Elbows

[Kees Heiden]

On monday I was at home, and got quite some work done on prepping a bunch of wood for my cabinet project. I did most of the work by hand, using a jackplane and a tryplane most of the time. After a while my elbows started to hurt, I should have stopped at that point but I didn't. So, long story short: I blew up my elbows, mostly the joint on the inside, golfers elbow it's called. Both sides. It still hurts a little bit. And this is not the first time it happened to me.

I am curious, do other handplane users have troubles with their elbows too, or is it just me?

[David Wong]

I developed some temporary elbow and shoulder pain when I was using western planes to prep rough stock. A jack and a jointer. The bench surface was a few inches too high for me, and that probably contributed. No pain since using Japanese planes, but in fairness I never use them on rough boards.

[Kees Heiden]

My bench is very low, so that might be a problem. I usually bend my legs very deep.
I can see how japanese planes are easier on your joints. You can use them with nearly stretched out arms. I really try to plane as much as possible with my body instead of my arms, but things don't quite work out like that.

[Brian Holcombe]

I like using both western and eastern for the variety of muscle groups used. I've injured myself badly one time, with a twisting injury pushing a metal jointer over a the center of a table.

[Phil Mueller]

In a word, yes. For me it's the shoulders. Age is taking its toll. To save the bones, I typically rely on a lunch box planer for cleaning up rough stock before the hand planes.

My only advice from a non-medial professional; when something starts to ache...take a break.

[Pat Barry]

Just a friendly reminder from your body that you are getting older. The older you get the more these things happen. Avoidance is the best thing, however, if you must, you need to get into training for this sort of thing and work your way up in rep's, not just dive in and wear yourself out. But, remember the old NFL saying - "You can play(ne) with pain but not with an injury".

[Derek Cohen]

On monday I was at home, and got quite some work done on prepping a bunch of wood for my cabinet project. I did most of the work by hand, using a jackplane and a tryplane most of the time. After a while my elbows started to hurt, I should have stopped at that point but I didn't. So, long story short: I blew up my elbows, mostly the joint on the inside, golfers elbow it's called. Both sides. It still hurts a little bit. And this is not the first time it happened to me.

I am curious, do other handplane users have troubles with their elbows too, or is it just me?

Hi Kees

Golfer's Elbow is caused by overuse of the forearm when gripping something, and in your case, a handplane. The pain is from tiny tears in the tendons.

I have not had golfer's elbow for many years, not since the days when I played serious squash and mucked about on the court when playing less serious friends - lazy shots and poor posture led to my holding the racquet and striking the ball in a way that strained the tendons. You are likely doing something similar with your planes.

I have likened the ideal posture for planing as a movement where the strength comes from the hips. Bend your knees. A bench that is too high may force one to push with shoulders. A bench that is too low may place more stress on the wrists and forearms. What do others think?

In any event, the cure is rest. Damn!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Prashun Patel]

Yes. A couple years ago. My doctor called it tennis elbow. Hurt so bad I couldn't shake hands or grip for a while.

Tricep extensions were good therapy for me.

I now take many breaks during planing sessions, wax the sole often and resharpen often.

[Christian Thompson]

I got tennis elbow (outside of the elbow) a while back playing... golf :-). After fighting it for a while I found an exercise for it called the "Tyler Twist" that helped a lot. The internet has a bunch of videos if you search. There is a reverse tyler twist for golfers elbow. If it is persistent you might want to give it a shot. But resting a few days sounds like a good first move :-).

[Derek Cohen]

Prashun, tennis elbow are the name given when the pain occurs on the outside of the elbow, and golfer's elbow is on the inside of the elbow.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[george wilson]

I have had both elbows operated on from "tennis" elbow. Tore the ligaments loose on one elbow when swinging a hammer. Tore the other when a 5 gallon water bottle slipped while putting it onto the cooler in the tool shop. Great!! 5 gallons of water all over the floor!! I laid down planks to walk on till it evaporated or drained away through seams in the concrete.

[Kees Heiden]

At least today it doesn't hurt in daily life anymore, so i feel that I am going in the right direction. And indeed, I must take this task of planing all the rails and styles and panels in small stages!

I was planing the legs, chunky pieces of wood with a wooden plane, so my low bench might not have been so low in reality! The legs plus the wooden plane easilly add an inch or 5. BTW, I had most trouble with my left arm. The unusual pose with the left hand clamping over the wooden plane stock might need some training.

The idea now is to take some more rest. And then start to train the musles with some specific exercises. Those triceps extensions are the way to go if I can trust the Internet...

And just a warning to myself and everybody else, if it hurts, quit doing it :D

[Prashun Patel]

As for the t-extensions, one of my colleagues tipped me off to that and said his tennis elbow 'magically' disappeared after a couple weeks of this. Skeptical, I tried it, and mine went away too. I am certain this is BS, but maybe the BS will work for you too... ;)

[Chris Fournier]

Aside from blisters on my hands I have not hurt myself while hand planing. This being said it became very obvious to me that I was losing strength and more prone to injury over the past ten years, nothing like asking for help to move a dry piece of lumber that you used to move alone - when it was green from the mill.

The above circumstance was the final push to get me to the gym three days a week and undertake a strength training program with my friend who is a trainer. I was shocked at how weak I had become. Results were obvious in 3 months and after a year they were dramatic. The cost to me is three time a week in and out in one hour. This is not a religion for me but I now know that it has to be part of my routine if I hope to be active and able for the remainder of my days. Strength will protect you from a lot of injuries.

Squash is a killer on the body but so much fun! Strength training has improved my squash game and my ability to endure the beatings I get. Perhaps some very simple strength training would help all of us who are north of 50?

[Mike Brady]

I suspect that wooden planes take more of a toll on the body because they lack the mass and inertia of metal ones. My use of wooden planes is limited, admittedly, but observing those who use them well tells me that user is somewhat more involved in keeping the tool on the wood and moving forward, particularly since many wooden planes lack any kind of handle. This may sound like a bias toward metal planes on my part, which is not deliberate. Hopefully others here can speak to this point.

[Kees Heiden]

This is the excersize I will start tonight and hopefully it is going be magical: http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=3614

Instead of using weights, I guess using several sizes of hammers is just as effective.

[Chris Fournier]

I think that Japanese style planes without totes would be the worst as you have to grip the plane body which can lead to the elbow injury described. I find that with totes I can have a more relaxed grip. This being said if I have to hog a lot of material I use a scrub plane and find it pretty effortless. It is the final finishing with the smoothers where I an tighter on the plane.

Good luck with the exercises Kees.

[Jim Koepke]

My only advice from a non-medial professional; when something starts to ache...take a break.

A big +1 on this.

A little tired or winded? Take a break and REST! Aches or pains? Take a break and REST!

I also do something that may not work for everyone else, I switch sides. Most tools can be used either left or right handed. What is really strange is there are often times my left hand sawing is better than my right hand sawing. It may be due to my eye dominance also switching sides. My left eye doesn't have any astigmatism.

As has also been said, keep the blade sharp and wax the sole. Dull blades and friction can add a lot of extra consumption of energy.

Another personal observation is I can last a lot longer taking 0.003 – 0.005" shavings than when trying to take 0.015" shavings. It is less tiring and jarring to such an extent that more material can be removed, before becoming tired, by using more strokes with the blade set to remove less material.

After a previous post about clearance angles I have been paying attention to my planing. Most of my pressing down on a large plane is done at the beginning of a full length stroke on the front of the plane to make sure it is fully registered before starting the stroke. Once the whole plane is on the piece I do not use a lot of down force. A sharp blade will stay in the cut until it comes upon a valley or has to go over a hill.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

I think that Japanese style planes without totes would be the worst as you have to grip the plane body which can lead to the elbow injury described.

Wouldn't this be different due to the Japanese style planes being used by pulling instead of pushing?

Though maybe Japanese woodworkers have different work related injuries.

Samurai elbow anyone?

jtk

[Luke Dupont]

Be careful with tendonitis / tendonosis / "tennis elbow."

The problem with tendonitis is that you generally don't notice it until you've already done the damage. Then, you'll feel better, think it's all healed up, and hurt it again without knowing. Rinse and repeat, and you have a recipe for chronic tendonitis / tendonosis. And, there's nothing to do but let it heal up for 6-12 months at that point.

It comes from over using the tendons. I've been struggling with this for a year now. In my case, while I do feel it in my elbows when it's bad, it's more in my wrist from too much gripping. It's probably from a combination of typing, martial arts, and tool use, for me. Using tools used to really aggravate it, but with a combination of healing and adopting a looser grip (which, incidentally, has helped my sawing!), tools use doesn't tend to bother me much anymore. Find efficient ways to work. Make sure you're not gripping too hard, and if you're planing, make sure you're kind of "throwing" the plane and using momentum, rather than slowly bulldozing along. Alternatively, do definitely consider tools with different ergonomics, such as Japanese planes.

[Brian Holcombe]

I think that Japanese style planes without totes would be the worst as you have to grip the plane body which can lead to the elbow injury described. I find that with totes I can have a more relaxed grip. This being said if I have to hog a lot of material I use a scrub plane and find it pretty effortless. It is the final finishing with the smoothers where I an tighter on the plane.

Good luck with the exercises Kees.

WRT Japanese planes; you would use your lats and thighs to pull the plane.

[steven c newman]

Elbows and shoulders aren't hurting.....however, lower back usually calls a halt to things way before the other start to hurt....Spinal Stenosis Lumbar can be a bear....Makes me want to go and sit down with the heating pad for the rest of the day.

Had one shoulder worked on, long time ago. Been fine since. Too many out there do not know how to swing a hammer, and wind up with bad elbows. Swing with the ahoulders, not at the elbow or wrist.....unless you like wearing a brace.

[Chris Fournier]

WRT Japanese planes; you would use your lats and thighs to pull the plane.

I think that Triceps would come into play as well. It is the griping of the plane body that would lead to "the elbow" I think.

[Chris Fournier]

When I am injured I definitely have a rest or go easier. Aches and pains almost always feel better after stretching and a good workout. Keep moving or freeze up for me.

[george wilson]

Re: tennis elbow getting better; the surgeon told me that those ligaments that were torn loose were really not needed,and the muscle would function without it. But,I decided to get the ligaments sewn back onto the bone(they drill little holes in the bone to sew to.)

Your mileage may vary,but,I had to do manual work,and I didn't want the risk of the torn ligaments coming back when I had to lift or move something heavy. I like to be sure of everything. I'll gamble $1.00 on the lottery.Nothing more!:)

[Brian Holcombe]

I think that Triceps would come into play as well. It is the griping of the plane body that would lead to "the elbow" I think.

I doubt that its impossible to injure yourself with one, but Odate's book describes the grip and pull as using your one hand to pull from behind the blade and using the other to guide the body and apply slight pressure. It always appears that they're using their hand to grip the body, but they are not.

Triceps as well at the end of the stroke.

It should be a full body movement.

When So Yamashita was describing the use of a Kanna to me, he said the reason behind the pull stroke was so that small stature people could use the largest muscles in their body to work the material.

When I use it to plane a panel my body can be tired but it does not cause my hand to cramp (my hands cramp with ease if I'm using an improper grip thanks to an injury).

I plane for hours at a time, just take a break from what you are doing and do another task to ease up on those specific muscles.

[Kees Heiden]

Tonght I tried the excentric exercise. I didn't feel a thing in my elbows with a 1 kg hammer. So either I did it wrongly, or the elbows aren't that bad. Tomorrow I have my usual sport climbing evening, I'm going to take it very easy and listen to my body. After that durng the weekend taking up the handplaning again in small doses.

I had the same I remember now when working on my dining table. It was pretty bad after one long planing sessions but the pain disappeared after a few days and I could continue later on.

As always, and some of you allready mentioned it, listen to your body! Something that ain't easy for me.

And it looks like there is a Japanese plane in my future :)

[Patrick Chase]

I suspect that wooden planes take more of a toll on the body because they lack the mass and inertia of metal ones. My use of wooden planes is limited, admittedly, but observing those who use them well tells me that user is somewhat more involved in keeping the tool on the wood and moving forward, particularly since many wooden planes lack any kind of handle. This may sound like a bias toward metal planes on my part, which is not deliberate. Hopefully others here can speak to this point.

If your technique is correct then most of the "mass and inertia" should be coming from your body anyway, not the plane. You should be "stacking" your joints so that they simply transmit power as efficiently and directly as possible, and driving from the hips like Derek said.

I've had elbow and shoulder pain after planing, but it's usually been because I got sloppy and started pushing from my upper body.

[Lenore Epstein]

Prashun, tennis elbow are the name given when the pain occurs on the outside of the elbow, and golfer's elbow is on the inside of the elbow.

Regards from Perth

Derek
Here's a page describing the Reverse Tyler's Twist for golf elbow, for those of us who don't want to watch a whole youtube video.

http://info.thera-bandacademy.com/flexbarelbowmedial

Kees, either you were misdiagnosed or missed something in the exercise technique if you felt nothing at all. It might be worth carefully trying it with a heavier weight, but first I suggest varying body position and grip and greatly slowing down the movement so you can tell when it hits the spot. Remember you're not looking for pain in physical therapy, just stress on whatever muscle group needs strengthening.

[Bill White]

George,
Age wisdom prevails. Believe me. I'm old.
Bill

[Reinis Kanders]

I frequently roll my forearms, triceps and biceps with lacrosse ball or hard foam roller of this type https://www.amazon.com/Original-Tiger-Tail-Muscle-Massage/dp/B00ZPMAIO6
Seems to help, I also do a bunch of pull-ups most days spread across the day and that has strengthened those areas as well.

[david charlesworth]

This happened to a couple of my students, who stood facing the bench and planed with their arms.

There is much more control and power in the legs, so turn the hips as far as possible to the left, (feet in Yoga type position), jam the elbows into the ribs and use the legs.

I see a lot of arm planing on the net and do not consider this to be good practice.

Hope it heals soon,

David Charlesworth

[Patrick Chase]

I see a lot of arm planing on the net and do not consider this to be good practice.


Au contraire, it makes for terrific practice, if you happen to practice orthopedic surgery.

Seriously, I agree with this 100%. IMO there's too much emphasis in this thread on how to deal with the symptoms and aftermath, and not enough on potential root causes in our technique.

[Kees Heiden]

Well, I THINK that I am having good body posture. But on every stroke I push through and go from elbows neatly tucked in to almost stretched out (depends on the length of the piece of course). Anyone want to comment on that?

