Never square; I can't joint straight.

[Luke Dupont]

I'm writing this after having reduced a board by an inch or more in width, having been unable to joint it square.

This happens every project that I attempt. I cannot joint a 3/4 board square. I am always, invariably, twisted to one side, and after hours of toiling, I just wind up reducing the width to the point that it's unusable.

This is easily the most frustrating aspect of woodworking. I dread starting any project where I have to square up the stock. Ok, well, I know I said that about sawing square, and that might be up there as well, though I am getting much better at that since I started using knife walls and a tenon saw.

I notice a few things when I'm hand planing the edge of a board:

1) I always taper the board away from me if I take full length strokes. If I take short strokes starting at the far end and working backwards, as I recently learned, it sort of helps, but I have a hard time getting the plane to bite to the same thickness as it did at the end (I assume because it's in a sort of concavity at that point), and I just wind up adding more inconsistencies and twist because of all of the uneven strokes I'm taking.

2) I can't feel vertical. I always, invariably and without fail, find myself planing lower on one side, or worse yet, imparting twist. Trying to correct this, I will literally spend hours and come away with nothing more than a board that is an inch thinner and still out of square.

I have ensured that my plane iron is square. And, I understand that to make corrections, you are supposed to overhang the edge of the plane, take a pass or two, and then go back down the middle. Invariably, I will do this 3, 4, or 5 times and find no difference, then go back and try again and find that I've imparted twist or over compensated, etc. etc.

It baffles me that I can spend an hour or more doing this, and never even happen upon squareness by accident.

I'm wondering if, perhaps, it's not to do with making corrections, but planing square to begin with. I can't feel square, and I don't feel that I have the control of the plane that I should have. I've tried both heavy and light touches, and oh so many ways of gripping the thing. The lighter I go the more feeling I have (though, I still can't really tell if I'm vertical), but the less the plane bites at the start of the board, leading to more of the taper problem. Moreover, and I thing the biggest problem, is that the width of the board is so narrow that it's very difficult to balance my plane perfectly on top of it. I have somewhat better luck jointing 2" stock, though even that is not easy.

I'm half tempted to just make a jig to clamp on the side of my plane, as much as I'm embarrassed to say. Or maybe jointing with the board horizontal, as I've seen some Japanese joiners do. I would rather develop the skill to actually feel and plane straight, of course. I have, at this point, read all kinds of advise, and watched all kinds of videos on the subject, so I don't really know what I'm hoping to gain by posting here.

I'm also half of the mind to record a video of myself. Maybe someone can spot what I'm doing wrong better than I can.

As an aside, I can get fairly square IF I have gauge lines to work to. But that first edge will easily have rendered my board far too narrow (and me far too frustrated!) before I ever get it square. This leads me to believe that it's the lack of any reference or ability to feel "square" that's getting me. I kind of feel like I'm balancing the plane on a see-saw whenever I'm jointing.

[Pat Barry]

1) what tool are you using for this joitning process?
2) how close is close enough? Ie: nothing is ever perfect
3) what is driving the need for perfection? ie: edge gluing for panels or?

[Luke Dupont]

1) what tool are you using for this joitning process?
2) how close is close enough? Ie: nothing is ever perfect
3) what is driving the need for perfection? ie: edge gluing for panels or?


1) In this case, I was using a Stanley No. 3 on a fairly short piece. I've had the same trouble on a variety of planes (a Japanese plane, and a few other wooden or western planes), and a variety of pieces. Much the same results in all cases.

2) I don't know. That is a good point. Maybe I'm being too much of a perfectionist. But, it is important in some cases where you want the edges to fit squarely, at say a 90 degree angle to another piece. The difficulty is, that with such a narrow piece, if you're a millimeter, or even half a mil low on one side, that can translate into say 10 degrees or so.

3) If I were edge gluing, I wouldn't worry so much about squareness. I'd just joint both pieces at once and they'd match regardless. Basically, I just want nice 90 degree corners; partially for aesthetics, and partially for functionality, when I want to have that edge register against another at 90 degrees.

It's somewhat of a matter of just not feeling that my level of accuracy is within acceptable standards. I'm not a huge stickler for having everything perfect, but sometimes things are just off enough to potentially cause problems.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I am sometimes slow to understand, so, I want to be clear on what you are asking....

Are you trying to square an edge, or make a face flat? I think that you are talking about squaring the thin edge of a board, not making the face flat...

If this is correct, then I have a couple of suggestions.

Use a square and mark all of the "high points" that are out of square. More specifically, you are marking the place where you want the blade to take it down.
Can you create and use a guide? For example, this:

http://www.leevalley.com/us/HARDWARE/page.aspx?p=41716&cat=1,41182

Then again, they have this fancy thing as well

http://www.leevalley.com/us/HARDWARE/page.aspx?p=73008&cat=1,41182

But, back to the edge jointer...
http://www.popularwoodworking.com/techniques/joinery/cheating-at-jointing-edges

Oh wait, a home made one
http://www.popularwoodworking.com/techniques/joinery/cheating-at-jointing-edges

Not sure if I can link to it, but www.craftsy.com has some tips to improve shooting, which includes putting the board down flat and running your jointer on its side to cut the edges square.


www.startwoodworking.com also has an easier handplaning build block, but I am not sure if I can link directly to that article either.


