Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 44 of 44

Thread: An alternate approach to controlling tear-out.

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    407
    Double irons work!

    Birdseye Maple, Curly Maple, Baked hard Birdseye Maple. A Variety of random Hardwoods, nice shavings. Supersurfacer*. ( *handplane with a power feeder)


    IMG_4015.JPGIMG_4018.JPGIMG_4019.JPGIMG_4020.JPGIMG_4021.JPGSAM_1812.JPGrsz_shavings18.jpgshavings1a.jpg

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    407
    A cheap handplane that works. Easy to adjust the blade depth, ( smack with a hammer) easy to adjust the lateral alignment ( smack with a hammer) easy to adjust the chipbreaker to blade edge setting ( smack with a hammer)

    Did i mention ZERO backlash.

    SAM_1294.JPG

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,458
    Hi Mark

    How are you?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,458
    Interesting how a thread about high cutting angles morphs into a defence of the double iron!

    High cutting angles and the double iron can be complimentary - there are areas where a high cutting angle is very relevant. Where a double iron cannot go. As I pointed out earlier, ploughing and beading are two examples. Another is making mouldings in less-than-ideal timber.

    Perhaps the original topic has value?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    407
    Derek,

    Back bevels, high bed angles, close throat openings and chipbreakers work to help prevent tearout and leave a fine finished surface.

    As far as chipbreakers, I am just stating the facts as i know them, for those that don't know.

    I don't know anything about high bed angle planes, as i have never owned or used one. I have experimented with back bevels, and had some success. Mostly i have used standard planes with chipbreakers and i know that they work. I have used supersurfacers with lower bed angles and chipbreakers, and i know that they work, So i never miss an opportunity to let people know that they work, as many still don't know. Usually in these threads questions will always come up about if they work at all, how well they work, and do they work in difficult woods.
    Chipbreakers work to help control tearout and can be adjusted for heavy or light shavings, and work in a a hard and softwood, they work to prevent tearout in knarly woods and when planing against the grain.

    250 years after the chipbreaker was invented and it still needs defending and explaining, so those of us who know have a duty to inform those that don't. Not looking for an argument, not putting down high bed angles or back bevels, just clearly stating the facts and presenting the proof.

    Tight throat opening and a heavy shaving, and a video of a blade with zero clearance (relief angle) blade to sole.

    Born to Tinker.
    SAM_1305.JPGSAM_1293.JPG





    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Interesting how a thread about high cutting angles morphs into a defence of the double iron!

    High cutting angles and the double iron can be complimentary - there are areas where a high cutting angle is very relevant. Where a double iron cannot go. As I pointed out earlier, ploughing and beading are two examples. Another is making mouldings in less-than-ideal timber.

    Perhaps the original topic has value?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hennebury View Post
    Derek,

    Back bevels, high bed angles, close throat openings and chipbreakers work to help prevent tearout and leave a fine finished surface.

    As far as chipbreakers, I am just stating the facts as i know them, for those that don't know.

    I don't know anything about high bed angle planes, as i have never owned or used one. I have experimented with back bevels, and had some success. Mostly i have used standard planes with chipbreakers and i know that they work. I have used supersurfacers with lower bed angles and chipbreakers, and i know that they work, So i never miss an opportunity to let people know that they work, as many still don't know. Usually in these threads questions will always come up about if they work at all, how well they work, and do they work in difficult woods.
    Chipbreakers work to help control tearout and can be adjusted for heavy or light shavings, and work in a a hard and softwood, they work to prevent tearout in knarly woods and when planing against the grain.

    250 years after the chipbreaker was invented and it still needs defending and explaining, so those of us who know have a duty to inform those that don't. Not looking for an argument, not putting down high bed angles or back bevels, just clearly stating the facts and presenting the proof.

    Tight throat opening and a heavy shaving, and a video of a blade with zero clearance (relief angle) blade to sole.

    Born to Tinker.
    Mark, there is no need to defend the double iron, at least on this forum. Many, such as myself, are firm supporters. My comment was that a thread about high cutting angles is useful. If anything, I feel that I am the defensive one since I expect someone to challenge the value of a high cutting angle. It has is place, which is what I am emphasising.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    6,458
    Here is some work I did today with high cutting angles ...

    I needed to make slips for the drawers in the table I am building. The wood used is Tasmanian Blue Gum. It is very interlocked and a poor choice. One really should choose straight-grained timber. However, I am using it for the drawer bottoms, as it is a good tonal match for the quarter-sawn Tasmanian Oak drawer sides.

    The slips required two processes: firstly, a 3/16" bead was shaped using the Veritas Combination Plane ...


    Here's a look at the wood ...



    The beading blade has a 30 degree bevel and a 15 degree back bevel (for a 60 degree cutting angle).