[david charlesworth]

This is a lot of work for elbows. Easily avoidable. With the added benefit of more power and more control.

David

[Kees Heiden]

Good. Something to give a try.

[Patrick Chase]

Well, I THINK that I am having good body posture. But on every stroke I push through and go from elbows neatly tucked in to almost stretched out (depends on the length of the piece of course). Anyone want to comment on that?

You don't want to do that. When your elbows are tucked in your skeleton isn't aligned with the applied forces (there are large force components that aren't in-line with your bones) and that means your muscles, tendons, and ligaments are carrying the load. When they're locked out straight you don't have range-of-motion to absorb impacts or other load variations, and that creates problems of its own (potential meniscus damage for starters). You want your joints to be "comfortably flexed" so that they have some range of motion to absorb impacts while still allowing your skeleton to carry most of the load.

We woodworkers actually have it easy. Tennis players and musicians don't have a choice - they *have* to contort their joints to a certain degree to perform well in their chosen endeavors. That isn't the case for planing.

If you think planing is bad you should try ski racing. To be competitive you have to be able to handle ~600 lbs turning forces on a single foot, while absorbing terrain and managing pressure over the ski (varying balance through the turn etc). Skeletal alignment is critical there. Once you get to a certain point it becomes easy to spot the people who will end up with their knee surgeons on speed-dial...

[Kees Heiden]

I'll see if I can make some videos this weekend. Apart from being fun, we could learn a bit from the comments.

[Luke Dupont]

You don't want to do that. When your elbows are tucked in your skeleton isn't aligned with the applied forces (there are large force components that aren't in-line with your bones) and that means your muscles, tendons, and ligaments are carrying the load. When they're locked out straight you don't have range-of-motion to absorb impacts or other load variations, and that creates problems of its own (potential meniscus damage for starters). You want your joints to be "comfortably flexed" so that they have some range of motion to absorb impacts while still allowing your skeleton to carry most of the load.


I swear that I've heard the same thing -- possibly word for word, from several my Martial Arts instructors. ;)

We generally have a guideline as to a position that is too collapsed; the elbow should generally be more than a fist's distance (forward) from the body. Beyond that, you quickly lose support of the body behind your arm. Likewise with very extended positions -- though, in the case of "throwing" something that already has momentum behind it, such as a punch, or in this case, a plane, I think it is fine to follow through.

Tennis elbow can result, in Martial Arts, from over extending punches such that the elbow locks out and takes the load when the strike "stops" in the air, though. The same could be true of planing; if you are throwing your plane and you allow your arms to *fully* extend/lock out, the force of stopping the plane's momentum will damage your elbow and result in tennis elbow. That could very well be the OP's issue.

[Patrick Chase]

I swear that I've heard the same thing -- possibly word for word, from several my Martial Arts instructors. ;)

We generally have a guideline as to a position that is too collapsed; the elbow should generally be more than a fist's distance (forward) from the body. Beyond that, you quickly lose support of the body behind your arm.

You see some version of that in almost every sport.

In my experience the ideal position depends on the dynamism of the activity, with highly dynamic tasks requiring more flex in the "default" position as you describe. IMO throwing/hitting is a lot more dynamic than planing, so I suspect that the ideal for planing is a bit straighter than that (at least, that's my experience).

Again going back to my own sport of choice, ski racers use more ankle/knee flex (and accept higher stress on connective tissues and/or lower load limits) on variable terrain than on smooth courses.

[david charlesworth]

By chance, I have just made a short You Tube clip to illustrate what I mean by planing with the legs.

https://youtu.be/Nka94EiVkmM

See what you think.

Best wishes,
David

[Patrick Chase]

By chance, I have just made a short You Tube clip to illustrate what I mean by planing with the legs.

https://youtu.be/Nka94EiVkmM

See what you think.

Best wishes,
David

Yep. I personally don't like having my elbows in that tight (it's not a very relaxed or athletic position, at least for me) and prefer to keep my back straighter (again, more relaxed position. Also, I have neck problems), but now we're getting down to fairly subjective quibbles.

The way I learned to plane from the legs/hips was by focussing on "stepping into" shorter planing strokes. That is, I consciously focussed on stepping onto my leading foot (left for me) as I started each stroke. When you do that you force your hips to move at the same time as the plane, and that establishes the habit of driving from your core rather than your arms. It also prevents you from folding at the waist, because if your hips are coming forward from taking a step then it's very difficult to make your upper body go further forward still by folding. Walking through a longer stroke is just the same thing with a bit more coordination.

As I mentioned above, you see similar issues and associated skill-building drills across a remarkably wide range of sports. Driving the hips forward to avoid "reaching" with the upper body is a foundational skiing technique in particular.

[Kees Heiden]

Thanks David, that's very clear.

One point though, you take a thin shaving from a narrow board, that doesn't take much force. I am not a strong guy, reasonably fit, but not strong. I choose to use speed to assist the hard work of planing rough sawn boards, and with just your legs it is kind of hard to get up enough speed.

Anyway, I promissed a video too this weekend. Here are two videos, flattening a quite severely bowed, rough sawn cherry board, first a vid with the jack plane, then a vid with the tryplane.

I am completely open for critique. I certainly know that I don't make it look easy!

In the end I did have a nice straight board, out of wind, hardly any tearout.

Edit: I forgot the links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lclnlBYuadI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEzF8Q7IZnw

[Patrick Chase]

Thanks David, that's very clear.

One point though, you take a thin shaving from a narrow board, that doesn't take much force. I am not a strong guy, reasonably fit, but not strong. I choose to use speed to assist the hard work of planing rough sawn boards, and with just your legs it is kind of hard to get up enough speed.

Your legs and core are MUCH stronger than your arms, unless you have very serious limb/spine/nerve damage or are on an extraordinarily ill-advised workout program. I can leg-press the entire stack (480 lbs) on a Nautilus machine for with one foot, but I've never been able to bench much over 200. My lower:upper strength ratio is probably higher than most (that's how I'm built), but even so it's a nontrivial multiple for all able-bodied humans. If you can drive the plane through a given cut with your arms then you can drive it through that cut with your legs, period. It's just a matter of establishing the right habits.

That is why I commented on David's elbow position, though: Your arms can't transmit anywhere near as much load in that position as they can with more extension (and better skeletal alignment).

[Kees Heiden]

But you get much more speed through your arms then moving your whole body.

But I am open for critique, and whiling to change my habbits.

[Patrick Chase]

But you get much more speed through your arms then moving your whole body.

But I am open for critique, and whiling to change my habbits.

Really? A reasonably athletic human can run at 15 mph for short distances without much trouble (and elite athletes have sustained a mile-plus at that speed since Bannister). That's ~23 feet/second. How fast do you think you need to move a plane? I think the answer is "less than walking pace" FWIW.

Planing is more about power than speed.

[Patrick Chase]

Thanks David, that's very clear.

One point though, you take a thin shaving from a narrow board, that doesn't take much force. I am not a strong guy, reasonably fit, but not strong. I choose to use speed to assist the hard work of planing rough sawn boards, and with just your legs it is kind of hard to get up enough speed.

Sorry about the double-reply, but two more remarks:

1. Speed literally doesn't get you very far. Let's make some generous assumptions: I estimate your planing speed as 3 m/sec at most from the video (which is quite a lot as planing goes). If your plane has 3 kg mass, then the kinetic energy is 13.5 Joules. Energy is just force times distance, so that much energy will carry the plane through 13.5 Newtons of resistance for 1 meter. 13.5 N is ~1.4 kgf or ~3 lbs. In other words, the amount of speed you're building up can't possibly do much to carry the plane through the stroke.

2. Not being strong is a reason to AVOID arm planing. Even weak people have vastly higher core and leg strength than arm strength, and your arms can resist a higher load than they can actively drive. Also, your core has vastly higher mass than any plane or than your arms, so if you get your core moving then you actually *will* be able to exploit momentum/energy to carry through the cut.

Intrestingly both of your argument actually appear to be reasons to not arm-plane.

[Kees Heiden]

This is strating to be real fun! Thanks for the comments Patrck, you are completely right of course. I was just put on the wrong leg because Charles posted a video with a very light shaving whle I am working on some energy sapping stuff!

Here is a new video, as you can see I try hard to get my legs and body working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n889PPeUFRg

[Graham Haydon]

I don't think there is a like for like comparison here. David's example if a fine cut on on thin stock close to the edge of a bench. Kees has rough sawn wood and needs to make it clean and true for work. If there was an 8" wide board to be prepared or even smoothed I find the arms have to come into play. I'm pretty mediocre at taking rough wood to planed ready for work, when I do I try to prevent my elbows from completely straightened. But I find the arms do need to be used, unless it's shooting long edges.

[Brian Holcombe]

Here's more fodder for the conversation.

https://youtu.be/dtACbdWWgl4

When going along the grain with the try plane I am mostly using my legs, not overextending arms.

[Graham Haydon]

You make woodworking look very stylish Brian, I feel like a hobo after watching that!

[Kees Heiden]

Indeed! I'm a hobo too!
But you certainly give a push with your arms too Brian.

[Brian Holcombe]

Haha! That's my schtick.

I do push but you might notice it's s full body movement, hard not too when you are working panels. That panel is 18.5" x 36".

My right side elbow never extends past about 100 degrees with the try plane or Jack.

[Patrick Chase]

Indeed! I'm a hobo too!
But you certainly give a push with your arms too Brian.

Cross strokes like that are an exception - You can't really get your body fully into it because the bench is in the way. Like Brian I focus on initiating with a step to get as much "drive from the core" as possible (at least I think that's what he's doing, too bad his feet are out of frame) but then you have to finish with the arm to some degree, esp on wider work.

Jeans and an Izod shirt *are* hobo for Brian. When he's serious he wears a robe. He probably cropped his feet out because he doesn't want us to know that he's also not wearing slippers.

[Brian Holcombe]

:D

On that note I will post this video;

https://youtu.be/mEmS7n0es1g

[Kees Heiden]

Cross strokes like that are an exception - You can't really get your body fully into it because the bench is in the way. Like Brian I focus on initiating with a step to get as much "drive from the core" as possible (at least I think that's what he's doing, too bad his feet are out of frame) but then you have to finish with the arm to some degree, esp on wider work.

Jeans and an Izod shirt *are* hobo for Brian. When he's serious he wears a robe. He probably cropped his feet out because he doesn't want us to know that he's also not wearing slippers.

From 2:30 onwards it is a few bits of tryplane work with the grain. Each planing impuls does start with an arm push, but there is obviously a lot of body work too.

[Warren Mickley]

I watched the videos. The damage comes at two points where your body gets a jolt. One is when the plane first engages the timber the second is when the plane is suddenly stalled by the timber. These jolts are very destructive to the body. I would not recommend taking full length cuts with so much iron (projection) that the plane stalls.

For using the jack plane, pick a section of the board, maybe 15 or 18 inches, lift up the plane, ease into the cut and then ease out of the cut. Kind of a scooping action. Take a number of cuts planing with the grain, then move to another section. At the beginning of the cut, your arms are going at the same speed as your body, then they are extended mid cut while things are going smoothly. When you use the trying plane you can take sectional cuts also; if taking full length shavings, the cut should be light enough that you don't stall, at least not with a jerk. Smooth technique will help your body.

[Brian Holcombe]

Warren, I've noticed that if I am over agressive with my jack plane setting it actually slows me down. I wind up at like a medium to heavy cut for most work along the grain. So, it is encouraging to see what you have written.

Kees, here is a bit more planing with the try plane. Wide panel again do my reach is slightly extended at times.

https://youtu.be/Mr9zzO8vuVo

Next round of videos I'll back the camera up to show leg movements. Many you-tubers wanted to see up close, the shavings, so I took a close video. The camera got buried by accident but I thought it to be entertaining, so I kept that part.

[Kees Heiden]

That's very helpfull Warren. And Brian too. I am for sure way too agressive. No wonder my body hurts. In the end I do get nice flat and straight boards, but it would be great if it was efficient too.

Anyone want to comment on my third video from post #48? Am I on the right track? Those were full length shavings. I like the idea of working short bits, especially with the jack plane.

[Brian Holcombe]

Kees, do you have any camber to that Try plane's iron?

I think that second video looks better.

[Patrick Chase]

That's very helpfull Warren. And Brian too. I am for sure way too agressive. No wonder my body hurts. In the end I do get nice flat and straight boards, but it would be great if it was efficient too.

Anyone want to comment on my third video from post #48? Am I on the right track? Those were full length shavings. I like the idea of working short bits, especially with the jack plane.

The basic stance looks better, but Warren's right - the cut is too aggressive and you're stopping/starting too much. Building upon my string of marginal sports analogies it looks a little like a weightlifter who's trying to put up more than they can cleanly lift, and "jerking" to make it work. Not coincidentally people who do that also get joint issues.

I also think Brian is probably onto something when he asks about camber - IIRC from other posts you don't camber your jack/scrub planes much if at all, and that means you're pushing a full-width shaving. That's a super difficult way to rough even with a narrow plane like a scrub. FWIW I mostly rough with 2" wide (#5, #5-1/4W) blades cambered at 6" to 12" radii. I almost never take a full-width shaving, and I back off if I end up stopping in the middle of a shaving. The nice thing about camber is that backing off the depth also reduces the width, which gives the adjustment a lot of "dynamic range" (large range of achievable shaving cross-sections).

It's hard to tell from videos but I suspect that I take significantly smaller shavings than you do. Size isn't everything :-).

[Brian Holcombe]

It's interesting, Prashun and I were able to test that out this past week, not intentionally so but two basically identical try planes one with camber that was enough to feather the edges of a full width shaving that are probably .004"-.005" thick in the center vs just slightly cambered and relieved at the far edges, the difference was dramatic.

Both set for a similar cut and very similar cap iron settings.

[Clay Parrish]

I developed (or exacerbated) cubital tunnel syndrome trying to resaw with a crappy handsaw.

[Warren Mickley]

That's very helpfull Warren. And Brian too. I am for sure way too agressive. No wonder my body hurts. In the end I do get nice flat and straight boards, but it would be great if it was efficient too.

Anyone want to comment on my third video from post #48? Am I on the right track? Those were full length shavings. I like the idea of working short bits, especially with the jack plane.

