Do hand cut rasps make a difference?

[James Spillman]

At the beginning of the pandemic last March I paused on furniture making to concentrate on small projects. I started making Shaker oval boxes. Purchasing instructions and box making supplies from John Wilson is probably the best decision I've ever made in my 50 years of woodworking. He is truly a master.
Making nice boxes involves a lot of fine woodworking skills. Feathered edges and precise bevels really enhance the appeal of the finished box. I use cabinet maker rasps and files to try to finely tune my boxes. The rasps are all machined rasps and do quite well as I gain more experience using them. I've read that there are hand cut rasps like Auriou and Corradi that are far superior to the standard machine cut rasps. Is this true? Do these higher priced rasps really help you to make a more pleasing oval box?

[Jim Koepke]

James, Here is a post that might help answer your questions > https://sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?255103

IMO, yes the Logier, Auriou and Corradi rasps are worth the extra cost. With my 15 grain Auriou there is no reason to sand afterwards.

Another 'trick' you might try for precise work is a chisel with a 90º bevel.

Recently when making a mallet the handle was partially turned on a lathe. The transition between flat sides and the turned portion wasn't finished on the lathe:

Transition Ring Around Handle.jpg

That was taken down with a chisel with the tip of the bevel ground to 90º:

90º Bevel Chisel in Use.jpg

It also works well for fine tuning the fit of pins and dovetails.

jtk

[Mark Rainey]

James, I am finishing up this table and I used a couple spokeshaves to smooth the curved top, and then used Corradi and Auriou rasps to put a small chamfer around the edge. I then smoothed that chamfer with a mill file. I have been using the mill file lately and am surprised at how smooth it can get the surface after the rasps. I just finished planing the top with my Clifton #3. There are a couple tool marks here and there but I think I will leave them and avoid sandpaper. I like my rasps but I also like my Shinto rasp for hogging off wood.

Table 2.jpgTable 3.jpg

[Jerome Andrieux]

. The rasps are all machined rasps and do quite well as I gain more experience using them. I've read that there are hand cut rasps like Auriou and Corradi that are far superior to the standard machine cut rasps. Is this true? Do these higher priced rasps really help you to make a more pleasing oval box?

A hand made rasp won’t make as much a difference as experience in using the tool. They don’t cut faster nor leave a much smoother than the equivalent machine made ones. They would however prevent you from digging tracks as the teeth are not perfectly aligned.
There is also a wide choice of sizes, “grit” and shapes to fit your needs.

I find Auriou rasps (which may be cheaper here in France) really nice to use. I consider them as “finishing” rasps, they excel at that task.

[Charles Guest]

If you're able to vary the direction at which you attack the work they make very little difference. You may want to scrape a little afterward to brighten up the surface (very lightly and judiciously), or burnish after the rasp with handfuls of fine sawdust and burlap to knock down any errant nibs, rows, and furrows and to impart a soft sheen. I hesitatingly mention sandpaper since its mere mention agitates more than it illuminates. I wouldn't be without some.

[Mark Rainey]

I wouldn't be without some.

Daring to say in the Neanderthal Forum, but I agree.

[Charles Guest]

Daring to say in the Neanderthal Forum, but I agree.

Here's the text of a post Don McConnell made on the SAPFM forum:

« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2010, 05:34:21 PM »

Hi Joe et al,

I think the most direct answer to your question may be found in Peter Nicholson's _Practical Carpentry, Joinery, and Cabinet-Making_, published in 1826. On page 25 of the section entitled "Practical Cabinet-Making," he has several paragraphs under the heading of "Cleaning off Wood-Work, &c." In part, he writes:

"The finishing the surface of wood-work is sometimes called polishing; but, to avoid using the same word in two senses, we shall apply the ordinary term of cleaning off. The mode of commencing this operation depends on whether it be a veneered or a solid surface that is to be cleaned off. In solid wood the surface is rendered as even as possible; first, by a finely-set smoothing plane, and then by a steel scraper, to remove the marks of the plane. The surface is afterwards rubbed with glass-paper, finishing with the finest kind, so as to render the surface as smooth as possible."

For woods prone to raised grain during finishing, he describes dampening the surface and re-smoothing with the glass-paper or pumice stone. I learned this technique under the name of "flashing," and have also heard it called "whiskering." For veneered surfaces, Nicholson describes using coarser and finer toothing planes, followed up with a scraper and glass-paper. In either event, Nicholson treats this cleaning off process as a precursor to "common polishing" (oil polishing), wax polishing, french polishing and varnishing.

[As to filling the pores, Nicholson describes adding finely sieved brick dust, or, preferably, tripoli to the linseed oil for new work, if doing oil polishing.]

Nicholson trained/worked as a cabinet-maker during the 1770's, so it isn't too much of a stretch to think that he is passing on the practice of "cleaning off" as he experienced it during that time. Though, of course, when it comes to "polishing," french polishing became popular a little later. However, I'm not aware of any direct textual evidence from that period with which we can definitively confirm this. Which leaves us with indirect and fragmentary evidence from which we can assess whether it is possible and/or likely.

