Warren - need guidance for raised panel plane [Archive] - Sawmill Creek Woodworking Community

David Weaver

11-10-2014, 6:06 PM

Warren, I have the itch to build a raised panel plane, but want to get some idea on historical bevel sizes. I'm requesting your input because I know you make raised panels without the modern flat lip at the bottom of the bevel.

Can you give me an idea of what thickness your bevels are at the edge of a raised panel and how deep the grooves are in the rails on a typical cabinet sized door?

This seems like a rudimentary question, and I guess it is. I just want reasonably handsome proportions, and will probably make a plane with a sliding fence on the bottom (but not the side) so that it's relatively versatile.

Warren Mickley

11-10-2014, 7:35 PM

I generally make doors that are 7/8 thick with 5/16 grooves (5/16 for a moulding, 1/4 for the back). The grooves are usually deeper on the stiles than on the rails, like 5/16 or 3/8 for the stiles, and 1/4 or maybe 5/16 for the rails. There are more expansion worries horizontally than vertically, and you have to leave more empty clearance for the stiles. I think some historic work has both grooves the same. If the rails grooves are shallow, the tenon can be a little wider. For a 5/16 groove I usually mark the edges of the panel at around 1/4 or 7/32. You can adjust the fit by taking more of the bevel or by bevelling the back.

I usually draw a diagram of the panel and stile meeting to set up the dimensions. I have not used a panel raising plane. I think that they were generally used for panelling in rooms or doors, architectural work. In making a piece of furniture it is nice to be able to adjust the various dimensions for the size of panel etc.. With your cabinets you are doing enough to begin to justify making a plane.

I have a rail from an 18th century walnut cabinet in my lap. The ovolo is 5/16, the groove 1/4, the back 1/4, thickness is 13/16. The groove depth is 1/4. The edge of the tenon is even with the bottom of the groove.

David Weaver

11-10-2014, 9:07 PM

Thanks for the advice, Warren. I think you're right, it is sort of an indulgence. I probably need to make an effort to look at a few dozen older pieces. My parents have some very old furniture where the bevels are planed on the front, not perfectly, but in a way that looks nice, and the backs of the panels have been cut quickly with a draw knife.

I'm not sure what the right terminology is, maybe it's fielding - but the step that exists between the middle of the panel and the bevel is not there on their doors and I've made my kitchen doors that way - looking around, I don't see many similar panels. Unfortunately, my kitchen cabinets are about 2/3rds done and the doors are just router bit set cope and stick doors. The cabinets are permanent to the house, and my house is 1950s, so they're not really getting any special attention.

I'm making a plane partially for novelty, but I have a couple of pieces of furniture to put together for the house, and probably half a dozen doors.

I had an architectural panel raiser at one point made by John Bell, but it was far too large to do anything useful with cabinets, and it had a lot of erosion at the mouth.

Your advice will help me decide what I want to do for post-cabinet doors and how.

steven c newman

11-10-2014, 10:27 PM

While I am not warren, I have done a few raised panels lately.

Except i just used a Junior jack plane, or a #4 sized plane. Used a 1/4" plough plane on the last set of grooves.

Might want to look up the screen door i built.

David Weaver

11-10-2014, 10:36 PM

I need to look at a lot of things, but I'm hoping to look at stuff that was pre-widespread machine use and 150 years old or more. My parents have several pieces of that age, but they're fairly plain and maybe not a good representative sample.

It's proving not that easy to find much that isn't either old and ornamental or just new and machine done with very machine-like fixtures.

The idea of not fielding a panel with a step from the middle of the panel to the bevel is attractive because it allows finish planing the bevels. Of course, I wouldn't need a special plane for that, just any plane and held askew for the cross grain work.

Sean Hughto

11-10-2014, 10:38 PM

I own an excellent Robbins panel raiser. And I've made severally raised panel doors with hand tools ... But, wait, I'm not Warren, never mind.

David Weaver

11-10-2014, 10:45 PM

I own an excellent Robbins panel raiser. And I've made severally raised panel doors with hand tools ... But, wait, I'm not Warren, never mind.

Building a plane and raising a panel with it isn't much of a challenge. I'm not concerned about that part.