If I totally missed the point and you are talking about flattening the face....

[paul cottingham]

Honestly, I bought a magnetic fence for my jointer plane. I don't really. Care what people think of them, it works great, and takes all the guesswork out for me. Waste a lot less wood too. I have very little feeling in my right hand that isn't pain, so practice wasn't going to change it.

seriously. Go check it out. http://www.leevalley.com/en/wood/page.aspx?p=41716&cat=1,41182,41716
dont listen to the naysayers.

[Prashun Patel]

I also tend to taper the board downward on the far side. Plane slowly, one stroke at a time. My problem was that I was not ENTERING the cut strongly. This means I wasn't exerting the same pressure throughout the board. I now try to imagine the board as 1 foot longer on each end. You need sufficient pressure on the toe on entry such that your blade 'bites' from the start and doesn't airplane into the cut. Conversely on the leaving side, you need to exert pressure on the tote so the plane does not dip forward and cut too aggressively there.

"exert" overstates it. It's really about NOT exerting adverse pressure at the beginning and end.

As for jointing square, that's the easy part ;) Take one pass shifting your pressure to the high side. Then measure with a square up and down the edge, and repeat as necessary. I find fixing square is much faster than fixing flat. As a result, it's easy to overcompensate when fixing square; the trick is doing one pass at a time (assuming your kind of close...) and checking your work.


above all, practice and be persistent. Keep telling yourself that if Prashun can do it, *I* ought to be able to do it. It's the truth.

The quality of my planing increased dramatically after watching David Charlesworth's dvd's. His strokes are deliberate and slow, not huffy-puffy and sweaty as mine has always been. If you realize the plane is quite efficient at what it does, you will realize it takes fewer strokes and less downward pressure to accomplish than intuition previously told me.

Last, how are you holding the work? Proper support along the length is critical for me to getting an even cut. So long pieces in a face vise can come out tapered. Alternatively, a tail vise can cause pieces to flex if clamped tightly. So either support the piece in face vise at its ends, or use the tail vise lightly - almost as a stop.

I have a jointing fence for my jointer and have stopped using it because it requires set up and awkwardly checking it for square and then adjusting it. And if I have to joint from the other side, then disconnecting and reattaching it is a non-starter. So, I'm forcing myself to learn free-hand. Just like sharpening. No judgment on you, just impatience over here.

[bridger berdel]

Put a fence on it.

[Jim Koepke]

Howdy Luke,

For small thin pieces I almost always use a shooting board. Quick, easy and it requires only a little thought process.

For larger pieces held in a vise there are a few techniques often brought into the mix. The one I use has been pretty good, for me, at getting square without a lot of effort.

It is discussed toward the end of this post:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?148076-Getting-Started-With-Hand-Planes&p=1515247#post1515247

It starts with end grain and runs into a #113 Circular plane before finally getting into squaring edges.

The last image, of me using a jointer, shows my thumb pressing on the area right above where I am cutting a narrow track. This is to help prevent the plane rocking when taking a narrow cut. The next cut will ride on this track and take a slightly wider shaving. It is a kind of 'seat of the pants' reasoning where your eye sees how much out of square the work piece is divided by one's feel for the thickness of the shaving determining how wide of a shaving you need to make on the first and subsequent passes. My experience has also taught me when doing this regularly it is almost natural to get to square. When there is a lot of time between shop work, my nature tends to take a little retraining.

One of your comments is that it seems you mostly lean to the same side. This was also my problem. Being a little off felt comfortable. So I worked at leaning a bit the other way, yes it felt uncomfortable at first, just a little at a time.

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

Three thoughts to get you going:
1. table saw with a decent fence and a good ripping blade - glue ready joint.
2. match planing
3. jig the planes with a shooting board on the benchtop or by attaching a fence to the plane.

[Adam Stevens2]

I'm having this problem as well, though I suspect that it's much to do with how I am holding the work than anything. I tend to use my moxon vise to hold boards for edge jointing and I think it has a tendency to make the board lean ever so slightly away from parallel once it's cinched tight. I tend to wind up over-correcting in a couple of different ways and I am probably making more work for myself than I need to. Does anyone have any experience with this? The other option is that I am really genuinely hopeless at this process.

[Jim Belair]

I check for square often, and if I'm struggling, pencil mark where I'm trying to remove and, if necessary, where I try to not remove material. This gives nearly instant feedback.

[Normand Leblanc]

1) If you taper the board it's because either you are not putting enough pressure at the beginning (not very much pressure is needed anyway) or your iron need sharpening. Most likely the latter.

2) I can't feel it either but I have no problem correcting it.

Is your small board out of twist? If not, maybe when you clamp it in the vise it get straightened and then when it's removed from the vise it twist back.

If you take a heavy cut, no matter what pressure you apply - left or right - the plane will follow the twist. As an example, when I want to square a board, once it's flat, I reduce the depth of cut and, knowing which side is higher, I run my plane on that side but not the other side. All the other side sees is the sole where there is no blade. Works perfectly for me.

Many years back I bought a fence for my LV jointer. Tried it then put it away. Too much trouble to set-up.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

If it truly has to be perfectly square, I always use a shooting board (for small stuff), or a fence (for large stuff). Some people will make fun of you for that. Personally, I don't care what those people think. Your mileage may vary.

[Curt Putnam]

IMO use a fence until learn how to control the taper over the length of the piece. Once you learn the transfer of pressure from toe to heel you are half way there. Is your vise plumb? Meaning when you clamp a board into it, is the board exactly vertical? If not that could be part of your problem. Regardless, the rest is take a stroke, check with the square, rinse and repeat until done.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

I also tend to taper the board downward on the far side.

Yeah, I have had a lot of trouble getting it straight. I appreciate your advice on this...

[ken hatch]

Luke,

You didn't mention how you shape the plane's iron.

Is it straight, is it straight with relieved corners, or does it have a slight or greater camber?

Most bench plane irons should be sharpened with some camber, very slight for finishing planes, greater for your Jack.

When you set your plane's cambered iron, using a thin test strip, set the iron so the iron disappears into the sole at about the same distance on each side. With a square see which edge of the board you are jointing is "low". Using the plane you just set, place the plane so the edge of the mouth is just outside the low side and take a full length shaving. If done correctly the plane shouldn't remove any wood on the "low" side but because the iron is cambered a thicker shaving should come from the middle of the iron which should be over the "high" side. Check for square and repeat as needed. Once square you should take a finish pass down the middle of the plane.

Please forgive me if that is what you are already doing and it is a different problem.

ken

[Dave Anderson NH]

The one thing that most seem to have missed here is that you are using a #3 plane. For any board of over 18" in length this is way too short when trying to get the edge square. Depending on technique it might also be problematic on pieces down to 12" in length. Except in rare circumstances I would never consider jointing an edge with anything shorter than a #5 and on anything 24"+ I use my #7.

[Paul Phillis]

What does "3/4 board" mean?

For small thin pieces I put a 5 1/2 or 7 stanley plane upside down in the bench vice and move the wood over the blade. When I get close to the line I finish on a shooting board.


A cambered blade will make it easier to get sqaure.


A very sharp blade on a fine smoothing setting as you get close to the line reduces chances of over correcting. It often only takes a swipe or two to correct a boards edge.

These are tips I've picked up.

Paul

[Jim Koepke]

I'm having this problem as well, though I suspect that it's much to do with how I am holding the work than anything. I tend to use my moxon vise to hold boards for edge jointing and I think it has a tendency to make the board lean ever so slightly away from parallel once it's cinched tight. I tend to wind up over-correcting in a couple of different ways and I am probably making more work for myself than I need to. Does anyone have any experience with this? The other option is that I am really genuinely hopeless at this process.

Hi Adam,

I was over at another member's shop and he had a Moxon type set up. I didn't think about it at the time, but I think it was a bit tall for me to plane square. He is a bit taller than me.

There may be a work position that isn't too tall or too low but just right.

One of my most used tools is a 2" machinist's square. This makes it easy to check most work while still in the vise.

jtk

[Adam Stevens2]

Hi Adam,

I was over at another member's shop and he had a Moxon type set up. I didn't think about it at the time, but I think it was a bit tall for me to plane square. He is a bit taller than me.

There may be a work position that isn't too tall or too low but just right.

One of my most used tools is a 2" machinist's square. This makes it easy to check most work while still in the vise.

jtk


Hi Jim,

I do have a 4" double square that I use similarly to check for square. I always find that it's the same side (to my right) that tends to be the high spot. My Not-A-Bench is low enough currently that it's at a comfortable height with the board held in the vise. I've also been experimenting with a very primitive system of clamping a...clamp to the side of the bench and using those clamped clamps as the workholding, but they don't feel as secure - though I think the results have been generally better, and I suspect it's because the piece gets held straighter along the side of the bench. Not sure what mechanism might be pushing the piece out of parallel in the vise though.

[Robert Hazelwood]

Ken mentioned what I've found to be the biggest help- putting a slight camber on the blade. This makes it much easier to correct an out of square edge by shifting the plane towards the high side. I think this is most helpful on a wide jointer plane, but I think it will help with a #3 as well.

I also recommend placing your left hand to the left side of the plane, with your thumb pressing down on the sole behind the front knob (may not be room on a #3, in which case place it in front). Use your fingers as a fence, riding along the side of the piece to keep the plane aligned where you want it laterally.

Lastly, while you are trying to figure this out, take thinner shavings where the force of the plane is easy to manage, and take deliberate strokes. Check squareness after every stroke or two....try to link in your mind how the planing feels compared to the results you're getting. And keep the blade as sharp as you can, don't hesitate to stop and sharpen...results get less predictable as the blade dulls.

