Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
I’m trying to post photos and further description, but it isn’t coming through. I tried on Chrome and couldn’t even get it to let me attach a photo. On Safari, I can attach photos, am told that the system is verifying I am human, and then the post never shows up. Perhaps it is in review by a moderator. My experience in the past is that things that go to the moderator either disappear forever or take a long time (a week or three) to show up. I’m giving up on this for now.
I guess I can at least say that I did file the yoke and this partly corrected the problem. The adjuster knob could now fully seat against the frog. There still wasn’t quite enough retraction. Further examination showed that the nose of the yoke (that engages the cap iron) was narrower than on my other planes and was also contributing to the abnormal blade retraction. I wonder if this is a replacement yoke or a poorly manufactured one? I built up the nose of the yoke with JB Kwik weld and this would have been the final step, but as anticipated, there isn’t enough surface here, no keying, and too much pressure, so the JB Kwik broke off quickly. Time for a new yoke.
As a final comment, this is a Bailey, so it should be a decent plane. Also, this is a smoothing blade, not a heavily cambered jack or scrub blade. I keep a fine set on the cap iron, so that is not the issue, either. I really think it is the yoke and the combination of these two changes did fix the problem entirely, but the epoxy is just too fragile. Time for a new yoke.
- This reply was modified 6 days, 15 hours ago by Ed.
- This reply was modified 6 days, 15 hours ago by Ed.
Bumping this 4 year old discussion in case someone comes back to it… I just ran into another cause for this problem. I have a Bailey #4 that does not retract fully. The cause seems to be the brass depth adjustment knob. On my other Stanley / Bailey planes, the depth adjuster will tighten fully against the frog. On this one, there is some interference that is stopping the knob about 1/32″ short. I can see a gap between the bottom of the adjuster and the back of the frog.
The interference may be between the back of the depth knob (next to the knurling) and the yoke. If I put a 1″ knob on instead of the 1 1/4″ one, it works fine. The thing is, though, that his frog appears to be a Type 16-20, but those frogs used 1 1/4″ knobs. So, I’m not sure what is going on.
If this is the problem, I could either swap the knob or file 1/32″ off the back of the yoke.
I spent a fair bit of my career doing something called lifecycle analysis, which is a method to assess and compare the environmental consequences of various processes. To explain, let’s suppose one is interested in energy use and greenhouse gas production. If one simply evaluates the energy used by and emissions from Factory #1 and then again for Factory #2 and compared them, the results would be meaningless. This is so because both require raw materials and those materials must themselves be produced. Also, the type of energy matters. So, if Factory #1 uses half the energy (total joules) as #2, but it is electricity rather than natural gas, it isn’t doing any better and may be doing worse than #2 because we need to combust about 2-3 joules of gas to make a joule of electricity.
If you want to worry about glues, you will need a careful analysis of the upstream portions and will likely need to know about embodied emissions associated with plant construction and end of life emissions from disposal. This is really, really hard to get right, especially for industrial chemical processes because of how often unrelated chemicals and products are co-produced or share energy through process heat integration.
Moreover, need to consider many aspects here. Energy use and GHGs is just one thing, but eutrophication, criteria pollutants, and a hoard of other emissions and environmental changes are possible.
In the present context, the energy use and petroleum consumption for the production of chemicals to make PVA glues sounds bad, as perhaps might the disposal of “plastic,” but hide glue will be associated with animal husbandry which inevitably is associated with methane emissions, one of our big challenges. Animal husbandry couples to farming, which is a large driver for fertilizers and chemicals. Using hide glue likely is associated with plastic consumption upstream, but I have no idea how much.
I applaud your diligence and concern. We all should make choices in our personal behaviors rather than waiting for some global or governmental solution. Unfortunately, there are times when it is just too hard to know which thing to choose! People like me aren’t doing their jobs to get the required info. But another way to look at this is that using wood glues for woodworking and maybe even for all industrial operations, is quite likely to be a small effect compared to plastics use in the food industry, packaging industry, and so forth.
