WTF is “Fretwood”?

I was reading through Paul Hasluck’s book Cabinet and Joinery from 1907 and came across a term I am unfamiliar with.

It is from the section on making serving trays. Page 352: “The base, which is a piece of 1/4-in. thick figured oak fretwood, already planed, should be neatly rounded on the edges.”

What exactly is “fretwood”? The internet had the answer thanks to John Johnston on the Unplugged Woodworkers Facebook Group. They linked me to a PDF regarding fretwork from VictorianVoices.Net (Link).

It states, “Many sorts of wood are now in the market, ready cut to the proper thicknesses for fretcutting, and in addition to ordinary fretwood, what is known as three-ply wood is sold ; this consists of three thin layers of wood glued together, the grain of the middle piece running in a direction at right angles to that of the grain of the two outside pieces.”

What is fretwood? Wood used in fretcutting. Once of which is a plywood. For this specific piece I am going to guess that the 3-ply fretwood should be used. That makes sense based on the piece this is suppose to go in as there is no allowance for expansion and contraction of the part. Using plywood lets us ignore wood movement.

It looks like I’ll be making some 3-ply fretwood in the future.

Jorgensen 102 Low Angle Block Plane Review

TL;DR – I encourage you to buy tools from small makers, premium manufactures, or from the second hand market when you can. However, I recognize that cost and access may be a limiting factor and that is not an option for everyone. With that said, this plane can be made to do good work. Just expect to give it some TLC before hand.

I picked up the new Jorgensen 102 Low Angle Block plane to try out. I am a fan of small, yet usable, planes and thought it would be worth testing.

If you would prefer to watch the testing and review you can do that by clicking on this link: https://youtu.be/aNk0BGvGVKg

Otherwise, here is my review which is entirely subjective and based on a N of 1. Additionally, I have no affiliation with any company or maker that I mention or link to in my review or video.

I purchased the Jorgensen 102 from the local Lowes and it cost me $14.98 plus tax. There were about eight on the shelf and I ended up looking through all of them trying to find the one that looked the best. They come in a clamshell plastic package so there is only so much inspection that can be done while in the store.

Once I got it home and opened the package I found that the plane was covered in a thin layer of oil. An unexpected, yet welcome surprise. I made sure to read the instructions thoroughly and then set about putting the plane through its paces.

Specs

  • 3-1/2” (89 mm) stressed relieved steel body
  • 7/8” (22 mm) wide x 1/8” (3 mm) O1 tool steel blade (bevel up)
  • 20 degree bed angle
  • 25 degree primary bevel
  • The manufacture recommends adding a 5 degree secondary bevel
  • It weighs 7 oz (198 g)
  • 3/32” (2.4 mm) wide mouth

The specs were what I was looking for in a plane of this size and I give it an A-. The A- for the specs is because of the mouth. I would prefer for the plane to have a smaller mouth. The bed can be shimmed to close up the mouth, but a mouth of this size was not a deal breaker.

Ad Copy
I am going to pick on them for their ad copy. This is advertised as a low angle plane. Additionally, the instructions state, “the blade is flat ground at 25 degrees sitting bevel up in the body at 20 degrees making the cutting angle 45 degrees. The low angle makes it an excellent choice for endgrain work.” As shipped, this is not a low angle plane. It is a standard angle plane (I verified their stated bed and bevel angles). Adding a secondary bevel of 5 degrees as recommended would bump this into the high angle territory. To make it a low angle plane the bevel angle would need to be altered.

Second, they should not have called this a 102, in my opinion. They copied the 101 (I believe Lie-Neilsen’s version of the 101 to be specific). The 102 is a longer and wider plane with a lower bed angle.

In this category I would rate them an F. If someone was expecting a low angle plane and/or a LN/Stanley 102 copy they would not be getting what they expected.

Out of the Box Ready to Go
I think most of us would agree that for tools in this price range we should expect that some tuning up would need to be done prior to putting the tool to work. That was my expectation. However, the instructions stated that the tool was ready to go out of the box. I put that statement to the test. I was able to pull a shaving on Southern Yellow Pine. The thinnest shaving I could get it was about 4-1/2 thou thick (0.0045” / 0.114 mm). It was not the prettiest shaving though. Additionally, it took some effort to push the plane over the wood. With the blade fully retracted I noticed I was getting dust when pushing the plane across the surface of the wood.

Upon inspection of the blade, I found that it had two small nicks, as well as, a bur on the back of the blade. Additionally, I found the mouth also had a small bur on it. I believe that is what was generating the dust.

After looking at the blade, I checked the sole. According to the manufacture both were ground flat. The sole was mostly flat. The same for the blade. Both were fairly easy to get to flat.

In this category I give the plane a D. D’s get degrees and it passed in that it could make a shaving. Not a good shaving, but it could pull one. Again, I would not expect a hand tool to be ready to go out of the box, especially at this price point. But, the manufacturer said the plane was ready to use out of the box so I felt it warranted a rating.

Fit and Finish
Jorgensen was trying to hit a price point and this is where it was evident. Starting with the paint. It was applied unevenly with evidence of orange peel. In the front it was applied relatively thin and at the heal there was a large glob of paint hanging off the back. On the bed you could see and feel the milling marks. The cross bar that holds the lever cap was slightly out of square. On the underside of the lever cap there is a hole for a threaded insert. That insert is what the tensioning wheel screws in to. That hole is crooked causing the tensioning wheel to sit of kilter. The adjustment knob to extend and retract the blade has double tracked knurling. Then there was the previously mentioned issues with the sole, mouth, and blade.

