called a jack plane; 6 is a fore plane; 7 is a jointer or try plane; and 8 is a jointer plane.  The planes increase in size as the numbers increase.  For much better explanations, along with beautiful photographs and illustrations take a look at The Handplane Book, by Garret Hack.  This book also has lots of useful information on sharpening irons, tuning and using planes.

   BLO is boiled linseed oil; as opposed to raw linseed oil.  Boiled linseed oil is processed and made with various ingredients so it will cure and harden within a day or two or so.  Raw linseed oil will not cure within a human lifetime.

   Alan

1. 
   racwood | Jul 09, 2002 03:40pm | #6

   Alan,  I am curious to know why, when planing a 42" panel, the reccommendation is to use a smoothing or jack plane in lieu of a try or joiinter plane.  I have to admit my uncle's old 10" Craftsman "smoothing" plane did a fantastic job.  However, my thinking would be that a longer plane (18 - 22") would be preferable.  Any comments?  As I mentioned the newly sharpened smoothing plane rendered a wonderful result, just like you described.  I do need to get rid of a slight burr on the edges of the blade face.  Is that why you mention putting a gentle arch into the face?  Again I really appreciate your and allthe comments.  Kind regards, Rich

1. 
   RSRose | Jul 09, 2002 09:46pm | #7

   A long joining plane gets long surfaces true and flat but it's too hard to control for the "final" smoothing. As you've proved to yourself, a properly set up 10" smoothing plane "did a fantastic job." Once the surface is flat, the smoothing plane has just one job to do which it does very well.

   I would stay away from using ANY linseed oil on this work. (But then I never have anything positive to say about linseed oil as a finish!) I would finish with shellac.

   Rich

2. 
   racwood | Jul 10, 2002 04:42am | #10

   Rich, Then Uncle Frank's old Craftsmen it will  be!  I've got a Jack plane (#4?)comming as well so I'll play with it too.  I'm not sure about the finish.  I know I want something subtle to highlight the wood but no shiny high tech stuff.  I guess I'll have to play with all these possibilities and render my own opinion.  I really appreciate your input.  Kind regards, Rich Collins

3. 
   Alan | Jul 09, 2002 10:17pm | #8

   Rich,

   You can use a jointer to smooth panels.  It does a wonderful job if it's properly tuned and has a sharp iron.  It's especially useful when you want a dead flat panel: the long sole rides along the high spots, trimming them and leaving the low spots alone, until you take one long continuous shaving.  That's why I recommended a smoother--a #3 or a #4.

   If I don't need the face of the panel to be dead flat I usually reach for my #4--no matter how large the panel is.  With the #4 I can smooth the panel without having to first flatten it completely.  In other words, I don't like to do work I don't need to do.

   I find the smaller plane is also much easier to handle than the big jointer.  This can be an advantage if I have to skew it--or even reverse the direction in which I'm planing--to get through a tough spot with opposing grain, or a knot, for instance.  With the smaller plane it's also much easier to stop or begin a stroke in the middle of the panel.

   I use my jointer mainly for edge jointing.  To do that job the iron needs to be sharpened straight across, and that has distinct disadvantages when smoothing.  With square corners on the iron there's a good chance that if I skew the plane the corner will dig in and leave a gouge.  It's also rather difficult--or impossible--to not leave a little ridge along the edge of the cut.  (I'm sure you can see why: with a flat cutting edge the iron will cut a little flat-bottomed trench, leaving a ridge on each side.)  To reduce the ridge I have to set the iron ever finer as I work, so the ridge it leaves is smaller each time; but I still must use a scraper to eliminate them completely.

   The best way to eliminate both the problems of digging in and leaving a ridge at the edges of the cuts is to hone the iron with a slight arc.  An iron with a slightly rounded edge that is set fine enough that the entire width of the iron doesn't cut, will take a shaving that is deepest in the middle but then tapers away to nothing towards each edge:  no ridges.  The arced iron is also what leaves the gently undulating surface that is the much prized mark of hand worked wood.

   There was something bothering me about my previous posts to you.  I looked in my journals and realized that I had given you the wrong information.  I did not wet sand the BLO on the doug fir pieces I wrote about.  Instead, I made three applications of BLO thinned three to one with naptha, and the rest of the coats were thinned one to one.