I want the panels to be accurate. I recall a discussion not that long ago of several people asserting that modern panels with a flat lip going into the groove were somehow superior to vintage panels that generally don't have them. Anyone who has ever looked at furniture a couple of hundred years old with pinned M&T and panels still in good shape knows that's hocum.

I don't want to make modern style panels, and figured that warren would have much more experience with period work.

If anyone else knows much about period raised panels or has examined a bunch of older ones and has input on "they're usually___", etc, I'm all ears.

Sean Hughto

11-10-2014, 10:49 PM

Kay. :rolleyes:

Tom M King

11-10-2014, 10:50 PM

I've seen a few old ones, but never with a flat part that goes in the groove, like you're talking about. It would be interesting to get Graham's experience from over there too.

I've seen a lot of interior doors with flush panels on one side, and just flush with the groove(flat) on the other. I guess it would be fairly easy to make those flush panels into raised panels, and keep the "modern" tongue.

steven c newman

11-10-2014, 11:27 PM

Seem to recall a Woodwright's Shop show on this subject. Roy even demostrated a few different planes, too.

pbs.org

As for my raised panels300061the bevel part

300062
Fitted up. There is a 3/8
" wide rebate along the backsides of the panels, that matches the depth of the groove the panel sits in.

300063
Cut with a #78.

Pat Barry

11-11-2014, 9:41 AM

It seems kinda stupid to do the raised panel with an edge tapered all the way to the edge. Is it all that modern to use the taper and flat lip?

Sean Hughto

11-11-2014, 9:51 AM

shhh, Pat! That's hokum! His priority is not learning how to build robust good looking doors, it is learning the "typical" measurements for 17th century doors.

Joe Leigh

11-11-2014, 9:59 AM

It seems kinda stupid to do the raised panel with an edge tapered all the way to the edge. Is it all that modern to use the taper and flat lip?

I think his point is the flat lip section prohibits him from making the bevel with a hand plane.

To me it's just an illustration of inferior construction for the sake of being "historically" correct.

Sean Hughto

11-11-2014, 10:18 AM

No, Joe. He understands that planes like this:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3076/2801245977_4f11248828_o.jpg
Can make the flat. He doesn't want to do that.

Frankly, I don't think the ancients make panels with bevels going all the way to the edge cause they determined it was superior. I think they were making work-a-day furniture of their time and didn't find the extra time or effort to do the extra step worthwhile. They could stop most of the rattling some strategic glue or a center peg at the top and the bottom.

Pat Barry

11-11-2014, 10:41 AM

I wonder if historically they would have then made a matching slot for the beveled edge or if they would just have put a plane groove in there and lived with the expansion causing cracking of the front groove edge?

Daniel Rode

11-11-2014, 10:45 AM

You're asking if historically they would have angles the groove to match the beveled panel edge?

I wonder if historically they would have then made a matching slot for the beveled edge or if they would just have put a plane groove in there and lived with the expansion causing cracking of the front groove edge?

Pat Barry

11-11-2014, 12:54 PM

You're asking if historically they would have angles the groove to match the beveled panel edge?
Yep, thats right

Warren Mickley

11-11-2014, 1:13 PM

The bevel with a flat is a good illustration of a general difference in approach between the 18th century and today. In the 18th century this kind of work tended to be done with tools like hollows and rounds, rabbits, fillisters, tools that were used in combination to make a more complicated shape. In contrast today's approach is to make a tool for a very specific application and to get another tool for a different application.

A neighbor of mine works in a factory that makes doors for kitchen cabinets; they sell them to guys making custom kitchens. They had about a dozen "regular raises", but for a while he just did "custom raises". He had a shaper and a cabinet with about 100 cutters and would change the cutter for each order. A different tool for every situation.

In contrast the 18th century guys used simple tools in combination to achieve their versatility. A bevel with a flat would be hard to do with a hand tool unless one had a plane that was specifically made to make that particular size and angle raise. Roubo illustrates many planes, but does not show a panel raiser. Here are some examples from Roubo showing the possibilities of designs made with hollows and rounds and various rabbet planes.
300074300076

For bevelled raises we make straight groove and the panel only touches at the edge and the back.

Graham Haydon

11-11-2014, 1:15 PM

Tom, FWIW here it is :). Just on Pat's point I've yet to see a tapered groove to suit a fielded panel but never say never. I would say that most of what I've seen is just a fielding to the edge and although I might be doing the old folks a disservice I think it was done for reasons Sean mentioned and that's not a bad reason. I have done them both ways with machinery and I've not had one "fail" so to speak. In areas prone to high moisture variation the square tongue is nice.