[David Carroll]

When I'm jointing boards for panels I clamp them side by side and joint both edges together, any out of square jointing will be canceled out when you glue up and your panel will be flat. For long boards that need a nice square edge, I clamp the board to the bench top with another flat board below it. The work piece edge to be jointed needs to be proud a quarter inch or so of the board below. Then I use a jointer on its side like a huge shooting board. Works like a charm!

David C.

[Brian Holcombe]

Luke, what are you using to check squareness? What are you checking it against?

If you are using the side of the board you may be causing yourself undue grief. If the side of the board is twisted you will be attempting to mimic that twist on the edge of the board. If you are using your square up against a face that has been trued than your going in the right direction. If the face has not been trued then you should be checking for twist with winding sticks.

You can't balance your plane on the edge because your making a convex edge with all of these biased passes. You may want to take a heavy pass and get back to flat, even if it still has wind to it.

[Stanley Covington]

Brian has it right.

You must start with at least one flat face, 2 is better.

You will have a hard time achieving this without a flat, twist-free bench top.

After these conditions are met, mark the line of the desired finished edge on the board.

Then lay the board flat on the bench with a board at least as thick as your planes sidewall underneath, and clamp in place.

Use a longer plane, at least a jack, on its side to shoot the edge. The line you made earlier is clearly in view so you can check your progress, and judge how and where to press.

Stop planing when you reach the line. The edge should now be straight and perfectly square to the faces.

Stan

[Roy Lindberry]

I also recommend placing your left hand to the left side of the plane, with your thumb pressing down on the sole behind the front knob (may not be room on a #3, in which case place it in front). Use your fingers as a fence, riding along the side of the piece to keep the plane aligned where you want it laterally.




This advice is one of the best tips for planing square that I came across in my journey. It works wonders. Also, make sure the work is low enough. If you are planing at chest height, you will likely tilt the plane away. If the work is closer to your center of gravity, you should naturally keep the plane more square.

[ken hatch]

Luke, what are you using to check squareness? What are you checking it against?

If you are using the side of the board you may be causing yourself undue grief. If the side of the board is twisted you will be attempting to mimic that twist on the edge of the board. If you are using your square up against a face that has been trued than your going in the right direction. If the face has not been trued then you should be checking for twist with winding sticks.

You can't balance your plane on the edge because your making a convex edge with all of these biased passes. You may want to take a heavy pass and get back to flat, even if it still has wind to it.


Brian has it right.

You must start with at least one flat face, 2 is better.

You will have a hard time achieving this without a flat, twist-free bench top.

After these conditions are met, mark the line of the desired finished edge on the board.

Then lay the board flat on the bench with a board at least as thick as your planes sidewall underneath, and clamp in place.

Use a longer plane, at least a jack, on its side to shoot the edge. The line you made earlier is clearly in view so you can check your progress, and judge how and where to press.

Stop planing when you reach the line. The edge should now be straight and perfectly square to the faces.

Stan

Head slap.....Typical example of my making assumptions instead, of going back to first principles. I never thought of someone trying to joint an edge without first having a reference face. Remember Bubba..... step one reference surface, step two reference face, step three reference edge.

Thanks guys, I'll remember and use it in my day job because if you are trying to correct a problem, work, woodworking, flying, or life, start with step #1 followed by step #2 and so on. I know better.....and I call myself an "instructor",,,,meh.

ken

[Robert Engel]

What Dave ^ said.

You simply can't joint a board with a #3 plane. Even if you got it square, it wouldn't be flat.

Use at least a 6 or 7/8. You will find with a larger, heavier plane a lot of this problem will correct itself.

Frequent checks (like every 2 strokes) are the key to staying on course.

I find a short winding stick is also quite helpful.

A trick for correcting: keep the edge of the plane flush with the board on the low side this will cause the plane to take a heavier shaving off the high side because the bit of sole outside the blade will limit the shaving a bit.

Of course you have to start with straight, flat stock for optimal results ;-)

[Mike Cherry]

What Dave ^ said.

You simply can't joint a board with a #3 plane. Even if you got it square, it wouldn't be flat.

Use at least a 6 or 7/8. You will find with a larger, heavier plane a lot of this problem will correct itself.

Frequent checks (like every 2 strokes) are the key to staying on course.

I find a short winding stick is also quite helpful.

A trick for correcting: keep the edge of the plane flush with the board on the low side this will cause the plane to take a heavier shaving off the high side because the bit of sole outside the blade will limit the shaving a bit.

Of course you have to start with straight, flat stock for optimal results ;-)

I think what you can joint with a #3 depends on how long the piece is. I'm not gonna bust out a #7 for a 10" piece. I see your point though, a longer plane, when learning, can help make things more stable.

