Handsaw hang angles.

[rob streeper]

Continued from: http://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=198834&p=1899943#post1899943

[rob streeper]

Derek,

Isaac's analysis is interesting but I haven't come across an analysis that includes h, the height of the saw plate. Have I missed it?

Rob

[planemaker]

Isaac makes a valid point regarding hang angle;

This principle being that, as the weight of a saw increases, the teeth “bite” more deeply into the wood, allowing a greater proportion of the sawyer’s thrust to be directed parallel to the toothline (and less of it downward) by lowering the hang angle of the handle.http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/further-discussion-of-hang-angles/

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Stewie,

I agree that the mass in front of the handle has an effect. However, I still haven't found a discussion of the height of the saw plate (h), or is it the height of the center of force on the handle, relative to the toothline.

Rob

[ian]

copied from the other thread http://www.woodworkforums.com/showthread.php?t=198834&p=1899943#post1899943

Thanks Rob

An example of something more specific are the articles by Isaac Smith (Blackburn Tools). He descrives how he sets the hang angle to the cant of the saw plate ..

http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/i-just-cant-stop-myself-yet-more-discussion-of-hang/

On my recent mitre saw (in a mitre box), with a 16" long plate, the hang angle was 23 degrees. This encourages more of horizontal push, which is wanted in a mitre box, where downforce is unnecessary. 23 degrees is also recognised by some, such as Isaac, for tenon saws generally ... regardless of length?

http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/saw-hangs-ex.gif

http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/

Any thoughts?

Regards from Perth

Derek

hope I'm not stomping on toes ...

[ian]

also copied from the other thread

Stewie, you opened the topic ...

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af219/swagman001/18%20Pink%20Myrtle%20Open%20Handle/_DSC0042_zpsh9ijgvl6.jpg (http://s1009.photobucket.com/user/swagman001/media/18%20Pink%20Myrtle%20Open%20Handle/_DSC0042_zpsh9ijgvl6.jpg.html)

Regards from Perth

Derek

[ian]

I think you're overlooking a couple of critical aspects.

every backsaw has an maximum depth of cut -- set I suggest by the clearance between the tooth line and handle less some measure, say 1/4 in

the maximum depth should be some multiple of the optimum depth of cut which will related to the typical furniture joint designed for cutting with the particular saw.

The "ideal" hang angle will then be related to the relative height of the sawyer, the height at which the work is held or clamped and the depth of the cut.
Relationships to the saw plate depth will be then be related back to these fundamentals

[planemaker]

also copied from the other thread

Hi Ian. Can you supply any more clues. I am not sure of the point your trying to raise.

regards Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Hi Ian,

I haven't overlooked the other factors, I just didn't mention them. Of course all are important. The thrust of my comment was directed to the analysis Isaac did where h was defined/called out but not used. The rake angle, and all of the factors you mention, are connected to h as well. As Ron B. has said...

Cheers,
Rob

[planemaker]

I think you're overlooking a couple of critical aspects.

every backsaw has an maximum depth of cut -- set I suggest by the clearance between the tooth line and handle less some measure, say 1/4 in

the maximum depth should be some multiple of the optimum depth of cut which will related to the typical furniture joint designed for cutting with the particular saw.

The "ideal" hang angle will then be related to the relative height of the sawyer, the height at which the work is held or clamped and the depth of the cut.
Relationships to the saw plate depth will be then be related back to these fundamentals

Hi Ian. You have raised some interesting thoughts to the discussion.

regards Stewie;

[ian]

Hi Stewie

at the risk of stepping on some toes, I thought it would be worthwhile to repeat Derek's comments in this thread

[planemaker]

Hi Ian. I dont think I was being unreasonable in asking Derek to open a separate thread on hang angles. Most saw makers for example will have a differing opinion as to where along the tooth line they like to see the extended index finger point too. If you take dovetail saws as an example, I personally dislike the higher hang angle Isaac prefers. That doesn't mean I devalue Isaac's opinion.

Stewie;

[ian]

I agree.
I too thought it was a good idea.
I also thought it was worthwhile to copy Derek's two posts on the subject into this thread. Perhaps that was too presumptuous, in which case I apologise.

[planemaker]

Hi Ian. I see no problem.

regards Stewie;

[planemaker]

Historically there is little written evidence that gives modern saw makers a clear insight into the thought process of early saw makers. As a result. What we gain in knowledge the study of the early saw makers work, will vary according to how each individual modern saw maker is able to interpret that information. As an example; achieving a clear consensus on the best hang angles for each type of backsaw is going to be very difficult to tie down. IMO

regards Stewie;

[ian]

I think you're overlooking a couple of critical aspects.

every backsaw has an maximum depth of cut -- set I suggest by the clearance between the tooth line and handle less some measure, say 1/4 in

the maximum depth should be some multiple of the optimum depth of cut which will related to the typical furniture joint designed for cutting with the particular saw.