Daniel Rode

11-11-2014, 1:33 PM

Thanks Warren!

I *thought* that the grooves were straight but I really didn't know for sure. The reasoning behind it is interesting. That simpler but more versatile tools was the norm makes a lot of sense.

Having seen a few panels raised with nothing but a bench plane, I began to think about how I would add a flat area with my simple hand tools. It's trivial with a table saw or router, but not so with a chisel, plane or the like.

David Weaver

11-11-2014, 3:24 PM

For what it's worth...

...of course I know how to make a raised panel that is solid and will serve for a long time.

In case nobody gathered, by all of this minutiae in figuring out how a double iron plane is made, something very few other people are making at this point, I am getting into things more specific than just "any way that works is fine".

I could easily make a raised panel plane like the one that Sean has shown, but I could also just use the raised panel bit set that I have for my kitchen and make the same things. There are some things like this where modern tooling creates a profile and now people are backing into getting their hand tools to make what are essentially power tool profiles. I'm just not that interested in that kind of thing. We have largely traded what is perceived as a weak panel (which is a perception only from poor fitting) to an easier to fit panel with a flat tongue and then cope and stick for the sticking instead of mortise and tenon. Do I know that's easy to fit? Of course, that's how my kitchen cabinet doors are made. I have a lot of leeway with the measurements, but I don't need that if I'm doing hand tool work.

I asked warren, because I wanted to know about period knowledge. I figured that if I wanted period knowledge that I would ask someone who does period work (and restoration) professionally and has for four decades.

Do I think that I'm forgoing an improvement that's been made because of modern tooling? No, my parents have at least a dozen raised panels in their house that are in the range of 150-200 years old and no gaps. The sticking is pinned M&T on some of them, but mortise and tenon on all. Do I believe those doors and panel sides would be as trouble free if they were cope and stick? I doubt it. Do I care if they were? Not really.

I'm not going to go to the trouble to try to improve my planemaking for period planes and then have them imitating modern work. I'll leave that stuff to the plane laminators. I'm tuning out stuff that is done on machines, I just no longer have any interest in it and don't have any interest in imitating it with hand tools.

Joe Leigh

11-11-2014, 4:01 PM

I'm not sure I see how there could be no gaps where the panels meet the frames. Assuming the panels are solid wood and the panels are beveled with no flat tongue, and the frames have flat square grooves. Only a very small amount of panel would be captured inside the groove. Wouldnt there eventually be a gap on the long grain of the panel at the stiles? Unless I missed something in an earlier post....

David Weaver

11-11-2014, 4:11 PM

The amount of panel that goes into the groove is fairly substantial. I have seen some old furniture that was sort of run of the mill inexpensive plain stuff where you can take a loose panel that has shrank in the winter and move it all of the way to the left or right and just get a gap, but it's likely that the wood wasn't dry to begin wtih, or the panel not fitted properly.

If the panel is sized correctly, it shouldn't be a problem.

Unless you're referring to gaps that occur front to back, as the panel shrinks along its width there would be small gaps, but I don't find such a thing visually unappealing any more so than a flat that appears because the panel moves in laterally. As long as there isn't a gap that you can literally see through.

The other thing in this equation is that we are building with dry lumber and installing what we build in houses with climate control. There will not be nearly as much movement.

steven c newman

11-11-2014, 4:12 PM

On the panels I have been raising, I add a rebate on the "back" side. FWIW.

I do use just an iron bodied smooth plane, or a small jack plane to make the beveled faces. One could look no further than the two tool chests I have built. Without a pin to hold the panels in place, and no gaps. Frames around them are M&T. Last set, the grooves for the panels to sit in was made by a 1/4" G. Roseboom Plough plane.

I did clean up the bevels with a small, low angle block plane. A Millers Falls #1455.

Just don't have the set-ups to do raised panels with a machine, no room. A couple hand planes can do the job in about the same time as a machine. Plus, you get a Cardio Workout, for free......

David Weaver

11-11-2014, 4:19 PM

Just don't have the set-ups to do raised panels with a machine, no room. A couple hand planes can do the job in about the same time as a machine. Plus, you get a Cardio Workout, for free......