I still struggle with edge squareness from time to time. I think the best advice and technique I've seen here is to camber the blade slightly and let that cambered side ride on the high side of the edge. My practice, right or wrong, is to get a flat face and then joint the edge. When I joint the edge, I'm looking for a full length full width shaving. This shaving tells me that whether I'm square or not, the edge is in one plane. Then I can set about correcting any discrepancies with regards to it being square to the face.

[Prashun Patel]

Mike, after seeing your desk work, I'm reluctant to challenge you! But unless the piece is so small you cannot see it underneath the plane, I like to use a longer plane to joint. The longer toe on a #7 is fantastic. It's a matter of getting comfortable with the ergonomics and balance of the larger planes; I don't subscribe to the philosophy of smaller work, smaller plane. For finding flat, the biggest (as is practical) plane works easiest for me.

[Warren Mickley]

There is no reason one cannot true an edge with a #3 plane. If you need a 22 inch plane to true a 12 inch board, what is might you need for a 48 inch board?

I timed myself truing opposite edges of a 29 inch red oak board. It took about 30 seconds longer with the #3 than with the #7.

The main skills needed for this work are discerning which areas of the surface are too high and then planing only those areas, avoiding planing areas which are too low. Learning to true a surface with a short plane is worthwhile because it will disabuse one of the notion that the plane is doing all the work while the operator does not need skill and judgement.

[Mike Cherry]

Prashun, I love a challenge! Hence the reason I am building that's desk out of white oak haha. I look at every opportunity as a chance to learn something. I see your point about the longer toe on a larger plane. I suppose my thought process comes from the earliest person I watched when getting into hand tool woodworking, Paul Sellers. He maintains you can use a # 4 for everything( I am aware he uses machines for milling and only removes machine marks with his planes).

I certainly dont don't think a #4 can do everything. I'm talking more about the situation you propose, when you can't see the piece under the plane. I always look for a chance to use the lightest plane I can get away with at the time. Bad shoulder injuries are the worst for hand planing. Cheers!

[Jay Larson]

First off, nobody gets it right off the bat. It does take some practice, even if you have been doing it a while. All of these are good things to remember, but one thing I do is take a few practice swipes on a piece of scrap before I work on the main piece. Especially if I have not worked with a tool for a while.

Second, relax. I mean that literally. If you have squeezing the handle of the plane, you are physically forcing the plane in one direction or the other depending on which handed you are. ( I am left handed, so I have to reverse most instructions.;) ) Theoretically, you should be able to push the plane with an open palm. I think it was Paul Sellers had a video where he tied a string/rope to the front knob and pulled the plane.

[John Dykes]

You can't feel perfectly square.... stop trying.

I bit surprised that no one has mentioned this yet, so I’ll give it a go.

There are staunch proponents of the several (yes, several) ways to get an edge square to the face. Fence, cambered blade, match planing – and the list goes on.

I too struggled quite a bit with this. For me, David Charlesworth’s DVD about hand planing was a game changer (Both DVD 1 regarding sharpening, and DVD 2 regarding hand planing). His method is slow, meticulous, and explained in excruciating detail – it might drive most folks here crazy. However, for me at that time, with no mentor or school or experience, that level of detail was just enough that I could recreate what he was explaining and exhibiting.

If you are new to hand planes – I strongly (most strongly) recommend his 1 & 2 DVDs. I struggled with hand planes for years (even sold a LN #4 because I thought it was faulty in some way) until I worked through those videos. David Charlesworth’s DVDs forever changed how I do woodworking….

[Mike Cherry]

You can't feel perfectly square.... stop trying.

I bit surprised that no one has mentioned this yet, so I’ll give it a go.

There are staunch proponents of the several (yes, several) ways to get an edge square to the face. Fence, cambered blade, match planing – and the list goes on.

I too struggled quite a bit with this. For me, David Charlesworth’s DVD about hand planing was a game changer (Both DVD 1 regarding sharpening, and DVD 2 regarding hand planing). His method is slow, meticulous, and explained in excruciating detail – it might drive most folks here crazy. However, for me at that time, with no mentor or school or experience, that level of detail was just enough that I could recreate what he was explaining and exhibiting.

If you are new to hand planes – I strongly (most strongly) recommend his 1 & 2 DVDs. I struggled with hand planes for years (even sold a LN #4 because I thought it was faulty in some way) until I worked through those videos. David Charlesworth’s DVDs forever changed how I do woodworking….

i haven't seen his sharpening DVDs but the hand planing one stuck with me greatly. I almost always take "stopped shavings" as he shows. Mostly when edge jointing but sometimes when face planing as well. If I walked away with anything, it was that an almost immeasurably cupped surface/edge is not only ideal but easier to replicate 99% of the time. The other 1% is because I've had too much whiskey.

[Warren Mickley]

You can't feel perfectly square.... stop trying.

.

Stop trying? It reminds me of the violin teacher who said "This boy will never play the violin." The parents got a better teacher and the boy was soon enough better than the old teacher.

1n 1978 Kirby wrote:
Don't despise checking the board at any time by eye without instruments. It would be foolish to claim that the eye can be developed to the point where measuring tools become redundant, but one should develop as keen an eye as possible.

