Link with the past

Posted on May 3, 2013 by Stuart

After reading my article on line shafts, Evan suggested I look at the following video on YouTube.

It is an excerpt from a 1981 documentary about a craftsman who is still using a water-powered (and line-shaft enabled) workshop from the 1840s.  It is 26 minutes long and does a pretty good job of documenting the creation of a project in this workshop.

The video starts with a bit of blacksmithing, which is interesting in its own right, but the majority of the video is about the creation of a large water trough for cattle, completed in a single day using techniques that are very similar to that a cooper would utilise to create a barrel. A very large barrel!

What I found fascinating, and really very invigorating and inspiring (used enough adjectives here?) is the machines in this workshop are practically no different from those in mine, and many others around the place.  We may utilise electricity rather than water power, but little else has changed.  We would be quite comfortable operating in a workshop of the 1840s, and in turn someone from that era would find ours very familiar as well.  Our links with our roots are not very long at all.

A tablesaw is still very recognisable as a tablesaw, as with the thicknesser, jointer, horizontal borer etc.  It seems the only really new technology in our workshops is the router, and even then it is quite possible the spindle moulder dates back far enough to be included in water powered workshops.  In 1925 they were still using flat-sided cutters, so that is something we can be grateful has improved over time! (Kickbacks would have been common, and incredibly violent).

So have a look at Ben Thresher’s mill, right out of the pages of history, and enjoy as I have, that we are still keeping these traditions alive in our own workshops.  The digital age of woodworking seems to be approaching, CNC, laser, 3D printing etc, so lets not allow our craft and skills to be lost in the way that digital photography has affected (what I call) chemical photography, and what computers and iTunes is slowly doing to music. (Had to end on a note of controversy!)

Filed under: Shed | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Baby Bed Build Bis

Posted on June 30, 2012 by Stuart

Had a change to take another crack at the cot build this weekend, which was good – more progress.

After last weekend, we had the bed itself built (as in the surround and support for the mattress), so today it was time to build the side rails. Oh, and fwiw we are referring regularly to ensure compliance with the Australian Standard for cot design, so the maximum clearance between mattress and bed, height of sides, gap between slats etc etc are all being carefully adhered to.

Once again, we started with a large chunk of timber (around 250×45) and began machining it down.

A combination of jointer, thicknesser and tablesaw gave us the rails and stiles as the frame for the sides.

Despite having them for years, this is about the first time I have actually used the jointer MagSwitch featherboards. They worked very well to ensure even pressure across the jointer cutter. A quick tap down between passes to ensure even pressure is maintained as the board becomes thinner (I do 0.5mm passes on the jointer, so not a real issue in any case). And in case you were wondering, we jointed an edge so we had something straight and true to run up against the tablesaw fence, then ran the board through the tablesaw to get 2 lengths a bit over 90mm wide. From there, we started machining the boards from scratch, jointing a side, then an edge. Next onto the tablesaw to rip the boards in half, so they ended up 20mm thick after machining.

We then spent some time testing and preparing to make the slats for the sides. A number of test pieces, and setups done to fine tune the operation. We started with the Domino – when we need mortices, why not use the best tool for the job?! So with a 10mm cutter, and set to the widest mortice setting, we got a 33mm slot, and thus our slat size was determined. We then made one, and tested it for strength. That went well too.

With all setups done, all the spare pieces, offcuts from other pieces of this job were run through the tablesaw to create the number of slats needed, with a number of spares. Each was then tested, bent and abused. A few failed, but the majority were perfect, and will be able to survive even Arnold Schwarzenegger’s kid.

Still need to actually create the mortices in the rails, but will do that after some sanding and finishing.

To get the required slat placement, the Domino grows wings. It makes cutting the required mortices so incredibly easy, and accurate.

Now I know there are two main groups out there – those who cannot understand how any tool can be worth as much as a Domino, and those who love the tool. Unfortunately, I used to belong to the first camp, but since first using the Domino and then more recently (last couple of years) owning one, I cannot help but reside in the second. Awesome machine. Yes, I know – hideously expensive. But very, very cool. One of these days, I’d love to become permanently familiar with the Domino XL too.

20120706-173704.jpg

Filed under: Project, Techniques, Timber | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Burl meet Torque

Posted on April 5, 2012 by Stuart

Another burl found itself being flattened at the hands of the TWC at Ballarat last weekend. This one had quite a curvature, with over 1″ from edge to centre on the cut side.

20120406-221422.jpg

For a thicknesser, this would be a nightmare. For the TWC this was a piece of cake.