The "ideal" hang angle will then be related to the relative height of the sawyer, the height at which the work is held or clamped and the depth of the cut.
Relationships to the saw plate depth will be then be related back to these fundamentals


Hi Ian,

I haven't overlooked the other factors, I just didn't mention them. Of course all are important. The thrust of my comment was directed to the analysis Isaac did where h was defined/called out but not used. The rake angle, and all of the factors you mention, are connected to h as well. As Ron B. has said...

Cheers,
Robto expand somewhat on my earlier comment ...

I think we, as early 21st century woodworkers, are wont to be somewhat ignorant of the factors that governed the design and use of saws made and used in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
There is a reason that Benjamin Seaton had 4 completely different back saws in his tool chest. Each is specialised in some way -- but this is difficult to research while my copy of the Seaton Tool Chest book is in storage. However, I will speculate that as a trainee cabinet maker, Benjamin learnt to saw with a particular stance based on the height of the bench he was using, and the height at which the work was fixed. I'll also speculate that each saw is most efficient when used to cut a particular sized tenon or joint.

From these speculations, I suggest that h is a derived measurement related to the intended use of the particular saw. In other words it's not an independent variable.

I might also suggest that in an era when a cabinet maker relied on his saws for his livelihood and hence probably sharpened them at least once per week, changing the rake and fleam angles to suit the particular commission in hand might be an expected response.

[planemaker]

Hi Ian. If h represent the depth of saw plate then its still retains an influential value. For example; if I have 2 backsaws at the same hang angle and saw plate length, but the saw plates vary in depth, the line of directional force on the deeper saw plate will be nearer the toe of the saw plate as it crosses the tooth line.

Stewie;

[planemaker]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/10279097/Men-grow-four-inches-in-100-years.html

Height not length. :C

[Isaac S]

Derek,

Isaac's analysis is interesting but I haven't come across an analysis that includes h, the height of the saw plate. Have I missed it?

Rob

I'm supposed to be getting ready for a tool show tomorrow mornign, so I have to keep this short for now. Consider yourselves fortunate on that front...

The effects of changing h are shown in this analysis. I don't explicitly discuss it, but if you look at equation 3 on page 2, it's evident that the moment required to balance/use the saw changes with h.

In plainer English: when you cut with a saw, you are not simply pushing straight ahead, but also have to apply a moment (also called a couple or torque). As the height of the plate changes, so will the torque required to use it. The magnitude of this effect varies along the length of the stroke.

Changing h also has an effect in the third dimension that is not considered in this analysis. This would show up in real life as how tippy (I think that's the technical term) the saw feels.

[Bushmiller]

Stewie

I am putting on my charlatan's hat here, but my take is that the weight of a saw has a huge bearing (oops, sorry about that, it just flowed out) on the positioning of the handle and in saying that I am not attempting to suggest geometrical angles.

If you compare the two extremes in back saws being the humungus mitre saws and the diminutive dovetail saw you can see that there is really no need for downward pressure on a mitre saw while there is on the dovetail saw. The weight of the mitre saw is quite sufficient to cut, assuming it is sharp, and all the effort can go into the horizontal push.

So all other saws with a spine are going to fall in between and this fits in with Derek's quote from Blackburn tools. I think the range was 23 deg to 50 deg. The only modification to this might be the height at which you work. IanW has had input to this in the past. For example dovetail cutting might be performed at a greater height than work on a bench hook.

Just out of interest I measured the only vintage back saws I own (the charlatan mantle is revealing itself now) and these were the results:

Simonds No.95 Mitre saw - 22 deg
Simonds No.96/97 back saws 10",12" & 14" - 24 deg
Thos. Turner open handle 12" - 47 deg

All the saw are in the 11/12 ppi range.

The results surprised me a little and they were crudely measured using protractor, ruler and set square so in the rough ball park but not perfect.

Possibly this indicates that the hang angle is more dependent on end use than weight or any other factor. I also should point out that my sample is very small and not truly representative. I feel sure there are others among you who could give a far more comprehensive set of data.

Regards
Paul

[Isaac S]

The "ideal" hang angle will then be related to the relative height of the sawyer, the height at which the work is held or clamped and the depth of the cut.
Relationships to the saw plate depth will be then be related back to these fundamentals

I heartily agree with that.

[Isaac S]

The rake angle, and all of the factors you mention, are connected to h as well.