Developing a feel for things allows us to get close to flat and square a lot faster. Some cookbook techniques are designed to help beginners have success. We are not limited to this style of work; there is no reason we should not try to do better, develop our senses.

[liam c murphy]

To OP-


Can you flatten the face of a board with a plane?

If so, I'd say the problem is definitely related to work holding or technique. If not, the problem could be related to how you set up your plane.

For practice, I'd suggest picking up a 4x4 from a lumber yard. It certainly wont come square. Practice getting that squared up, then move on to narrower stock.

[Luke Dupont]

To OP-


Can you flatten the face of a board with a plane?

If so, I'd say the problem is definitely related to work holding or technique. If not, the problem could be related to how you set up your plane.

For practice, I'd suggest picking up a 4x4 from a lumber yard. It certainly wont come square. Practice getting that squared up, then move on to narrower stock.

Yep. I have no problem flattening faces. It's just the edge jointing that is throwing me for a loop.

I've got some 2x stock for a project, all with those terrible rounded corners and ovaled edges, so I'll have quite a bit of practice in my near future.

[Luke Dupont]

Lots of great advise, as always! Some of which I hadn't considered.

In particular, I've been sharpening my irons flat and only cambering the very corners. I guess this makes it difficult or impossible maybe to make corrections simply by shifting the plane to one side?

I resharpened with a very slight cambered profile, so I'll see how that works.

I may just use a jig for the time being, though - at least in projects where taking too much wood off is trouble, or if I have a lot of jointing to do. I made a little fence, gave it a try, and it seems to work with a little adjustment using the lateral adjuster. I do want to learn to do it free hand, though! Not because I abhor using guides, but just because I think it's good to have the skill to do so because it gives one added flexibility in much the same way being able to sharpen freehand does.

[ken hatch]

Lots of great advise, as always! Some of which I hadn't considered.

In particular, I've been sharpening my irons flat and only cambering the very corners. I guess this makes it difficult or impossible maybe to make corrections simply by shifting the plane to one side?

I resharpened with a very slight cambered profile, so I'll see how that works.

I may just use a jig for the time being, though - at least in projects where taking too much wood off is trouble, or if I have a lot of jointing to do. I made a little fence, gave it a try, and it seems to work with a little adjustment using the lateral adjuster. I do want to learn to do it free hand, though! Not because I abhor using guides, but just because I think it's good to have the skill to do so because it gives one added flexibility in much the same way being able to sharpen freehand does.

Luke,

A flat iron makes it difficult for no other reason than it is very difficult to adjust the iron with perfect projection and if one side is taking a slightly greater cut on each subsequent pass the error is compounded. You do not need a lot of camber but some is helpful. If the board is way out of square dig out the Jack, it should have a significant camber to correct back to close to square.

ken

[Jim Koepke]

Yep. I have no problem flattening faces. It's just the edge jointing that is throwing me for a loop.

I've got some 2x stock for a project, all with those terrible rounded corners and ovaled edges, so I'll have quite a bit of practice in my near future.

Hopefully you have something larger than a #3 for this task.

jtk

[Luke Dupont]

Hopefully you have something larger than a #3 for this task.

jtk

Well, actually I don't. I mean, I've got a cheap no. 4 with the spoke-shave type adjustment mechanism, but the extra length is very negligible and hardly merits using in comparison to my vintage Stanley.

What is the advantage of a longer plane in jointing? I assumed that it was just straightness. If that's the case, I can achieve a straight, flat surface with a smoothing plane over a fairly long surface. But, is it also an issue of guarding against twist and such when planing the edge of boards? I could see how a short plane would allow for more twist to be imparted.

I haven't found a good jack plane yet. I'm on the lookout for a #5 1/2, or something in that region, though. Might even try making a wooden one, as I have some extra irons, but that's a time consuming process, and isn't guaranteed to yield a usable product.

[Bill McDermott]

Luke, To reinforce what Jim B. said, pencil lines help me a lot. After noticing with a square that I am off, I make a bunch of pencil lines all the way across the board, maybe every inch or two. Fast, quick scribbling with a carpenters pencil. That way I can see if I am doing what I intend to do to correct the edge. Sometimes you have to draw more lines when they get cut off. But this helps me to take down the high side little by little until the pencil is gone on the last stroke. While this helps you see square, seeing square helps to feel it. The disappearing pencil lines provide the feedback. Getting square certainly can be a challenge sometimes. But square is worth the effort. Bill

[Luke Dupont]

Luke,

A flat iron makes it difficult for no other reason than it is very difficult to adjust the iron with perfect projection and if one side is taking a slightly greater cut on each subsequent pass the error is compounded. You do not need a lot of camber but some is helpful. If the board is way out of square dig out the Jack, it should have a significant camber to correct back to close to square.

ken

Ah - that makes a lot of sense!

