Clifton Bench Planes one piece cap iron - anyone tried it

[David C]

I don't see any difference either.

Matthew,

Katie informs me that the tip of the new cap iron is somewhat hardened.

Seems like a good plan to me! The persistent wire edge was not evident when honing the front edge.

David

 

[essexalan]

Never found any plane where tightening down the CB did not flex the iron that's from woodies, infills to Bailey type and some of those infill irons are pretty thick. Obviously it has been done that way for a reason and as long as the iron beds solidly at the bevel and the top then I have not had any problems. Whether tightening down the lever cap or it's equivalent has the effect of flattening the double iron against the frog or bed I have no idea, if it does then surely the CB would tend to move away from where you carefully placed it. Frogs that are out of flat I find give me less smooth depth adjustment so I flatten them.
The Clifton CB appears to be a solution in search of a problem and why bother grinding behind the bevel? Of course this arrangement will work well with nice flat ground Clifton irons but how would they work with some of my decidedly wonky Stanley/Record irons? Would there not be a small gap present if you back bevel a blade or even use the ruler trick? The concept of a zero bend CB has already been examined here http://planetuning.infillplane.com/html ... lanes.html but still an amount of pressure is exerted on the iron sufficient to make it arc slightly.

 

[D_W]

Seems like a good plan to me!

David

Agree. Even if it does nothing more than prevent wrestling with the wire edge, that's a plus.

 

[matthewwh]

DW, there are two separate problems and sets of solutions.

The way that the cap iron is set relates to tearout - fibres lifting ahead of the cutting edge. This can be solved by several techniques, all of which amount to increasing the slope that the detatched shaving runs up after it has been cut, causing it to break nearer to the cutting edge thereby reducing the lifting and splitting forces exerted on the surface about to be cut.

One of these methods is to set the cap iron close enough to the cutting edge that it alters the effective pitch from 45 to vertical. Correctly it should be set back from that position for most work and only engaged when needed to control tearout. The downside of steeper pitches is that they make the plane harder to push, so like the gears in a car, you select the most appropriate setting for the conditions.

Flutter, or chatter, on the other hand is characterised by regular ripples or patterns in the cut surface the blade juddering across the surface because it is inadequately held.

On mild timber you won’t see any difference, when you work on harder stuff with a standard thin iron bailey it becomes much more likely. Having either a thicker cutting iron or a thicker, flatter cap iron will extend the range of timbers you can use it on without experiencing flutter.

The principle behind Clifton bench planes is a further extension of this - basically getting as close as humanly possible to casting the blade into a solid block of iron, whilst still maintaining the ability to adjust and remove the iron.

 

[David C]

I was informed today that the Clifton cap irons are hardened to approximately Rockwell C 48-50.

Not as hard as a blade but enough to make edge preparation much easier.

David

 

[matthewwh]

Just the sort of close attention to detail that makes life easier for the end user.

In fact, I understand that this step was indirectly inspired by your work on cap iron preparation David.

 

[D_W]

DW, there are two separate problems and sets of solutions.

The way that the cap iron is set relates to tearout - fibres lifting ahead of the cutting edge. This can be solved by several techniques, all of which amount to increasing the slope that the detatched shaving runs up after it has been cut, causing it to break nearer to the cutting edge thereby reducing the lifting and splitting forces exerted on the surface about to be cut.

One of these methods is to set the cap iron close enough to the cutting edge that it alters the effective pitch from 45 to vertical. Correctly it should be set back from that position for most work and only engaged when needed to control tearout. The downside of steeper pitches is that they make the plane harder to push, so like the gears in a car, you select the most appropriate setting for the conditions.

Flutter, or chatter, on the other hand is characterised by regular ripples or patterns in the cut surface the blade juddering across the surface because it is inadequately held.

On mild timber you won’t see any difference, when you work on harder stuff with a standard thin iron bailey it becomes much more likely. Having either a thicker cutting iron or a thicker, flatter cap iron will extend the range of timbers you can use it on without experiencing flutter.

