Moderators: Random Orbital Bob, nev, Charley, CHJ, Noel

 Reply
By Bodgers
#1204313
patrickjchase wrote:
Bodgers wrote:Why the preference for the solid beech - is this type of Lignum Vitae bad?


There are two potential problems with laminated soles like that:

If the two parts are made of different species as in this instance, and if those species have different expansion properties then the presence of the lamination may cause instability. Note that this applies to both the rate at which moisture moves through the woods as well as the amount of expansion at equilibrium. On a related note, Beech has unusual moisture transmission properties along the radial axis because of the high fraction of medullary rays.

Second, the glue line itself acts as a moisture barrier and can alter the response of the plane to moisture changes even if the species are identical.

These potential issues have to be balanced against the wear benefits of the harder sole. My subjective preference is for stability at almost any cost, hence my remark. Others may arrive at differing conclusions.
Interesting info thanks.

I just worked on the assumption the crazy toothed joint they use would override any potential problems. Didn't even think about the moisture thing...:)

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk
By phil.p
#1204317
We haven't anything like the same climate, though, so whether it would make much difference is debatable. Humidity here is 91% today and drops as far as about 65% once in a blue moon.
By D_W
#1204459
Bodgers wrote:
patrickjchase wrote:
Bodgers wrote:Why the preference for the solid beech - is this type of Lignum Vitae bad?


There are two potential problems with laminated soles like that:

If the two parts are made of different species as in this instance, and if those species have different expansion properties then the presence of the lamination may cause instability. Note that this applies to both the rate at which moisture moves through the woods as well as the amount of expansion at equilibrium. On a related note, Beech has unusual moisture transmission properties along the radial axis because of the high fraction of medullary rays.

Second, the glue line itself acts as a moisture barrier and can alter the response of the plane to moisture changes even if the species are identical.

These potential issues have to be balanced against the wear benefits of the harder sole. My subjective preference is for stability at almost any cost, hence my remark. Others may arrive at differing conclusions.
Interesting info thanks.

I just worked on the assumption the crazy toothed joint they use would override any potential problems. Didn't even think about the moisture thing...:)

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk


Some of them eventually separate. I had a NOS primus plane where the joint was letting go a little bit (the top had shrunk more than the sole), but the lignum is really nice, slick and long wearing if you're going to do anything abusive. The movement wasn't too much of an issue for actual use in the one that I had, the joint just wasn't flush all the way around. I couldn't get past the pain in the rear end primus iron holding device coupled with a mediocre chip-prone iron compared to decent quality stanley wares. Some people love them, it's not like they're a complete trash design, but I found their assertions that they had fixed every shortcoming found in stanley planes (which I haven't found myself) to be way off.
By Cheshirechappie
#1204469
Not sure that moist air would be much of a problem given modern glues. Back in the day when all they had for glue was boiled Dobbin, the sort of fancy mechanical joints you see between body and boxing of moulding planes made a lot of sense. Especially in unheated UK workshops!

One advantage of a wooden plane sole (on a flat-bottomed plane anyway, maybe less so on a moulding plane) is that it can be trued up by a woodworker. That goes for one-piece bodies or those with attached soles of different timber.
By patrickjchase
#1204530
Cheshirechappie wrote:Not sure that moist air would be much of a problem given modern glues. Back in the day when all they had for glue was boiled Dobbin, the sort of fancy mechanical joints you see between body and boxing of moulding planes made a lot of sense. Especially in unheated UK workshops!


Lignum (whether Argentine or the "real thing") is fairly oily and problematic to glue.
By Cheshirechappie
#1204546
patrickjchase wrote:
Cheshirechappie wrote:Not sure that moist air would be much of a problem given modern glues. Back in the day when all they had for glue was boiled Dobbin, the sort of fancy mechanical joints you see between body and boxing of moulding planes made a lot of sense. Especially in unheated UK workshops!


Lignum (whether Argentine or the "real thing") is fairly oily and problematic to glue.