With all that said, I’m giving the plane a C for fit and finish because none of these problems interfered with the functionality of the plane. Its ugly, but it works.

Performance
The plane did require some tuning. I flattened the back of the blade and the sole. Both of those flattened relatively quickly. I also sharpened the blade. First at 25 degrees to make sure there was a consistent, nick free, bevel that was well polished. Then I added a 5 degree secondary bevel as recommended by the manufacture. This resulted in a 50 degree cutting angle. I used a small diamond file to remove the bur that I felt at the mouth. I also used a sand paper to break all of the edges where the sole and the sides meet to ensure none of the edges could catch.

After tuning the plane, I attempted to pull shavings from the same piece of Southern Yellow Pine as I did with the out of the box test. Post tuning the plane performed remarkably better. The thinnest shaving I was able to get was about 1-1/2 thou (0.0015” / 0.04 mm). The shaving would not win a competition, but it was more than adequate for woodworking.

Using the plane on both face grain and end grain left the wood with a smooth and shiny surface.

A test on a single board is one thing, but it I felt it needed to be used more before any conclusions could be made. I then used it heavily on a small box I was making out of red oak. The plane ended up being used, in some manner, for dimensioning, cutting chamfers, smoothing bevels, flushing dovetails, spot smoothing, and general smoothing purposes. Overall, it worked well taking both thin and thick shavings. Now, I did find myself having to adjust the blade frequently to try and get that perfect depth of cut, but that was not detrimental to getting the work done.

I give it a B for performance. It was pretty good.

Now, should you buy one?
If you are looking for a plane in this size, and you have the means, I would encourage you to look at the small makers or the premium manufactures first. It has been my experience that you get more value for your money buying tools from those places. Especially, when you purchase from small makers.

Alternatively, a vintage Stanley 101 is relatively the same price as the Jorgenson 102. Additionally, there are other styles of antique planes that fall within the size range of this plane that may be worth considering (chariot planes, luthier planes, etc). Buying antique planes is a way to (sometimes) save some money. It can also reduce the environmental impact caused by mass manufacturing if that is something that is of concern to you.

If budget and availability are your primary concerns then this plane is one to consider. You can absolutely do great work with it. Just expect to have to tune it and try to pick the best looking one before you buy.

So should you buy one? Maybe. It all just depends on your set of circumstances, budget, and values.

As for me, I am using this plane as a stop gap measure. It serves a need while looking for a replacement. I am not disappointed with it, but I’m not excited about using it either. It works for the time being.

Below are links to where you can purchase this plane as well as some alternatives. I’m also including a list of independent and custom plane makers for your consideration (please let me know who I should add to that list). Again, I am not affiliated with anyone linked below. Nor do I earn any commissions or other income if you click on one of the links.

101 Sized Planes

Independent and Custom Plane Makers (please let me know who I need to add to the list)

More disclosures: I occasionally make tools to sell as well.

Update! November 2022

Man, oh man it has been awhile since the last post. In the last post I talked about building a chariot plane. I still have not done it as other stuff has peaked my interest. I did make another mitre plane. This one was based on the Stanley no 9. The full build series is up on YouTube. That was a tough build. I would like to make another one, but I need to find an easier method of doing so.

I also built a bullnose smoothing plane. There is a severe lack of antique wooden hand planes in my area so I made my own. This plane was inspired by the one found in John Whelan’s book The Wooden Plane: It’s History, Form, and Function. I’m using a repurposed Hock 1-1/4″ scrub plane iron. Making my own irons is a goal for 2023. The plane is made from birch and brass with a damascus steel strike button. I also experimented with antiquing the wood and brass. There is room for improvements, but overall I am extremely pleased with it. I have plans for a second version and I think that is one I will offer for sale along with the hammers I am making from time to time.

I have a few furniture projects underway and will post more about those in the future. In addition to the youtube stuff I am building a new shop. That is one where I will be doing the occasional vlog. The first one is linked below.

It is a 11:15pm on a Wednesday. I’m wrapping this up. Thank you for the continued support.

Iteration, Iteration, Iteration

Time to make another infill! I’ve been using my infill mitre plane for a few months now and I have some ideas for improvements.

The first major change is that this one will be a chariot style plane instead of a mitre plane. The overall size will be similar, but I am switching up the body profile. The major problem with my mitre plane is clearing the shavings. I am going to assume that I made a mistake somewhere along the line and it is not an inherent flaw in this type of plane design. With my plane I need to periodically stick a pencil or a scratch awl into the thumb compartment to clear our the shavings. At this small size I cannot easily get my fingers in there. With the chariot plane it has a bit of a cut away in that area that I think will make clearing out shavings easier to manage without searching around for another tool.

The other issue I have with my plane is that it is not very comfortable to use with one hand. The chariot planes have a wooden wedge that is rounded to fill the hand. I think that style of wedge design will greatly improve the feel.