The principle behind Clifton bench planes is a further extension of this - basically getting as close as humanly possible to casting the blade into a solid block of iron, whilst still maintaining the ability to adjust and remove the iron.

Hi Matthew, I'm familiar with those things and the cap iron setting techniques, so far as that goes. I've noticed in the past that any time I get chatter on a surface (which in my case is always due to a plane skipping across a surface rather than an iron flexion issue - something that happens, say, when I'm planing the ends of a beech bench plane that I've just made), the chatter ceases to exist with a little bit of wax on the bottom of a plane. The hardest planes I have to use in that particular end-grain planing operation are the ones that are perfectly flat on the sole - they have such grip on the end grain of a board. Just as planing the endgrain on a panel is much easier with a smoother plane that isn't perfect on the sole than it would be with a low angle boutique jack plane (such a long perfect plane bottom that gets tremendous grip on endgrain that is otherwise very easily cut with an old metal smoother or even more easily cut with a continental wooden plane).

I guess what I'm getting at is that I do agree that some of the modern planes are easier to use because they are just heavier in places where poor setup occurs, and thus the heft can throw a sheet over some poor setup issues, so to speak.

But I haven't had any problem planing anything with a stock stanley. I had gobs of problems with the same years ago before I learned to set the cap iron. I'm trying to think of the "worst" thing I've planed, but there's just so many ways that you could define worst that it's maybe pointless to say. I have planed plenty, though, that is over 3k hardness on the janka scale (and even some of that planes quite nicely - my recent experience dimensioning ebony showed it to plane almost too easily for its hardness - brittle).

I don't say that to belittle the efforts of manufacturers trying to differentiate themselves. I believe the one solid block concept that you're describing is sort of a modern idealistic thing that isn't really necessary with proper setup, but it is intellectually satisfying when someone is early on in their planing. If each of us was given a stanley 4, never allowed to have anything else, and taught how the cap iron works to eliminate tearout, I think we'd all get so good with it that we'd really not want for much of anything else, except maybe a little more weight when working the absolute worst of stuff. But a little more weight is easily achieved by just reaching for a larger plane.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Hi Matthew, I'm familiar with those things and the cap iron setting techniques, so far as that goes. I've noticed in the past that any time I get chatter on a surface (which in my case is always due to a plane skipping across a surface rather than an iron flexion issue - something that happens, say, when I'm planing the ends of a beech bench plane that I've just made), the chatter ceases to exist with a little bit of wax on the bottom of a plane. The hardest planes I have to use in that particular end-grain planing operation are the ones that are perfectly flat on the sole - they have such grip on the end grain of a board. Just as planing the endgrain on a panel is much easier with a smoother plane that isn't perfect on the sole than it would be with a low angle boutique jack plane (such a long perfect plane bottom that gets tremendous grip on endgrain that is otherwise very easily cut with an old metal smoother or even more easily cut with a continental wooden plane).

Out of interest, what mechanism causes a plane iron to chatter when there is close contact, and high friction, between a plane sole and the workpiece? I can see how that higher friction would make the plane harder to push, but not how it makes the iron flutter.

 

[D_W]

Hi Matthew, I'm familiar with those things and the cap iron setting techniques, so far as that goes. I've noticed in the past that any time I get chatter on a surface (which in my case is always due to a plane skipping across a surface rather than an iron flexion issue - something that happens, say, when I'm planing the ends of a beech bench plane that I've just made), the chatter ceases to exist with a little bit of wax on the bottom of a plane. The hardest planes I have to use in that particular end-grain planing operation are the ones that are perfectly flat on the sole - they have such grip on the end grain of a board. Just as planing the endgrain on a panel is much easier with a smoother plane that isn't perfect on the sole than it would be with a low angle boutique jack plane (such a long perfect plane bottom that gets tremendous grip on endgrain that is otherwise very easily cut with an old metal smoother or even more easily cut with a continental wooden plane).

Out of interest, what mechanism causes a plane iron to chatter when there is close contact, and high friction, between a plane sole and the workpiece? I can see how that higher friction would make the plane harder to push, but not how it makes the iron flutter.