I watched the third video again. You are somewhat easier on the arms, but still way more iron than you can handle comfortably, more than necessary. With the trying plane we usually concentrate on the high spots, (ends, middle, corners or whatever), and take relatively few full length shavings.

Here is a passage from Nicholson similar to what I do. I don't think I learned this from Nicholson, but am not certain. He doesn't say to lift the plane at the end of each stroke, but if you don't the shaving remains attached to the board.
338966

[david charlesworth]

Kees,

I am afraid I would say not.

The "bunny hops" with stopping and starting do not look comfortable at all.

Why not try taking a slightly lighter cut, keeping your left elbow still, jammed against your side and walking steadily from one end to the other?

David

[Jim Koepke]

Before I could walk and plane wood at the same time I had to quit chewing gum. :eek:

jtk

[Graham Haydon]

The Nicholson write up and Warren's tip seem right on the money for rough stock prep, David's seem good for edge jointing.

[Kees Heiden]

Who would have thought I have been hacking my way through life? Luckilly I never claimed anything else :p I am glad to be the guinea pig this time.

So, another message from this highly educative thread, you can still make things even when you are not some demi-god of handtool woodworking.

I'll look into the shaving thickness later.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Kees

I attempted to address this area in my "review" of the Veritas Custom Planes, which I posted here 18 months ago. (I saw the flexibility of the planes as an opportunity to discuss the ergonomics - as I view them - of planing, per se). The article of relevance is this one (although there are three altogether): http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3.html

One of the points I made, based on observing videos of experienced woodworkers planing, was that the hand grasped and pushed the handle on the horizontal, and not downward, as often thought. Here is our own David Charlesworth ...



http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m12d57880.jpg

... and Garrett Hack ...

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_3a39a39d.jpg

The experiences that influence the way I examine the ergonomics of planing - where the power comes from - are karate, tennis, squash and windsurfing. All have in common a drive from the hips. When David, above, talks of walking forward, what I do is bend the knees and maintain the same height as I move forward. I've tried to represent that here (extract from the article) ...

Inexperienced woodworkers appear to push down on the handle and lunge forward from the waist or shoulders. This leads to poor balance, poor control and limited power.


Experienced woodworkers, such as Jim Kingshott, describe that there is an optimal position for one’s feet for the push stroke (see his video, “Bench Planes”). Similarly, Jeff Miller (in “The Foundations of Better Woodworking”) demonstrates dropping the planing height as he pushes forward.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<…………………………………………………………..<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_594a744e.jpg

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_708badac.jpg

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m5514ce5b.jpg


Obviously, by squatting low, the effective height of the bench is being raised. What I discovered I was doing was simply compensating for the lowered bench, dropping down lower and pushing the plane forward … as if I was working at a higher bench and standing more upright. This meant that the “advantage” of a forward leaning Bailey handle was lost.


Here is an illustration. Below is my bench. Notice that the top aligns with the hem of my t-shirt.


http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_4831e92d.jpg


Now in the sequence below note that the hem has dropped below the skirt of the bench (about 5”), and it does not move in height as I shift my weight forward. The hips are the source of the forward drive and transfer force into the lowered forearms.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ……………………………………………………<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m1b5d3797.jpg

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_6314d6fd.jpg



Regards from Perth

Derek

[Warren Mickley]

Stock preparation is an art. One of the things one has to balance is the trade off between a heavy enough cut to make efficient use of time, and light enough that one does not tire or injure. A stone mason once offered me a summer job some decades ago. I said "I'm just a little guy." He said "You know how to pace yourself. I get these weight lifters who have a ball for an hour, throwing stones around, then they can't work any more."

Kees may be working himself too hard, but he is successfully preparing stock from rough lumber. None of the guys pictured in Derek's post are doing any serious stock removal. And looking at the pictures, I would question whether they have more experience than Kees in this regard.

[Kees Heiden]

Well, for the discussion I measured some stuff, so we know what we are talking about.

Yesterday the jackplane produced shavings around 0.4 mm thick, that's about 16 thou. Of course the edge is cambered, but not as drastically as you see advertised sometimes. I guess the camber is 12".

338980

The tryplane has a subtle bit of camber plus the corners are relieved a bit. I took shavings 0.15 mm thick, that's 6 thou.

338981

Today I reduced the depth of cut on both planes, jackplane is 0.3 mm tryplane 0.1 mm. That makes quite a difference indeed! I am still not perfect, but at least it doesn't feel so jerky anymore. First you think that nothing happens with thinner shavings, you just have to go back and forth a few times extra to get the same amount of work done and suddenly you start to pull full length shavings.

Here is a short video from some tryplane work. There is a huge knot in this board, so that makes me stumble somewhat from time to time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS7GQQodmjs

Far from perfect yet, but I feel that I'm getting there. Now to heal the elbows first (especially right side). This is the work accomplished so far in this tutorial thread. As you can see, not really the best lumber ever. I hope the thread has been helpfull to other people struggling with the right body mechanics too.

338982

[Patrick Chase]

Hi Kees

I attempted to address this area in my "review" of the Veritas Custom Planes, which I posted here 18 months ago. (I saw the flexibility of the planes as an opportunity to discuss the ergonomics - as I view them - of planing, per se). The article of relevance is this one (although there are three altogether): http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3.html


In addition to showing driving from the core, I think the pictures of Derek show pretty good elbow position and arm extension - extended enough to let the skeleton carry much of the load, flexed enough to provide absorption.

[Derek Cohen]

Kees may be working himself too hard, but he is successfully preparing stock from rough lumber. None of the guys pictured in Derek's post are doing any serious stock removal. And looking at the pictures, I would question whether they have more experience than Kees in this regard.

I disagree, Warren. Firstly, while the planing involves jointing, there is no difference in the mechanics involved. Planing technique is the same regardless of type of plane or type of planing: use the hips and legs. Secondly, both David Charlesworth and Garrett Hack are far from intermediate woodworkers. Look at the video that David posted. I've watched videos of both, and they are the model of good technique.

Did you watch the last video of Kees? Kees, this video reveals all. That is, why you are experiencing elbow problems. Here is a screen shot from your video ....

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kees1_zps6y8skkoo.jpg

What is evident is that you are pushing with your shoulder and elbow. Your hips and legs hardly move. Instead you sway from the upper body, and lever with your shoulder and elbow. That places all the stress on your elbow. Further, your body faces the board - the bench may be too low - and you do not bend your knees. This makes it difficult to face forward, where you would have being able to drive the plane with an elbow against your side. Instead you appear well off balance.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Graham Haydon]

I still can't help thinking there are two topics in one thread. It's very easy to stroll along the bench taking fine refining cuts on narrow stock and give it as an example. With work of that nature accuracy would suffer with poor technique but you'd be hard pressed to hurt yourself. Kees is doing something which is my opinion very different to anything shown in the photos.

Kees, that video is looking very good to me! Smooth movements, seems close to what I'd imagine Nicholson was describing. I'd like to think I look that controlled when I'm converting stock.

[Kees Heiden]

Derek, this is the classic pose of holding a wooden plane. With the left hand across the plane body, thumb on near side, fingers on the other. This automatically puts your body facing the bench, otherwise your left hand couldn't put any weight on the plane.

[Kees Heiden]

And on each stroke you can see how the stroke is initiated by the lower body, I do bend the knees, and then the upper body follows the plane through the stroke.

At least, that is what see.

[Derek Cohen]

Derek, this is the classic pose of holding a wooden plane. With the left hand across the plane body, thumb on near side, fingers on the other. This automatically puts your body facing the bench, otherwise your left hand couldn't put any weight on the plane.

Kees, I don't think so.

Yes, the front hand is across the plane body, however your body is rotated too far. Here is a picture of Jim Kingshott with a jack plane. Look at his posture ....

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kingshott_zpsrmwhys7o.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

Well, these things are a bit like learning to ski. You can really only process one tip at a time. And you can't see yourself while doing it. The video is helpfull, but comes afterwards. This time I was concentrating on the tip from Warren to work one part of the board at a time. And I was enjoying the smoother action of the thinner shavings.

Next time I'll watch how my body turns around.

I never learned planing in any other way then looking things up on the internet and then muddeling along in my own shop. Feeling how your body reacts is not always the same as watching someone else.

Everybody should post some videos from themselves working. It's very enlightening.

Edit: I don't think mr. Kingshot is planing in that picture. There are no shavings.

[Pat Barry]

And on each stroke you can see how the stroke is initiated by the lower body, I do bend the knees, and then the upper body follows the plane through the stroke.

At least, that is what see.

That last video looks very much improved - effort level seems very reasonable, an the results are indicative of a sharp blade and good set-up of the tool. By contrast, that first video looked like someone having their first encounter with a tool of that sort. Just friendly kidding of course.

[Kees Heiden]

Thanks Pat,

And I can handle a bit of kidding. Otherwise I wouldn't have posted the videos.

[Kees Heiden]

I looked a bit on youtube to find some well trained oldskool workman planing a bit of wood with a wooden plane. What is obvious is that nonone is keeping their elbow locked to their side throughout the entire plane stroke. Instead you see a lot of arm movement.

Frank Klaus from 1:57 onwards, just a few strokes. He does indeed keep his body pointing forward. https://vimeo.com/41720914
Paul Sellers from 3:20. Facing more with his body towards the bench. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RPOPBTwZA
Richard McGuier from 4:27. He seems not to use his lower body at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNrof3cd1cA

Hmmm.

[Pat Barry]

I looked a bit on youtube to find some well trained oldskool workman planing a bit of wood with a wooden plane. What is obvious is that nonone is keeping their elbow locked to their side throughout the entire plane stroke. Instead you see a lot of arm movement.

Frank Klaus from 1:57 onwards, just a few strokes. He does indeed keep his body pointing forward. https://vimeo.com/41720914
Paul Sellers from 3:20. Facing more with his body towards the bench. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RPOPBTwZA
Richard McGuier from 4:27. He seems not to use his lower body at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RPOPBTwZA

Hmmm.
I think the whole idea behind god giving us arms is that we use them. Its utter nonsense to think the body must be somehow locked into a position and that the body should do all the work. Sure, I believe in using the lower body as much as anyone - its all part of the same organism after all. No sporting examples of activity are all arms and or, ever, locked arms. The entire body always plays a role.

[Kees Heiden]

I thought that I would let the stuff rest for today, but of course couldn't leave well alone. One last video made from a different vantage point, so you can see the leg work too. I think I got most of the tips now, except for keeping my elbows close to the chest all the way. That kind of doesn't feel right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYBLvSjEnYs

[Christian Thompson]

... I hope the thread has been helpfull to other people struggling with the right body mechanics too.

I think this thread is great! I'm learning a lot from the discussion and video. Thanks Kees.

[Kees Heiden]

Your welcome Christian. I'm glad you posted because I thought I was the only one strugling :D

[Patrick Chase]

Your welcome Christian. I'm glad you posted because I thought I was the only one strugling :D

Nah, I actually have the opposite problem - so much focus on mechanics and fluidity that I'm not entirely happy with productivity. I'm watching with interest too.

[Steve Voigt]

Kees,

I think videotaping and watching yourself is a great idea.

I think listening to the cacophony of competing voices telling you how to improve your posture is the worst thing you could do. I think that trying to model your posture on videos of well known woodworkers is almost as bad an idea.

There are a couple of issues here. First, just because someone has some notoriety as a woodworker doesn't mean he knows squat about trying and thicknessing stock on a repetitive basis. Notice that all of the guys that Derek pictured are planing the edges of boards. I don't think any of those guys actually flatten/thickness wide boards on any regular basis, if indeed they do it at all. I wouldn't draw any meaningful conclusions from them. Similarly, as you observed, that picture of Kingshott is completely staged--he looks like a stiff breeze would blow him over.

Second, even if someone is proficient at processing by hand, it doesn't mean his posture is good, or appropriate for you. Of all the people shown in video/photos in this thread, Richard McGuire is the one I would take seriously, because I know for sure he's thcknessed miles of rough lumber, and can do it in his sleep. But he's built completely different from you or me, so there's no guarantee that what works for him would work for us or be ergonomic in any way.

I though Warren's rather minimalist advice was excellent--try to avoid shocking your body with violent movements, take smaller bites, etc. Beyond that, I would suggest that microanalyzing your every move is going to do more harm than good--you'll be tying yourself in knots. My $.02.

[Tom M King]

Here's another one for your criticism. I've never thought about how I plane anything. This is one of the porch boards on an 1850 house we were working on. The front and back entry porches are each 12' wide by 8' deep. The floors were rebuilt in the early 1980s with 40 year pressure treated Pine. The floor was put down like a deck with 2x6x12's. Fortunately, they were put down with 16d finish nails, for some odd reason, so we could turn them over and put cut nails in the old, small nail holes. The tops were pretty badly checked, but the decision was made to just turn them over, and put good paint on them, since they were nice and dry.

One of my helpers took this with his cell phone. This is a Stanley no. 3 with stock blade. I don't bother with even looking what type it is, but it's a turn of the 20th Century one. I've never done anything to this one but sharpen the iron. I have a number of smoothers, with different cambered irons to match old smoothing plane texture on the old houses I work on. I don't lift on the return, but do lighten up.

This particular board had a lengthwise cup, and the planning is done on the concave "bottom" of the board. I'm angling the plane since this board surface is nothing close to flat, and I'm trying to hit as much of it as possible.

These porches are second story level, and each has a run of steps 15 steps high, 4' wide, and 2 - 2x6's for each thread, of the same type of 40 year treated lumber. We turned the treads over too, and also planed the bottoms, which would be the new finished tops.

It took about 45 minutes, if I'm remembering correctly, to plane each set of porch floor boards, and probably less, but I don't remember how long on the steps. I'm thinking probably a half hour on each set of steps.

The boards are laid lengthwise on a couple of sawhorses. I don't have to handle the boards. A helper handles the boards. They are just butted against the stair stringers as a stop, and Big Mike does the vise work.

Feel free to criticize, but I won't be changing the way I do it. It would probably look different on something else, but this is the only video I have. The picture is what it looks like after painting.

It's done outside so that cleanup can be done with a bagging push mower. There was quite a pile of shavings when we got finished.

I remember having to hone the iron twice for each porch floor. On both of them, the first honing was as it started to dull, and was started on the 6k Sigma Power, and the second on each required grinding and starting from scratch because I'd hit a grit of something, which left lines. On clean lumber, the stock iron would probably have been honed once on that much square footage.