Additionally, there are several minor areas that need modified in order to improve the general feel as well. The knob on the lever cap would feel better if it was rounded or if it had a large chamfer. It’s current configuration digs in to the palm if the plane is being use one handed and pulled like a Japanese hand plane. The same is true for the end of the blade. The end of the blade is straight with rounded over corners. When the blade is being used as a tote the corners can hit pressure points in the hand. I think this could be reduced if the end of the blade was a half circle. Another change would be extending the rear infill. In the current configuration it stops once level with the top of the plane’s body. This leaves a bit of a gap between the blade and the plane body. I find my index finger naturally wants to rest here and it can be a bit of a pinch point. Extending the rear infill I believe would correct this problem. There is chance that changing the wedge design may alleviate all of these issues. It is going to fundamentally alter how I hold and use the plane. I will not know until I try and then iterate on the design. My goal is to make this plane comfortable to use both with one hand and two hand operations.

Besides the comfort aspect, I am also working through ways to simplify the building process and hit the aesthetics that I am looking for. At the time of this post I am on version 4 for this hand plane.

Version 1 – This was made from plastic. I was trying to work out the general size, feature placement, and build operations. This gave me enough information to start working with steel.

V1


Version 2 – I decided to make the sides from A36 mild steel with an O1 tool steel sole. A36 for the price and tool steel for its longevity. I absolutely botched cutting the dovetails on this one. I attempted to do them on my hobby mill and it did not go well. However, it taught me a lot so I consider that a win.

V2


Version 3 – I started over and switched to a hand cut dovetails like I used on my mitre plane. These went better, but I paused worked on this version to try other options.

The first change will be with the steel I am using. The good thing about destroying one set of parts is that you now have extras to experiment with. The infills are going to be held in with rivets so I used the remains of version 2 to work on riveting. I used some 1018 cold rolled mild steel for the rivets. Besides finding out the need to improve my technique I discovered that the two steels had a slight difference in color once filed. At least to my eyes. My goal for this project is to make everything look as seamless as possible. It is possible that it does not matter, but I figured one way to improve the chances of making that a reality is to use the same type of steel for both the rivets and the sides. I switched to using 1018 steel for everything because this was the easiest to find in the widest variety of shapes that are needed for the various components.

Working on the rivets also made me start thinking about the dovetails. My goal for this project is to make the construction invisible. Personally, half the fun of the dovetails is being able to see them. That is one of the things that is so appealing, IMO, about the brass and steel planes. You get to see the work. And it is a lot of work. If the goal is invisible, why put in the same amount of work for half the pay off? So, I started looking at alternative construction methods. I assume that any method is going to be labor and time intensiveness. The main difference, I can see, is where I am spending that time. With the dovetails I am spending it hand filing. With other methods that time is spent standing at the lathe or mill.

Now, I am keeping all of the parts I made for version 3. If V4 does not work the way I want it to I can pickup where I left of on V3 and continue.

V3

Version 4 – The challenge now is figuring out how to make the plane using a different construction method. I have found a few so far. The first is casting the plane and then sweating on a tool steel sole. That method is going in the “that would be cool, but maybe someday” pile.

The next one is cutting the sole with integrated pins. This one comes from Holtey planes. Cool, but no. Karl Hotley is a wizard with a mill and a CNC. I do not have the equipment or the knowledge to do something similar.

The third method comes from Lazarus planes. It is a combination of screws and dowel pins. This one seems do able with what I am working with. The challenge will be making a precision hole. I am searching for short drill bits and reamers that will work with my hobby mill. I need short cutters because of the mill’s limited z-height. The major issue here is knowing what to look for and then finding the one that fits my budget.

The last method I am looking at is drilling and tapping the sole and locking the sides in with custom made screws. This one also comes courtesy of Karl Holtey. This is the one I am leaning towards as it would be the easiest one to implement with my current tool and knowledge set. Individually making screws seems like a tedious process. On the other hand, I feel like I could spend a weekend at the lathe just making extra screws. Then I have them ready to go for future builds. A bit of extra work now for time savings in the future. I want to make a few of these at the very least.

Version 4 – ready for drilling

With the sides sorted I am now making the internal parts for this plane. Currently, I am working on the front infill and the sole. I am determining sizes at the moment. I had a drawing of the outline of an older plane to use as reference. The only dimension that was given was the length of the sole to work from. All of the other dimensions I needed to workout for myself. To start finding the dimensions I scanned the drawing and then scaled it so the sole length was correct to the original. From there I rescaled the drawing to generate numbers that were easier to work with. A sole that was 3-1/4 inches long made more sense to me than one that was 3-19/64 inches long. This slight shrinking made each of the component’s dimensions land on or near a common fraction. I could use the measuring functions inside the software to get general measurements of the other features of the plane. However, I found the easiest thing to do was print the newly scaled drawing and then use calipers to make my measurements. At this point it became an exercise of picking a size, trying to hit it on the mill, and then seeing if it looks to the right. Tedious, but fun!

The reference plane had an adjustable mouth like on a standard block plane. I want to try and do that on my plane as well. I’m going to do this by making a two piece sole. The fixed sole will be made from O1 tool steel. The moveable sole will be made from a bit of bronze. In terms of the aesthetics, I think that contrast will help to communicate that this part is suppose to be different. I plan on doing that with the lever cap and knobs as well. The parts that are suppose to move I want to stand out from the steel body.

