Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 81
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hiroller View Post
    A wood species sub forum was recently started in the Timber section!
    https://www.woodworkforums.com/f283
    Hmm, hasn't had a lot of input, yet, has it?

    I'll have to give this some thought when I get some spare time (ha!). Maybe we can develop a template with sections for each important property and get people to add their observations. Input from both 'flat-work' woodies & turners would be good. And a few (clear & in-focus!) pics of representative samples to illustrate the range of each species would be very helpful....
    Cheers,
    IW

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Age
    2010
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanW View Post
    Hmm, hasn't had a lot of input, yet, has it?

    I'll have to give this some thought when I get some spare time (ha!). . . . . . ,
    This has been discussed a number of times in these forums and there have been promises by a number of individuals with good intentions but nothing has ever come of it. Most people underestimate the time and effort needed to provide the information and image needed for even one species. The data obtained from just one tree is unlikely to be representative enough of a species, so a range of trees need to be studied and statistical data recorded and assessed.

    Maybe we can develop a template with sections for each important property and get people to add their observations. Input from both 'flat-work' woodies & turners would be good. And a few (clear & in-focus!) pics of representative samples to illustrate the range of each species would be very helpful....
    Given the poor quality of images (or no images) and vague description provided in the numerous "can you identify this wood?" posts we receive on a regular basis, comprehensive guidelines and a template would be essential.

    Unfortunately I wouldn't expect many folks on this forum to have the time, word skills, photo skills or equipment, or incentive, to fill out a template with the level of detail needed to generate something useful. To provide

  4. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Armadale Perth WA
    Age
    54
    Posts
    4,524

    Default

    What is the link to the guy with the colour-standardised photos of timber online please?
    Thanks,
    Paul

  5. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pmcgee View Post
    What is the link to the guy with the colour-standardised photos of timber online please?
    Thanks,
    Paul
    Do you mean this one?
    http://www.wood-database.com

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    McBride BC Canada
    Posts
    3,543

    Default

    Skip the sling-shots, OK?
    The singular reason for the use of ash (Fraxinus sp.) hickory (Carya sp.)
    and the oaks to a lesser extent is that they are ring-porous.
    As a result of that anatomy, they perform as multiple leaf springs in their mechanical properties.
    What have you got, for timbers in Australia, which are ring porous???
    I would bet on those.

    The English Yew, known for centuries as a bow - wood, is/was ring porous.
    This explains why trebuchet had to be built with the strength to launch
    pox-killed, 1500lb horses from more than 300 yds into castle court-yards.

  7. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Age
    74
    Posts
    6,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    Do you mean this one?
    http://www.wood-database.com

    Thanks for that link.. just as an experiment here is a google site search of that data base for "tool handles" just to see what comes up..

    https://www.google.com.au/search?num....0.VBeYO7LdKng

    Or here's another idea, a bit out of left field... .. I see that Bunnings sell spotted gum 1200mm shovel handles for $25 http://www.bunnings.com.au/1200mm-sp...ndle-_p3360746
    That could be cut down and you'd probably get 4 or 5 hammer handles out of one shovel handle..

    Ray

  8. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    800

    Default

    From memory Bunnings sell the Kruger handles, but you can get them from them direct online.

    http://www.krugers.com.au/handles.html
    ...I'll just make the other bits smaller.

  9. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    This has been discussed a number of times in these forums and there have been promises by a number of individuals with good intentions but nothing has ever come of it. Most people underestimate the time and effort needed to provide the information and image needed for even one species. The data obtained from just one tree is unlikely to be representative enough of a species, so a range of trees need to be studied and statistical data recorded and assessed.....
    You are absolutely right, Bob, and though I have thought of doing something a number of times, the thought of how much work is involved soon brings me to my senses. Having collaborated on a few book chapters during my professional life, I do have a fair idea of what would be involved in writing a decent reference book!

    And yes indeedy, pics have to be very, very, good to start with. Every reproduction process degrades the original image. Start with simply 'good' pics & they end up so-so. Start with anything less & they end up crap. I've spent a lifetime photographing biological specimens, but have found photographing wooden objects a whole new ball game, & am only slowly getting better at it. Originally, I envisaged something like the CSIRO book, with pics of trees in habitat, the bits essential for ID, and at least good pics of wood to show the median and each extreme for that particular species (or even more, if it is a particularly variable beast). I've got lots of pics I've collected over the years, but could only fill those requirements for maybe two species if I'm lucky, so still have a little ways to go...

    As someone said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    Cheers,
    IW

  10. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    800

    Default

    I actually think the power of a forum such as this, with user generated content, is not to provide definitive content but and this will sound trite, but a web or net of content. If twenty of us submit our pics of dubious quality of spotted gum it would probably give a better summation of the species and its working characteristics than one choice, professional image and description.