For what it's worth, I'll be 66 in a couple of weeks, and resting heart rate is in the low 50s. This is the kind of stuff I do for a living. If you'd like, find my website by clicking on my name. I'm not allowed to post a link because I'm "commercial".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTEkiRh0VTY

[Pat Barry]

I looked a bit on youtube to find some well trained oldskool workman planing a bit of wood with a wooden plane. What is obvious is that nonone is keeping their elbow locked to their side throughout the entire plane stroke. Instead you see a lot of arm movement.

Frank Klaus from 1:57 onwards, just a few strokes. He does indeed keep his body pointing forward. https://vimeo.com/41720914
Paul Sellers from 3:20. Facing more with his body towards the bench. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RPOPBTwZA
Richard McGuier from 4:27. He seems not to use his lower body at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10RPOPBTwZA

Hmmm.
Hi Kees, could you please repost the Richard McGuire video. The last two links are both the same Paul Sellars video
Thank you

[Brian Holcombe]

Tom, how the hell are you 66! You look great!

Here's another video;


http://youtu.be/Q5eFhN0N_-g

[Patrick Chase]

Well, these things are a bit like learning to ski. You can really only process one tip at a time. And you can't see yourself while doing it. The video is helpfull, but comes afterwards. This time I was concentrating on the tip from Warren to work one part of the board at a time. And I was enjoying the smoother action of the thinner shavings.

Skiing is my sport (a couple thousand days on skis in my life, with a fair amount of racing in there), so I'll use yet another analogy to that to address the topic of joint (and specifically elbow) movement.

In high-level skiing it is (now) generally considered poor technique to use too much hip or knee angulation or to break excessively at the waist. The rationale is that if you do any of those things you "unstack" your skeleton and force the connective tissues to carry the load. Folding at the waist has several other negative impacts that aren't relevant to this discussion, but feel free to PM me if you want a diatribe on the topic.

That doesn't mean that you should "lock" any of the aforementioned joints - It just means that you should try to achieve an athletic position (neither overly extended nor compressed) when it matters, at peak turning load/acceleration. You can see this really clearly if you look at photo montages of elite racers. Picking my personal favorite, whom I've observed and filmed/photographed a number of times during training and domestic races like US Nationals, here's somebody with infamously "bad" technique (http://ronlemaster.com/images/2006-2007-B/slides/bode-bc-2006-gs-1.html) who somehow managed to become the top US men's racer ever.

An uninformed viewer might key off the fact that he's hinged at the waist and obviously in the backseat in frame 1 (he's still riding the tail of his old outside / new inside ski), or his appalling hand position in frames 2-3 (his right hand is behind his core - don't try this at home, as it would drag most people into the backseat in short order). What they would miss is that frame 4 is the only one that matters - he hits the apex of the turn in balance, with good leg extension and skeletal alignment, and with his weight mostly on the outside ski (he'll partially transition to the inside below the gate). In fact he was the only person to make a clean turn on this gate in this race precisely because he was (in his prime) so incredibly good at getting stacked and balanced when it mattered. A fair percentage of the times I watched Bode he appeared to be doing completely assinine stuff at the time, but close investigation of the stills/videos almost always revealed him exactly where he needed to be at the apex.

I think it's the same with planing. As Pat says your arms are there for a reason, but you also have to take advantage of your core to avoid putting yours arms in damaging positions. As I've said a few times I think that "locking" any joint is overdoing it and a bad idea.

I swear, no more bad analogies after this.

[Tom M King]

Brian, Post 90, I don't understand the stopping. I'm pretty sure for a board that length I would have gone all the way from the start. I know a lot of times, my left foot will stay in one spot, and the right steps over the left, and then backwards back over the left for the next pass. I don't know that I've ever stopped in a pass with the cutter still in the wood. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it, I'm just pretty sure I don't do that.

[Brian Holcombe]

I'm on the lighter side and that cut is a medium to heavy cut, so I find it easier to reposition myself than to keep going. With a smoother taking a lighter cut I usually keep walking.

Neither shaving nor wood show signs of my stopping.

[Derek Cohen]

Edit: I don't think mr. Kingshot is planing in that picture. There are no shavings.

Hi Kees

The photo was the first in I grabbed from a DVD by Jim Kingshott, "Bench Planes". If you (or others) have a copy, look at the 30 minute mark.

This is one of many videos I viewed specifically to learn more about body mechanics in planning. My interpretation of these observations may be questioned - I am very happy if you do as part of a discussion, but please offer something tangible to support the same or a different viewpoint. Below is what Jim Kingshott had to say in the video. Kees, I chose this video specifically because he uses the same style jack plane you were using in your video.

"If you are going to learn to play golf, you are going to learn to stand properly and hold the clubs. Nobody thinks of that in planing. but it is very important ..

When planing, we don't want to use our arm muscles. If we stand beside the work .. it is all muscular, and that takes a lot of energy. But if we get behind the plane, so that we use our body weight, the upper torso is behind it and propels the plane, it is much easier.

Getting our feet right is quite important as well. On a short piece of wood we don't have to walk the length of the bench. So we place our right foot at right angles to the bench ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kingshott3_zpsbwflxjcj.jpg

... and our left foot pointing along the bench ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kingshott4_zpskr2u1ovn.jpg

... position ourselves just behind the edge of the wood."


Here are two more photos of Kingshott planing - with shavings! :) In the first you see how his elbow is tucked against his side and how his weight is over the plane and he is facing forward (not facing the bench) ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kingshott1_zps7kzr3osa.jpg

And he he moves forward, with his weight over the plane and leaning forward. His elbow is still tucked back and this allows his body to drive the plane forward ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kingshott2_zpsqpsjz4gc.jpg

What I tried to point out earlier, Kees was that you are not learning forward, but rather sideways and back. Your torso cannot take up power, and it is then left to your arms (elbows) to do so ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/Woodworking/Kees1_zps6y8skkoo.jpg

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Derek Cohen]

Skiing is my sport (a couple thousand days on skis in my life, with a fair amount of racing in there), so I'll use yet another analogy to that to address the topic of joint (and specifically elbow) movement.

In high-level skiing it is (now) generally considered poor technique to use too much hip or knee angulation or to break excessively at the waist. The rationale is that if you do any of those things you "unstack" your skeleton and force the connective tissues to carry the load. Folding at the waist has several other negative impacts that aren't relevant to this discussion, but feel free to PM me if you want a diatribe on the topic.

That doesn't mean that you should "lock" any of the aforementioned joints - It just means that you should try to achieve an athletic position (neither overly extended nor compressed) when it matters, at peak turning load/acceleration. You can see this really clearly if you look at photo montages of elite racers. Picking my personal favorite, whom I've observed and filmed/photographed a number of times during training and domestic races like US Nationals, here's somebody with infamously "bad" technique (http://ronlemaster.com/images/2006-2007-B/slides/bode-bc-2006-gs-1.html) who somehow managed to become the top US men's racer ever.

An uninformed viewer might key off the fact that he's hinged at the waist and obviously in the backseat in frame 1 (he's still riding the tail of his old outside / new inside ski), or his appalling hand position in frames 2-3 (his right hand is behind his core - don't try this at home, as it would drag most people into the backseat in short order). What they would miss is that frame 4 is the only one that matters - he hits the apex of the turn in balance, with good leg extension and skeletal alignment, and with his weight mostly on the outside ski (he'll partially transition to the inside below the gate). In fact he was the only person to make a clean turn on this gate in this race precisely because he was (in his prime) so incredibly good at getting stacked and balanced when it mattered. A fair percentage of the times I watched Bode he appeared to be doing completely assinine stuff at the time, but close investigation of the stills/videos almost always revealed him exactly where he needed to be at the apex.

I think it's the same with planing. As Pat says your arms are there for a reason, but you also have to take advantage of your core to avoid putting yours arms in damaging positions. As I've said a few times I think that "locking" any joint is overdoing it and a bad idea.

I swear, no more bad analogies after this.

Hi Patrick

This is a good observation. I have no doubt that there are similar comments to be made from other sports. I previously mentioned my involvement in several. The common factor is keeping the weight (centre of gravity) low. No doubt this is the raison d'etre behind the body shape of sumo wrestlers! :)

Timing and balance go a long way in many endeavours.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[david charlesworth]

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/image.php?u=122579&dateline=1433042375 (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?122579-Tom-M-King)Tom M King (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?122579-Tom-M-King)
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngContributor



Join DateFeb 2014LocationLake Gaston, Henrico, NCPosts2,127



Brian, Post 90, I don't understand the stopping. I'm pretty sure for a board that length I would have gone all the way from the start. I know a lot of times, my left foot will stay in one spot, and the right steps over the left, and then backwards back over the left for the next pass. I don't know that I've ever stopped in a pass with the cutter still in the wood. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it, I'm just pretty sure I don't do that.

It is the stopping which bothers me. It is so easy to just do what Tom says. I have always done this.

The other most troubling issues are the strain on the elbows, caused by posture and over thick shavings.

David




http://www.sawmillcreek.org/clear.gifReply (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896&noquote=1) http://www.sawmillcreek.org/clear.gifReply With Quote (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896) http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/buttons/multiquote_40b.png (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896) (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/report.php?p=2574896)


Today, 1:12 AM

[Kees Heiden]

This thread has been very helpfull for me, and I think I learned a good deal. If you want to see where I am at now, I posted a last video somewhere in post 83 or so, but here the video is again:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYBLvSjEnYs

Some points:
Pat, I edited the post with the link to Richard McGuire's video.
Steve, I hear you! Now it is my job to get the many advices, and use what is applicable to my situation. In between all the discussions there have been some very good hints.
Tom and Brian thanks for your videos too.
Derek, I now understand what you mean with getting behind the plane. i think I corrected that one as you can see in this last video. BTW, I don't think mr. Kingshot is tucking his elbow in his side, his elbow is well behind his body at the start of the planing stroke. He certainly doesn't keep his elbow tucked in all the way. But he sure puts his body better behind the plane then I did.

Thanks everybody.

[Brian Holcombe]

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/image.php?u=122579&dateline=1433042375 (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?122579-Tom-M-King)Tom M King (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/member.php?122579-Tom-M-King)
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/statusicon/user-offline.pngContributor



Join DateFeb 2014LocationLake Gaston, Henrico, NCPosts2,127



Brian, Post 90, I don't understand the stopping. I'm pretty sure for a board that length I would have gone all the way from the start. I know a lot of times, my left foot will stay in one spot, and the right steps over the left, and then backwards back over the left for the next pass. I don't know that I've ever stopped in a pass with the cutter still in the wood. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it, I'm just pretty sure I don't do that.

It is the stopping which bothers me. It is so easy to just do what Tom says. I have always done this.

The other most troubling issues are the strain on the elbows, caused by posture and over thick shavings.

David




http://www.sawmillcreek.org/clear.gifReply (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896&noquote=1) http://www.sawmillcreek.org/clear.gifReply With Quote (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896) http://www.sawmillcreek.org/images/buttons/multiquote_40b.png (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2574896)


Today, 1:12 AM



I will post a video where I walk along the side of a 4/4 board while edge jointing, which is how I edge joint heavier stock (light stock is edge jointed differently).

In my experience thicknessing a panel requires effort outside of what is considered ideal for edge jointing, it also requires heavier shavings. In processing that panel I have kept my elbow in a narrow range and keep my wrists perfectly straight and in line with the effort. There is much focus on elbows, but wrists are also very important.

[Kees Heiden]

David Weaver sent me an email and pointed me to one of his videos of rough planing a large cherry board. He shows good form in this video, I would say a powerfull motion and really getting his body behind the plane action. Extending the arms into the stroke, like all the professional woodworkers I have now witnessed. He starts planing at 10:15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yYnjUhVvzk

He also mentioned the famous Roubo workshop picture. Of course it is hard to draw any conclusions from painted pictures, but for what its worth, here you see the outstretched arms at the end of the stroke too.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-J400DRYyAzc/USw3YCm76uI/AAAAAAAADhU/ECOW6wdOAHE/s1600/Plate+11_close.jpg

[Warren Mickley]

Thanks for showing the Roubo plate, Kees. I had it in mind to show that along with these two other paintings. I think that it needs to be repeated that Kees and Brian are facing boards, taking rough sawn lumber and leaving a trued face. This is work where it is helpful to take as deep a cut as can be handled without injury or fatigue. A lot of these others are not close to doing this kind of work. I watched the Charlesworth video; I don't know whether he is jointing an edge or just making nice shavings.

I watched the King video; he appears to be putting texture on boards that are already machine planed, faking if you will. Again this is just skimming a little bit off the surface and not really needing to remove the kind of material necessary for facing rough lumber. I did like Tom's mechanics, good work with arms and body. It is obvious that he has done this much more than the others. One thing I noticed is that Tom keeps his head up. Like many of the beginners, even Kingshott seems to need to hold his head down to watch the plane. Take a look at the heads in the drawings. And do notice the arms.
339076339077339078

[Jim Koepke]

This thread has captured my interest and almost got me to make a video of myself to see where improvements can be made.

Then it came to me my most recent video of using some molding planes was online:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apLzrpsdcK0

Looks like I do a bit of both arm throwing the planes and using my legs.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

This thread has captured my interest and almost got me to make a video of myself to see where improvements can be made.

Then it came to me my most recent video of using some molding planes was online:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apLzrpsdcK0

Looks like I do a bit of both arm throwing the planes and using my legs.

jtk
Very good form from what we can see, but, is your head up or down Jim?

[Jim Koepke]

Very good form from what we can see, but, is your head up or down Jim?

Thanks for the kind words Pat. I tend to look at the work, so most likely the head is down. Most of the time when it can be seen in the video it is just the brim of my cap. This likely indicates it is down.

One of the old tips that came to me about planing was to watch the shavings to see how the work is progressing.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

Thanks for the kind words Pat. I tend to look at the work, so most likely the head is down. Most of the time when it can be seen in the video it is just the brim of my cap. This likely indicates it is down.

One of the old tips that came to me about planing was to watch the shavings to see how the work is progressing.

jtk

I think this makes perfect sense (watching the shavings) and is very natural. Not sure if Warren was more concerned with looking ahead to see where you're going or not with his keep your head up philosophy though. Its not like driving a car down the road where you need to watch from all directions. You're headed in a straight line after all and you know the destination. I think he might really mean not being too hunched over which can be fatiguing all by itself.