I don't think that changing h should have any effect on the rake you want to use. Rake is dependent on/related to the hang angle of the saw.

[Isaac S]

If you take dovetail saws as an example, I personally dislike the higher hang angle Isaac prefers. That doesn't mean I devalue Isaac's opinion.

I make two basic dovetail saw designs. I still prefer using the larger one with the lower hang angle, but the other is growing on me as I become more familiar with it. It's reinforcing my belief that you can get used to a wide range of saws (within reason) given enough time and practice.

I should also say that the example saws in the illustrations were chosen for their extreme designs, so as to make the contrast and differences clearer. They shouldn't be viewed as an endorsement, dislike, or repudiation of any particular design.

[rob streeper]

Interesting. The hang angle thus seems to be heavily influenced by preference or opinion as well as mechanics. As I wrote on the prior thread before transfer I find the finger method to work pretty well. On my handsaws I've found that a hang angle that points the finger above the horizontal works well, in fact I just received a No. 7 from the 1877-1888 era that has that feature.

[planemaker]

A worth while read. Of interest to Isaac. Note the different methodology to measure the hang angle . http://www.wkfinetools.com/hUS-saws/MSW-WMC/tools/05-Bakewell-WMB-No3-Backsaw/Backsaw-WMB-No3-1.asp

Stewie;

[hiroller]

Personal preference is a very big factor.
Of importance is that the hang angle of our knuckles to our forearm all differ.
Type "hand fist" into Google and check out the images.
Some knuckles are perpendicular to the forearm others are at almost 30 degrees.
The saws that the two extremes would find comfortable will be very different!

[rob streeper]

I agree. Within certain bounds the various combinations of dimensions and methods of use work for some people and not for others. My experience has been that most people prefer a saw with a relatively relaxed rake angle, but preferences vary over a broad range of hang angles. Some people prefer heavy backs, some want lighter. Blade length preference varies quite a bit too.

[rob streeper]

A worth while read. Of interest to Isaac. Note the different methodology to measure the hang angle . http://www.wkfinetools.com/hUS-saws/MSW-WMC/tools/05-Bakewell-WMB-No3-Backsaw/Backsaw-WMB-No3-1.asp

Stewie;


Hi Stewie,

Coincidentally, I bought a Monhagen saw recently. It has a nearly positive rake and the hang angle is about 10o above the toothline.

Rob

360805

[Ron Bontz]

Thanks for posting. To avoid a rather lengthy reply I would only add the height of the grip area of a hand saw ( measured center of the hump vertically to the tooth line ) is absolutely related to the height if the plate. By lowering the grip area you compensate for the "tipsy" effect, Issac mentioned, along the Z axis, for more balance control. This also helps to maintain the wrist in a more neutral position in line with the forearm. Hence a more comfortable and efficient stroke. The Wheeler Madden-Clemsen hand saw is a good example of a lowered grip area to maintain control and balance functionality while maintaining an aesthetically pleasing design. Best wishes.

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. Very nice looking hand saw. Those truncated cone bolts and cover plate give the saw a unique appearance.

Stewie;

[planemaker]

The fact that there is no historical reference to the use of a mathematical formula to measure the hang angle to high level of accuracy may suggest no formula was deemed necessary by early saw makers. Possibly, saw makers of that era simply relied on the more basic technique of lining up the extended index finger to a point along the tooth line that was deemed highly functional for that type or size of backsaw. That the point along the tooth, was not some agreed value by all saw makers of that era, but likely an individual judgement based upon each saw makers prior learning and/or experience. The fact that early era backsaws fitted with the same dimensional saw plate do show a wide range of variation within their handle hang may add weight to that theory. If we move forward in time to that of the modern era saw makers and quiz them in search of an agreed consensus to where along the tooth line that index finger should point on a backsaw of a given dimension, its mostly the feedback received would range from; aligned to the front toe, an inch back from the front toe, 2 inches back from the front toe, center of the saw plate, toe side of center, heel side of center, pointing at the heel, 1 inch forward of the heel, 2 inches forward of the heel. In other words, a lack of agreed consensus.

Stewie;

[planemaker]

Isaac's feedback on the subject of using a formula to determine the hang angle:

admin (http://blackburntools.com) says: November 9, 2013 at 12:28 am (http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/#comment-3750)
Andy,
I more or less made all of this up as I went along. Like you, I could find no precise definition or standard, so I took the basic definition and expanded upon it.
I put it at the center of the handle because it felt like a good average. I think the actual location of the force varies from person to person, as well as varying throughout the stroke. It’s really a tough one to pin down, but that seemed like a good compromise, even if somewhat arbitrary.
I intentionally avoided using any numbers for this very reason. It was my intent to show the effects of changing the variables, and using numbers just complicates that, and contributes little to actually understanding the matter.
Using this as a starting point, it should be a fairly trivial matter to vary the angle and point of application of the force to see what happens.
As far as being a saw geek, well, you’re talking to someone who spent more than a few sleepless nights working on these posts. I’m not sure which is worse, but I’m glad to have the company down here… http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/

[planemaker]

How the hang angle should actually be measured also varies within opinion.

http://www.wkfinetools.com/hUS-saws/MSW-WMC/tools/05-Bakewell-WMB-No3-Backsaw/Backsaw-WMB-No3-2.asp

[rob streeper]

Another factor that hasn't been mentioned here is the differences in how handsaws are used now compared to the 19th and early 20th century.
Then, handsaws were used for all types of woodcutting done outside of a saw mill or shop equipped with machines. Today there are very few handsaw made cuts relative to the total number of cuts. Further the nature of the cuts we now make is largely restricted to furniture joinery or other small scale work. No doubt that there a few people that use handsaws for building houses but they're very atypical.

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. I am not sure I can add much more to the discussion on hang angles. As mentioned earlier, IMO most saw makers are guided by their own unique preference.

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Hi Rob. I am not sure I can add much more to the discussion on hang angles. As mentioned earlier, IMO most saw makers are guided by their own unique preference.

Stewie;

That's pretty much my perception. This is another important factor in handsaw manufacture that everybody (those who're interested of course) has an opinion on but nobody has seriously analyzed, much like saw plate hardness.

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. To be fair, Isaac has already done some excellent work on this subject. I hold a great deal of respect for Isaac's depth of knowledge within the craft of saw making. His own study on the subject of handle hang is a very good example of his fine work. No different to the work you recently undertook on hardness testing and taper grinding of saw plates.

regards Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Stewie,

True, Isaac has laid out relevant factors and describes their interactions and I don't fault his work in the slightest. However, it doesn't tell us what hang angle, or range of hang angles, is most appropriate for any particular type of work. I'm proposing to study trends in the various parameters, something easily accomplished given the depth of images of older saws available now. As time allows I may also do some empirical work. Fortunately for us all, science is not 'done'.
Another factor that hasn't been discussed is that we're only considering push-to-cut Western type saws. What about Japanese style pull-saws? Their toothlines are set at an angle to the force applied by the sawyer too. What, if any, connections might be found between the angles used on Western and Eastern saws?

Rob

[planemaker]

I am current focused on open handle design; specifically the importance of beam strength through the neck of the handle.

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Great, I've been thinking about how I might instrument an open handle such that the dynamic forces applied can be measured.

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. My approach is a little less complicated. I am focused more on the shaping of the neck to maximize the benefits continuous long grain can offer.

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130784/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-open-handled/

http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130785/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-closed-handled/

(http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130785/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-closed-handled/)http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEViWrYRFWqjoA.TMnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByNXM5bzY5BGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMzBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1444008492/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.walkemooretools.com%2fwp%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2014%2f04%2fUnderstanding-Western-Hand-Saws.pdf/RK=0/RS=5PyoCfrodIgEU9YO6FqbD5M01W8-

http://www.backsaw.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=59&Itemid=103

https://thesawblog.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/dont-hang-yourself-tote-angles-change-your-saw/

https://books.google.com/books?id=QU8FAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA258&lpg=PA258&dq=backsaw+hang+angle&source=bl&ots=9Xax0fHCaa&sig=to9nuVMaLbjwAmg-2qdSQEkWxh0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CFMQ6AEwB2oVChMIxo_LnbKpyAIVi40NCh1f2wYJ#v=onepage&q=backsaw%20hang%20angle&f=false

http://thevalleywoodworker.blogspot.com/2015/06/part-2-mysterious-saw-hang-angle.html (https://books.google.com/books?id=QU8FAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA258&lpg=PA258&dq=backsaw+hang+angle&source=bl&ots=9Xax0fHCaa&sig=to9nuVMaLbjwAmg-2qdSQEkWxh0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CFMQ6AEwB2oVChMIxo_LnbKpyAIVi40NCh1f2wYJ#v=onepage&q=backsaw%20hang%20angle&f=false)

[planemaker]

http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130784/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-open-handled/
Hang angle range 38 - 55.
http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130785/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-closed-handled/
hang angle range 54 - 76.

Without knowing the saw plate dimensions, its difficult to make any clear judgement on hang angle trend. IMO

Stewie.