20120406-221635.jpg

You may be able to see the separate passes in the photo- this is because at the time of the photo, I was working on maximum material removal (4-5mm per pass, to the full width of the cutter). This means the grain on adjacent passes got cut in the opposite direction to the previous, resulting in a different reflective surface- you can see the passes, but it still feels flat.

The final pass is done with very little material removed 0.5mm depth of cut, and maximum 1/2 the cutter width max, so all the grain is pushed in the same direction.

Either way, a few passes with the ROS (random orbital sander) removes any minor irregularities.

The problem for the thicknesser is both the tortured grain – in all directions so tearout is likely. The cutter direction on a thicknesser makes this even more likely, with the cutter scooping the material up, out of the surface.

Secondly, stabilising a burl to pass through a thicknesser is also tricky. With drive rollers pushing down before and after the cutter, the chances of the burl shifting and getting a massive kickback from the thicknesser is pretty high.

On the Torque, the cutter direction is horizontal, the amount of material removed each pass can be minimal, and is not over the entire burl width simultaneously, and there are no feed rollers to potentially destabilise the burl during the cut.

Thicknessers obviously perform a very useful role, but when their idiosyncrasies work against you, the Torque Workcentre takes over!

Filed under: Manufactures and Suppliers, Techniques, Timber, Tools | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Completing timber dressing

Posted on January 8, 2012 by Stuart

The boards have been resawn on the bandsaw, and had a side and edge dressed on the jointer.  Next step is the thicknesser.

15" Thicknesser

I have a 15″ thicknesser, with a fixed head and the table rises and falls.  I prefer this style of thicknesser, but it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.

The other version has a fixed table, so any additional infeed and outfeed support can remain at the same height, and the motor and blades rise and fall.  Winding the height down isn’t a problem – gravity and all that, but increasing the height is a lot more work, especially with the weight of a decently-powered induction motor overhead as well.

On the other hand, my thicknesser has a motor in the cabinet, and rise and fall is only the weight of the table – very smooth, very easy.  Added bonus, as the head doesn’t move, I have my drum sander located on top,  and a very functional arrangement it is, especially as the thicknesser and the drum sander both have the same requirement for infeed and outfeed.

Dressing boards

With the side dressed on the jointer face-down, the boards are fed through.  There is no point rushing the process – a little taken off each pass will still result in a finished product very quickly.

If I had a spiral head, things may be a little different, but I still have a thicknesser head with straight blades, so loading the machine and chipping away needs a little more finessing.

This doesn’t refer to the ‘spiral’ heads that have a bunch of the small square cutters arranged in a spiral around the head, but are still presented to the timber straight on.  This means the loads on the blades and machine are much less, but they are still chipping at the surface.

Instead, there are spiral heads where the small blades each present to the surface at an angle, producing a slicing motion.  This gives the best finish, combined with the benefit of much lower loads on the tool, and excellent waste clearance.

Completed boards

The boards, now complete (and you can see the bookmatching, if I intended to use the timber for that).

In this case, I now have a dressed side, the other side also dressed and parallel to the first side (and the boards are a uniform 10mm thick).

One edge is also flat, and at 90 degrees to both sides.  This side will be very relevant for the next step – the tablesaw.

How a thickness planer works.

From Wikipedia - a diagram of thicknesser operation

An illustration of the operation of a jointer ...

From Wikipedia - compare the above operation to this one which is how a jointer works.

Related articles

Filed under: Techniques | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Picking up a slab

Posted on May 22, 2011 by Stuart

In many sheds (and parties, and sports clubs) down under, that’d raise connotations of an end of the productive side of the day, and the cracking of a few favourite beverages is about to commence.  But for woodworkers, there is also the possibility that it means just that – the acquisition of a large flat slice of timber, usually cut by someone else who has more specialised toys than in the average shed.

However, if you own (or are considering) the Torque Workcentre, it is not out of reach, as the slabbing attachment gives the typical workshop the ability to claim very useable timbers from the very trees in which it grows.

The attachment has 2 main parts – two clamps that attach to the main arm on the TWC, and securely clamp a chainsaw between them.  About 4″ of the chainsaw bar length is lost in this, so a 16″ chainsaw can slab a maximum width of 12″.  The bigger the chainsaw, the more powerful the motor, the larger the slab you can manage.

There is a block on either side of the bar (narrower than the width of the bar, so as not to touch the chainsaw teeth) that hold the chainsaw firm, and with one at either end of the bar, it is locked in tight.