Now, because I am making an adjustable mouth I am going to make the front infill from steel. 1018 like the sides. I’ll be putting a screw or two through it to hold the moveable sole. The steel should provide better performance than wood in this application.

I am slowly getting these to the right size.

Back to the changes. The last of the major changes I want to make from the first plane is changing how the blade is adjusted. Currently it is done with a hammer like you would with a wooden hand plane. I like this for lateral adjustments. I do not like this as much for extending and retracting the blade. On my mitre plane you cannot retract the blade with the hammer as there is no place to hit the plane or the blade to do so.

On this plane I need to solve that problem. There are three options as I see it. The first is making a snecked iron. The problem here is that I am using premade iron from Hock as I do not have the equipment or the experience to heat-treat my own blades. Drilling through hardened tool steel to add a sneck will be a challenge. I likely will need to figure out how to anneal just the rear section of the blade without ruining the temper on the cutting edge.

The second option, is making a Norris style adjuster. I have these on my Veritas planes and I like how they work for the in and out adjustments. I do not like them as much for the lateral adjustments. This is okay as I can use my hammer to make the lateral adjustments which is how I prefer to do it anyway. I have the same issue as above. I am using a commercial iron and I need to figure out a way to modify the iron to work with an adjuster.

The third option is leave it as is. There are several makers with planes that do not have snecked irons nor adjusters. It works for them. This options is the easiest. This may be a problem that I do not need to solve. I may just need to change my technique.

My next step is to finish dimensioning my parts then it is on to testing out different screw designs. I need to get a torque wrench so I can achieve repeatable results. The goal to be able to tighten the screws enough so the heads deform and make for a seamless joint, but not so much that I strip out the screw threads while tightening.

I’ll report back after I’ve done some experimenting.

Making a Metal Mitre Plane: The Last Part

Honestly, I’ve lost the steam to keep working on these posts about the mitre plane. It is finished and I am very happy with it.

Specs:
5″ long
1-1/4″ Hock iron
1/32″ mouth opening
Maple infill
25 degree bed angle with a 25 degree bevel angel

The build video is up on YouTube. Pictures are below. Thank you for following along.



P.S. – I’m going to make another one.




Making a Metal Mitre Plane: Part 7 – Fixing Mistakes

If you have seen the making of video (link here) you’ll know I made a lot (A LOT) of mistakes. However, that is how we learn.

The major issue I had was that I drilled the holes for the cross bar in the wrong spot. This caused the cross bar to be twisted and it meant there was not enough room to insert a wedge between the bar and the blade.

Instead of starting over I decided to plug the holes with silver solder and redrill. It is not a perfect match, but it will do.

I waited to drill this hole once the body was together because I did not know where it needed to be when I was laying everything out. I should have taken more time during the layout stage to solve that problem. Oh, well. I’ll know for next time.

Another Follow-Up to Making My Hammers: Finishing

TL;DR – Jump to the end for the schedule I followed for this batch of hammers.

I’ve slightly changed what I have been doing when it comes to finishing compared to the original post. Spoilers – Even though I liked the result, I’m probably going to alter what I did here on the next round of hammers. It is a balance of getting the look I am after and finding efficiencies in the finishing process.

In the original post I wrote that I added two coats of brown dye with a brush, pulled this back with 600 grit sand paper, and then followed by a gray 3m pad. After the brown dye I applied yellow dye and then a clear coat.

I am still doing that, but I have altered the steps. The point of adding the brown dye and then pulling it back was to help pop the curl and darken up the overall color of the handles. The curl will suck up more dye than the surrounding wood. When the wood is sanded the curl will hold on to most of the dye that was applied. With subsequent dye coats the curl will be darker overall and stand out more. Additionally, I wanted to have multiple layers of color. Adding brown first and then yellow could get me closer to the color I wanted than doing either of those dyes by themselves.

To my eye, I can get the same effect by brushing on and then pulling back just one coat of brown dye. That second coat is not needed. However, at this stage, by adding the second coat of brown dye, after sanding, the handles has a darker overall color while retaining the curl pop. This alteration has gotten me closer to the look that I have been trying to achieve.

The other change that I made is to what I am sanding the dye coat with. In earlier batches it was 600 grit sandpaper and a gray 3m pad. For this batch I used a maroon 3m pad followed by a gray pad. The maroon pad better conformed to the handle. This seemed to remove the excess color in a more even manner compared to the sandpaper.

For this batch I brushed on a weak coat of brown dye (1/2 tsp to 16 oz water). I then wiped it off with a rag. The color is uneven, but that is okay. This is getting sanded off. As for rag vs brush. The brush seems to flood the surface more. I wanted as much dye in the curl as I could get.

IRL, this is darker and more of a reddish-purple than the photos show. Also check out the blotchy spot on the left.

Once this first coat was dry I started sanding it with a maroon 3m pad. After the maroon pad I went over it with a gray 3m pad. I could do everything with the gray pad, but it takes a long time to cut through the color that way.

The color has evened out and is mostly in the curl. The non-curly areas still have some color to them though. Additionally, the blotchy spot near the head is gone.
One coat of dye after sanding on the left. One coat of dye before sanding on the right.
This is after one coat and sanding compared to an undyed board. The curl is more prevalent and overall the color is darker.