[rob streeper]

These links give an appreciation of what history can teach us if we're willing. I've conceived a design for a variable hang angle / variable h / quick-change blade dovetail saw. Now to get some time to make one up.

[planemaker]

We now have a 3rd method being used to measuring the hang angle. Different methods, different results.

1st.
http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130784/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-open-handled/
http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130785/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-closed-handled/

2nd.
http://www.wkfinetools.com/hUS-saws/MSW-WMC/tools/05-Bakewell-WMB-No3-Backsaw/Backsaw-WMB-No3-2.asp

3rd.
http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

I think Isaac's method is best. Most of the force of sawing in my case is applied by the web of the hand between the thumb and forefinger.

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. Of the 3 methods listed, Isaac's looks to be the more reliable as its takes into account the effect of Cant.

http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/canted-uncanted.gif

Stewie;

[planemaker]

Its also interesting to note with Isaacs method, as the grip line moves down, the hang angle decreases in value. (my preferred option)

By contrast, if you then look at the results from the method used here. http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130785/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-closed-handled/ http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/archives_handtools.pl/bid/3108/md/read/id/130784/sbj/handsaw-handle-angles-open-handled/ , as the grip line moves down, the hang angle increases in value.

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

As is typical of so many areas the lack of standard methods and measures inhibits understanding. This factor contributes to the mystery surrounding handsaw manufacture, little was written down or made public to protect trade secrets and as a result these techniques are considered 'lost'. Fortunately, technology has made enormous strides in the interim and I think that through the application of systematic study and experimentation we can easily rediscover these secrets - there's no magic here.

[hiroller]

I make it 4 methods if you include the angle between the handle and the toothline.
As described by Andrew Lunn here: http://www.popularwoodworking.com/oct13/hang-with-a-sawmaker
I think Issac's work is great but I think this way of describing the hang angle is the simplest.
As Rob mentions, the fact that there is no standard makes it difficult to decipher each of the various discussions without going back to a common reference.
361151

[derekcohen]

My apology for not coming in on this thread earlier - time has been short.

I do not see how one can determine hang without including the purpose of the saw, and this is will determine the size and rake of the teeth. I do not see blade length, per se, having a large part to play with hang angle. We do not use a 12" dovetail saw any differently to a 6" dovetail saw. On the other hand, we would approach differently two saws where one has zero rake and the other 14 degrees of rake, or one has crosscut teeth and the other has rip teeth. Size of teeth also come into this.

Let me take one step back and note that I may have made a dozen saws, but do not consider myself a saw maker. Then, again, I have made a few dozen planes, but do not consider myself a planemaker either. What I am interested in is handtool ergonomics, and I pay attention to this area whether I am using a chisel, knife or blunderbuss.

Over the last few years I have posted a number of pieces (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3.html) on the effect of the handplane handle angle on handplane control. What became apparent is that there is a relationship with the type (e.g. length) of plane used and its centre of effort. For example, we automatically drop our planing height (by bending our knees) when pushing a jointer to create a horizontal vector. The alternative is to raise the height of the bench. In both cases the handle is used more in the vertical.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/VeritasCustomPlanes3_html_m12d57880.jpg

Plane handles and saw hang angles are essentially the same in my book.

We could substitute the height of a bench for planing with the height of a saw arm when sawing. We could substitute the cutting angle of a plane blade with the rake angle of a saw. In other words, the angle of a plane handle facilitates forward power via the ideal vector, and hang angle on a saw does exactly the same.

I would rather have a lower hang angle on a saw that will drive larger rip teeth, such as a tenon saw. Smaller teeth on a dovetail saw reduce the effort, but a higher hang would also reduce the power and "lighten" the effect.

On the 16" mitre saw I recently made, the hang angle is 23 degrees. It is low since the power vector is controlled by the guides, and the hang angle teams with this.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolRestorations/MFMitreboxRebuild_html_m7c4cc0bd.jpg

I guess what I am saying is that there cannot be a simple formula for hang. It is the combination of features that are involved in creating power, or reducing it, when sawing. As with hand planes, it is easy to see how hang alters the feel of a saw. However, to say that it is where you point your finger is being over simplistic as a way of determining the hang angle. In short, I do not see the hang angle as a finite, but as a feature that the sawmaker chooses to add to that particular saw.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[hiroller]

To me, the best example of this is if you went from using a bench vise to cut dovetails and then moved to using a Moxon vise (or equivalent) which raised the work by 250mm, would you want the hang of your dovetail saw to change?
I would expect that handle more perpendicular to the thrust would be more comfortable.
Not sure if I should describe that as more or less hang but it is just as important as the hang of the individual wrist.