I use hide glue, but not for environmental reasons. I use it for woodworking reasons.
Hope this wasn’t too long, too far afield, or (most likely) way too boring. Again, I applaud your considerations, but suspect you shouldn’t drive yourself nuts over it. Probably the most important choice is to use a method that reduces waste of whatever you choose including waste associated with product lifetime.
Thanks, Dean, but I don’t think that is it. I believe a pollisoir is used to burnish the surface and apply wax. What I am describing is a bristle brush normally used for painting (I think). It is dipped into a dry abrasive (pumice) which is used to dull the gloss shellac. Steel wool cuts surface to make scratches to lessen the sheen whilst the dry brush technique drags an abrasive powder along the surface.
Forgot to say: In that photo, the 4 quadrants are:
-Near left: 0000 Steel wool (Liberon)
-Near right: untouched, full gloss
-Far left: dry brushed 4F pumice
-Far right: dry brushed rottenstoneThe test surface was about 5 coats of (I’d guess) 1 pound dewaxed shellac sanded flat with 320, then a couple coats of even thinner shellac padded on. No grain filling.
Hope this doesn’t go off the rails and away from brushes. Ah, this is the practice piece I used to learn to carve thumbnails on curved edges. I can do them now without all the dipsy doodle scalloped pockmarks. 🙂
@LORENZOJOSE I was laying out flutes on a turned column for a longcase / grandfather clock. I thought this would be ideal, but in the end found it wasn’t suitable for me. Instead, I ended up dividing the circumference up at the top of the column, again at the bottom, and then using a manilla folder to connect the dots. The card stock flexed to follow the curves of the column. I put a Bessey clamp (F clamp) in the vise and then held the column with that. By fiddling around with the height of the clamp, I could have the the card stock be supported by the bench so that I could focus on holding the working edge on the layout marks. Because of this, it turned out best to leave the folder wide rather than cutting a ruler-like strip.
There were 8 flutes. The standard trick of dividing by walking dividers around I found unsuitable. It is too easy to mess up, too fussy, and can leave prick marks from the trials. Also, we care more about it looking right than being right. So, I focused on getting 4 divisions first, aligned with the 4 faces of the column base and top, then dividing those in half and adjusting by eye to look right.
It’s really easy to end up with the flutes having a bit of barber pole swirl to them! I didn’t avoid this completely and I think it came in during the carving, not the layout.
Anyway, the ultrafine chalk line is sitting in the toolbox. It will be useful for other things.
Here are some photos of a dado plane made by Chapin to give you a comparison. Notice how the front blade (nicker) is different from yours. It doesn’t matter that these blades do not line up with the sole. What matters is that the nicker and blade line up. The sole is like the skate on a grooving plane and just determines the depth of cut, giving the plane something to ride on. Looking at my photos, I think my nicker is in backwards, given the way it is sharpened. If you address these things on your plane, it might do some useful work. On the other hand, I’ve pretty much never used mine and just chop them the way Paul taught us. A plane cuts what it cuts, but a knife and chisel cuts exactly what you need, even if slower.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.This looks like a shop-made dado plane. Unfortunately, I doubt that it can cut well. The escapement is very rough, but that probably doesn’t matter. The issue is the nicker up front. This needs to have parallel knife edges the width of the dado and they must be sharp to cut across the grain and must align with the main blade. What is there instead is a blade that appears to simply scrape the wood, not sever the fibers. I wonder if it could be sharpened differently. Offhand, it looks like someone took a blade from a hollow and stuck it up front in this plane.