The position is probably different from chainsaw to chainsaw, but a hole through to, or scalloped out area near the chainsaw would be useful so blade adjustments can be done without the need to remove the chainsaw from the jig.

I’d also like to see some form of oil reservoir mounted above the chain with a controllable feed rate, as the normal chain lubrication method being gravity fed is rather ineffective with the chainsaw perpetually on its side.  However, these are all refinements to the basic operation.

I started with a lump of camphor laurel (yes, oh Roving Reporter, THE lump of CL – you’ll have to find an alternate seat!) that I picked up for $10 a couple of years ago, and secured it to the TWC.  Although this piece is short enough to pass through a resawing operation on the bandsaw, it works well as a test piece here.  With the chainsaw bar levelled out, and the depth of cut set, I was ready for a first pass.

The first cut was set very shallow – I only wanted to take off enough to flat-spot the log, so it would sit more securely on the workbench for further slices.

As the chainsaw bit in, the unmistakable aroma of camphor wafted through the shed, undiminished by the continuous air filtration of the Microclene unit, or even the head protection afforded by the Purelite Respirator (I geared up a bit for this) – I’d have to have used a carbon filter to extract that, but it isn’t unpleasant (although my wife strongly disagreed when she made a surprise visit, committing the cardinal sin of interrupting shed time :( ;) )  Even a couple of hours later when I walked past the outside of the shed, the smell was still very much in evidence!

With the first cut complete, the log was flipped over for the first slab to be cut.

One of the problems I always have, is getting timber that is thick enough when I go shopping – like purchasing steak from the supermarket, they are sold so measly thin, on the (probably correct) assumption that people will buy more quantity, rather than quality (3 thin steaks sells better than 2 thick ones).  This isn’t an issue when you do it yourself, and in the case of slabbing a trunk, you can cut the slab as thick as you like.  And you can also choose whether you want regularly sawn timber, or quarter sawn.

Not an option you normally get from a box-hardware store.  For the same reason – a quarter sawn log is more expensive (more timber is wasted) and the average shopper doesn’t distinguish, other than on the price.

There are plenty of ripples across the surface from the cut, but a few quick passes through the drum sander got rid of them without a problem (I used the drum sander to avoid the snipe from the thicknesser on a short board).

Finally, it was off to the new workbench, and firing up of the Festool ETS 150/5 (random orbital sander)

Hard to see here, but a quick rub down with a wood oil (the ol’ Triton oil in this case) really picked out the details.  I didn’t actually need to oil it yet, other than my own curiosity – the board will head over to the tablesaw to cut it to size for the next project, and get whatever finish is applied to that, but I just wanted to really see how the details responded, especially the spalting, to a bit of oil.

Filed under: Manufactures and Suppliers, Project, Techniques, Timber | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Now That’s a Knife

Posted on April 28, 2011 by Stuart

It’s only been 4 months since I got this set of steak knives from Professional Woodworker Supplies.  That is a pretty quick turnaround time for me these days!  Everything hasn’t gone to plan though, as I will elaborate, but I got close to achieving a good result.  I don’t like accepting a compromise – it may be that others wouldn’t notice anything wrong, but I would every time I use one of these.  However, I’m getting ahead of myself.

Knife blanks

These four knives are begging for some stunning handles (the timber on either side are known as “scales”), and so the timber of choice is African Rosewood.  I recently bought a couple of lengths during the recent April WoodFest with the vague idea of making a box, but it jumped out at me when I was looking for what to make the knives from.  The timber is around 19mm thick, so a bit over double the thickness required for each side of the knife.  So resawing was the order of the day.

Resawing the African Rosewood

I changed the blade down to a 5/8″ blade on the Carbatec bandsaw, then racked up the tension.  With the MagSwitch fence in place (single roller), the blade sliced the timber cleanly in two.  I am so loving having the bandsaw tensioning handle below the upper wheel.  The benefits of a larger bandsaw.

Single Roller MagFence making the job easy

Can’t beat those MagFences either for resawing. Love how easy, and accurate it makes the task.

Passes through the Drum Sander for accurate dimensioning

From the bandsaw, the next step is to run it through the drum sander.  This may not be everyone’s first choice – for one you have to have a drum sander to be able to use it.  I’ve become a big fan, especially for situations like this.  These are pieces of timber way too short to ever consider running through a thicknesser, so you’d have to resort to a ROS, hand plane or similar.  Me, I like the electron-murdering whirling abrasive wheel! With careful passes, I was able to get the board down to within 0.1mm of the required thickness.