[Derek Cohen]

I cannot imagine how one can plane without watching the work and the shavings.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Brian Holcombe]

I'm also guilty of looking at the shavings, but it is good not to be hunched over all day. I would imagine that is the logic, but hopefully Warren will clarify.

[Jim Koepke]

I think this makes perfect sense (watching the shavings) and is very natural. Not sure if Warren was more concerned with looking ahead to see where you're going or not with his keep your head up philosophy though. Its not like driving a car down the road where you need to watch from all directions. You're headed in a straight line after all and you know the destination. I think he might really mean not being too hunched over which can be fatiguing all by itself.

I always strive to be comfortable in my work. Too many times I have suffered the aches and pains of doing something "the quick way."

Maybe when I was young I could have made 1/16" shavings without breaking a sweat. Now it seems if I want to do a lot I have to do it with less effort. Maybe I could still take some very thick shavings, but the jarring to the joints and stress on the muscles would have me worn out very quick. Taking a lot of thinner shavings over a longer time frame allows me to do more work in total.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

It feels like my body leaning forward allows me to see the work without hunching over.

I do know the aches & pains of having my head tilted in any one position for too much of the day.

jtk

[Warren Mickley]

I looked at Tom's video and saw how comfortable he looked. The way he held his head struck me as a part of the equation and the old drawings confirmed what I was thinking.

Here is a picture Derek posted earlier. Note head down, shoulders scrunched up, a tiring posture. He just doesn't look comfortable like Tom.

339098

[Graham Haydon]

Thanks again for this thread Kees. It's really illustrated the difference between taking a few thin and whispys from machined planed wood vs preparing rough stock.

Nice vid Tom :)

[Phil Mueller]

I find my shoulder/elbow ahces increase when - as Warren says - I hit sudden stops, or hollows that shoot my arms quickly forward. I found this was occuring most when I try to increase my speed of planing (attack the board, if you will) and using mostly my arms.

After watching a few of David's videos, my interpretation of his approach is just to be more methodical with elbows close to the body and "walk" it through the cut - whether rough stock or not. I have found this method to greatly reduce the over extension from a sudden shot forward or the jolt from a sudden stop.

[Derek Cohen]

I looked at Tom's video and saw how comfortable he looked. The way he held his head struck me as a part of the equation and the old drawings confirmed what I was thinking.

Here is a picture Derek posted earlier. Note head down, shoulders scrunched up, a tiring posture. He just doesn't look comfortable like Tom.

339098

I agree Warren. Jeff Miller looks clumsy. I extracted these shots from a video of his. In my article they were used to illustrate the lowering of the body and the positioning of the arms. Nevertheless, he just did not look "loose" and comfortable to me.

I must add that pictures of all the woodworkers I posted - these included Frank Klausz, Chris Schwarz, Paul Sellers, David Charlesworth, Garrett Hack, myself - everyone was looking down at the work. The link once again is http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3.html

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Tom M King]

I've learned from this thread too. Most of the hours I've spent planing is matching smoothing plane texture that I find in old houses I work on. It's always been strange to me seeing restoration work done by others where their smoothing plane tracks are in straight lines for the length of a board, even in side by side, parallel lines. I've never seen this in old, original boards. I see now that they didn't have the motion down with their arms, and walked the plane down the board. I had never been able to figure this out before.

In the Cupola House, an otherwise(maybe) fine, complete restoration, every smoothing plane track in the house is in straight, parallel lines. If anyone is close to the original, if you go, look at the planed surfaces for me. I'd love to know.

The only time I walk the plane is running a joint, or flattening an edge of a face for the fence of another plane to ride on. There may be others, but they're not coming to mind right off.

[Stewie Simpson]

Warren and Kee's are quite correct in pointing out that both arms do extend away from the body; but its important to note that the arms and shoulders do not bear the full load during the planning stroke; it is in effect a whole body movement; it is the combined effort of the hips and upper thigh muscles that redirect a lot of the pressure away from the shoulders and arms, whilst the lower body remains pressed against the side of the workbench and remain so until the completion of the stroke.

Stewie;

[Derek Cohen]

Well put, Stewie.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Brian Holcombe]

I've learned from this thread too. Most of the hours I've spent planing is matching smoothing plane texture that I find in old houses I work on. It's always been strange to me seeing restoration work done by others where their smoothing plane tracks are in straight lines for the length of a board, even in side by side, parallel lines. I've never seen this in old, original boards. I see now that they didn't have the motion down with their arms, and walked the plane down the board. I had never been able to figure this out before.

In the Cupola House, an otherwise(maybe) fine, complete restoration, every smoothing plane track in the house is in straight, parallel lines. If anyone is close to the original, if you go, look at the planed surfaces for me. I'd love to know.

The only time I walk the plane is running a joint, or flattening an edge of a face for the fence of another plane to ride on. There may be others, but they're not coming to mind right off.

This is interesting Tom, can I trouble you to share your thoughts on the logic behind this? When you say the planed surfaces are you speaking of paneling, or other surfaces?

[James Pallas]

This is very interesting for me. I want to see the discussion continue. So far I have seen strategy for planing fairly close to the bench edge. What about the center of a 30"x 6' long table top. You can't keep your elbow close to your body in that case. My take is you have to adapt. You can only have that perfect form when working close to the edge. The other strategies would be helpful to me and others I would think.
Jim

[Tom M King]

This is interesting Tom, can I trouble you to share your thoughts on the logic behind this? When you say the planed surfaces are you speaking of paneling, or other surfaces?

Yes, almost every finished surface-casing, paneling, baseboards, doors, and any boards used as a wall surface in the less than formal rooms. Anything that wasn't scraped, and came out of a Joiners shop or "dressed" on site. This is in 18th, and 19th Century houses, and one 1920s house that I know of. I'm sure the average person never even notices. Even the people living in that 1920s house, for the second generation, had never noticed it until I pointed it out on door casing while we were sitting at the dining room table at a meal. It's not That obvious, and you have to have a low angle crossing light for it to really stand out.

Here's a link about the Cupola house: http://cupolahouse.org/association.php

[Brian Holcombe]

Thanks Tom!

[Pat Barry]

This is very interesting for me. I want to see the discussion continue. So far I have seen strategy for planing fairly close to the bench edge. What about the center of a 30"x 6' long table top. You can't keep your elbow close to your body in that case. My take is you have to adapt. You can only have that perfect form when working close to the edge. The other strategies would be helpful to me and others I would think.
Jim
Not everyone has gorilla arms so I have seen examples of this where the person will literally climb onto the top (on a bench or other supports, even on the floor maybe) and do the necessary work from a kneeling position. Say for example you lay the top down on a clean piece of cardboard on the floor and kneel on the top and have at it. My knees would scream without some decent pads but it wouldn't be the worst position to do the work.

[Kees Heiden]

On a wide board you can do a lot of work cross grained and then move to a diagonal direction. That allows you to get your body behind the plane. Only on the last trying and smoothing phases you plane along the grain and have to lean over the board.

[Kees Heiden]

Yes, almost every finished surface-casing, paneling, baseboards, doors, and any boards used as a wall surface in the less than formal rooms. Anything that wasn't scraped, and came out of a Joiners shop or "dressed" on site. This is in 18th, and 19th Century houses, and one 1920s house that I know of. I'm sure the average person never even notices. Even the people living in that 1920s house, for the second generation, had never noticed it until I pointed it out on door casing while we were sitting at the dining room table at a meal. It's not That obvious, and you have to have a low angle crossing light for it to really stand out.

Here's a link about the Cupola house: http://cupolahouse.org/association.php

Hi Tom,

I still don't understand it completely. You wrote in your post where you also linked to your video and showed this picture about "smoothing".
339143

In my, admittely narrow, view of the world, smoothing is something else. Smoothing to me is making a really smooth surface. You use a plane with quite a bit of camber, more like a jack plane. Do you find this kind of finish in this more or less random pattern all over the place in joinery work on old buildings? And you didn't find it on some restauration work?

BTW, I totally dig this kind of finish planing and I think I am going to use it more or less on the cabinet I am working on.

[Stewie Simpson]

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/51adf536e4b08b89ff6558cc/t/529cbcd7e4b053ec04581b74/1386003673311/White+Pine+-+Hand+Plane.jpg?format=500w

Hand Planed
This surface is acquired by hand planing boards using a slightly scalloped blade in a hand plane. The affect is to have boards with a smoothed but slightly uneven surface that is reminiscent of the early hand made boards from an earlier time. This treatment can also be used in combination with stroke sanding to minimize unevenness.

[James Pallas]

Tom may be hitting on something here. In the past were woodworkers trying to finish all of their work to machine standards like we like to see today. It would be a lot easier to take shorter strokes on wide boards. I'm sure that in very fine work fine finishing was done. From what I have read wide boards were used in the past. If we see 16" wide boards it makes news here. Just makes questions for me. I know some of you mill your own lumber and have those wide boards. What do you do, get on the floor, climb on the bench or the big one, plane with your off hand?
Jim

[Kees Heiden]

These are going to be the bottom boards of the cabinet. This is the side facing the floor. I am afraid my wife wouldn't understand if I left the inside like this. It is really coarse, jack plane across the grain.

339144

[Stewie Simpson]

Kees; that's commonly described as a scalloped finish. http://www.timbertrussworks.com/Pages/finishes.html

Stewie;

[Warren Mickley]

I think the boards Tom is trying to copy were originally done with a jack plane, not a smoother. I suspect that if Tom were given the choice of a 200 year old smoother or a jack he would quickly move to the jack.

My own 200 year old house was gutted 70 years ago, but of the remaining original woodwork, there are boards with mild scalloping all quite parallel to the grain, though probably not full length cuts. There is some frame and panel work in one of the doorways to the stone portion of the house. Here the boards were done with a trying plane and show little scalloping. In general older workers were adept at picking an appropriate level of finish for various elements.

I spent Friday night at my son's place in Connecticut, a house from 1775 or so. The room I slept in had a nice fireplace, two panelled doors and four windows, all original woodwork (floor had been sanded). The doors were carefully planed. It is difficult to do this kind of joinery on stock that is not carefully prepared. The fireplace woodwork had a mortise and tenon frame with careful mouldings and mantle applied. There was just a subtle hint that these flat surfaces were hand planed.

One interesting thing was the window trim mouldings. The flat surfaces were nicely planed but the mouldings themselves were sloppy. I was struck by how handsome they looked from six feet away and how poor they looked from one foot. The fireplace mouldings were not sloppy.

[Brian Holcombe]

Tom may be hitting on something here. In the past were woodworkers trying to finish all of their work to machine standards like we like to see today. It would be a lot easier to take shorter strokes on wide boards. I'm sure that in very fine work fine finishing was done. From what I have read wide boards were used in the past. If we see 16" wide boards it makes news here. Just makes questions for me. I know some of you mill your own lumber and have those wide boards. What do you do, get on the floor, climb on the bench or the big one, plane with your off hand?
Jim

Jim, I just finished a coffee table not long ago, it's 26" deep, and 48" long, I took full length strokes with the table top on the bench. I just move to the place with the shortest overhang. Nothing too crazy.

I did the same for a big dining table a few years ago, 30" wide and over 6' long. I finished that top on the base, by just butting it up against my bench and taking passes. I probably wouldn't need to do that anymore, just finish it on the bench.

[Jim Koepke]

In general older workers were adept at picking an appropriate level of finish for various elements.

And they likely didn't have a picky wife like mine looking over their shoulder saying the hidden sides had to be just as well finished as the show side, "because I will know and it would bother me."

jtk

[James Pallas]

Warren has a good handle on this. The workers in the past knew the level of finish required and worked to that end. Brian also has a handle on it also. Wide pieces can be finished but your surely can't do it without facing the bench and reaching out with your elbows away from your body and putting stress on all of your joints involved. Back, shoulders, elbows, wrists and such. I don't feel that we can just say get your body in line and go.
Jim

[Brian Holcombe]

I think that's an excellent point. When I was learning to TIG weld, once I got a handle on it my father required me to weld upside down, into corners, out of corners, around large pipes, ect. Every odd situation possible because, as he explained to me, that more often than not I would need the skill when the conditions were least likely to be ideal. Planing is similar, you get a good handle on what ideal is, then realize that if you want to work giant beams, or big tables, etc that you're going to have to find a way to work properly in those situations.

[Graham Haydon]

As others have been good enough to show themselves using a plane I did a quick 50 second vid using a jack plane. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX5jYnuiqKY I seem to be using the arms although when I was doing it I though I felt movement in my midriff too. What felt improved to me was using a lighter cut and not being so frantic. Critique welcome

[david charlesworth]

Softwood Graham?

Best wishes
David

[Brian Holcombe]

Looks good Graham!

[Kees Heiden]

Looks perfect to me. Good drive from the lower part of the body. As soon as the plane is moving the arms just more or less follow the plane and only need to maintane the momentum.

[Tom M King]

Hi Tom,

I still don't understand it completely. You wrote in your post where you also linked to your video and showed this picture about "smoothing".
339143

In my, admittely narrow, view of the world, smoothing is something else. Smoothing to me is making a really smooth surface. You use a plane with quite a bit of camber, more like a jack plane. Do you find this kind of finish in this more or less random pattern all over the place in joinery work on old buildings? And you didn't find it on some restauration work?

BTW, I totally dig this kind of finish planing and I think I am going to use it more or less on the cabinet I am working on.

Yes. I'll try to get some pictures of old stuff this weekend. Even on those steps, the depth of the tracks left by the cambered iron is not that much. You can't even see it easily unless you have a strong side light. Those "hollows" left by the smoothing plane are probably not over 3 thou deep. I'll measure some shavings from that plane and see. I just shaped the iron to match some of the old stuff by eye. The camber is nothing to compare to an 8 or 10 inch radius Jack plane iron.

I've never seen old smoothing plane tracks in straight lines, except maybe for a track or two on the edge next to a tongue or groove. Everywhere else is pretty much random.

These are house parts, and not furniture parts. I expect furniture was scraped after smoothing, but smoothing always left subtle "scallops". Even a smoother that has a half thou camber with still leave "scallops" that can be seen in a strong side light. The only way I could get a photograph of those steps to show the "texture" was to wait until the Sun was very low in the sky barely above the trees (treeline 280 yards to the West), right in line with the steps.