Have you had a problem with your bottom falling off, then?
By Bodgers
#1204584
Cheshirechappie wrote:
patrickjchase wrote:
Cheshirechappie wrote:Not sure that moist air would be much of a problem given modern glues. Back in the day when all they had for glue was boiled Dobbin, the sort of fancy mechanical joints you see between body and boxing of moulding planes made a lot of sense. Especially in unheated UK workshops!


Lignum (whether Argentine or the "real thing") is fairly oily and problematic to glue.


Have you had a problem with your bottom falling off, then?


LOL
By patrickjchase
#1205769
Delayed reply, but...

D_W wrote:I couldn't get past the pain in the rear end primus iron holding device coupled with a mediocre chip-prone iron compared to decent quality stanley wares.


Their irons are indeed a bit chippy. I found mine to be fine for a jointer because it stabilizes in an acceptable state for that use (i.e. it chips a bit to start and then settles in), but I wouldn't be happy with it in a smoother.

With that said the wedged ECEs will accept basically any reasonable iron with a Stanley-style slotted cap iron. It isn't like, say, an LN where you have to do a bit of metal working to use a thinner non-A2 iron.
By D_W
#1205836
I should clarify before people read into the iron being unusable - it's certainly fine. I just didn't find it to be up to *their* boast. I found it a lot more in line with Brent Beach's wear photos (not long wearing, and not even wearing - but few people are finishing off the plane that I'm aware of, so the small chipping is probably not a big deal).

I'd have replaced my plane with a wedged version, but I found two nice vintage continental smoothers around the same time for about $20, and already have a rosewood muji.
By Bodgers
#1205843
How do you mean chippy? Like brittle and prone to chip?


So, I've had a chance to try both the planes. Rather than do what a lot of people do (who seem to know what they are doing) and sharpen/hone straight out of the box, I basically just used them straight out the box.


I tried the jointer first as I have just laminated together some redwood pine for a top on my XCarve stand to server as a sort of assembly table.


Top has recently been glued, I removed all the dry squeeze out and it just needed a a few of the high spots between the laminated joins flattening. After getting the blade height set, I started planing...


This thing is a beast, I've never handled a plane this size before, and I actually had move the whole top into the middle of the workshop as to take full length passes across the top needed a lot of space. For the most part it did its job - the top was flat. There were some issues with some tear out as my laminations had opposing grain directions in places and I couldn't always get the run both ways. I also ended up with some significant plane tracks - I think this is a result of me not getting the alignment quite right in the mouth and the blade having zero camber straight out the box. I like it - though, it has a lot of weight in it.


I then moved on to the Secondus Jack (and/or smoothing plane). Again, no honing or adjusting of the chip breaker, out of the box I hit a strip of poplar about 3 cm wide. Wow. This thing is amazing. As I said previously, my main experience with planes is the ECE block (My SW Stanley LA Jack is still in its box) but this thing just strips off incredibly thin smooth shavings effortlessly. The surface it leaves is incredible. I don't see any way you could do better with fine sand paper. It is like glass, and glistens in the light. It would be interesting to see what a Veritas blade would do in it - if one could be made to fit?


After this I decided to sharpen and hone the Jointer. I took the blade out, and my first observation what just how rough the end of the chip breaker was - it was sort of more roughly ground than the rest of it. As I looked across its width, holding it against the blade, I could see the edge wasn't completely even. It also had what a appeared to be some kind of burr turned up in the opposite direction to the angle in which the chip breaker touches the blade.

I have no idea what I'm doing with it, but I decided it must have to be cleaner and more level, so I hit the end of it with a 600 grit diamond stone. On doing this the burr just dropped off - quite a decent bit of metal string. Strange - or maybe not? I basically just cleaned it up with only the 600 stone and ground it in the same direction the previous burr was going. I sharpened the main blade briefly going from 600 and then to 1200 and then some honing with a piece of leather and some Autosol.


