Face Laminations for planemaking

[Adam Stevens2]

I have a bit of a conundrum, maybe? I sourced a large piece of 8/4 hard maple that appears to be flatsawn. My purpose is to make a try plane about 28" long out of this wood. I've been reading up a bit about grain direction for plane construction from a billet and the consensus seems to be that the grain should run more or less horizontally along the side of the plane.

My piece of maple is about 7" wide. Would there be any disadvantage to flattening the board, ripping it in half and laminating the halves on top of each other to get the desired height? With this arrangement the grain along the sides would run horizontally, but I'd like to make sure I wouldn't be creating instability or structural weakness by face laminating the boards in this way. I'm still a long way off really understanding how wood works in different orientations and would appreciate the input - even if said input is to find different wood!

[Steve Voigt]

As long as it doesn't bother you aesthetically, I don't see any problem with it. European planes are sometimes made with a fairly thick layer of denser wood laminated to a piece of pear, as in this video:
http://www.rts.ch/archives/tv/culture/suisse-au-fil-du-temps/3464421-les-outils-de-bois.html
It's normal to put the bark side down, but it's not an absolute requirement.
I think you may find that 28" is heavier than you like, harder to keep flat, and awkward to use in a lot of typical situations, compared to 22" or 24". But you can always cut it down later if you don't like it.

[Adam Stevens2]

Thanks Steve, I'll take the size into consideration. It seems traditional for wooden jointers/try planes to be in the 28" range but I've also seen them at 24", so there does seem to be some variation. Also maple being as heavy as it is may lend itself towards a smaller size.

Funnily enough I have your website pulled up at the moment from another link, inspiring stuff.

[Allan Speers]

I've been reading up a bit about grain direction for plane construction from a billet and the consensus seems to be that the grain should run more or less horizontally along the side of the plane.


FWIW, there's some interesting thoughts on this here:
http://www.renaissancewoodworker.com/raging-against-plane-making-tradition/

- Definitely worth a read.


Ideally, a laminated sole is best. Lignum vitae is ideal, as it is self-lubricating, but other woods work well, esp Ebony which of course is lovely as well.


With no lamination, I've always figured that it would be best to pick a very stable wood (such as Mesquite) and then put the endge grain on the BOTTOM, because it will wear much better than the face grain. - But I'm no plane-building expert.

[Steve Voigt]

Thanks Steve, I'll take the size into consideration. It seems traditional for wooden jointers/try planes to be in the 28" range but I've also seen them at 24", so there does seem to be some variation. Also maple being as heavy as it is may lend itself towards a smaller size.

Funnily enough I have your website pulled up at the moment from another link, inspiring stuff.

If you look at the Old Street website for example, the try plane is 24", and the jointer is 30". These are historically accurate 18th c. sizes, but it's worth remembering that a jointer plane like that would have been routinely used by joiners on big stuff, 10-12' long. Certainly if you are doing big work like that, a long plane is nice, but for normal furniture-sized components, my feeling is that the smaller plane is more useful. But again, if you don't like it, you can always cut it down!
And thanks for the nice words. :)

[Adam Stevens2]

If you look at the Old Street website for example, the try plane is 24", and the jointer is 30". These are historically accurate 18th c. sizes, but it's worth remembering that a jointer plane like that would have been routinely used by joiners on big stuff, 10-12' long. Certainly if you are doing big work like that, a long plane is nice, but for normal furniture-sized components, my feeling is that the smaller plane is more useful. But again, if you don't like it, you can always cut it down!
And thanks for the nice words. :)

At the moment I'd probably tend to use stock in the order of 6' or shorter, but I'm also probably going to make myself a decent bench in the near future, so a longer plane might be good for something that large and wide. I'll see how I go for now and then decide if it's working out. Of course there is the small matter of actually building the plane; it's the first time I have attempted this and I may well have bitten off more than I can chew anyway!

[Warren Mickley]

Historical sources put the trying plane at 20-22 inches, with 22 being most common. Jointer planes are in the 28-30 range and planes around 24 are called long planes.

More importantly than naming are functional considerations. The trying plane is the workhorse plane for getting from the rough surface of a jack plane to a smooth flat surface. For planing the edge of a board, it is relatively quick to plane with a jack plane and finish with a jointer, but for the face of a board planing with a plane longer and heavier than a trying plane is tiring for any kind of serious use. It is more than just the weight; the length also makes the plane tiring to swing around. If given only three planes I would choose jack, 22 inch trying, and smoothing.

[Adam Stevens2]

Thanks for the tip, Warren. Based on the feedback above, I shortened my 'blank', such as it is, to 24-ish".

About the 'biting off more than I can chew' reference - I'm attempting to make this out of hard maple. I think it might even be figured, it has orange-y coloured bits. I'm trying to flatten it by hand (no power jointer or planer) and I'm having a hard time planing length-wise down the board. Planing across it seems to work fine, but I am completely unable to get a decent cut even with the grain. Any tips for planing this wood? I'm getting the sense that I am still a total hack with a plane. It's a Veritas fore plane that I'm using - blade seems to be sharp enough based on the ease with which I can cut across the board, but it's bouncing and skittering and not staying in the cut length-wise. Very frustrating!

[Matthew N. Masail]

Adam, sounds like your blade is not truly sharp. it doesn't take a very sharp blade to cut well across the grain.

[Joe A Faulkner]

I'm curious, what plane are you using? I am no expert, but a lot has been noted about how setting the chip breaker very close to the cutting edge can help reduce tear out. Also, I think some have even lubricated the lumber with mineral spirits to help. I've struggled to totally avoid it when dealing with figured woods where the grain swirls or changes directions. Here's one post that might help:
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?221689-Mechanics-of-chipbreakers-and-high-cutting-angles-in-woodworking-planes-Abstract assuming you are using a plane with a chip breaker.

[Adam Stevens2]

It's a Veritas fore plane that I am using. I have experimented a little with the chip breaker and all that, but really I am trying to flatten it as much as anything, so I've not been attempting to take wispy shavings.

I am getting some Sigma Power stones sometime shortly to replace my dinged-up King stones, so perhaps working my blade over those while give me the sharpness I need.