Much like using a light right against a sheetrock wall. Without the strong sidelight, it may look like a smooth wall, but hold a light right against it shining across it, and you can see every taped joint, nail location, and any other imperfection. Smoothing plane tracks are very similar.

It's the main reason that smoothing plane tracks left with a straight iron with only the corners rounded up are something like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

Stewie's picture in post #123 looks like light cuts with a Scrub plane to me. I've seen things like bar tops done like that. I don't really care for it for anything that I can think of, but that's just my personal opinion.

[Graham Haydon]

Brian, Kees, thanks! Good to know I'm close to it.

David, we spent a very pleasant hour one afternoon a while back in my workplace, therefore you should know we only use primo hardwood :). It was not softwood, it was a timber called Idigbo. Not much of a test really, kiln dried Euro Oak we also have could have been a better test. However, I just wanted to share my moves :)

[david charlesworth]

Indeed! I am familiar with Idigbo.

What would you do with 8 foot stiles? The arms are not going to reach that far....

David

[Tom M King]

Graham, Looks like you have all the right moves. Now that you've tested your plane on that short piece, lets see some footwork.:)

[Derek Cohen]

Good morning Graham. Had a look at your video. Good bend in the knees and you can see the part your lower torso plays in powering your shoulders and arms. Excellent.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

That is about how I move when I am planing something of that size. The only difference is my plane would likely be a Stanley/Bailey #5 or 6.

jtk

[Kees Heiden]

Thanks for the explanation about the surface texture Tom. Next time I visit an old church or so I"ll have a look ( or feel).

[Graham Haydon]

David, on a longer piece of wood I'd would work on a section with the jack with that stance then take a big stride forward or back and work on the next section. I'd do the same with the trying plane and when the high spots from the jack were gone I'd do a few full length Hollywood shaving to wear around my neck as woodworking bling :). However that might not be the best way! I'll have to come over and see you at some point over the summer.

Thanks Derek! I'm not sure I'd of made such good progress through Jarrah or some other Australian concrete you call wood! Using a metal plane Jim, how dare you! :)

[Jim Koepke]

Using a metal plane Jim, how dare you! :)

What can I say, they were all pretty cheap and easier to find than good wood bodied planes.

Though lately I have found a lot of molding planes in the $10 range.

jtk

[david charlesworth]

Graham,

Yes, do come as soon as you can!

Am I the only craftsman in the world who likes a nice steady walk, with all the power coming from the legs?

About 58 six foot benches were built by students (and some by myself) over the years. Tennis elbow only afflicted a couple of students, the ones I could not persuade to use their legs.

I show this technique on You Tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nka94EiVkmM

I was motivated to film this because the original planing clip posted by Kees, was obviously likely to cause him physical damage, like my two past students.

We used European Un-steamed Beech for many and latterly Afzelia. This is a hard dense African hardwood with interlocked grain and "stone" deposits in some of the grain.

Why did we use this? Because it is beautiful and one of the most stable timbers in the world. (Also cheap).

David

[Warren Mickley]

David, are you not the one who said it would be lunacy not to use machinery as much as possible? After watching you plane I can imagine why you would think that. Your "nice steady walk" appears to produce about three very thin shavings per minute. It would be absurd to try and accomplish the work that Kees does at that namby pamby pace.

[Luke Dupont]

Graham,

Yes, do come as soon as you can!

Am I the only craftsman in the world who likes a nice steady walk, with all the power coming from the legs?

About 58 six foot benches were built by students (and some by myself) over the years. Tennis elbow only afflicted a couple of students, the ones I could not persuade to use their legs.

I show this technique on You Tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nka94EiVkmM

I was motivated to film this because the original planing clip posted by Kees, was obviously likely to cause him physical damage, like my two past students.

We used European Un-steamed Beech for many and latterly Afzelia. This is a hard dense African hardwood with interlocked grain and "stone" deposits in some of the grain.

Why did we use this? Because it is beautiful and one of the most stable timbers in the world. (Also cheap).

David

How does one slowly walk the plane along without excessive fatigue? I've tried that method, and it put unnecessary strain on my arms due to the added resistance, I found. Maybe I was doing it differently. I *do* use my lower body and connect that to my upper body when planing, though; I just throw the plane along in short-ish passes in order to use the momentum of the plane to do the work, as opposed to "bulldozing" along with my own strength the whole way.

I'm quite the novice though, so I can't claim to really know what I'm talking about yet! I think, however, regardless of the method you choose, connecting your upper and lower body is vitally important. This is something I became familiar with in Martial Arts, but I can see it when observing others planing as well; if you look at Graham's video, for example, you can see that his upper and lower body are "linked" and that the force is being transmitted back down through his lower body and down to the ground. In contrast, someone else posted a picture where the person planing had his shoulders hunched up and he was trying to use solely the weight of his upper body to press the plane forward/along, even though he was in a low stance. There was no connection; all of the returning forces are going straight back/up, through the empty space behind his upper body, as opposed to being redirected to the ground. Also, by hunching the shoulders up like that, you lose the connection between your arms and your body; the arms tend to collapse and be unsupported. If anything, the shoulders should sink for a good connection.

Power comes from the ground; never from the upper body. Especially if you're a scrawny 120lbs guy like myself!

Anyway, maybe I'll revisit your "walk along" technique some time. I've been meaning to check out some of your videos and would love to see your technique. It could be that I was planing at too high a level to make it work for me the last time I tried.

Edit: Oh hey, you have a link to a youtube video right there in the middle of your post! Sorry - I'm not the most observant type.

[Steve Voigt]

Graham,

Am I the only craftsman in the world who likes a nice steady walk, with all the power coming from the legs?

…

I show this technique on You Tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nka94EiVkmM

David


I suppose it is fine for what you're doing, but it's not really relevant to this thread, for two reasons.

First, as Graham has pointed out a number of times, strolling along and taking a few .001" shavings off a machine-jointed edge is totally different from surfacing rough boards with a rank-set jack. You can't tuck your elbow and walk when you are planing diagonally, traversing, or working the far side of a wide board.

Second, sorry to be blunt, but the pace you are working at is excruciating. I timed your video: you average 10 seconds per forward stroke on a 5' board. You don't demonstrate the return stroke in context, but let's charitably assume that you move three times as fast. that works out to a rate of about 0.375 feet per second.

I did the same calculations for the Richard Mcguire video that Kees posted, and got a rate of nearly 3 feet per second. He's moving nearly EIGHT TIMES as fast as you are. This might not be a big deal if you are just taking a few shavings, but if you are surfacing a stack of boards and taking hundreds, perhaps more than a thousand shavings, it's going to add up. There have certainly been plenty of days where I've spent five hours planing (about my limit). With your method, that work would take me a full week. I'm afraid I would give up woodworking if that's what my productivity was.

[Prashun Patel]

(comment from the peanut gallery alert)

I am so enjoying this thread. As I am refining my technique to optimize efficiency, enjoyment, and ergonomics I am really benefiting from the strong debate. Hope it continues to ride the line between challenging and respectful!!!

[david charlesworth]

Steve,

Those are not 1 thou" shavings, More like 0.003" ~;-)#

Don't know where that crazy idea came from?

David

[david charlesworth]

Warren,

They are not very thin. 0.003" in hard maple, 2 " wide, is not unreasonable, and Kees is the guy with tennis elbow, not me. (or most of my students).

BTW real tennis elbow is very painful and can take at least six months to resolve.

This later fact seems to have been overlooked for much of this thread.

Machinery is a great boon, much used since at least the start of the 20th century. The desire to mimic 18th century craftsmen, who had undertaken a seven year apprenticeship, seems very odd to me.

Also, if there is much stock to remove I understand that diagonal or cross grain planing is the most efficient, and creates the least stress?

This was excellently demonstrated by Brian. Therefore the need for heavy stock removal, long grain, does not exist, and should not be undertaken.

David

[Luke Dupont]

Warren,

They are not very thin. 0.003" in hard maple, 2 " wide, is not unreasonable, and Kees is the guy with tennis elbow, not me. (or most of my students).

BTW real tennis elbow is very painful and can take at least six months to resolve.

This later fact seems to have been overlooked for much of this thread.

Machinery is a great boon, much used since at least the start of the 20th century. The desire to mimic 18th century craftsmen, who had undertaken a seven year apprenticeship, seems very odd to me.

Also, if there is much stock to remove I understand that diagonal or cross grain planing is the most efficient, and creates the least stress?

This was excellently demonstrated by Brian. Therefore the need for heavy stock removal, long grain, does not exist, and should not be undertaken.

David

Good points in regards to not needing to take long shavings across the long grain. Though, I did recently redimension a bunch of 2x4" stock to 2x3", entirely by hand, and that did involve heavy shavings over the length of the grain (as the surface is much too short to go across the grain), after hogging off most of the stock waste with a drawknife.

Which does bring me to one other point: whilst it's completely logical to take advantage of modern methods when it comes to getting stock to rough dimension boards, not all of us have the luxury of owning a shop with bandsaws, power planers, and jointers. For a hobbyist living in an apartment like myself, if I can't get something planed or cut to the dimensions I want, or if I've got rough sawn stock, or if my stock is cupped, or twisted, I have little choice but to dimension it by hand using traditional methods.

As you've said though, tennis elbow is pretty serious. I've had both tennis elbow, and tendonitis in the wrist/fore-arm (something which I'm still recovering from after a year's time) -- not from woodworking, but from other activities, and it is indeed very debilitating and very difficult to recover from. It's nothing to play around with, and if you can supplement or reduce the amount of work you have to do by hand, even with GOOD technique, then by all means, do so. Any use is enough to prolong your recovery time.

[Tom M King]

I tried to get some pictures today of 1850 smoothing plane texture in the house we're working on, but everything in that house has such a thick coat of paint on it that I couldn't get the right lighting to take anything telling. I could see it, but couldn't catch it with the camera. The only long strokes I found were along the edge of backs of raised panels on doors for two or three strokes where the panel fit into the groove in the stile. All tracks were quite narrow in this house-the narrowest I've seen anywhere else.

I plan to go to an 1816 house this weekend where I know I can get some pictures that will work, and maybe a 1780 house, but it's pretty dark in that one, and I don't think a flashlight will work, but I'll try.

I didn't have a good way to measure depth of the tracks on the porch floor that the board in my video here has been down on for a while. The best I could do was find one of the widest tracks, but a Starrett combination square blade across the peaks, and used different papers as feeler gauges. Yellow lined paper from a small writing pad would slide under. Thicker white paper from a drawing pad would not. I used the corners of pages. I think that yellow paper is 3 thousandths, and the white is probably 5, but that's just from old memory that hasn't lasted as good as my vision. In short, it's probably not as deep as it looks like in that picture of the gray painted steps.

[Tom M King]

We'll be making a 32" x 78" door for a mid 19th Century work building tomorrow. It will all be done by hand from rough cut Cypress boards, but I've selected some really straight flat ones, so the "rough" part really shouldn't count. It'll just be a simple tongue and grooved boards with battens, and clinched old nails, but everything will be hit with a smoother. I'll try to get some video.

[Brian Holcombe]

For What it's worth, I take heavy cuts with a jack along the grain as well, it all depends on the work at hand. For a panel, I prefer cross grain, for small width boards (for conversation, lets say from 1/2" to 6"~ usually I will take my passes along the grain.

Thank you for the comments.

[Steve Voigt]

Steve,

Those are not 1 thou" shavings, More like 0.003" ~;-)#

Don't know where that crazy idea came from?

David


David,

I'm disappointed that you could not come up with a more substantive response. The shaving thickness was entirely tangential to my post. Did you pick that number out because it was the only one that wasn't demonstrably correct? But since you bring it up, I would call .003 shavings "thin" on the QS side of hard maple, and "moderately thin" on the flatsawn side. For trying boards, I would want to move from .015-.020 (approximating here) on the jack plane, to more like .005 on the try plane. .003 and thinner would be nice for the smoother, if necessary.


Also, if there is much stock to remove I understand that diagonal or cross grain planing is the most efficient, and creates the least stress? … Therefore the need for heavy stock removal, long grain, does not exist, and should not be undertaken.

I am glad that you acknowledge (in the first sentence) that you don't have much personal experience with this, but then you're not really in a position to conclude so emphatically that "the need for heavy stock removal, long grain, does not exist." Read the description by Nicholson that Warren posted, or watch some of Richard McGuire's excellent videos (or even better try it yourself for a couple dozen rough boards), and you will quickly see that long grain jack planing is very much necessary for efficient stock preparation (by hand). Speaking for myself, I rarely traverse, and I only plane diagonally when I am specifically trying to take the wind out of a board. I never plane in an "x-pattern," and I plane with the grain 90% of the time (when roughing with the jack).


Machinery is a great boon, much used since at least the start of the 20th century. The desire to mimic 18th century craftsmen, who had undertaken a seven year apprenticeship, seems very odd to me.

You know it's funny, hand tool guys are often accused of being intolerant and judgmental towards power tool woodworkers, but I don't remember anyone here saying that "the use of power tools seems very odd to me." Making your own furniture, tools, whatever in ANY fashion is pretty odd and anachronistic in this day and age, so whatever mix of hand and power people want to use is OK by me. FTR I'm not a purist and I use power tools too (especially when I'm on the clock; when I'm working for fun I try to avoid them), but that's not the point. The point is that smoothing or edge jointing machine-prepped boards doesn't have much to do with dimensioning rough stock, and techniques from the former are not particularly helpful for the latter. I like to walk a couple miles a day on city sidewalks. As such, I probably don't have a lot to say about proper mountain climbing technique.

[Jim Koepke]

I would want to move from .015-.020 (approximating here) on the jack plane, to more like .005 on the try plane. .003 and thinner would be nice for the smoother, if necessary.

I would need some serious pain medicine to take .015-.020 shavings for very long. Might get close to that size with my #5-1/4 that is set up as a scrub plane.

I try for even less than .003 with a smoother. The piece can often be done without any tracks or scallops.

jtk

[david charlesworth]

Steve,

My video clip showed an accurate method for edge jointing.

It was nothing to do with heavy stock removal or speed.

It also demonstrated use of the legs as clearly as possible.

Most of these points have been completely missed by those so keen to criticize, and I think I am taking my bat home at this point.

It is tedious being miss represented.

I am also intrigued by the way the end grain passage has been totally ignored.

