Originally Posted by
Normand Leblanc
I was also surprised. I was thinking that 30 maybe more would be the best angle.
Well, that is one mark of a good test, when the results surprise you or seem a little counterintuitive; it suggests that you didn't let your own bias control the test. But you repeated the test and got (basically) the same results, which suggests to me that the test is valid and useful.
I see some people complaining that the test is not "real world" enough. The truth is that there never has been, and probably never will be, a test that exactly duplicates real working experiences. You always give up a little reality, in order to simplify and quantify. But that doesn't mean that the test isn't useful. I think what's really going on is that these people feel threatened by data that contradicts their entrenched outlook. Oh well, too bad for them.
My one caveat is that you are taking thin shavings in softwood; I wonder if the results would be the same with harder woods and/or thicker shavings. I suspect not, but I don't really know.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of your data.
"For me, chairs and chairmaking are a means to an end. My real goal is to spend my days in a quiet, dustless shop doing hand work on an object that is beautiful, useful and fun to make." --Peter Galbert