   Alan

4. 
   racwood | Jul 10, 2002 05:12am | #11

   Alan,

   Thanks for the excellent explanations.  A good friend has some wonderful old planes from turn of the century. They belonged to a carpenter who worked for Curry Co. in Yosemite.  He wants me to try the jointer.  Think I'll use it on the edges!  While I've got your elctronic attention here's another question though not regarding finishing:  How should I hold my rails and stiles together (i.e. the "frame" for all the panels)  I've got a bunch of sections to make up, mostly 4 and 8 foot increments.  I'm thinking of just biscuits with and edge jointer.  Should I opt for mortise/tenon?   The top rail be "capped by a rather extensive set of moldings encompassing another 10 " of elevation and the bottom will rest on some base molding.  Should I plan on attaching each and every stile to the wall or just afix the preassembled frame as necessary?  Kind regards, Rich 

5. 
   Alan | Jul 10, 2002 05:37am | #12

   Rich,

   As I wrote in my previous post I don't like to do more work than I must (I am a very lazy sort).  I wouldn't dream of joining the rails and stiles of wainscoting with mortise and tenon joints--especially if the top edge, and whatever lies beneath, was going to be covered with molding.  That's just way too much work.  I don't have a biscuit joiner (and I don't want one) so I would probably attach them with half laps.  That would be over kill for strength, but that's still the way I would probably do it.  But if I can't persuade you to toss all your forked-tail tools (surely the instruments of Beelzebub himself!) I guess a biscuit joiner would work fine.  (DISCLAIMER:  that really is a guess; I know nothing about biscuit joiners.)

   As for attaching it to the wall:  attach it strongly enough that it doesn't fall off.  Seriously, I would probably nail the bottom every 6 or 8 inches, and nail the top into each stud (I'm assuming all the nails will be covered with the molding.)

   Alan 

3. 
   StanleyNiemiec | Jul 10, 2002 07:43am | #13

   It seems extremely easy to tell someone else to hand plane 200 square feet of panelling and another thing to actually do it, especially so that there is consistency and uniformity among the 50 panels vis a vis thickness and final surface appearance.

   Having worked a fair amount of DF for interior finished work, I will definitely state it is not my favorite wood.  Even with supposed VG material, it is a bitch to work with hand tools.  In my recollection the grain tends to rise and fall within a board, and therein is subject to both tear-out and splintering.  If you book match and the grain is not perfectly VG, one side of the panel may have rising grain and the other side diving.  Hand work will be tough in these circumstances.

   After glue-up, I would suggest you machine the panel so that the back is flat and then thickness plane all the panels to a uniform dimension (on the front surface).  Raise your panels and if necessary machine the back surface so that the panel "tongues" are of uniform thickness.  I use a three wing fluting shaper cutter and come in about 0.375" from all the edges. (who cares what the back of the panel looks like  --  only the mice will see it; the main issue is getting a good fit in the grooves.)   At this point in time you can either sand the front surfaces to remove machine marks or work with hand tools to produce a hand-worked look.

   I have plenty of Luddite tendencies but you have to realize that besides yourself, it is likely that only 1 person in a thousand will actually appreciate the difference between hand planing/scraping and thorough, quality hand sanding.

   With regard to finish choice, I moved into a house that had mucho DF panelling (t&g boards).  Those boards were oiled and after a number of years, looked like hell for several reasons.  First, the finish was not applied evenly so that streaking and lap marks were visible to me.  Secondly DF photo-oxidizes and gets darker as do oil finishes.  As a result, the wood/finish combination can get very dark making the room dark and dreary.  Finally DF is relatively soft and over time, it gets dinged and banged into, and the dents and damage show.  There is no good way to repair this damage without finishing the entire wall.

   It might be worth your while to consider applying several coats of finish before final installation.  If you finish the panels on a flat surface, you will tend to avoid a lot of drips, runs, and sags.  You will also be able to coat the end grain of panels as well as the entire machined/raised surface.  Thus you will not get a finish line when the wood shrinks.  The finished pieces after installation makes it easier to fill/putty nail holes.  And instead of applying multiple coats of finish in place, you only have to do the final.  And for a finish choice, I would recommend either a flat or matte varnish that does not photo-oxidize.  Myself I would prespray 'em with lacquer, and then fill/touch-up the nail holes.  Oil finishes are extremely poor as barriers to vaporous moisture movement into and out of the wood; and they are very difficult to keep clean/wash.