Indeed, I did put a very slight camber on it. Half unintentional, because I was trying out a new Arkansas stone I found at a fleamarket that had a slight cup to it :D

It's quite interesting how even technique in sharpening, or the tools you use in doing so, inform how you must work and what techniques may or may not be successful for you. Change one variable, and you may have to change others as well. That's why, I guess, it's not always easy just to copy what someone else does, and everyone develops their own unique methods for certain things. It's all inter-related.

It occurs to me that an entirely flat blade profile is probably most suited to use with a fence and slight tweaking of the lateral adjuster to achieve level.

The cambered iron, perhaps less so. I'll try it out and see if I like it, though!

[Mike Cherry]

It's quite interesting how even technique in sharpening, or the tools you use in doing so, inform how you must work and what techniques may or may not be successful for you. Change one variable, and you may have to change others as well. That's why, I guess, it's not always easy just to copy what someone else does, and everyone develops their own unique methods for certain things. It's all inter-related!

Copying what others do is a good way to get started. There will be things that stick and things that don't. This is the reason that we can have numerous posts about sharpening. There are so many ways to get things done and I would say it is rare that one person has tried them all. Try to remind yourself of this when you don't get the results your looking for. There is probably another way out there, one more suited to you. For example, in my build thread I'm using 8/4 white oak for the legs of a desk and I asked for suggestions on how to remove the waste aside from a coping saw that was clearly not up to the task. I had at least three different suggestions.

[Brian Holcombe]

Luke, if it's helpful to you check out my latest blog post as I've detailed how I go about jointing an edge on 4/4 material without using the sides as a reference except to estimate perpendicular at one point.

[david charlesworth]

My "Hand Planing" DVD is designed to show methods for the precision planing of a component sized piece of timber.

All 6 faces are explained, and it is available from L-N.

Best wishes,
David.

[Jim Koepke]

What is the advantage of a longer plane in jointing?


A longer plane, other than a #5-1/4, will have wider blade and more mass along with more length.

A #3 will be rocked by any variance in the surface it is planing. It will follow the contours of the surface. A larger plane, #5 and up, will be less influenced by bumps and valleys.

Yes I know some say you can do it all with a small plane. I would bet I can join an edge quicker with my larger planes.

jtk

[Brian Holcombe]

It depends on the work that you're doing. Of course for prep work I think that a 7 or a try plane is good, but sometimes a fine plane is helpful. For instance, I'm working on the cabinet back currently and jointing it with a 4 plane because I'm going around mitered corners and a fine setting is something that offers more assurance at that juncture. I check my work with a straight edge to ensure that I'm not going astray.

[James Waldron]

A couple of thoughts here:

One of the first things stated by the OP was that he practiced until the board wasn't usable any longer. He also mentioned planning off over an inch. A part of the problem here may have been that he kept practicing whatever error caused the problem until is was deeply ingrained. When something isn't going right, a Good Idea is to stop and think or stop and correct (something) or stop and get help. Practicing the wrong thing won't ever make it get better.

Second, there has been a lot of very good advice given in the thread by highly experience, highly able, highly articulate and highly respected people. Following their good advice is a good thing to improve one's technique. Even so, one key aspect of this issue is not amenable to suggestions by the experienced - mainly because they are so experienced that they can't actually articulate what it was that got them there. I would suggest that "seeing square" or "feeling square" is such an issue. I routinely plane square edges and know they're at least damned close even before I check with my engineer's square. But can I tell you how I know that other than in "touchy-feely" terms that don't help anyone else? Absolutely not. Can I tell you any specifics of how I gained my sight and touch? Not a chance. I can't even tell you when I attained such a capability. All I do know for sure is that the capability is the result of experience.

I can remember my lacrosse coach denying the Five Ps, "Practice Prevents Piss Poor Performance" were good enough. For him only the Six Ps are enough: "Perfect Practice Prevents Piss Poor Performance."

That "Perfect Practice" comes from assimilating all the good advice given above and implementing it with care. Go Mr. Charlesworth one better: periodically stop, check for square, and then sit your plane on the edge and look and feel what you've got without planing, just looking and feeling. Then continue and check again. With experience, the sight and feel will come.

Learning the technique requires a bit of an investment beyond planing the edge of "this" workpiece to get on with your build. But like any investment, you have to invest wisely.

[Don Morris]

Not much replaces experience.

[Robert Engel]

What is the advantage of a longer plane in jointing? I assumed that it was just straightness. If that's the case, I can achieve a straight, flat surface with a smoothing plane over a fairly long surface. But, is it also an issue of guarding against twist and such when planing the edge of boards? I could see how a short plane would allow for more twist to be imparted.

Imagine a long board with waves. A short plane will ride the waves up and down while the long plane will just skim the tops. The longer the board, the more important to have a jointer plane. Yes, as I said before, I think a wider, heavier plane is more stable and less prone to tilting.

Troblem for a lot of guys is the cost of a one-task tool. Even a vintage Stanley will be upwards of $200.

My advice is don't get frustrated, but having the right tool to do the job is the key . In addition to the correct plane, you also need an accurate square, a straight edge, and some winding sticks.