[derekcohen]

Hiroller, I think that the issue you describe is not about hang angle, per se. Raising the end of the board in a Moxon is more about comfort - about standing more upright rather than stooping over. It is also about the angle the teeth enter the end grain (as the saw does when cutting dovetails). The cutting angle, per se, does not change as you alter the angle of the saw cut. Yet there is a noticeable difference where you start the sawcut, for example, at the far end of the board, in the middle, or at the near end.

When starting the saw cut one has a choice of three methods from which to choose. The “Rob Cosman (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxIgNel0H_I)” method is to start at the far edge of the board, saw a slight bevel, and then saw horizontal. The advantage here is that the blade gains a purchase in the wood for sawing and creates a saw kerf to follow (similar to starting the kerf at the far end when sawing a tenon). The downside is that a saw with zero rake will get stuck in the kerf.

The “Joel Moskowitz (http://www.toolsforworkingwood.com/prodimg/gt/pdf/GT-DSAW9XX_INST.pdf)” method is to start on the horizontal and cut the wood evenly. The saw here is easier to start than with Rob’s method.

Finally, the “Adam Cherubini (http://www.adamcherubini.com/Dovetail_Saws.html)” method is to start the cut on the near edge so that one can follow the two adjoining marked lines, and then level the saw. The downside is that a low bench can make the stance uncomfortable.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritas20ppiDovetailSaw_html_m736c552e.jpg The “Rob Cosman”

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritas20ppiDovetailSaw_html_m586de7e0.jpg The “Joel Moskowitz”

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritas20ppiDovetailSaw_html_m654f2955.jpg The “Adam Cherubini”

Regards from Perth

Derek

[rob streeper]

I think that it's best to measure the grip angle from the back surfaces of handle at top and bottom as discussed above relative to a line passing through the position on the handle where the web of the hand presses that is parallel to the toothline, or perhaps its' supplement. As this:

361193

The height can thus be accounted separately.

[planemaker]

Total agreement with Isaac.

Stewie ;

admin (http://blackburntools.com/) says: August 25, 2013 at 12:12 pm (http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/#comment-1623)
Brian,
Thanks for reading through it. I don’t use gent’s style saws very often, but you can think about them in the same way.


In looking at saws with traditional handles, I ignored the weight of the saw itself to simplify and clarify the illustrations. In reality, the weight of the saw is very important, and is part of the reason that longer saws have lower hang angles (the weight provides some of the downward force needed to bite into the wood).



Since gents saws tend to be very light, the sawyer needs to provide most of the downward force. Fortunately, the way a gent’s saw is held makes it easy to do so; from the position of the wrist to the finger held along the spine, the grip lends itself to applying downward force.
I hope that made a little bit of sense, but please let me know if it needs further clarification.
Isaac



http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/concerning-hang-angles-and-saw-handles/

[planemaker]

Derek. Do you know what handle hang has been used on these 3 different sized Veritas backsaws. Are they different or all the same. Do you have an idea where the directional force is located along the tooth line on each of these saws. http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=71884&cat=1,42884,68511&ap=1

regards Stewie;

[derekcohen]

Hi Stewie

The only one I have used is the dovetail saw. Here it is alongside the LN and Independence dovetail saws ..

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/TheVeritas20ppiDovetailSaw_html_m4411cfdf.jpg

Their hang angle is essentially the same.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. Do you think early saw makers bothered with the need to accurately measure the hang angle. Were they only interested in setting the handle hang to influence the directional force along the tooth line. Was their method of choice no more complicated than using the extended forefinger as a directional pointer. A method I continue to use with my own saw making work.

Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Hi Rob. Do you think early saw makers bothered with the need to accurately measure the hang angle. Were they only interested in setting the handle hang to influence the directional force along the tooth line. Was their method of choice no more complicated than using the extended forefinger as a directional pointer. A method I continue to use with my own saw making work.

Stewie;

Hi Stewie,

My idea in measuring a set of angles was directed to finding the most commonly used angles, a question that we've discovered that others have addressed in the past. I'm thinking to add a few more measurements and then plot the frequency of occurrence of each angle rather than the mean for each type of saw assuming that a kind of convergent evolution has taken place resulting in most saws of a given type and h having a certain range of hang angles. Then I'll do some empirical work and add it in to the study.

Cheers,
Rob

[planemaker]

Hi Rob. View the following as a suggestion only, and not a criticism of your recent mention on how the hang angle should be best measured.

