The Veritas Custom Planes - more than a review

[Derek Cohen]

One thing lead to another, and I wrote a series of articles ... four in all.


It just seemed to flow in that direction.


It began with the idea that if one could design a plane of their dream, what what they include? Lee Valley recently released the Custom Bench Plane concept, and I have a jointer and a smoother. I also have a bunch of parts ... and together they offer the opportunity to explore different combinations. And then compare these with BU equivalents and Stanley equivalents ........


You get the message. It became bigger than Ben Hur.


I'd like the articles to be a springboard for discussion here. Some of it is old stuff, but there is also new stuff. I can add, modify, include what is written to the articles.


1. Introduction: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes1.html


2. Designing a Plane: tips on choosing and tuning: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes2.html


3. Designing a Plane: Knobs and Handles - or how we really use a plane! : http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes3.html


4. To Chipbreak or Not to Chipbreak: frog angle choice : http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRev...omPlanes4.html


Happy New Year and ...


Regards from Perth


Derek

[Will Boulware]

In a word, WOW! Thanks for taking the time to answer (and bring up) so many questions!

[Bill White]

Excellent study and documentation. Wish we had more well thought efforts such as yours.
Bill

[Richard Line]

Thanks for these articles. They answered a number of questions, including several I hadn't got around to asking myself. A thought did come to me about using the LV standard handle and downward pressure (I have the LV bu jointer and bu smoother). Particularly with the jointer, I am now wondering if we don't also apply downward pressure through the side of the heal of our hand as it 'rests' on the bottom of the plane; I shouldn't think this would be a lot of pressure.

Also thanks for including the link to cambering bu blades. I had seen this before I got my bu planes and had forgotten about it. Now, I will need to use this approach. Thanks again.

[Derek Cohen]

.... Particularly with the jointer, I am now wondering if we don't also apply downward pressure through the side of the heal of our hand as it 'rests' on the bottom of the plane; I shouldn't think this would be a lot of pressure. ...

Hi Richard

I cannot imagine the benefit of both downforce and forward thrust being exerted from the handle side of the plane. The only time I expect to exert downforce at the handle end is when we reach the end of a board. Otherwise it strikes me as wasted energy.

My perception (open to discussion, so do to take this as the only view) is that downforce is only meaningful at the mouth of the plane, where there is benefit in holding down wood fibres as they are cut. My perception is that this is done via downforce on the toe (above the mouth).

This is the reason I asked Mateo about the radical forward lean of his handles, particularly with such a heavy plane. I was not being critical, just curious. His threads are: http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...fill-smoothers and http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthre...fill-completed

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

That's a very interesting article Derek, especially the bit about the handles and how to push a plane. I quickly watched some videos from myself and I see that I move from my shoulders often and don't have my elbow so low. I guess that isn't wrong (I still get my boards flat without physically falling apart), but there might be room for optimisation. As far as I can see, light work like smoothing and jointing an edge don't need all that thrust from behind, and I still think that during the stroke you not only move from the hips but certainly also extend your arms towards the end of the stroke (especially on longer boards). And then there is speed. Building up speed before the stroke helps to overcome hard work. But building up speed is easer from the shoulders then from the hips (I think). Well, anyway, complex subject, and certainly worthy of some experimentation.

Regarding the vertical force on the plane. How the cutting edge is pulled into the wood or pushed out of it depends on many factors. A thicker shaving tends to pull the edge into the wood, a thin one hardly. The cutting angle is important, 45 degrees has a lot more force pulling the edge into the wood then 60 degrees. The capiron demishes this force, but not hardly as much as a steeper cutting angle. Grain direction is important, against the grain has much more vertical force into the wood. The wood species, pine is easier then beech. And last but not least the dulling of the edge. When the edge becomes dull, a bulge forms at the underside of the edge which literally pushes the edge upwards.

The Paul Sellers trick of pulling the plane with a cord is a nice party trick, but it needs the right circumstances. He uses pine, a thickish shaving, a 45 degree plane without capiron, a very sharp edge and probably some cooperative grain. I tried it too, and it is very hard to get a full length, full width shaving. It helps to dial in a shaving at least 0.1 mm thick, and you will see that the shaving becomes thicker as soon as you push down a bit on the plane. So, in real life, you often do need vertical force, even when mathematical analyses would have you believe that you don't need it. Luckily you can sense pretty accurately how much vertical force you really need.

The English woodworker also had an interesting blog about this a while ago: http://www.theenglishwoodworker.com/?p=2095

[Derek Cohen]

That's a very interesting article Derek, especially the bit about the handles and how to push a plane. I quickly watched some videos from myself and I see that I move from my shoulders often and don't have my elbow so low. I guess that isn't wrong (I still get my boards flat without physically falling apart), but there might be room for optimisation. As far as I can see, light work like smoothing and jointing an edge don't need all that thrust from behind, and I still think that during the stroke you not only move from the hips but certainly also extend your arms towards the end of the stroke (especially on longer boards). And then there is speed. Building up speed before the stroke helps to overcome hard work. But building up speed is easer from the shoulders then from the hips (I think). Well, anyway, complex subject, and certainly worthy of some experimentation.

Hi Kees

Power comes from the hips, never the arms. You will just tire yourself out. And adding speed will just do this faster!

I posted the links on the Aussie forum, where they were read by a good buddy of mine, who is a recently retired lecturer from the medical world. This was his comment:

"You have also illustrated rather well 'how to push a plane'. As you imply, long use of a tool brings you to adopt body positions that work over long sessions, which means, essentially, minimising muscular effort. Having your forearm roughly horizontal is 'right' for handles with a mean angle of around 70 degrees. Lay your arm flat, with your wrist in a 'neutral' position & close your fist. The angle your closed fist makes is (surprise) about 70 degrees, unless you are an anatomical anomaly. Pushing with your wrist in that 'neutral' position is less tiring than if you had to twist it up or down a bit. It makes perfect sense that you adopt postures that 'get behind the tool', as I was always encouraged to do. For planing, you most certainly want to bend into the job to bring hip & lumbar muscles into play, so the bench height that best suits you is one where it gives you just the right amount of stoop for a comfortable & sustainable 'power posture'. Using 'postural muscles' in a steady, rythmic process is good. Without getting too technical, these muscles are not only bulky & powerful, they can sustain steady effort over a long period, while your arm muscles are full of so-called 'fast-twitch' fibres that develop lots of power, but tire more quickly. Ask any rock-climber.."

With regard Paul Sellers, he is as much a good showman as he is a good teacher - and he is good at both. His thread may be a stunt, but it remains accurate in regard to demonstrating centre of effort.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

Ask any rock-climber.."

I still feel sore from yesterdays training . Of course you do as much with the legs as possible, but without strong arms you won't become a good climber! And I am not sure if a static way of planing without momentum is more efficient.

Anyway, I am going to look closer how I use a plane. It'll have to wait a bit though, because I am heading towards the mountains this weekend. And thanks for bringing this up.

[Richard Line]

Derek,

I didn't mean to say that down force is necessarily needed, more that we may be applying it and not aware of it. I'm fairly sure I've been guilty of doing it, and in a rather inefficient manner - behind the handle where it doesn't drive or hold the blade in the work, just tires one.

Thanks for all the good work, info and thought provoking you provide.

[Matt Radtke]

Derek,

Not that you've necessarily got the optimal planes for it, but did you happen to test one of them as a single iron fore plane?

[Hilton Ralphs]

Nice Derek!

Interesting that the tote angle results seem to lean towards the Veritas Standard handle which has for ages attracted unbridled castigation by the other makers' fan-boy club.

An excellent article as usual and I'm thinking of changing all my Stanley handles to the more upright (in both sense) Veritas tote. A low bench and my back are not friends.

Thank again.

[John Kananis]

Derek, you're a wealth of information - thank you for your diligence.

[Jeff Ranck]

Derek:

Well done (yet) again! I read all four and I can't imagine the amount of actual "work" it took to put these together. I found the articles very interesting and will definitely be using the info in there if (when?) I actually can purchase one of these. I certainly want one, even if I don't necessarily need one.

I found it interesting that after reading your section on handles and how folks actually push a plane, I could recognize the way that I use my old stanley #5, which I have set up as a coarse plane with a 8" or so camber on the iron. I hadn't noticed before, but I do tend to push with the heal of my hand and the top of my hand is basically unsupported. My forearm is parallel with the work and I'm definitely not pushing "down" toward the mouth of the plane. My first plane was a LV bevel up jack, so that may have influenced how I "learned" to hold and push a plane.

I don't have the range of planes you have, but I do find I prefer the mushroom front knob of my BU jack and BU jointer over the other knob types on my Stanley #5 and LV BD smoother (old style).

Again, well done!

[Jim Koepke]

Thanks for all the work Derek.

Maybe I will win the lottery and then get a hankering for some new planes.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

Your concept of Center of Effort has been discussed previously here in at least one other thread "The other advantage to a BU plane is that it has a low centre of effort. The force vector focuses the energy efficiently. I have long argued that, angle-for-angle, a BU plane require less effort to push and offer more feedback than a BD plane with a high centre of effort. "
This is an unfamiliar term but it seems what you are saying is that the center of mass of a BU plane is apparently lower than for a BD plane with the same angle. Perhaps this has to do with the handle and the way the tool is gripped and pushed or maybe it has do to with the apparent tendency of the blade to pull the plane into the wood. If this (latter) is the case, then I now see that the chipbreaker being set close to the cutting edge as advocated for a BD plane actually causes the user to have to exert more downforce to push the plane down as opposed to the BU plane being unrestricted by a cap iron, therefore less restricted and requiring a lower user downforce. This reduced user supplied downforce is interpreted by the user as what you term the lower center of effort. Thoughts? Does this make sense?