After I sanded the first coat I applied another coat of brown dye. This time I applied it with a rag. The rag allowed me to get a fairly even coat compared to the brush.

In the next photo, the handle on the left has been dyed, sanded, and redyed. The handle on the right has been dyed once. Both handles have a similar color, but the one on the right looks a bit muddy and with less grain clarity. At least to my eye.

At this stage, these handles still look a little bland. The clear coats will fix this. What the dye looks like while it is still wet is what it will look like when then clear coat is added.

After I finished with the brown coats I added a bit of yellow dye to the wood. I use the same 1/2 tsp to 16 oz water mix for the yellow. The yellow was applied with a rag. In my opinion, the addition of some yellow helps to make everything pop. The amber tones in an oil based top coat will also do this. However, I have been using a blonde dewaxed shellac for the top coat. I think the yellow dye prior to adding shellac helps overall as it allows for more amber tones than I would get from the shellac alone.

I believe I picked this tip of from one of John McLaughlin’s Shop Night Live, live streams. IIRC he suggested that adding yellow dye to walnut will improve its color. I was working with dyed maple, but I decided to try it anyway and I liked the results. It may be the placebo effect, but to my eyes there was an improvement.

This is what the handles look like after a coat of yellow. This is looking pretty good. Normally, I would do a second coat, but I may have to stop while I am ahead. If you could not tell I am writing the post mostly in real time over the several days it is taking me to finish the handles. At this point I have not decided what I am going to do regarding the yellow. I do know that the next step is to burnish the handles with a white 3m pad. I did not need to do this on the last batch of hammers, but on this batch the handles feel just a bit fuzzy. It is likely the dust that was in the air has settled on the surface of the handles. On the last batch of hammers I was able to work through 2 coats of brown, 2 coats of yellow, and 2 coats of shellac all in a single day. That left less time for dust to land on the surface. On this round there have been a few days between the brown and yellow coats. Plenty of time for dust to stick to wet dye.

I decided to stop where I was with the dye and move on to the shellac. I am considering applying an amber shellac for a couple of coats. Much more experienced finishers have said that great color is added in layers. I think that is true. Right now, there is brown and yellow in the wood. Adding yellow that sits on top of the wood should help to add depth to the color (I think). I will follow that with a few coats of blond shellac so I do not get things too yellow.

Here is what the handle looks like after it is fully finished and waxed. I decided to go with a few coats of dewaxed blonde shellac and then follow that with two coats of dewaxed amber shellac. After the shellac hardened up I wiped on some clear paste wax that was thinned out with mineral spirits.

After the dye was done I needed to buff the handles with some white 3m pads. Then I applied two coats of the blond shellac. Let those cure and buffed them again with white 3m pads. I decided that I needed just a bit more color in the handles and used the amber shellac. Two coats here as well. Those were then buffed with 0000 steel wool. The wax was applied by dipping a white 3m pad in some mineral spirits before it went into the can to pull out the wax.

Overall, I like how these turned out. If I were to do it again I think I could skip the second coat of brown. The yellow dye and the amber shellac seemed to have washed it out, visually. If I were to try and make these darker I would skip the yellow dye and do two coats of brown. Or maybe a coat of black that is sanded back, then brown, then yellow, then blond shellac. The possibilities are endless! I’ve been keeping notes so I know how to replicate what I have been doing.

I am getting close to dialing in the color. The next thing I am going to experiment with is the top coat. More on that in a future post.

The Routine – This is what I did for this batch

1. Spoke shave, scrape, and sand the handles. Sand up to 600 grit. Raise the grain along the way.

2. Mix up a batch of water based seal brown walnut dye. I get mine from ToolsForWorkingWood.com (not a sponsor). The mix is on the weak side at 1/2 tsp per 16 oz of water.

3. Apply one coat of the brown dye with a brush. Wipe off the excess with a rag or a paper towel. Let this dry.

4. Sand off most of the color with a maroon 3m pad. Follow this with the fine gray 3m pad. The curly areas should retain most of their color. The other areas will still retain some of the dye, but will be lighter in color.

5. Apply a second coat of brown dye. This time with a shop paper towel or a rag. Make the coat as even as possible. Let this dry.

6. Apply a coat of water based medium yellow maple dye. Use the same mixture as the brown. Apply it as evenly as possible with a shop paper towel or a rag. Let this dry.

7. Buff the handle with a white 3m pad. If the handle is smooth then you can skip this step.

8. Apply two coats of dewaxed blonde shellac (1lb cut). After these coats have dried sand any rough spots. Start with a white 3m pad. If that does not smooth it out step it down to a gray pad. If the gray pad does not do it try some 400 grit sand paper. Rub two pieces of the sand paper together first to knock off any loose grit first. I find I get a better result that way.

9. Apply two coats of dewaxed amber shellac (1lb cut). After it has dried then sand it again, like before, if it is needed.

10. Evaluate the finish. Keep applying blonde shellac until the finish appears even.

11. After all of the shellac has been applied let it dry. At least overnight. The longer the better. The longer the shellac cures the better it will look in the end.

12. After curing buff the handle with 0000 steel wool.

13. Now it is time to apply the wax. Take a white 3m pad and dip it in some mineral spirits. Then dip the pad in some clear paste wax. Apply this to the handle and wait 10 or so minutes. Or whatever the can says. Then clean off the wax with a paper towel or rag.