It's not the iron fluttering, it's literally the entire plane refusing to stay in the cut, and it bounces across the surface. It'll do that with a premium plane or a properly set up stanley.

I don't know for sure why it doesn't happen with wax (or is less likely to happen with wax), but every time I've ever had it happen, a bit of paraffin wax eliminates it.

Other than that, I've never had a problem *except* the very occasional occurrence of something like ebony or cocbolo on it's "hard orientation" making its way under the cap iron just because the wood is hard enough (my belief, at least) to make its way under the cap iron when other softer woods do not. That's rare, though - something that happens once a year or so.

I can still get a bit of chatter with a larger plane doing jack work (of the stanley type), but it is genuine chatter because the cap iron is not set that close. I'm not sure, but I think chatter in that situation might actually make planing a little bit easier as long as it doesn't turn into outright gawdy tearout.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It's not the iron fluttering, it's literally the entire plane refusing to stay in the cut, and it bounces across the surface. It'll do that with a premium plane or a properly set up stanley.

I don't know for sure why it doesn't happen with wax (or is less likely to happen with wax), but every time I've ever had it happen, a bit of paraffin wax eliminates it.

Other than that, I've never had a problem *except* the very occasional occurrence of something like ebony or cocbolo on it's "hard orientation" making its way under the cap iron just because the wood is hard enough (my belief, at least) to make its way under the cap iron when other softer woods do not. That's rare, though - something that happens once a year or so.

I can still get a bit of chatter with a larger plane doing jack work (of the stanley type), but it is genuine chatter because the cap iron is not set that close. I'm not sure, but I think chatter in that situation might actually make planing a little bit easier as long as it doesn't turn into outright gawdy tearout.

Interesting. I've had planes chatter on me (usually, but not exclusively, whilst working harder timbers or endgrain), but never experienced any sort of vibration through the handle or knob, which I'm pretty sure you'd feel if the whole plane was bouncing up and down.

I'm inclined to think that Matthew was nearer the mark when he talked about the iron 'fluttering'. In some configurations of iron and capiron (most especially thin iron and bent steel sheet cap-iron in a Bailey-type plane), it has plenty of scope to do that.

Maybe there are more than one cause of 'chatter', but it would be odd for one woodworker to have experienced one and not the other, and for another woodworker to have experienced the other but not the one.

Whatever!

 

[D_W]

I have experienced chatter, too, like I mentioned - with an iron ground for jack plane work. I never thought too hard about what was causing it because in a metal jack plane, I can't think that it's necessarily undesirable. It leaves that tiny chattery look evidence on the wood, but not necessarily tearout.

In my house-made wooden jack planes, I don't get any such chatter, though - the iron is too heavy and the lock the wedge has on the cap iron is too great since the planes are relatively new and everything is tight.

The skipping that I'm describing leaves little waves on the surface of whatever you're planing. You likely have experienced it before without knowing (it's something that might occur when you're planing a drawer or something that isn't as easy to lock down tight. If the handles on the plane are tight, you don't feel vibrating through the handles.

Paul sellers had a video where he was making a mallet that he experienced it (I think he did, at least). ...found it.

28:20 or so in this video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u31Ixu6mSHY

(in anything where the cap iron is set reasonably close, there will be no iron flutter, but you can still get this kind of skipping - paul resolves it the same way I do, except he uses oil).

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I very much doubt that the whole plane 'jumping' or 'skipping' would give the effect Sellers experienced. The high-pitched squeak (and a pattern of little cuts on the workpiece about 1/16" or so apart) suggest a much higher frequency event than the normal human could induce just by pushing a rigidly set up plane over a piece of wood. I think the result of that would be marks much further apart. It can happen if a plane is set far too rank, or is significantly dull, or both, and usually is something people only experience in their very early days of woodworking, before they've become familiar with plane use.

The Sellers chatter is down to a thin iron fluttering. Here's how.