David

[James Pallas]

I am very much enjoying all of this. For myself I learned from someone I thought and still think was very good at stock prep. They way I learned was to first evaluate the work and know where it was going to be used. If you need an 8' piece 3/4" thick than don't waste your time if it won't work. If you jack plane a lot of material. And end up at 5/8" you wasted a lot of work. That is just the beginning of how I was taught. I would like to here from some more experienced how they would prepare say some five quarter rough to 3/4" finished all hand tool. Of course today I would pick a nice straight piece and resaw it on the band saw. I was taught how to plane it though. Worked in some places with no power at times.
Jim

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Good points in regards to not needing to take long shavings across the long grain. Though, I did recently redimension a bunch of 2x4" stock to 2x3", entirely by hand, and that did involve heavy shavings over the length of the grain (as the surface is much too short to go across the grain), after hogging off most of the stock waste with a drawknife.


I saw Kees initial post, and then ignored it for a while. It has turned into something pretty interesting, particularly the videos. I am no expert, but I have dimensioned rough boards in the 6-8 foot range with hand tools only. I started out trying to "walk the plank", and for a number of reasons I did not find that to be a good way to do it. Shorter strokes and working in sections (first at an angle then with the grain) are what seems to work best for me. I agree the power needs to come from the legs, and what Graham is doing in the video above is pretty close to what I try to do. The arms are not locked in at the sides, but are also not really doing the majority of the work. They are instead sort of finishing or extending the stroke that the legs started. At least that is how it feels to me.

I am quoting the comment above, because it is what I started out thinking I was supposed to be doing with a hand plane. I use my saws and saw bench a lot more now. With my rip saw I can pretty accurately do the rough dimensioning, and it is a heck of a lot quicker and less wear on the planes.

[Warren Mickley]

I am also intrigued by the way the end grain passage has been totally ignored.


I will say something about the end grain passage. The whole thread is about Kees work facing rough stock. Your "jointing" had limited relevance, the end grain even less relevance.

I use a chisel to make the chamfer. Much easier, much faster than a block plane. I use a bench plane (42 degrees) for planing end grain. A block plane is just too crampy for the fingers for any kind of serious work. Block planes were designed for carpenters to carry in their belts.

I use my arms rather than swaying the whole body for end grain planing because it is much faster. You make three cuts in the video; I could do more than 20 in the same time if it were needed. If you can't control your arms, maybe you haven't done very much of this. I am not making up alternate techniques for beginners.

[Steve Voigt]

Steve,



Most of these points have been completely missed by those so keen to criticize, and I think I am taking my bat home at this point.

It is tedious being miss represented.


David

David, I don't think I misrepresented you, but if I did, I apologize for that, and for any comments that were unduly harsh. I think I'm almost done with this thread as well, but I look forward to vigorous discussion in future threads. You and I have some fundamental disagreements, but I appreciate the opportunity to debate and discuss. Have a good evening.

[Steve Voigt]

I would like to here from some more experienced how they would prepare say some five quarter rough to 3/4" finished all hand tool.
Jim

If we are talking about furniture, then I would avoid the scenario you describe like the plague! And I'm fairly certain that 18th c. cabinetmakers and joiners would do the same. They would get the material from the sawmill at a thickness close to the finished dimension. In this case, 1" rough stock. Then ideally surface it to 13/16". I would do the same. And if say one side of a cabinet didn't quite clean up at 13/16", I would have no problem taking another 32nd off that piece only. There's no reason they'd have to be the exact same size.

In general, 18th c. Hand tool woodworkers did not work from precise drawings or cut lists. Dimensions were not nearly as rigid as they would be in a modern power-based shop. The idea of taking a bunch of boards and planing off 1/2" from all of them, because a number on a blueprint says so, would have been foreign to 18th c woodworkers (at least that is my admittedly imperfect understanding).

Toolmaking is a little different: the tolerances are smaller and the dimensions more rigid. Same for instrument making, I imagine. But for furniture or carpentry, I think what I said is accurate.

[Patrick Chase]

I would need some serious pain medicine to take .015-.020 shavings for very long. Might get close to that size with my #5-1/4 that is set up as a scrub plane.

Camber (the constant-radius kind as in the blades I posted in the other thread) is the key here. 15-20 mils is child's play with a r=6" blade, though of course the shavings are fairly narrow (1" wide at 15 mil cut depth, 1-1/8" wide at 20). Also cross/diagonal strokes are easier than lengthwise at those depths.

Steve, what blade profile are you using for that cut depth?

If you're crazy enough to rough with a flat blade or one with "turned-up corners" then yes, 15-20 mils will be rough going. It's doable and I've done it, but not my idea of fun.

EDIT: If you're using a scrub with a lot of camber then 15-20 mils is even easier. The resulting cut widths are 0.7" and 0.8" at 15 and 20 mil projection, respectively.

[Tom M King]

I would need some serious pain medicine to take .015-.020 shavings for very long. Might get close to that size with my #5-1/4 that is set up as a scrub plane.

I try for even less than .003 with a smoother. The piece can often be done without any tracks or scallops.

jtk

I'm having a hard time understanding the last sentence. In the case I mentioned earlier when I pointed out the smoothing plane texture in the 1920 Dining room, most people sitting at the table couldn't see it, even after I pointed it out. I thought about this all the time I was eating dinner tonight. I think maybe the people who couldn't see it were all wearing glasses. I'm not sure if it had something to do with wearing glasses, or something to do with eyesight. I don't see how it's physically possible to do any kind of hand planning without leaving some tracks or scallops, even with an iron taking a half thousandth shaving for a full width cambered iron.

[Patrick Chase]

I'm having a hard time understanding the last sentence. In the case I mentioned earlier when I pointed out the smoothing plane texture in the 1920 Dining room, most people sitting at the table couldn't see it, even after I pointed it out. I thought about this all the time I was eating dinner tonight. I think maybe the people who couldn't see it were all wearing glasses. I'm not sure if it had something to do with wearing glasses, or something to do with eyesight. I don't see how it's physically possible to do any kind of hand planning without leaving some tracks or scallops, even with an iron taking a half thousandth shaving for a full width cambered iron.

You can come really, really close to "no tracks" with a mostly flat iron with a small amount of gradual relief/rouding on each corner (if the corners are square then it's a lost cause). You can always find the boundaries if you know what to look for though - even if the cuts are near-perfectly coplanar there's slightly different reflectivity/sheen where the cut feathers out on each side, that can be seen at high grazing angles, though certain finishes may obscure that.

[Jim Koepke]

Tom, If your eyes can resolve 0.0005", be thankful. I can see tracks from my planes when taking thick shavings. I am also able to take very thin shavings while riding a high track to remove the tracks. It may be my eyesight from old age not seeing what a younger person may see.

Though often I see things others do not. Some folks have never had a job like a printer or a photographer where seeing the details comes with the training.

jtk

[Steve Voigt]

Camber (the constant-radius kind as in the blades I posted in the other thread) is the key here. 15-20 mils is child's play with a r=6" blade, though of course the shavings are fairly narrow (1" wide at 15 mil cut depth, 1-1/8" wide at 20). Also cross/diagonal strokes are easier than lengthwise at those depths.

Steve, what blade profile are you using for that cut depth?

If you're crazy enough to rough with a flat blade or one with "turned-up corners" then yes, 15-20 mils will be rough going. It's doable and I've done it, but not my idea of fun.

EDIT: If you're using a scrub with a lot of camber then 15-20 mils is even easier. The resulting cut widths are 0.7" and 0.8" at 15 and 20 mil projection, respectively.


Hi Patrick,

Your numbers seemed off to me, so I ran them myself…for a 6" radius, I get:

.021" at 1" width of cut
.027" at 1 1/8" width of cut.

Can you doublecheck please? One of us is off; it could certainly be me.

Anyway, to answer your question, I use a 10" radius on jack planes. I never used to measure, but I kinda have to now.
If my calculations are correct, I get .013" at 1" wide, .016" at 1 1/8" wide, and .020" at 1 1/4" wide. that seems right to me. Just eyeballing, I'd say that 1 1/2" wide cut (with a 2" iron) is the absolute max for me in hardwood, and it's usually less. For David's example of hard maple, the 1" width would be plenty. For something like EWP though, I could take almost full width shavings.

[Patrick Chase]

.021" at 1" width of cut
.027" at 1 1/8" width of cut.

Can you doublecheck please? One of us is off; it could certainly be me.

Are you correcting for bed angle? I get almost exactly those numbers if I don't multiply by sin(bed_angle) after calculating the "raw" extension along the long axis of the blade. Depth of cut is the extension projected along the vertical axis (normal to the sole) so you do have to correct.

FWIW (not much without independent confirmation IMO, given the source :-) Brent Beach's online calculator (http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpen/camber.html#calc) gets the same numbers I did. It gets your numbers with the bed angle set to 90 deg.

[Steve Voigt]

Are you correcting for bed angle? I get almost exactly those numbers if I don't multiply by sin(bed_angle) after calculating the "raw" extension along the long axis of the blade.

Nope, I wasn't. You are absolutely right. Sorry!

So, I am taking a few thou less than I thought, but still in the same ballpark.

[Patrick Chase]

Nope, I wasn't. You are absolutely right. Sorry!

So, I am taking a few thou less than I thought, but still in the same ballpark.

I don't think it matters that much: O(15) mils either way, just a question of whether it's 10-15 or 15-20. EIther way you're going to want some camber on that blade :-)

[Patrick Chase]

Tom, If your eyes can resolve 0.0005", be thankful. I can see tracks from my planes when taking thick shavings. I am also able to take very thin shavings while riding a high track to remove the tracks. It may be my eyesight from old age not seeing what a younger person may see.

Though often I see things others do not. Some folks have never had a job like a printer or a photographer where seeing the details comes with the training.

jtk

There are at least two phenomena that can cause visible tracking: Flatness variations (ridges, scalloping) and surface texture/quality variations. As you point out the flatness variations can be made really, really small by taking thin cuts.

In my experience the texture/quality variations are a much tougher nut. A plane leaves a fundamentally different finish when it's cutting a clean shaving in the center of the blade vs where it's cutting a partial or feathered shaving as the depth tapers to 0. This is really quite easy to see once you know what to look for, though obviously species/grain/sharpness etc all play into it. Ironically the better or glassier the finish at the center, the more obvious the edges are. You can avoid this by using a flat blade, but then you have to contend with step transitions at the edges, and those are obvious at any depth.

You can mitigate the quality variation issue by managing the final sequence of planing passes such that each successive shaving hasn't quite tapered to zero thickness where it meets the previous one. That takes very careful blade preparation (you actually want a fairly small amount of corner relief, or else you can't avoid tapering to zero thickness) and even more careful "workpiece management" to make sure the strokes are coplanar to within the required (small) tolerance and meet as desired. I can't achieve it all the time, though I bet some very experienced folks like Warren, George, and Steve can. Even then you can usually see something if you know what you're looking for.

It's also important to note that the human visual system is incredibly, borderline-unbelievably good at picking out straight lines. I used to work in image quality and image/signal processing, and upon being confronted with an issue one of the first tricks we'd pull out of the bag was often some variation on "well, can we make it wiggly?". I could easily believe that somebody with full visual acuity could pick out a 1/2-mil scallop if it's straight and if the lighting is [un]favorable.

EDIT: Clarified.

[Brian Holcombe]

That is true they almost always show, I tend to stager my cuts so that it minimizes them, then back the plane out for a final pass on a show panel.

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/546A6E06-D95E-42F0-98B9-DD9F86F552C7_zpsyu15gry7.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/541B727D-399C-4F14-8DB4-1B497E0712AE_zps3f9h2cdn.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/BA5BF1C4-E709-4578-AC84-586AA17763B4_zpscb9vu0e3.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/A1294D8D-C079-4D69-984D-BBEB4AB81F81_zpsfijlm7ne.jpg

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/2D5C6895-E60A-42A6-B740-5AAABC9B1FE7_zpsj5uwyd16.jpg

You can feel slight scallops on this surface. I can plane finer but it's just not practical for everyday use.

[Stewie Simpson]

To those that see fit to restrict themselves to using tooling that was only available to the craftsmen of the 18th century; a gentle reminder that it was most likely 20th and 21st century technology that was used to fell that tree; that milled that wood from the tree to its rough sawn dimension; that was then able to process that rough sawn feature into a DAR finish after being fed through an industrial sized power jointer and thicknesser; all before it reached your workshop.

Stewie;

[Patrick Chase]

You can feel slight scallops on this surface. I can plane finer but it's just not practical for everyday use.

I probably should have been clearer that I don't view the very subtle sorts of tracking we're discussing here as objectionable. While I think that Tom is right that it's very hard to avoid completely, I think that at the levels we're discussing here they're much less objectionable than, say, the aftermath of an ROS. For that matter I think that scraping to fix such subtle discontinuities is often counterproductive in the final analysis.

Wood is an inherently nonuniform medium. If somebody wants perfect uniformity then they should probably seek some other material, or just buy commercial furniture that's been stained and finished to the point of homogeneity.

[Patrick Chase]

To those that see fit to restrict themselves to using tooling that was only available to the craftsmen of the 18th century; a gentle reminder that it was most likely 20th and 21st century technology that was used to fell that tree; that milled that wood from the tree to its rough sawn dimension; that was then able to process that rough sawn feature into a DAR finish after being fed through an industrial sized power jointer and thicknesser; all before it reached your workshop.

Stewie;

Like you I joint by hand but often thickness with a lunchbox planer (DW735 with helical head). I sometimes do both by hand, though, not out of purism but because I enjoy it even though it's by far the most physically demanding part of neander woodworking.

I think that most others here come from similar perspectives - we're all looking for ways to do what we enjoy (working wood by hand) as much as possible without destroying our bodies. In that sense I think that this is a good thread inasmuch as it may help some folks who want to do more of their work manually achieve that goal.

[Graham Haydon]

I think that's a valid point Stewie. Then as now, I'm sure people would want to work with well sawn timber. If the local pit saw team were poor at their job I'd assume they'd go hungry quick, as would a supplier today if their boards were badly prepared. In both situations it would be causing both loss in time and money to have poor stock.
I might be a bit off here but the UK has been big importer of wood for hundreds of years. Most notably I think we imported, and still do, huge volumes of European Redwood. I'm not sure how early the Dutch had their wind powered mills but they were pretty early giving uniform "deals".
I think my point is the wood in earlier workshops was still well prepared and uniform enough to allow brisk progress. I'm not a purist, I would not like to live "back in the day" but I do enjoy discussing and having a go at working by hand in the most efficient and practical way possible, even if my boards do come off a resaw.