14. After the wax has setup come back later and give it a quick buffing. Use a rag or some broken in jeans (like you are polishing an apple). This will give it that last little bit of shine.

TIP – in the US you can buy premixed dewaxed shellac. Look for a can Zinnser Seal Coat. It will come in a 2lb cut and you can thin it to a 1lb cut by mixing it 50/50 with denatured alcohol. Both can be found at the home center or the hardware store.

If you cannot find Seal Coat you can dewax a premixed can of Zinnser shellac by letting it sit. The wax will settle to the bottom of the can and you can scoop off the dewaxed shellac from the top. Zinnser sells clear (really a blonde) and amber shellac in the can. These come in a 3lb cut instead of a 2lb cut. You can mix these with alcohol to thin them out.

As for why dewaxed shellac over standard shellac. It seems to be tougher when the wax is removed. It better resists water, heat, etc. Dewaxed shellac has the added bonus of sticking to anything and anything sticking to it. This makes it great for barrier coats. For example, if you wanted to apply a water based varnish as a top coat to these handles it would be a good idea to apply a coat of dewaxed shellac first. This would minimize the chances of the water based dye from being reactivated by the water based top coat.

Thanks for putting up with my ramblings.




A Quick Follow-Up On Making My Hammers: Shaping The Heads

Looking back over my previous post I thought it was a little light on the details if someone else was trying to follow along and make their own hammer. I figured I should go more in-depth on how I shape the heads. Again, I am not a professional. This is the process that works for me and I am positive there are additional efficiencies that can be made. I am working on improving the build process with each batch that I make.

I start by cutting the heads to length and then cut in the peen on the back. Then I drill the hole for the handle and another for the pin. Once I am at this stage I can layout and shape the head. I want all of the holes drilled first so I can use that as a reference point. The handle hole is a stop point for me. From a visual stand point, I do not want the chamfers to get too close to this hole so having it drilled makes cutting the chamfers easier for me.

Once the head is cut and drilled I cover it in layout fluid. Then I come through with a marking gauge (one designed for metal) and draw out my lines. I draw a line 1/8″ from every edge on all four sides. I do the same for the face. These lines do not need to be perfect. I let my eye tell me if something looks good as I am shaping the heads. After I draw the lines in with a marking gauge I use a double square to mark my stop line. This is about 7/8″ from the front. This is the line closest to the handle hole. I mark this on all four sides. This is the line that I use to tell me where to stop cutting the chamfer.

Now that I have everything marked I put the head in the vise. I grip it by two edges so I can file straight across on the edge that is facing up. I start with a 1-B half-round file. I use the rounded side to remove most of the waste. Across the front half of the chamfer I will flip the file over and use the flat side to help flatten it out. After removing most of the waste with a 1-B file move on to a second cut file and finish up with a fine cut file. I use half-round files for all of these operations.

1-B
Second Cut File – You see I went past my stop line. That is no big deal. It can be blended out.
Finish by draw filing with a fine cut file. If you run the file down the length of the edge it will blend out and minimize the hard transitions.

TIP – cut one edge and then flip the head 180 degrees and cut the opposite edge. When you do this you will be holding the head by the original edges for the first two filing operations. Then, when you go to file the other edges you will be holding the head by the newly filed edges. I have found that when I try and hold the head by one original edge and one filed edge that the head tends to slip out of the vise fairly easily.

Now that the chamfers are filed I can round over the face of the hammer. I use the flat side of my half-round files to do this because I already have them out. You could use a flat file instead.

I start the rounding over process by filing roughly a 45 degree bevel around the face. I try to connect the layout lines on the front of the face to the ones that are on the side of the hammer as shown in the next two photos.

Once this is done I start breaking the sharp corners. I hold the file at approximately 45 degrees and move it in an arc around the perimeter of the head to start to make things round.

Once I have it to this stage, I sweep the file, in an arc motion, over the top of the hammer’s face. The start of the arc motion has the handle of the file is below the front of the vise. I work across from left to right. I will move my body and turn the hammer head in the vise so I can hit the face from all angles. The goal here to end up with a circle pattern in the middle of the face.

From here I will keep filing in an arc motion. Both horizontally (like in step 1) and vertically (like in step 2). I do this until the face is rounded over. At this stage there will be a number of flat facets in the face. Sweeping the file in all directs helps to break up these facets.

Once I am at this stage I pull the head out of the vise and hold it up to the light. I look at it from all four sides. I am looking to see if the head is roughly even in its roundness.

The left side has a bit of a hump.

I put the head back in the vise and will refine the face with a second cut file. With this file I am trying to remove any flat spots that may still be there and correct any errors I found when I held it up to the light. I recheck the head in the light often.

That is better

Once I am happy with the face shape I cover it in layout fluid. The next step is to start sanding and the layout fluid helps to illustrate where I still need to sand.

I start with 120 sand paper on a flat surface. I pull the head across the sand paper in a sweeping motion. I do this for all four sides, from chamfer to chamfer, with my hand titled, basically in every position so I can be sure that the entire face has been hit.

My sweep primarily hit one side. I’ll flip it and repeat the motion from the other side to keep the curve of the face even.

I sand until I have removed all of the layout fluid. The chamfers and front face are now ready to be smoothed and polished.