Jig to accurately cut the handles

Next job was to shape the scales.  The only important side initially is the edge that butts up against the bolster.  To save on timber (a big mistake – not how I chose to do it, but any attempt to scrimp on timber inevitably leads to undesirable results, and more timber wastage. I know this, and still find myself doing it), I cut the timber close to dimension, and drilled holes using an MDF template I made of the scale from the knife tang. I used a couple of lengths of brass rod to replicate the rivets to position each scale to be cut precisely.

Thinning down the pins

For the two pins, I needed them a little thinner than the rivets would be, so I could get the scales off the jig.  To take off a small, controlled amount, mounting the pin in the drill, then running it on the sandpaper provided a precise size decrease.

Ready to cut the handle end

In hindsight, doing it this way was a mistake. Drilling the holes for the rivets needed to be done after the first scale was glued to the tang.

Knife handles roughed out

The scales, ready to be glued on.  Rather than gluing both sides at once, the plan was to do one side only, then use a pattern copying bit to get the scale to accurately match the tang.

Gluing the first handle side on

Two part epoxy resin (Araldite) being the glue of choice.

Clamped up

There is plenty of overhang which is a good thing, but this is where two mistakes compounded.  The trying to be too thrifty which resulted in the scale slipping in a couple of cases enough that the tang wasn’t properly covered, and when the glue had set, not trimming off the excess resulted in a couple of chipouts on the router table that destroyed the handle.  The router bit here is a straight bit with copying bearing.  Straight after this, I was down at Carbatec and picked up a solid carbide spiral router bit with double bearing – the spiral has a shearing/slicing action rather than a chipping action for the next time I attempt to make more handles.

Shaping the blank to the handle

Did have a couple of successes, the bearing running on the tang so the scale gets cut accurately to match.

As good as it got

The results were looking good, and the few refinements to my technique should prove very successful.  For the handles here, I took the photos, then took a chisel and snapped the scales off. Oh well, I’d rather it right than compromise.

Filed under: Manufactures and Suppliers, Project, Techniques, Timber | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Developing the Dust System

Posted on August 17, 2010 by Stuart

Another small development – from the overhead system from the bandsaw, it now leads across the shed to above the thicknesser and drum sander.  This drops down, picking up the outlets from these two machines before heading off to the dust extractor.

Picking up the dust generators

The diagonal clear pipe is from the overhead trunking. The drum sander feeds into the top of the Y section.  The trunking then leads to a second Y section which connects to the thicknesser.  Blast gates on each inlet obviously.

It has proved significantly harder to retrofit a new trunking system into an already occupied (crowded) shed.  It means the system is perhaps not as optimised as it could be.  Even though there seemed an excellent selection of parts in the trunking kit, more is needed.  Some longer runs use up joiners that would otherwise be needed for the components.  But I can’t knock having a system where everything actually joins together without duct tape fixes.

A roll of glossy, grey duct tape.

Rabbit Run Fixes

I still find the Rockler blast gate mounts superb, and provides a very secure system.

Filed under: Safety, Techniques | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

Spirals

Posted on June 14, 2010 by Stuart

Ideal Tools has a regular email they send out to subscribers (sign up through their website), which includes specials, and often some background info about what they are up to etc.

***Update*** you can sign up for the Ideal Tools Newsletter here

This time, they were talking about an ideal (heh) thicknesser they have just purchased for their training workshop – the Powermatic, with a Shelix head (a respected brand of spiral cutters).  They included a really cool graphic that I had to steal and use here.

Pity it is so small – it is hypnotic! (I want one (a Shelix head for my planer and thicknessers that is)!!)

As you can see from this closeup (also taken from the Ideal Tools email), not only are the cutters arranged in spirals, but they are also rotated so the edges of the cutters follow the spiral as well.  This is critical.  If the cutters are straight onto the direction of travel of the timber, they are chipping, not slicing, and no matter how much of a spiral they are in, the result is not the intent, or the finish that can be achieved.

The Shelix head does understand this principle.  The cutters will be a slicing action, resulting in very little tearout, even on cranky wood, and irrespective of grain direction.

But mostly, I just wanted to post that animation!

Filed under: Tools | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

15″ Cast Iron Thicknesser

Posted on October 20, 2009 by Stuart

As regulars of Stu’s Shed will have seen, I upgraded my thicknesser aways back (and have been very pleased with that decision ever since). I got the CTJ-681, but owners of the CTJ-680 also expressed how happy they were with their model.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I saw this in the entranceway of Carbatec (Melbourne) this morning: their floor model CTJ-680 going for $1095, down from $1449. Basically unused afaik, with a few shop marks on it (paint that has been a bit rubbed)

CTJ-680

CTJ-680

3HP motor, large columns, induction motor (which is a real pleasure after using brushed motor thicknessers that absolutely scream even before the timber starts being machined.  Brushed motors include the GMC, Ryobi, Triton etc)  15″ width, good blades, and if you ever have the inclination, it can be upgraded to a helical head.

