Preparing Stock By Hand - Sequence?

[Erich Weidner]

When preparing stock for a project by hand, what is the most labor efficient sequence?

Now, it may seem like a dumb question, but when using hand tools to rip and crosscut, say I have a board much wider than I need for most parts. Say a 12" wide x 8' long board that I'm going to get some 10" wide boards and some 4" wide boards out of for a cut list.

Do I cross cut first, then rip, then joint and thickness plane?
If I were using power tools, and the whole board would fit in a thickness planer, I'm guessing most people would just joint/plane the whole board first, like what I see in the stacks of S4S stock at the lumberyard.

Granted I don't know any better, but this doesn't feel like a time/labor efficient way to tackle it with purely hand tools. I'm guessing I'd first want to break that big board down into more manageable pieces. But if I've not yet created reference edge/face I can't really saw to final width...

Thoughts?

[Ben Ellenberger]

I’m interested in seeing people’s responses too. I tend to rough cut pieces to size before planing or gluing up wide pieces. If I’m trying to save a long piece for something else, I may rip first, then only crosscut the pieces for the immediate project. Usually I crosscut first so I don’t have to rip more than I need to. I always leave them a little bit wide/long at this stage.

i usually let pieces sit for a day after rough cutting them before I flatten my reference face and edge. then I’ll get them thicknessed and down to their final width. Ideally they will be close enough to final width that I can get there pretty quickly with a jack plane set coarse. If I’m gluing up a wide panel I usually make sure each piece isn’t too twisted/cupped, then I joint and glue them up, then I flatten the whole panel as one. I don’t try to get them perfect before jointing/gluing. I get one end square to my reference edge, then the final step is cutting to final length.

[David Eisenhauer]

As I see it, cross cut sawing is the easiest, so I would cut down the lengths that I had to rip (unless the entire board needs to be the same width). After cutting my piece(s) to rough length(s), I would definitely rip down close to final width so as to limit as best possible the amount of thickness planning required. After I had my pieces rough cut to length and width, I would then start establishing the reference faces with my hand plane. Even if I had (say) four stretchers (x length) of the same dimension to take out of a larger piece of timber, I would cut down to four individual pieces before starting to hand plane. That's me, others may prefer to hand plane a long piece already rough cut to 4x length and rough width. It seems that I can deal with wind, etc more effectively in shorter pieces than I can on a long piece. Same for making longer rip cuts to width - it is easier for me to handle (say) a 2' long board than an 8' long board simply due to the mechanics of handling the length/weight/holding securely for the cut. I don't try to dodge or limit hand sawing, as I grew up doing lots of it and don't mind it. While I don't mind hand planning, I am much more cognizant of the amount of effort/time/sharpening/potential issues that I associate with hand planning.

[Doug Dawson]

When preparing stock for a project by hand, what is the most labor efficient sequence?

Now, it may seem like a dumb question, but when using hand tools to rip and crosscut, say I have a board much wider than I need for most parts. Say a 12" wide x 8' long board that I'm going to get some 10" wide boards and some 4" wide boards out of for a cut list.

Do I cross cut first, then rip, then joint and thickness plane?
If I were using power tools, and the whole board would fit in a thickness planer, I'm guessing most people would just joint/plane the whole board first, like what I see in the stacks of S4S stock at the lumberyard.

Granted I don't know any better, but this doesn't feel like a time/labor efficient way to tackle it with purely hand tools. I'm guessing I'd first want to break that big board down into more manageable pieces. But if I've not yet created reference edge/face I can't really saw to final width...

Thoughts?

Definitely cut pieces to rough size before doing any planing on them, it saves a ton of work. BTW, I do most of my rough ripping on the band saw, but I do almost all of my rough cross-cutting by hand. (I _could_ do the rough ripping by hand, but have done enough of it that I don’t have anything to prove, and I’m getting old. :^)

Whether your rip or crosscut first, depends on whatever is most convenient.

FWIW, when planing, exact dimensions don’t matter as much as many people think they do.

[Blake M Williams]

Planing after sawing off excess saves you a lot of work. And like Doug said, having everything to exact thicknesses isnt all that necessary.

[Andrew Seemann]

The snarky answer is:
1. Start cutting and planing.
2. Realize how much work it is and how much time and physical effort it takes.
3. Give up and use your power tools:)

The answer to your actual question is what David, Doug, and Blake said, making the pieces as close to final dimension as practical and then planing. I'd only add that there is nothing heroic about dimensioning all your wood by hand. If you want to do it, go for it, but don't feel you "have" to do it for any reason. Many/most hand tool enthusiasts will use some power tools. Many of us just don't have the time (or in the case of those of us getting up in years, the physical stamina) to do everything by hand.

[Jim Koepke]

Mine is done by hand because the only stationary power tools in my shop are a bandsaw, drill press and lathe.

Also it is good exercise to build up or help to keep one's stamina.

As to the original question, it is often easier to cut to size before finishing the surfaces. One exception is if the work needs ripping and has rough edges you may want to plane one edge before feeding it through the bandsaw.

Some rough wood may also be best to clean up a face a little to find the bad spots to dodge.

For some projects it might be best to plane a single piece before sawing it up into smaller pieces to make a box. This would take care of matching thickness for ease of joinery.

It really depends on the size of the lumber and the project for which it is being used.

jtk

[Jim Matthews]

Not mentioned above is that smaller size boards reduce waste lost to twist, warp and cupping.

*****

I'm currently building an entryway cubby.
The challenge is finding boards longer than 48" without serious defects.

I suspect that the sequence boils down to sawing to size, planing to dimension, sawing joints, planing for finish, assembly, plane for best fit.

It's *all* easier with straight grain, air dried lumber.

[Warren Mickley]

In general, we cut all pieces to rough size before any planing. An inch longer than needed and 1/4 wider than needed would be typical. These numbers could be smaller if it enabled you to get an additional piece out of the board.

Flattening the face of an eight foot board takes away an inordinate amount of stock. A 1x12x96 board with a flat face may have less than 3/4 left while a flat 1x10x20 board from the same stock may have 15/16 left after flattening.

We first flatten a face side, then make an edge flat and square to the face. The sequence after this depends on specific usage, but for example if we are going to plane the end grain we do this before cutting to width.

Edit: I got interrupted while posting and did not read Jim's post, which makes similar points.

[James Pallas]

Lots of good advice here. I’ve seen a lot of good wood turned into chips for no reason. It pays to make an initial evaluation of each board. I seen so many just say “flatten one face”. Warren touched on it a little. If you know what you need and can save both work and money by cutting from one or the other end of a board to eliminate now or crook do it. It is a little harder to work vertical grain but you can still save. Machine has taught to just work thinking in straight lines. If the piece you need is there but at an angle to the edge it’s still there.

[Jim Koepke]

I seen so many just say “flatten one face”.

Recently in reading an old FWW Magazine there was an article on timber framing. The article suggested only flattening where the joints were going to be.

jtk

[James Pallas]

The issue with starting out by flattening one face on a longer board can cause the lose of much material. If you do that you can easily take 1/4” or more thickness on say an 8’ board. If the case is, which is often in my experience, that most of the bow is in two or three feet of one end you wasted a lot of good wood. The same goes for crook. I recently surfaced an 8/4 8’ hard maple board. If I hadn’t cut off about 2 ft I would have lost the thickness I need for 6’ of material and would have had some work taking 3/8” of hard maple to the trash. What I’m saying is evaluate the material well before you put a tool to it. Sequence should start like this, evaluate, break down as needed, flatten one face, then the rest. If a hand tool worker this can save hours of prep time and dollars in materials.

[Ben Ellenberger]

I did that for my saw bench. Only the first few inches of the inside of the legs needed to be square. Getting them prepped took almost no time at all.

[Jim Koepke]

What I’m saying is evaluate the material well before you put a tool to it. Sequence should start like this, evaluate, break down as needed, flatten one face, then the rest. If a hand tool worker this can save hours of prep time and dollars in materials.

