Laminating wood for traditional plane

[Shaun Mahood]

I'm going to try my hand at making some traditional mortised planes, and was wondering if if there's any recommendations for laminating the body to width. I've got blanks of pine (1st practice) and ash (2 piece lamination for 2nd practice), and am thinking hard maple for the next ones. Should I be aiming for a specific width to laminate the bodies to width?

[Mark Baldwin III]

In the book "Wooden Planes and How to Make Them" it is recommended to have 9/32 of width on either side of the iron.

[Shaun Mahood]

Thanks Mark - any ideas if it matters how you get there? A bunch of 1" boards laminated together, a couple 2", anything like that?

[Robert Egilsrud]

Should the boards be laminated vertically or horiziontally for a krenov style smoother?

[Andy Mail]

If the central piece is to be laminated, I think the direction of the grain would determine whether you want horizontal or vertical laminations. Wood expands or contracts perpendicular to the grain. If the grain were oriented horizontal and you laminated vertical, you may end up with the ramp an/or sole having one lamination moving up more than the other. You really want your ramp and sole to be as stable as possible. Therefore, laminate whichever way keeps the central body grain vertical.

If the central piece is a solid piece I don't think it matters which way the grain is oriented.

I may be overthinking it, but that's my 2¢.

[john brenton]

It depends on how you plan to secure the iron. If the central piece were wedged in the body itself as typical one piece wood planes are, you want horizontal grain. If you were using a roman pin you would want vertical grain.

As to the comment about wood movement, all wooden planes with traditional wedges are made with horizontal grain. I may be wrong, but I think there may different opinions of why. I'm fairly certain that it is because vertical grain would pop the cheeks off when you wedged in the iron.

EDIT: I said what I said, but then just now stumbled on to this on a completely unrelated search: http://pfollansbee.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/further-thoughts-on-fore-planes-scrub-planes/

I don't think he/they are right on this.






If the central piece is to be laminated, I think the direction of the grain would determine whether you want horizontal or vertical laminations. Wood expands or contracts perpendicular to the grain. If the grain were oriented horizontal and you laminated vertical, you may end up with the ramp an/or sole having one lamination moving up more than the other. You really want your ramp and sole to be as stable as possible. Therefore, laminate whichever way keeps the central body grain vertical.

If the central piece is a solid piece I don't think it matters which way the grain is oriented.

I may be overthinking it, but that's my 2¢.

[Kees Heiden]

Hi Shaun

Your post catched my attention, because I am working on something similar. Beech is plentifull overhere in Holland, so I have some nice thick pieces and no need to laminate, so I can't really help you with that one. Did you read Leif's article about a similar project? http://norsewoodsmith.com/content/building-traditional-coffin-smoother

I wouldn't bother with pine. There is a lot of endgrain cutting involved in morticing a plane and endgrain pine is a pain. It's just too soft. Ash might be a better choice. There have also always been oak planes around, can't you get some thick quarter sawn oak? I know beech is difficult to get in the US, so just to make you jealous, it is a wonderfull wood to work while still being plenty hard enough. Another idea might be cherry? If at all possible I wouln't laminate the stock. It is kind of pointless to choose the more difficult morticing technique when you are laminating anyway.

For dimensions, you can find some drawings on the net for example:
http://www.cornishworkshop.co.uk/galootishgleanings.html
http://toolemera.com/bkpdf/haywardhowtobk.pdf
And there are some scaled pictures somewhere on this forum from an 18th century jack from george wilson.

Maybe you can even get some ideas from my blog, http://seekelot.blogspot.com/2011/04/schaafje-maken.html. I was pleasently surprised with the ease of working with ramp blocks. It doesn't relieve you from meassuring, because the chisels tend to deflect so you need to carefully steer them anyway. But it does help to get smooth even cuts. I am still having some clogging problems at the tips of the wedge. But I catched a cold and am now too lethargis to even think about going to the workshop.

Have fun and please make pictures, Kees.

[Andy Mail]

...snip

As to the comment about wood movement, all wooden planes with traditional wedges are made with horizontal grain. I may be wrong, but I think there may different opinions of why. I'm fairly certain that it is because vertical grain would pop the cheeks off when you wedged in the iron.

...snip

I'm not sure what you mean by this - I can't see the physics behind it. If the grain in the central piece runs vertically, eg parallel to the cheeks, what mechanism would pop off the cheeks? The wedge is held by either complementary slots in the cheeks or a dowel. The wedging force would want to shear the cheeks off the central piece or cause the down to rupture the cheeks, but I don't see what other forces are introduced by the grain orientation.

[john brenton]

Give it a try. I'm sure there have been tons of planes made successfully with every kind of grain orientation imaginable. But the first plane I made was with vertical grain based on my assumption about wood movement and planes. The pressure from the wedge didn't literally "pop the cheeks off", but about 1/4" or so on either side cracked off fairly quickly.


I'm not sure what you mean by this - I can't see the physics behind it. If the grain in the central piece runs vertically, eg parallel to the cheeks, what mechanism would pop off the cheeks? The wedge is held by either complementary slots in the cheeks or a dowel. The wedging force would want to shear the cheeks off the central piece or cause the down to rupture the cheeks, but I don't see what other forces are introduced by the grain orientation.

[Andy Mail]

Was this a solid piece or laminated? I could see it being an issue if it were a solid block with the mouth & ramp chopped out.

[Shaun Mahood]

Hi Kees,

thanks for the post - I thought I would use the pine as a super rough test case, make all my first stupid mistakes on a free piece of wood. Then I can make all my next stupid mistakes on the ash that I already have.

Hard maple is pretty affordable here compared to other woods, so I'm going to use that once I have some sort of idea what I'm doing. Those links look like a great help, I've also got 2 books on the way. I will definitely take some pictures.

I think my original question must have been poorly worded. I have a few different options of width for buying my wood, but all of them right now are not think enough to make a plane without laminating. Would it be better for me to buy 1" thick boards and laminate a few together, or buy the thickest boards I can and laminate 2 together to get my desired width? Or does it even matter?



Hi Shaun

Your post catched my attention, because I am working on something similar. Beech is plentifull overhere in Holland, so I have some nice thick pieces and no need to laminate, so I can't really help you with that one. Did you read Leif's article about a similar project? http://norsewoodsmith.com/content/building-traditional-coffin-smoother

I wouldn't bother with pine. There is a lot of endgrain cutting involved in morticing a plane and endgrain pine is a pain. It's just too soft. Ash might be a better choice. There have also always been oak planes around, can't you get some thick quarter sawn oak? I know beech is difficult to get in the US, so just to make you jealous, it is a wonderfull wood to work while still being plenty hard enough. Another idea might be cherry? If at all possible I wouln't laminate the stock. It is kind of pointless to choose the more difficult morticing technique when you are laminating anyway.

For dimensions, you can find some drawings on the net for example:
http://www.cornishworkshop.co.uk/galootishgleanings.html
http://toolemera.com/bkpdf/haywardhowtobk.pdf
And there are some scaled pictures somewhere on this forum from an 18th century jack from george wilson.

Maybe you can even get some ideas from my blog, http://seekelot.blogspot.com/2011/04/schaafje-maken.html. I was pleasently surprised with the ease of working with ramp blocks. It doesn't relieve you from meassuring, because the chisels tend to deflect so you need to carefully steer them anyway. But it does help to get smooth even cuts. I am still having some clogging problems at the tips of the wedge. But I catched a cold and am now too lethargis to even think about going to the workshop.

Have fun and please make pictures, Kees.