This photo is my second pass at rounding these hammers. I rounded them with the files and had to stop for the day. When I came back with fresh eyes the next morning I was not happy with how they looked and took them back to the files. Do not be afraid to redo something if it needs it.

You Do Not Have To Alternate The Growth Rings

TL;DR – You do not have to alternate the growth rings when you build stuff. Failing to alternate the rings is not why your table top warped. Your top warped because of moisture exchange and lack of proper joinery methods.

I’ve been seeing a steady stream of posts on subreddits and facebook groups where people are asking why their top has warped (Yes, please continue to ask questions. That is why we are all here!). The common response is some variation of “you should have alternated the growth rings” or “cut wide boards into narrow boards”. Neither of these are the cause of the top warping. Now, if you feel like this is personal, do not worry, this post is not directed at you. If you alternate the growth rings feel free to keep doing so (you’re not required to, but you can keep doing so ;)). What I am arguing is that you do not need to alternate the growth rings and failing to do so is not why tops warp.

The reason the top warped was because of moisture exchange often combined with inadequate use of proper joinery. Alternating the growth rings and cutting up wide boards do not prevent a top from warping. That is a myth. Your shop teacher, like mine, was wrong. The orientation of the growth rings will influence what the top will look like after it warps, but the orientation of the growth rings does not prevent nor cause warp.

When the boards are glued together with the growth rings in the same direction the top will develop a cup or a crown along the entire width of that piece if it warps. If you alternate the growth rings the top will look like a washboard if it warps.

There are advantages and disadvantages to using both orientations. If you join boards with the growth rings in the same direction you have two things going for you. First, you can minimize the appearance of sap wood when they are oriented heart side up. Second, if it warps (heart side up) it will rise in the middle. In this orientation the edges will stay tight to the finish piece, in the case of it being a top, and you only need a single point secured to the middle to hold things flat. This can also be a downside in a situation where the board has nothing to help keep it flat, like in a multi-piece cutting board. On something like a cutting board, if it warps it will end up having a hump in the middle that will be noticeable when sitting on a counter.

If you alternate the growth rings, it will require more points to hold the top flat to prevent the washboard look. Additionally, there will be more effort in getting color and grain matches due to the prevalence of sap wood appearing on the show side of the piece. However, in something like a multi-piece cutting board, where there is nothing to keep the piece flat, you can use the potential for washboarding to your advantage. If it washboards, it will no longer be flat, but compared to the previous example, it will appear flatter when sitting on a counter.

With all of that being said, when it comes to tops, panels, boxes, chairs, etc keeping things flat is done with joinery. Breadboard ends, battens, apron buttons, etc are what keeps everything flat. Alternating or not alternating the growth rings does not mean things will or will not be flat. How things look should be the priority. Pick the best side of the board to be the show face. Orient the boards that get the effect you are after. Growth ring orientation is secondary. Looks should be the primary focus.

For example, when I built this chair (pictured above), the seat was made from two pieces. I joined them together with the growth rings going in the same direction and oriented heart side up. Of the two sides, the heart side looked better. Of these two boards, one was primarily green with a bit of white at the edge and the other was primarily white. Joining them together with the growth rings in the same direction let me color match them fairly easily. Additionally, I could use the way wood moves to my advantage. If the seat was to warp it would get a cup along the width of the entire seat. With the heart side up, if it moves, the seat will rise in the middle and the edges will curl down. However, the legs and the stretchers will resist this. If the seat tries to cup it will be pushing into the undercarriage so the seat remains flat. The better choice here, in my opinion, for both looks and structure, was to join the boards with the growth rings going in the same direction.

Again, alternating growth rings is NOT required. Do not limit yourself by rigidly sticking to alternating the growth rings. This is a “rule” that is okay to break.

Similarly, you do not need to cut wide boards into narrow boards. Joinery will keep these boards flat as well. If you have a beautiful piece of 12″ wide stock, why cut it into three 4″ pieces just to glue it back together? The only thing you are doing is cutting up perfectly good wide stock. If you are cutting up wide boards it should be to remove defects not in attempt to keep things flat after a piece is built. The one time you may want to slice up and rejoin a wide board is in the milling process. If you have a rough sawn board that is extremely cupped, twisted, etc that may require ripping and rejoining. In that case, where the defect is severe enough that you cannot get it out by planning and jointing then ripping it and regluing it could remove enough of that tension that you can get it flat. However, that is a very different situation from cutting up a perfectly good board so it stays flat in a finished piece. If a board is flat in the milling stage then joinery will keep it flat when it is in your piece. There is no need to slice up wide boards unless you are trying to remove a defect or get it to the correct size.

With all of this being said, if you experience warp it is due to moisture exchange and exacerbated by the lack of proper joinery methods. First, all wood moves. Even in climate controlled homes and even if they are coated in thick layers of finish. This is why drawers can stick during the wet times of the year and move freely during the dry times. Or why a you may see a bare spot in the finish on the edge of a cabinet door during the dry season. Wood is always trying to be at equilibrium with the surrounding environment. That is what causes wood to warp. You can mitigate this through acclimation and joinery.