1. 
   RSRose | Jul 10, 2002 08:05am | #14

   Good advice. Specifically, what varnish would you use?

   Rich

1. 
   StanleyNiemiec | Jul 10, 2002 09:17am | #15

   I haven't used varnishes for years with the exception of an urethane earlier this year that turned out to be a nightmare because I need to glaze the piece.

   I seem to remember using McCloskey's years ago but any soya alkyd would probably do.  The key is to get one that is non-photochemically reactive.  Other individuals could likely recommend a suitable urethane varnish  --  like I said previously, I spray lacquer (for 99.99% of my finishes).

   I don't know how you will affix the panels and trim to the wall  --  most likely it will be with nails.  When I am installing woodwork like that, I rely on my pneumatic nailers.  When it is prefinished, I am very careful and tend to use the minimum number of fasteners (partly because of the filling/touch-up work required).  If you are hand hammering, you will have to be careful so that you don't leave peen marks on the finished wood.

1. 
   RSRose | Jul 10, 2002 09:37am | #16

   Re:(varnish) "one that is non-photochemically reactive."

   Why? And how does one tell?

   Rich

1. 
   StanleyNiemiec | Jul 10, 2002 12:35pm | #18

   Photochemically reactive finishes darken when exposed to light.  It should say so on the label.  Also avoid thinning with turpentine as it is photochemically reactive.

   The guy that built the home I was referring to was a Psychology professor and did some very bogus things during construction.  For example, he believed that his children should spend only the barest minimum of time in their bedrooms and therein made them so small you could barely turn around in them.  He also was no genius with electricity  --  on two instances he had 30 amp breakers with #10 wire running to the first junction box; coming out of the junction box, he ran #14 wire.  The lap marks appear in some very strange positions and it looks like he would do part of a wall and then stop.  Then (I assume at some later time) he would come back and do another part of the wall.

2. 
   DavidxDoud | Jul 10, 2002 09:46am | #17

   sanding vs jack plane - - assuming that the grain allowed for 'sweet' planing,  I believe I could hand dress a panel to finish faster than sanding - leaving crisp edges, breathing no dust,  and not hearing the sander - -I agree that it's machine work to get the panel accurately dimensioned - I can't speak to DF from experience,  but Rich C indicated that his sample worked well - and I did finish a 350sf project of this nature this previous winter - the effort is not small,  but nothing with which to be intimidated -

   I have to question in your experience with the DF paneling if the finish was plain oil - from the description of streaking and overlap,  it sounds to me like there was a varnish component in the finish - your point about dings and wear is well taken,  but to freshen an oil finish,  you clean,  oil,  and wipe - repairs to a film finish might be more complicated - Rich did ask for a 'low tech' solution,  and it doesn't get much easier than slopping on oil and wiping off the excess -drips, runs, and sags are not a factor - your points about oxidation are well taken,  and should be considered -

   In this case,  it sounds like the panels are the easy part - Rich talks of 'rather extensive sets of mouldings' - I have observed that 'dirt' and maintenance is mainly associated with horizontal profiles and horizontal cracks between components - any roughness along the top of a profile collects dirt which is turned into mud when wiped with a damp cloth,  showcasing any lasp of sanding - debris resides in cracks which shows as a line - minimizing these elements minimizes maintenance -

   BTW,  Fine Homebuilding #128 has a fine article entitled 'recycled redwood wainscoting' - it would be a good reference for this project,  addressing issues of backing/attachment -

   respectfully, DOUD

1. 
   racwood | Jul 12, 2002 05:56am | #20

   David, Thanks for the article reference.  As for my molding component I think I can lay your fears to rest as it all progresses outward from the lower extrmity and is capped by a 1 X 4 with a bevel  planed into the top.  I HOPEFULLY will not experince too much dust alighting on any lower members - think I have them all fairly well protected.  Wish I was smart enough to get a copy of the design on the web, but I'm not.  If its any solace I did steal much of the design from an old classroom at the University of Santa Clara.  It looks great today.  Kind regards, Rich Collins