Anyone tempted yet?

Filed under: Manufactures and Suppliers, Tools | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Developing the Dust System

Posted on May 21, 2009 by Stuart

I’m not sure if a dust system ever gets finalised.  At least it never seems to in my shop – I seem to be constantly changing my ideas, tool positions, and dust system layout concepts.  Oh well – it’s like a real-life jigsaw puzzle that can be assembled many different ways, and how well it works tells you which picture you’ve created.

As I’ve mentioned recently, I have capitulated and have moved the dust collector back into the main shed.  There are a number of reasons for doing so, and a number of reasons why I didn’t want to have to.

Reasons why I wanted the DC located in a different shed (or at least outside the primary workshop)

* Noise. DCs are noisy (not brushed motor noisy), but still, sounds of lots of air moving would be better elsewhere if possible.

* Dust. If air is passing through a filter, then there is a probability that dust will also be carried through, even if the filter is a 1 micron filter.  If the unit is in another location, some minor dust leaks are inconsequential.

* Space. The footprint of a dust collector is going to consume about 1 metre square of valuable shed floor space.

Benefits of having the DC in the main shed

* Starting and stopping. There isn’t the issue of requiring expensive remote starting systems.

* Blockages. Easier access to clear blockages, empty dust bags, clean filters.

* Airflow. Simply the less distance the air needs to move, the better the system works.

Relocated Dusty

Relocated Dusty

I’ve relocated the dusty into the same corner where the original 4″ tube to the other shed went, but now instead of joining the two halves of the system into one pipe, I’ve coupled each arm up to its own intake. In addition, I’ve also run the 15″ thicknesser directly in to maximise its collection.  More on that in a sec.

My primary influence on relocating the DC was performance.  After my recent air velocity tests, I decided that I was compromising the performance too much to have the luxury of it being in the other shed.  There are some other minor benefits as well, but they were not enough to sway the decision either way.

I haven’t decided if I will do anything to counteract the additional noise, other than running it when I need it rather than constantly.  I might investigate building a fake wall around it with noise dampening, but that is a project that will probably never actually eventuate.

To counteract any issue with fine dust leakage (and dust during bag changing), I have located it right near the overhead air filtration unit (which is also a 1 micron filter), so between the two, any dust I collect shouldn’t end up back in my environment.

Underneath the DC, I have used both 4″ inlets, as much to allow a smoother entry of air as anything.

DC Inlet

DC Inlet

I’m not happy with the result however.  The tubes you can see are – from the right hand side is a solid connection from one of the 2 main shed trunk lines.  It doesn’t have any flex section at all, and this is what I want to modify.  As much as flex sections have a greater internal roughness, a short section is going to have a tiny effect on the overall flow.  It would however, make removing the nozzle to clear out blockages much easier so that is the first change.

Into this same trunk line through a Y section is the output from the thicknesser.  However, after testing it out, it failed. Inside the DC nozzle are some grates/blocks to catch heavy particles before they hit the fan.  The amount of chips produced by the thicknesser formed a mass that caught there, and immediately blocked the pipe.  Without any airflow, the thicknesser then rapidly clogged its discharge nozzle.

I have 2 ways forward.  Removing the grates (which I am still dubious about their value), but I’m not sure if that will then result in the blades becoming blocked up, and accessing them is even harder.  The other solution is a pre-separator to catch the majority of the output from the highest producing machines.  I’ll start with this, and see if it is enough.  Damn- it looked to be an elegant solution.  But this is Bauhaus – form must follow function.

In the background is a flex end to the second trunk line, and that works well.

To improve functionality, I have replaced the flex hose to the tablesaw with another length of PVC pipe.

Tablesaw Extraction

Tablesaw Extraction

I’ve used a Y section which I’ve capped to allow cleaning of the system, and also as a way to add a bit of flexible hose when cleaning up around the place.

Jointer/Planer Extraction

Jointer/Planer Extraction

I’ve kept the extra flex from the jointer so I have the ability to move and angle it depending on the length of stock I’m trying to plane.  Each item has a blast gate (my modified version).

Filed under: Safety, Shed, Tools | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Next Page »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,296 other followers

%d bloggers like this: