Brief review: LV Shooting Plane

[Brian Holcombe]

I had a feeling we were both saying the same thing really Anywho, I want to wish you a happy holiday and much enjoyment with family and friends.

[Simon MacGowen]

In fact it saves a future headache in many cases to check for changes in that error and make certain it remains within an acceptable tolerance.

No disagreement on that. But what is acceptable tolerance?
It may be 0.001" to you or, 0.002' to Joe or Jane, in the case of a Starrettstraigtedge, 0.0002". Me? I don't measure it; I fix it if my work tells me so. I adjust my saw fence or mitre gauge if my cuts tell me they are off. I couldn't care less if it is 0.005" off on the tablesaw or bandsaw from the start go. In fact, anyone who has done enough woodworking (hand tools or power) knows very well that the tools are only one factor that affects the outcome of the work. A dead flat plane sole is great, but so what? I sometimes bend the plane to make certain cuts.
As I said in my last post, tolerance is not pointless but many people are over-obssessed with it. They mistaken tolerance with accuracy. My shooting plane might now be off 0.006". But my square may be off by the same amount, too. Anyone who tries to convince me that I should throw away my square is not working with wood. Or, insist that all machines be set to within a tolerance of x.xxxx mm.
Simon

[Brian Holcombe]

I don't believe anyone is advocating that LV narrow the tolerance for this tool and I dont believe anyone in the thread you're referring to was insistent than everyones tablesaw be set to .001" squareness in fact every response I read on there seemed to be that it was their own personal goal with the machine and that the wider range of tolerance would simply result in a rougher finish not necessarily anything to do with making perpendicular edges.

The field is quite broad and so people are inputting experience that draws from everything from hobby shop to production shop. I respect many who have inputted on why they're so particular and the logic is sound in the cases I have read.

You're making broad sweeping statements, if you want to narrow it down and prove that these things don't matter it's simple enough to do so. Show your work in detail and let the reader determine.

[Jim Koepke]

Because of the effects on my shooting board by atmospheric changes, the results are checked on the first few pieced being worked on it. Adjustments are made and the work is continually checked until it meets my approval.

Often it isn't even necessary to use a square. Standing the freshly shot end of a piece on flat surface next to another fresh off the shooting board piece can be used to tell if they are square. Other than that checking it with a square can be done rather quick.

My woodworking is seldom a race against time. My woodworking is for enjoyment, relaxation and hopefully every once in a while maybe make a little money… Usually very little.

jtk

[Pat Barry]

No disagreement on that. But what is acceptable tolerance?
It may be 0.001" to you or, 0.002' to Joe or Jane, in the case of a Starrettstraigtedge, 0.0002". Me? I don't measure it; I fix it if my work tells me so. I adjust my saw fence or mitre gauge if my cuts tell me they are off. I couldn't care less if it is 0.005" off on the tablesaw or bandsaw from the start go. In fact, anyone who has done enough woodworking (hand tools or power) knows very well that the tools are only one factor that affects the outcome of the work. A dead flat plane sole is great, but so what? I sometimes bend the plane to make certain cuts.
As I said in my last post, tolerance is not pointless but many people are over-obssessed with it. They mistaken tolerance with accuracy. My shooting plane might now be off 0.006". But my square may be off by the same amount, too. Anyone who tries to convince me that I should throw away my square is not working with wood. Or, insist that all machines be set to within a tolerance of x.xxxx mm.
Simon

A bit nit picky but saying something has a tolerance of let's say 0.001" doesn't convey any useful information unless you also state the span over which that tolerance applies.

[Patrick Chase]

A bit nit picky but saying something has a tolerance of let's say 0.001" doesn't convey any useful information unless you also state the span over which that tolerance applies.

It depends. If you're talking about a flatness tolerance and wondering if a non-gap-filling glue will form a useful bond then the simple tolerance is actually very useful, and the size of the surface doesn't really matter.