3. 
   racwood | Jul 12, 2002 05:50am | #19

   Thanks for the tips.  Pre finishing really seems like a good idea.  Don't worry about the size of this project.  Believe me, I'm going to take it 3 1/2 sq feet at a time.  I'm in no hurry and honestly relish the time I'll be able to spend doing it.  The wood is truly amazing stuff - each piece seems to have it's own personality.  As I cut the first plank off of each 8 X 10 timber it's like opening a Christmas present.  I actually am lamenting that so much of it is vertical grain no matter how I cut it.  The trees must have been HUGE to have that broad a radius.  It's nice but the pieces with some flat(ter) grain actually have a better story to tell.  Hope I can handle the challenge they pose to a set of inexperienced hands and eyes!  As yet another mild complication I was able to extract some fairly highly figured material for a few of the 2 1/2" stiles.  Any tips out there on how I hand plane that curly mess?!?  Again thanks to all who have provided so much great information.  Rich Collins

1. 
   Alan | Jul 12, 2002 11:04pm | #21

   Rich,

   On really nasty grain try setting your smoother's iron to take a very light cut.  If you're still getting tear out with a very light cut and trying it from different directions, about the only thing you can do (short of buying an high angle plane) is to use a card scraper or a scraping plane.  Don't panic; you can get a brand new Stanley #80 for around thirty dollars--or for two or three dollars if you can find one at a yard sale.

   Alan

2. 
   Biscardi | Jul 15, 2002 09:44am | #22

   To each his own, but I have to agree with Stanley.

   Surfacing huge quantities of stock with a handplane is an onerous job. Having just handplaned a little fir, I will tell you that it is likely to tear out. The grain plunges in and out of the board and reverses. Do a small bit and see what I mean.

   I just finished a  piece with some highly figured walnut ( also a bear to plane). I planed and scrapped the presentation surfaces of it by hand after glue up. It really produced a lovely effect. I think you are best rewarded on spending your time doing dramatic woods in presentation areas then large areas of wainscotting.

   Then again, if you really like doing that sort of thing go for it.

   Frank

1. 
   Alan | Jul 15, 2002 08:32pm | #24

   Frank,

   Whether a task is onerous depends on whether or not you take pleasure in doing the task.  I love to work with my hand tools.  Onerous for me would be having to use power planers, jointers and sanders.  I take no pleasure in plugging things into the wall and then having to listen to their screams.  I do take pleasure in the feel of a well tuned hand plane making gossamer shavings on a pretty wood.  Apparently Rich does also.

   Alan

1. 
   Biscardi | Jul 16, 2002 06:00am | #25

   "Then again, if you like that sort of thing go for it."

   Frank

2. 
   racwood | Jul 16, 2002 07:28am | #26

   Frank, BG, Alan et al, Thanks so much for all your comments and suggestions.  You've all been a great help.  BG I too have learned a lot.  I now feel like I know what I'm talking about and I've hardly done anything!!  Yes the grain of this old doug fir is like a school of porpoise - up and down up and down, at least on some of the pieces.  From those I'll have to learn first hand how to be patient.  Today I borrowed and OLD No. 8 from a friend and jointed (tried?) an old ten foot piece of 9" wide sugar pine (salvaged from same mill) This will go into a table top (yet ANOTHER project!)    I'll tell you there is NOTHING like standing in a huge pile of fresh pine shavings in your barefeet while you take a sip of Pinot Noir between decisions on what to do next with the emerging beauty afixed to the top of your bench .  Alan I have to agree with you that power tool noise/dust/cost leave a lot to be desired.  Speed of work is certainly a saving grace but my life is fast enough.  I'm spending my $ on some old reliable beasts that can be cleaned, sharpened and enjoyed.  I can handle planing 5 or 6 square feet at a time.  I know I'll derive a great deal of satisfaction when it's all done ,even if nobody else does.  Kind regards, Rich Collins

3. 
   BG | Jul 15, 2002 01:13pm | #23

   Rich, Great thread you started, enjoying the education.

   Recently I did a coupla pieces in 6/4 ash; kitchen table and coffee table.  Used the jack plane (#5) and finished up with the joiner (#7).  Being inexperienced, I had some cut marks where I started and used the scrapper over the entire length to remove any marks.  I used several coats of Waterlux, hand applied and finished with some wax.  It really looks great with great depth ..just makes you want to touch it.

   Have you thought about using pocket screws for the rails and styles...and are your walls nice and flat ? will they be a problem?