One or two maybe, but not many. If I were to decide to set up the sticking and panels for my router table to do all dozen doors in my kitchen at the same time, I could do them in an hour (profiling all of the panels and putting all of the cope and stick profile stuff on the sticking. They are just cherry, and out of curiosity, I put a panel through the cutters and cut the entire bevel at once (as opposed to several passes as recommended) and didn't really see any issues with it.

I won't debate that i'm doing them more slowly than I could with a router, but I am making one cabinet at a time rather than taking advantage of the fact that you can make the panels rather sloppy with a flat tongue as long as you don't cut them too wide.

Sean Hughto

11-11-2014, 4:32 PM

The reason for frame and panels in the first place is wood movement. How much the panel breathes is dependent upon its size and its species, no to mention its grain orientation. If it is too tight when assembled, when the panel expands it stresses the frame. If it is too loose the frame can rattle when the door is used (there would never be a gap unless you made far too shallow grooves or used far too wet wood. For the same reason that buttons work well in attaching real wood table tops, tongues that do not bottom out in grooves are the best way to do door panels: it allows the wood to move without stress or poor fits as the seasons change.

Wood compresses too. So a panel with an angled edge bevel expands into its groove, the bevel will press on the groove corner - if the wood is soft enough the groove and bevel will compress a bit over time such that the groove effectively develops an angled wall and the bevel develops a bit of a flatter spot.

I made all of the frame and panels in this picture, for example with only hand tools, and no panel raising plane.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3332/3475337558_5b7c70c3b8_o.jpg

lowell holmes

11-12-2014, 9:21 AM

How did you do the bead?

Sean Hughto

11-12-2014, 9:25 AM

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3275/3096319613_a94320d61f_o.jpg

Sean Hughto

11-12-2014, 9:28 AM

And if you meant beyond the forming:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3219/3105649111_e7c9abe108_z.jpg?zz=1
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3282/3106480204_4e0788e1a3_z.jpg?zz=1
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3065/3106479892_700e961a8d_z.jpg?zz=1

george wilson

11-12-2014, 9:36 AM

Nice little tool,Sean!!

lowell holmes

11-12-2014, 12:08 PM

I'm impressed.

Come to think of it, I do have two bead forming planes. I think I need to break them out.

I've never done stick and cope with hand tools. It may be time to experiment.

David Weaver

11-12-2014, 12:20 PM

You don't want to do cope and stick with hand tools, you want to do the mortise and tenon type like sean has done, and in my opinion the bead looks far more handsome than most or all of the router bit sets out there that just make a rebated roundover.

I like the look of seans doors (neatly done, but you can still tell they're done by hand and have a bit of a look of humanity to them) better than most of the shaper created doors that have a huge step between the panel and the bevel.

I'm going to make a plane that is of this type, it will create the classic raised panel with a step for the fielding, but have a movable depth stop so that the plane will make a bevel without that step if desired.

(and I'll add a nicker similar to the one shown - i lifted this photo from meeker's antiques)

300138

I'm unsure of whether it'll be double iron or single iron, but probably double iron, and I'll make it askew like the one shown and rather than having the iron diagonally at the top toward the edge like a badger plane (a spot that always causes trouble), I'm just going to relieve the bottom of the plane on the right side of the mouth just enough to make the step on a raised panel and no more, and put a brass wear plate in front of the mouth (in my experience, most panel raises and badger planes become troublesome to use once the corner of the mouth starts to wear, and it erodes much more quickly than the rest of the mouth. I don't love the idea of putting unneeded metal on the plane, but it will protect the integrity of the mouth at the front corner.

I don't need this plane at all, but I do have the desire to make planes. I just have to think about what they're going to do and how for a while, because I have no interest in making junk planes.

I also don't like making fixed width or fixed size planes, as in I don't want to make various raised panel planes that cut specifically one shape and have no ability to do anything other than the exact same profile every single time.

