Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 63

Thread: How square is square enough?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Lake Gaston, Henrico, NC
    Posts
    8,973
    I think the name of that Japanese jointer is quite fitting, especially if pronounced in Southern American English.

  2. #47
    Didn’t even notice that. Now I just gotta have one mostly because such I’m such a crass wise sass punk. Or maybe I’m just CUNY like you..

    How can I live without the opportunity to show everyone when the visit my shop my giant Fukami. Of course if someone was gonna have a giant Fukumi in theirs shop it would be me..

    Fu
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom M King View Post
    I think the name of that Japanese jointer is quite fitting, especially if pronounced in Southern American English.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,389
    Oh and while i am at it; back in the old days before "Craftsman combo squares" The Inca seemed to take precision seriously. So apparently it;s not a new thing. 4.jpg

    Some people get it and some don't, i guess.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,389
    Hi Patrick.

    Always glad to hear from you.

    I will check out Howard.



    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Walsh View Post
    Mark,

    You just became my second hero of the day next to Howard Stern.

    Go take a listen. Hopefully o don’t make a mortal enemy after you do but if I do so be it lol..

    Oh and by the way that jointer!

    And why Im on a roll you really do some crap work.....

  5. #50
    Wait aren’t we talking about squares.

    So why are you posting pictures of rock, not one of such to be square. You would use a square for that work lol..

    And aren’t the Inca like some tribe in Mexico.

    Oh crap here I go again...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hennebury View Post
    Oh and while i am at it; back in the old days before "Craftsman combo squares" The Inca seemed to take precision seriously. So apparently it;s not a new thing. 4.jpg

    Some people get it and some don't, i guess.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Posts
    208
    Blog Entries
    1
    This thread went sideways. But for me, square enough is if you are pleased with the job you did. Worrying about thousandths just for the sake of it is silly. If you joints don’t have gaps and the work looks good, who cares? And to answer the initial question, yes that would be acceptable. If your striving for further perfection, work with metal, wood moves anyway.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Hilo, Hawaii
    Posts
    208
    Blog Entries
    1
    I guess I should clarify. No one is gonna critique your work for something out of square or out of line if the naked eye can’t see it. Do you imagine guest to your house will judge you that your dining table is 0.002 out of line? How would they even know? Feeler gauges and dinner? Hah! So take it for what it is. At the same time, i realize this is a work bench, not a dining table, but you will dent it if any work is done on it, it’ll get humid and dry with seasons and affect for change than that. if you want to strive for perfection, there is nothing wrong with that. But it’s it absolutely necessary for every single project? Of course not.
    Last edited by Zac wingert; 05-16-2020 at 1:28 AM.

  8. #53
    Actually, metal has an annoying habit of moving too At one of the shops I worked at, the foreman would freak out if someone left the good 24" B&S square in the sun. But yes, these threads about precision tend to go down the rabbit hole fast. And that is from a former machinist (and woodworker who uses calipers and a dial indicator to set up tenon jigs).

    If the original poster is still reading this thread, assuming your square is in good condition, yes, the out of square is probably caused by the cutting load being on one side of the blade. For thinner wood it usually isn't an issue, but with a blade sticking up 2 or 3 inches, even with a softer wood like poplar, you can get some deflection. I normally try to rip with at least an eighth on the waste side when I can. Rotating the piece the same direction can compound the error.

    As for 0.002" out of square across 3 inches, there aren't many things in woodworking that would require that level of accuracy. I would say a workbench leg isn't one of them.
    Last edited by Andrew Seemann; 05-16-2020 at 11:58 PM.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    1,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Seemann View Post
    Actually, metal has an annoying habit of moving too At one of the shops I worked at, the foreman would freak out if someone left the good 24" B&S square in the sun. But yes, these threads about precision tend to go down the rabbit hole fast. And that is from a former machinist (and woodworker who uses calipers and a dial indicator so set up tenon jigs).

    If the original poster is still reading this thread, assuming your square is in good condition, yes, the out of square is probably caused by the cutting load being on one side of the blade. For thinner wood it usually isn't an issue, but with a blade sticking up 2 or 3 inches, even with a softer wood like poplar, you can get some deflection. I normally try to rip with at least an eighth on the waste side when I can. Rotating the piece the same direction can compound the error.

    As for 0.002" out of square across 3 inches, there aren't many things in woodworking that would require that level of accuracy. I would say a workbench leg isn't one of them.

    Agreed - 100%.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Inkerman, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,389
    Original question: "Bottom line. 0.002” over 3”. Is that square enough for you?"

    Simple Answer: Yes...No... Maybe...depends.


