Planing Long Lengths of Timber

[mudman]

Hi all,

I'd be interested in people's opinions on this.

I'm planning to build my son a tall loft bed. This will be at least six feet tall and will have uprights that are at least six feet tall, maybe longer.

I have some 3"x2" oak lengths that I plan to use but I need to plane them straight and square.

I have a small SIP 6" bench-top planer and a selection of planes including a Veritas bevel up jointer, Stanley #5 1/2 & #7.

Given the length of the pieces to straighten, I was wondering how to approach this.
I have had a think and have come up with these:

1. Use the SIP and try to use it as is.
2. Use the SIP and incorporate some roller stands for support.
3. Use a hand jointer and 'eyeball' it to check for flatness/straightness.
4. Use a hand jointer and use a homemade straightedge from a sheet of MDF to check.
5. Use a hand axe and call it 'rustic'. :wink:

I'm thinking that #1 is quite likely dangerous so I won't try that and I doubt SWMBO would let #5 into the house. I will probably opt for #4 or maybe try #2 and finish with #4.

How would others approach this?
Are there any other options?

I've never had to true-up anything this long before and was wondering if there was any special technique involved.

I was also wondering if #3 would produce a 'good enough' result bearing in mind that I need to mortice and tenon cross members between the uprights. Is it possible to get them straightish by eye and then fit the other parts to them? A sort of custom fit?

I've done a bit of searching on this and have come up short. It might be that my search skills are a lacking but I would like to get other's ideas on this.

TIA

 

[RogerS]

Hi Barry

OK - I'm not an expert by any means but I would have thought option 2 would give you a good result by itself and be the easiest to do.

just my two pennorth

Roger

 

[Philly]

Barry
If you can take a full length shaving off the timbers then they definitely will be straight enough. Why not experiment and see which method (or combination ) will work best for you?
What condition is the oak in? Is it already planed or roughsawn?
Cheers
Philly

 

[jasonB]

I'd be inclinde to put it over the SIP, I assume the tables must be approx 36" long. It not a big heavy section of timber so you shouldn't have much problem holding it or the weight causing the tables to sag. My Kity combi tables are only about 1.0m end to end and I've run 4x2 tulipwood 9'long and 7ft lengths 0f 7x2 oak over that. Make sure the SIp is well fixed to a bench!

If the machine does not work out you could use it to take the worst out and finish by eye.

If there is any noticable bow int the boards you will probably only end up with 1 1/2" finish size which may be a bit flimsy, but will depend on design.

Jason

 

[Roger]

uprights that are at least six feet tall, maybe longer. I have some 3"x2" oak lengths that I plan to use

That isn't going to give you anywhere near the strength and solid support that you need for a bed of that height, unless you're thinking of laminating them?

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting.

 

[Anonymous]

If your planer is working OK, I'd pass them through to get a good face. Then pass again to get a good edge at 90 degree's to the face (assuming it has a reliable fence that can be set acurately to 90 deg. Then to get them to thickness (I'm assuming yours isnt with a thicknesser as well??) I'd use the old marking guage to scribe the thickness off of the good face, hand plane down to this line; then scribe the width off of the good edge, then handplane down to that line.
However I agree certainly with Ploget 3x2 is a bit flimsey (unless possibly you added some 45 degree brace support's similar to what you see in an oak house frame??) to stiffen the structure?? Otherwise the bed could start moving like on those film's of japanese earthquakes :shock:

Chers Jonathan

 

[woodbloke]

Mr G wrote:

'eyeball' it to check for flatness/straightness.
This is normal practice for all woodwork - sounds like you need the practice or you wouldn't be asking. And you don't need a straightedge.

This might be good for some but not for all woodwork. The type of stuff that I like to do requires me to make sure that surfaces are as flat as I can get them.....a quick squint along may ensure that I'm pretty much there but a straight edge will tell me when I'm exactly there - Rob

 

[mudman]

Oh wow, lots to think about since I left work.
Thanks for all the replies.

Philly, the oak is rough sawn, not waney edged.

Jacob,
My asking stems from my not having trued-up anything this length before. My concern was that passing a 2' plane over a 7' length would ride up and over any bow and just result in a thinner, bowed piece.
My wondering about 'eyeballing' stems from some discussions that have been on here recently and if it would apply to such a project. I understand that the eye is much more powerful than we often give it credit for and that it is a much ignored tool.
No worries about sounding sarcastic although I prefer the much nicer irony myself. I sort of expected tyu to chip in with the eyeballing option anyway and was looking forward to your opinion.
As to the numbre of planes, yep, I guess do have more than I need :roll:, but I like planes and actually do like using them as well. I'm more likely to use the handplane option purely because I detest the noise and dust of the machines so like to use a handplane for at least part of the operation.