    I think it might prove to be an exercise in futility to try to standardise user supplied content but I don't think that is a reason not to leverage the potential that the forum offers. Let people post their pics and loves, hates, anecdotes, whatever about a species and we will all benefit from the rich content. Don't forget errors and omissions appear in even the most trusted resource books. The difference and real magic of a forum is constant 'cloud editing'. Most books are lucky to get a revision once every five years, errors here are pointed out in twenty minutes!!
    Matt
    ...I'll just make the other bits smaller.

  11. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Berlin View Post
    I actually think the power of a forum such as this, with user generated content, is not to provide definitive content but and this will sound trite, but a web or net of content. If twenty of us submit our pics of dubious quality of spotted gum it would probably give a better summation of the species and its working characteristics than one choice, professional image and description.
    That sounds like a "Quantity making up for quality" argument to me.
    Personally I would rather see one well finished piece of furniture than 100 poorly made items.

    If people want to put things on line there's alway Wikipedia for which there already many species info and some photos provided.
    Rather than reinventing the wheel it may be ease rot add to that.

  12. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Berlin View Post
    I actually think the power of a forum such as this, with user generated content, is not to provide definitive content but and this will sound trite, but a web or net of content. If twenty of us submit our pics of dubious quality of spotted gum it would probably give a better summation of the species and its working characteristics than one choice, professional image and description.

    I think it might prove to be an exercise in futility to try to standardise user supplied content but I don't think that is a reason not to leverage the potential that the forum offers. Let people post their pics and loves, hates, anecdotes, whatever about a species and we will all benefit from the rich content. Don't forget errors and omissions appear in even the most trusted resource books. The difference and real magic of a forum is constant 'cloud editing'. Most books are lucky to get a revision once every five years, errors here are pointed out in twenty minutes!!
    Matt
    All excellent points, Matt. As you say, blatant errors/typos should get corrected quickly, though things that are more matters of opinion might generate a lot of unnecessary text. I guess that's part of the self-regulatory approach. We should all feel part of it, and not be afraid to contribute if we have anything to say on how a wood works (or doesn't) for us. Beginners' points of view can sometimes be at least as valuable to a beginner as some sage's pearls of wisdom. They are each looking at the same thing, but from opposite directions.

    I think the best thing to do is to make a start, and put up a few 'stubs' that others can add to or discuss. I'm going to be spending quite a few hours just driving, over the next few weeks. Plenty of time to think, so I'll try to sketch out a few ideas in my mind on th woods I like or don't like, & why. If someone else is ready to kick-start it in the meantime, though, don't hold back!
    Cheers,
    IW

  13. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brisbane (western suburbs)
    Age
    77
    Posts
    12,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    .......If people want to put things on line there's always Wikipedia for which there already many species info and some photos provided.
    Rather than reinventing the wheel it may be easier to add to that.
    Bob, I guess the attraction of doing it ourselves is that it's then open to everyone on the Forum to participate in, & would be more focused on the properties we are interested in. I often look up some plant on Wikipedia & while it may have some specific information I'm after, like distribution or origin, it is usually pretty skimpy on 'uses', & there is seldom much of the type of detailed information on workability or any finishing eccentricities that the wood might have. For e.g. some Scented Rosewood is incompatible with shellac. An old cabinetmaker told me this, after I'd discovered it the hard way, and I read it somewhere since, but can't remember or find where. So having such info available in one place could be handy.

    Besides, the wheel got reinvented several times, & I'm rather glad it did. Rattling down the highway on a set of iron-shod, wooden spoked things doesn't have a lot of appeal to me......

    Cheers,
    IW

  14. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    800

    Default

    We could call it The Dust Cloud.

    I'll happily contribute what tit bits I can, even if just to give people some rubbish they feel compelled to correct.
    ...I'll just make the other bits smaller.

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Millmerran,QLD
    Age
    73
    Posts
    11,094

    Default

    Australian makers of handles traditionally have only used Spotted Gum. This is in a commercial sense as it was the only timber that was available in sufficient quantities. It doesn't mean that other Australian timbers are not suitable.

    However, you can't go wrong with Spotted Gum. It's combination of strength, toughness, elasticity and impact resistance are virtually unsurpassed even by Hickory and this all combined to make it the preferred tool handle timber.

    Regards
    Paul
    Bushmiller;

    "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

  16. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    St Georges Basin
    Posts
    1,015

    Default

    I handled up 3 hammer heads with hickory wattle (a. longifolia?) about 15 years ago and 2 of them are still going strong.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. GIS handling characteristics
    By callsign222 in forum Michael Storer Wooden Boat Plans
    Replies: 229
    Last Post: 28th August 2010, 07:43 AM
  2. Parcel Handling At Wallan PO
    By Barry Hicks in forum WOODIES JOKES
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 26th February 2008, 07:16 PM
  3. Handling Strippers
    By BrisBen in forum PAINTING
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 6th October 2005, 12:00 PM
  4. Cheapest adequate dust handling
    By occam in forum DUST EXTRACTION
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 1st September 2005, 11:14 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •