Guest
I'd consider them less complete if there was someone else with the same amount of technical skill but also with good design ability. ....." but can only make copies of other peoples work" is a line I've heard as a caveat when people describe someone who does great work but relies on copying other peoples' designs.
Member
I would definitely agree on the "less complete" part, but that still does not mean that their physical woodworking skills (strictly mechanically speaking) are inferior. Therefor taking their advice on how to cut, or saw, or make a joint, or whatever the case may be, may still very much a reasonable course of action and that they still deserve consideration.Originally Posted by David Weaver
Guest
Yes, they could teach us a lot. I could stand to watch them, for sure. I guess it is more about whether or not someone is remembered. People who come up with designs never have trouble being remembered. People who are excellent at copying them are not often remembered unless they do something untoward, like get caught taking credit for someone else's design or do something illegal (like faking vintage paintings, etc).
Member
The best craftsmen are those who are able to both design and build things. That's just the way it is. It can't be denied. Chippendale was one of them. Others who could not design relied upon his design books. The Anthony Hay Cabinet Shop in the museum did. But,it was their job to make accurate reproductions,not design them. I had that responsibility as tool maker. Not what I REALLY wanted to do,but that was my job. I designed my things on my own time. Certainly competent workers deserve consideration. I have friends like that who I give and make tools for. And,I like them. But,they'd be better if they could also design well.
David is quite correct: Those who just copy,be it in woodworking,or music,are not remembered. I personally knew banjo players who could play rings around Scruggs, but copied his style. Scruggs originated the style. He will be remembered.
Those who can design things,but not build them are called designers.They would also be better off if they could also build. I have made quite a few things for a customer who designed what he wanted me to make. He made some features that were an absolute PAIN to accomplish(and could have been better designed,too). He got big time,great paying jobs though,so I made the stuff.
Last edited by george wilson; 09-25-2014 at 5:34 PM.
Contributor
Design is the most torturous aspect of woodworking for me, I pour over the details for months before beginning a project. Quite frankly one should design, build, then redesign and build again, but I never do. I just design and redesign and redesign and redesign..then build.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
Contributor
Warren and all others, thanks for your information on chip breakers and standing up when others were trying to knock you down.
I kind of do that. Many times a project is started with just a general idea of a goal. Then what ever wood is available is measured to figure out how to not end up with a lot of scrap. Then the joinery is thought about, chosen and sawdust starts a flyin'.
Corrections are made along the way. Parts are trimmed to fit and it eventually comes together.
Currently my #1 project is another potting bench. My notes and templets from previous builds come into play. Getting it refined to allow cutting parts without having to work as much at fitting saves time.
Am I a designer? NO WAY! I just bumble through, remind myself to do the math and end up with a finished product that works and sometimes even looks proportional and gets pleasing comments from people at the farmers market.
Not an expert either, just an aggregator of knowledge found here and elsewhere to help me through with what seems fun to do.
It drives my wife crazy that I often work without plans.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
I make fairly well worked out plans prior to starting most of my projects. It helps, saves quite a bit of trouble on occasion.
However, some projects can be worked out on the fly, I felt like I did that with my humidors for the most part and they are great. Sometimes just hammering away at design so often just leaves you with some of the right imagery floating around in your brain when you are working this stuff out on the fly.
I was reading and interview with the architect who designed the Rare book library at Yale and he basically described his process as soaking up good design in fields outside of architecture was incredibly helpful to him in architecture. I feel the same can be applied here.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
Contributor
Hi George, what I meant was the 90+% of the woodworking world that isn't part of the SMC club.
And yes, design is art. As art, it is not appreciated the same by all. For example Salvador Dali - I don't get it. I'd take something by an old Flemish master over a Dali any day.
Contributor
Design is not always surrealism and it's not always divorced from the rational.
Bumbling forward into the unknown.
Member
I maintain that the 90% you refer to are beginners or semi beginners,Pat. Those who do not have sufficient information to make judgements on their own. They will follow a perceived leader. Someone who likes to write articles. Eric Sloane and Irving Sloane come to mind. Irving Sloane came to my shop. He had written a book in guitar making. He was looking for a shop he could photograph doing repair work. We didn't do that there. We made new instruments,demonstrating the trade to the public. I sent him to Martin Co..I was VERY surprised at the BASIC questions he began to ask me. He asked me if I REALLY believed in that STUFF about tuning violin tops and backs!! Every violin maker worth his salt does that!!! It prevents wolf notes. Later,I began to see that he would build ONE instrument,taking careful pictures the whole way through. Then,he'd make a book out of it. Soon,he published another book that had 3 or 4 simple instruments in it. He only ever made ONE of each. I must say,it was a smart way to make money,if not the best way to give advanced information about instrument making. There are more like him out there. They don't do woodworking for a living,they write for a living. I personally know a few more who do exactly that,though one is a leather worker. Well,I can't blame them for being smart! But,they are not real master craftsmen.
Have you noticed the number of drawings available for the simplest of projects? And just about all of the magazine articles cater to those who are cutting their first dovetail joint,or similar. I get so tired of seeing magazine articles,often written by beginners themselves,who like to see their names in print,who cater to beginning woodworkers. I refer to no one in particular here. I'm just telling the truth. Yet,I have striven to keep the beginners from getting wrong information. I suppose I recall how difficult it was for me in the beginning to get any information on guitar building. Back in 1954 there were no books available,and Alaska was a cultural vacuum. Hunting,fishing,and logging were the chief activities up there. It took me a very long time,and many failures to learn.
P.S.: Irving Sloane died a while back. Vintage Guitar Magazine eulogized him as "A pioneer guitar builder". What a load of hooey.
Last edited by george wilson; 09-26-2014 at 11:56 AM.
Contributor
Does anyone actually have video of this happening?
Maybe I'm being to literal here (which is highly possible), but you can't push a shaving back into the wood; calling it a shaving implies it's been separated from the wood and already removed. From Merriam-Websters:
My gathering from that article kind of clarifies things a little, though. I'm not the biggest fan of academic-esque papers, so perhaps my annoyance with that is making it harder to understand.: a very thin piece removed from something with a sharp tool
From what I gather, the breaker breaks the plane the shaving was taking (this causes the curl), radically redirecting it, putting pressure through the wood before the cutting edge can separate the wood. So while the cutting edge will always wedge the fibers, it's more of wedging/separating compressed wood. Seem better? (I'm just restating what I read to make sure I understand it, not to swipe someone's idea).
The Barefoot Woodworker.
Fueled by leather, chrome, and thunder.
Contributor
Have you seen the video linked in some of the discussion about setting the cap iron?
http://vimeo.com/41372857
That sounds about the same as my understanding of this.
If the chip breaker is set too far from the action there is too much flex in the shaving to provide any 'back pressure' on the wedging action. In effect this 'back pressure' prevents the shaving from lifting ahead of the blade.
Another wood working phenomena comes to mind which helps my understanding of this. It is the wedging action of a chisel when cutting dovetails. The chisel's bevel causes the chisel to move toward the back of the blade when chopping dovetails. This is why one doesn't start chopping right on the line.
This wedging force, imo, is present more in a bevel up configuration than in a bevel down set up. Please note this is just opinion and I have not taken the time to set up actual tests nor are there any plans for me to do such.
BTW, some of the books I read about joinery when I first started in woodworking advised to start on the line. Must have been some of those non-woodworking writers George mentioned.
jtk
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Contributor
Yes. It turns out that most woodworkers want plans for their projects. I bet you don't and most experienced woodworkers don't either. In fact, I really dislike plans myself. I'd rather figure it all out (the hard way) but that's the engineer in me - LOL. As a result I have numerous design tweaks as I go along and it (usually) all works out fine in the end. Know one needs to know that a drawer width that was planned to be 24" actually came out to be 23" due to a cutting mistake, ie: forgetting to account for the material thickness when cutting dovetail joints. In the end it really doesn't matter to me that it wasn't 24" exactly. I know what to do to adjust for it.
Contributor
Try working as an engineer for 20 years.
me: "I don't think that will be stiff enough."
him: "I did the FE analysis. It's plenty stiff."
me: "Look, we have some stuff laying around. Let's just mock it up really quickly."
him: "I've been doing this for 20 years. It will be fine."
me: "I've been playing with this particular device in the lab for 1 year. It won't work."
several months later
manager: "Why does it loose power when the other slide moves?"
me: "It's not stiff enough."
manager: "Can you fix it?"
me: "No, but I can maybe take it apart, run up to my hobby shop, buy some engine ISO mounts, drill out the mounting holes and try to isolate the platforms."
VP: "NOOOOOOO....don't you dare touch it and drill holes!! You'll never get it to work again!"
me: "It's not a big deal. I built the darn thing once. It should be easier this time."
manager: "Don't touch it. Find some other way."
So I leave work, go to the hobby shop and buy iso mounts. When everyone else is gone for the night, I take the stupid thing apart and isolate just one side. Next morning it's back working.
VP: "How's it going"
me: "Good...I got one side working."
VP: "How did you fix it."
me: "I took it apart and installed isolation mounts."
VP: "What??? BUT I SAID....uhm...did you say it's all working?"
me: "Yes."
VP: "Quick quick...do the other side too, but don't let ***** see you. He'll kill me if he knew I let you change anything."
::::sigh:::: The situations change, but it seemed like I spent most of my time either arguing with people and being the "loose cannon", or quietly trying to get along and then having to untangle the mess when it eventually made it back to my desk. I eventually just got sick of pushing on a rope and left the field. Well, I ended up always doing way more than I got payed to do, they still have cushy jobs and now I'm STILL busting my behind for a lot less money, but the only idiot I have to deal with every day is ME, so it's not so bad
We'd have much better products if there were more people out there that knew maybe just a LITTLE something outside their main discipline. You know, get in the lab every now and then and actually try to use the stuff you're pumping out. Hang out with the guys in the machine shop a bit...or maybe with the software guys, or the operators. The handful of engineers and managers I've worked with over the years that do that were always such a pleasure to work with. Everything always seemed easy and fun when we got to work with each other. I don't think it's a fluke that companies like Lee Valley continue to pump out really useable and well thought out products. It's obvious that SOMEONE over there has really good instincts for what works and what doesn't both for manufacturing and for the user.
Last edited by John Coloccia; 09-26-2014 at 12:53 PM.
[OP]
Member
It's better explained in my article Adam, but let's give it another try.
chipbr function.jpg
Imagine a shaving riding up the back of the blade and then suddenly hitting upon that capiron. This is a restriction to the flow of the shaving. A restriction means a force in the reverse direction. The only path available for this force is the shaving. So when you look at my drawing, you see the force pictured as a blue line. The point where tearout could happen is the red circle. That's what I mean by "the shaving is pushed back into the wood". The force supports the shaving.
A better force would be in the vertical direction and that is what you thing will happen with a tight mouth. But a mouth tight enough to actually prevent tearout, also forms a restriction for the shaving. You can feel this in the force needed to push the plane. So maybe the actual mechanism of a tight mouth and a chipbreaker are similar.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote