WoodCentral Forums

Est. 1998 — 27 years of woodworking knowledge

Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

Posts

Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#1

Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

I'm wondering if there is a problem with the terminology used between the US and Aus/UK regarding mild steels. In reading Mick's section on steels in his Infill book he states:

**** Don't use cold rolled steel, it is like trying to use the most case hardened piece of reaction wood. If available your best choice in mild steel is 1018 guage plate which is precision ground thus reducing the effort required to flatten the sides and sole of the finished plane. ****

The terms 'guage plate' and also 'bright mild steel' incidently, aren't used in the USA. It's my understanding that 1018 may be cold rolled or hot rolled. In the hot rolled state it's typically called A35 and is dark in colour and tends to have rounded edges and in general is not "precision". I believe "guage plate" is the same thing as 1018 cold rolled and as such recommending *against* cold rolled and *for* guage plate is contradictory. Is there anyone out there with *real* knowledge on the subject who could clear up my confusion?

Ken

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#2

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

Can't comment on the Aussie aspect of your post Ken, but IMO blanchard ground low carbon 1018 CR plate is likely the way to go, straight from the MSC catalog. It'll work easier than the hot rolled, which will have a skin. Maybe Mick got ahold of prehardened stock? In general, the low carbon 1018 is fairly free-machining.

Any of these can be precision ground if you feel like paying for it, but the blanchard grinding will at least ensure it's flat.

P.

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#3

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

Hey Paul!

You're definitely right about CR machining easier than HR, but it's my understanding that HR *works* better than CR - important for peining.

How *much* easier I don't know. I have ordered some 1018CR, A35(1018)HR, and 304 Stainless to play with as potential sides/bases. I was thinking 3/16 A35 sides with 1/4" 304 base might be a good combo.

Ken

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#4

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

Ken - do report back - I'm guessing the HR will "flake" on you, but let us know!

P.

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#5

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

I've made 2 planes so far and used CR on both, because of two things. One was economical( my employer has a large rack of all sizes. The other was the fact that it is already flat.

I agree with Stephan that it has internal stresses but it peined well and was easy to work with (no scale). I have seen these stresses rear their ugly head when I've needed 2 pieces of 1/4x 1X18 and "ripped" them from a piece of 1/4x2.

Yes, they was warped!!!!

It worked for me on the planes though.

Work Safe

George

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

#6

Re: Infill plane - HR vs cold rolled

I know Jim Wilson used cold rolled 1018 for my infills and he never had any problems at all. not sure where he got it from though.

👍 This page answered my questions

Your vote helps other woodworkers quickly find the answers and techniques that actually work in the shop.