Acclimation happens in the building phase. I will focus on kiln dried lumber. You can build furniture with green lumber (fresh from the tree), but the steps to do so can be a bit different and I suspect that a majority of use are building things with kiln dried lumber. The first thing you need to do is let the lumber you buy acclimate to your shop. Bring it in, stack it and sticker it (see below). This allows for air to get to all sides of the boards. This helps to let the moisture release evenly from both faces. If it can escape evenly then the board may warp less. Then just let it sit. Get yourself a moister meter and take a reading. It doesn’t really matter what the number is. Come back a few days to a week later and take another reading. Then repeat as necessary until that number stabilizes. Once you are getting a consistent reading that board has acclimated to your shop environment. If you are buying furniture grade lumber from a hardwood dealer then this process likely will not take a long time. If you are buying 2x material from a home center then this process will most often take a while. Construction grade lumber is kiln dried, but it is not dried as much as furniture grade lumber so it is going to take longer to dump its excess moister. If a completed piece of furniture is going to warp it happens, usually, because the boards still had moister to get rid of when it was built.

The photos at the bottom of this paragraph show what happens to construction lumber when it gets rid of its excess moisture. This is a 2×12 board that was sitting around for about a week after it was purchased. It developed a severe twist. It was flat when I bought it, but it twisted as it acclimated to the shop environment. If that had been in a finished piece it would have caused a major problem. These photos are also a good example when wide boards should be cut down. The two boards underneath under the twisted one could be made flat through jointing and planing. However, they should be ripped and rejoined to remove the pith. Wood likes to move a lot around the pith of the tree. If it is removed though, you end up with incredibly stable quartersawn lumber. Again, these should be ripped to remove a defect. If they were clear with minimal warping ripping and regluing is unnecessary.

After acclimation, there is the matter of making and then keeping everything flat. The next part happens when you are milling the lumber. Try to remove equal amounts of material from each side of the board. Even on an acclimated board, the inner part of the board likely will have more moisture than the outside. When you mill the lumber you will start exposing the wetter core. By taking equal amounts from each side you reduce the likely hood of the board warping. Once a piece is milled your joinery will keep it flat. If you cannot get a part joined then stack and sticker it during the building processes. If it sits on the bench, it will take and give off moisture primarily from one side. You want an even exchange to help keep it flat. On something like a wide panel you can wrap it in plastic. If you slow the moister exchange then it makes it harder for a part to warp before you can get it secured in the finished piece. .

To keep all of your hard work flat you need to join it to something else is such away that it lets wood expand and contract with seasonal changes, but restrains it from moving in a way that you do not want it to. The method that is used essentially comes down to the design of the final piece. On a table it could be breadboard ends, battens, or apron buttons. On a dresser top it may be screws in elongated holes. In a door it could be a panel in a frame. Joinery is what will keep things flat. You may have a perfectly flat top now, but if you do not attach it to something it, in all likelihood, will no longer be flat in the future. For example, a top made from boards edge glued together or from a single slab and then attached to some hair pin legs likely will warp sometime down the road. There is nothing to keep it flat as time goes on. That should not dissuade you from building things in this style. The addition of a couple of hidden battens is a minimal amount of additional effort that is going to extend the life of your piece. You get the same look without the potential issues.

In summary, growth ring orientation and cutting wide boards into smaller ones is not the solution to or cause of a piece of furniture warping. These are “rules” that can be broken. If you are concerned about warping in furniture, pay attention to moister exchange and the application of joinery. This is what will keep furniture flat.

And because you should not just believe some jackass on the internet here is some further reading:

(Edit for clarity- This is not a works cited. Instead, these are links that contain information that I gloss over. Look at all of the furniture you can and try things for yourself. Don’t just take my word for it. )

Avoiding Cupped Panels – The Wood Whisperer https://thewoodwhisperer.com/articles/avoiding-cupped-panels/

Glue-ups and Grain Direction – The English Woodworker https://www.theenglishwoodworker.com/glue-ups-grain-direction/

Text Book Mistakes – Tage Frid, Fine Woodworking Magazine https://www.finewoodworking.com/1976/04/01/textbook-mistakes

When Good Wood Goes Bad – Wood Magazine https://www.woodmagazine.com/wood-supplies/lumber/when-good-wood-goes-bad\

Calculating For Wood Movement – Ed Pirnik, Fine Woodworking Magazine https://www.finewoodworking.com/2013/08/29/calculating-for-wood-movement

How Calculate Wood Shrinkage and Expansion – Popular Woodworking Magazine https://www.popularwoodworking.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/WoodMovement.pdf

Keeping Plank Doors Flat – Christian Becksvoort, Fine Woodworking Magazine https://www.finewoodworking.com/membership/pdf/23131/011145078.pdf

Matching For Color, Grain Pattern, and Figure – Stephan Woodworking https://www.stephanwoodworking.com/MatchingForColorGrainPatternAndFigure.htm

Matching Wood Grain – Wood Magazine https://www.woodmagazine.com/woodworking-tips/techniques/intermediate/matching-wood-grain

Michigan Woodworker, p4 https://michiganwoodworkersguild.com/wp-content/uploads/newsletters/JANUARY-2021-NEWSLETTER.pdf

Use Wide Boards Best Side Up – Christian Becksvoort https://www.finewoodworking.com/2010/09/30/use-wide-boards-best-side-up

PS – I have no affiliation with the links listed above.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started