As to the size, some of the lengths are 2 1/2" x 3" and I was hoping to end up with 2" x 2" from these. I've looked at a fair few Ikea-like ones and they all seem to be constructed using uprights of these dimensions. I do of course intend to brace the structure with cross members as well as the members that will make up the bed part. Is this still going to be a bit flimsy? Would laminating up to 3" be better? I don't want my boy ending up in a re-enactment of the Kobi earthquake. :lol:

Interesting the thoughts that it should go over the planer okay. I may try it, at least for the initial surfacing.
The SIP is a good, solid machine and the fence is pretty good. It's also so heavy it tends to stay where it's put. I also have a DeWalt thicknesser so do intend to use that as well.

Anyway thanks for all the replies. I'll let you know how I get on.

 

[Roger]

I'd double up on at least the main corner supports Barry, if not the main cross members also - and don't go too much by Ikea as a construction guide! Cheap and Chippy isn't in any way similar to Oak and doesn't act the same.

Good luck and let us know how it all turns out.

 

[Paul Chapman]

My concern was that passing a 2' plane over a 7' length would ride up and over any bow and just result in a thinner, bowed piece.

Which is why you need to use a straightedge :wink: That way it is easy to mark the high spots and plane them away. And keep checking. If you are not very experienced, it's all too easy to plane the wood into a curve (even if it started off straight). If you do plane it into a curve, you might find that to get it straight again you have to plane away too much and the wood ends up too thin.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[garywayne]

Paul. You sound like a man talking from experience.

I can plane any shape you want, except straight, of coarse.

Barry.
I was taught if one was going to use a planner to finish off by hand plane to eliminate the scalloping effect left by the planer blades.

I hope this is of some help.
Good luck with the project.

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting.

 

[garywayne]

jacob. Don't forget that some people wear specs, therefor are unable to see the length of timber clearly.

 

[Anonymous]

You must enter a message when posting.

 

[Paul Chapman]

Paul. You sound like a man talking from experience.

I can plane any shape you want, except straight, of coarse.

I know a lot of people who have difficulty with planing. If nothing else, use of a staightedge helps you to see where you are going wrong. People seem quite happy to use a square to check that one side is 90 degrees to the other - why not use a straightedge to check that the wood is straight as well? It might save a lot of time, effort and money.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

PS use winding sticks as well to ensure that the piece is not in winding :wink:

 

[mudman]

Yebbut you can see them if you look down the length, and you can put 2 pieces togther as an extra check. Getting reliant on a straight edge seems like bad practice to me esp for a beginner, except across the width with edge of a square

But as a beginner, how sure are you that you are getting a straight edge without something to reference against?
When I first started to hack at wood with a plane, I bought a straight edge. I was pleasantly surprised at how straight my edges were. But, it is nice to be sure.

Agree about these points. But it sounds like Mudman is after a way of doing things without actually having to look at them i.e. not by eye. I think he needs to get stuck in and spoil a few bits of wood or he might as well sell his planes.

cheers
Jacob

No I do look at things whilst I'm doing them. It may be that I can't bear to look at them after I've finished though.
You can be sure that I have spoilt a lot of wood in the past. There is some around that I haven't spoilt though. b

 

[mudman]

I know a lot of people who have difficulty with planing. If nothing else, use of a staightedge helps you to see where you are going wrong. People seem quite happy to use a square to check that one side is 90 degrees to the other - why not use a straightedge to check that the wood is straight as well? It might save a lot of time, effort and money.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

PS use winding sticks as well to ensure that the piece is not in winding :wink:

Makes perfect sense to me.
I did have a bit of trouble when I started out. I found the staightedge took the place of the apprentice's master and showed me where I was going wrong.

Yep, I do intend to use winding sticks as well.

 

[mudman]

jacob. Don't forget that some people wear specs, therefor are unable to see the length of timber clearly.

I do nowadays. Turns out I'm slightly shortsighted now. So slight that I hardly notice. The specs do help though, I used to think my computer screen was a bit fuzzy but it was me all along.

Funny thing is that my distance vision is better than 20/20. :?