As to the use of a steel scraper (cabinet scraper), I have yet to find any mention from the 18th century. Though, personally, I strongly suspect it was commonly in use to the point that it was taken for granted. Possibly cabinet scrapers were not commercially available, though there are plenty of mentions of scrapers for use on the hulls of wooden ships. Tangentially, I've run across a passing mention, dated 1758, in the context of smoothing the ground for japanning, of the use of fish-skin ... or a "glass shave."

As to the use and availability of abrasives, the other early mentions also have to do with fish-skin. In a 1745 book on farriery, we find this brief excerpt: “... may well be compared to the Fish-Skin used by Joiners in smoothing up their Work ... .” Then, in a 1766 book on angling, appears this text: “ ... The Skin of [Monk] Fish is very rough, and covered all over with filthy Slime. It is very much used to polish Wood and Ivory, and goes by the general Name of Fish Skin.” Finally, as a change of pace, by 1774, in a work on amateur scientific experiments, there is mention of using emery paper to smooth a piece of box[wood] being used in a scientific instrument.

As to commercially available abrasives, I am interested in John’s mention of a possible 1760’s Philadelphia listing of sand or glass paper. Tom Clark, the man I apprenticed with, thought he remembered a similar citation, but we’ve never been able to track it down. I’d be very interested if anyone has specific information on this.

I suspect several people are already aware of the listings from Christopher Gabriel’s inventories toward the end of the 18th century:

1791
13 quire glass paper
2 Bundles Dutch Rush
1 [lot?] Fish Skin

1800
11 Ream & 6 Quire Paper Emery
1 Ream Sand Do.

A slightly earlier mention is a newspaper advertisement dated February 17, 1786. The listings are for “Ironmongery and Hardware Goods,” from Forrest and Brown, High Street, Edinburgh, “At the Gilded Cock.” Along with listings for Joiners and Carpenters Tools, these abrasives are found:

“Fish skin, Fin Tails & Rushes
Emery Paper, & Sand Ditto.
Coarse and fine Glass Paper.”

Though Joe didn’t ask about finishes, it seems this thread has veered off this issue to some extent. This strikes me as an important question due to the fact that it seems there is a widespread assumption that cabinet/furniture finishes, prior to the introduction of french polishing, were typically indifferent and lackluster. Based on microscopic studies of small samples, the conservators and curators at Winterthur are finding that the third quarter 18th century pieces they’ve studied largely refute this assumption. Specifically, they have been finding that the residue of resins still extant in the surfaces of these pieces are consistent with the varnish finishes known to be in use at the time.

When these varnishes are discussed to any extent in the older literature, the quality of shine or gloss almost invariably comes up. For example, Richard Neve, in 1736, says: “Varnish, or Vernish, of Vernix, Lat. a viscid Compound of Gums and other Ingredients for setting a Gloss upon Cabinets, Pictures, and other Works. ...” A second example comes from a widely advertised prize, or premium, being offered by the [London] Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce, in a period from about 1758 to 1762. This calls for the production of a varnish, better than Martin’s (copal) varnish from Paris, on the basis of hardness, transparency, “being capable of the finest polish,” and resistance to cracking.

This emphasis is borne out by paintings from the period, as has already been mentioned. Here are links to four period paintings which show reflections indicating glossy surfaces to one degree or another (Larry posted a link to one of these on another forum some time back). The first of these is pretty subtle, but useful to look at. Some of them can be enlarged by clicking on them:

http://tinyurl.com/ykv662j

http://collections.tepapa.govt.nz/ObjectDetails.aspx?oid=41241

http://tinyurl.com/y99orgv

http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=yl07522443wk2u60&size=largest

Of course, these are high-style pieces, as David already mentioned. This is to be expected because of the social status of likely subjects for portraits from that period. But I think these images, and the information about the varnish finishes, are important in refuting the seemingly common assumption that cabinet-makers and their clients were indifferent in their approach to surface preparation and finish quality before the introduction of french polish.

Don McConnell
Eureka Springs, AR

[John Keeton]

Off topic, but in the 70s and 80s when I was building longrifles, I would collect window glass from various sources and use broken pieces for scrapers. Put a piece of tape on the edge that was held for protection and it did a great job. That was before I knew about metal scrapers. It may be that the 18th century folks did the same.

[Mel Fulks]

Off topic, but in the 70s and 80s when I was building longrifles, I would collect window glass from various sources and use broken pieces for scrapers. Put a piece of tape on the edge that was held for protection and it did a great job. That was before I knew about metal scrapers. It may be that the 18th century folks did the same.

I'm pretty sure they did that...and found other uses for it. Breaking glass was a big deal !

[Charles Guest]

I'm pretty sure they did that...and found other uses for it. Breaking glass was a big deal !

You can see a scraper being employed on these tea tables. They seem to have turned out rather well:

Piecrust Tea Table Building Process Part 2 by Doucette and Wolfe Furniture Makers - YouTube