Sean Hughto

11-12-2014, 12:48 PM

For a while, years back, I coveted the idea of an adjustable panel raising plane. I even asked Lee Richmond (The Best Things) to look for one for me on a tool buying trip he was taking to the UK. He said he had found many in the past and that they were popular sellers. I don't have one, so my best guess is that he didn't find one that suited me on that particular trip. And I lost interest once I made a few doors myself. If I was pumping out solid wood paneled interior doors or board room framed paneling like back in the day, I can certainly see the value of a paneling plane. But for furniture, not so much. It's too variable, and the difference slight variations in proportion make to a clumsy or elegant result too great. You also face cross grain and against the grain challenges as you form the bevels that are easier to deal with for me using simpler more-varied sets of tools.

If you haven't made a frame and panel door by hand tools alone, I recommend you knock out a small wall cabinet or something just for the insights I think it will give you in perfecting your plane ideas. I made this little plane cabinet in a weekend, not because I needed, but because I wanted a vehicle for learning a couple techniques (ball catch installation and raised ebony pegs, sliding dt shelves, etc). It was time well spent to inform those operations on bigger projects. In a similar way, it might give you insights for the perfect panel plane.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3108/3256578957_17e609cbbb_o.jpg
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3456/3249289560_6c5f76b62c_o.jpg

Pat Barry

11-12-2014, 12:55 PM

...I made this little plane cabinet in a weekend, not because I needed, but because I wanted a vehicle for learning a couple techniques (ball catch installation and raised ebony pegs, sliding dt shelves, etc). It was time well spent to inform those operations on bigger projects. In a similar way, it might give you insights for the perfect panel plane.

Very nice work! That right there would take me a month of weekends (minimum). Of course, mine would look primitive compared to yours.

Sean Hughto

11-12-2014, 1:00 PM

Pat, thanks .... but I don't think anything could be more primitive than this with its through dovetails - quickly hacked out panel - and plain unbeaded rails and stiles. I suppose the ebony is sort of fancy. :rolleyes:

It goes fast when you just have to make it hold water, but don't care about much else.

David Weaver

11-12-2014, 1:11 PM

With and against the grain isn't an issue with a double iron. The rest of the problems are easily solved by making a plane that is designed for the specific use.

Finding such a plane used is unlikely. If Lee found you a plane, it's unlikely you would've been happy with it either due to design issues or just as likely due to wear problems. I have no doubt mine will work better than any I can buy because it won't have design or wear problems.

Kees Heiden

11-12-2014, 3:19 PM

Sliding dovetailed shelves? Then I've got a question but will start a new thread.

David Weaver

11-12-2014, 7:58 PM

Steve Voigt

11-12-2014, 8:21 PM

Well, I ran into a real bummer tonight. I don't have a double iron set that's on the slant, so I guess the plane will be a 55 degree single iron plane so as to stay out of trouble. The only double iron that I have is already in a badger plane, which i'd rather not throw away just to get the iron. Though it's an option.

I'd so much rather have a 45 degree panel plane with a double iron than 55 with a single iron that it's not remotely humorous, but I guess that's just the way it goes.

I know I've posted this before, but Lars Parrington had a nice thread on WC about turning a transitional double iron plane into a panel raiser. He did a nice job of shaping the chipbreaker to match the iron's profile. You know the drill about posting links, but google will turn it up fast.

Anyway, if you have a transitional, or can pick one up on the auction site, you could cannibalize the iron.

David Weaver

11-12-2014, 8:36 PM

I gather the transitional in its entirety was used?

I just would like to build the entire plane nicker and all with early 19th century style, so I may end up building two - one with a single iron, and if I can find a dilapidated plane eventually, one with a double iron, too.

FWIW, the john bell panel raiser I had a long while ago was single iron, but it had too much mouth erosion to ever feed well. That was a bummer, one I'll prevent. Since I'll be preventing mouth erosion with a brass wear plate, I'll actually be able to make the mouth of the plane fairly tight. Something on the order of 4 thousandths is necessary to really make a single iron tearout proof, but a hundredth will allow a plane that cleans up coarse bevel work and does a decent job.

I, fortunately, have one good single iron plane on hand to eyeball if I have any lingering questions about the abutment setup.

David Weaver

11-12-2014, 9:59 PM

One last surprising find - a raised panel plane that makes the tongue, and not a new one. It's still limited to making one size bevel, though. It looks like the iron is housed like a badger plane, and not like I'm thinking of making (which would essentially be more similar to a regular bench plane with the side let up in how large the step is between the flat panel and the bevel.

http://www.thebestthings.com/oldtools/graphics/wp91118.jpg