I set the chip breaker as close as I could get it, whilst still having the end of the blade visible. Back in the plane, I initially got quite a deep shaving that sort of accordianed up - obviously a result of having the chip breaker so close. So I raised the blade a little and I was getting great ultra thin shavings effortlessly - so I now have the world's largest smoother :)


What's the deal with the chip breaker then? What are they supposed to look like on the tip?
By patrickjchase
#1205905
Bodgers wrote:How do you mean chippy? Like brittle and prone to chip?


Yes, though ECE's irons are fairly "chewy" and not terribly brittle overall. Usually when this happens it means that the steel contains some large-ish carbides, that become exposed upon honing and fall out in use leaving chips. Without knowing what steel ECE are actually using I can't say more than that with any confidence ("Cr-V" is pretty meaningless as it encompasses a huge subset of tool-steel alloys).

Bodgers wrote:After this I decided to sharpen and hone the Jointer. I took the blade out, and my first observation what just how rough the end of the chip breaker was - it was sort of more roughly ground than the rest of it. As I looked across its width, holding it against the blade, I could see the edge wasn't completely even. It also had what a appeared to be some kind of burr turned up in the opposite direction to the angle in which the chip breaker touches the blade.


Yeah, I also recall that cap iron as having been pretty ratty as-shipped.

Bodgers wrote:What's the deal with the chip breaker then? What are they supposed to look like on the tip?


I don't know about "supposed to" but I can tell you how I set mine up. IIRC I ground a 40 degree face about 1/16" high into the leading edge, then ground a 50 degree face about 1/32" high within that, then finally a 60 degree face about 1/64" high at the very tip. I then polished the face smooth freehand on a 5K or 6K stone, rocking the cap-iron to blend the different-angle facets into a continuous curve. I was careful not to remove too much of the 60 degree facet, though, as i wanted to keep that angle for at least the first 1/100" or so (which is where all of the action happens when close-set).

IIRC I also reworked the bottom of the cap iron edge where it interfaces to the iron. The goal there is to get it smooth, flat, and undercut.

EDIT: I would pay close attention to D_W's reply to this post, if any. He's one of the established experts at cap iron configuration, so it will be interesting to see what he says. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately for those with thin skins) Warren Mickley doesn't post here. I know that he's said that he goes as high as ~80 deg at the very tip, though I don't know how far up the cap iron face he takes that.
Last edited by patrickjchase on 05 Feb 2018, 02:32, edited 1 time in total.
By D_W
#1205962
Mild curve on the cap iron (not camber, though if nicholson says you can do that, too, you can, but I'd wait and get the thing functioning first).

Curve sort of like the roll that paul sellers does sharpening.

The angle at the point of contact with the iron should be 50-60 degrees, and no stringy mild steel bits, polish the end if you need to and work the undercut on the cap iron as you would anything else. I think cap irons are a tremendous pain in the ass to get polished with no wire edge, so I roll them on a strop with autosol to finish them.

If this plane you're talking about has an adjustable mouth, give yourself a little bit wider set (if we're talking about the jointer, a sixteenth of an inch should do it). As I recall (no longer have an ECE plane), the cap iron is a very springy tall thing, relatively cheaply made compared to the old english cap irons. Tall springy cap irons like that can create a restriction at the mouth.
By D_W
#1205963
"Chippy" - any iron that doesn't leave a nice smooth uniform finish when it dulls. The ECE irons either release carbides or bits of the edge one way or another pretty early on. They're not overhard chippy (as Patrick said), they just don't hold a uniform edge.

http://www3.telus.net/BrentBeach/Sharpen/bladetest.html

Note the look of the edges on this page. the tsunesaburo edge is black with nothing relfecting back. It's uniform. Then take a look at the ECE edge and the A2 and D2 edges - the sparkles are small notches. They leave a trail of lines on a surface, just little ones, but they're there.
By patrickjchase
#1205966
I agree 100% with what David wrote, but feel obliged to throw out one caveat: While the pictures he linked on Brent Beach's site show exactly what he and I were describing, one needs to exercise caution with most other content on that site. Some of the conclusions Brent draws from that blade test are "questionable", and some of his conclusions elsewhere (most notably about honing compounds) are just plain wacky.