[Kees Heiden]

Cornelis Corneliszoon invented the wind powered sawmill in 1592. He invented a crankshaft to change the rotary action from the wings to the up and down motion of the saw frame. His invention was quickly turned into practice and the 17th century saw many appear, especially in the Zaan, just north of Amsterdam.

This one is still in use in my town Leiden:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Zaagmolen_%22d'Heesterboom%22_-_Leiden_-_20137617_-_RCE.jpg

[Graham Haydon]

Nice photo Kees! The use of this sawing method is earlier than I had expected.

[Kees Heiden]

So, if you are trying to relive the 18th century, then you can easilly explain away the use of presawn stock. :p

Personally I draw the line at the puffy shirts...

[Graham Haydon]

Damn, I was hoping to see that in the next video!

[Kees Heiden]

Never! Jeans and a shirt for ever! :D

[Brian Holcombe]

I probably should have been clearer that I don't view the very subtle sorts of tracking we're discussing here as objectionable. While I think that Tom is right that it's very hard to avoid completely, I think that at the levels we're discussing here they're much less objectionable than, say, the aftermath of an ROS. For that matter I think that scraping to fix such subtle discontinuities is often counterproductive in the final analysis.

Wood is an inherently nonuniform medium. If somebody wants perfect uniformity then they should probably seek some other material, or just buy commercial furniture that's been stained and finished to the point of homogeneity.

Exactly, some like the uniformity of ROS finishes but I prefer subtle scallops. I read your post that way but wanted to point out how subtle they can be for everyone reading.

[Tom M King]

So, if you are trying to relive the 18th century, then you can easilly explain away the use of presawn stock. :p

Personally I draw the line at the puffy shirts...

Any time I run across someone who claims to be a purist, I ask them if they are wearing handspun wool underwear.

I never said smoothing plane tracks were objectionable, but like Brian's pictures show, they're there in the best of work. I've never seen old ones that are as shallow as we can produce today, but have always felt like they showed us a lot about how it used to be done.

[Warren Mickley]

Any time I run across someone who claims to be a purist, I ask them if they are wearing handspun wool underwear.

I never said smoothing plane tracks were objectionable, but like Brian's pictures show, they're there in the best of work. I've never seen old ones that are as shallow as we can produce today, but have always felt like they showed us a lot about how it used to be done.

At the Williamsburg conference one presenter suggested that an 18th century Philadelphia card table was sanded because there were no plane marks. Well, there were plane marks, they were just very subtle. And I have a walnut rail from an 18th century cabinet door that I like to show to period woodworkers because you can see how the tenon was sawn. Most have to be shown how to view the rail to see plane marks.

I have worn handspun wool hats, scarves, and socks, but not underwear. My guess is you have no real experience to share in this regard either. People talk about how terrible it was, but they don't really know.

[Kees Heiden]

Meringo wool is all the rage for mountain climbing these days, it wicks away perspiration from your skin, so it is a lot warmer then cotton, but it doesn't stink so bad as nylon. Meringo is said to be non-itchy. Well, I tried, I tried hard, but it kept being itchy! I suppose you can get used to it. Just like wooden clogs, which really hurt the first few days, but then your feet get used to it and they are even reasonably comfortable.

[Brian Holcombe]

Sorry to be pedantic but I'm fairly certain they would have worn button-in pants liners, not underwear as we know it, which probably would have been made of linen. I think people are under the impression that everyone back then wore heavy wool clothing everywhere, but I expect the reality was a lot more linen.

Linen is not uncomfortable, especially handmade linen that has also been washed by hand many times.

I forget the particulars of it, but one of my friends is a clothes hound (worse than me) and pointed to a historical figure's diary entry that mentioned having a linen coat made for an important occasion. I have many linen jackets which are mistaken for wool tweed from a slight distance, so people will sometimes stop me in the summer and ask why I'm wearing a heavy jacket....when it is in fact just the opposite.

They dressed for the weather.

Kees it's my understanding that cotton actually poses a danger to people hiking in the cold, wool retains its ability to remain warm when wet but cotton does not. Wool isn't uncomfortable, especially handspun wool.

Anyways, back to the topic. The scallops are there but can be made practically unnoticeable and even less noticeable under a finish.

[Prashun Patel]

For the record, I think David has been unfairly attacked. I re-read the entire thread and I don't find anything he says to be disrespectful. While some of you may feel his video or posts were not entirely on point, I certainly found them illuminating. As a person not yet properly skilled in jointing or thicknessing, I don't find it irrelevant. Even I am able to see that what he's doing and what Tom's doing in their videos are different. But it's all useful. What I find irrelevant is when two or three experts start attacking each other and one gets disgusted enough to leave the thread or worse, the forum.

[Phil Mueller]

Agree. I have found David's method to be extremely helpful in my stock prep.

[Mike Holbrook]

I don't know how I missed this thread for so long. Wow! thanks Kees great thread! Thanks for having the courage to post your videos, brave man, and we are all the richer for it.

This thread is great on multiple levels IMHO. It actually causes us all to think about how we are using probably our most used tool, which again IMHO, can't be bad.

It is very interesting to me to watch guys like Brian, Graham, Jim, David Weaver, David Charlesworth, Derek, Kingshott.... planing. It seems obvious to me that different people use different muscle groups more than others. Certainly everyone has different physiques, sore spots and work they are doing all of which effect form, still I find the videos very educational.

Prashun made a post while I was working on mine. It is unfortunate when things get personal. For myself it is precisely the purpose of such a forum to discuss and even argue. The trick is to discuss concepts and points of view not individuals or their right to their opinion. I make no claim to "expertise" in woodworking. There are some subjects at which I do believe I have a high level of expertise. I often find that it is precisely the new/uneducated, in those areas I have expertise in, who provide me the ability to rethink and approach topics from a fresh angle. From the mouths of babes....

I found Jim Koepke's form the most interesting. Which may have to do with the fact that I am around the same age and identify with what I think I see him doing. Jim seems to use just about all his muscle groups while doing the greatest amount of work with the larger muscles in the legs/butt and latissimus dorsi (largest back muscles). I think I also see him alter which larger muscle groups he is using at different stages.

Stewie's and Tom's pictures of boards with a rougher texture are of interest to me too. Then, I preferred to paint with a painting knife and lots of paint too. I have been reading Schwarz's "The Anarchist's Design Book". The book condones rougher/less technical forms of woodworking which I think is a valid point for discussion. I think Schwarz is sometimes maligned for moving from hand to electric tools and tackling controversial subjects. It seems to me that this is the man's true value as a writer on woodworking. It takes a certain courage and thick skin to assume that role, as we find here in this thread as well.

So thanks to all the posters in this thread, particularly those brave enough to post pictures/videos of yourselves working and pictures of "imperfect" boards.

[Patrick Chase]

Kees it's my understanding that cotton actually poses a danger to people hiking in the cold, wool retains its ability to remain warm when wet but cotton does not. Wool isn't uncomfortable, especially handspun wool.


It's a given that you don't wear cotton for that sort of thing. No fabric, including wool, is very insulative when soaked - insulation requires air gaps, and if the fabric is truly saturated there aren't any. The problem with cotton is that it gets and stays saturated very easily, whereas wool resists it and tends to wick moisture away from the skin.

Kees was mostly comparing wool not to cotton, but to the bazillion "technical innerwear fabrics" on the market that also wick water and resist saturation. The first ones were polypropylene and had absolutely horrible odor control problems but they've gotten a lot better over time.

[James Pallas]

[QUOTE=Steve Voigt;2575900]If we are talking about furniture, then I would avoid the scenario you describe like the plague! And I'm fairly certain that 18th c. cabinetmakers and joiners would do the same. They would get the material from the sawmill at a thickness close to the finished dimension. In this case, 1" rough stock. Then ideally surface it to 13/16". I would do the same. And if say one side of a cabinet didn't quite clean up at 13/16", I would have no problem taking another 32nd off that piece only. There's no reason they'd have to be the exact same size.

i agree with Steve on this one. I was taught to pick out the best longest pieces first. Than work those pieces with a jack in which ever direction was appropriate to get the work done. Take off the high spots to get it somewhat flat and wrk from there. If you were really lucky you may even be able to get close to a full length shaving, not required at this point. Now you can work the bows or twist or whatever. Hard work not easy and the ability to read the wood is eccential. Now get your pieces to match. This is what I learned. Others may have equally or better processes. It's a discussion after all.
Jim

[Jim Koepke]

Never! Jeans and a shirt for ever! :D

Wasn't there a song about For Ever in Blue Jeans some years back?

Found it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQLWF_ItzYs

jtk

[Mike Holbrook]

Prashun,

Good moderation job. I appreciate the fact that "jumping in" can open you up to "judgement" as well. Sometimes, however, debating how to debate is very important.

I think it is important to note that many different view points are valid: very talented people can be very good at doing something with no real clue as to how they do it, those who are very good at doing may or may not have any talent at explaining to someone else how to...a "minor" point may be of significantly more actual benefit to a specific individual than a "major" point that does not pertain, there are real experts who may exhibit horrible form or methodology for the majority of others....still points are points and who are we to judge their validity.

Great thread, hope it does not get canned because of "too much enthusiasm".

[Graham Haydon]

Mike, I'd echo you're thoughts. There are so many more experienced than I, sharing thoughts with others even if they are very contrasting is a privilege. Being prepared to stick you're neck out and say this is what I think and why and then being open minded to be proved wrong is important. Moreover, a quick video is useful too as often I think we're describing a physical actions in text form.

[Pat Barry]

I appreciate seeing the demonstrated practice and positive discussion of the techniques so much more than hearing the personal attacks and vendetta's

[Kees Heiden]

There is a thin line between personal attacks and spirited discussion. A lot depends on HOW you write something. For example in this particular instance, experience with the technique is the basis of your opinion. When someone else thinks your experience in this particular aspect of the craft isn't relevant enough, then that is part of the discussion. But you can also write it in such a way that is a denigrating comment.

[James Pallas]

Kees I went back and read your first post again just to make sure I had it right. Your are working on rough lumber so that is the conversation. This is what I do. I site down the board to look for high spots first. I than take those obvious high spots down using a jack. Cross grain along the grain which ever is better. I than can take a full pass to see what I get. If I run into bumps that stop the plane I work those some more and than try again. I really dislike hitting those plane stoppers, it hurts my back. I was taught it's much like grading the garden you take the humps out first before you try to level it out. Finish planing is another entirely different job, like using a shovel and a rake shovel fist, rake to smooth. Hope this makes some sense. I was hoping to refine my technique with this thread and it went off topic somehow.
Jim

[Mike Holbrook]

I have been inspired. I am working lots of reps with dumbbells in positions that I think will work the correct muscle groups. I am working out a shoulder issue. I think my issue relates to my age and trying to catch German Shepherds moving 35MPH on a bite sleeve, not the woodworking. It always seems to me that even small amounts of exercise and stretching help faster than I think they will. I am relearning exercise programs that stretch and firm more than build muscle mass.

I am interested in working with splits from logs, which is another level of rough wood. I think splitting skill is worth learning. I had very real trouble with it starting out. I am very impressed with how accurately skilled people, like Drew Langsner can split logs. It helps a great deal to start with a log with good grain structure. Pieces with grain running from one end to the other can be a real pleasure to work.

I have been experimenting with cambers that are a little less in the center and a little more rounded at the corners.. A camber like this seems to make it possible to get more of the camber down into the wood, since the total depth is less. This type camber is easier to push through the wood than a flat blade, especially if the bed angle, or in the case of a BU plane the combined blade & bed angle, is not too high. The center of the blade makes a relatively level cut and the edges leave feathered edges that I can live with.

[Kees Heiden]

Ok, how about another video? This time jointing. I used David Charlesworth's technique. Keeping the elbow near to my body and walking the plane along the plank. For this type of work it is a very usefull technique, gives precision when you need it and the relatively narrow shaving makes it doable. The walking along sure does need some practice!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXFfnWSCfqY

[david charlesworth]

Kees,

Nice video.

I think you would find this so much easier with a metal plane. 5 1/2, 6,7,

The center of gravity is lower, the thumb is much nearer the edge, the fence, underneath must surely be easier.

My elbow, (or forearm) is not near the body, it is drawn against it for the majority of the stroke.

Best wishes,
David

[Kees Heiden]

Then it's all part of the learning proces. I made these planes this winter and they work very well. Not giving up on them because it might be a bit more difficult.

[Luke Dupont]

That's an awesome plane, Kees! I may be following your example in the not so distant future, as I have a few excess plane irons laying about.

The planing looks like a bit of a bumpy ride in places, but it looks very consistent.

[david charlesworth]

I am not suggesting you give up on them, just that for this job a metal plane would be easier.

By the way, the jerkiness in one or two passes would be cured by arm against ribs.

best wishes,
David

[Kees Heiden]

On the next one I'll take more care. The jerkines was in spots with strong grain reversals.

[Kees Heiden]

And now I just need a lot more practice. But I feel to be on the right road now thanks to all the help.

[david charlesworth]

I suspect that jerkiness is reduced when the mass of the body is directly linked to the plane.

As opposed to by a chain of flexible levers. Forearm, elbow, arm, shoulder.

best wishes,
David

[Patrick Chase]

At the risk of re-stirring the hornets' nest, there's one thing I think hasn't been discussed enough: Reading and reacting to the wood.

I was roughing a piece the other night, and paying closer than normal attention to my movements because of this thread (sorry, no video) and realized at some point that I was adjusting my stroke based on the wood without even thinking about it. After the first couple strokes (if not before) you pretty much know where you're going to hit peak resistance, and you can exploit that knowledge to make sure that you're in a good position (skeleton stacked with arms neither over-compressed nor over-extended, driving from the hips/center) where it counts.

This goes back to the sports argument: You generally can't and shouldn't try for some ideal static position throughout the stroke. You should be dynamic, but make sure you're where you need to be when it matters (i.e. when the grain suddenly goes haywire and the cutting force doubles).

Unfortunately it's hard to tell how the wood is behaving in a video of somebody else's work, and I think that's why we're all having such a hard time breaking down footage. It's obvious when somebody messes up (the plane comes to a screeching halt, with no drive from the center to power through the obstruction), but it's *really hard* to spot the adaptations that people make to avoid that.