Yes, start with the evaluation of materials and the project. Sometimes it will make the work easier to break down the material first. Especially if there are some knots or other unwanted features in the wood. Sometimes it may be easier to work one piece before breaking it down.

jtk

[Doug Dawson]

The issue with starting out by flattening one face on a longer board can cause the lose of much material. If you do that you can easily take 1/4” or more thickness on say an 8’ board. If the case is, which is often in my experience, that most of the bow is in two or three feet of one end you wasted a lot of good wood. The same goes for crook. I recently surfaced an 8/4 8’ hard maple board. If I hadn’t cut off about 2 ft I would have lost the thickness I need for 6’ of material and would have had some work taking 3/8” of hard maple to the trash. What I’m saying is evaluate the material well before you put a tool to it. Sequence should start like this, evaluate, break down as needed, flatten one face, then the rest. If a hand tool worker this can save hours of prep time and dollars in materials.

Agreed. Another time-saving tip is to always take down the most convex part of the _middle_ of a board _first_, by whatever means you have at your disposal. A scrub plane is great for this. It’s one of the things you learn really quickly when using a powered jointer. :^) It applies to hand planing as well. The rest of the board will see what you did there, and fall more easily into submission.

[Erich Weidner]

Many/most hand tool enthusiasts will use some power tools. Many of us just don't have the time

I'm not swearing off power tools, but I am trying to get as much usable space out of my shop (which is half of a 2 car garage, and I need to be able to park a car in the other half)as possible. I've never owned a power planer/jointer, and now I'm taking a very hard look at everything in the garage for it to justify any precious wall or floor space it consumes. I want to keep the table saw, or perhaps replace with a smaller TS and/or bandsaw for ripping. But the TS I have now is just too big. The dust collector takes up a lot of room, and at present it is only used with the TS and router table. If I ditch the TS and Router Table, I get another 6SF of floor back from the dust collector I'd no longer need. And I'm just finding my interest in using the router table dwindling. But I've went way off topic here... ;)

[Erich Weidner]

Recently in reading an old FWW Magazine there was an article on timber framing. The article suggested only flattening where the joints were going to be.

jtk


Yes, I've been reading some bits about pre-industrial furniture, and even more recently that the faces of boards which weren't visible were only given the minimum treatment (if it is a reference edge, it gets flat, but the smoothing plane and scrapers were skipped. Fatten and done!). I'm actually pretty excited about this concept! (Perhaps I need to get out more...) It does seem like a complete waste of time to 4 square a board and make it beautifully smooth on the inside of a cabinet case for example.

[Andrew Seemann]

I'm not swearing off power tools, but I am trying to get as much usable space out of my shop (which is half of a 2 car garage, and I need to be able to park a car in the other half)as possible. I've never owned a power planer/jointer, and now I'm taking a very hard look at everything in the garage for it to justify any precious wall or floor space it consumes. I want to keep the table saw, or perhaps replace with a smaller TS and/or bandsaw for ripping. But the TS I have now is just too big. The dust collector takes up a lot of room, and at present it is only used with the TS and router table. If I ditch the TS and Router Table, I get another 6SF of floor back from the dust collector I'd no longer need. And I'm just finding my interest in using the router table dwindling. But I've went way off topic here... ;)

It is relevant to the topic in that it is the reason for the topic and puts it in perspective. Swapping the router table for a lunchbox style planer is an option. Edge jointing without a jointer is pretty easy especially with hand planes and/or a table saw. Face jointing can be done well enough to run through a thickness planer with jack planes as well. Thickness planing on the other hand gets old pretty fast, especially as you get old:)

If I had to do a minimalist power tool set up with most of the work by hand, I would do a bandsaw (my preference is a 14" cast iron Delta style if I had only one bandsaw) and a thickness planer. Those two tools cover the grueling, time consuming part of stock prep the most. That said, I would keep a table saw if at all possible, as they are just so darned handy. Oddly enough, a hybrid or a cabinet style with a 30ish inch fence has about the smallest footprint of a decent saw. I'm assuming you would have the normal complement of powered hand tools for around the house usage like cordless drills, a circular saw, jig/scroll saw, ROS, and maybe a router.

Also, keep in mind if you do stock prep by hand, one of the most important tools in the operation is a decent bench with good options for holding boards.