If a single method of measuring the hang angle was deemed necessary, I would prefer to adopt Isaac's method of utilizing the tooth line. With 1 slight change. Where Isaac has the directional force line intersecting at 90* from the middle span of the handle grip, I would prefer that line intersect where the thumb and forefinger webbing makes contact with the outer grip. http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/two-saws-hang.gif

Stewie;

[derekcohen]

I think that it's best to measure the grip angle from the back surfaces of handle at top and bottom as discussed above relative to a line passing through the position on the handle where the web of the hand presses that is parallel to the toothline, or perhaps its' supplement. As this:

361193

The height can thus be accounted separately.


Hi Rob. View the following as a suggestion only, and not a criticism of your recent mention on how the hang angle should be best measured.

If a single method of measuring the hang angle was deemed necessary, I would prefer to adopt Isaac's method of utilizing the tooth line. With 1 slight change. Where Isaac has the directional force line intersecting at 90* from the middle span of the handle grip, I would prefer that line intersect where the thumb and forefinger webbing makes contact with the outer grip. http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/w...-saws-hang.gif (http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/two-saws-hang.gif)

Stewie;

My view is that part of the description of Rob is correct - that is, the angle at which the length of handle intersects with the teeth is the hand angle - but part is incorrect. It is not the web, per se.

The web of the handle - that is, the top of the handle - is only relevant in terms of providing a balance point for the saw as a whole. The closer one is able to tuck the web of the hand into the underside of the horn, the better the control of the saw. You can loosen the grip at this point, and the saw will still remain in the sawing position. You cannot do this from the lower horn - the saw will just tip forward. This is the reason why a saw handle needs to fit a hand ... so that the upper horn area is supported.

However, this web area has nothing to do with the hang, per se. The hang is about angle. The web is about supporting the existing angle. The hang is an existing angle, created by the length of the handle, not one created by the angle of the web.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[planemaker]

Hi Derek. Would it not be advantageous to adopt a singular method that not only serves to provide you with an answer to the hang angle, but also provides you detail on the directional force being applied to the tooth line. By adopting the tooth line within its formula as seen within Issac's method, changes within the directional force resulting from a canted saw plate can be accounted for.

regards Stewie;

[rob streeper]

Hi Rob. View the following as a suggestion only, and not a criticism of your recent mention on how the hang angle should be best measured.

If a single method of measuring the hang angle was deemed necessary, I would prefer to adopt Isaac's method of utilizing the tooth line. With 1 slight change. Where Isaac has the directional force line intersecting at 90* from the middle span of the handle grip, I would prefer that line intersect where the thumb and forefinger webbing makes contact with the outer grip. http://www.blackburntools.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/two-saws-hang.gif

Stewie;


That's my intention.

[planemaker]

On my recent mitre saw (in a mitre box), with a 16" long plate, the hang angle was 23 degrees. This encourages more of horizontal push, which is wanted in a mitre box, where downforce is unnecessary. 23 degrees is also recognised by some, such as Isaac, for tenon saws generally ... regardless of length?

Hi Derek. Are you sure your correct with that statement.

regards Stewie;

[Ron Bontz]

[QUOTE=planemaker;1902734]On my recent mitre saw (in a mitre box), with a 16" long plate, the hang angle was 23 degrees. This encourages more of horizontal push, which is wanted in a mitre box, where downforce is unnecessary. 23 degrees is also recognised by some, such as Isaac, for tenon saws generally ... regardless of length?

Hi Derek. Are you sure your correct with that statement.