OTOH if you're talking about a fundamentally angular error like non-perpendicularity of a miter then you should be specifying in angular units (degrees or radians) anyway. To be honest I can't think of any situation where error+span is the "best" way of expressing tolerance. I don't recall seeing it anywhere in the canonical GD&T (Geometrical Dimensioning and Tolerancing) guidelines for that matter.

The shooter is about 3" high, so 3 mils of perpendicularity error works out to 3-4 arc-minutes :-).

[Pat Barry]

It depends. If you're talking about a flatness tolerance and wondering if a non-gap-filling glue will form a useful bond then the simple tolerance is actually very useful, and the size of the surface doesn't really matter.

OTOH if you're talking about a fundamentally angular error like non-perpendicularity of a miter then you should be specifying in angular units (degrees or radians) anyway. To be honest I can't think of any situation where error+span is the "best" way of expressing tolerance. I don't recall seeing it anywhere in the canonical GD&T (Geometrical Dimensioning and Tolerancing) guidelines for that matter.

The shooter is about 3" high, so 3 mils of perpendicularity error works out to 3-4 arc-minutes :-).

Tolerance always applies over a span. It may be a surface or a profile or a straightedge. Regardless the basis is expressed as a reference. In the case of GD&T the reference is a datum. For the examples being duscussed, ie a straightedge or the bandsaw, the tolerance must include a span or be totally meaningless. Do you math any way you wish (arc seconds, really?), you stated the basis as the height of the shooter and pointed out 3 mils. That is adequate. For the straightedge, what distance does the.0.001" dimension apply, 1 inch, 5 inches, 12 inches. It makes a difference.

[Simon MacGowen]

A bit nit picky but saying something has a tolerance of let's say 0.001" doesn't convey any useful information unless you also state the span over which that tolerance applies.

You are not being nit picky at all. Tolerance over an inch or an entire length is not the same thing and is usally spelt out in the specification. Of course, I used it loosly in my post just to mke the point that, whatever the proper reference or range is, people -- many of them -- are over-concerned with such measurement.
Simon

[Simon MacGowen]

<p>

You&#39;re making broad sweeping statements, if you want to narrow it down and prove that these things don&#39;t matter it&#39;s simple enough to do so. Show your work in detail and let the reader determine.

I was pointing out how unproducitve it could be and how obssessive many woodworkers are with tolerance. That is a general statement, or in your words, a broad sweeping statement, based on my observations. I firmly believe in it. No one needs to see my work to determine whether they&#39;d want to agree with or not what I put forward. I&#39;ll never need to see the work of any members who have their own views on something for me to decide if theirs are good for me. Take it or leave it is my guide. I am sure I have been doing quality work with hand tools or machines that I&#39;ve never ever once checked if they are within the stated tolerances given by the vendors. I joint edges with handplanes by hand dead square; are their soles dead flat (within 0.00001&quot;?)? I don&#39;t know and I don&#39;t care. Now, if you happened to believe in Paul Sellers, you probably would flatten the sole of a new Lie Nielsen or Veritas plane right out of the box, too -- just to improve that little &quot;flatness.&quot; Simon</p>

[Simon MacGowen]

Standing the freshly shot end of a piece on flat surface next to another fresh off the shooting board piece can be used to tell if they are square. jtk

That is something I have not tried. Interesting way to check work in progress for sure. That works assuming the surface (bench) the pieces rest upon is flat...but, of course, I am not going to check first if my bench is still indeed flat to the tolerance of, say, 0.001&quot; per foot before I use your trick.
Simon

[Jim Koepke]

That is something I have not tried. Interesting way to check work in progress for sure. That works assuming the surface (bench) the pieces rest upon is flat...but, of course, I am not going to check first if my bench is still indeed flat to the tolerance of, say, 0.001" per foot before I use your trick.
Simon

Just stand them up side by side and then turn one of the pieces 180º. Anything out of square will be obvious, if not, then it is likely square enough.

jtk