Planing strategy glued up legs with hand planes

[tibi]

Hello,

I would like to ask about your opinion on planing strategy for gluing up legs from two pieces (Currently, I do not have jointer and thicknesser, so I work with hand planes only). I have tried both methods described below and I would like to know which one makes more sense for you and why.

A: Plane individual boards on all sides with slightly larger widths and thicknesses, then glue up boards together and then plane to final width and thickness
B: Plane a single face from each board, then glue up those faces together, and finally plane the board from scratch as if it was a single rough board(with the glue joint in the middle of the thickness of the leg)

Thank you.

 

[Jacob]

Hello,

I would like to ask about your opinion on planing strategy for gluing up legs from two pieces (Currently, I do not have jointer and thicknesser, so I work with hand planes only). I have tried both methods described below and I would like to know which one makes more sense for you and why.

A: Plane individual boards on all sides with slightly larger widths and thicknesses, then glue up boards together and then plane to final width and thickness
B: Plane a single face from each board, then glue up those faces together, and finally plane the board from scratch as if it was a single rough board(with the glue joint in the middle of the thickness of the leg)

Thank you.

A. will be much easier: it's easier to plane two 2" edges rather than one 4"
B. might give you a better yield i.e. sightly larger when finally planed all round, but wouldn't count on it.

 

[Ttrees]

This is for the bench legs then...
You didn't mention your timber might not be 100% dry, as IIRC it's air dried stuff, and cut through and through.
I think I would plane it up oversize and see if it moves much before gluing,
as I guess these pieces are fairly thick.

Interested to see if anyone suggests the opposite, to slow down drying or restrict any warpage from freshly sawn components off the slabs.

 

[tibi]

A. will be much easier: it's easier to plane two 2" edges rather than one 4"
B. might give you a better yield i.e. sightly larger when finally planed all round, but wouldn't count on it.

Thanks Jacob,

I have used B only once recently, when yield was the problem and I could not afford loosing any more thickness. That is why I started to think about it more.

 

[Jacob]

Coincidence but I'm just doing similar. Planing up some poor quality sycamore pieces about1900 x 75 x 45mm, to glue them together to make a single 70 x 280mm solid for a new bench worktop.
They are all bent and twisted, so where to start?
Luckily they have a "reference surface" built in! - which is approximately the face, either side, near the middle of the board, assuming they are evenly bent and twisted.
So if I start planing from the middle and extend this surface towards both ends it should optimise the removal of least material, for a flat face.
Can't plane out from the concave dip but can start on the convex hump on the other side. Ideally the last pass will finally remove the last traces of the distortion which should be at each end but towards opposite edges of the face.side.
Seems to work! Am using my machine but would work the same with a long hand plane. Perfect job for a No. 8.
On the machine it means convex side down, bearing down on the middle of the board as much as possible, so the ends may not even get near the cutters at first and all the action is from the middle, extending outwards.

 

[tibi]

Coincidence but I'm just doing similar. Planing up some poor quality sycamore pieces about1900 x 75 x 45mm, to glue them together to make a single 70 x 280mm solid for a new bench worktop.
They are all bent and twisted, so where to start?
Luckily they have a "reference surface" built in! - which is approximately the face, either side, near the middle of the board, assuming they are evenly bent and twisted.
So if I start planing from the middle and extend this surface towards both ends it should optimise the removal of least material, for a flat face.
Can't plane out from the concave dip but can start on the convex hump on the other side. Ideally the last pass will finally remove the last traces of the distortion which should be at each end but towards opposite edges of the face.side.
Seems to work! Am using my machine but would work the same with a long hand plane. Perfect job for a No. 8.
On the machine it means convex side down, bearing down on the middle of the board as much as possible, so the ends may not even get near the cutters at first and all the action is from the middle, extending outwards.

I have thought about laminating two 45 mm x 280 mm boards on top of each other for my tabletop to get 90 mm thickness for the workbench, but I have never seen it done this way. Is not it too wide for doing a face-to-face glue-up? Everybody is laminating in a way that the edge of the board is on the top. I have never seen two wide slabs laminated on top of each other so that the face of the board is facing up.

I think that there is a good reason not to do it. Maybe @Sgian Dubh could explain what wood movement would do with such a wide board face-to-face lamination.

 

[Jacob]

I have thought about laminating two 45 mm x 280 mm boards on top of each other for my tabletop to get 90 mm thickness for the workbench, but I have never seen it done this way. Is not it too wide for doing a face-to-face glue-up? Everybody is laminating in a way that the edge of the board is on the top. I have never seen two wide slabs laminated on top of each other so that the face of the board is facing up.

I think that there is a good reason not to do it. Maybe @Sgian Dubh could explain what wood movement would do with such a wide board face-to-face lamination.

I imagine it would need a press or a huge number of clamps. The surplus glue would have to be squeezed out from the centre to the edges somehow.

 

[Trafalgar]

Hello,

I would like to ask about your opinion on planing strategy for gluing up legs from two pieces (Currently, I do not have jointer and thicknesser, so I work with hand planes only). I have tried both methods described below and I would like to know which one makes more sense for you and why.

A: Plane individual boards on all sides with slightly larger widths and thicknesses, then glue up boards together and then plane to final width and thickness
B: Plane a single face from each board, then glue up those faces together, and finally plane the board from scratch as if it was a single rough board(with the glue joint in the middle of the thickness of the leg)

Thank you.

Most stock will have a little end-to-end bow. Leave it. Glue the two concave faces together aligning edges as best you can then process the glue-up into the leg by the usual hand tool methods -- establish a face, then an edge square to that face, then saw/plane to finished dimensions off these two faces. If the two concave faces also have a little twist or cup then remove the bare minimum in order for the surfaces to mate for gluing. Occasionally a defect in one face will cancel the defect in another. When that happens, go buy a lottery ticket.