Which mallet and why

[Warren Mickley]

http://www.closegrain.com/2013/04/ar...e-popular.html

I "Pitiful" but was told it was too short.

[Rafael Herrera]

Hanging out at woodworking forums instead of at the workshop says something about us. Some of us, it seems, find argument and opinion more entertaining than cutting dovetails.

Another one to add to the list above is:

"I would rather woodwork than talk about (fill in the blank)"

[Derek Cohen]

http://www.closegrain.com/2013/04/ar...e-popular.html

Brilliant article!

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

http://www.closegrain.com/2013/04/ar...e-popular.html

By Stanley and Preston?

jtk

[Justin Allen]

I don't think anyone has been suggesting that math will tell us what is the "best", that's absurd.

At least that's what I understand from reading the thread. If that's not the case, you should at least quote the post that you're responding to.

There have been some incorrect comparisons of "delivering momentum" or "delivering energy". Trying to understand what is going on satisfies curiosity, it might not make one a better woodworker, but it might stop one from thinking nonsense like start using a sledge hammer or thinking that because "all wood is different" there's no point in analyzing this.

To generalize, a little understanding is always helpful, specially when deciding on a choice. There are a lot of people that use their purported expertise to dispense advise. In many cases with other motives, sometimes commercial gain without disclosure or simply fame and recognition (barf).

Rafael

I think the math is important. Not in the absolute numbers sense, but in relationships and correlations that, once understood, can be used in addition to experience to help steer decisions. These discussions also (I think) help us who have studied this stuff at one point in our lives to get a little refresh and apply it, as well as fill in the holes where our memory has lapsed.

For instance, I knew that momentum was important, and went on to say that it was the most important. In reality, the most important part is the transfer of energy into work done at the cutting tip of the tool, and what yields that (which many were alluding to this thead).

What I came up with was that, for both completely elastic (hammer and chisel only contact at an instant) and inelastic (hammer and chisel "stick" together) collisions (and treating both hammer and chisel as rigid bodies), the hammer moving faster with less mass would transfer more energy into the "system" (chisel or hammer/chisel combo). Both of these scenarios, though, yield less than 100% energy transfer into the "system" except for the case of an elastic collision between the hammer and chisel of equal mass (as Johannes mentioned). Of course, real world energy losses would reduce the overall energy transfer as well.

So this is all fine and good. It doesn't take into account your body's capabilities, but it does let you know that if you can generate the same momentum by swinging a lighter mallet faster, with control, you'll probably get more work done at the cutting edge.

It also got me thinking of other ways this line of thinking could be applied, as several have alluded to in this thread as well, which is adjusting the chisel mass to that of the mallet (or the mallet to the chisel) to achieve a higher energy transfer efficiency. Related to this is how the mallet reacts after the impact. A mallet lighter than the chisel would cause the mallet to bounce back more after impact, generating more loading on the wrist/arm (I don't think many use mallets lighter than the chisels, but maybe there are some users of really big chisels out there?)

[Edward Weber]

When selecting a mallet to drive a chisel, weight is important. Let's look at the math without going deep.

There are two assets a mallet can bring to the work, Energy and Momentum.

Energy = Mass times Velocity squared. Energy = M V V (neglecting the constant 1/2 for this non numerical discussion)

Momentum = Mass times Velocity. Momentum = M V

Now let's go to the shop for an experiment. We'll cut across the grain.

Lets hit with a light and fast mallet, high energy. Fibers are cut but not deeply.

Now a heavy slow mallet, velocity is less important. More fibers are cut. Hmmm why is that?


I believe this can be understood without invoking integral calculus but have hit a wall here.

I asked the AI chatbot, Is a heavy or light mallet better to drive a chisel
Answer
"When it comes to driving a chisel, the ideal weight of a mallet depends on various factors, including the type of wood being worked on and personal preference. However, here are some general guidelines to consider:

1. Light Mallet: A light mallet is typically preferred when working with softer woods or when more delicate control is necessary. It allows for better precision and reduces the risk of overstriking or damaging the workpiece. Lighter mallets are often used for finer detail work or when working on intricate carvings.

2. Heavy Mallet: A heavier mallet is generally better suited for driving chisels into harder or denser woods. The additional weight can help transfer more force to the chisel, allowing for more efficient wood removal. Heavy mallets are commonly used in tasks like timber framing or heavy-duty joinery, where greater impact is required to drive the chisel into the workpiece effectively.

It's important to note that the weight of the mallet should be chosen based on your physical abilities and comfort level. Using a mallet that is too heavy for you could lead to fatigue or loss of control, which might compromise the quality of your work. Similarly, a mallet that is too light may not provide enough force for driving the chisel effectively.

Ultimately, finding the right balance between the weight of the mallet and the task at hand is crucial. I recommend experimenting with different mallet weights, considering the specific characteristics of the wood and the desired outcome, until you find the optimal choice for your particular woodworking needs."

[James Pallas]

There is a Marketing/woodworking guru who created a need made a product and sold it for 10 times the price. The infamous lump hammer is all you will ever need. 😎
Jim

[mike stenson]

Whether you’re grumpy this morning or not, you should be able to see that in Tom’s original post he asked a question about the physics of mallets. What followed was a discussion about the physics of mallets. In what way was that discussion off-topic for the thread?

Michael, I was referring to you being grumpy. Not me.

[Jim Koepke]

I don't think anyone has been suggesting that math will tell us what is the "best", that's absurd.

…

To generalize, a little understanding is always helpful, specially when deciding on a choice. There are a lot of people that use their purported expertise to dispense advise. In many cases with other motives, sometimes commercial gain without disclosure or simply fame and recognition (barf).

Rafael

Agree.

IMO, how it feels in the hand and doing the work is a better gauge than all the math formulae ever written.

jtk

[Rick Dettinger]

It doesn't take much experience to figure out how important a heavy mallet is to making mortises and such. I feel sorry for Sellers and his ilk who try to make mortises with dinky mallets.

I think it's a good thing that Paul Sellers uses a lighter mallet for chopping mortices, since he uses the same bench chisels that he uses for making dovetails. Likely saves chipped or broken chisels that way.

73,
Rick

[Warren Mickley]

[QUOTE=Rick Dettinger;3280304]I think it's a good thing that Paul Sellers uses a lighter mallet for chopping mortices, since he uses the same bench chisels that he uses for making dovetails. Likely saves chipped or broken chisels that way.
/QUOTE]

As someone who has used mortise chisels for over 45 years, it is obvious that Sellers was trained to make mortises by machine. We have used mortise chisels for a very long time. See Felibien (1676). I believe I have seen mortise chisels from the bronze age.

A bevel edge chisel has no problem being struck by a heavy mallet. For wider mortises we bore out the waste and then chisel to the lines. There is no problem doing this with a heavy mallet and a bevel edged chisel, whether the chisel is 19th century (butcher) or 21st century (Aldi). No chipping.

[Richard Hutchings]

"it is obvious that Sellers was trained to make mortises by machine. "

That's an odd thing to say, at least to me. I can't imagine how you came to that conclusion.

[Michael Bulatowicz]

"it is obvious that Sellers was trained to make mortises by machine. "

That's an odd thing to say, at least to me. I can't imagine how you came to that conclusion.

I can’t speak for Warren, but Paul Sellers can speak for himself: his apprenticeship included machine mortising to some significant degree. I don’t recall any description of how he learned to mortise by hand. https://paulsellers.com/2018/09/geor...ns-the-tables/

[Richard Hutchings]

I just don't understand how one has to do with the other. You can't learn to make hand cut mortises by using a mortise machine, I don't care how many years you use one.

[steven c newman]

Because, during Sellers Apprenticeship he was taught how to mortise by hand.....IF one would care to read his blogs about that time...

"Those that dwell in the Past, are apt to repeat it.." as the saying goes...

Maybe Warren was training REAL Neanderthals on chopping mortises with stone Mallets?

FWIW: I have been doing woodworking since Junior High School....back in the mid 60s...and then 4 yrs in the Ind.Arts classes...I just might have learned a few things...maybe?