Consider a standard Bailey-type plane in normal factory spec - no after-market thick irons or cap-irons. When dissembled from the plane for sharpening, the iron is flat. When the standard bent-metal cap-iron is attached, it takes a very slight curve, the cap-iron contacting the blade over a fair area near the screw, and along a line just behind the cutting edge on the flat side of the blade. Between these two points, there's daylight between iron and cap-iron. Thus, when the iron and cap-iron assembly is installed in the plane, and the lever cap pressure is applied, the blade is in close contact with the top of the frog casting, held by the top of the lever cap. However, the contact point (line, really) at the bottom of the assembly is along the back of the bevel, or along the lower front edge of the frog if the latter is set forward of the sole aperture. Thus, the lever cap pressure, transmitted through the cap-iron, acts outboard of the contact between blade and sole or frog, thus tending to flex the blade even more. All this can readily be observed on any standard Bailey plane.

Thus, there's detectable daylight between frog and blade, and between blade and cap-iron, between the back of the blade's bevel and the top of the frog. Again - this can be observed, and checked with feeler gauges. The blade is unsupported between these points - not trapped and rigid.

Now - let's put the plane to work. As soon as the cutting edge enters wood, there's a force needed to push it forwards and take a cut, and thus, an equal and opposite force pushing the blade backwards. Because the blade is bedded at 45 degrees, pushing it back also pushes it slightly downwards, deepening the cut. The blade pivots about it's contact point at the sole (or bottom of frog) along the back of the bevel. It's got room to flex between the bevel and the top of the frog, since it's not firmly held, so it flexes, allowing the cutting edge to go a little deeper. For normal planning that's just about OK, but in very hard woods or on endgrain, the force is enough to flex the blade so far that enough energy builds up in it (as it does in a spring) that it eventually has enough to overcome the force applied to the cutting edge, and it springs up, out of cut. Since the plane is being held down to the wood, it immediately starts to cut again, and the cycle repeats. From observation, the frequency must be somewhere in the 50 to 100 cycles per second region, which is why we hear a squeak rather than a series of judders.

The effect, as we know, can be avoided by using a stiffer blade, or by stiffening the blade with a Stay-set type cap-iron. That transmits the lever cap force to the blade at three points - the same two as the bent metal cap-iron, but also, crucially, a third point at the joint of the cap-iron. That holds the blade tight to the frog, giving it much less scope to vibrate or flutter.

This can be demonstrated with a six-inch rule on the bench. Place the rule at right angles to the bench edge, with about 10mm-12mm (3/8"-1/2") overhanging the edge. Place a finger firmly on the inboard end - the clamp between top of frog and lever cap. The bench edge represents the back of the bevel, the rule end the cutting edge. Now apply some 'cutting force' to the rule end, and the 'cutting edge' deflects down. A point at about 2 1/2" also pops up, quite a bit. Now apply a finger to about the 2" mark, representing the joint of a Stay-set cap-iron, and then apply the same 'cutting force' as last time to the rule end. It's now far harder to deflect the rule at all - everything is much stiffer.

That's how 'chatter' or 'blade flutter' happens, I suggest - and that's how to avoid it, too. It conforms nicely with the effects many people have reported using different blade and cap-iron combinations.

 

[D_W]

I'm not sure how sellers solved a fluttering iron by putting oil on the bottom of the plane.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

He didn't. If you watch the clip, he started off with a fairly straight-on planing stroke with a bit of skew, and the chatter developed as he flattened the endgrain. After stopping and oiling the sole, he used a much more 'round and round' technique, which would give the blade a very acute skew approach. I think that was what really made the difference.

I've done similar myself in the past. Started with a 'proper' plane stroke approach, and ending up with the plane skewed at 45 degrees or more to the board. You lose the registration that the sole length affords, but the screeching stops! Just got to be careful to watch your gauge lines and not cut a corner too deep.

 

[D_W]

I have done the exact same thing and solved the issue by waxing a plane sole.

the skip marks left by my plane were probably four to the inch. I don't remember what the sound was like.