@GECKODEV an update on the glasses: The “computer” glasses, which are bifocals with Intermediate as the main lens and Close as the lower inset lens continue to be excellent at the bench. I may end up getting single focus glasses for the Close prescription for when there are long extended periods of close-up work, like carving, to reduce neck strain. The bigger message, though, is that gave up on the other pair of bifocals, which had Far for the main lens and Close for the lower inset lens. This makes sense I suppose, but it didn’t work for me. The Far let me see down the road for driving, but I couldn’t see the instrument panel. It was too far away for the Close prescription and too near for the Far. We remade the glasses to have Far for the main lens and Intermediate (like the upper part of the computer/bench glasses” ) for the lower inset lens. Perfect!!! Now, I can see the dash. Also, they are fine for most reading, e.g., at lap distance or standing reading a label. So, I can do everything with them except close fine work, for which I just put on the other glasses.
Thanks, Larry. I did end up buying one of the Tajima boxes. Once I started cleaning the old Craftsman, I realized that I’d never be able to get all of the old red chalk out. Since the red chalk might be too permanent for marking furniture parts, I decided better safe than sorry and ordered one of the Tajima’s plus some purple “dust off” calk. I’ll see if I can adjust the pads in the Craftsman (for other work), but they seemed brittle.
Are you sure that Japanese use sumitsubo for furniture? I thought it was for carpentry, which still requires exquisite joinery, but for which permanent ink lines won’t matter. There is also a stylus that is used with the ink pot. That might be less likely to cause trouble.
Do you mean their bevel edged chisels? I bought a set a long time ago. The first problem I had was that the blades would randomly fall off of the handles. Others reported using hairspray and various other tricks to deal with this, but none of it worked reliably, so I finally epoxied the handles on, tired of jumping out of the way and watching the chisel fall to the concrete.
The second problem I had with the chisels is the A2 steel. It took longer to sharpen than O1. More importantly, I found that I had to put a steeper bevel on them to keep them from crumbling when chopping across the grain, e.g., for mortises and dovetails. That’s not a huge problem, but does mean the chisel may try to walk back into your knife wall more than a chisel with a smaller angle.
Bottom line, yes, I’ve chopped mortises. Despite my complaints, they are perfectly fine chisels. If you are bridging your knife lines, give yourself some more room. If you see edge failure, steepen the angle a little. They should work fine. A2, being harder, is more brittle so I suppose there might be more of a chance of braking one when levering out chips, but if you are mortising properly and sensitively, this shouldn’t be an issue. If you have to pry hard, your chips are too big or you’re stuck in a ledge on the bottom or something. Don’t do that. 🙂
@GECKODEV Glad it helps. Other things I’ve found helpful, as I do struggle with seeing well:
1. Light. I can no longer get by with ambient light from overhead even though I’ve done a reasonable job lighting the shop. I have a gooseneck LED lamp on my bench that I am constantly moving about and aiming at the work, sometimes just to see, sometimes to change contrast and shadows. Mine looks like the IKEA Jansjo LED Gooseneck, the one with a base that plugs into the wall. I also have an OttLite LED Desk Lamp with Charging Station. It isn’t as versatile because it cannot be aimed, but the color and light quality is better, so when it can be aimed as needed, it is helpful. With patience, it can be found on sale for half off.2. Donegan DA-2 OptiVISOR, 1.5x magnification, 20″ focal length. This goes over my glasses. I haven’t used it since getting the bifocals, but am sure I will again. I used it with my drugstore reading glasses or with no glasses. I couldn’t have done some of my carving without it.
Old eyes. Feh. But, I’m happy there are workarounds! I’m fortunate to have them. There are times when I feel like I’m guessing rather than seeing and then it is frustrating, but these things have helped enormously. If someone needs this but needs the least expensive way, I’d say the Ikea gooseneck (or similar) plus the Donegan visor along with drug store reading glasses. If the Ikea light isn’t available, or maybe even if it is, one option is a light made by Trond. I have the clip-on version on my bandsaw, but there is a table top version. It gives a wider, better distributed light than the Ikea light. On Amazon, it is called, “TROND Desk Lamp, Bright Dimmable Eye-Caring Table Lamp, 3 Color Modes 7 Brightness Levels, Flexible Gooseneck, Touch Control, Memory Function, Desk Light for Home Office Bedside Task Reading”
-
AuthorPosts