Hi everyone. Sorry I have once again missed the bulk of the discussion.
I have been reading this thread when time allows, ( Putting on a roof lately so no time. ) There are several things I noticed that I may not agree with completely. But more so that I do. Just some rambling thoughts. My apologies if I state the obvious.
1st. Thank you to Derek for posting. Particularly for showing me another picture of the wonderful little miter box and saw you made. Feel free to send it to me when you tire of it. I do like the Groves saws as well. Anyway, Derek and others have pointed out very clearly why one's personal mechanics, as well as length and intended use, are paramount to determining the appropriate hang angle for a saw. At least a custom saw. Production saw makers will no doubt settle for the middle of the road to serve the greatest percentage of customers. No differently than hand size.
2nd. I do not put dovetail saws in the same exact category as tenon saws. One should be careful to not put all saws in the same category when seeking methods for determining hang angles. Hand saws and panel saws must absolutely take into consideration the grip height relative to the plate height. Hand and panel saws are certainly different animals with their own constraints in design and use.
Joinery saws, depending on many factors such as bench height, using a moxon vise or not, overall personal height,( pivot points ), and of course whether one likes to stand over their work or stand back a bit, all comes into play. Imagine, if you will, once upon a time, numerous workers in a "factory" all working at the same benches at the same bench height. Were all the workers the same height with the same mechanics? I doubt it. But, they may all very well have had their own personal saws, made to their preference, including hang angles. Sharpened to their preference to best suit their mechanics/ needs. Even if they were not, I would be willing to bet they had their favorites they tried to get each day. More of a behavioral component based on comfort level with a particular tool and preference. I can't help wonder if the owners had shorter benches for the shorter guys and taller benches for the taller guys. Perhaps in a small shop. There is a reason some one invented the moxon vise other than bench height, no doubt. Imagine the reaction those workers, many of whom were masters in their own right, would have had if one of our modern day writers had told them they were not doing it correctly because they did not do it "my way" or like the picture in a book showed. Indeed there are just too many variables to make any assumption of what is the best hang angle or what should be the standard. There are, I think, general guide lines with plate length vs hang angle being one of them, but I doubt there were any standardized formulas for determining the hang angle vs the plate height ratio. More than likely, in my opinion, just some accepted guidelines through trial and error over time and passed on from one to another based on feed back from the buyers. Many of whom, no doubt, worked in the factories such as Disston's.
3rd) I should point out that Issac's method is spot on when determining hang angle, in my view. Regardless of where the actual resultant vector passes through the handle. I often draw mine through the center of the hump just out of convenience. The angle is still the same. Of course, since I also use that method, I may be biased. "Hiroller's" is basically the same. The hang angle should be determined, in my opinion, based on grip angle vs tooth line. Using any other "formula" may lead to false results. Example: The cant of a tooth line affects the downward force of a saw directly as well as the visual reference line. Altering the folded back angle does nothing except alter the visual reference. ( I have seen numerous examples of folks mistakenly believing a saw is canted because the toe end of the back was tapped down ) I see no need to address pitch, rake and fleam, because they do nothing but fine tune the hang angle of any given saw. This is not to say those variables can not make or break the functionality of a saw. But these can be very individualized preferences or task specific and can be changed. If you don't like how it cuts, refile it. :)
4th) Obviously, the lower the hang angle the greater the distance, from the neck of the saw to the actual force being applied. Hence you may have noticed lower hang dove tail saws, for example, have a thicker ( front to back ) neck area to compensate for the increase in the moment about that axis. ( force times distance )( I hope I said that correctly as it has been a while. ) There is no way, in my opinion, to accurately calculate the needed volume of the neck area, other than perhaps averages, as different woods have different shearing strengths, as well as muscle bound monkeys that think every saw is a hand saw and you should plow through a cut as fast as possible. Hand planes are no different than saws in that, given the grain direction, too much force at the top of the plane tote will shear the tote in two, despite the long steel bolt passed through it. The saw is just the opposite. Too much force at the bottom could shear an open handle tote. A closed handle, of course, transfers the force being exerted on the tote to the cheek, preventing the shearing. Indeed the lamb's tongue was born out of function and made to be attractive by the craftsman like every thing else back then.
Lastly, my personal mechanics has me applying a resultant force ( resultant thrust vector ) closer to the neck/ web of my hand, rather than the center of the grip on my 45* hang dovetail, but slightly lower on my 38* dovetail. If I were to use a moxon vise with the work being higher, I would no doubt prefer my 32* dovetail due to my height relative to the work. So I think all things are relative, within reasonable limits, and no wonder there are so many different hang angles on joinery saws. Lest we drive ourselves crazy searching for absolutes. :):) Sorry if I rambled a bit. It's late. Best wishes.

[planemaker]

Hi Ron. Appreciate the time taken to forward your thoughts. Excellent value.

regards Stewie;

[Ron Bontz]

Hi Ron. Appreciate the time taken to forward your thoughts. Excellent value.

regards Stewie;

Good morning. Now that I am awake I did indeed ramble a bit. Oddly, I left out a little bit.
Miter saws, for the most part, fall outside of this comparison because the vertical weight is supported by both the wood being cut and the guide to some extent. While the "Z" axis is supported by the guide rods as well. Again, what ever the hang angle, within reason; the pitch rake and fleam can fine tune, leaving the arm to act only as a crank shaft driving the piston back and forth.
Also, if we draw a stick figure of a person and just draw the pivot points, hips, knees, shoulders, elbows, and wrist relative to a given point to represent the work piece being cut; we can more clearly see the need to consider the point of the grip center/ hump as a reference point for both balance and stroke force. Having a grip height too high diminishes the ability of the triceps / upper arm to push forward. Leaving the rotational strength of the shoulder to drive the stroke as well as putting the wrist in a some what unnatural position. And back to ergonomics we go. :) A mechanical engineer would no doubt be able to show this better graphically. Best wishes.

[hiroller]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for taking the time to post.
Nicely put.