It takes a lot of practice. The masters with experienced eyes and fine tuned muscle memory make it look easy.

[Warren Mickley]

The hills and valleys explanation has been around for a while, but is lacking in real world experience. If a #3 plane is inadequate for a 12" board, then surely a #7 plane is inadequate for a 29" board. In fact it is no problem planing a board that is two or three times (or more) as long as the plane.

What is needed is skill and understanding, not equipment. I made full size furniture without a jointer and bought one only when it was justified by my level of business.

[Tom McMahon]

No matter which plane or planning method you use it will not make a straight square board by itself. The operator must be aware of the high and low areas of the board and only remove the material needing to be removed. You can't just push a plane [any plane] across a board and expect the board to become square or flat. It's not the plane it's the operator.

[Kees Heiden]

A relatively long plane certainly makes the work a whole lot easier!

[Patrick Chase]

The hills and valleys explanation has been around for a while, but is lacking in real world experience. If a #3 plane is inadequate for a 12" board, then surely a #7 plane is inadequate for a 29" board. In fact it is no problem planing a board that is two or three times (or more) as long as the plane.

What is needed is skill and understanding, not equipment. I made full size furniture without a jointer and bought one only when it was justified by my level of business.

Yup. This came up in another thread a few wks ago when somebody tried to argue that a #6 wasn't long enough for a 36" board IIRC (I know it was 2X, just not positive about which plane). Similar math, same conclusion.

[Patrick Chase]

Imagine a long board with waves. A short plane will ride the waves up and down while the long plane will just skim the tops. The longer the board, the more important to have a jointer plane. Yes, as I said before, I think a wider, heavier plane is more stable and less prone to tilting.

Troblem for a lot of guys is the cost of a one-task tool. Even a vintage Stanley will be upwards of $200.

Unfortunately the jointers have joined the #2, #10-1/2, #62 and many others in the category "tools that are at least as economical to buy new as vintage".

w.r.t. hills/valleys you can deal with those with a short plane. Good woodworkers can feel when a shorter plane is on a high spot or dip and adjust accordingly. For the rest of us a straightedge does the trick - just check your work frequently and take partial strokes on the high spots. I've done a 4' board with a #4 that way and gotten good results.

[Jim Koepke]

I've done a 4' board with a #4 that way and gotten good results.

Can it be done? Of course it can.

Would it be easier to work an edge true and square on an 18" piece of wood using a #5 or #6 compared to a #3? For myself, yes.

jtk

[Tom McMahon]

I would give you that a longer plane could make it easier to make an edge flat, but how does a longer plan help with square?

[Jim Koepke]

I would give you that a longer plane could make it easier to make an edge flat, but how does a longer plan help with square?

The short plane is more prone to follow the hills and valleys. Sometimes those are side to side. It is also easier to use the 'finger fence' technique with a longer nose on the front end of the plane. When I have an out of square edge the plane is held up off the low side and a narrow shaving is taken on the high side. With my thumb pressing down on the toe of the plane it is easy to ride this narrow ridge to take a slightly wider shaving. Repeat until a shaving the full width of the workpiece is taken, check and repeat as needed.

Some folks like to use a camber on their plane blades. With a #3 plane on 2X material with any more than the very slightest camber there may be parts of the work not being touched by the blade. Others have mentioned with using a larger plane and cambered blade they only need to move the center of the plane to the high side to achieve a square edge.

Mostly I do not used cambered blades, but in theory it sounds quite reasonable.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

1) In this case, I was using a Stanley No. 3 on a fairly short piece. I've had the same trouble on a variety of planes (a Japanese plane, and a few other wooden or western planes), and a variety of pieces. Much the same results in all cases.

2) I don't know. That is a good point. Maybe I'm being too much of a perfectionist. But, it is important in some cases where you want the edges to fit squarely, at say a 90 degree angle to another piece. The difficulty is, that with such a narrow piece, if you're a millimeter, or even half a mil low on one side, that can translate into say 10 degrees or so.

3) If I were edge gluing, I wouldn't worry so much about squareness. I'd just joint both pieces at once and they'd match regardless. Basically, I just want nice 90 degree corners; partially for aesthetics, and partially for functionality, when I want to have that edge register against another at 90 degrees.

It's somewhat of a matter of just not feeling that my level of accuracy is within acceptable standards. I'm not a huge stickler for having everything perfect, but sometimes things are just off enough to potentially cause problems.
There are few situations in which you really need to be perfectly square with a jointed edge, other than when jointing the edges for an edge glued panel. Even then there is an alternative as you described. If you do find yourself in a situation that requires a perfect square edge then look into the various shooting board jigs and find one of those that will work for you.

[Luke Dupont]

Update:

Sharpening my irons with a very slight camber seems to have helped.

Also, a jig I made seems to have worked as well, but I haven't been using it much.

I've mostly just been jointing thicker stock though, which is quite a bit easier, so that may be a contributing factor as well!