[James Pallas]

Over the years and because of where I have lived I’ve seen a lot of antique furniture. Most of what I have seen has had some lesser finishes on what would be considered not visible in normal use. My opinion is when machinery came into use and speed was called for the so called not visible areas improved somewhat from jack planed to planer finished. In a factory it was easier and faster to train someone to run a planer on both sides than it would be to have someone with the knowledge to judge the lumber. It also allowed for the use of either side. Even in the early ages of machine work the unseen areas weren’t much to look at. Even today you can be severely judged for your work on interiors if not up to “studio” standards. Of course if your dovetails are absolute perfection all of the cross graining and nailed solid tops, stub tenons and swirling sander decoration is forgiven😉

[Jim Matthews]

Even today you can be severely judged for your work on interiors if not up to “studio” standards. Of course if your dovetails are absolute perfection all of the cross graining and nailed solid tops, stub tenons and swirling sander decoration is forgiven😉

Yep. Couldn't have said this better myself.

Kudos

[Mike Allen1010]

[QUOTE=Warren Mickley;3029120]In general, we cut all pieces to rough size before any planing. An inch longer than needed and 1/4 wider than needed would be typical. These numbers could be smaller if it enabled you to get an additional piece out of the board.

Flattening the face of an eight foot board takes away an inordinate amount of stock. A 1x12x96 board with a flat face may have less than 3/4 left while a flat 1x10x20 board from the same stock may have 15/16 left after flattening.

We first flatten a face side, then make an edge flat and square to the face. The sequence after this depends on specific usage, but for example if we are going to plane the end grain we do this before cutting to width.

Excellent question Erich. +1 to Warren's comments. For what it's worth, my general approach is:

1) Laying out all the rough lumber on any horizontal space available in your shop and using the cutting list and a crayon Mark out all the major components of the project. This is where you look for optimizing grain/figure; is there a particularly pretty piece of face grain that you'd like to feature a show surface? Do you want to "wrap" the grain so that it's continuous around the project? – E.g. left side matches the front, which matches the right side. If you're doing any frame and panel construction, can you find lumber that will accommodate both top and bottom rails or left and right stiles? They can be ripped to create complementary grain pattern that surrounds the panel etc.


2) rough crosscut major components +1 inch, ideally for both length and width. If there pieces that are gonna be glued up to make a panel or tabletop for example, +2 inches (allows for slacking case the glue up is out of square etc.). It is much easier to

3) face plane the show surfaces. 1 inch extra width allows you to rip off any spelching that might occur in planing cross grain to get a flat level surface. Clearly Mark this reference face surface.

4) joint and clearly Mark the reference long grain edge.

5) crosscut and shoot end grain to final length dimension working off reference edge.

6) rip and joint to final width dimension, again working off reference edge.

7) with multiple identical or adjacent components is were planning ahead really pays off. For example, drawer fronts or rails/styles for frame and panel construction, face plane the show surfaces before cutting to final dimensions ensures continuous grain pattern.

FWIW, I rarely plane non-show surfaces. I try and reference all joinery layout from the original reference edge and show surface.

Just my thoughts,YMMV.

Cheers, Mike

[Erich Weidner]

3) face plane the show surfaces. 1 inch extra width allows you to rip off any spelching that might occur in planing cross grain to get a flat level surface. Clearly Mark this reference face surface.

Interesting. I was just about to ask why folks were suggesting initially cutting the parts just a bit wide/long which means you end up crosscutting and possibly ripping twice. That makes sense.

[Warren Mickley]

Interesting. I was just about to ask why folks were suggesting initially cutting the parts just a bit wide/long which means you end up crosscutting and possibly ripping twice. That makes sense.

When cutting to length, we usually knife the board all the way around at both ends, then saw about 1/32 from the line at each end. We then put it in the vise, chamfer the far end to avoid splitting out, and plane to the line. When sawing it is nice to have some extra to saw off for best precision, and that is why we leave extra length at rough cutting. If we don't have plenty of length, we can avoid the sawing and just plane at one or both ends; this usually is more time.

