Workbench height and width

[Brian Holcombe]

My logic in this respect is that when I’m pushing a plane I want my wrist to be straight. This is affected by workbench height, work piece height and plane height.

[fritz eng]

I am 6'-2" and my bench is 34 1/2". when determining the height of my bench, my thought was to shim UP (instead of cut down) so that I wouldn't have to disassemble the bench to remove material. I built an auxiliary mini-bench about 6" high to use when added height is needed for cutting dovetails.

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

[Steve Voigt]

My logic in this respect is that when I’m pushing a plane I want my wrist to be straight. This is affected by workbench height, work piece height and plane height.

Very true Brian, though I would stress that (as you imply) this is relative to normal planing position, i.e. leaning forward, legs bent and spread apart. Anyone assessing wrist position from a normal standing posture will be misled by several inches.
I notice that what the advocates of a tall bench have in common is that they mostly don't dimension stock by hand. For example Derek uses a combo machine and Sellers doesn't use any plane longer than a 4 or 5 because he claims (I am not making this up) that wood comes parallel and "square" from the lumberyard.
Of course there is nothing wrong with using machines but it sounds like the OP is dimensioning stock by hand, and doing that on a tall bench will be fatiguing.
To the OP, I suggest you use a kitchen counter and some boards to mock up a surface that's 1"-2" higher than your proposed bench height (to account for stock thickness). Place your biggest wooden plane on top and assume a proper planing posture, which means leaning into the work, using your weight and legs, not your upper body, to propel yourself forward. I suspect that if you do this on a 40" surface, your elbow will be tucked up under your arm like a bird's wing, which is not a position you'd want to plane from.
There are lots of ways to raise the work up for daintier tasks like sawing dovetails, but if your bench is too high for planing, you're stuck with it, unless you build a planing beam or saw the legs off your bench.

[Nicholas Lawrence]

Lots of good advice in this thread.

My current bench (the Nicholson design by Mike Siemsen) is shorter, narrower, and longer than what I started with. All in my view are improvements.

[William Fretwell]

Gene, I am 6’ 1” (used to be a bit taller), my bench is 38” tall. For you 40” sounds right. Low benches give you back ache and it’s harder to see what you are doing, especially dovetails.
As for width, my work surface is 22” deep, the back of the tool tray adds 7.5” to the available support. The width is plenty, I do have to reach a bit for the tool tray but that’s because it’s deep.
I have to chuckle a little as people reading that book often seem to make a Roubo bench afterwards. The smaller Tage Frid bench would seem to fit the space well and be much easier to move. Someone should ask Chris Swartz what height of coffee table he prefers the book to be displayed on!

[mike stenson]

I should have touched on this in my last post, but it's been a long weekend of dealing with rats.

My next bench will be a couple inches shorter, right now it's sized to my thumb joint (which is pretty much the old flat hand rule). It is 'comfortable enough' for planing, if I'm dimensioning I wish it was shorter (but it's passible, just less than ideal). As stated it'll be wider, but I'll have space all around it, and I can still easliy reach the width anyway. It'll also be longer. Since I have the space, I'm seriously considering making it 8', and without an end vise. I pretty much decided that I'll build a sharpening bench, that I will make taller as I find myself too hunched over. There are always trade offs.

This is like fitting a bicycle, general proportions and flexibility play into this. Making it completely unique per person.

[Gene Pavlovsky]

Thank you everyone for your advice, and for sharing your own bench dimensions. The advice still a bit conflicting, but I think I'm getting a bit closer
I've tried taking my biggest plane (a 26" wooden jointer) and assuming positions similar to the photos in the article Derek had posted earlier, and also described in Steve's post.
The plane's bottom was 100 cm (39 3/8") off the ground. If I just stand upright with the plane in my hands and my forearm parallel to the ground, it would be a good 4" higher (~110 cm). That does suggest a 39-40" workbench height?

About the width (depth)... It was mentioned that the extra width will come in handy for assembly (I only have space for one bench so it has to multi-task). 30" wide shouldn't present problems with regards to reach. Would it have any other drawbacks?

Mike, good that you mentioned bicycles. I like mountain biking a lot and if I believe all the articles I've read, I should have a slightly bigger frame and much lower handlebar. However I hated riding a bike that was set up like this, and am enjoying a slightly smaller frame and a tall handlebar I am pretty flexible though, when it comes to yoga etc, so leaning down is not a problem for me. Good luck with the rats!

[Gene Pavlovsky]

I have to chuckle a little as people reading that book often seem to make a Roubo bench afterwards. The smaller Tage Frid bench would seem to fit the space well and be much easier to move. Someone should ask Chris Swartz what height of coffee table he prefers the book to be displayed on!

William, I had this thought actually. After perusing various forums I got an impression that a Roubo bench became some kind of "fad". After reading Schwarz's book, I found several other types of benches not mentioned in his book, and many of them look interesting. However, I often suffer from indecision, when I'm given too many choices. Sometimes I make a joke that in Soviet Russia (where I was born), life was much simpler, because many things were only available in one (maybe two or three) models, and people would be happy if they could just get that, and they would manage to live with that model's limitations and peculiarities. But these days when I need to buy something, I go to an online shop and find such a multitude of choices that I just get discouraged and decide to leave it for later. So, when reading Schwarz's book, I thought I would pick one design, and stick with it. I quite liked the plans for a knockdown Nicholson bench, and it would be handy when we decide to move to another place (we live in a rental apartment). However there's something nice about the Roubo design which attracts me. I guess I am just too tired of wobbly mass produced furniture that I've experienced during my life. It just would be nice to have something extremely solid and overbuilt, that won't budge no matter what I do at the bench. Again, perhaps these are my Soviet roots talking. In the USSR many things were over-engineered with 2-3x margin of safety. Not like modern stuff...