    The reason the thread goes sideways is that people make statements that offer their opinions as if they are facts, then they get blow-back.

    If you answer, yes that's plenty good enough for me, or no I like to do better, Or it depends on the application etc..you wont get any
    arguments.

    The arguments start when people make statements about what, others can and cannot do, based on their own limitations, or lack of knowledge.

    When people make statements about the limits of machinery, joinery, measuring and marking and fitting of wood, that are incorrect, they will get arguments from those of us that know different.







  11. #56
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Modesto, CA, USA
    Posts
    9,876
    Quality micrometers have rubber grips on the frame. It is not for comfort. It is a feature.
    My answer is , as much as possible, inset one piece from the other at least 1/8 inch. that way a few thousandths does not show. My tables or chairs the apron is not flush it sits back a fraction from the legs etc. Frame and panel construction ignores this as well. This is the reason for raised panels and beveled glass. Just take the edge down close enough to fit and let the field be a little off.
    Bill D

  12. #57
    I'm glad everyone has enjoyed the this thread, sideways or not. For anyone still interested - Last night I milled the vertical leg members for this bench base, and used my planer to dimension width - results were more accurate than my tablesaw, so thanks for all those who suggested such.

    I truly appreciate the tight tolerances of "fine woodworking" and I strive to be as accurate as possible. But I guess that's the challenge and learning curve of woodworking, for me at least. My first woodworking projects were using home depot pine boards and dowels. Downright embarrassing compared to the pieces I've built in the years following. I'm an amateur, no doubt. But questioning 0.002" over 3" is what helps me grow as a woodworker. For the current project, I think I'm happy with the level of accuracy.

    I agree with Zac that worrying about 0.002" just for the sake of it not being 0.001" or better is useless. It's sometimes hard for me to fine the area in between "good enough" and "it could, theoretically, be better".

    But reading through this thread and having some of you validate the fact that these measurements will not ultimately affect the function of the bench, I'm happy with it. Next time maybe it'll be tighter though. We'll see.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,252
    Blog Entries
    7
    That is a good outlook! For me, this is part intellectual pursuit, so finding out why and improving is part of the enjoyment. Each project completed gives me a chance to review what I could be doing better.

    I used to work for a place that sold danish furniture, one brand we sold manufactured furniture designed by Carl Hansen. I was probably 7-8 years into woodworking at the time and upon inspecting one of Wegner’s chairs with a woodworkers eye, I could not find a defect. Perfect wood, perfect finishing, perfect joinery, tight laminations and high quality design which utilized compound splays to make a sound structure, worst of all it was affordably priced.

    I went home and realized that at the time I could accomplish none of those things to the same level of quality. At that point I decided I better start making improvements.
    Last edited by Brian Holcombe; 05-16-2020 at 1:01 PM.
    Bumbling forward into the unknown.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    9,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Holcombe View Post
    That is a good outlook! For me, this is part intellectual pursuit, so finding out why and improving is part of the enjoyment. Each project completed gives me a chance to review what I could be doing better.

    I used to work for a place that sold danish furniture, one brand we sold manufactured furniture designed by Carl Hansen. I was probably 7-8 years into woodworking at the time and upon inspecting one of Wegner’s chairs with a woodworkers eye, I could not find a defect. Perfect wood, perfect finishing, perfect joinery, tight laminations and high quality design which utilized compound splays to make a sound structure, worst of all it was affordably priced.

    I went home and realized that at the time I could accomplish none of those things to the same level of quality. At that point I decided I better start making improvements.
    Brian, you recall that I made a damn close copy of Wegner's "The Chair" using just hand tools for all the joinery and shaping (only a bandsaw for roughing out). The end result looks identical to the non-woodworking eye. For some reason those who see them together (as I have an original The Chair at home) prefer my version. I suspect it is all the irregularities and (hopefully) minor errors that contribute to ... let's call it .. warmth. But the absolute tautness of the factory-made joinery and parts is amazing. At the time of the build I found, viewed and shared many of the videos made at the factory. They used copy lathes for many years. I guess that they now CNC everything. And it is eye-opening to know that Hans built every prototype with hand tools!

    Which is which?



    For the lighter side of accuracy, I am always grounded by this now classic from Chris Wong, The Magic Square ....



    Regards from Perth

    Derek

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,252
    Blog Entries
    7
    Cnc in and of itself does not make a perfect product, it helps but it alone doesn’t do it. In fact factory furniture is not all perfect either, they can just as well build the same error in every time.

    It still requires a commitment to making those errors as small as possible.
    Last edited by Brian Holcombe; 05-17-2020 at 8:23 AM.
    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
  •