If you rough cut the board 1/4 inch or so wider than finished dimension, then you can plane one edge flat, have some extra to make chamfers for planing the end grain, then plane to final width. If the original rough board is maybe only an inch wider than finished, we usually plane the face and edges for the whole width, then rip to about a 1/16 from the line, (or whatever you are comfortable with), and then plane to a gauge line. In both of these cases we only make one rip cut.

[Jim Koepke]

Interesting. I was just about to ask why folks were suggesting initially cutting the parts just a bit wide/long which means you end up crosscutting and possibly ripping twice. That makes sense.

Of course if one is making mortiise and tenon joints it is common practice to cut the piece with the mortises a bit longer allowing extra support at the end in order to avoid breaking out the ends.

jtk

[James Pallas]

Glad to see this thread. Machine prep and hand prep are very different. Warren’s experience is valuable here as are others. Hand preparing has its ways of avoiding a lot of time consuming processing that is easier to do by machine. When making single pieces, hand working can match or even better machine work as long as the hand tool worker does not try to match machine work processes.

[Michael J Evans]

Not to pull this thread off topic, but since we're talking about preparing stock by hand, what do you neanders consider flat enough across a face? I was preparing some small parts the other day 12"l x 8" wide and was setting my square from corner to corner to check flatness. I wasnt able to get it without some amount of light showing through. If the stock is small I generally hold my stock and square up to a shoplight and look for gaps. Back to my piece, I was able to get mostly flat, but was still able to insert a corner from standard notebook paper in places. Is that considered good enough, or too much? I feel like I want it perfect.
I see a lot of YouTube where the person is showing how to prepare a board and planes away, sets a square across it and claims it is deadflat.

[James Pallas]

Not to pull this thread off topic, but since we're talking about preparing stock by hand, what do you neanders consider flat enough across a face? I was preparing some small parts the other day 12"l x 8" wide and was setting my square from corner to corner to check flatness. I wasnt able to get it without some amount of light showing through. If the stock is small I generally hold my stock and square up to a shoplight and look for gaps. Back to my piece, I was able to get mostly flat, but was still able to insert a corner from standard notebook paper in places. Is that considered good enough, or too much? I feel like I want it perfect.
I see a lot of YouTube where the person is showing how to prepare a board and planes away, sets a square across it and claims it is deadflat.
Michael your probably close. The flatness is directly related to the thickness of the shaving. If the blade of your smoother is cambered than in theory the thinnest shaving you can take full width with no tracks is the depth of the camber. If the camber is .003 for example you are going to see that much light between the tops of the scallops. If you decided to try a straight iron you would leave tracks if you extended the iron enough to cut. If you round just the ends of the iron it will still form a scallop cut. If you took a cut on a board exactly the width of the iron with a straight iron you could , in theory, make it flatter. Hence a straight iron for edge work with a jointer plane.

[David Eisenhauer]

Another thing to consider is where the "flatness" is being considered. If the area is one where joinery work will take place, I try for flat-no light showing-flat/square. If it is across the middle of a panel, a little variance does not bother me.

[Warren Mickley]

Not to pull this thread off topic, but since we're talking about preparing stock by hand, what do you neanders consider flat enough across a face? I was preparing some small parts the other day 12"l x 8" wide and was setting my square from corner to corner to check flatness. I wasnt able to get it without some amount of light showing through. If the stock is small I generally hold my stock and square up to a shoplight and look for gaps. Back to my piece, I was able to get mostly flat, but was still able to insert a corner from standard notebook paper in places. Is that considered good enough, or too much? I feel like I want it perfect.
I see a lot of YouTube where the person is showing how to prepare a board and planes away, sets a square across it and claims it is deadflat.

Most of the U tube people are not very experienced, including a lot that are teaching classes and selling videos.

Yes, you want to be able to flatten a face. The idea is to evaluate the surface and plane only the high spots. If you have a low corner that dips and you keep planing that corner, things will not improve. If the edges are high, you want to plane the edges , not the middle. if the middle is high , don't plane the edges. If the two ends are low, start the plane a few inches in and lift it before you come to the other end. If there is wind, there will be two low corners. Don't plane them!

I use a beech double iron trying plane for this work. You can use a smoothing plane or a jointer etc. if that is what you have.