The flatter the plane, the worse the skipping if not oiled (the premium LA bench planes were the worst for me with it, they're too flat and too finely finished and really grip).

Still, behind all of this, I didn't know what a stay set cap iron was until a couple of months ago and I never had problems with chatter prior to that, and I use a stock stanley 4 a LOT. Let me revise - I did have problems with chatter when I was a beginner. Once the planes were set up correctly, I can say for sure that the planes will stop me in my tracks or skip before they chatter, unless the cut is intentionally rank and the cap iron set off a little.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It's a pity Flinn's have dropped production of the old Clifton two-piece cap-iron, because it'll now be more difficult for you to try one. Quite a few people on this forum and elsewhere have attested to performance improvements in Bailey planes so fitted, and as the only modification. It does this by the mechanism set out above - stopping the scope for the cutting iron to flex between the top and bottom of the frog, pivoting over the back of the bevel, and thus allowing the cutting edge to deflect more than a stiffer assembly permits.

To bring the thread back to the original point, the new one-piece flat design does pretty well the same job as the two-piece - stiffens the blade/cap-iron assembly. The small amount of relief ground behind the nose is only enough to ensure a good, tight, shaving-free fit between cutting iron and cap-iron at the working end, but not enough to allow the cutting iron flexure observable with the standard bent metal cap-irons. Thus, the scope for the cutting edge to deflect in cut is significantly reduced, giving better performance in adverse planing circumstances.

(The other way of stiffening up the blade/cap-iron assembly is to fit a thicker blade, but that can bring other problems such as engagement of adjuster yoke with cap-iron slot if taken too far. However, you don't need to go much thicker to get appreciable improvement. I certainly noticed a positive difference after putting a Clifton blade in my 07, many years ago. In fact, so many years ago, that the blade is stamped 'Victor', which was Clifton before they branded them Clifton.)

Most of the time, standard cap-iron and standard thinner blade will serve. If that's good enough for the planing you do, then that's fine. Some of us do appreciate the extra rigidity, though.

 

[Trafalgar]

The best smoothing plane I've ever used is a Record 08.

 

[D_W]

What are adverse planing circumstances? I've never had the stanley 4 stock fail at planing any of those. Doesn't last long in wood that has visible silica sparkles in it, though.

Is it going to be difficult for people to try a two piece cap iron because the clifton version was markedly different than record? I've only tried record's version. I find the stay set to be about as good as their somewhat heavier than stanley's stamped curved version.

I might find differently if I didn't set the cap iron in the right place. I used to think stanley planes were flimsy in a heavy cut.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

David, the answers to your questions lie in earlier posts on this thread, I think.

I don't really want to get involved in prolonged, bad-tempered circular arguments. I've set out my thoughts above, based on experiences I've had at the bench, observations I have made and conclusions I've deduced from them. I know from comments on this forum and others that I'm not the only person to have made those observations - and I certainly wasn't the first.

Please note - I am not making ANY comment on cap-iron settings. Just on the relative flexibility of thinner blades paired with different cap-irons.

If you don't mind, I'll just leave it at that.

 

[D_W]

I'm not into any bad-tempered arguments, either, though I could be accused of that in the past. I don't have the energy for it.

My point in this case is that I think cap irons existed on bailey planes as they were for some large number of years, I don't know how large 75 years? And then the stay set came along, which is nice as long as it's not ill fitting, but things of that type only become needed if the cap iron isn't being used.

I'll yield also that some bailey planes just feel better than others, even when they are generally relatively similar. I've got my favorite still, and I'll also admit that I have replaced the iron - but it's the only one I did that for and that's because it's a type 20 with the soft iron that David Charlesworth sometimes describes. (plus, I felt like it was stupid that I took hours to drill and hand file out an iron slot and harden the iron and then not use it).

No ill will or bad temper, though. My take on it is that if someone is having chatter problems, they should probably concentrate on setting the cap iron. That will reduce chatter problems to the entire plane skipping. If the stay set works on its own and someone doesn't want to learn that, certainly that's fine, but the former is a cheaper solution.