[Oskar Sedell]

Brian, a straight wrist sounds good, but I have problem visualising how this straight line relates to the workpiece, benchtop or to horizontal? Could you elaborate?

Gene: regarding a wide top. I too would love it as an assembly surface, but would also have concerns regarding flatness. A narrower bench top would move less and be easier to flatten. In the end most boards one is planing only need the 20 cm or so that are closest to you.

I seem to remember now that my bench is about 85 cm high.

[jeff norris 2011]

Have you considered both a short and tall bench in the same shop? Build your bench at the lower range, which is great for heavy planing etc and then build a moxon vice to bring fine detail work higher up.

just a thought.

[Derek Cohen]

Brian, a straight wrist sounds good, but I have problem visualising how this straight line relates to the workpiece, benchtop or to horizontal? Could you elaborate?.......

Oskar, I think that Brian and I are saying the same thing.

There are a number of photos in my article that explain and demonstrate how we hold and push a plane: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes3.html

Here’s one of David Charlesworth (which is echoed by other well-known woodworkers) ... forearm is parallel to the bench top, and via the wrist/palm, this drives the plane from low down ...



Now this is what happens when your bench is too low! A photo of Chris Schwarz



Guess who is putting more strain on their back ...?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[steven c newman]

I have the belt buckle rule bench....top of the bench is right at my belt buckle....Not sure where the OP's buckle winds up...I'm 5'11"

Span? Was more about what size plank I had for the top.....IF I can reach the far side with ease, no stretching out, needing the other hand to balance me..seems to work. Maybe from elbow to the "Social" fingertip. aka, cubit.

Hold a plane, like you were using it....have somebody else there, to measure from the floor to the plane's sole....easy as that.

[Scott Winners]

Lots of good advice already. I don't disagree with any of it. I do guess Ken Hatch must be out on the golf course or at the beach this week--- I just got back from Hawaii myself.

The thing Ken and I see eye to eye on (that he hasn't posted already) is your first bench isn't going to be your last one. Once you get this one built and use it a while you will, via personal experience, cone up with some things to do a little differently on your next build.

The other part is what are you going to be doing or making at this bench? CS does go into this a bit in his book, at least the second one, about how Americans seem to want one bench to do everything but if you are going to do a lot of dovetailing the perfect bench height is different than if you are going to do a lot of planing with wooden planes. And etcetera ad nauseum.

I do think it is a good idea to make your height at the top of the reasonable for you range with the stretchers up off the floor some so you could shorten the legs without having to re-engineer the whole bench.

The other thing is once you have a bench and start working at it you'll either be delighted with it or change something for the next build. I like having four feet (I know, it sounds like a lot) all the way around my bench and I like to be able to get a thing clamped down and get at it form every angle. I personally don't use a tool well, but many may folks use then to advantage.

Sooner or later you will have to just build it.

[Oskar Sedell]

Derek, thank you! So straight means horizontal. I guess I have to watch my stance, it could be that my planing resembles the bottom pic more than the top.

[Charles Guest]

Lots of good advice already. I don't disagree with any of it. I do guess Ken Hatch must be out on the golf course or at the beach this week--- I just got back from Hawaii myself.

The thing Ken and I see eye to eye on (that he hasn't posted already) is your first bench isn't going to be your last one. Once you get this one built and use it a while you will, via personal experience, cone up with some things to do a little differently on your next build.

The other part is what are you going to be doing or making at this bench? CS does go into this a bit in his book, at least the second one, about how Americans seem to want one bench to do everything but if you are going to do a lot of dovetailing the perfect bench height is different than if you are going to do a lot of planing with wooden planes. And etcetera ad nauseum.

I do think it is a good idea to make your height at the top of the reasonable for you range with the stretchers up off the floor some so you could shorten the legs without having to re-engineer the whole bench.

The other thing is once you have a bench and start working at it you'll either be delighted with it or change something for the next build. I like having four feet (I know, it sounds like a lot) all the way around my bench and I like to be able to get a thing clamped down and get at it form every angle. I personally don't use a tool well, but many may folks use then to advantage.

Sooner or later you will have to just build it.

The Schwarz quote makes no sense. If you're making furniture entirely by hand, planed then joined, then joinery of some sort will inevitably ensue. Craftsmen did not have two benches and all craftsmen did not have Moxon vises. All that said, most guys didn't live much less work to the age of the 'experts' opining now -- it was more or less a young man's game and those who did work to a relatively advanced age, in a busy shop, hadn't had to plane significant amounts of lumber in decades. It's a quandary that might be best solved by getting or staying in shape. There is no perfect bench height for all the work you'll do building a piece of furniture entirely by hand from rough timber. If most of your stock is processed by machine, and you're worried about how a little jointing and clean up planing will play with your back, then it may be time for another hobby.