The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Another View 

Paul in NJ

>

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

VTAndy4

>Very nice! I also like the way the images pop up in the new forum format.

-Andy

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Wiley Horne

>Paul,

That's a fascinating plane. Bevel-down, low-angle mitering plane, long enough to joint end grain, but light enough to be used one-handed. Was there anything in particular that got you interested in making this olde-fashioned plane?

Moxon talks about how they were used freehand on smaller pieces to clean the sawtracks off of beveled and mitered surfaces--the work in one hand and the plane in the other.

Thanks for sharing, Wiley

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Paul in NJ

>"Was there anything in particular that got you interested in making this olde-fashioned plane"?

I am interested in traditional tools and methods of building furniture. The 18th century craftsman did not have the infill miters or block planes but they had these perhaps. Not sure how common they were. I have never come across one of these planes at auctions, tool sales, antique stores, or flea markets. Figured I would have to build one in order to try one. I like the idea of the bevel DOWN low angle. It seems like it would have the advantage of easier edge maintenance over bevel up types.

Paul Dzioba

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>It seems like it would have the advantage of easier edge maintenance over bevel up types.

Could you explain that one to me? I don't get it here...

Thnx,

DC

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Paul in NJ

>My bevel up blades seem to need more honing or lapping of the back to get past the wear spot opposite the bevel. Or...perhaps it is just me!

Paul Dzioba

Very nice job Paul!

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond, CA

>Turned out real nice. It will look real good sitting next to your homespun plow plane. Of coruse we must see shavnings, now get to it and show us some!

Well done!

Dominic Greco in Richboro PA

>Paul,

Awesome looking plane! Nicely executed and a joy to look at. I bet it handles like a dream.

See ya around,

Dominic

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Stephen Shepherd in the State of Deseret

>Paul,

Your plane looks great, like an eighteenth century example, with the heavy camfers. I don't know if you are going for a reproduction look or not but the handle looks a little bulky. Maybe it is for comfort, but with the great look of the rest of the plane the handle does looks a bit modern.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Stephen

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>I heard that mentioned about bevel up planes before. Never noticed it myself, but then it could be me...

In any case, with the ruler trick (which I use) that's not an issue anyway...

Cheers,

DC

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>Spruce up that tote and chamfer the edges of the wedge and you'll have a C&W. Great work.

Pam

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>Nice job, Paul! I looked at the picture before reading the text and thought Dominy Strike Block right away. Same dimensions, same 40 degree angle etc. I think the Dominy plane has a somewhat more stylish handle, although the picture in the book is taken from an awkward angle and hard to read. Similar handles can be seen somewhat better in the Fore Plane (70) and the Round plane (88). I think the handle on the strike block plane is from the same pattern, but has lost a little on the back of the tote.

Interestingly, the Dominy plane (made by Nathaniel V in 1793) has a double iron, which doesn't quite jibe with our ideas of the strike block's uses for end grain and mitering. Is that what you were thinking? Also I have long wondered if the handle mortise on the Dominy plane extended to the very back of the plane because the handle is so far back. What did you do?

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>As Steve Elliot has mentioned, the wear bevel, which is a primary contributer to dulling, requires roughly twice as much honing on a bevel up plane as a bevel down plane. The reason is that the wear bevel occurs on the lower face of the iron, which is the bevel for the bevel down plane and is the back for the bevel up plane. The use of the "ruler trick" would not have a big affect here.

The Handle .....

Paul in NJ

>Earlier in his book, Wheelan discusses a few handle types. I thought the Dominy plane handle looked like the �mushroom� shape handle as he called it. I extended the mortise for the handle all the way through the back of the plane, it didn�t make sense to do otherwise. I didn�t use the cap iron for my blade, I wanted to keep it simple. Cap irons add to the fettling of the plane and it didn�t seem to serve any purpose for this plane.

Paul Dzioba

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>As Steve Elliot has mentioned, the wear bevel, which is a primary contributer to dulling, requires roughly twice as much honing on a bevel up plane as a bevel down plane

I've been trying to find where he said that, and I can't find it. Do you have a link? I'd like to read that...

Thnx,

DC

I still believe that the ruler trick takes care of the wear bevel, unless your blade is reeeally dull... Still trying to visualize the geometry here :-)

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>Sorry, Denis, I'm having trouble accessing the archives and have not found the post I was thinking of. I think Brent Beach has discussions of the wear bevel on his site as well.

If you want to get a picture of the geometry involved, draw two large diagrams of edges with 40 degree cutting angles and 12 degree clearence angles. If you use a protractor it will be easier to see. Tnen draw a wear bevel on each one. The wear bevel is parallel to the stuff being planed (12 degrees from the clearance angle. Then use one diagram for bevel up, drawing a line parallel to the bevel (the cutting angle in this case) that represents the amount removed in order to eclipse the wear bevel. Do the same for the other bevel down diagram, making a line parallel to the bottom bevel (the clearance angle in the other case). You will see that more material needs to be removed when sharpening the bevel up example.

The "ruler trick" only alters the angle by one or two degrees, a very slight bend in the back. It is not significant when compared to the 10-15 degrees of clearance or the 25- 35 degrees of the bevel.

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Denis Ch�nard, Orl�ans, Ont.

>OK, I can picture it...

My question though is, how long does that wear bevel gets before one elects to re-sharpen?

By honing on the bevel side, then doing the ruler trick, one attacks the wear bevel from both sides. In any case I get all my bevel up blades sharp on my planes, and I've never experienced a case of insufficient clearance angle AFAIK.

I'm asking respectfully, is this a theoretical issue, or does it happen in practice?

DC

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block ..... *LINK*

MikeW

>Hi Denis. It's real.

The cure of course is either sharpen past the lower wear bevel on the primary side, or do what you are doing and hone more frequently than you might otherwise need to do on the same wood, same thickness of shavings using a BD plane.

As long as the BB is kept small and at a low angle and the honing done, it's a moot issue.

the real problem comes to people who don't hone frequently enough. Then when they do, and don't get rid of the lower wear bevel, the iron simply isn't as sharp as it ought to be. However, I suspect these same people don't sharpen any plane iron frequently enough.

Brent's web site is below...

Take care, Mike


Brent Beach's Sharpening pages

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

MikeW

>Nice plane, Paul!

I'm going to wimp out and have Phil Edwards make me one (no handle). But I never tire of seeing such nice results that others do.

Take care, Mike

Re: The New Kid (plane) on the block .....

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>Denis, I think some workers fail to sharpen enough to really get beyond the wear bevel, getting an edge that is only marginally sharp. I am rather certain that you are not having this problem.

The point of the "ruler trick" is to have a back surface that is easy to true up and maintain. It is similar to the hollow on a Japanese iron. The angle, probably 1 or at most 2 degrees is not enough to effect cutting geometry. If you put a back bevel of 8 or 10 degrees on a bevel up plane you would have serious clearance problems. The sharpening you do on the back side is probably not doing much to remove the wear bevel. If you were to try sharpening with the ruler exclusively (not at all on the main bevel) for several rounds, the back bevel would quickly grow to an unreasonable width because of the low angle.

I've seen .0005 mentioned as a width of wear bevel that can be considered dull. I think the standard depends on the thickness of your shavings etc.

Practical issue

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>Denis, I missed your last question. As a practical issue, roughly twice as much material has to be honed away on a bevel up plane than on a bevel down plane. Paul stated as much on Sunday.

Re: Practical issue

MikeW

>I would in general disagree with this assessment. At least if the irons are honed before utter edge failure.

Take care, Mike

Re: Practical issue

Warren in Lancaster, Pa

>The lower wear bevel is an early contributor to dulling. Because it it skewed to the underside, sharpening on the underside has an advantage here. I think that as the lower wear bevel widens it grows more slowly (more bulk to wear away) and dulling occurs at what is left of the point, top and bottom. So sharpening on the underside gradually loses its advantage as the tool becomes duller. I think with really dull tools it doesn't much matter whether you are sharpening the top side or the bottom side.