    The resulting bead ...





    Then a 1/8" groove was ploughed with the Small Plow. This blade also had a 15 degree back bevel (and 30 degree bevel) for a 60 degree cutting angle ...



    The resulting groove ...



    The completed slip ....



    The 1/8" groove for the 1/4" drawer bottom is facing outward.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    2,050
    When working difficult wood, I need to spend more time fiddling with throat opening and chipbreaker settings. I will add that based on what others have suggested here, I put a 50 degree bevel on my #62, and have been very pleased with the results. Iíve never compared the surface with a well set up standard frog double iron plane surface, but at least the tear out is all but eliminated.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    19,522
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Interesting how a thread about high cutting angles morphs into a defence of the double iron!

    High cutting angles and the double iron can be complimentary - there are areas where a high cutting angle is very relevant. Where a double iron cannot go. As I pointed out earlier, ploughing and beading are two examples. Another is making mouldings in less-than-ideal timber.

    Perhaps the original topic has value?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    Most of my molding planes have their irons bedded at high angles. Among the hollows & rounds, some are at a higher angles than others. Occasionally some have been found with what looks to be an intentional back bevel. Some others look like the back bevel was from someone being a bit sloppy at the sharpening stones.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  10. #40
    The double iron does need its defence IMO, as none of the top viewed youtube celebrities use it, thus leading many newbies down a path of expense, hence the obligation for some folk to make it known, Yes, Derek has posted here many times about it, as this forum can be very busy, this might go unnoticed, nevermind the weird scrambling of posts, that happens frequently.
    Not trying to start an argument, just helping some folks from getting in bother with the spouse.

    Stewie, it might have been a good idea to show a photo of the cap iron in use, if you wanted to exclude the cap iron effect from the conversation, it's not like you guessed this would not happen.
    So, it seems the original thread has much to offer, if its about planes what don't have a double iron.

    Has anyone noticed any difference on say a plough plane with a back bevel, and a higher angle plough plane without one?
    That would make a healthy argument if there was to be one, and we might learn something from it.

    All the best
    Tom

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Here is some work I did today with high cutting angles ...

    I needed to make slips for the drawers in the table I am building. The wood used is Tasmanian Blue Gum. It is very interlocked and a poor choice. One really should choose straight-grained timber. However, I am using it for the drawer bottoms, as it is a good tonal match for the quarter-sawn Tasmanian Oak drawer sides.

    The slips required two processes: firstly, a 3/16" bead was shaped using the Veritas Combination Plane ...


    Here's a look at the wood ...



    The beading blade has a 30 degree bevel and a 15 degree back bevel (for a 60 degree cutting angle).

    The resulting bead ...





    Then a 1/8" groove was ploughed with the Small Plow. This blade also had a 15 degree back bevel (and 30 degree bevel) for a 60 degree cutting angle ...



    The resulting groove ...



    The completed slip ....



    The 1/8" groove for the 1/4" drawer bottom is facing outward.

    Regards from Perth

    Derek

    I never thought about back bevel on my combo plane irons. That a great tip that Iíve never put two and two together.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    5,975
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hennebury View Post
    Double irons work!

    Birdseye Maple, Curly Maple, Baked hard Birdseye Maple. A Variety of random Hardwoods, nice shavings. Supersurfacer*. ( *handplane with a power feeder)


    IMG_4015.JPGIMG_4018.JPGIMG_4019.JPGIMG_4020.JPGIMG_4021.JPGSAM_1812.JPGrsz_shavings18.jpgshavings1a.jpg
    Chris ran a few boards for me to see the super surfacer in action. These are amazing machines.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    5,975
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Mueller View Post
    When working difficult wood, I need to spend more time fiddling with throat opening and chipbreaker settings. I will add that based on what others have suggested here, I put a 50 degree bevel on my #62, and have been very pleased with the results. I’ve never compared the surface with a well set up standard frog double iron plane surface, but at least the tear out is all but eliminated.
    I like to think if it as my toolbox of technique. My go-to is to set the chipper but I keep everything in mind for odd circumstances where it is needed.

    As example, I made rails for shoji with the tsukeko molded into the profile. I cleaned up the facets with a shoulder plane. I increased the bevel angle until the the shavings came out clean and free of tear out. I’d rather have the sheen produced by a 38 degree bevel and a chip breaker but I don’t have double iron joinery planes.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    5,975
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Cohen View Post
    Stewie, either you need to read my post again, or take your medication Do you not recognise when I am defending the thread you started?

    Regards from Perth

    Derek
    Quote Originally Posted by Stewie Simpson View Post
    Fred; the insinuation from Derek's comment was aimed at questioning the value of the topic I raised. End of discussion.

    best regards Stewie;
    Please put this feud to rest.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •