When shooting the end grain to fit drawer fronts some odd shavings were made. They look like they were shaved off plastic. Must be a result of the Unicorn effect
The lighter colored band is the veneer which looks like typical end grain shavings.
I get similar shavings routinely, though I have never used a buffer on an edge tool. This walnut has a reddish color, which has been favored in Pennsylvania since the 18th century.
The shavings are nothing to do with buffing the edge. Note that the veneer attached to this walnut substrate makes a normal looking shaving. The shaving is a result of some unusual property of this piece of wood. When compiling a theory include that the veneer came from the second log from this tree and the plastic looking shaving from the first log.
The drawer front that made these plastic looking shavings was cut from the end of a board that will be part of the top, which in turn was cut from the first log of this tree, butt end.
When I cut this tree I hoped to get some stump grain, curly, however, didn't. I peeled the bark and dirt back and cut it at ground level, or slightly below. Maybe something about wood near the roots made this unusual wood.
if this is a bevel up plane, I see that waxy look on everything with the edge buffed, but on nothing if it's not buffed - doesn't matter what the wood is or the grain orientation is.
I don't know why that is.
A polished cap iron set close can also make what warren shows.
A complete wild guess, but I would imagine that the work done to the shaving (and how it's burnished as it goes over either the rounded edge (BU) or the rounded cap (BD) is similar.
Whatever the case, it's really pleasing. When I Planed long grain cocobolo with the BU plane with the unicorn tip, the shavings were far more attractive. The comparative edge (62 degrees total) was so steep that neither edge sustained silica damage from the silica in the cocobolo.
just a guess that it is. I'm guessing the shaving conforms to part of the curve and maybe doesn't break the same way it would if the arise was flat with a sharp top.
No real clue, though, except that it happens every time I use the buffer and round the tip over on the block plane or the LN BU plane.
walnut may be a wood that does it more easily. But with the unicorned front edge, I see it on everything -even pine.
and long grain cocobolo. I think the shavings are taking some burnishing from the edge of the iron as they're broken, and maybe it's not a simple thing.
Maybe this kind of shine would be seen at low angle, but the tearout prevention isn't there to see it. Who knows. But I'd encourage anyone with a buffer or even the freehand roll (that I couldn't get anyone to try until they found out what the buffer does) to see if they can duplicate the same thing.
I'm sure you all know that wet wood of almost all wood is half as dense or hard as it is when dry, so giving it a swipe with a damp rag ought to make the cutting easier. However it does make for more drag on the bottom of an un-lubricated plane.
As for as your theory of stump wood, I can't say about walnut. However a couple of woods, Water Tupelo and Cypress are two that are much softer or lighter than higher on up the trunk. Maybe someone could do a Janka test to see if Walnut is too.
As for your effort too harvest the stump of a Walnut tree, I'm sure I don't need to tell you, there is a lot of effort required to get anything useful from the stump. I don't think most people know that the best figure is NOT down in the bottom roots, but rather on the top of the roots near the surface of the ground where they make a right angle turn up. And even then, I wouldn't bother with it for a tree less than about 42" DBH. It takes those big old buttress roots to make the figure.
I've got a couple of good gunstock blanks that I cut about 20 years ago that I could part with if anyone is interested.
I have seen some curl extend up the trunk for a foot or two....but not in this case. The lower density observation is curious. I can easily measure it on a scrap . That is what this piece acted like.
> I don't think most people know that the best figure is NOT down in the bottom roots, but rather on the top of the roots near the surface of the ground where they make a right angle turn up.
The best figures are indeed the parts where the horizontal roots meet the main vertical root (pivot).
Walnut can produce various kinds of "burl" for which we have different designations in French: "ronce de noyer", "loupe", etc.
The most expensive and sought after cut for guns blanks where the straight parts of the pivot though (family business).
Walnut is great, usable from the roots to the leaves.
As I was cleaning up to enable restoration of the cover on my bench I examined the cut-off waste from where these shavings were made. And I examined an adjacent piece of wood.
These shavings were made from wood no more than a few inches from ground level. Normally trees are not cut this low, so I have never experienced wood properties of wood from this location. And I do not know how typical this specific tree might be.
This wood has no distinct pores. Note in Warren's picture you can clearly see the boundary between spring and summer wood. In my shavings one can see pores in the lighter colored band which is the veneer, which is a lighter color. This veneer wood is from 10' above the darker ground level wood, same tree.
This "stump wood" is not lighter weight. But again it planes, and looks, like a piece of plastic.
Warren's photos are not very sharp, so who knows what the fine details are. But when I right click on the image then hit save to new window then enlarge, I'm pretty sure I can see that your shavings were from a QC board, and exhibit some terminal parenchyma between some annual rings.
Even though Warren's photo is't sharp, it is easy to tell that his sample was flat sawn, and that the terminal parenchyma cells seem to have shrunk more that the normal wood in between, causing them to buckle and give it that corrugated look.
Re: Bill, I hate to say, may be time for new glass
Bill Tindall, E.Tn.
I have no idea what you are saying but if you are suggesting that I can't see, and feel planing, an obvious difference in this wood close to the roots vs that 12' up the tree you are mistaken, or perhaps confused by my explanation of the data. I have been intimately working with this wood the past couple of weeks, not simply observing it blown up on a computer screen.
There are four unusual things about this tree. I never harvested wood this close to the ground. This tree grew at an astonishing rate, 1.5" diameter a year at best. It was a "barnyard" tree but sprouted among thick brush. It shot up 10' without any significant branches, the top broke off at 11' and it regrew taller from a cluster of large branches at 11'. It had an enormous top which put unusual weight on the trunk. Any of these factors may, or may not, be significant. My vision is not.
Usually the center 4" "/- of a walnut tree is discarded. It typically shatters when dried. This is the wood made by the tree when it is young and it is reaching for the sky to get a light advantage. The cells are different from wood made later. If I remember correctly they are longer and make weaker, limber wood.
In any case, this tree was unusual in this regard too. The wood right up to the pith was sound. Just the pith itself cracked upon drying. It may be that this "butt" wood was also wood from near the pith. It came off one of two boards and one of these was sawed close to the pith, and in fact had pith on one edge which I later trimmed away.